Opinion

Sam Ekpa’s Arrest And Peace In Igboland

Published

2 years ago

December 2, 2024

August 9 this year made it three years that the people in the South Eastern part of the country are mandated to remain at home every Monday. The sit-at-home was initially declared by the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) in protest against the arrest and imprisonment of its leader, Nnamdi Kanu. For three years, people living in Enugu, Abia, Imo, Ebonyi and Anambra States, are prevented from going about their businesses every Monday. Markets, schools, offices, banks, and so on remain closed. In some places, people are not even allowed to go to hospitals on “Ghost Mondays”. Reasons may have prevailed on the leadership of IPOB to put an indefinite end to the weekly exercise in 2023 as it had constantly resulted in killing and destruction of lives and property. In the statement titled, ‘Monday weekly sit-at-home: An ugly phase of a bygone history that must never be repeated as echoed by Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’, the spokesman of IPOB, Emma Powerful warned that any person or persons talking about sit-at-home in Igbo land again will be considered an enemy of the people and will be dealt with accordingly.
However, a young Finland-based, Nigerian, Simon Ekpa, refused to heed the call. The factional leader of the secessionist group decided to take the “agitation” to the next level by sometimes declaring a whole week as sit-at-home and wasting innocent lives within those days. He sits comfortably in Finland and dishes out orders on how to destroy his homeland. His calls for sit-at-home protests, often enforced with violence, have disrupted daily life, harmed economic activities, and deepened mistrust between residents and authorities. Many people have tales of woes to tell of how their loved ones and family members were butchered by Ekpa’s foot soldiers who are bent on forcing everybody to comply with the sit-at-home directives. Reports have it that some hoodlums have capitalised on the sit-at-home order to perpetrate all manners of crime in the zone – kidnapping, killing, maiming, etc. wearing the toga of IPOB and ESN and unknown gunmen. Many government buildings have been razed down with many policemen being killed.
So, the recent arrest and detention of Simon Ekpa by the Finnish authorities over terrorism charges was long overdue. It is high time the young man and his co-travellers were put on the right track. Of course, the Constitution of the country grants the citizens the freedom of expression and the right to protest against any wrong in the system or make any demand from the government but when one oversteps his bounds by stepping on the rights of others and engaging in acts of terrorism, he should be called to order. But is Ekpa’s arrest enough to bring about the much-needed peace and security in the South-East? For a lot of people, the arrest of the Finland-based separatist, a divisive figure in the struggle for self-determination in Southeastern Nigeria, marks a significant development in the ongoing crisis in the region. To others, it sends a strong message about the global community’s unwillingness to tolerate activities that incite violence and destabilisation.
However, it may not be uhuru yet until the root cause of the agitation is addressed. The region’s grievances extend beyond the actions of any single individual, and the movement for Biafra remains deeply rooted in historical and socio-political factors. The crisis in Igboland is primarily driven by demands for self-determination, economic, political marginalisation, and other grievances. Commenting on a recent controversy on whether or not non-indigenes are sold land to in Igboland, the Executive Director of Development Specs Academy, Prof. Okey Okechukwu, noted that contrary to the erroneous belief of some uninformed people, Igbos do sell land to non-indigenes but the problem is that land in the South-East are not attractive for non-Igbos to buy due to the limited absence of federal presence in the region. “Tell me, what federal establishment do you have in Enugu and all over the South East that will make me leave my place in Yorubaland to come and buy land?. Is it to be a villager? he asked.
“So, we must also see the connection between national infrastructure, national institutions, national political headquarters etc. the limited absence of that in the South East makes the land there totally unattractive for anyone to procure”, he continued. Therefore, it is high time the federal government engaged in meaningful dialogue with legitimate leaders from the Southeast, including traditional and religious rulers, political figures, and civil society organizations. Government should see Ekpa’s arrest as a diplomatic victory and an opportunity to engage the region without the looming shadow of Ekpa’s rhetoric. Economic empowerment, infrastructural development, and justice for victims of violence on all sides are essential components of any sustainable solution. Very importantly, the federal government should, in the interest of peace and security in the South East Zone and the country at large, reconsider its position towards the release of the IPOB leader.
President Bola Tinubu should show that he is interested in peace and unity of the country by heeding to the call by south east governors and other people from the zone on the release of the IPOB leader. What about solving the matter politically as has been canvased by many groups and persons. In the words of the founding Chairman of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), Chief Chekwas Okorie, to Former President Muhammadu Buhari, “The time for President Muhammadu Buhari to show magnanimity and leadership in the vexed issue of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is now.” The same is being said to Tinubu today. On their own part, the governors of the South-East region must prioritize the welfare and security of their people. The story of marginalisation of the South East by successive governments in the country is not strange but the political leaders in the zone are not making matters any better. They hardly make efforts towards employment creation for the youths.
A writer recently lamented the high number of political thugs in Enugu. He spoke with some of them who disclosed that they took to that line of “job” due to lack of meaningful employment opportunities years after their graduation from higher institutions. Many times, we have heard the spokesperson for IPOB, Emma Powerful, debunk the accusation that the group is responsible for the insecurity and the mayhem that have been going on in the region for years, saying that other people, some non-Igbos, masquerading as IPOB are taking advantage of the situation in the zone. IPOB should not stop at the disclaimer. They and other youths from the zone should join hands with the government to reveal the identities of the criminals and uproot them from the zone and the country at large. It is also high time IPOB and the Eastern Security Network (ESN)took a look at their strategy for their agitation.
If the whole thing is causing untold hardship and pain to the region and the people they claim to be fighting for, why continue with it. IPOB and its factions must reassess their strategies. The use of violence and coercion has alienated many who might otherwise sympathise with their cause. Advocacy for self-determination must align with democratic principles and respect for human rights. Ekpa’s arrest provides an opportunity for introspection and recalibration. It is a reminder that actions taken in the name of liberation must not perpetuate the suffering of the very people they aim to serve. While the arrest of Sam Ekpa is a notable step, it is only one piece of a much larger puzzle. Peace in Igboland requires a concerted effort from all stakeholders to address historical grievances, foster economic development, and create a platform for genuine dialogue.
this moment will not be another flashpoint but a turning point toward lasting peace and reconciliation in the region.

By: Calista Ezeaku

Opinion

Gift Or Will: Why Wait Until Death To Give?

Published

1 week ago

October 19, 2026

The Tide

Quote:”The value of wealth is measured not only by what a person leaves behind but also by the good it accomplishes during that person’s lifetime. Why wait until death to give when we can make a meaningful difference in the lives of those we love today?”

Will and gifts are subjects that many people, particularly in this part of the world, are reluctant to discuss. This may be due to the misconception that they are matters reserved for the dying and that talking about them could somehow invite death. Yet, both are important subjects that everyone, young and old alike, should understand. Every property owner should ask a fundamental question: Why wait until death before allowing the people we love to enjoy the fruits of our labour? Many parents spend their productive years acquiring houses, land, businesses and other valuable assets, yet postpone sharing these blessings with their children and loved ones until they are no longer alive. They prepare Wills, appoint executors and hope their wishes will eventually be fulfilled. But is there a case for giving more generously during one’s lifetime?

A Will is an important legal instrument, and nobody should be discouraged from making one. However, lifetime gifts deserve greater attention because they allow property owners to witness the benefits of their generosity and, where properly completed, transfer ownership before death. One practical difficulty with inheritance is that writing a Will does not automatically make the property available to beneficiaries upon the testator’s death. Ordinarily, executors must obtain a grant of probate from the appropriate Probate Registry before administering the estate under the Will. The process may involve producing the original Will and death certificate, identifying executors and beneficiaries, preparing an inventory and valuation of assets, completing prescribed forms, paying applicable fees and satisfying other registry requirements. Procedures vary across jurisdictions in the country and depend on the circumstances of each estate.

Where documentation is incomplete, the estate is complex or questions arise about the Will, administration may be delayed. Matters become more difficult when a relative or beneficiary challenges the Will, enters a caveat or commences litigation. Legal expenses accumulate, family relationships deteriorate, and intended beneficiaries may wait for years before receiving their inheritance. A child expecting to inherit a house may be unable to deal freely with the property while administration remains outstanding. Similarly, a beneficiary hoping to use inherited funds to establish a business may be frustrated by delays. Across Nigeria, families have experienced difficulties accessing their late parents’ estates because of disputes over Wills and prolonged legal proceedings. See Dan Jumbo v Dan Jumbo. Where a court declares a Will invalid, those named as beneficiaries may lose their entitlement under that document, and the estate may instead be distributed under the applicable intestacy rules. Consequently, people the deceased deliberately intended to benefit may receive nothing under the disputed Will. Ajibaiye v Ajibaiye

This does not mean every challenge will succeed or that all beneficiaries will necessarily be excluded. It nevertheless highlights a risk in postponing every act of generosity until death: the intended beneficiaries may have to establish their entitlement through a process whose outcome is uncertain. A lifetime gift, commonly called a gift inter vivos, is a gift intended to take effect during the donor’s lifetime. Where validly completed, ownership of the transferred interest generally passes to the beneficiary, and the property ordinarily ceases to form part of the donor’s estate.This distinction is significant. A beneficiary who acquires valid ownership of property during the donor’s lifetime does not ordinarily have to establish entitlement to that property through the donor’s Will. The claim rests on the completed transfer rather than a testamentary promise. For instance, a parent with several properties may transfer a house to a child who needs accommodation or give land to another who wishes to build a home. A business owner may transfer an interest in a business to a child already involved in its management. These arrangements provide practical support while allowing the giver to witness the benefits.

Properly completed lifetime gifts may also reduce the assets that must subsequently pass through probate, potentially simplifying the administration of the remaining estate. However, such transfers must comply with applicable law. A mere declaration or unfulfilled promise to give land may not be sufficient. Depending on the circumstances, a gift may require an appropriate deed, acceptance, execution, registration and any necessary consent. Sections 21 and 22 of the Land Use Act 1978 regulate certain dealings involving statutory and customary rights of occupancy. Lifetime gifts are not immune from disputes though. Transfers may be challenged on grounds such as fraud, undue influence, incapacity or failure to comply with legal formalities. Proper legal advice and documentation are therefore essential. Encouraging lifetime gifts does not mean abandoning Wills. A Will remains useful for assets an owner wishes to retain throughout life, property acquired later and assets not transferred before death. It also allows the testator to appoint executors and give instructions for distributing the remaining estate.

Property owners must also avoid giving away assets indiscriminately. Adequate provision should be made for personal upkeep, accommodation, healthcare and other financial responsibilities. Parents should never be pressured into transferring their entire estates or surrendering their financial independence. Where a donor wishes to retain the right to occupy a gifted house, that arrangement should be properly structured and documented. Ultimately, the value of wealth is measured not only by what a person leaves behind but also by the good it accomplishes during that person’s lifetime. A gift of land may enable a child to build a home; financial assistance may help a young person establish a business; and a properly transferred property may provide security while the donor is still alive to share in the beneficiary’s joy. Probate is a necessary safeguard, not a reason to dismiss Wills. Nevertheless, where appropriate, lifetime gifts can reduce the property left for administration and help beneficiaries avoid waiting for assets that could have been transferred earlier.

My appeal is simple: let us cultivate a culture of thoughtful giving. Make a Will, but also consider what you can responsibly give today. Seek legal advice, document your intentions and ensure every transfer is properly completed. Why wait until death to give when we can make a meaningful difference in the lives of those we love today?

By: Calista Ezeaku

Opinion

Nigeria’s Anti-corruption Institutions: How Independent?

Published

1 week ago

October 19, 2026

The Tide

Quote:“Nigeria’s anti-corruption battle is too important to be reduced to political contests or personalities. It must rise above administrations, parties and individuals and become a sustained national institutional commitment.”

Corruption remains one of Nigeria’s most persistent governance challenges. It affects public resources, weakens institutions, undermines service delivery and erodes citizens’ confidence in government. For decades, successive administrations have declared their commitment to fighting corruption, while agencies such as the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) have investigated and prosecuted numerous cases. Yet, beyond the number of arrests, investigations, prosecutions and convictions, there is a more fundamental question Nigeria must continue to confront: How independent and fair are the institutions entrusted with the fight against corruption?

This question matters because the success of anti-corruption agencies depends not only on their legal powers but also on the confidence citizens have in the manner those powers are exercised. An agency may possess extensive statutory authority, but if citizens believe that its decisions are influenced by political considerations, public confidence can suffer. The ICPC Act provides for the Commission’s independence, stating that in discharging its functions, it shall not be subject to the direction or control of any person or authority. This statutory provision is significant. An agency charged with investigating public officers and institutions must be sufficiently protected from improper influence if it is to perform its duties objectively.

Independence, however, should not be confused with freedom from accountability. Anti-corruption agencies must themselves operate within the law and remain subject to appropriate constitutional, judicial and institutional checks. The power to investigate and prosecute is enormous, and such power must always be exercised responsibly.This is where fairness becomes indispensable. An effective anti-corruption campaign cannot be built on the perception that the law is tough on some people and gentle on others. Citizens should be able to believe that allegations are examined on their merits, evidence determines the direction of investigations, and suspects are afforded due process irrespective of their political status, social standing or connections.

The presumption of innocence must remain sacrosanct. Being investigated is not the same as being guilty, just as being charged is not the same as being convicted. The media and the public also have a responsibility to distinguish allegations from established facts. At the same time, fairness must not become an excuse for inaction. Where credible evidence exists, investigations should proceed without fear or favour. The challenge, therefore, is to build anti-corruption institutions whose actions are guided by law rather than personalities. Their credibility should not depend on who occupies political office, which party is in power or whose interests may be affected by an investigation. Nigeria has made important institutional investments in the fight against corruption.

The EFCC’s mandate covers the investigation and prosecution of economic and financial crimes, while the ICPC combines enforcement with preventive measures, including institutional reforms and anti-corruption initiatives within public institutions. But enforcement alone cannot eliminate corruption. Institutions must also close the loopholes that make corrupt practices possible. Procurement systems, financial controls, public-sector accountability and transparency mechanisms must be continually strengthened. Prevention is often more effective and less costly than waiting for corruption to occur before pursuing those involved. The judiciary also has an important role. Courts provide the constitutional and legal checks necessary to ensure that anti-corruption powers are exercised within the law.

Judicial oversight should not be regarded as an obstacle to the anti-corruption fight. Rather, it is part of what gives the fight legitimacy. There is also a need for greater transparency in the work of anti-corruption agencies. Nigerians deserve credible information about institutional performance, while sensitive investigations must be protected from unnecessary exposure. Regular publication of statistics, outcomes and institutional reports can help citizens distinguish between genuine enforcement and publicity. Ultimately, Nigeria does not need an anti-corruption campaign that is powerful only when directed at particular individuals. It needs institutions that remain strong regardless of who is being investigated. The real measure of progress should therefore go beyond the number of people arrested or prosecuted.

It should include whether public institutions are becoming more transparent, whether public funds are better protected and whether citizens believe that the law applies fairly. Nigeria’s anti-corruption battle is too important to be reduced to political contests or personalities. It must rise above administrations, parties and individuals and become a sustained national institutional commitment. Independent institutions, impartial investigations, due process, judicial oversight and equal application of the law are not competing objectives. They are the pillars upon which a credible anti-corruption system must stand. If Nigeria succeeds in building institutions that can investigate without fear, prosecute without favour and operate without improper political interference, the country will have moved beyond the politics of anti-corruption to the establishment of a genuine culture of accountability. The ultimate victory over corruption will not come merely when more people are punished; it will come when Nigerian institutions become strong enough to make corruption increasingly difficult to commit, conceal and protect.

By: Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi

Opinion

Nigeria On Age of Prosperity?

Published

3 weeks ago

October 5, 2026

The Tide

Quote: “The real test of prosperity is not what government announces, but what the ordinary Nigerian can afford, earn and hope for.”

Nigeria’s 66th Independence Anniversary came with a message of hope from President Bola Ahmed Tinubu: the country has moved beyond the difficult phase of economic reforms and is now entering what he called an “age of prosperity.” In his October 1 national broadcast, titled From Reform to Prosperity, the President argued that the painful economic measures of the past three years had corrected the country’s economic direction and laid the foundation for shared and widespread prosperity.

The declaration is significant because Nigerians have lived through an extraordinarily difficult period. The removal of fuel subsidy, exchange-rate reforms, rising living costs and other economic adjustments have placed considerable pressure on households and businesses. Government’s argument has consistently been that these sacrifices were necessary to correct structural weaknesses and prevent an even deeper economic crisis. President Tinubu therefore used his Independence Day address to announce what he sees as the beginning of the reward phase.

According to the President, the economic indicators now point in the right direction. He said Nigeria’s economy had grown by more than four per cent in 2026, while both the oil and non-oil sectors contributed to the growth. He also cited declining oil theft, falling inflation from its peak, rebuilt foreign reserves, greater stability in the foreign exchange market and more than $6 billion in non-oil export revenue in 2025.

But economic statistics, important as they are, must eventually be translated into household realities. For the average Nigerian, prosperity is not merely a matter of GDP growth, foreign reserves or export figures. It is the ability to buy food without anxiety, pay school fees without borrowing, travel at affordable cost, access healthcare, secure decent accommodation and earn an income that provides dignity.

This is where the President’s new promise becomes particularly important. He said prosperity would mean a Nigeria where farmers can cultivate their land safely, produce at lower cost and earn decent returns; where factories have reliable electricity; where businesses can obtain credit; where young people can find productive employment; and where food, transportation and education become more affordable.

That vision places production at the centre of the prosperity agenda. Nigeria cannot permanently consume its way out of poverty. The country must produce more food, manufacture more goods, create more jobs and export more competitive products. This requires reliable electricity, good roads, efficient rail and port systems, accessible credit, security for farmers and investors, and an environment in which businesses can survive and expand.

The President’s emphasis on agriculture is therefore noteworthy. Nigeria has vast arable land and a large youthful population, yet food insecurity and high food prices remain major concerns. Expanding irrigation, mechanisation, access to inputs, storage and transportation could help reduce production and distribution costs if properly implemented. The challenge, however, will be moving from policy announcements to measurable results across the farming communities.

The same applies to employment. Nigeria’s youthful population can become an enormous economic advantage, but only if young people have opportunities to acquire relevant skills and participate meaningfully in the economy. President Tinubu spoke of expanding digital connectivity, supporting industries, using domestic gas to power factories and helping Nigerian businesses grow.

These are areas that deserve sustained attention because prosperity cannot be built on government spending alone. It must be driven by productive citizens, viable businesses, innovative entrepreneurs and industries capable of creating wealth and employment.

Yet, the transition from reform to prosperity must also recognise the millions of Nigerians who cannot afford to wait indefinitely for the benefits of future growth. The President acknowledged that many families still struggle with food, school fees, medical expenses and transportation. His administration therefore pointed to social support programmes, education loans, consumer credit and other interventions as bridges towards greater economic opportunity.

The question Nigerians will inevitably ask is: when will the promised prosperity become visible in their homes and communities?

That question should not be dismissed as impatience. It is the legitimate demand of citizens who have been asked to endure sacrifice in anticipation of better times. If reforms are to retain public confidence, their benefits must progressively become tangible. Lower production costs should ultimately mean lower prices. Increased investment should create jobs. Higher agricultural output should improve food availability. Economic growth should broaden opportunity rather than remain concentrated in statistics and balance sheets.

President Tinubu’s declaration that “the age of reform has done its work” therefore carries a heavy responsibility. The next phase must demonstrate that the sacrifices of Nigerians were not merely endured but converted into lasting national benefits.

Nigeria’s journey since independence has been marked by repeated promises of a better future. At 66, the country cannot afford another cycle in which hope rises with political declarations only to fade under the weight of everyday hardship. The promised age of prosperity must be measured by the quality of life of ordinary Nigerians.

The President has declared that Nigeria has passed through its own “Red Sea” and that the destination is now in sight. The road ahead must therefore be one of delivery, accountability and inclusion. Prosperity must reach the farmer in Rivers, the trader in Kano, the manufacturer in Lagos, the student in Enugu and the young entrepreneur in every part of Nigeria.

The age of prosperity, if it is to mean anything, must not remain a presidential phrase. It must become an experience Nigerians can see, feel and confidently pass on to the next generation.

By: Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi