Connect with us

Opinion

NIS Tragedy: Should Moro, Paradang Be Sacked?

Published

on

It was tragedy in many states in the country penultunate
Saturday as 19 job seekers who participated in the Nigeria Immigration Recruitment exercise died in the stampede that ensued at overcrowded venues of the exercise.
Following the unfortunate incident, the Nigeria Labour Congress, youths and some prominent Nigerians have called for the sack of the Minister of Interior, Comrade Abba Moro and the Comptroller General of Immigration, David Paradang despite President Goodluck Jonathan’s compensation for families of the deceased  applicants and the hospitalised victims.
Our Chief Correspondent, Calista Ezeaku and photographer, Dele Obinna, sought the views of Port Harcourt residents on the burning issue: Hon. Samuel Yorkum (Insurance Consultant).
My advice is that people should be careful how they respond to any job advertisement especially this political era. Politicians are not reliable, especially when it comes to dealing with the public because they can do anything to get that position. I will advice job seekers to be careful. When they go for any job interview and see a very large crowd, they should withdraw  from the exercise.
The president has tried to compensate the families that lost their loved ones in that stampede although that cannot bring back life. We should give him kudos for doing that but then; the applicants are to be blamed for that tragedy. When you see a large crowd in any public gathering, you should watch and be careful because if you don’t get that job, another job opportunity will come out tomorrow. You should have trust in God in whatever you are doing. When your body tells you this thing is risky, you should withdraw. But people do” gree-die,” it’s either do or die, I must be employed.
If God will give you employment, you wouldn’t suffer for it.
I think the recruitment exercise should have been handled with better tactics.
However, nobody is perfect. So I don’t think the Minister of Interior, Abba Moro and the Comptroller-General of Immigration should be sacked because of the unfortunate incident. If the incident happened because of their mistakes, any other person can make it tomorrow; does that mean people will be sacked, sacked and sacked?
So these people should not be punished but they should go back home and carry out thorough investigation on how to carry out hitch-free exercises in future.
Mr. Solomon Kalu  (Applicant)
I took part in the recruitment exercise here in Port Harcourt. I sustained an injury that day. The crowd there was unimaginable. This is because there are no job opportunities in this country. The youths are wasting. It is very painful after going to school, you come out there is no job. So what happened that day was a very sad experience; lives were lost, many people were injured. It is good that the President had decided to compensate the families of those that died in the stampede. It is very painful that after sending your children to school, after investing so much, you will lose them out of some people’s negligence of their duties. And I think that Saturday’s incident should be investigated and anybody found culpable should be punished appropriately. Abba Moro and Paragang should not necessarily be sacked. There should be laid down procedures on how to conduct similar exercise in future. People that have degree, HND, OND, FSLC, WAEC certificates should have been taken to different venues instead of squeezing everybody in one place. The crowd was more than the capacity of the stadium. All the seats were occupied and people were asked to sit on the grass and write exams. Things are not done that way. There should be procedures of doing things. They should give us back the N1,000.00 we paid. I even borrowed that money and I had to pay transport fare to the bank to pay it. It is so painful that they had to extort money from jobless people. It’s very unfair.
Mr. Moses Freeman (Consultant)
The stampede is a wrong signal for the nation. It shows that leaders in Nigeria have no plans for the youths. If we are saying that youths are leaders of tomorrow, there should be a transition plan. What we are seeing today is a situation where those in authority refuse to plan. Ordinarily, in the 21st century, we are in, there is nothing wrong in this computer age to organise a test through computer arrangement. Majority of graduates today are exposed to computer, so why gathering them in a stadium, an open place to write exam. It is very wrong. I condemn it. And that is why I am equally in support o those agitating that the Comptroller General of Immigration, Paradang and the Minister of Interior, Abba Moro should be removed from their offices for lack of planning. In planning and management, you put into consideration how you get things done without much problems. This is not the first time such unfortunate incident is happening. This is the second time. So it should be discouraged. And if they are removed that will create opportunity for Nigerians to know that the leadership of Jonathan is responsive to the problems of the youths in the country.
The compensation given by Mr. President is as a result of the laxity of those in government. It is very wrong. Is it because somebody is dead in a family that you can now give employment to them? It is only a useless father who refuses to plan for the children. There is no transition plan in this country and that is the problem we have. Many people within the corridors of power today were in government from the age of twenty. Some of them refuse to allow the youths of today to have a place in government and that is the problem. The youths of today feel they are not stakeholders in this present democracy.
There should be a revolution. Not the type that will take gun or anything. It is a resolution that square pegs in round holes should be removed. Those who lack understanding of strategic planning and management of things around the country should be removed. So the youths of this country should now know that they have no stake in this country. They should sit up, plan and seek a way forward for themselves through a revolution of organised minds. The problem within the youths again is ignorance. They don’t even know their left from their right. If not, they were supposed to even reject in the first place, coming to write an examination in an open place in this modern world.
And I want to add that the money collected from the applicants should be refunded for purposes of transparency. And if possible, government should pay them more for suffering them. The emotional trauma they passed through is enough reason for government to pay. There is enough money in this country to go round. If somebody can spend N10 billion to maintain a chartered plane, a minister in this country, that N10 billion is enough for all those that participated in that exercise for suffering them as a nation.

Gloria Princewill (Business woman)
It’s very sad after investing on a child to have him die in such way. The government is supposed to provide jobs for the youths instead of asking all applicants to come to one particular venue for recruitment exercise only for them to have this kind of problem. It’s a sad thing. Even if the persons responsible for the unfortunate incident are sacked, the people that died have died. It’s for us to put our heads together to think of a better plan on how to tackle unemployment in the country. They should also think of better ways to organise this type of programme in future. Government should empower the youth through skill acquisition and others.
They don’t need to wait until tragedy like this happens before giving people job. Is it only when people died in circumstances like this that they wake up from their slumber? These are things they are supposed to have done before now. The ministers and what have you are just there to keep themselves good. They don’t think about the poor people. They should sit down and think of what to do because every year people are coming out from school, what are they going to do? They are just employing the people they know. Man know man is just too much in this Nigeria. That is what is killing us. You cannot find their children in that kind of place.

Mr. Jaja Gift (Civil Servant)
The way the recruitment exercise was conducted was not supposed to be. I agree that a lot of people blame the government and all that. Be that as it may be, you see, we have to be very clear about the issue. Corruption is the basic of our struggle today in Nigeria. I’m surprised that a parastatal like the Nigeria Immigration Service would conduct such an interview in a open place. This is my first time of experiencing such situation. I have been in this state when Air Force and other parastatals were conducting similar recruitment exercise. There were days for school Certificate, OND, HND, Degree holders. And when you know that your certificate falls on so, so so, day, you go. I have not seen a situation where you gather thousands of persons in one place for a test. It is surprising. I don’t even understand what is going on.
We talk about corruption. I think it is now the government has to sit up to look into the issue because I see no reason why N1,000 should be collected from each applicant, for what? I don’t understand what it means.
The president has tried by compensating the families of the dead and the hospitalised victims but it is not enough. Must somebody die before you know the situation on ground? Must somebody die before you know that this person needed this? Look at poverty all over the country and few individuals are somewhere sucking even the poor masses who have nothing doing. If it was all well in Nigeria, would we have such crowd for just an interview? And how many persons do they want?
The Minister of Interior and the Comptroller-General of Immigration should be punished. If sack is the appropriate punishment, fine. The government knows what to do to them. Government should go into details and find out why a government form should be sold to a job seeker who borrowed money to come for an interview. It is not only Moro and Paradang that should be punished. All the key officers in Immigration should be called to order and punished. They should all be brought to book. All the people that benefitted from the exploit should be brought to book.

Continue Reading

Opinion

One Attack Too Many 

Published

on

Quote: “Ogoniland does not need leaders competing over who can destroy another’s platform; it needs leaders competing over who can create more opportunities, empower youths and build a better future.”

The latest attack by Chief Gani Topba on the President of KAGOTE and Chief Executive Officer of Giolee Global Resources Ltd, Chief Lesi Maol, appears to have opened another troubling chapter in the politics of leadership and influence in Ogoniland. While disagreements are inevitable, the frequency and manner of attacks directed at individuals or organisations contributing to Ogoni development should concern every stakeholder. The concluded extraordinary meeting of Ogoni stakeholders in Bori was convened to deliberate on challenges confronting the people, including insecurity, farmers-herders clashes, youth disunity, education and development. It also considered harmonising the numerous youth organisations operating across Ogoniland under a strong and representative umbrella capable of giving Ogoni youths a more coordinated voice. One would have expected such an initiative to attract constructive contributions, especially from those with reservations about it.

Instead, the gathering and its organisers have come under criticism, raising a fundamental question: what exactly is wrong with Ogoni stakeholders coming together to discuss problems affecting their people? If there are legitimate concerns about the meeting, its organisers or resolutions, such concerns should be supported by facts and subjected to constructive engagement rather than personalised attacks. Leadership is demonstrated through service, sacrifice, participation and results. If Chief Gani Topba believes the stakeholders’ meeting was unnecessary or lacked legitimacy, nothing prevents him from convening another meeting and demonstrating that he can attract traditional rulers, professionals, academics, clergy and youths. Different approaches to development should therefore be allowed to compete on their merits.

The proposal for a unified youth platform should equally not be presented as an attempt to silence Ogoni youths. Rather, it should be examined against the reality of numerous organisations claiming to represent different segments of Ogoni youths. Too many competing organisations can create confusion, weaken collective bargaining power and make it difficult for genuine concerns affecting young people to receive coordinated attention. A credible umbrella body, if properly constituted and broadly accepted, could strengthen the voice of Ogoni youths and provide an organised platform for employment, education, skills acquisition, security and governance. Ogoniland has experienced enough institutional fragmentation. Its history contains painful lessons about divisions that allow personal interests, leadership struggles and competing platforms to overshadow collective objectives. The present generation should learn that destroying institutions one does not control damages society.

The question should be: who benefits when Ogoni youths remain divided and every attempt at unity is interpreted as rivalry? Against this background, KAGOTE deserves objective scrutiny rather than blanket condemnation. Any organisation with influence must be accountable, but accountability is different from a campaign aimed at delegitimising initiatives associated with its leadership. Chief Lesi Maol’s activities through KAGOTE and Giolee Global Resources Ltd have attracted attention in areas including skills development, education, youth empowerment and community support. Such interventions should be assessed on their impact and encouraged where they serve the public good. Those who believe Chief Maol is not doing enough should not stop at criticism. They should show Ogoni what they can do better. Where are the alternative skills programmes? Where are the educational interventions? Where are the youth empowerment schemes? Where are the community development initiatives?

It is easy to criticise someone who is building; it is harder to mobilise resources and sustain programmes that benefit ordinary people. This is not to suggest that Chief Maol or KAGOTE should be immune from criticism. No leader or institution should be beyond scrutiny, and legitimate questions about accountability must be welcomed. But responsible criticism should be based on facts, evidence and alternative ideas. Personal attacks and attempts to destroy initiatives simply because their leadership is not controlled by particular interests cannot provide the solutions Ogoniland needs. What is unfolding is bigger than one meeting, one statement or even two individuals. It reflects a broader contest over influence and leadership. If anyone believes KAGOTE is taking Ogoni in the wrong direction, the response is to present a better direction. If anyone believes Lesi Maol is not doing enough, the answer is to demonstrate what more can be done. Ogoni does not need leaders competing over who can destroy another’s platform; it needs leaders competing over who can create opportunities, improve education, promote security, empower youths and contribute to development.

The people are looking beyond rhetoric. They are examining records, observing programmes and measuring results. No individual owns the permanent right to speak for Ogoni or determine which organisation must survive or collapse. Ogoni must replace the politics of personal control with a culture of ideas, service, accountability and measurable achievement. Differences should produce better alternatives, not destruction. Every Ogoni leader and stakeholder should ask whether his actions are strengthening the region or deepening divisions. Ogoni needs people who can build bridges, institutions, opportunities and hope. Those who genuinely love Ogoni should support what is good, correct what is wrong and offer better alternatives. The future of Ogoni will not be secured by destroying its builders, but by encouraging more people to build.

onest people can reach different conclusions based on different experiences and information. Public debate should therefore remain respectful, evidence-based and open to correction. Truth is strengthened by honest examination, not insults, suspicion or personal attacks. The phrase “Truth has no agenda” carries a powerful message. Truth does not belong to any political party, ethnic group, religion or ideology. It cannot be permanently owned or manipulated by those in power. Governments change, institutions rise and fall, and public opinion shifts, but truth remains indifferent to popularity.The real test of character comes when speaking honestly threatens influence, privilege or personal advantage. It is easy to defend justice when there is nothing to lose. It is far more difficult when the truth may cost us something. That is when conscience must rise above convenience.

Society must therefore cultivate a culture where integrity is valued more than comfort and accountability is welcomed rather than feared. Leaders should learn to accept criticism without hostility, while citizens should express disagreement responsibly. Progress becomes difficult when honest questions are treated as acts of disloyalty. Ultimately, every society must choose the future it desires. A nation built on silence cannot sustain justice, while a community where comfort consistently outweighs conscience risks making injustice ordinary. But people committed to truth, even when inconvenient, lay the foundation for stronger institutions, trustworthy leadership and lasting progress. The call is not to condemn those who succeed or to glorify perpetual criticism. It is to remember that privilege should never silence principle, influence should never replace integrity, and personal gain should never outweigh the public good. Truth has no hidden agenda. It seeks neither applause nor favour. It simply asks to be spoken, defended and lived. When truth is silenced by comfort, everyone eventually pays the price.

By:  King Onunwor
Continue Reading

Opinion

When Comfort Silences The Truth  

Published

on

Quote: “Privilege should never silence principle, influence should never replace integrity, and personal gain should never outweigh the public good.”

There is an old saying that truth does not fear investigation. Genuine truth neither depends on applause nor seeks permission to exist. It remains constant whether celebrated or rejected, defended or ignored. Yet, in today’s society, truth often competes with comfort, convenience, loyalty and personal interest. This raises an important question: Can a person remain objective after beginning to benefit from the very system he once criticised? Throughout history, reform movements have been driven by courageous individuals willing to challenge injustice despite personal risks. Their commitment to truth sometimes cost them popularity, comfort, freedom and even their lives. History has also recorded instances where influential voices became quieter after receiving appointments, promotions, contracts, political favours or other advantages.

While motivations cannot always be known, such patterns remind us that personal benefit can sometimes influence public conviction. Human beings naturally seek security, stability and opportunities for themselves and their families. There is nothing wrong with success or advancement. The concern arises when personal comfort replaces public responsibility, or privilege becomes a reason to ignore problems affecting others. One of the greatest dangers facing society is not only corruption or poor governance but the normalisation of silence. Systems rarely collapse overnight. They deteriorate gradually when people who know better decide that speaking the truth is no longer worth the personal cost. Every society therefore depends on citizens willing to ask difficult questions, demand accountability and defend justice, regardless of who benefits or feels uncomfortable.

A person who benefits from a broken system may become less inclined to challenge it. This is not true of everyone, and individuals should not be judged without evidence. Many principled people continue to advocate reform while working within imperfect institutions. Nevertheless, personal interests can sometimes soften criticism, dilute conviction or redirect attention from uncomfortable realities.Perhaps the greatest threat to truth is not open opposition but quiet compromise. Censorship is easy to recognise; silence purchased through convenience is harder to detect. When people gradually stop asking questions, demanding transparency or defending principles they once considered important, society should ask whether something has changed. Perspectives may genuinely evolve with new information, but incentives can also influence what people say—or choose not to say.

This is why citizens should not place blind trust in personalities. Ideas, principles and actions should be examined independently. Loyalty to individuals must never exceed loyalty to truth. Political affiliation, professional status, financial success or social influence should not exempt anyone from accountability. A healthy democracy depends on independent thinking, not unquestioning allegiance.The responsibility to speak truth does not belong only to journalists, activists, judges, religious leaders or opposition politicians. It belongs to every citizen. The teacher who refuses to manipulate facts, the public servant who rejects corruption, the business owner who acts with integrity, the parent who teaches honesty and the young person who chooses principle over popularity all contribute to a more just society. However, defending truth also requires humility.

We must not assume that everyone who disagrees with us has been compromised.

By: Michael  Abraham

Continue Reading

Opinion

Poor Federal Roads: The Oshiomhole’s  Outburst

Published

on

Quote:”Although the Federal Ministry of Works is responsible for road construction and rehabilitation while the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) oversees maintenance, road maintenance has consistently taken a back seat”

The recent outburst by the lawmaker representing Edo North Senatorial District, Senator Adams Oshiomhole, over the deplorable condition of federal roads in Edo and Delta states has once again drawn national attention to one of Nigeria’s most persistent infrastructure challenges. During Senate plenary last Wednesday, Oshiomhole criticized the Minister of Works, David Umahi, accusing the Federal Ministry of Works of neglecting major federal highways in Edo and Delta while prioritizing new road projects. According to him, the government should focus on rehabilitating existing roads that have become impassable before embarking on new construction. He identified the Benin-Warri, Benin-Asaba, Benin-Auchi and Auchi-Okene highways as strategic economic corridors that have deteriorated to alarming levels, making travel difficult for commuters and motorists while increasing the cost of transporting goods and services.

The senator also alleged that road projects affecting Edo and Delta states were repeatedly omitted from budgetary provisions and that some interventions were only undertaken following directives from President Bola Tinubu. Ironically, the Federal Government has consistently reiterated its commitment to reconstructing and rehabilitating federal roads across the country. The Minister of Works has repeatedly assured Nigerians that the government is deploying reinforced concrete technology to build more durable highways capable of withstanding the country’s climatic conditions. Despite these assurances, vast sections of federal road across the country remain in deplorable condition. The consequences are enormous. Federal highways serve as the backbone of the nation’s economy, carrying more than 90 per cent of passengers and freight.

They connect ports, airports, industrial centres, state capitals and agricultural belts, facilitating the movement of food, fuel, cement and manufactured goods. When these roads fail, the entire economy suffers. Although the Federal Ministry of Works is responsible for road construction and rehabilitation while the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) oversees maintenance, road maintenance has consistently taken a back seat. The result is a recurring cycle in which newly completed roads quickly deteriorate while existing ones are left to collapse. The economic consequences are severe. Bad roads increase transportation costs, contribute to food inflation, delay the movement of goods from ports to markets, increase vehicle maintenance expenses and lead to avoidable road crashes that claim countless lives every year.

To address these challenges, the Federal Government has introduced initiatives such as the Highway Development and Management Initiative (HDMI), which seeks to attract private investment into road maintenance through concessions and tolling. While the initiative holds promise, public acceptance will depend largely on visible improvements in road quality and transparent management of toll revenues. Similarly, the Road Infrastructure Tax Credit Scheme is designed to encourage companies to finance the reconstruction of strategic highways in exchange for tax credits. While the scheme has shown promise, its ability to address road infrastructure challenges equitably across the country remains to be seen. Other countries facing similar infrastructure challenges have demonstrated that sustainable road management requires a different approach.

Rwanda and Morocco, for instance, have prioritized dedicated road maintenance funds, performance-based contracts that reward quality rather than kilometers constructed, and policies that allocate a significant proportion of road budgets to maintenance instead of new construction. Nigeria can draw useful lessons from these experiences. Maintenance funding should be increased and protected because preventive maintenance is far cheaper than complete reconstruction. Public-private partnerships should be expanded with adequate safeguards, transparent tolling policies and independent monitoring. Development finance institutions should support contractors with affordable financing to minimize disruptions caused by delayed government payments. Road designs should withstand heavier rainfall and flooding, while compensation and right-of-way issues must be resolved before projects begin to avoid unnecessary delays.

FERMA should also prioritize durable, high-quality road maintenance over the shoddy repairs that have become all too common. Ultimately, Nigerians are not asking for perfect roads; they simply want roads that are safe, durable and properly maintained. While new highways are desirable, a well-maintained five-kilometer stretch is often far more valuable to road users than a much longer road that quickly falls into disrepair. The media, civil society, the National Assembly and Nigerians must continue to hold the government accountable by monitoring road projects and demanding better results. Good roads are not a privilege but a right of every citizen. With tax credit schemes, concessions and other funding mechanisms already in place, what is now required is political will, transparency and consistent implementation. However, Senator Oshiomhole’s criticism also invites legitimate public reflection. 

Many Nigerians have asked what the condition of these same federal roads was during his eight-year tenure as Governor of Edo State. Several governors, including those of Rivers State at different times, undertook repairs on critical federal roads within their states and subsequently sought reimbursement from the Federal Government. It is therefore fair to ask whether similar interventions were pursued during Oshiomhole’s administration. Public officials, whether serving or former, should be judged by the same standard. Constructive criticism is essential in a democracy, but it carries greater weight when matched by a demonstrable record of action. Nigerians expect those entrusted with public office to address pressing challenges while they have the authority to do so, rather than becoming vocal critics only after leaving office

By:  Calista Ezeaku
Continue Reading

Trending