Opinion

By Saifullahi Attahir

In his article, titled “Yar’adua: Great Expectation, Disappointing Outcome,” Mallam Nasir El-Rufa’i wrote that the late Umaru Musa Yar’adua graduated from ABU in 1975 and did his youth service (NYSC) at Holy Child College in Lagos as a chemistry teacher.

After the service year, Yar’adua took a government job at the College of Arts, Science and Technology (CAST), Zaria, as a chemistry lecturer. He later obtained his MSc in 1978, while continuing his teaching career at the same CAST until 1983, when he joined his brother’s business after the latter resigned from the National Service as second-in-command to General Olusegun Obasanjo during the handover to civilian rule in 1979.

The above narrative can attest to the clear moral right Yar’adua has over Mallam Nasir, despite the latter’s constant attacks. I’m sure that in the years between 1976 and 1983, the late Umaru could have accessed all the privileges a graduate could have as a brother to a senior military officer and son of the establishment. His service year in the grammar school and his continued lecturing job at CAST Zaria can testify to a great deal about the individual Yar’adua, his brother Shehu, and the regime.

As a young and well-connected chemistry graduate, Umaru Yar’adua could have access to serve in the newly established NNPC, top agricultural firms, top Lagos banks, or even become a legislative aide in the green or red chamber.

Securing a job through connections is a common and sometimes effective method. Networking, which involves leveraging personal and professional relationships, can significantly increase your chances of finding a job. Indeed, many talented and industrious individuals can be harnessed through this process, although it may be perceived as nepotistic. Hadiza Bala Usman got her start at BPE by El Rufa’i through a similar path.

Of course, time has changed; it’s now normal that specific places, such as CBN, FIRS, NPA, BPE, top private firms, and Federal MDAs, are not accessible to ordinary corps members. We can still recall a time when a brother of Nigeria’s second-in-command opted to attend a grammar school and later took a teaching job at a college in Zaria. But still, that doesn’t prevent him from becoming Nigeria’s president.

While the 5th May remembrance has been immortalised in the hearts of Nigerians despite Yar’adua’s short stint as president, Mallam El-Rufa’i was still battling and settling past scores and fights.

Saifullahi Attahir wrote from Federal University Dutse via saifullahiattahir93@gmail.com 

 By Nasiru Ibrahim 

The channels of distribution from exploration to consumers in Nigeria’s oil industry—before Dangote’s refinery—began with crude oil extracted by NNPC Ltd. and international companies such as Shell, Mobil, and Chevron. The crude was sold to NNPC or exported. Due to the poor performance of local refineries, such as those in Warri and Port Harcourt, Nigeria relied on importing refined fuel through NNPC and major marketers, including TotalEnergies, Oando, and Conoil.

Once imported, the fuel was stored in depots like Apapa, Atlas Cove, Ibru Jetty, and Calabar. From there, independent transport companies such as Petrolog, TSL Logistics, AA Rano, and MRS transported it by tanker to filling stations. These stations—both major and independent—sold the fuel directly to consumers. 

Alhaji Aliko Dangote is on the verge of taking full control of Nigeria’s downstream oil sector, covering everything from marketing and retail to transportation and distribution of petroleum products. In economic terms, this is known as vertical integration. Many Nigerians are now raising concerns that Dangote could dominate the entire fuel market. This comes after Dangote Petroleum Refinery released a press statement outlining its upcoming plans for fuel supply and distribution.

In the statement dated June 16, 2025, the company announced that it will start selling petrol (PMS) and diesel in the Nigerian market from August 15, 2025. To support this, it plans to roll out 4,000 Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)-powered trucks across the country to deliver fuel directly to buyers at no additional logistics cost.

Dangote also revealed that it will offer credit facilities to credible buyers who purchase at least 500,000 litres of PMS or diesel. 

These buyers include registered oil marketers, manufacturers, telecom companies, airlines, and other large fuel consumers. The company states that this move will enhance fuel availability, reduce reliance on imports, and bolster Nigeria’s energy security by overseeing both refining and distribution.

With Dangote’s new initiative, he buys crude oil from NNPC and refines it here in Nigeria. Then, using his trucks, he moves the fuel to his storage depots and delivers it straight to filling stations. This means no need for middlemen or prominent marketers—everything is handled by Dangote’s team from start to finish.

However, while this could lower fuel prices and ease supply challenges, it has also sparked fears about reduced competition. Some worry that giving too much power to one player could lead to a market monopoly, calling for proper regulation to ensure fairness in the downstream sector.

Economists, policymakers, businessmen, entrepreneurs, and economics students like myself are actively considering the potential impact of this new initiative on oil marketers, the Nigerian economy, employment, exchange rates, consumers, filling stations, climate change, and other critical factors. Many are questioning whether this move will yield positive results. However, we cannot understand the implications unless we first examine the structure and components of Nigeria’s downstream sector, including Dangote himself, his competitors, those affected by his actions, and all other players in the supply chain up to the final consumer.

In economics and policy development, a long-standing debate exists about how policies should be evaluated. Some scholars argue that policies should be judged by their outcomes, while others believe they should be assessed based on their intentions. For example, Milton Friedman emphasised that policies must be judged by their results, not their intentions. 

In contrast, economists like Paul Samuelson acknowledged the importance of considering both intent and context, especially when outcomes are not yet visible. This debate is relevant here. It may be premature to conclude whether Dangote’s new initiative is positive or negative solely based on expected results, as those outcomes have not yet materialised. 

Nevertheless, some would argue that judging the initiative by its intention — such as improving fuel availability, reducing logistics costs, and enhancing energy security — is still meaningful, especially in economic policy, where many decisions are based on projected or long-term effects. Evaluating intentions enables us to gauge the direction of policy, even in the absence of immediate evidence.

Nigeria’s downstream sector is responsible for refining, retailing, distribution, transportation, and marketing of petroleum products. It comprises several companies and regulatory bodies, including NNPCL, Dangote Refinery, Oando, MRS, AA Rano, ExxonMobil, Danmarna, Aliko Oil, and many others. While Dangote operates across both the midstream and downstream sectors, his actions may also indirectly affect the upstream sector, particularly through their influence on demand, supply, and the pricing of petroleum products.

Instead of focusing solely on the structure of the downstream sector, I believe we should carefully consider both the potential benefits and drawbacks of this new initiative by Dangote Refinery, without completely dismissing Friedman’s view on judging policies strictly by results.

Potential Positive Implications of the New Initiative

Firstly, Dangote’s new initiative will reduce Nigeria’s dependence on imported oil from the Gulf and Europe. This is beneficial for Nigeria’s foreign exchange (FX) reserves, as less demand for imported fuel means the country will need fewer U.S. dollars for imports. As a result, this could lead to an appreciation of the Naira due to a fall in demand for foreign currency. Additionally, it will improve the trade balance and increase GDP contribution from the domestic oil refining sector.

Secondly, the initiative will create both direct and indirect jobs in Nigeria. Direct employment opportunities will arise for truck drivers, mechanics, technicians, depot workers, and logistics personnel. If Dangote deploys between 2,000 and 4,000 trucks, and each truck requires one to two drivers, along with at least one support mechanic, one depot staff member, and logistics coordinators, this could result in approximately 20,000 direct jobs. Indirect employment opportunities will arise for consultants, accountants, lawyers, filling station managers, as well as workers in catering, cleaning, petrochemicals, fertiliser, plastics, and related industries.

Thirdly, the initiative will enhance fuel accessibility and improve supply chain efficiency, thereby reducing waste and environmental pollution. By taking direct control over storage and distribution, the initiative can eliminate middlemen inefficiencies, potentially reducing fuel scarcity and hoarding, which often drive up inflation. With direct sales to filling stations, illegal practices like tanker swaps and product diversion by middlemen can be curbed. Furthermore, the use of Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)-powered trucks will lower transportation costs, reduce emissions, and increase domestic gas utilisation, thereby boosting gas revenue.

Fourthly, the initiative is expected to lower fuel prices, which is a major driver of inflation in Nigeria. By eliminating international shipping fees, foreign refinery profit margins, and import levies—all of which form a significant portion of the overall fuel cost—the retail price per unit of fuel could drop. Lower fuel prices can ease the cost of living, reduce inflationary pressures, and improve economic stability.

Fifthly, the initiative will strengthen Nigeria’s energy security in the face of global supply chain disruptions. For instance, ongoing conflicts such as the Israel-Iran and Russia-Ukraine wars, or geopolitical tensions in the Middle East, can threaten the global fuel supply. Additionally, OPEC+ efforts to raise oil prices increase external vulnerabilities. By reducing dependence on imported fuel, Nigeria becomes more resilient to global shocks, ensuring steady availability of fuel at domestic filling stations even during international crises.

Sixthly, from a broader perspective, this initiative positions Nigeria as a regional supplier of refined petroleum products in Africa, reducing the continent’s reliance on Europe and the Gulf. This shift enhances Nigeria’s foreign policy leverage and strategic influence, particularly within regional and international institutions such as ECOWAS, AfCFTA, AfDB, and Afreximbank. A robust domestic refining industry enhances investor confidence and may attract more foreign direct investment (FDI) in the long term. Investors are more likely to commit to economies with stable energy supply, regional trade advantages, and reduced exposure to global price shocks.

Potential Negative Implications

Firstly, there is a serious economic fear that this could lead to a monopoly, and many Nigerians have already raised concerns about that. The Petroleum Tanker Drivers and Owners Association of Nigeria (PATROAN) and the Independent Petroleum Marketers Association of Nigeria (IPMAN) have both expressed worry that Dangote might dominate the entire downstream oil sector. In economics, when a single company controls the whole supply chain, from refining to selling, it stifles competition. And when there’s no competition, prices can be fixed unfairly, small businesses get pushed out, and consumers suffer in the long run.

Secondly, there’s the risk of predatory pricing. This occurs when a powerful company sells at very low prices—sometimes even below cost—to drive smaller competitors out of the market. Dangote might do this since he doesn’t import fuel and can afford to sell at a lower price. However, after chasing them out, he can raise prices at any time, leaving people with no choice and putting consumers at risk of exploitation. This leads to what is called “deadweight loss” in economics, where both individuals and the economy lose out.

Thirdly, many jobs could be lost, especially among small fuel marketers, distributors, and transporters who previously imported and sold fuel themselves. Dangote is now doing everything directly—refining, distributing, and even retailing—which means companies like AA Rano, Danmarna, Aliko Oil, and many others might be pushed out or forced to operate under unfair terms. This is already affecting their businesses, especially in the North, and could lead to job losses in areas that rely heavily on these companies.

Fourthly, government policy interference and the role of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) could create more problems. NNPCL also operates in the downstream sector and has partnerships and influence that could either support or conflict with Dangote’s activities. Past issues, such as unclear pricing, fuel subsidy mismanagement, and delays in policy implementation, demonstrate that when government agencies operate without transparency, it can create more confusion than solutions. This could make it easier for big companies like Dangote to influence decisions in their favour while others suffer.

Fifthly, new investors might avoid the sector. If one company already controls everything, what’s left for others to invest in? People may view the fuel business in Nigeria as a “one-man game,” making it challenging to attract new ideas, competition, and investment. This can slow down innovation and limit the country’s long-term progress in energy.

Sixthly, there’s a risk of regional imbalance. Dangote might focus more on high-demand urban areas where there’s more profit, and this could lead to fuel shortages in rural or northern regions. Small marketers who once served these communities may not survive, and that means remote areas could suffer more from fuel scarcity. This may exacerbate existing regional inequalities.

Possible solutions 

Firstly, don’t ban fuel imports immediately. Let other marketers continue importing fuel, at least for the time being. If only one company controls the supply, prices may rise or stay unstable. The government can grant import waivers to others, ensuring that competition remains alive and fuel remains affordable.

Secondly, we should repair our old refineries and support the development of new ones. Dangote shouldn’t be the only one refining fuel. If we repair the Warri, Port Harcourt, and Kaduna refineries and encourage small private ones, we’ll have a more local supply. That also helps in the future if we want to export after meeting our own needs. 

Thirdly, ensure that other players can access storage and transportation facilities. If only Dangote had the port, pipelines, and trucks, smaller marketers wouldn’t survive. The government can step in to make sure these facilities are shared fairly, with clear rules and affordable fees.

Fourthly, don’t forget far places like Northern states and rural towns. Most fuel may remain in the South, where Dangote is located. Therefore, the government should support distribution to remote areas by encouraging group buying or establishing shared fuel depots. Everyone deserves access, not just those near the refinery.

Fifthly, expand the availability of fuel alternatives like CNG to more locations. If we’re shifting to compressed natural gas (CNG), it should not be exclusive to the rich or city dwellers. Rural and remote areas require the same support,including CNG buses, filling stations, and awareness initiatives.

Finally, monitor prices and ensure fairness. We need a simple system that tracks and shows fuel prices across regions. That way, if one company tries to raise prices unfairly, the public and the government will be aware.

Ibrahim is an economist and writer based in Jigawa State, Nigeria. He holds a degree in Economics from Bayero University, Kano. With a background in journalism at Forsige, he currently works as a research assistant and contributes expert commentary on economics, finance, and business.

By Zayyad I. Muhammad

The growing political controversy surrounding the Tinubu/Shettima presidential ticket for the 2027 general elections came to the fore at the Northeast Zonal Meeting of the All Progressives Congress (APC), held in Gombe on Saturday, June 14, 2025. Party leaders, stakeholders, and delegates gathered to endorse Tinubu for a second term, amid rising internal debates over the party’s viability, unity, and future direction ahead of the next electoral cycle.

If President Tinubu decides to drop Vice President Kashim Shettima in favour of another Muslim from the North, it could reignite the deeply divisive Muslim-Muslim ticket debate that stirred significant controversy during the 2023 presidential election.

Retaining Vice President Kashim Shettima may help the Tinubu camp avoid reigniting the contentious Muslim-Muslim ticket debate, but it also raises questions about the ticket’s continued strategic value. While the pairing was originally calculated to consolidate support among Muslim voters in the North during the 2023 election, changing political dynamics suggest that the ticket may no longer hold the same appeal. With growing dissatisfaction in parts of the North and shifting voter sentiments nationwide, some within the APC believe that the Tinubu/Shettima combination may now offer diminishing electoral returns.

Even if President Tinubu opts for a new Muslim running mate, the Muslim-Muslim ticket may no longer deliver the same political dividends in the North. A growing number of Northern-Muslim voters reportedly feel underrepresented or sidelined in the current administration, despite the religious alignment of the top two offices. 

Discontent over perceived sidelining in federal appointments, economic policies, and security outcomes has weakened the assumption that religious pairing alone can secure Northern loyalty. As such, simply replacing Shettima with another Northern Muslim may not be enough to re-energise the base or guarantee widespread support in 2027.

Should President Tinubu replace Shettima with another Muslim from the North, it would likely provoke renewed backlash from Christian communities nationwide, especially in the North. Many would raise the familiar and legitimate question: Are there no capable Northern Christians fit to serve as Vice President? In a country where religious identity plays a central role in politics and representation.

If President Tinubu chooses a Northern Christian as his running mate, he risks alienating a core part of the APC’s support base. These Northern Muslim voters have historically been the backbone of the party’s electoral strength in the north. Many within this bloc view the Muslim-Muslim ticket as both symbolic and strategic. Without votes from the north, Tinubu’s second term will have key-leg

Selecting a running mate from the Northwest could trigger resistance or even quiet rebellion from the Northeast, which may interpret the move as a political slight or marginalisation. Having produced the current Vice President, the Northeast might expect to retain the position as a matter of continuity and recognition of its contribution to the party’s 2023 victory. Overlooking the region could stir resentment among its political leaders and grassroots supporters, potentially weakening the APC’s hold in key Northeastern states. It may also open the door for opposition parties to exploit regional grievances and rally disaffected voters under the banner of regional justice and equity. The  NorthCentral will also ask some questions- Tinubu won four states in north central- Kogi, Benue, Kwara and Niger

Choosing another Muslim running mate from the Northeast, but outside the Borno-Yobe axis, could provoke backlash from that axis. The Borno-Yobe axis, long considered the APC’s stronghold in the Northeast, may view such a move as a betrayal of loyalty, especially given that Borno was the only state in the region that delivered a win for Tinubu in the 2023 presidential election. Overlooking this issue in favour of another Northeastern state could result in protest votes or political apathy from key stakeholders and voters who feel their support is being taken for granted. In a tightly contested 2027 race, such fractures could prove costly.

Ultimately, the debate surrounding the Tinubu/Shettima ticket for 2027 is shaping up to be an early and avoidable self-inflicted wound for the APC. Rather than uniting the party around governance and strategy, it has reopened an unnecessary debate and controversy. This is fueling unnecessary tension within the party ranks and distracting from core governance issues that could strengthen the APC’s re-election prospects. 

Yet, amid all the speculation and lobbying, it is important to remember that the selection of a running mate remains the sole constitutional prerogative of the presidential candidate. While input from party leaders and stakeholders matters, the final decision rests with President Tinubu, who must now weigh loyalty, optics, regional dynamics, and electoral viability in making a choice that could define both his legacy and the APC’s future.

Zayyad I. Muhammad writes from Abuja via zaymohd@yahoo.com.

By Salisu Uba Kofar Wambai

Audu Bulama Bukarti is a noisemaker who understands nothing about politics. His recent comments on the newly formed opposition coalition are not only shallow but also dangerously misleading. While millions of Nigerians are applauding this coalition as a timely and necessary step to challenge the Bola Ahmed Tinubu administration and rescue the country from economic suffocation, Bukarti — a London-based lawyer — chose to mock the effort on social media.

Rather than supporting a credible and coordinated opposition, he is promoting a vague, unstructured “youth political party,” claiming that only the youth can bring about change. This may sound attractive on paper, but it shows just how politically naive he is. Politics isn’t wishful thinking — it’s a game of structure, influence, visibility, and strategic alliances.

Just like filmmaking, where unknown actors rarely carry a blockbuster, political success depends on familiar, trusted, and tested figures. The leaders in the ADC-led coalition may not be perfect, but they possess the political weight, experience, and resources to help Nigeria emerge from this crisis. They are not saints, but they know what the people are going through, and their unity reflects the seriousness of the moment.

We must not forget the damage the Tinubu-led APC government has caused: the reckless removal of fuel subsidy, the crippling naira devaluation, inflation that has turned food and transportation into luxury, and a general sense of hopelessness among ordinary citizens. Nigerians are hungry and angry — and they need relief, not political experiments.

Bukarti’s idea that youth alone can take over now is not only unrealistic, but also risky. It will divide the opposition, weaken the resistance, and give the APC a smooth ride into another term of hardship. The youth are important, yes. However, they must join hands with established political structures to make an impact, rather than isolating themselves in emotional idealism.

The ADC coalition brings together people who understand Nigerian politics, who have reach, recognition, and machinery. That’s what it takes to defeat a regime that has weaponised poverty and punished the poor. Unity is the only way forward. This is not a time to gamble or experiment — it is a time to act wisely and strategically.

Bukarti’s obsession with promoting his “youth party” at this critical point raises serious questions. Is it merely ignorance, or is he playing a hidden role to distract and sabotage the coalition’s genuine efforts? Either way, Nigerians must not be fooled. The real enemy is not the coalition, but the hunger, insecurity, and hopelessness forced on us by the Tinubu government.

This is not the time for ego or empty noise. What Nigerians need are leaders with courage, experience, and structure, not social media loudspeakers who offer nothing but confusion. Bukarti should either contribute meaningfully or step aside.

The ADC coalition may not be perfect, but it is Nigeria’s best shot at ending the nightmare. This moment demands unity, not division — strategy, not noise — and above all, action, not confusion.

Salisu Uba Kofar Wambai wrote from Kano. He can be reached via salisunews@gmail.com.

By Oladoja M.O

Benue bleeds again. A recent massacre in Yelewata village, where at least 100 to 150 lives were claimed, cast a shadow over headlines, but smothered the deeper truth of decades-long sorrow. As images flash across social media in real time, outrage erupts. But near-instant outrage often substitutes for understanding. And in Benue, where tragedy is almost normalised, such performative empathy does more harm than good.

A Land on Fire, not for the First Time. This is not a one-off disaster. The roots go deep:

The 2001 Zaki‑Biam, where Nigerian soldiers massacred hundreds of Tiv civilians, razing villages in a brutal military reprisal, the 2016 Agatu Massacre, where more than 300, possibly up to 500, villagers were slaughtered during herders‑farmers clashes, leaving thousands displaced, the Odugbeho 2021, where suspected Fulani herders killed at least 40 residents in Agatu LGA, part of a continued wave of violence. In April 2022, over 25 were murdered in coordinated herder attacks on farming communities in Goma, up till this latest carnage, where victims were shot and burned in their homes, echoing a tragic pattern.

Between 2015 and March 2023 alone, 5,138 lives were lost across Benue in herder‑farmer attacks. Under President Buhari’s term, Benue became a killing field; 6,000 killed, 2 million displaced. The Humanitarian Crisis has been ongoing under the surface of fleeting headline moments.

The tragedy is not fodder for political stunts. The moment a video goes online, hashtags spiral: blaming the President, vilifying the government, and stirring political gain. But very few pause to ask: who suffers most in these cycles of condemnation? The dead do not return. The displaced families do not reclaim their farms. The real loss is in our silence, our unwillingness to grasp the whole before pointing fingers. Yes, government leaders, state and federal, bear responsibility.

The 2017 anti‑open grazing law in Benue was well-meaning. However, it remains a paper tiger: characterised by uneven enforcement, a lack of ranches, and feeble federal support. President Tinubu’s speeches and increased defence budgets amount to little on the ground when arms still flow, and security forces remain under-resourced. And when political opponents oversimplify the conflict as mere religious persecution or ethnic cleansing, nuance is lost.

At the heart of all these disputes is a struggle over scarce resources, including land, water, and natural resources, as well as grazing routes, which is exacerbated by climate change. Historically, grazing corridors existed. However, escalating population growth, farmland encroachment, and desertification have reduced these spaces. Compounding this: centuries-old migration, religious and ethnic tensions, cattle rustling, and political exclusion of Fulani groups. Each side bears accumulated grievances; farmers over burnt crops, herders over stolen cattle.

This is fundamentally communal, not merely political. Solutions must be rooted in non‑kinetic, non‑violent engagement. Dialogue tables must sit Fulani herders alongside Tiv farmers and local officials. Traditional leaders, ranchers, security services, and federal authorities must all negotiate a win-win framework, including grazing reserves, clear land-use maps, property rights enforcement, and swift justice for perpetrators. Yes, bring the perpetrators to book. Those profiting from killing, whether herders or cartels supplying arms, must face speedy consequences. However, we cannot rely solely on force. We need intelligence systems, community policing, and legal reform. We need peaceful co-management of land and water.

It’s time for Nigerians to shift from hashtag empathy to hard-won solidarity. Unleashing threads of blame on social media while clicking “share” does little for grieving widows or orphaned children. 

Recording a burn-out home instead of rescuing a trapped neighbor is the hallmark of a self‑absorbed age. 

Public discourse must evolve from political opportunism to intellectual empathy. From performance to purpose. When presidents speak, let’s demand substance: “Where are the ranches? Where is land‑use reform? Who funds security at the village level?”

We demand action, but not at the cost of conscience. We must hold leaders accountable while still listening. Civil society must stop yelling into empty rooms, and start negotiating into full ones.

A practical roadmap might include;

Reviving grazing reserves with clear boundaries, monitored jointly by local farmers and herders, enforcement of anti-grazing laws, backed with ranching incentives and federal support, swift prosecution of killers, with community courts supported by federal justice, strengthening local security, with trained village vigilantes under lawful guidelines. Climate adaptation, planting trees, building dams, restoring soil to reduce migration pressure, and, more importantly, promoting inter‑communal peace‑building through youth exchanges, shared markets, and local councils.

If Nigeria continues to allow Benue’s blood to stain its conscience, we’ll face another generation hardened by loss, distrust, and rage. A country that waits for television headlines before honouring its fallen has already forgotten them. Benue’s suffering needs more than outrage; it needs us: grounded, knowledgeable, purposeful. We must reject hollow political theatre and demand real solutions. Because beneath the noise and the blood, lies an entire community crying for justice, and silence is not an option.

Oladoja M.O writes from Abuja and can be reached at: mayokunmark@gmail.com.

By Muhammad Umar Shehu

Parental care is slowly disappearing in today’s Nigeria, and the consequences of this are evident. The family used to be the first point of training where values were shaped and morals were taught. Now, many homes are broken by the absence of emotional, physical or financial support. 

Parents are either too busy chasing survival or have surrendered their roles to the internet, peer groups and street culture. And the result is right in front of us. Young people with no sense of direction, crime becoming a normal path, and a country overwhelmed by insecurity.

A child not guided at home is more likely to find purpose in the wrong places. We are now dealing with the consequences of that neglect. From cultism to kidnapping, cyber fraud to political thuggery, we are raising a generation that is desperate, angry and emotionally abandoned. You cannot discuss national security without addressing family failure. Every bandit and every drug addict started as someone’s child.

At the same time, some parents do too much of the wrong kind of parenting. They shelter their kids from reality, provide for everything but discipline nothing and expect the schools to build what they have not started. Some parents no longer listen to their children. They demand excellence without showing concern for mental or emotional well-being. That is why depression is rising among young people. That is why suicide, addiction and social vices keep growing silently.

It is true that we no longer have the strong community system that once helped raise children. But there are still ways to rebuild. The society needs to encourage good parenting by example, not just by words or scolding. We need honest conversations between parents and children. We need schools to include real-life education, not just grades, but responsibility, empathy and values. We need religious and traditional leaders to focus less on miracles and more on morality and family life.

It is easy to blame the government, but even if they build roads and power, we will still collapse as a nation if we do not raise humans with a conscience. No law can replace the love and discipline of a present parent. And no society can grow when its children are lost.

If we want to fix this country, we must go back to our roots. Parents need to be present, not just physically, but also emotionally and morally. Being a parent is not just about giving birth or paying school fees. It is about being a guide, a mentor and a strong emotional backbone. Let us not expect society to raise the children we refused to raise. If the home fails, everything else will.

This country needs healing, and it starts in the family.

Muhammad Umar Shehu wrote from Gombe via umarmuhammadshehu2@gmail.com.

By Lawal Dahiru Mamman

A senior colleague once shared a thought that has stayed with me for years. While discussing the burdens of parenthood, he described how fathers would go to great lengths to provide for their children, often at the expense of their own comfort. 

He explained that for every penny earned, the first question in a father’s mind is, “What do the children need?” That struck a chord. With each passing day, as I grow older, I find myself reflecting on how my father silently sacrificed to ensure our needs were met. 

These memories linger like a background hum in my consciousness. What becomes clearer with time is that we often miss what is right in front of us. We benefit from the comfort, the food, the shelter, the school fees, and the security,without giving much thought to the man behind it all. 

It is the classic case of not seeing the elephant in the room or, as the saying goes, not seeing the wood for the trees. It is no surprise, then, that some people have questioned why there seem to be more songs, poems, and films celebrating mothers than those appreciating fathers. 

While we may lack precise statistics to prove this imbalance, popular culture seems to confirm the observation. From the nursery rhyme “Who sat and watched my infant head…” titled “My Mother,” many of us were introduced to the emotional pull of maternal devotion. 

Over time, several explanations have emerged for this artistic focus. Mothers are often perceived as more emotionally accessible. The mother-child bond, portrayed as warm, nurturing, and unconditional, lends itself easily to emotional expression in music, film, and poetry.

Cultural symbolism also plays a role. Across different societies, mothers are often regarded as the emotional anchors of the family. This perception makes them natural muses for stories about love, sacrifice, and resilience. 

Moreover, many creatives draw from personal experience, with some having been raised primarily by their mothers. And then there is the reality of audience connection — people often relate more universally to stories about mothers. 

All of that said, as we commemorate Father’s Day, it is crucial — now more than ever — to reflect on and appreciate the often-unnoticed contributions that fathers make. While mothers are frequently, and rightly, celebrated for their warmth and care, many fathers quietly go about their roles with little attention or applause.

Providing for the family remains one of the most visible expressions of a father’s love. Fathers work tirelessly to ensure there is food on the table, school fees are paid, and their children live comfortably. As children, we may take these things for granted. 

It is only with maturity that we begin to realise the depth of their commitment. Fathers often do all this without asking for recognition. Their sacrifices are quiet and enduring — a form of love that speaks less and does more. 

This year’s Father’s Day, like those before it, may have come and gone without noise or public fanfare. But even in the silence, we must recognise the strength of men who daily put their families ahead of themselves. They go without, just so we never lack. 

They deny themselves small luxuries so their children can feel seen, equal, and included. That is not just love — it is selflessness in its purest form. Many of us, growing up, may have perceived our fathers as distant or overly strict. 

But now, we realise that those long hours spent away from home, the constant budgeting, the unspoken worries — they were all signs of a love that often hid behind responsibility. Fathers may not always wear their emotions on their sleeves, but their love is steadfast and deep.

Times have changed, and we now see more women contributing financially to their homes, a development that deserves celebration. Still, it is important not to diminish the sacrifices and emotional labour of fathers. This is not a contest about who does more. 

Instead, it is a moment to reflect on all that fathers do — without complaint, without applause, and often without being asked. If there is such a thing as an unsung hero, the average father fits that description. They show up. 

They stay. They build. And they keep going. So, to every father, stepfather, guardian, and father figure — thank you. Thank you for your sacrifices. Thank you for the quiet strength you bring into our lives. 

Thank you for the roads you walk, so that we can dream. You are the solid foundations upon which we rise. May your love, sacrifice, and strength never go unnoticed again.

Lawal Dahiru Mamman writes from Abuja and can be reached via: dahirulawal90@gmail.com.

By Habib Sani Galadima

In the 1960s, South Korea was poor, dependent on American aid, and still struggling with the scars of war. Then President Park Chung-hee changed the script. His government blocked most consumer imports and poured resources into industries that could export. Credit, subsidies, policy direction; all of it was aimed outward. By 1969, exports were growing at 35.3 percent each year. In the 1970s, they kept climbing at over 25 percent annually. Over two decades, South Korea’s economy grew by nearly 10 percent a year.

The turning point was clear. Instead of surviving on what came in, they built power by focusing on what went out. This same logic applies to language, especially to the future of Hausa.

For decades, translation into Hausa served as a cultural intake valve; bringing foreign ideas, religious teachings, policy language, and literary forms within reach of local audiences. This inward-facing strategy was institutionalized in 1933, when Rupert East and the Translation Bureau (later known as Gaskiya Corporation) launched a historic literature contest. The goal was practical: Western education had arrived in Northern Nigeria, schools were filling up, but there were no Hausa books to read.

That contest birthed a canon. It gave us Ruwan Bagaja by Abubakar Imam, Gandoki by Muhammadu Bello Kagara, Shaihu Umar by Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, Idon Matambayi by Muhammadu Gwarzo, and Jiki Magayi by John Tafida Umaru and Rupert East. These were not just books; they were tools for reading, models for fiction, and blueprints for cultural imagination.

Yet today, the imbalance is unmistakable. Nearly all cultural translation still flows inward, despite the fact that Hausa literature now spans generations, genres, and thousands of titles. We are no longer short on reading material. What we lack is export.

As a result, most outsiders now know Hausa culture through social media behavior, not through its stories. The literary gaze of the mid-to-late 20th century has faded. In its place is a shallow feed, not a studied archive. Our cultural signals are reduced to online patterns. Our worldview is flattened by algorithms.

The hunger for culturally grounded stories is not the problem. The gap lies in output direction. Hausa literature has grown in abundance from contemporary novels (known as Adabin Kasuwar Kano), oral chronicles, audio dramas, and digital fiction communities. But most of this intellectual output remains sealed within Hausa, or reduced to summaries when it crosses into English. This isn’t just a publishing shortfall, it is a missed tool of cultural diplomacy.

A language spoken by tens of millions across West Africa, rich in rhythm and moral nuance, should be shaping global discourse through its stories. The same way Korea exported Samsung and cinema to build national identity, Hausa can export ‘Magana Jari Ce’ or ‘So Aljannar Duniya’ , not just as books, but as blueprints of thought, ethical scaffolding, and communal logic.

But cultural export needs architecture. It means funding skilled translation from Hausa into global languages. It means backing writers who carry both the language and the ambition. It means understanding that prestige is not inherited through English, but built by those willing to make Hausa visible to the world. Until then, we keep importing ideas we already understand in a language that is not our own.

A people who do not share their worldview will one day find it narrated by outsiders. That is the quiet danger we face. Hausa is not vanishing, but it is being compressed. Our literature, our metaphors, our moral reasoning; all remain alive among us, but they rarely cross borders in our own voice. Others interpret us through news cycles and trending hashtags, not through the stories we wrote ourselves.

By Umar Farouk

In a time when Nigeria faces complex challenges in its quest for economic growth, digital inclusion, and youth empowerment, one man has quietly and steadily emerged as a beacon of visionary leadership: Kashifu Inuwa Abdullahi, the Director-General of the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA). Appointed in August 2019, he has not only repositioned the agency but also redefined what leadership in the public sector should look like: effective, transparent, youth-focused, and transformative.

As Nigeria strives toward a diversified economy powered by innovation and technology, Kashifu Inuwa Abdullahi has been the chief architect, laying a strong digital foundation that could sustain the country for decades to come. His work has turned NITDA into a symbol of hope, especially for Nigeria’s millions of tech-savvy, ambitious youths who are eager to shape their future in the global digital economy.

Before Kashif took the reins, NITDA was largely known for its regulatory role. However, under his stewardship, the agency has evolved into a full-blown enabler of digital transformation and economic development. One of his most remarkable achievements is the Strategic Roadmap and Action Plan (SRAP 2021–2024), a bold vision designed to guide Nigeria’s digital aspirations across seven critical pillars, including policy, regulation, digital literacy, innovation, and stakeholder engagement.

As of 2023, over 64% of the goals outlined in the SRAP have been achieved. These include improved IT project clearance (which saved the government over N300 billion), robust cybersecurity policies, and the aggressive push toward digital literacy and inclusivity. By aligning NITDA’s operations with national priorities, such as the National Digital Economy Policy and Strategy (NDEPS), Kashifu has ensured that digital development is no longer a side project; it is now a central engine of governance and growth.

Perhaps one of the most commendable areas where Kashifu Inuwa Abdullahi has excelled is youth empowerment. Nigeria, with over 70% of its population under the age of 30, faces both a challenge and an opportunity. Kashifu saw the potential and acted. He launched multiple initiatives aimed at equipping millions of young Nigerians with the skills, tools, and platforms necessary for success.

Through NITDA’s various capacity-building programs, more than 3 million Nigerians have been trained in essential digital skills. The organisation also offers free online training for young Nigerians in areas such as coding, data science, AI, and cybersecurity. 

There is Tech4COVID, during the pandemic, Kashifu led efforts to upskill thousands of youths and develop local IT solutions to support education, healthcare, and e-commerce, while through ONDI and programs like iHatch and Technology Innovation and Entrepreneurship Support (TIES), hundreds of startups have received technical support, seed funding, and global exposure. These programs have helped thousands of young Nigerians gain employment, start businesses, and even attract international investment. 

Under his leadership, NITDA has taken infrastructure development seriously. He has overseen the establishment of over 600 Digital Economy Centres, including Innovation Hubs, Fab Labs, and IT Community Centres, across the country. Including the virtual Libraries and Smart Classrooms for schools in underserved areas.

Kashifu Inuwa is also an advocate for homegrown solutions. He has actively promoted the use of Made-in-Nigeria software and hardware, ensuring that local IT firms get the recognition and support they deserve.

Furthermore, through the enforcement of the Nigerian Data Protection Regulation (NDPR), NITDA has strengthened data security practices across industries. His tenure has seen the licensing of over 59 Data Protection Compliance Organisations (DPCOs), the creation of thousands of jobs, and the protection of millions of Nigerians’ data from misuse and breaches.

Today, NITDA, under the guidance of Kashifu Inuwa Abdullahi, has become a shining example of integrity and productivity in the government. In 2022, NITDA was awarded as the Most Productive Government Agency and became the first federal agency to earn ISO 27001 certification for information security management. Kashifu has represented Nigeria on global stages at GITEX, the World Summit on the Information Society, and the Smart Africa Alliance, consistently advocating for Nigeria’s place as a rising power in the digital world.

Hence, Kashifu’s vision goes beyond just setting up programs or delivering statistics. He is cultivating a digital culture in which innovation is encouraged, risk-taking is rewarded, and the government actively supports the next generation of builders, creators, and entrepreneurs. He often emphasises that Nigeria must move “from consumption to creation”, and everything he does at NITDA reflects this philosophy.

Kashifu Inuwa Abdullahi is more than just a Director-General; he is a national asset. His leadership at NITDA has ushered in a new era of innovation, digital transformation, and youth empowerment in Nigeria. By investing in people, building infrastructure, and promoting indigenous technology, he is laying the groundwork for a digital economy that benefits all Nigerians.

His story serves as a reminder that when leadership is grounded in vision, integrity, and action, it can truly transform lives and shape the destiny of a nation.

Umar Farouk writes from Abuja. 

By Zayyad I. Muhammad

On Thursday, June 26, 2025, President Bola Tinubu signed into law four landmark tax bills that the National Assembly had recently passed.

Whether one agrees or disagrees with Tinubu’s style of governance, the new tax bills signal a new beginning for Nigerians, businesses, and governments, both at the subnational and federal levels.

Some key  highlights of the Reforms are:

Elimination of Duplication in Tax Collection: One major reform is the establishment of the new Nigeria Revenue Service (NRS), which will now collect revenues that were previously handled by numerous agencies, such as the Nigeria Customs Service, Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA), Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC), NIMASA, and others.

Tax Exemption for Low-Income Earners: With the new provisions, individuals earning ₦800,000 or less per year are now fully exempt from income tax. This is a masterstroke, especially for many people in the North. It removes a huge burden and creates space for their small and medium-sized businesses to grow and flourish.

New Personal Income Tax Rate: 

Only those earning above ₦50 million annually will be required to pay the new 25% personal income tax rate. This is both fair and reasonable.

Another significant win for the North, which has the highest concentration of impoverished people in Nigeria, is the removal of VAT on essential goods and services, including school fees, medical services, food, pharmaceuticals, and electricity. This is a significant relief for the poor and small to medium-sized businesses.

The corporate tax rate will now be reduced from 30% to 25%, and small businesses will be fully exempt from paying income tax.

The controversial VAT issue has now been ‘fairly’ settled, and again, it’s a big win for the North, which had previously raised concerns. The new revenue-sharing formula is as follows:

Federal Government: 10%

States: 55%

Local Governments: 35%

Even more importantly, the VAT sharing formula has been revised in a way that favours the North. If northern states seize the opportunity to harness and develop their economies and markets, especially in agriculture, they will benefit significantly.

The new sharing criteria are:

50% of VAT is shared equally among all states

20% is based on population

30% is based on where goods/services are consumed

One of the most important features of these tax reforms is how they protect and uplift the poor and small businesses,especially in the North, where:

About 65% of Nigeria’s poorest people live

Over 52% of the country’s states are located

More than 60% of the population resides

Nearly 70% of Nigeria’s landmass is found

And almost 80% of agricultural production takes place

It’s time for northern states to tap into local knowledge and deploy homegrown experts to thoroughly study the four landmark tax laws in line with each state’s peculiarities and needs, yet with the whole North as the unifying objective.

If well studied and strategically implemented, Tinubu’s new tax reforms could be the silver bullet the North has been waiting for.

They offer fiscal justice, decentralisation of revenue, protection for the poor, incentives for businesses, and a practical opportunity to lift millions out of poverty.

However, as always, it will take visionary leadership, technical expertise, and political will to translate policy into meaningful impact. The opportunity is here. The North must not waste it.

Zayyad I. Muhammad writes from Abuja via zaymohd@yahoo.com.