Opinion

Street begging is often wrongly associated with disability. When someone loses a leg, an arm, their sight, or any part of their body, many assume that the next step is to become a street beggar — as though it’s prescribed. This harmful stereotype is one of the reasons PWDs are widely known for begging.

I have personally experienced this bias before. It happened when I got out of a tricycle that had pulled up at Kabuga Underway. I was unfamiliar with the area and trying to find my way to Bayero University, Kano (New Site). I approached a passerby and handed him a scrap of paper on which I had written:

“Assalamu Alaykum. Please, where can I get a tricycle to the BUK New Site?”

The man was around thirty to thirty-three years old. He had a neatly trimmed beard, wore a stylish sky-blue shirt paired with dark jeans, and black shoes.

To my surprise, he refused to collect the paper. Instead, he reached into his pocket and brought out a one-hundred-naira note and offered it to me. I was stunned and disappointed.

I declined the money and insisted that he read the paper. Reluctantly, he took it, read it, and then immediately apologised. He directed me to the place where I could find a tricycle to BUK.

I didn’t hold it against him. I understood. He had likely encountered deaf individuals who were begging with a solicitation note on the streets and had generalised.

But this is precisely why I strongly condemn street begging. Disability should never be an excuse for begging. PWDs should not be reduced to beggars simply because of their condition. We must challenge this narrative.

Instead, society should actively support PWDs. Disabilities can indeed limit one’s ability to perform certain tasks. But that doesn’t mean we are incapable. Those who are uneducated should be empowered with vocational skills to start small businesses. Those who are educated should be given equal opportunities for employment.

The real problem is not disability. It is the lack of support, education, and inclusion. Street begging is not a destiny for PWDs. With the proper support, we can live independently, contribute meaningfully to society, and break this damaging stereotype.

Ibrahim Tukur is a Disability Rights and Inclusion Advocate. He can be reached via email at: inventorngw@gmail.com.

By Muhammad Umar Shehu

Nigeria, as a nation, has always struggled with the idea of unity. From the country’s very foundation, deception has played a central role in shaping the narrative we’ve been led to believe. The idea that we are “one people” is more of a slogan than a reality. The truth is, there has never been genuine unity in the way the state was formed or in how it is currently run.

The political class has done more to divide us than to unite us. Instead of promoting national interest, they manipulate ethnic, religious, and regional sentiments to serve their selfish goals. Over the years, these tactics have created deep hatred and mistrust among citizens. What should have been a diverse but united people has become a society fragmented by deliberate division.

Our leaders talk about unity during campaigns or national crises, but their actions show otherwise. Appointments, projects, and policies are often distributed along lines of loyalty, tribe, or religion rather than merit or national need. This is not only unfair, but also dangerous. It feeds resentment and makes many Nigerians feel like outsiders in their own country.

In almost every region, people feel marginalised. From the South East crying out over exclusion, to the North East lamenting underdevelopment, to the Niger Delta’s struggle over resources, the sense of belonging is weak. When some groups feel like second-class citizens, it becomes nearly impossible to build a strong national identity.

The younger generation is growing increasingly aware of these divisions. Many of them are no longer buying into the false narrative of unity. They see through the hypocrisy and want a country that treats everyone fairly, regardless of background. But without sincere leadership and bold reforms, their hope for a united Nigeria may remain a dream.

Unity cannot be built on lies. It cannot exist where injustice is the norm, where corruption thrives, and where the average citizen feels neglected. We cannot continue to pretend that all is well when millions feel disconnected from the system that claims to represent them.

If Nigeria is ever going to move forward, we must stop repeating slogans and start dealing with the hard truths. The illusion of unity must give way to honest conversations, equitable governance, and deliberate efforts to bridge our divides. Only then can we begin to build a nation where unity is not just a word, but a lived experience.

Muhammad Umar Shehu, who wrote from Gombe, can be reached via umarmuhammadshehu2@gmail.com.

By Malam Aminu Wase 

Your Excellency,

I write with deep concern for the moral and cultural fabric of our nation. It is my humble request that you consider banning the operation of TikTok in Nigeria to restore and preserve the dignity of our country, our religious values, cultural heritage, and the moral upbringing of our youth.

While TikTok is used in many parts of the Western world as a platform for creativity, advertising, and business promotion, the situation in Nigeria is deeply troubling. Instead of being a tool for productivity and education, TikTok has become a channel where inappropriate content thrives, particularly content that undermines our moral values and exposes young people to harmful influences.

In Nigeria today, TikTok is alarmingly associated with immoral displays, including the exposure of private parts by married women, as well as the promotion of prostitution. It has sadly become a platform that contributes to the breakdown of marriages and family structures. Many relationships have been destroyed because of disagreements over the use of this platform, with some spouses refusing to delete their TikTok accounts despite repeated appeals from their partners.

This moral decline is not just a private matter; it affects our collective national conscience and identity. If left unchecked, it may have long-term consequences for future generations.

Therefore, I respectfully urge your administration to take decisive action to regulate or, if necessary, ban TikTok in Nigeria. Such a step would not only protect our societal values but also send a strong message about the importance of discipline, modesty, and responsible use of technology.

Thank you, Mr. President, for your continued commitment to the growth and integrity of our nation.

Malam Aminu Wase writes from Kaduna. He can be reached via aminusaniusman3@gmail.com.

By Zayyad I. Muhammad

The passing of former President Muhammadu Buhari marks not just the end of an era but also a significant political loss for two of the three key political parties in Nigeria, the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and the rising coalition force, the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

For both parties, Buhari represented more than just a former head of state; he was a political symbol with immense influence. His mere presence at a campaign rally, no matter how brief, would have carried tremendous weight, particularly among his loyal base, which is estimated to be over 12 million strong. These supporters, often described as a “cult-like” following, have remained fiercely committed to him since his early political days under the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) and the Buhari Organisation. However, the number may have decreased by now.

In recent times, many former CPC loyalists and Buhari-era political operatives have appeared to find a new home in the ADC, reshaping its structure and lending it a dose of national relevance. This quiet but strategic realignment has positioned the ADC as a potential beneficiary of some of the Buhari political legacy, especially in northern Nigeria, where his influence remains deeply rooted. However, a good number of the CPC bloc and the Buhari Organisation have remained in the APC.

Had Buhari lived to make even a symbolic appearance at an APC campaign event, it would have significantly dampened the ADC’s momentum and reinforced the APC’s claim to his enduring political capital. Conversely, had he chosen to lend his image, even silently, to the ADC, it would have sent shockwaves through the APC, raising questions about its hold over his base.

Now, with his passing, both parties are left in a competitive vacuum, each scrambling to appeal to the millions who revered Buhari for his perceived integrity, simple lifestyle, and northern populist appeal. The political battlefield is wide open, and neither the APC nor the ADC can confidently claim to be the rightful heir to Buhari’s legacy.

However, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu may have gained an early edge. His respectful and dignified handling of Buhari’s death, marked by prompt tributes, state honours, and symbolic gestures, may resonate with many of Buhari’s followers. In Nigerian politics, such symbolic acts are never underestimated. They signal alignment, loyalty, and shared values, all of which matter deeply to a base that is emotional, ideological, and still seeking a new political anchor.

As the 2027 election cycle approaches, the real question becomes: Who will inherit the Buhari political machinery? The answer may shape the future of both the APC and ADC, and by extension, Nigeria’s political landscape.

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

By Ibraheem Muhammad Mustapha

The passing of former President Muhammadu Buhari on July 13, 2025, presents a fascinating and troubling paradox for the information ecosystem. Instead of closing a chapter, it appears to have reopened a well-worn, debunked narrative that the “real” Buhari died during his medical trip to London in 2017, and was replaced by a clone or body double named “Jibril” from Sudan. 

As a fact-checker who has previously addressed and debunked this claim, this moment is a sobering litmus test for me and other fact-checkers, as it poses an elementary question of whether classical fact-checking is effective. My analysis leads me to a disquieting conclusion: we are not merely fighting a deficit of information, but a surplus of emotionally resonant, identity-affirming mythology.

Motivated Reasoning and the Psychology of Belief

To grasp the tenacity of the “Jibril” theory, we must first dispense with the simplistic notion that its believers are merely ignorant or unintelligent. The phenomenon is far more complex, rooted in predictable and well-documented psychological mechanics. The primary force at play is what political scientists Milton Lodge and Charles Taber have extensively studied as motivated reasoning. This framework posits that humans, especially in politically charged contexts, behave less as impartial judges and more as motivated attorneys seeking to arrive at a conclusion that aligns with their pre-existing beliefs and identities. For Nigerians whose political identity was defined by opposition to or deep disappointment with the Buhari administration, the “Jibril” narrative was never a hypothesis to be tested; it was a conclusion to be defended.

This dovetails seamlessly with the basic cognitive dissonance theory as was first postulated by Leon Festinger in the 1950s. From the perspective adopted by Festinger, an individual suffers great mental discomfort when they hold contradictory beliefs or are confronted with new information that challenges their existing beliefs. For a citizen who felt alienated, disenfranchised, experienced worse economic conditions or insecurity under a leader they may have once supported or hoped would succeed, the psychological stress is immense. It is far less dissonant to embrace a radical conspiracy that the “real,” competent Buhari is gone than to accept the more painful and complex reality that his administration, for a host of intricate reasons, fell short of expectations. The “Jibril” theory, therefore, is not a failure of logic but a psychological coping mechanism, a path of least resistance to resolve an otherwise unbearable internal conflict.

The Power of Narrative and the Poverty of Facts

Furthermore, fact-checkers fundamentally misunderstand the nature of the battle when we arrive armed with a dossier of facts and data to a war of narratives. Human cognition is not optimised for data points; it is wired for stories. The “Jibril” theory is a masterclass in narrative potency. It contains a villain (the cabal that orchestrated the switch), a victim (the Nigerian populace), a tragic secret (the president’s death), and a mystery to be solved. It transforms the believer from a passive citizen into a heroic truth-seeker, possessing gnosis —a secret, elevated knowledge unavailable to the deluded masses. In contrast, what does the truth offer? It offers the mundane and often unsatisfying complexity of economic policy, security logistics, and bureaucratic inertia. The conspiracy narrative is simply a better, more emotionally gripping story. It provides a scapegoat, assigns clear blame, and creates a sense of intellectual superiority in the believer.

For its most ardent believers, “Jibril” is a symbol of how distant, disconnected, and unrepresentative Buhari’s government felt. Claims that he no longer spoke Fulfulde fluently or looked physically different were not weighed as forensic evidence; they were experienced as embodied metaphors of alienation.

 The Core Crisis is Institutional Distrust

This entire dynamic is supercharged by a catastrophic collapse of institutional trust, which I see as the true Achilles’ heel of fact-checking as a profession. Our work as fact-checkers is predicated on the assumption that a trusted, authoritative third party can adjudicate truth claims. The “Jibril” case demonstrates the collapse of this assumption. The theory gained traction in an environment of profound distrust in public institutions. When citizens do not trust the government to tell the truth about policy or the economy, why would they trust it to tell the truth about the president’s identity? The fact-check is DOA (Dead on Arrival) because the source is already deemed compromised. Therefore, in an environment of deep-seated cynicism towards government, media, and experts, any attempt at debunking is easily reframed as part of the cover-up. Hence, the more forcefully an official source denies a conspiracy, the more it can convince believers that the conspiracy is real. This phenomenon was documented by researchers Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler, who identified the backfire effect: each denial is interpreted as a sign of panic from those trying to hide the “truth.” President Buhari’s own need to address the rumour in 2018 (“It’s the real me, I assure you”) was, for many believers, served not as a refutation but as high-level confirmation that they were indeed onto something big.

Reassessing the Role of the Fact-Checker

Therefore, I am forced to reassess our role as fact-checkers and the efficacy of our traditional methods. The “Jibril of Sudan” case study demonstrates that reactive debunking is akin to trying to unring a bell. The path forward must be a paradigm shift towards what social psychologist William J. McGuire pioneered as Inoculation Theory. Rather than merely correcting falsehoods after they have taken root, we must pre-emptively “vaccinate” the public by exposing them to weakened forms of misinformation and deconstructing the manipulative techniques being used. The goal is to build cognitive antibodies against emotional manipulation, conspiratorial thinking, and logical fallacies.

Also, we need to learn how to fight a narrative war, not a Factual Skirmish, because we cannot defeat a powerful story with a list of facts. We must counter it with a more compelling, truthful narrative. This involves storytelling that explains complex realities in an accessible and empathetic way.

Then we need to embrace the method of empathy before evidence. The first step in engaging a believer is not to present a fact-check but to acknowledge the underlying grievance. A conversation that starts with, “I understand the frustration with the country’s direction that leads people to seek drastic explanations,” is more likely to open a door for dialogue than one that starts with, “You are wrong, and here’s why.”

Lastly, the ultimate antidote to misinformation is trust. This is a generational project, not a short-term fix. It requires sustained efforts from the media, government, and civil society to operate with transparency, accountability, and a genuine commitment to public welfare.

The persistence of the “Jibril of Sudan” theory, even in the face of death, is not an indictment of our work as fact-checkers. It is a diagnosis of a deeper societal condition where trust has eroded, and narratives have become more powerful than reality. It signals that the core battle is not over facts, but over trust. Until we can begin the long, arduous work of rebuilding faith in the institutions that serve as arbiters of reality, we will remain locked in this frustrating cycle. The work of a fact-checker, I now believe, must evolve from being a mere verifier of claims to becoming an architect of a more resilient, critical, and trust-based information ecosystem.

By Zailani Bappa

In the last few days, we have been engaged in a debate over whether it was right or not for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to rename the University of Maiduguri (UNIMAID) after the late President Muhammadu Buhari. I want to add my voice to this as well.

I am a staunch fan and supporter of the late President, and I cherish his exemplary qualities, which are truly uncommon among our present-day crop of active politicians. I respect him alive and in his death. I am also a graduate of UNIMAID.

Despite the above, I strongly disagree with Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s decision to rename my alma mater after President Muhammadu Buhari at this time. The move, to my understanding, is self-serving, dishonest and, obviously, unpopular. And if the President has to do it, there are so many other things available to manipulate for achieving political ambition. 

Just imagine renaming the University of London, or the Oxford University or the Harvard University to another name at this hour. These names have become top brand symbols worldwide and are synonymous with the excellence the Universities are demonstrating.

So is UNIMAID. Its service of excellence has become synonymous with this name for more than five decades. Universities with names of persons, such as Ahmadu Bello University and Bayero University, built their present reputation from the outset, along with those names.

In truth, if President Bola Ahmed Tinubu wanted so desperately to seize the demise of President Muhammadu Buhari to advance his political opportunities in the Northern part of Nigeria ahead of the upcoming elections, he should have renamed the University of Ibadan or the University of Lagos after the late President which will prove to the Northerners more of his nationalistic and unbiased posture. 

After all, the latter of the above Universities was reportedly saved from this kind of unwholesome political decision by his active participation when it was to be renamed after the late MKO Abiola. I will sign and urge everyone to sign the petition currently circulating, which opposes this highly offensive decision.

By Sale Rusulana Yanguruza 

When a leader and loved one passes away, we often reflect on their legacy, the meaning of their life, the impact they made during their lifetime, and the significant contribution they made to society. Upon receiving the sad news about the demise of the immediate former President Muhammadu Buhari, what quickly came to mind was his honourable and distinguished efforts to end insecurity, eliminate corruption, and transform the agricultural sector in Nigeria.

His love for Nigerians prompted him to contest in three elections, and he lost the first two. The losses made him shed tears, but he still contested again. He didn’t give up and strived in 2015; he won and was declared the winner of the presidential election. On corruption, Buhari wasn’t just a fighter against corruption in Nigeria; he was a leader who despised untrustworthy individuals. A president who came to office with a unique energy aimed to end his enemy,”corruption”, and politicians who loot citizens’ property.

When Femi Adesina was granted an interview immediately after Buhari’s demise was announced, he boldly said, “Buhari was as clean as a whistle. Nobody can accuse him of anything that has the slightest affinity to corruption.” Adesina’s words imply that Buhari was incorruptible, as no one could accuse him of corruption; his life was a testament to his integrity. While Buhari saw corruption as a disease that was drastically hampering and tempering development in Nigeria, he stated, in his words during an anti-corruption speech in 2016, “If we don’t kill corruption, corruption will kill Nigeria.”

No one can doubt Buhari’s assertion that corruption must be eradicated before Nigeria can develop. However, unfortunately, during his first tenure, Buhari made significant efforts to ensure that all stolen assets by politicians were returned to Nigerians and implemented measures to prevent further occurrences. Yet, as time went on, Buhari was said to be poised, which led him to spend about three months abroad during his first tenure as the president of Nigeria. That story paved the way for a lot of rumours, which people spread, saying he had died, but with God’s grace, he was back and continued with his activities, finished his tenure, and sadly, today, he has met his maker.

Buhari has backed his commitment by putting in place some necessary measures, such as the Treasury Single Account (TSA), the Whistle-Blowing Policy, and the establishment of the Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption, to combat the systemic theft of public resources and, by extension, its pernicious effects on human rights and development. Yes, Buhari is known for Mai Gaskiya, which earned him votes in 2015. He was the first president who made leaders who had stolen the country’s finances fear him when he was declared president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in 2015, beating the incumbent president, Goodluck Ebele Jonathan.

 Looked at Buhari and Boko Haram

When Buhari was elected, before his swearing-in as President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on May 29, 2015, he met with the President of Chad, Idriss Déby, to discuss collaboration on ending insecurity, particularly from Boko Haram in Borno State. Buhari didn’t stop there; he took an official visit to Niger to discuss the issue with the president, aimed at addressing the Boko Haram problem. As Vanguard reported on June 1, 2015, the visit by the newly inaugurated Nigerian leader to Niamey was directed and aimed at decapitating the head of the group as a final solution to the insurgency that had wreaked havoc on the country’s North-East region.

Do you know that Buhari’s first trip as president of Nigeria to an outside country was about insecurity? 

Chad and Niger were Buhari’s first foreign visits outside Nigeria after he was sworn in as president, with the matter of insecurity bedevilling the region, particularly in the northeast. In his inaugural speech in 2015, Buhari said, “The most immediate challenge is Boko Haram insurgency. Progress has been made in recent weeks by our security forces, but victory cannot be achieved by basing the Command and Control Centre in Abuja. The command centre will be relocated to Maiduguri and remain until Boko Haram is completely subdued. But we cannot claim to have defeated Boko Haram without rescuing the Chibok girls and all other innocent persons held hostage by insurgents. This government will do all it can to rescue them alive.”

To support Buhari’s statement, when I attended the Town Hall Meeting organised by News Central Television in Maiduguri, Professor Babagana Umara stated that the Chibok Secondary School, where the girls were abducted, had reopened and is running actively, with Teaching and learning currently taking place in the school.

Undoubtedly, all this was part of the efforts put in by the former President of Nigeria, President Muhammadu, who gave his attention and good synergy to end it. Without a doubt, the long-standing insecurity in the region was drasticallyreduced. Though Boko Haram has carried out some recent attacks, one cannot deny the fact that the former President was at the forefront in reducing it in the region during his tenure.

Is Buhari an Agricultural Transformer? 

Buhari has always been a president who advocated for Nigerians to take agriculture very seriously. President Buhari stated this while delivering a lecture on Tuesday in Abuja at the launch of the National Young Farmers Scheme, a program designed by the National Agricultural Land Development Authority (NALDA). The program aims to spark greater interest among young people in farming.

According to the President, agriculture remains the backbone of the Nigerian economy, being the largest contributor to the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Although the advice was intended for Nigerians, today our youth have largely accepted the President’s advice and returned to farming, which they were previously unable to do.

Legacy is not leaving something for people; it’s leaving something in people.” – Peter Strople

Rest in perfect peace, Baba.

Sale Rusulana Yanguruza wrote via salesaifullahi931@gmail.com.

By Ahmad Muhammad Mijinyawa

The Root of Nigeria’s Leadership Crisis?

“As within, so without.”

The (above) ancient adage, the Law of Correspondence, offers a profound lens through which to examine Nigeria’s enduring leadership challenges. Our leaders aren’t from Mars; they are products of our very own society, having navigated the same systems as the rest of us.

To truly understand the quagmire of leadership in Nigeria, we must look beyond what is happening at the higher levels and examine the very foundation of how leaders are formed.

If you examine the structures that produce our leaders from the ground up, a stark reality emerges. We often encounter the same pervasive issues that plague the highest echelons of power: a lack of vision, mediocrity, and disheartening mismanagement of resources. 

This isn’t a coincidence. More often than not, individuals who ascend to higher positions of authority are those who have been leaders at lower levels. This cyclical pattern underscores a fundamental truth: a flawed system inevitably produces flawed leaders, and vice versa.

A significant reason for Nigeria’s current predicament lies in our collective disregard for the Law of Cause and Effect. Every single effect we witness, every challenge we face, has a preceding cause.

Crucially, you cannot change an effect with another effect. The intelligent approach, therefore, is to identify the underlying causes, deconstruct them to understand their intricate interplay with the impact, and from there, a clear blueprint for change and problem-solving will effortlessly emerge.

Nigeria’s leadership landscape is, undeniably, in a dire state, with dysfunction evident across multiple levels. So, what precisely are we getting wrong in the fundamental process of producing our leaders? The answer isn’t always at the higher levels.

The most crucial insights often lie at the bottom. We must return to the very genesis of leadership to diagnose the root causes of the widespread effects we are experiencing. By doing so, we can finally begin to discern the right direction forward.

Ahmad Muhammad Mijinyawa wrote via ahmadmijinyawa833@gmail.com.

Your Excellency,

We, the undersigned concerned applicants of the Kano State Postgraduate Scholarship Scheme 2025, wish to bring to your attention an issue that has caused great concern and uncertainty among many eligible indigenes of our dear state.

Following the screening exercise conducted by the Kano State Scholarship Board in January 2025, we were informed that nearly 4,000 candidates were confirmed eligible for the scholarship. The process was widely appreciated for its inclusivity across all fields of study.

However, it has come to our attention that the selection process for awardees has taken a one-sided turn. The Ministry for Higher Education has reportedly begun contacting selected candidates via phone calls; however, all those contacted so far are exclusively from STEM fields (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics). Applicants from equally important fields, such as the Social Sciences, Management Sciences, Arts, and Humanities, have been completely left out.

Several applicants have verified with the callers that only STEM candidates are being considered. This development has caused confusion and concern among the rest of us who also performed excellently and are proud indigenes of Kano State. We believe this situation undermines the spirit of equity and fairness for which Your Excellency is known.

To seek clarification, we formed a committee and visited the Scholarship Board. We were directed to the Ministry for Higher Education, but unfortunately, our concerns were not addressed; we were only allowed to submit a letter to the ministry’s secretary.

Your Excellency, we respectfully appeal for your kind intervention in this matter. We believe that every qualified and hardworking indigene, regardless of their field of study, deserves a fair opportunity. If the current arrangement cannot accommodate all eligible applicants from abroad and domestic private universities, we request that consideration be given to sponsoring students to domestic public universities within Nigeria or providing automatic job placements within the state civil service. These would be a worthy recognition of our academic dedication and a meaningful investment in the future of Kano State.

We remain hopeful and confident that Your Excellency will act with your usual sense of justice, fairness, and compassion.

Yours respectfully,

Comrade Safiyanu Yunusa Musa Rijiyar Zaki, Chairman of the Concerned Applicants Committee

MJ Bashir, Vice Chairman

By Usman Abdullahi Koli, ANIPR 

Muhammadu Buhari, former President of Nigeria, is no more. For a moment, I felt very shocked and touched. Not because I expected him to live forever, but because I had never honestly imagined a Nigeria without him somewhere in the background watching, guiding, deciding, or simply being present. I asked myself why the end of some lives feels heavier than others. Perhaps it is because those lives were never ordinary. Buhari’s life was one of service, controversy, silence, and symbolism. Now that the chapter is closed, what remains is the long shadow of his presence, a legacy that will be remembered, questioned, and reflected upon for years to come.

Buhari was never a man you could ignore. You were either with him or against him. I, more often than not, stood in opposition. I challenged his approach to national security, criticised his handling of the education system, and voiced strong concerns about his oversight of Nigeria’s crude oil sector and economy. My criticisms were never born out of malice, but out of conviction. I believed, and still do, that our country deserves better. I thought it was our duty to demand it.

Yet, amid my disagreements, I never lost sight of the man behind the decisions. In 2020, during the #EndSARS movement, when the nation was boiling with fear and fury, I felt compelled to offer a different perspective. I wrote an article titled “Calming the Tide: Buhari’s Antidote.” In that piece, I tried to humanise him. I described him as a lanky man, often caught smiling with his teeth in full view, yet known for the signature frown that defined his public image. Something was striking about how he carried himself in his flowing babban-riga, standing tall and firm like the general he once was, even in the calm of civilian leadership.

Buhari’s story began long before he entered Aso Rock. As a young man, he embraced the uncertainties of military life. He rose through the ranks with grit, ultimately becoming a general in the Nigerian Army. He ruled Nigeria first as a military leader and returned, decades later, as a civilian president. His reemergence was not merely a political move; it was deeply personal. He saw his return as a duty to complete a mission he once began in uniform. Whether he succeeded or fell short, Buhari believed in his cause, and that belief fueled his resolve.

He was undeniably a man of sharp edges. His stubborn adherence to principle often came at a cost. He preferred silence when the nation needed clarity and stood firm when compromise was necessary. His integrity, once lauded, became the subject of scrutiny. Some wounds were self-inflicted; others were inherited from the complexities of leadership. Regardless, they will shape how history remembers him.

Despite it all, Buhari remained anchored in a modest way of life. He never sought extravagance. He governed in the way he understood best—that is, through order, discipline, and restraint. These traits, while admired by some, alienated others. Yet, behind that stoic exterior was a man deeply invested in the idea of service, even if the methods failed to reflect the expectations of many.

The end of a life always casts a different light on it. Legacies are never truly complete until the final chapter has been closed. Buhari’s legacy will be debated in homes, classrooms, and political circles for years to come. But today is not for judgment. Today is for remembrance. For the man, not just the president. For the soldier who once stood on the frontline, and for the leader who walked through the dust of Daura into the marble halls of national power.

At over eighty, he still had something to give. Not in speeches or policy, but in presence, in counsel, in memory. Nigeria needs his wisdom, perhaps now more than ever.

I mourn him, not because I always agreed with him, but because I respected the weight of the burden he carried. He did not lead perfectly. But he led. And in many ways, he led with sincerity.

Now he is gone. But his footprints remain on the battlefield, in the ballot box, and in the hearts of those who watched, waited, and sometimes wept. His story is one of contradictions, courage, convictions, and consequences. But above all, it is a Nigerian story.

Rest in peace, General Muhammadu Buhari. The march is over. The bugle has sounded. And history, in all its fullness, will remember you.

Usman Abdullahi Koli wrote via mernoukoli@gmail.com.