Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu

By Muhammad Sulaiman

A group of prominent Nigerian citizens has condemned recent threats by U.S. President Donald Trump to relist Nigeria as a “Country of Particular Concern (CPC)” and possibly take military action to protect Christians, describing the move as an affront to Nigeria’s sovereignty.

In a statement issued in Kaduna, the group — comprising Dr Bilkisu Oniyangi, Professor Usman Yusuf, Dr Ahmed Shehu, Dr Aliyu Tilde, Dr Hakeem Baba-Ahmed, and Barrister Kalli Ghazali — warned that such rhetoric from Washington could inflame religious tensions and “turn Nigeria into a pawn in global geopolitics.”

The signatories emphasised that while the concerns of friendly nations such as the U.S., China, the U.K., and Russia are welcome, threats and external pressure are counterproductive. “This is our problem as Nigerians, and it will be solved by us,” the statement read.

The group urged President Bola Tinubu to directly address Nigerians, prioritise national security, and suspend foreign travels until the crisis is resolved. They also called on the U.S. to withdraw its threats and instead assist Nigeria through strategic cooperation and capacity building against terrorism and banditry.

They further appealed for unity among Nigerians, noting that “every life taken, every kidnapping or assault anywhere in Nigeria matters equally.”

Reaffirming faith in Nigeria’s resilience, the statement concluded: “Our independence and unity have been tested many times, and this too shall pass — but only if we act together as one people.”

By Zayyad I. Muhammad 

1. Immediate Actions: Dispatch a high-level delegation to Washington: President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu should immediately send a high-powered delegation composed of respected Nigerian statesmen, business leaders, and senior government officials to engage with U.S. authorities.

The team should include former President Olusegun Obasanjo, former Head of State General Abdulsalami Abubakar, Chief Bola Ajibola, business mogul Aliko Dangote, Rev. Hassan Matthew Kukah, and the President of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), Most Rev. Dr Daniel Okoh, His Eminence Sultan of Sokoto, representatives of Religious groups, NGO, etc.

From the government side, the delegation should include the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, and the Governors of Benue,  Plateau, Niger, Katsina, Kaduna, Zamfara, Borno, Yobe and Adamawa States, given the security relevance of their regions.

2. Re-engage the U.S. Mission in Nigeria: The Presidency should task the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and other well-placed Nigerians with deepening communication with the U.S. Mission in Abuja and the Consulate in Lagos to strengthen diplomatic rapport, address misperceptions, and align mutual strategic interests.

3. Reach out to U.S. allies and partners: Nigeria should actively engage with other influential U.S. allies across Europe, the Middle East, and Asia to rally broader international support for Nigeria’s security and development agenda.

3. Seek U.S. assistance in defence cooperation: President Tinubu should formally request more support from the Donald J. Trump administration in providing modern weapons, intelligence-sharing technology, and counter-insurgency training to bolster Nigeria’s fight against terrorism and violent extremism.

4. Immediate appointment of ambassadors: Nigeria’s diplomatic missions have remained without substantive ambassadors for too long. Swift appointments of competent, credible, and globally respected diplomats will help restore Nigeria’s voice and visibility on the international stage.

5. The Minister Yusuf Tuggar should be reassigned to another portfolio, and a new Minister of Foreign Affairs, preferably one with strong international connections and more diplomatic weight, should be appointed. This will send a clear signal that Nigeria is repositioning its foreign policy and engagement strategy.

6. Launch a global public relations drive: Nigeria must embark on a robust, well-coordinated international PR campaign to reshape global perception. This should highlight the Tinubu administration’s economic reforms, anti-corruption measures, and counter-terrorism efforts, while showcasing Nigeria as a stable, investment-friendly democracy that protects all faiths and ethnicities

7. On the Security and Communication Front: The office of the National Security Adviser and the high military command are doing well; thus, to further boost the effort, they should further re-align the war against insurgency and banditry. The battle against bandits, terrorists, and other insurgent groups must be comprehensively restructured. This includes better coordination among the armed forces, improved intelligence gathering, community-based security initiatives, and enhanced welfare for frontline troops. A unified national security strategy will yield faster and more sustainable results.

8. Strengthen media visibility of Nigeria’s counter-terrorism efforts: Nigeria’s efforts in the fight against terror are often underreported or misrepresented internationally. There should be massive, transparent media coverage, both traditional and digital, to showcase the government’s ongoing efforts, victories, and human stories of resilience. This will help counter misinformation, boost public morale, and attract global understanding and support.

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

By Misbahu El-Hamza

President Bola Tinubu has finally responded to the false accusation of a “Christian genocide” in Nigeria, a narrative that surfaced in late September. Yet as this claim gains traction in U.S. conservative circles, he should be more worried about his political prospects. The narrative—and U.S. President Donald Trump’s recent call to redesignate Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern (CPC)—could give Washington both motive and cover to oppose Tinubu’s re-election in 2027, just as former President Goodluck Jonathan alleged of the Obama administration in 2015.

Former President Jonathan publicly claimed that he lost the 2015 election because of U.S. interference. Two issues broadly defined the diplomatic rift between the two governments. The first was Boko Haram’s insurgency and the abduction of the Chibok girls. In a 2018 BBC interview, Jonathan lamented that Nigerians in the U.S. joined public protests there, one of which famously featured Michelle Obama holding a placard with the slogan #BringBackOurGirls.

At the October 2025 launch of ‘SCARS: Nigeria’s Journey and the Boko Haram Conundrum,’ by former Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Lucky Irabor (retd.), Jonathan recalled: “When I was in office, one of the major scars on my government, and one I will retire with, is the issue of the Chibok girls. As Bishop Kukah said, no plastic or cosmetic surgeon will remove it.” The then-opposition under Muhammadu Buhari, which included Tinubu, exploited insecurity for political advantage, a factor that clearly contributed to Jonathan’s loss.

The second, and in my opinion, more damaging rift was Jonathan’s stance against same-sex marriage, reflecting the convictions of most Nigerians. In 2014, he signed the Same-Sex Marriage Prohibition Act, shortly after the Obama administration’s 2011 pledge to “use all the tools of American diplomacy” to promote gay rights globally. Washington’s reaction was swift. The White House warned of possible cuts to HIV/AIDS and anti-malaria funding, while Jonathan’s government held firm. Nigerians applauded him for that. But during the 2015 campaign, the Obama administration’s outreach, including direct appeals to Nigerian voters and a high-profile visit by Secretary of State John Kerry, was widely viewed as tacit support for Buhari, which many Nigerians, including Jonathan himself, believe shaped the election’s outcome.

Insecurity also played a domestic role in Jonathan’s downfall. Nigerians were increasingly alarmed by unrelenting violence—beyond Boko Haram, currently compounded by communal, ethnic, and religious clashes and by banditry mostly in northern Nigeria—that claimed hundreds of innocent lives. Regardless of how the world described it, the reality was and is still tragic. It eroded public trust and patriotism. Yet successive governments, rather than restoring security, have often appeared more concerned with foreign perceptions than with rebuilding national confidence and truly working to end the bloodshed of innocent Nigerians.

So, while Jonathan’s administration angered the Obama White House over the same-sex marriage law, many believe that Tinubu’s has irritated Washington for another reason.

In early September, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz introduced the Nigeria Religious Freedom Accountability Act of 2025 (S.2747) to the U.S. Senate. The bill seeks to sanction Nigerian officials allegedly complicit in “Islamist jihadist violence against Christians and other minorities” and those “enforcing blasphemy laws”. Blasphemy remains an offence under Nigeria’s criminal code and in the twelve northern states operating shari’a law. Yet, the Cruz bill’s language raises serious questions: how would the former officials be identified, and on what evidence? If Washington possesses proof, it has not presented any. Within Nigeria, such accusations often surface in political rhetoric but rarely withstand scrutiny.

Still, Nigeria’s greater “offence” under Tinubu—at least to American conservatives like Bill Maher, Mike Arnold, Ted Cruz, Riley Moore, and now Donald Trump—is its unwavering support for the Palestinian people. Successive Nigerian governments, whether Christian- or Muslim-led, have consistently condemned Israel’s occupation and called for a two-state solution as the only path to peace. This position, long-standing and bipartisan in Nigeria, clashes directly with Washington’s pro-Israel consensus.

After Nigeria’s firm statement at the 80th UN General Assembly in September, Maher went on his HBO show and declared, “I’m not a Christian, but they are systematically killing the Christians in Nigeria,” comparing it to Gaza and calling it “a more serious genocide.” Such claims, amplified by Trump’s rhetoric about “defending Christians,” serve U.S. political optics more than global justice. Recall Trump’s 2020 CPC designation for Nigeria. It was largely symbolic and carried no enforcement before he left office. His renewed posturing appears equally opportunistic.

Tinubu may believe U.S. pressure arises from concern for Christian victims of Islamist violence and that this aligns with Nigeria’s large Christian population. Yet the U.S. record tells a different story. The same establishment that condemns persecution in Nigeria supports Israel’s war in Gaza, where many casualties are both Muslim and Christian Palestinians.

If Nigeria accuses Washington of selective advocacy, it may find sympathy at home, but not in Washington, where lobbying interests dominate the narrative. Assuming that the “Christian genocide” argument will shield Nigeria from criticism would be a miscalculation.

Tinubu is not yet where Jonathan stood in 2015, but the parallels are unmistakable. The Obama administration’s posture during Jonathan’s re-election bid showed how U.S. influence can shape Nigerian politics. A sustained clash with U.S. policy on religious freedom and Palestine, coupled with insecurity and governance failures, could become a tipping point. Avoiding that outcome will require strategic diplomacy (which we have no doubt our president possesses), credible reform, and a domestic agenda rooted in accountability. Nigerians must see real action towards ending Boko Haram and banditry.

This moment demands political acumen and the disciplined management of both security and foreign relations. Tinubu cannot afford to repeat Jonathan’s missteps. In global politics, misreading Washington’s signals has previously cost Nigerian presidents, and history may not be kind to those who fail to learn from it.

Misbahu writes from Kano and can be reached via email: misbahulhamza@gmail.com

By Muhammad Abubakar

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has withdrawn clemency earlier granted to Maryam Sanda and other convicts of serious offences following a review of the federal pardon list.

Sanda, sentenced to death in 2020 for killing her husband, was among those removed from the list after consultations with the Council of State and public feedback.

Presidential spokesman Bayo Onanuga said the review was guided by the gravity of certain crimes, public sensitivity, and the need to uphold justice for victims and society.

Offenders convicted of kidnapping, drug trafficking, human trafficking, fraud, and unlawful possession of firearms were also excluded from the clemency list.

President Tinubu further ordered the relocation of the Secretariat of the Presidential Advisory Committee on Prerogative of Mercy to the Federal Ministry of Justice and directed the Attorney-General to issue new guidelines for future exercises.

The President reaffirmed his administration’s commitment to judicial reforms and maintaining public confidence in Nigeria’s justice system.

By Abdullahi Mukhtar Algasgaini

The Defence Headquarters (DHQ) has strongly denied an online report linking the cancellation of Nigeria’s 65th Independence Anniversary parade to an alleged coup attempt.

In a press release signed by Brigadier General Tukur Gusau, the DHQ described the publication as “false, malicious, and intended to cause unnecessary tension.” 

The military high command stated that the parade was cancelled to allow President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to attend a strategic bilateral meeting abroad and to enable the Armed Forces to sustain their operations against terrorism, insurgency, and banditry.

The statement also addressed the recent arrest of sixteen officers, clarifying that they are part of a routine investigation for professional misconduct. The DHQ assured that an investigative panel has been constituted and its findings will be made public.

Reaffirming its loyalty, the Armed Forces declared its unwavering commitment to the Constitution and the Federal Government, urging the public to disregard the falsehood being circulated by “purveyors of misinformation and enemies of our nation.” 

The statement concluded with the firm declaration, “Democracy is forever.”

By Abdulhamid Abdullahi Aliyu 

When President Bola Ahmed Tinubu announced a presidential pardon for 175 convicted persons across the country, Nigerians received the news with mixed emotions. But among the list, one name struck a raw national nerve: Maryam Sanda, the woman convicted of killing her husband, Bilyaminu Bello, in what remains one of the country’s most chilling domestic murder cases.

For many, it was not just another item in the roll call of mercy; it was a haunting reminder of how justice can sometimes be undone by power, privilege, and politics. The presidential prerogative of mercy, though constitutional, has now become a moral battlefield where the grief of the victim’s family collides with the influence of the powerful.

The late Bilyaminu Bello’s story is a tragic one. Murdered in cold blood by his wife in 2017, his death tore through the conscience of the nation. From the Federal Capital Territory High Court to the Court of Appeal, and finally to the Supreme Court in 2023, every judicial panel reaffirmed her guilt and upheld the death sentence. For many Nigerians, that long, painstaking journey through the courts was justice done and seen to be done.

But when the same Maryam Sanda walked free through the gates of presidential pardon barely two years later, the wounds of that tragedy reopened. In a country where thousands of convicts languish for years without the benefit of mercy, her release looked less like compassion and more like privilege dressed in forgiveness.

What deepened public unease was not just the pardon itself, but the drama that followed. As the late Bilyaminu’s family protested the decision, a man claiming to be his biological father suddenly appeared before journalists in Abuja beside Maryam’s own father to bless the President’s gesture. He pleaded that the woman should be allowed to raise his “grandchildren.”

Yet, investigative accounts reveal that this man, Alhaji Ahmed Bello Isa, had been absent from his son’s entire life. A retired storekeeper from the old Sokoto State, he reportedly disappeared shortly after the boy’s birth in 1981, never to return, not during his son’s childhood, not during his marriages, and not even during the long, high-profile murder trial that went all the way to the Supreme Court. His sudden reappearance, looking frail and poor, has been widely viewed as an orchestrated spectacle to give moral cover to an otherwise controversial pardon.

Meanwhile, Dr Bello Haliru Mohammed, OFR, the Ɗangaladiman Gwandu and uncle who raised Bilyaminu from childhood, issued a deeply moving statement titled “When Prerogative of Mercy Inflicts Inexorable Pain.” In it, he lamented that the pardon had reopened the family’s wounds, describing it as “the worst injustice any family could be made to go through.” He reminded the nation that the accused had shown “no remorse even for a fleeting moment” throughout her trial, and that her release mocked the memory of a life lost in cold blood.

Dr Bello’s words resonate beyond his family. They echo the silent frustration of many Nigerians who see the selective use of presidential mercy as a reflection of the country’s deeper moral decay. In this system, the powerful can always find their way out, while ordinary citizens drown in bureaucracy and neglect.

At this point, I must confess that I, too, find the whole episode unsettling. Mercy, in its truest form, should heal, not wound. It should reconcile, not re-traumatise. What purpose does clemency serve when it is perceived as a reward for influence rather than repentance? How do we explain to millions of Nigerians that justice can be reversed overnight, not because the convict was wrongly judged, but because connections spoke louder than conscience?

The case of Maryam Sanda is not just about a family’s pain; it is a mirror reflecting the cracks in our collective sense of fairness. When the law becomes a ladder, only the privileged can climb; justice loses its soul. When mercy is granted without genuine repentance, it ceases to be mercy; it becomes mockery.

Perhaps the President acted out of compassion, perhaps on counsel. But genuine compassion would have considered the pain of the victim’s family, the moral lessons for society, and the need to preserve faith in the justice system. Instead, what we have witnessed is a decision that reopens grief and reinforces the notion that justice in Nigeria bends easily for those with the right surname.

Now, as the nation debates and families mourn afresh, one cannot help but reflect on Dr Bello’s final words: that ultimate justice lies only with the Supreme Judge — Allah. That truth should haunt every conscience involved in this affair. Because when human mercy wounds justice, divine judgment will, in the end, heal what man has broken.

Abdulhamid Abdullahi Aliyu writes on disaster management and national development.

By Bilyamin Abdulmumin, PhD

One of my grandfather’s wives, Hajiya Ba’u, survived to live with us till last year, when she passed away. She was fond of sharing history, and in me she found a devoted student. One particular period stuck with her was the early years of her marriage, which was a few years before Nigerian Independence. She once narrated to me how oranges and bananas were considered costly gifts at the time. They only got to see such fruits when my grandfather travelled to Ibadan; these fruits were shared meticulously, as they were seen once in a blue moon.

These fruits, which were once rare luxuries, have now become common in every household, regardless of the season. One can wake up at any odd hour, walk to the main street, and easily find them. Both oranges and bananas are now available in many varieties. The sweetest orange is Dan Boko, named after its place of origin, while the sweetest banana is the variety known as Senior; it has a taste beyond ordinary bananas. Beyond oranges and bananas, fruits like apples, pineapples, and coconuts have also become ubiquitous, and the richness of fruits reaches its peak in the form of fruit salad. People of the 1960s could only dream of fruit salad in Heaven.

Hajiya Ba’u also mentioned that soap was a rare luxury in those days, and they would only use it once in a while. The equivalent of soap, if I didn’t forget, is Bagaruwa (Gum Arabic tree); the pods and bark of this tree contains substance called saponins, like in the case of sodium salts of fatty acids of modern soap, the hydrophobic part of the saponins binds to oils on skin, clothes, or utensils while hydrophilic part binds to water, this creates micelles, which trap dirt and wash them away. Some rural areas still use Bagaruwa as a means of cleaning. In other words, these rural areas are just as advanced as my community of the 1960s. This is why going to rural areas is reminiscent of time-travelling.

Today, whether it’s table soap or liquid soap, it comes in various types, sizes, colours, and fragrances. My memory was reset in 2019 when I lodged at Hotel 17 in Kaduna. There, I saw just how far the customisation of everyday items had gone: single-use soaps, single-use rubbing Vaseline, single-use sugar, single-use perfume, milk, and more. People of the 1960s would think such convenience could only be found in Heaven.

My grandma was also nostalgic about the advancement of packaging. Polyethene (black nylon, etc) was non-existent in those days, so instead they used Tumfafiya—a broad leaf large enough to serve as a wrapper. In fact, I myself bought zogale da kuli (Moringa oleifera and groundnut cake) wrapped in Tumfafiya. In a chemical process called polymerisation, thousands of two-carbon alcohols (ethylene) are woven together to form polyethene. That is more or less like laying thousands of bricks together to make a block. Thanks to the Polyethene revolution, it has now taken over, from shopping bags to “leda” bags, “Santana” bags, water sachets, milk sachets, and stretch wraps in different sizes, brands, and designs. Our packaging revolution extends to cardboard boxes, aluminium foils, plastic containers, and resealable pouches. Those living in the 1960s could only have been left speechless.

Far back in the 1960s, donkeys and camels were the standard vehicles. So, when my Fiqh Sheikh travelled to Zamfara in the 2000s, we only closed for one day. He reminded us that in earlier times, such a journey would have required at least two weeks. Similarly, cellular communication, once a dream of the 1960s, now happens in a split second. One day in the lab, a colleague, who was fond of observing social change, sent a message to England using his mobile phone. Our conversation would revolve around the miracle: the efficiency of sending the message at a negligible cost of only about ten naira.

The paradox is this: even as social change is undeniable in contemporary Nigeria, the strength of our institutions has nosedived and been reversed. A small clinic in a district in the 1960s would treat patients better than what is obtainable in our modern general hospitals. Teachers, even at the primary school level, were treated like kings. We are still in touch with the rural communities my father taught in the seventies and eighties. In one viral clip, late former President Buhari recalled how immediately after secondary school graduation, he was offered a managerial job, a new motorbike, and a competitive salary. 

Late Chief Audu Ogbe, in a Daily Trust reminiscence, noted that in the 1960s, the Central Government even borrowed from the Native Authorities, which now became local government authorities. A former permanent secretary from Kebbi State once told me how, during his days at ABU in the 1980s, students had meal tickets and even their clothes washed. All these examples point to one fact: institutions were working then.

With remarkable social change beyond recognition and technological advancement beyond imagination, if our institutional trajectory is redirected, Nigeria could go to the moon.

Happy Independence Day.

By Muhammad Sulaiman

The Association of Nigerian Authors (ANA) has lauded President Bola Ahmed Tinubu for granting a posthumous pardon to the late Major-General Mamman Jiya Vatsa, a former Nigerian Army officer and acclaimed poet.

In a statement signed by ANA President, Dr Usman Oladipo Akanbi, and General Secretary, Dame Joan Oji, PhD, the Association described the gesture as a “commendable act of national healing” and a recognition of Vatsa’s enduring contributions to Nigerian arts and literature.

General Vatsa, who was executed in 1986 over alleged involvement in a coup plot, was one of ANA’s early leaders and a strong patron of the literary community. He was instrumental in securing the land for the Mamman Vatsa Writers’ Village in Abuja, a landmark project of the Association.

While expressing appreciation for the pardon, ANA maintained that Vatsa was wrongfully convicted, noting that his trial and execution were the result of “deliberate malice orchestrated by a perceived close associate.” The Association said the presidential pardon serves as a vindication of Vatsa’s innocence.

ANA further appealed to President Tinubu to direct that all the rights, privileges, and entitlements due to the late General be paid to his family as a gesture of justice, closure, and recognition of his service to the nation.

The Association concluded by thanking the President “for finally wiping the tears of the Mamman Vatsa family,” adding that the act will forever immortalise the legacy of the distinguished poet-soldier and patron of Nigerian literature.

By Hadiza Abdulkadir

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has granted a presidential pardon to several inmates across the country, including Maryam Sanda, who was sentenced to death in 2020 for killing her husband, Bilyamin Bello, in 2017. Sanda, aged 37, had spent six years and eight months at the Suleja Medium Security Custodial Centre before her release.

Her family had earlier appealed for clemency, citing her exemplary conduct in prison, genuine remorse, and commitment to a reformed lifestyle. They also argued that her release would serve the best interests of her two young children.

The presidential pardon, announced by the Ministry of Interior, also included other notable inmates such as former lawmaker Farouk Lawan and businessman Herbert Merculay, among others.

Officials stated that the decision was part of President Tinubu’s broader initiative to decongest correctional facilities and promote restorative justice, focusing on rehabilitation and reintegration of reformed inmates into society.

By Muhammad Abubakar

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has accused President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration of promoting forgery and deceit as instruments of governance, following the resignation of Uche Nnaji, Minister of Innovation, Science and Technology.

In a strongly worded statement on Wednesday, Atiku described Nnaji’s “voluntary resignation” as an attempt to cover up a scandal that exposes the “deep moral crisis” within the Tinubu government. He said Nnaji should have been dismissed and prosecuted for falsifying documents rather than allowed to quietly exit.

Atiku also faulted the Department of State Services (DSS) for clearing Nnaji despite alleged discrepancies in his records, accusing the agency of “failing in due diligence” and embarrassing the nation.

He linked the scandal to what he called a wider pattern of deceit that “begins from the very top,” pointing to longstanding controversies over President Tinubu’s own identity and academic credentials.

“When a man of questionable identity leads a country, deception becomes the standard of governance,” Atiku said, alleging that Tinubu’s personal history has “institutionalized falsehood in public service.”

The former vice president called for an independent and transparent investigation into the academic and professional records of all members of the Federal Executive Council, starting with the president.

Atiku concluded that Nigeria would continue to suffer “moral decay, economic ruin, and global embarrassment” unless integrity was restored to public life.