Emir Muhammadu Sanusi II

By Uzair Adam 

The Court of Appeal in Abuja has suspended the enforcement of its January 10 judgment, which upheld the Kano State Government’s repeal of the 2019 Emirate Council Law, pending the determination of an appeal at the Supreme Court.  

The appellate court, sitting in Abuja, overturned the June 20 order by Justice Abubakar Liman of the Federal High Court in Kano, which had nullified actions taken by the state government under the Kano State Emirate Council (Repeal) Law 2024, including the reappointment of Sanusi Lamido Sanusi as the 16th Emir of Kano.  

The court ruled that Justice Liman issued the order without jurisdiction. Dissatisfied with the decision, the Kano State Government took the case to the Supreme Court and sought an injunction at the Court of Appeal to halt the execution of the judgment while awaiting the apex court’s ruling.  

On Friday, a three-member panel of justices led by Justice Okon Abang ruled on two suits—CA/KN/27M/2025 and CA/KN/28M/2025—filed by Alhaji Aminu Babba Dan’agundi (Sarkin Dawaki Babba). 

The suits were brought against the Kano State Government, the Speaker of the House of Assembly, the Inspector General of Police, the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps, and other security agencies.  

Dan’agundi’s application, filed on February 6, 2025, sought to prevent the respondents from enforcing the appellate court’s judgment while an appeal was pending before the Supreme Court. 

He argued that the trial court lacked jurisdiction over the case and emphasized the need to maintain the status quo.  

In a unanimous ruling, Justice Abang held that the application was valid and deserving of the court’s discretion in the interest of justice. 

He stated that preserving the subject matter of the case was necessary since a valid appeal was already before the Supreme Court.  

The court ordered that the status quo be maintained as it was before the Federal High Court’s ruling on June 13, 2024. 

It also directed the applicant to file an undertaking within 14 days to indemnify the respondents for damages if the order was later found unnecessary.  

With this ruling, the reinstatement of Sanusi Lamido Sanusi as Emir of Kano remains on hold, pending the Supreme Court’s final decision on the matter.

By Bashir Uba Ibrahim, Ph.D.

In my article “A Deconstructive Reading of Sunusi’s Remarks on Tinubu’s Economic Policies,” published by The Daily Reality on 19 January 2025, I noted that the Emir loses authority over his words when the media and the public interpret him as they wish. This provokes deconstructive readings of his remarks. The more his statements are rife with contradictions and aporia, the more they invite diverse interpretations. Prof. Kperogi presents one notable critique of the Emir’s outburst in Lagos.

Kperogi’s scathing deconstructive critique of Emir Sanusi’s Lagos outburst, “Emir Sanusi’s Quid Pro Quo for His Friends Turned Friends,” is simultaneously attracting national and international critical attention, indignation, and approval due to its epitomising use of language and skilful deployment of sarcastic symbolism to ridicule its target subject (Emir Sanusi).

The piece provokes sporadic responses and comments that seem to open a Pandora’s Box. Consequently, this write-up reviews notable responses and comments on Kperogi’s piece, primarily authored by Prof. Aliyu Barau and a remark by Prof. Ibrahim Bello-Kano (hereafter referred to as Barau-IBK comments). 

The piece revisits the epistemological challenges posed by such critique from the perspective of speculative criticism. Speculative criticism is a branch of theoretical criticism. As a philosophical approach to textual and non-textual studies, theoretical criticism focuses on the analysis and interpretation of spoken and written texts.

Prof. Barau, in a piece titled “Kperogi: A Captive of the Raw Emotions”, makes a scathing “scientific” deconstruction of Kperogi’s piece. In that article, he x-rays Kperogi’s write-up from scientific lenses. He argues that “Kperogi’s overloaded bags of insults towards Sanusi are unguided by science or descent knowledge”. Thus, Kperogi’s punch on Emir Sanusi should be predicated upon a scientific mode of inquiry by formulating research questions and hypotheses that would guide his critique as he succinctly puts that “writing on Sanusi Lagos outburst, I expect Kperogi to be deeply critical and analytical with scientific objectivity”. 

The above reference to systematic research questions and hypotheses provides an invariable allusion to Barau’s scientific method of criticism (critique). His astute exploitation of language, adeptly combined with an erudite excavation of symbolism (e.g., the Tower of Babel, Neo-Babel Tower, etc.), to register his caustic critique of Kperogi’s piece, remains a recurring feature in his write-up.

On the other hand, in his response to Barau’s deconstruction of Kperogi’s deconstruction of Sanusi titled “Science” or “Critique” in Reguting Malice, IBK refutes the scientific method of critique advanced by the latter. He contends that the best way to match Kperogi’s verbiage is through eclectic methods of criticism. Thus, his reason for deploying sizzling anger and vituperative language in his comment on the latter’s piece. 

Supporting this argument, Prof. IBK maintains that “only the concept of critique can meet head-on and devastate mere malicious criticism”. For that, he surmises that there is a problem with offering “a scientific critique of ideas” as Kperogi’s piece on Sanusi is “speculative ideas”. Thus, there cannot be a “scientific criticism”; science relies on facts, and there are no facts but only interpretations, as argued by IBK quoting Nietzsche. Since Kperogi’s article on Sanusi is a speculative idea, there cannot be a “scientific criticism”. 

Finally, IBK concedes that his comment is by no means a criticism of Barau’s magisterial write-up but rather his way of showing how a convergence of Philosophy, Social Theory, Psychoanalysis and Chaos Theory within analytical critique can or could be used to deconstruct any discourse. 

In conclusion, Barau’s write-up and the subsequent response by IBK are both deconstructions of the deconstructive critique of Kperogi’s earlier article on Emir Sanusi’s Lagos outburst. While the former advocates for a “scientific critique”, the latter espouses critical standpoints.

Dr Bashir Uba Ibrahim writes from the Department of English and Literary Studies, Sule Lamido University Kafin Hausa. He can also be reached via bashirubaibrahim@gmail.com.    

By Usman Abdullahi Koli

I read Professor Farooq A. Kperogi’s article “Emir Sanusi’s Quid Pro Quo for His Friends Turned Fiends” with keen interest. While it was well-written and rich in rhetorical flair, I believe it unfairly misrepresents the character and contributions of His Highness Emir Muhammadu Sanusi II and the broader context of his remarks. My intention here is not to disparage Mr. Kperogi or his intellectual depth but to offer a more nuanced perspective based on facts and a balanced understanding.

Sanusi’s commentary on economic reforms is not new, and it is not driven by self-interest, as the article implies. His economic positions, controversial as they may be, have always been rooted in his commitment to transparency, accountability, and fiscal prudence.

As governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Sanusi spearheaded reforms that stabilised the financial sector and exposed corruption, notably the mismanagement of funds in the petroleum industry. His leadership saved the Nigerian banking system during the 2009 global financial crisis. These efforts reflect a consistent commitment to economic pragmatism, not the “self-loving sadism” Mr. Kperogi ascribed to him.

At the Gani Fawehinmi Memorial Lecture, Emir Sanusi addressed Nigeria’s economic challenges within a historical framework, highlighting how years of poor management led to today’s difficulties. His statement about not defending the current government’s policies was not a quid pro quo demand but an expression of discontent over the failure of political leaders to reciprocate loyalty or act decisively for national progress.

Sanusi’s critique of governance has often transcended personal affiliations. For instance, he openly criticised the Goodluck Jonathan administration despite being part of the government apparatus, risking his career in the process. His comments in the lecture reflect this same principle: his loyalty is to ideas, not individuals.

The article unfairly caricatures Sanusi as an unrepentant neoliberal apologist indifferent to the suffering of the masses. While he has supported subsidy removal and exchange rate harmonisation, his positions are informed by Nigeria’s fiscal realities. Subsidy regimes, historically marred by corruption and inefficiency, drained trillions of naira from public coffers without addressing systemic energy sector challenges.

Critics often overlook the fact that subsidies disproportionately benefit the elite rather than the poor. Studies by organisations like the World Bank and Nigeria’s Budget Office have shown that wealthier Nigerians consume more fuel and thus benefit more from subsidies. Sanusi’s advocacy for subsidy removal aims to redirect these funds toward targeted interventions, such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure, which directly benefit the masses.

Contrary to the claim that Sanusi derives “delight from the misery of the masses,” he has consistently called for equitable resource allocation and the empowerment of marginalised communities. As emir, he launched initiatives to promote girl-child education, gender equity, and poverty alleviation in Kano State. His reforms in the Kano Emirate Council prioritised addressing social injustices that have long plagued Northern Nigeria.

For instance, his campaign against child marriage and his emphasis on the importance of education for girls drew both applause and backlash. These efforts single out his commitment to social progress and human dignity.

Mr Kperogi’s passionate critique of Sanusi’s remarks offers no clear alternative solutions to Nigeria’s economic woes. If we agree that Nigeria’s economy has suffered from decades of mismanagement, what is the path forward? Should we continue subsidising consumption at the expense of critical investments? Sanusi’s prescriptions, while debatable, are at least anchored in economic logic and long-term sustainability.

Nigeria’s challenges require a balanced, solutions-driven discourse. Reducing complex issues to personal attacks or dismissing individuals who have contributed significantly to national development is unproductive. Emir Sanusi’s positions are not beyond critique, but such critiques should engage with the substance of his arguments rather than resorting to ad hominem attacks or speculative interpretations of his motives.

Nigeria stands at a crossroads, and leadership—whether in government, traditional institutions, or civil society—must rise to the occasion. While Emir Muhammadu Sanusi II is not infallible, his track record of service, advocacy, and reform warrants a more balanced appraisal. Let us concentrate on fostering a Nigeria where ideas are debated with civility and respect, rather than transforming crucial national discussions into platforms for derision.

Usman Abdullahi Koli is a public relations expert, writer, and advocate for balanced public discourse. He can be reachedvia mernoukoli@gmail.com.

By Bashir Uba Ibrahim, Ph.D.

Emir Muhammadu Sanusi II’s recent remarks about the harsh economic policies of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s government, made during the 21st Memorial Lecture for the late Gani Fawehinmi organised by the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA Ikeja Branch in Lagos, themed ‘Bretton Woods and the African Economies: Can Nigeria Survive Another Structural Adjustment Programme’, have sparked a diverse range of reactions across social media. 

As the chairman of the occasion, when giving a microphone to comment, he remarked, “I can give a few points here about what we are going through and how it was predictable and avoidable. But I am not going to do that because I have chosen not to speak on the economic reforms or to explain anything because if I explain it, it will help this government. But I do not want to help this government. They are my friends, but if they do not behave like friends, I will not behave like a friend”. 

 These remarks received and continuously attracted fierce critical rebuttals and approbations from the government and Emir Sunusi’s perceived critics. On the other hand, his apologists are overtly in a tactical defence of such remarks on the pretence that the Emir is a victim of misperception by the public and misinterpretation by the media as they usually used to quote him out of context. Even the Emir himself is reported by the Leadership newspaper lamenting that his remarks were taken out of context, reducing the broader message of his speech to a single paragraph. But Emir and his media warriors fail to understand that linguistically, by the time a person makes an utterance, he no longer has control over it. 

To borrow a popular Hausa adage which says magana zarar bunu, idan ta fita ba ta dawowa or what Jean-Paul Sartre called “every word has its consequences” or in what Roland Barthes, the prominent French Structuralist and Post-structuralist literary theorist and critic called in his widely celebrated magnum opus “the death of the author is the rise of the reader”. Similarly, Barthes argues that “once the author is removed, the claim to decipher a text becomes quite futile. To give a text an author is to impose a limit on that text, to furnish it with a final signified”. And the text here refers to both spoken discourse (phonocentrism) and written (logocentrism). The former is the spoken remarks by the Emir, while the latter is its interpretations or deconstructive reading(s). Thus, the latter supplements the former in what Derrida called “doubling critique”.

Meanwhile, concerning the above remarks by the Emir, the media houses have done what part of their job, i.e., deconstructive or interpretive journalism. Thus, by the time the Emir loses authority or control over his utterances, it is when the media and the general public have the right to interpret him the way they like. Thus, it forms the crux of their deconstructive readings of Emir Sunusi’s remarks. Therefore, the more remarks are enmeshed with aporia and entangled in contradiction, dislocation and disunity of words or, to borrow Jacques Derrida’s words, “play”, “decentering”, or “rupture” like the one made by Emir Sunusi, the more it attracts deconstructive readings or interpretation from various standpoints.    

For instance, Emir’s remarks, as widely reported by the media, sound contradictory if not antipodal or antithesis. Given his unflinching and uncompromising stand as an unrepentant neo-liberalist who always supports the removal of fuel subsidy and currency liberalisation, floating of the naira against the dollar, which ultimately leads to the devaluation of the former, how can you say the situation the Nigerian government find itself is “avoidable” while you are among those who advise the government to implement such policies for reforming the shrinking economy. As the popular social media influencer Aliyu Dahiru Aliyu (Sufi) argues, “…For years, Sanusi has been a vocal advocate of neo-liberal economic policies, including subsidy removal and currency liberalisation–policies now adopted by Tinubu’s administration. These were once touted by people like Sanusi as the perfect remedies for our economic woes, yet their implementation, according to his recent expression, hasn’t delivered the promised relief. So, what fresh ideas Sanusi hides that he can offer if the FG has been friendly towards him apart from the familiar intellectual manoeuvres?”. 

Finally, as opined by the father of modern linguistics, the popular Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure, that language be spoken as the one used by the Emir or written, i.e., the one used by his deconstructive readers is a system of signs; that the sign (word) is the basic unit of meaning, and that the sign comprises a signifier (form) and signified (mental representation or meaning). Therefore, the signifiers uttered by Emir Sunusi carry variants of signifieds in what Derrida called “transcendental signified”, which are beyond the control of their owner (the Emir) and thus warrant such myriad deconstructive reading(s).

Bashir Uba Ibrahim, PhD, wrote from the Department of English and Literary Studies, Sule Lamido University, Kafin Hausa. He can be reached at bashirubaibrahim@gmail.com.

By Anwar Usman

The Emir of Kano, Malam Muhammadu Sanusi II, has made it clear that he will not use his expertise to address Nigeria’s economic challenges simply because he is unwilling to assist the Tinubu administration.

As a certified economist and former CBN governor, Sanusi made this assertion while speaking at the 21st anniversary of Fawehinmiism with the 2025 Gani Fawehinmi Annual Lecture held today at the Lagos Airport Hotel in Ikeja, Lagos state.

He stated that “explaining the economic crisis would simply provide solutions to the lingering economic problems and pave the way for the proliferation of Nigeria’s economy.” 

While speaking, the Emir emphasised that despite being a good friend to the government, he would not offer any solutions that could help the administration achieve its goals. 

He criticised the Tinubu administration, stating they lacked credible and competent people who could explain the persistence of economic constraints on Nigerians.

He reiterated, “I’m not going to discuss any of the problems, let alone provide an insight to navigate this challenging period”.

Instead of offering solutions, Sanusi shifted the responsibility to the administration, saying, “It’s up to them to explain to Nigerians why their policies keep failing. He attributed the current economic woes to decades of unnecessary economic reforms.”

By Anwar Usman

The Emir of Kano, Muhammad Sanusi II, has affirmed to the residents of Bichi Local Government Area in Kano State that the Emirate Council will ensure the peaceful conveyance of their District Head, Munir Sanusi Bayero, to assume his duties in Bichi.

Sanusi gave this assurance on Wednesday during a solidarity visit by traditional and religious leaders from Bichi, led by the Chairman of Bichi Local Government, Alhaji Hamza Sule, at the Gidan Rumfa palace in Kano.

The Emir explained that a new date would be scheduled for the transfer of the District Head, who was recently turbaned at the palace after an earlier attempt was disrupted.

“I assure you that another day will be fixed, your District Head will surely be brought to you, and everything will take place peacefully,” he said.

The pledge followed an incident last week when security personnel allegedly denied access to the palace to prevent the District Head’s planned departure for Bichi.

According to palace sources, the heavy security presence disrupted the scheduled ceremony, leaving the reasons for the intervention unclear.

“What happened was only a distraction. We still don’t know why it happened, and those involved have not disclosed the reason why they did it. However, this will not stop anything.

In his remark, Alhaji Hamza Sule reaffirmed the people of Bichi’s loyalty to the Emirate and Muhammad Sanusi II’s leadership.

“Even on the controversial day that was fixed for your visit to Bichi to accompany the new District Head, Munir Sunusi Bayero, we were fully ready to receive you, but we only heard that there was a crisis when we were already celebrating your coming.

“We in Bichi, from our Imams, Village Heads, Wards Heads, and everybody, are behind your royalty, and our solidarity is only for you.

“That is why we decided in our numbers to come today and reiterate our loyalty to you and whatever decision you have taken on your domain, Bichi,” he stated.

By Abdullahi Muhammad

Renowned US-based Islamic scholar Dr. Yasir Qadhi paid a visit to Dr. Muhammad Sanusi II, the Emir of Kano, at his royal palace. Accompanying Dr. Qadhi was the esteemed Shaykh Dr. Bashir Aliyu Umar.

During the visit, Dr Qadhi, who has delivered a sermon and lectures across Nigeria in the last few days, presented one of his scholarly works to the Emir as a gesture of intellectual camaraderie. 

Dr Qadhi acknowledges that Emir Sanusi II was widely respected as both a traditional leader and an academic. Sanusi holds multiple degrees in economics and Islamic law, reflecting his dedication to scholarship and his role as a revered political figure.

The meeting highlighted the shared commitment of all parties to fostering intellectual and spiritual growth within the Muslim community. 

Dr. Qadhi expressed his admiration for the Emir’s leadership and intellectual pursuits, while the Emir extended his gratitude for the thoughtful visit and gift.