Hardship

By Ukasha Sani

As the ruling party, the APC, launches its presidential campaign in a bid to re-elect President Bola Tinubu, the question is no longer whether Nigerians can survive the present hardship, but whether they can survive its continuation.

Based on the last three years’ trajectory, a second victory for President Tinubu will not renew hope, as we have already lost it; it will only deepen hardship. All the tragic events in the country today, from the increase in fuel prices, insecurity, kidnapping and banditry to poor economic policies, are at their worst in the last three years. He has not reformed any sector; rather, they are more like abandoned projects that have worsened under his administration.

What if Tinubu wins? Then the economic hardship we call temporary becomes permanent policy.

They [the government] have comfortably watched the naira lose its dignity, from N460/$1 as of 29th May, 2023 to N1,475/$1 today.

They have watched fuel subsidy removal turn from a textbook reform into a daily punishment, from buying petrol at N200/litre in May 2023 to N1,440/litre today.

They have watched food inflation turn the market into a place of tears, where a bag of rice sells at N65,000 today compared to N30,000 in May, 2023. We are living in an economy where a bag of rice swallows the minimum wage. This government tells us the reforms are painful but necessary. But you should ask: necessary for whom? The hardship is not shared. The political class still convoys in new SUVs, still budgets billions for renovation and entertainment.

A second term means that the model stays. No reversal, no cushion, only more lectures about patience.

And amid this suffocation, they present NELFUND as an achievement to be applauded.

Let us be clear about NELFUND. It is not a grant. It is not a scholarship. It is not free education. It is a LOAN. A debt trap dressed as help. This is the only thing this government is proudly beating its chest about, yet it exposes its entire contradiction.

You cannot deny a man the peace and means to feed his family, deny him security on his farm, deny him a stable economy to run his shop, and then call yourself a saviour because you gave his daughter a loan to pay tuition. What happens after graduation? She graduates into the same jobless economy, into the same insecurity, with a loan on her neck before her first job. This is not empowerment; it is enslaving the future to pay for the present’s failure.

A government that truly wants to educate the poor would have made education affordable, not loanable.

What if Tinubu wins? Then insecurity gets a new uniform.

Banditry is no longer an emergency; it is an industry. Kidnapping has become a multi-million-dollar enterprise.

People are being picked off the streets for ransom, picked from their homes, schools, parks and every other place, without seeing any visible effort by the government to address it. It only amplifies the PR bots that come online and tell us not to “politicise” insecurity. What it means is, if he wins, we will continue to have a government that negotiates from a position of weakness, that condemns attacks today and forgets the victims tomorrow.

Dear PR bots, the insecurity you defend today, because you are paid or promised to be paid to do so, is coming back to haunt you tomorrow. Kidnappers and bandits are not going to spare you because you are a Tinubu supporter.

What if Tinubu wins? Then partisanship becomes the constitution.

Appointments, projects, even palliatives are prioritised through ethnicity and party loyalty. Trying every possible way to conquer all 36 states, leaving no governor in the opposition. The National Assembly has become an extension of Aso Rock. A second Tinubu victory will entrench this winner-takes-all politics. It will be the final burial of independent institutions. Dissent will be called treason, and criticism will be tagged as hate speech. This is where movements like Tinubu Must Go were denied access to exercise their constitutional rights.

And what if Tinubu wins? Then corruption will be legalized by silence.

The subsidy is gone, but where did the subsidy money go? Billions saved, yet borrowing increases. Customs revenue hits record highs, yet hospitals have no drugs. Politicians with existing corruption cases are contesting elections. Under a continued Tinubu administration, accountability will remain selective. The opposition’s corrupt will be prosecuted; the ruling party’s corrupt will be given a chance to govern again.

The government has nothing to show to justify its re-election next year.

After three and a half years of serial governance disasters, it is clear this government has no clue how to tackle the challenges facing this country. They have failed, and perhaps that is why the president himself decided to send his representatives to campaign for him, because he has nothing to show to justify his re-election bid next year. That is also why his PR bots are struggling to explain his failures. This is why some Villa big boys from the North are selling him through the lens of religion and tall tales. Some of them call him “Malam, Al-Sheikh, Muhammad Bola Tinubu,” while others say he is from Kano and that even the name Tinubu is a corruption of Tanimu. It is only your favourite Sheikh who is brazen enough to tell us that the North is well secured, that all those incidents of kidnapping and banditry are mere tales and not what is actually happening. That people can travel freely in all corners of the region at night.

What if Tinubu wins? It means Nigerians must prepare for four more years of explaining to their children why they cannot afford school fees, why the lights are still off, why they must check the road before travelling, why they must take a loan to learn in their own country, and why those who stole yesterday are leading today.

After three and a half years, why do they need more time, given they’ve been the most disastrous government since amalgamation?

Sir, even a bachelor’s degree—which has technically become harder to get than winning a presidential election for some lucky individuals—only gives you a 2-year probation period to meet the required CGPA, and failure to do so will result in you being asked to leave. So why do you need more time?

Unfortunately, despite all these nerve-wracking issues, Tinubu may still win his next election, not because he deserves it, but because the opposition is too sentimental and self-centred to drop their ego for the common man.

May Nigeria prosper

By Muhammad Abubakar 

Professor Abdelghaffar Amoka of the Department of Physics at Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, has responded strongly to what he calls a “misinformed and politically biased” opinion by Sunusi Musa, SAN, regarding the state of Nigerian academia.

In a lengthy rejoinder titled “The Impoverished Nigerian Professors and the ‘Unpopular Opinion’ of a Misinformed SAN,” Prof. Amoka criticised Musa for attributing the poverty of Nigerian professors to their alleged lack of productivity and large family sizes. 

Amoka argued that the true cause lies in the systemic neglect and chronic underfunding of the Nigerian education sector, particularly university staff salaries and research funding.

He noted that academic salaries have remained stagnant since 2009, with professors now earning the equivalent of less than $400 per month, a sharp drop from over $3,000 in 2009. He described the situation as a “crime against humanity,” accusing the political class of starving intellectuals while enriching themselves.

Amoka debunked the claim that Nigerian academics are unproductive, citing the international recognition they receive and their contributions to research and student success abroad. 

He further pointed out the lack of sufficient research funding, comparing Nigeria’s meagre investments to the billions spent annually by countries like the US, UK, China, and even smaller nations such as Norway and Malaysia.

The professor further criticised the SAN for bringing personal life choices—such as marriage and family size—into a discussion about national policy failure. He emphasised that productivity in academia depends on conducive working conditions and appropriate incentives.

Amoka ended the piece by urging fellow academics to prioritise their well-being, pursue legitimate side hustles if necessary, and continue doing their best to sustain a struggling system. He warned that the continued devaluation of education poses a threat to the country’s future.

“We are starving the thinkers and feeding those who can’t think. What sort of system are we expecting to create?” he asked.

By Prof. Abdelghaffar Amoka

A Hausa interview by a professor from ABU, lamenting academics’ poor pay, is trending and has re-ignited the debate on the salaries of Nigerian academics on social media. The discussion is championed by my brothers from the region, which is considered by the country as educationally less developed. I didn’t know what to say that I hadn’t said before. It will be like repeating myself.

Professors in Nigeria are now blamed for their financial status. They are expected to stop lamenting and get a side hustle to augment their salaries. A professor whose salary was ₦450,000 in 2009, when the exchange rate was ₦140 per dollar, is blamed for his economic state in 2025, with a salary of about ₦500,000, when the exchange rate is ₦1,600 per dollar. 

Some people are referring to professors abroad as if some of us have not had the experience. A number of us have studied and worked there, and we know how their university system works. I got two grants in the UK during my PhD. They said a professor earns more abroad from their research grants. The primary beneficiaries of research grants are postgraduate students and postdoctoral researchers. Professors are not paid from their grants.

Grants have a budget, and personnel costs are not included. They are paid to the university account and managed by the university. The university pays professors to encourage them to think critically and attract grants for the institution. A university lecturer around the world is paid enough to give him the comfort to think and do his job as it should. Any extra cash from stuff like consultancy is for additional comfort. 

The Executive Secretary of TETfund, Sunny Echono, in July 2024, said: “On salary to lecturer, I feel ashamed because I have the privilege to represent Nigeria at a global conference where former presidents and prime ministers were in attendance. I was asked if it was true that a professor, after 20 years, still earns less than $1,000 a month. I couldn’t answer that question; I only said that we are doing something about it.” I think we should be proud of the salaries of our professors and boldly tell anyone around the world their actual salaries. 

Before you, in your narrow-minded state, blame professors for their financial status, ask yourself why the Nigerian government will pay the same professors about two thousand dollars per month under the Technical Aid Corp (TAC) to go help teach in universities in some African countries? The same professors who are given approximately $ 2,000 to teach in Ugandan universities under TAC are receiving an equivalent of $ 320 per month at home.

You know what? Everyone is right—those for and against. The argument won’t change anything, and it will likely end within a day or two. The new reality is that younger academics have learned from the impact of senior colleagues’ commitment to the academic job. The commitment you considered as “our stupidity”. The younger academics are planning for themselves.

A colleague, after the 8-month strike and the withholding of our 8-month salaries, said the university does not deserve his full-time commitment. That he is going to give the university the time it deserves and use a large chunk of his time for a side hustle to pay his bills, I thought, was unreasonable. I later realised I was the unreasonable one. And he is not doing badly from the side hustle. 

Around this time last year, I was passing and met some of my students in the class without the lecturer. In my usual chat with the students, I asked whose lecture it was. I decided to call a younger colleague, as students were waiting for his class in case he forgot. He picked up the call and said he had forgotten he had a class, but that he was on his farm planting, and that he would see them next week. He was at the farm during work hours and forgot he had a class because the farming hustle is paying the bills. He is actually doing quite well with his side hustle. 

Farming during work hours becomes more important. I reflected on that for several days. There are several examples of young academics who won’t be seen on campus, except when they have a lecture or are on campus for something they consider essential. 

People sometimes question why a whole professor would accept being an adviser or assistant to a political office holder. A trip with the political officeholder boss could get him his one-year gross salary as a professor. Since it’s his fault that he is poor, why shouldn’t he accept such an offer or even lobby for it?

As a consequence of defeat, we have accepted one awkward thing as a part of us. Because we can’t do anything about our tormentors and needed someone to blame, we blamed ourselves, the victims. It’s our fault that we’ve been on the same salary for 16 years, from 2009 to date. It’s our fault that successive governments refused to renegotiate the 2009 agreed salary with ASUU. It is our fault that the government of President Tinubu has kept Yayale Ahmed’s 2009 Renegotiation Committee report since November 2024 without speaking about it. They are still studying it, possibly till May 2027 or beyond. 

Universities are designed to attract the best minds from around the world. Universities, including those in Africa, such as those in Ethiopia, Uganda, Kenya, and Chad, are attracting the best brains. At the same time, we justify the poor pay for academics and still blame them for their inability to compete with their colleagues in the UK, the US, and Iran. We’ll continue to breed our best brains for these countries. 

Meanwhile, as we take all the blame for our economic status as professors, younger academics are devising ways to survive. They don’t want to he like their senior colleagues who bury themselves in their books thinking they are serving the country. They are given more time for their side hustle to pay the bills, and leave the students hanging. They’ll attend to them when we can. The system will bear the consequences of neglect, and our survival plans will be affected.

From a reality check, you can’t think when you are hungry. So, what are your expectations when your thinkers are hungry and you are unfortunately justifying it? We may be on a journey of illusion if you expect a man to look for food to eat and think for you. The future will tell who gains and who loses.

Best wishes to all of us! 

©Amoka

By Muhammad Umar Shehu

Let’s stop sugarcoating it. Nigeria’s leaders have failed the very people they swore to serve. The signs are everywhere. Millions go to bed hungry, communities are under constant threat from bandits and terrorists, and families bury loved ones over avoidable tragedies. The cry from the North to the South is the same: “Where is the government?”

For decades, we have watched politicians campaign with promises and disappear after elections. We have listened to speeches full of hope, only to wake up to worsening hardship. Whether in education, healthcare, security, or the economy, Nigerians are primarily left to fend for themselves in a country that seems to work only for the elite.

Electricity is unstable. Public schools are underfunded. Hospitals lack basic equipment. Roads are death traps. Jobs are scarce. The police often protect the rich while the poor face brutality. The gap between government and the governed has become dangerously wide.

But the failure didn’t start yesterday. It results from years of corruption, mismanagement, and lack of vision. Successive governments, both military and civilian, have chipped away at the country’s foundations while enriching themselves. The civil service, once respected, is now known more for inefficiency and bribery than service delivery.

What’s worse is that people have grown tired. Tired of voting without results. Tired of protesting with no response. Tired of hoping for leaders who never come. This fatigue is dangerous because when people lose faith in the system, they seek alternatives. And that is where chaos begins.

Still, all hope is not lost. The first step is honesty. We need to admit that things are not okay. Then, we must demand better. Louder. Consistently. In unity. Good governance doesn’t happen by chance. It happens when citizens hold leaders accountable during elections and every day after.

Nigeria is not poor. Nigerians are not lazy. The failure lies in a leadership that treats public service like a private business. Until that changes, the suffering will continue. But if the people find their voice and use it, we may turn this broken system into something that works for all.

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

By Lawan Bukar Maigana

At a birthday lecture titled “Weaponisation of Poverty as a Means of Underdevelopment: A Case Study of Nigeria,” organised in honour of former Governor Rotimi Amaechi at the Continental Hotel in Abuja, the Emir of Kano, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, bitterly complained about the unprecedented hardship Nigerians face today. 

According to him, the inflation and poverty gripping the nation are the direct consequences of loving to rule over people rather than loving them through developing favourable policies. That’s what I understand from his statement. But isn’t the fuel subsidy removal connected mainly to the realities he pointed out? 

Many might forget, or conveniently overlook, that this same Sanusi Lamido Sanusi has been one of the strongest advocates for removing fuel subsidies since 2012. Years ago, I heard him proudly state on BBC Hausa that he had repeatedly advised President Muhammadu Buhari to remove subsidies and shut down Nigeria’s borders. 

Respectfully, Buhari granted only one of his two wishes—closing the borders while leaving fuel subsidies intact. The subsidies lingered for years, postponed amid fears of political backlash.

Under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the fuel subsidy has finally been removed. The impact on ordinary Nigerians has been brutal—prices for fuel and essential commodities have surged, sending inflation into uncharted territory. People are being hunted by hunger and economic hardship like never before.

In this context, I believe Sanusi’s recent criticisms miss the mark. If anyone deserves celebration, it is President Tinubu,who dares to implement what Sanusi himself recommended years ago. Blaming Tinubu alone, even though Sanusi didn’t mention his name, for the hardship is unfair because he and other elite policymakers never offered concrete solutions or mitigating measures to cushion the blow on the poor when pushing for subsidy removal.

It is important to remind Nigerians that the blame for this economic situation is shared, not the fault of any one individual or administration. As the former Governor of the Apex Bank, Sanusi is part of the problem he now publicly laments. He advocated for the policy without proposing corresponding safety nets or economic reforms to soften the impact. The failure to plan has cost Nigerians dearly.

At the Abuja event, Sanusi asked a question that cut to the heart of leadership in Nigeria: “Do we as leaders truly love Nigerians, or do we just like ruling over them?” The answer is painfully obvious: too many leaders are interested in power for power’s sake. They seek to rule over the masses rather than serve them by crafting policies that uplift the poor.

This question should prompt serious reflection. If policymakers want to see genuine progress, they must remember that leadership is more than advising harsh policies; it is about standing with the people during the painful transitions these policies cause. It is about preparing the ground and providing support systems before asking citizens to bear the burden of economic reforms.

Nigeria’s elites, including Sanusi, need to own their history, yesterday. They must remember their past advocacies and be willing to share responsibility when those policies create hardship. It is easy to blame the current government for long-advocated but poorly planned decisions. It is far harder to admit one’s role in the consequences.

The harsh reality is that many elites conveniently forget their yesterday—the positions they took and the policies they championed. When those policies are finally implemented, and Nigerians bear the consequences, those same elites criticise the outcomes as if they had no hand in shaping them.

The lesson here is clear: policymaking in Nigeria must be holistic. It must consider not only economic theories but also social realities. Removing subsidies may be necessary, but without effective mitigation strategies, it becomes a weapon of poverty, inflicting untold suffering on the most vulnerable.

So, as Nigerians struggle with inflation and hardship, we should remember the true colours of our elites. They must be held accountable—not only for the policies they recommend but also for the human cost of those policies.

Lastly, I ask again: Should those who recommend harsh policies also bear part of the responsibility for their outcomes? The answer is a resounding yes. True leadership demands not just bold ideas but also the courage to accept the consequences and work tirelessly to protect the people.

Lawan Bukar Maigana is a journalist, humanitarian, Pan-Africanist, and social commentator. He’s known as Ibn Maigana on Facebook.

By Muhammad Lawal Ibrahim, PhD

Another brilliant mind has died. Another Nigerian professor, Prof. Abubakar Roko, has just been murdered by the state,not by bullets, nor by bandits, but by an unforgiving system, deliberate neglect, and a government that treats its academics like disposable rags. He needed ₦13 million for medical treatment abroad. After over 20 years of service to this so-called nation, he could not raise it. He lay bedridden, helpless, abandoned, and now he is dead. We must stop calling this “natural death.” This was murder by government negligence.

In a country that throws billions at political cronies, gives lawmakers millions in wardrobe allowances, and funds endless pilgrimages and jamborees, a professor had to be paraded online like a beggar, with students scrambling to raise funds just so their teacher might survive. Yet even that was insufficient. The system choked him to death slowly, much like it is doing to thousands of others right now.

Where are the salaries? 

As of this writing, tertiary institution workers are celebrating Sallah (Eid-ul-Adha) without salaries. Go and verify. Civil servants in other sectors have been paid weeks ago. But those who teach your children, those who write your policies, those who keep the soul of the country alive—are being starved like prisoners of war. And when it was reported that over 1,000 lecturers have died under this current administration, bootlickers and sycophants ask, “What killed them?” What killed them? What didn’t?

Sickness, hunger, depression, suicide, systemic poverty, lack of medical care, all wrapped in the evil legacy of Buhari’s betrayal and now Tinubu’s reign of economic terrorism, killed them and are still counting.

Tinubu’s “Renewed Hope” is academic genocide

Let’s not sugarcoat it. What’s happening in Nigeria’s higher education system today is academic genocide. The federal government has effectively declared war on the ivory tower. Salaries are frozen. Promotions are denied. Research is dead. Morale is nonexistent. Students are turning to fraud and crime. Lecturers are dying in silence, many too ashamed to beg for help. But yes, the president has just approved ₦90 billion for Hajj. Where is the justice in this madness?

A rotten elite and a silent society

The ruling class in Nigeria treats lecturers like slaves while flying abroad for their checkups, educating their children overseas, and stealing public funds to build mansions in Dubai. Meanwhile, professors die waiting for ₦13 million. We are ruled by demons in agbadas, celebrated by cowards, and enabled by silence.

What’s worse is that many Nigerians have been so brutalised that they now laugh off their own destruction. “Lecturers are always complaining.” Yes, because they are slowly being buried alive.

We will not forgive

To those in power, your days of immunity from truth are over. You will be remembered not as leaders, but as executioners. We will not forgive you for the lives you’ve ruined. Not in death. Not in history. Not in the court of God.

You have destroyed one of the few remaining sectors that held credibility in this country. And for what? Your greed? Your power games? Your bottomless stomachs?

Prof. Roko is dead, and I pray for Allah to accept his good, innocent soul into the highest level in paradise, amin. But this article is not about him alone. It is about every Nigerian academic suffering right now in silence. It is about every student being denied a future. It is about a nation killing its own brain and expecting to survive.

Enough is enough. Let this death be a curse on the conscience of every politician who has contributed to this decay.

Let this be a rallying cry for every Nigerian who still has a soul left.

Muhammad Lawal Ibrahim, PhD, wrote from ABU, Zaria, lawalabusalma@gmail.com.

By Nasiru Ibrahim

If the economy grows by 4% in Q1 2025, people expect to feel it through affordable food, reasonable wages, more job opportunities, an improvement in the standard of living, and quality education. I agreed with Dr. Usman Isyaku’s recent claim that “Economics is the new rocket science in Nigeria,” because economists are busy presenting abstract models, charts, graphs, GDP growth, and the economic policy debate is centred only on economic jargon and indicators that appear technical and confusing to the layman. The economic policy debate is supposed to be centred on what people earn, what they buy, how the cost of living rises, and what happens to inequality and poverty.

People often ask: if the economy is growing, why is our life getting harder? The answer to all this is the Nigerian economy’s economic growth and inflation paradox, which refers to the presence of economic growth and high inflation at the expense of people’s purchasing power and standard of living. Inflation erodes people’s purchasing power and repeatedly makes them poorer as prices rise.

The economic growth and inflation paradox is the reality of the Nigerian economy, considering that the economy experienced its fastest growth in about a decade in 2024, as pointed out by the World Bank’s lead economist for Nigeria, Sir Alex Sienant, yesterday in Abuja. He said the Nigerian economy grew by 4.6% year-on-year in Q4 2024. This means that in the last three months of 2024, the Nigerian economy produced 4.6% more goods and services than in the same period in 2023. However, even though the country produces more, many people don’t feel any benefit because prices are still rising, and daily life is becoming harder.

Growth figures like GDP are averages and do not address poverty, high inequality, a poor standard of living, or food affordability.

What caused this paradox?  President Tinubu’s economic reforms — removing fuel subsidies, electricity subsidies, and naira devaluation cuts —resulted in fiscal improvement. Government revenue grew by 4.5% of GDP in 2024, the fiscal deficit decreased, and external debt declined. On paper, these achievements are impressive, but they feel different to the common man on the street, as the prices of food, transport, and rent continue to rise.

The immediate cause is the lack of inclusive growth, with a few sectors like oil and banking dominating the GDP. Secondly, weak institutions refer to government agencies and public bodies that are supposed to ensure fairness, transparency, and accountability but fail to do so. When institutions are weak, they allow corruption, inefficiency, and poor management of public funds. This means money meant for roads, healthcare, education, or farming support gets wasted or stolen, and policies that should help everyone only benefit a few elites. This worsens inequality and keeps essential services underdeveloped.

Thirdly, agriculture and supply chain disruptions caused inefficiency in the sector. Insecurity and poor infrastructure, plus the issue of import waivers, contributed to cheap food imports, making it hard for local farmers to compete and causing them to incur losses.

I do not view economics as rocket science dominated by charts, models, and jargon. I see economics in everyday life—prices, wages, job opportunities, choices, affordable food for all, happiness, and a better life for all and sundry.

Economists should explain how policies affect people’s daily lives — not just in GDP numbers, but in real terms like food prices, wages, and employment opportunities. Economists need to engage with the public more directly, explaining key concepts like inflation or interest rates in simple terms. In 2022, the Nigerian government reported economic growth in the oil sector. Yet, unemployment was at a 20% high, and poverty was increasing, with more than 40% of Nigerians living below the poverty line.

Economists and policymakers often discuss GDP growth, real income, or inflation rates—terms that many Nigerians don’t fully understand. Most people are focused on practical issues like food prices, rent, and transportation costs, not abstract economic concepts.

Governments often use economic data to justify their policies, sometimes highlighting growth figures that don’t fully reflect the real situation. In Nigeria, governments usually focus on growth rates in sectors like oil and telecoms, which don’t directly impact most people’s daily lives, while ignoring issues like rising poverty and growing inequality.

What Should Be Done? 

Firstly, fuel subsidy reform must be done to protect ordinary Nigerians. The sudden removal of fuel subsidy in 2023 made life harder—transport became expensive, food prices shot up, and suffering increased. Even big economies like the U.S. still subsidise farmers, energy, and housing. But in Nigeria, our subsidy system was full of corruption and waste. Instead of removing it overnight, the government should have planned a gradual withdrawal and used the savings to support school feeding, health insurance, and public transport. State governors, like those in Lagos and Borno, should use their share of subsidy savings to support poor families. Local government chairmen can help by identifying struggling households and ensuring the help gets to them.

Secondly, we must secure our farms and support agriculture to fight food inflation. Insecurity in places like Benue, Zamfara, and Niger has chased farmers off their land. No farming means no food, and no food means higher prices. The government should send security teams to protect farmers and work with local vigilantes. State governors must invest in irrigation, storage facilities, and feeder roads, like Ebonyi’s rice project or Cross River’s cocoa plan. Local governments should help distribute seeds and fertilisers, and organise markets in villages so that food can move easily and become cheaper.

Thirdly, Nigeria must stop mismanaging foreign exchange and support local production. The constant rise and fall of the naira, unfair access to cheap dollars, and heavy import dependence have worsened things. The CBN must be open and fair in its forex policy and prioritise local manufacturers. State governments should build industrial hubs and support processing industries, as Ogun State is doing. Local governments can help small producers in things like leather, cassava, and shea butter—so we can reduce imports, create jobs, and lower prices.

Fourthly, state governors and LG chairmen must stop blaming the federal government for everything. Many things affecting people—bad roads, dirty water, expensive local markets—are within their power. Governors should form regional plans, invest in infrastructure, and support small businesses. Local governments should fix boreholes, maintain primary health centres, and organise rural markets. These small actions reduce the daily cost of living and improve lives.

Fifthly, we need proper social protection, not random handouts. Inflation is eating deep into people’s pockets. The government should use verified data (linked to NIN and BVN) to send digital cash transfers to the poor. Local governments must identify real households that need support. States should create public works programs—like road maintenance, tree planting, or waste collection—so people earn a living while helping their communities. That’s how India’s rural job scheme helped millions.

Lastly, no reform will work without fighting corruption and fixing our broken institutions. We can’t keep discussing change while money disappears, budgets are padded, and governors pocket LG funds. The government must pass audit laws, publish how money is spent, and punish corruption. State and local governments should meet transparency targets before receiving federal funds. We must also return full independence to local governments so they can serve people directly. Without these changes, even the best economic plans will fail.

By Abdulhamid Abdullahi Aliyu

The Nigerian House of Representatives has directed the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) to block all pornography websites, arguing that adult content is fueling moral decay in the country.

Lawmakers behind the move claim it is necessary to protect societal values, but many Nigerians are asking: With all the pressing challenges facing the nation, is this the priority?

At a time when the cost of living is unbearable, insecurity is rampant, and unemployment continues to frustrate millions, banning pornography feels like a classic case of misplaced focus.

There is no doubt that pornography is a controversial topic, especially in a country as religious and conservative as Nigeria. Many believe it is a moral threat, linking it to addiction, broken homes, and declining values among the youth. But is an outright ban the solution?

If the government is genuinely concerned about morality, should it not focus on improving education, strengthening family values, and addressing the root causes of social vices? What about the rising cases of drug abuse, internet fraud, and sexual exploitation—issues that demand urgent action?

It is often easier for politicians to push symbolic laws than to tackle society’s deeper problems. But morality cannot be legislated; it is shaped by economic stability, good governance, and proper education.

Even if we assume the government is serious about this ban, another question arises: Can it actually be enforced? Countries like India, Indonesia, and China have attempted similar restrictions, only for people to bypass them with VPNs and other simple workarounds.

Nigeria, with its millions of tech-savvy youths, will be no different. At best, this ban will be a temporary roadblock; at worst, it will push the industry underground, making regulation even more difficult.

What is most concerning is the potential for this move to set a dangerous precedent for internet censorship in Nigeria. Today, it is pornography. Tomorrow, it could be news websites, social media platforms, or even political activism.

If the government can dictate what people access online, what stops it from controlling other forms of content? Where does it end?

Beyond the moral and censorship debates, an outright ban could also have unintended economic consequences. Nigeria’s creative and tech industries thrive on the internet’s openness.

Restrictions like this could discourage investment in the digital space. Besides, history has shown that banning something does not eliminate demand—it simply drives it underground.

This move may just create a bigger mess instead of solving anything. If the real concern is protecting children and upholding values, there are smarter ways to achieve this.

Many developed countries regulate adult content through strict age verification, parental control mechanisms, and public awareness campaigns. A more effective approach would involve educating young people about digital responsibility, empowering parents with monitoring tools, and addressing the economic and social conditions that contribute to moral decline.

With the economy in crisis, insecurity worsening, and corruption still unchecked, is banning pornography really what Nigerians need right now?

This is not to suggest that pornography is beneficial or free of consequences. However, governance revolves around priorities. A country that is struggling to feed its people should not waste energy on internet policing.

Nigeria’s progress will not depend on what it bans but rather on how effectively it addresses the fundamental issues that hold it back.

And unfortunately, a porn ban does nothing to fix them.

Abdulhamid Abdullahi Aliyu, an NYSC serving corps member, writes from the Center for Crisis Communication (CCC) in Abuja. 

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 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.