Muhammadu Buhari

By Uzair Adam

A prosecution witness, Mr. Stephen Gana, testified on Monday before an Abuja High Court, stating that two companies linked to the former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Godwin Emefiele, received preferential treatment in vehicle procurement contract bids.

Gana, the tenth prosecution witness, explained that the contracts were awarded to Emefiele’s companies through selective processes, which bypassed regular competitive bidding.

Gana, who served as the Head of the Procurement Department at the CBN, disclosed this while being led in evidence by the prosecution counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN.

He confirmed that he was in office when contracts for vehicles, as highlighted in exhibits presented to the court, were approved.

The witness testified that Toyota vehicles valued at N99,900,000 were procured from April 1616 Company Ltd through direct procurement.

Referring to another exhibit, Gana stated that two Toyota Hilux vehicles, costing N23,100,000 each, were obtained through selective bidding.

The April 1616 Company was awarded the contract after offering the lowest bid and meeting the CBN’s in-house estimate.

Gana explained that at the CBN, contracts could be awarded through direct procurement or selective bidding, depending on the recommendations of the Director of Procurement, who worked alongside him and other officials in the department.

Following Gana’s testimony, the prosecution counsel requested an adjournment, citing his involvement in a Supreme Court case.

The defense counsel, Matthew Burkaa, did not oppose the request but raised concerns about the cost of transportation. Justice Hamza Muazu adjourned the case until November 13 for further hearings.

Earlier, Burkaa had challenged the prosecution’s move to introduce new witnesses, arguing that the defense was not informed about these additions during the initial charge.

Emefiele faces allegations of forgery, conspiracy, and breach of trust during his tenure as CBN Governor.

He is accused of using his position to favor two companies—April 1616 Nigeria Ltd and Architekon Nigeria Ltd—in a case filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

The hearing will continue next month.

By Saifullahi Attahir

After I read many books and essays about the life of the Late General Sani Abacha, including the famous Soldiers of Fortune by the brilliant historian Max Siollun, I was able to draw out some key lessons I wanted to share with my readers, hoping it would serve as a guide toward their leadership, professional, and other life aspirations.

A famous Hausa saying goes, ‘In ka ji wane ba banza ba’, meaning (every popular, great, or successful person has a hidden story behind it).

Sani Abacha was born in Kano in 1943 to a Kanuri businessman. He attended Kano Provincial College (later called Rumfa College) before proceeding to Nigeria Army training in Kaduna. He was commissioned into the Army and could participate in various trainings and engagements within and outside the country.

Abacha was destined to be among the few soldiers to become Nigeria’s Head of State during his career. Little was known about this young man before the 1983 coup that brought General Muhammadu Buhari to power. It was stated that only three times during a span of over three decades did Abacha ever appear to make any official public statements. He was a master of silence and maintaining a low profile.

For an ambitious and very calculated person like Abacha to achieve his dream within the cycle of influence in the elite Nigerian army, it must call for some behaviours and attitudes that he possessed either inherently or learned that he was fortunate to use, and quite predictably, these were the strongest weapons he used during his time.

 I am not advocating military rule or any form of ruthless use of force to lead people. In contrast, my article is about what characters can learn from great individuals regardless of where they hail from or their human mistakes. I hope this will be a guide to our youth who aspire to lead a responsible and impactful life.

Below are the lessons I wanted us to learn: 

1) Concealing intention

Abacha may have read Robert Greene’s 48 Laws of Power or mastered the art even before the book was written. Whether Abacha had already harboured the intention to rule Nigeria was another subject of debate, but his ability to remain unpredictable to the extent that even his boss, General Ibrahim Bahamas Babangida (IBB) stated that he never for once thought Abacha had any intention to become Head of State. This concealment of intention shielded him from the attraction of his colleagues with similar ambitions. Also, he was able to escape the trap of Boss/protégé conflict. 

Had Abacha publicly started showing any intention of replacing his boss, their relationship might have gone sour. This key lesson of never outshining your master and never publicly sharing your dreams and goals with anyone except the needful ones is a very important strategy for achieving your goals in life. Keep your enemies busy and maintain an air of unpredictability.

2) Patience

The importance of this assertive attitude can never be overemphasised. The art of patience, deliberation, and taking things without a rush is one of the best attributes for lasting success and achieving life goals.

When you are patient, life-changing opportunities will eventually come your way. Both Abacha and Bukar S. Dimka were contemporary ambitious young soldiers, but Dimka rushed his ambition by conniving with others and making his intention known. He eagerly executed an ill-prepared coup against Murtala. The tragedy ended up destroying both Dimka and his collaborators.

On the other hand, Abacha was more patient and allowed his ambition to buy time until 20 years later when he became an indomitable force to reckon with. He eventually became the Head of State. 

3) Know when to decide

 It’s not advisable to remain patient and inactive all your life. You are supposed to know when to act when to strike and when to attack. Whenever the long-awaited opportunity presents itself, you must seize it and act decisively quickly. At that point, you are not likely to procrastinate even for a while. When the country plunged into crisis, and the Interim National Government (ING) under Shonekan could not control the situation, Abacha saw this as both necessary and an opportunity to exercise his power. The rest is history.

These art and qualities require training and mastery by every person from any walks of life.

May Allah forgive his shortcomings and let his gentle soul rest in peace, ameen.

Saifullahi Attahir, a Medical Student of Federal University Dutse, wrote via saifullahiattahir93@gmail.com.

By Bilyamin Abdulmumin

Since the return of democracy in Nigeria, successive governments have contemplated removing fuel subsidies. The then government of President Olusegun Obasanjo (OBJ) saw multiple fuel price hikes, from N20 per litre it inherited from the transitional military government to the last unforgettable fuel hike. In 2007, two days before the expiration of his tenure, OBJ jacked up the pump price from 65 to 75 naira per litre.  However, the incoming president Umar Musa Yar’adua returned the honest nest to order.

The subsequent struggle to remove fuel subsidies, perhaps the biggest standoff, came in 2012 during the government of Goodluck Ebele Jonathan (GEJ). Vibrant labour, trade, civil and student unions, and agglomeration of opposition descended on the government for the decision, forcing GEJ to lower the price from the initial N141 to N97 and later in 2015 to 87 naira per litre. The struggle would continue. As soon as President Muhammadu Buhari (PMB) ascended to power, he greeted the public with partial subsidy removal.

PMB took the pump price from the official N87 to N145 before hitting N187 at the end of his tenure. But all out on fuel subsidy removal came during the run-down to the 2023 general election, where all the major presidential candidates dismissed any doubt left on fuel subsidy. They all warned the point black electorates that they would remove fuel subsidies so that President Tinubu would walk the talk even from the inaugural stage. 

The government and subsidy removal activists argue that an unbelievable amount of funds are being poured into the scheme while the national infrastructure languishes in bad condition. The large amount spent on the subsidy has been said to reach this height dubiously, no thanks to inflated numbers by some unscrupulous officials and the diversion of subsidised fuel to neighbouring countries by rogue marketers. To add insult to injury, Nigeria borrows to sustain this counterproductivity. Although this argument is plausible, instead of throwing a baby with the bath water, why not the government sanitise the scheme so that it brings the amount to within its capacity?

Another pro-subsidy removal argument was that only a few rich Nigerians benefit from the subsidy, the poor masses who were the target of the scheme are not benefiting the way it is supposed to. This slogan is challenging to explain to people; which ‘The poor masses are not benefiting the way it is supposed to’? When people can visibly see the effects of the subsidy when they buy fuel. No answer is as crunching as for a Nigerian to enter a filling station, and after purchasing an expensive fuel, he declares, they said we don’t benefit from subsidy!

 GMB and APC supporters have an additional puzzling dilemma to unravel because GMB had outrightly opposed the plan in 2012 when President Goodluck Jonathan mulled the idea of its removal. GMB and other APC chieftains famously proclaimed ‘over their dead bodies’ would they allow it. Meanwhile, by the side of the TV screen, we threw roses at them.

So, one of the top Buharist El-Rufai’s tried to rescue the situation in the aftermath of the then PMB’s backpedal. According to an accidental civil servant: ‘When fact changes, decision changes.’ This was to defend the then PMB decision even though he opposed it earlier. This philosophy convinced me; I said that Elrufai rightly arranged the pieces together. But one of my friends would make my life miserable; he said the same philosophy could also be applied to Jonathan as his reason behind fuel subsidy removal. I became speechless.

The speed with which the marketers change fuel prices immediately after price changes from NNPC (Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation), regardless of what’s in their stock, whether old or new, is perhaps the biggest showdown between the public and marketers. As soon as NNPC announces a new price, marketers countrywide change the price in the blink of an eye. The public argues that since the new price is for the new product, the marketers with the old product should stick to the old price. One Sheik brought this public sentiment to the fore when he calculated the difference between the old and new prices and multiplied that by a presumably large number of litres for one marketer. The profit he got was staggering, about 300 million naira.

I share this public sentiment, and I, too, initially thought the marketers were doing it illegally until Mele Kyari explained it on BBC Hausa Ra’ayi Riga program. According to the NNPC MD, marketers must sell their old products at a new price. This approach enables them to recoup their old investment. For instance, if a marketer had 100 litres, he had to sell them at a new price so that he could buy the same amount, but if he sold them at the old price of N250, he would not be able to buy the same 100 litres of new product at a higher price.

This is a plausible reason from a market viewpoint; what of the masses? Because while the market provides safety measures for marketers, it does not offer the same to the general public, especially the poor. Economics and the related professionals’ expertise are needed here; they should help us balance these conflicting but appealing arguments.

Although it could be too late to cry when the head is chopped off, Nigerian policymakers may need to learn from thermal shock phenomena when it comes to subsidy removal or any government policy implementation.  Thermal shock is a situation a material experiences when exposed to sudden changes in temperature conditions; it can lead to the material cracking or even breaking down. 

Take a glass cup of tea, for instance. If the tea glass cup is scorching and you suddenly put it in cold water to cool the tea inside, the glass may crack or even break depending on the level of the thermal shock, but to cool the tea inside the got glass cup successfully without harming the glass, you apply gradual cooling. First, you put the glass cup in warm water, then gradually reduce the water temperature until it becomes cold; in this way, the tea inside the glass cup can cool without causing any injury to the glass.

Bilyamin Abdulmumin is a doctoral candidate in Chemical Engineering at ABU Zaria, a public affair commentator, and a science writer.

By Dr Aliyu U. Tilde

How many times have I restrained my fingers from writing on this topic? It first came to mind when I heard His Excellency, Malam Nasiru El-Rufai, hinting that he would not be part of the Bola Ahmed Tinubu administration. I watched the clip and laughed. I said does not Malam know that he is now a Plc and no longer an individual enterprise? Can Aliko Dangote one day dream of returning to his quiet personal status of 50 years ago?

Once you are a Plc, forget it. You no longer own your life. We own it. You are our property. Our slave. Period. That is the liability you become to yourself when you prove to the public your competence in serving it. The prize of hard work is more work, they say.

I knew the positions of SSG and COS did not fit people of his personality even if he eyed them. Malam is at his best either as an executive or a project person tasked with a very difficult task, like Ministry of Power.

After missing him on campus, I came to know him through many of his intimate friends in Kaduna since 1986. But I knew him from a distance the more when he started public service in BPE, then as Minister of FCT and lastly as Governor of Kaduna State. In summary, he is one Nigerian that has proven his competence beyond a reasonable doubt.

That is not to say Malam, 63, is not human. Nobody can come straight in these positions without stepping on many toes, especially in a country that is as tortuous as Charles H. Robinson described the African footpath in 1892. Those adversely affected by his policies, which were necessary to straighten up things, will understandably complain and write petitions against him.

Then Malam is also a politician, a fierce one for that matter. We have seen that much during the build-up to the last presidential election. To complicate matters, he is vocal, unrelenting, open and many times politically incorrect; yet, calculating enough to yield result. These are enough to court him for many troubles.

One of those troubles is with the legislature. He had a problem in 2003 when the Senate refused to clear him. Finally, he got cleared by the intervention of President Olusegun Obasanjo and went ahead to prove his worth as FCT minister. This time the media is saying it is not about money or even the legislature per se but about some petitions or security issues.

Today President Tinubu needs to play the role that Obasanjo played in getting the Senate clearance in 2003. He campaigned for Godwill Akpabio, the President of the Senate. Some say he also intervened for Festus Keyamo. He stood for two other competent people before: Vice President Kashim Shettima and NSA Nuhu Ribadu.

The President has promised to choose for the country the best talents to serve under his government. Though he had difficulties keeping this promise on some of his nominees, the nation may not forgive him for missing the target on Malam. He should defy Malam’s opponents just as he did for many others.

Both the security apparatus and APC owe Malam a debt. His doggedness on power shift to the South and in fighting to neutralize the effect of last-minute anti-people’s policy of the Buhari administration that would have cost the APC the Presidency are moral debts that both the President and the party owe Malam; otherwise, both will suffer a trust deficit in the eyes of the public. I have told many—and I may be wrong—that even from a strategic point of view, not having a cerebral and politically hyperactive El-Rufai on board will be a grave political miscalculation for the administration.

The security apparatus has no moral locus to abandon Malam either. He stood by it and acted on its reports to literally go on the ethnic cleansing of Shi’ites in his State—his one act that I strongly abhor and wrote against.

The President now has three major contentious issues at hand: Removal of fuel subsidy, dollar deregulation and the coup in Niger Republic. He must make El-Rufai Plc become the fourth.

Dr Tilde tweets via @Dr_AliyuTilde.

By Uzair Adam Imam

There have been sharp retorts since the presidency’s claim on Thursday that pronounced the state governors as corrupt.

The governors continue to distance themselves from the laid down accusation, challenging the presidency to identify the governors involved in the process.

Barely 24 hours after governor Nayesom Wike of Rivers and his Benue State counterpart, Samuel Ortom criticised President Buhari over the allegation of corruption against governors, Governor Ifeanyi Okowa of Delta State also distanced himself from the allegation.

The President, while speaking about the height of corruption in the country at an event hosted for members of the Senior Executive Course 44 (2022) of the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS), Kuru, blamed the governors for looting the local governments’ allocation.

Buhari said the ugly behaviour by the governors also encourages corruption at the local government level, thereby inhibiting development at the grassroots.

But reacting to what Buhari said, Okowa, who spoke through his Chief Press Secretary, Olisa Ifeajika, said it was unfortunate for the president to have made such a “blanket statement.”

He said: “I want to say that Mr President, as one who has all the information about issues in the country, knows the governors who fall into that category of the so-called ‘thieves’ he was referring to.

“We all know that our own Governor, Dr Ifeanyi Okowa, does not belong there. He was one of the first governors, if not the first, to embrace local government autonomy when it was agreed on just like he did with the judiciary and the legislature.

“He went as far as getting legislation to grant autonomy to the legislature and the judiciary. He allowed them to run autonomously. And, for a man, who allowed these organs of government to have autonomy, he cannot have anything to do with funds belonging to the local governments.

“I repeat that the government of Dr Ifeanyi Okowa, every month, augments the finances of local governments in the state with more than N300 million to make sure they are able to pay their salaries and stay afloat.

“He does that religiously monthly; so, for a man who does that, how can he be among those who steal local government money?

“Our governor is not part of it. You are also aware that the government of Sen. Ifeanyi Okowa recently released N5 billion for pension arrears; N2.5 billion of that was a grant to the local government for payment of pensions.

“It is a grant to the local government; they are not going to pay. The governor did that because the local governments have to fund their activities, pay their teachers and healthcare workers.”

By Uzair Adam Imam

Governor Nyesom Wike of Rivers State and his Benue State counterpart, Samuel Ortom, have denied the allegation of corruption and diversion of public funds laid against governors by President Muhammadu Buhari on Thursday.

The duo challenged the president to name the governors he accused of stealing and diverting the funds meant for local governments.

The president, at an event hosted for members of the Senior Executive Course 44 (2022), accused the state governors of corruption and diversion of the local government alocations to own personal treasury.

He said the state governors used to collect money on behalf of the council areas in their states and remit just half of such allocation to the council chairman.

He also described the development as one of the major challenges that hinders the country’s development.

However, Wike and Ortom challenged Buhari to name those he claimed were stealing local government funds on Friday at the inauguration of the Mgbuosimini internal road project in Port Harcourt, Rivers capital.

The governors said the president claims could be termed as defamation against the state governors.

By Uzair Adam Imam

President Muhammadu Buhari Thursday accused the state governors of corruption and diversion of the local government allocations to own personal treasury.

President Buhari decried the menace, saying it was one of the major challenges that hindered the country’s development.

He said the state governors used to collect money on behalf of the council areas in their states and remit just half of such allocation to the council chairman.

Buhari disclosed this at the Presidential Villa in Abuja at an event hosted for members of the Senior Executive Course 44 (2022) of the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS), Kuru.

Buhari, who spoke about the height of corruption in the country, said the ugly behaviour of the governors also encourages corruption in the local government system, thereby inhibiting development at the grassroots.

He added, “Speaking from personal experience, a Chief Executive of a state, a qualified lawyer, trained, the treatment of local governments, what they did, this is my personal experience.

“If the monies from the federal government to state governments is N100m, let’s put it at N100m. N50m will be sent to the chairman with a letter that he’ll sign that he received 100 million.

“The governor will pocket the balance and share it with whoever he wants to, and then the chairman of the local government will see how much he must pay in salaries; to hell goes development. Monies for the salaries will be given, and the balance will put in his pocket. This is what is happening.

“This is Nigeria. It’s a terrible thing. You cannot say the person who was doing these was not educated. He was a qualified lawyer, and he was experienced, yet he participated in this type of corruption.

“So, it’s a matter of conscience, whichever level we find ourselves. As a leader, you sit here, with all the sacrifices the country is making by putting you through institutions and getting you ready to lead.

“The fundamental thing is personal integrity. May God help us.” The president said.