Nigeria

By Abdulrahman Yunusa

Perhaps, this current administration has come with the solid whims of making an agricultural revolution, but they failed to understand that it’s one of the most challenging plans to achieve. It’s most demanding because it’s beyond paperwork, lip service or even baseless table talk. Instead, it requires tireless effort and viable policies to realise.

Likewise, it’s really a sacrificial movement that needs to go beyond the border of border closure tactics. Modern farming techniques are required, well and learned agriculturists versatile in modern farming should be hired to do the job efficiently.

Contrary to the above, the government brought poor hands couple with the introduction of outdated personalities to do the job. It is a clear indicator that we are not ready to achieve our goals.

 I think all these failed tried politicians have been used by the father of mediocrity and ineptitude to prove how vast and expert this administration is when it comes to the game of political deceit. So can we keep channelling our traps into the wrong portion and be anticipating a rattling result? But, of course, things never work out in such a fraudulent way.

Imagine putting the wrong panel in a position and expecting it to work perfectly. Is this not a self-deceit at its truest form? If it happens to be true, then malfunction within their administrative circle would forever prevail since meritocracy has become a key factor to be sidelined by the change charlatans. As they move to change the seemingly poor narratives here, today, the incapacitated hands are making the job uglier than it was.

Therefore, as a country dancing in between the edge of capitalism, socialism and liberal economic system as a guiding economic instrument, they should promptly take off the fruitless idea of border closure and let food float into our country. Say this because for one to develop, he must underdevelop someone, and that could be made possible only when we have a shoulder to lean upon while trying to make the dream reality.

Also, technology should be the leading figure in this journey. All these outdated farming tactics and machines should be utterly dispelled and be substituted with modern ones.

On no reasonable ground, one will expect people to produce the enormous quantity of food that will suffice a big country like Nigeria and even have a surplus that could export to neighbouring countries using the 1908s farming system. Meanwhile, at the moment where they are battling with their stomach, and annoyingly the price of fertiliser and other farming equipment couple with chemicals are at a high price.

Most importantly, people need to be fed well before heading to the farming ground, where most of their energy is utilised. Failure to provide them food at an affordable price will drastically reduce the outcome of their farming during the harvesting season, yet the desired goals will never be achieved that way.

Our govt needs to work on its farming system mechanism to fill the existing gap in the realm of agriculture and food security. 

Abdulrahman Yunusa is a political and public affairs analyst. He writes from Bauchi and can be reached through abdulrahmanyunusa@gmail.com.

By Ahmadu Shehu, PhD.

To continue our conversation on a better northern Nigeria, let me bring you three unlived legacies of Alhaji Ahmed Joda, one of the most accomplished civil servants in this country. These are fantastic ideas capable of turning around the socioeconomic situation of this region and the entire country for good.

For the benefit of those who do not know him, Ahmed Joda OFR, CON, CFR was born on February 13, 1930, in Girei, a village located a few kilometres from Yola, the capital of Adamawa state. His basic education started at Yola Elementary School, from where he proceeded to Barewa College Zaria, before graduating from Pitsman College, London, in 1956. Before delving into journalism, Baba Joda started his career in agriculture and later became one of the longest-serving permanent secretaries of various federal ministries, including education, information and industry.  

Sometimes in 2019, former minister of Federal Capital Territory Dr Aliyu Umar Modibbo invited us to a meeting with Alh. Ahmed Joda. At the age of 90, Baba Joda, as we fondly called him, had assembled younger minds to think about the way forward for Nigeria and rethink the approach northern Nigeria has taken in negotiating its state, status and privileges within the Nigerian state. Baba Joda was very particular about the unity of this country, just as he was deeply concerned about the socioeconomic problems bedevilling the north. I, particularly, was astonished to see that despite his age, Baba Joda was chairing a four-hour meeting, perusing through documents and making amendments where necessary. After several meetings, recruitments, and deliberations, that meeting resulted in the “Nigerian Platform”, a collection of thinkers, excelled public servants, professionals, and academics, helping to chart a way forward for this country. The rest, as they say, is history.

Having noticed our contributions at the meeting, Baba Joda ensured my friend Dr MD Aminu and I stayed close to him and learned about this country as much as possible. We, indeed, kept in touch, learned, benefitted and enjoyed our relationship with this seasoned civil servant, experienced administrator, excellent intellectual and a special breed of the Nigerian elites.

One of Baba Joda’s agendas behind mentoring young Nigerians is to develop what he envisaged as the Nigeria Unity Forum (or any name that might suit the cause at the later stage of its development). Under this cause, Baba intended to develop a genuinely Pan-Nigerian national platform where citizens of this country will come together to discuss their grievances without hindrance, fear or hesitation. This was (to be) the first platform under which Nigerians from all walks of life, backgrounds and social status would have a free space to discuss, analyse and subject any topic of national interest without limits or limitations. The aim was to start a citizen-driven healing process among Nigerians to guarantee the true unity of our country. In the beginning, Baba had sacrificed his farmland and the facilities therein for weekly/monthly meetings of the groups. He was also to provide funding and feeding for the takeoff meetings. 

Another concept Baba Joda nurtured was a Sustainable Agricultural Model in which he invested so much time and resources in its conceptualisation and trial. Noting the waning natural resources, especially land and water, and the ever-growing population, vis-à-vis climate change and the attendant crises we are already witnessing, Baba had commissioned research into various models adopted by other countries such as India and Botswana. These countries have faced or are facing similar socioeconomic and environmental challenges. After thorough comparative studies, Baba proposed an agro-livestock model that, in my opinion, will forever change our society for good. The most fascinating and novel aspect of his proposal is its capability to deal with land and water resources, and at the same time, create a sustainable economic model that will undoubtedly work for the majority.     

The third and most important to him was the creation of the National Livestock Development Authority. Again, looking at the proposal of this agency, one cannot help but see the extraordinary visions and foresight in the manner in which it was to be designed, administered and supervised. This would not be another government-funded agency that would serve as a conduit for financial embezzlement and docility. Instead, it was meant to be a self-funding, self-sufficient and revenue-generating government agency responsible for making money for the country via our large, prosperous, but abandoned livestock sector. It was going to be a multibillion-dollar government company, richer than the NNPC and most of our aviation agencies. It would have led to vast foreign investments into our livestock sector, building companies for our manure, beef, leather, blood and born, etc., all expensive raw materials that go untapped in this part of the world. It would have been a major regional investor in this part of Africa, as it will not have had competitors for many years to come.   

While all of these and many more programs were coming up slowly but steadily, we sadly lost Baba Joda on August 13, 2021, at the age of 91. While I pray to Allah for his forgiveness and mercy upon his soul, I equally pray that those of us who are alive and are lucky to have drunk from his ocean of wisdom and patriotism will continue the struggle for a better future. I also pray that Allah will lead many more people to this cause and that these dreams, these ideas, will see the light of the day. Since Baba Joda is no longer around to pursue these ideas, I invite you to join his disciples and those who genuinely love this country to vigorously pursue and patiently work towards realising these ideas and their possible implementation.  

Dr Ahmadu Shehu is a nomad cum herdsman, an Assistant Professor at the American University of Nigeria, Yola, and is passionate about the Nigerian project. You can reach him at ahmadsheehu@yahoo.com.

By Dr Abdulkareem Kabir Masokano

The announcement of a high profile committee by President Muhammadu Buhari on September 6,  2021, to be headed by his Vice President, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo, to oversee reforms in Nigeria’s health sector, is a laudable and timely one. However, like most sectors in Nigeria, the health sector is, to put it mildly, in a state of stagnation that, with the existing structure and organisation, is practically impossible to make any headway despite the enormous potentials abound in the sector to the economy.

There are numerous angles to the problem bedevilling Nigeria’s fragile health sector. They include the collapse of the primary health care system, poor infrastructure, inter-professional rivalry, poor accountability, inefficient, limited health insurance coverage, etc. However, the single most important factor causing the apparent none progress of the sector is the absence of a robust, patient-centred health financing model. Every single one of the problems can be directly attributable to this.

Contrary to what many think, modern healthcare is too expensive to be offered for free anywhere in the world. Nigerians think other countries provide healthcare services almost free of charge to their citizens. Actually, these are products of either heavy government subsidies, strict universal taxation regimes, or compulsory insurance programs. Over the years, governments in Nigeria have gotten caught up with this delusion that they can offer free healthcare to their citizens from the little they generate of their internal and external revenues without any sustainable framework to ensure steady financing of such an important yet expensive sector.

The result of this thinking is the current problem of underutilisation of highly trained healthcare professionals across various tertiary hospitals in the country because of the unavailability of modern diagnostics and therapeutic equipment – all of which are very expensive to use and manage. For example, we have specialists across various surgical specialities with the necessary skills to perform highly technical surgical procedures like kidney transplants, open heart surgery and complex brain surgeries. However, the system is so designed that it cannot accommodate their expertise due to the unavailability of resources to sustain such programs. This leaves many Nigerian patients cumulatively spending billions on such medical procedures abroad, and Nigeria loses money tremendously.

Primary healthcare, the essential segment of any serious health system, is virtually non-existent in the country. This is not due to the absence of the structures. It’s because of the ‘internal’ brain drain within the levels of the existing health system. The primary healthcare centres are primarily under the care of the local governments in the country. Unfortunately, most of them cannot afford to employ the minimum required number of qualified doctors, nurses and other health workers who, by extension, are pulled by better-paying jobs available at the higher levels of the system. As a result, most of Nigeria’s primary health centres are manned by Community Health Extension Workers with minimal skills and expertise.

The National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS), which is supposed to be the primary driver of universal health coverage in the country, is essentially running far below par due to the poorly regulated profit-driven model it is structured. According to various statistical sources, the NHIS covers less than 5% of all Nigerians (out of over 200 million people!). As a result, the vast majority of Nigerians resort to paying out-of-pocket to access specialised healthcare. With that proportion, the insurance pool can only generate a meagre sum of money.

Coupled with the profit-only motive that drives the Health Management Organisations (HMOs), one can only expect that the system cannot cover the comprehensive health needs of its enrollees, not to mention driving any meaningful growth in the sector. The state-run contributory health systems are even worse! They are fraught with inefficiencies, lack of transparency and corruption. And as far as I am concerned, they ought not to have been created as their creation only serves to decrease the pool and reach of the National Scheme.

From the preceding, it is evident that sustainable financing is the critical element missing in our health sector; the focal point of any meaningful health sector reform in the country should include improving it. The current model whereby health financing largely depends on what the governments generate from their dwindling revenue or generous donor agencies is not sustainable and cannot move the sector even an inch from its current state. Therefore, it is about time Nigeria’s policymakers look for other alternatives to fund our increasing healthcare needs, given our explosive population growth rate.

Accordingly, this high profile committee set up by Mr President should look into developing a comprehensive, sustainable, and transparent healthcare financing model that would cover every Nigerian’s most basic health needs. It should consider a complete overhaul of the country’s healthcare financing by the development of a hybrid health financing system at various levels of the healthcare system with varying blends of public, private and public-private partnership, through the creation of a compulsory basic healthcare taxation system to cover for a comprehensive healthcare financing at the primary level for all Nigerians regardless of socioeconomic class.

A comprehensive reform of the NHIS should supplement this to enforce the enrolment of all workers in the formal sector of the economy (public and private), cooperative organisations of the various non-formal entities of the economy like farmers, artisans, transport workers, among others. This will cover specialised healthcare across our tertiary and specialist hospitals, both public and private and broadening the insurance industry to include ethical health insurance systems like the Takaful system to increase inclusivity across the various demographics of the country.

The committee should also encourage creating windows for community-based contributory health safety nets to tap into the national health insurance pool to enable citizens from lower socioeconomic access to specialised healthcare at our tertiary health institutions.

Special funds can be set aside annually from the NHIS fund pool for research and development in our tertiary health institutions regarding funding for specialised healthcare services and preventive health. This should be enough to cover all the available infrastructure needed to procure, support and maintain modern diagnostic and therapeutic equipment.

The committee has qualified, world-class technocrats as members. It also has the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Vesta healthcare partners, and WHO as observers. Thus, we are optimistic that it will develop a sustainable blueprint for health financing as the bedrock of their essential task. May the government implement the committee’s recommendation for the needed reforms in Nigeria’s fragile health sector.

Dr Abdulkareem Kabir Masokano is a resident Surgeon, ABUTH, Zaria. He can be reached via abdulkareemmsk@gmail.com.

By Simbo Olorunfemi

Federalism is not a Nigerian creation, tempting as one might be led to assume it is. Federalism is a concept in Political Science, with a consensus on what constitutes its grundnorm and what its main features are. I had thought, as a student of Political Science, that I had a modest understanding of what federalism is, having taken a number of courses wholly devoted to it at undergraduate and postgraduate levels. But that was until Nigerians happened on the concept of federalism and I realised how little I knew about it. I have now come to accept that what Nigerians cannot happen to does not exist. Nigerians took hold of federalism, created the aberrant idea of ‘true federalism’, as if there is ‘false federalism’ in practice somewhere, and there has been no rest ever since.

Yet, even though dissensus over the definition of concepts is part and parcel of interrogation in the field of Political Science, there is, in fact, a broad consensus on the definition of Federalism. “What sets federal states apart from other national communities is not their values but a number of institutional design principles that include a division of legislative authority between two orders of government, each of which is elected directly by citizens, and each of which is sovereign in at least one legislative domain. This division of powers is set out in a written constitution that cannot be amended unilaterally by either order of government. In addition, federal states provide for the formal representation of their constituent communities (states or provinces) within the national legislature, although the means by which this is done range from direct popular election (Australia and the United States) to indirect election through constituent governments (Germany), and even to the appointment of friends and partisan colleagues of the prime minister (Canada)” (Watts,1998).

In simple terms, federalism is essentially about shared and self-rule is about sharing powers, functions and responsibilities, against the backdrop of forces of plurality and diversity pulling the people apart. In accordance with this principle considered by Political Scientists as the fundamental plank upon which the concept of Federalism rests, Watts (1996) submits that there are 23 federations in the world. “They vary widely, however, in the character of the underlying social diversity, in the form and scope of the distribution of legislative and administrative powers and financial resources, in the form and processes of the shared representative institutions, in the scope and role of the courts as constitutional umpires, in the character of intergovernmental relations, and in the processes for flexibility and constitutional adjustment”.

The variety out there again reinforces the argument against the ‘Nigerian’ assumption of one Federalism as true and another false. It is absolutely erroneous. As I have repeatedly argued, every federal arrangement is a work in progress, each with its imperfections, with no finishing line for any to arrive at, that it might be adjudged as having attained perfection. On account of constant friction and collision by what Tekena Tamuno described as ‘centre-seeking’ and ‘centre-fleeing’ forces, federations are often under stress and in a constant state of flux, coming under pressure to undergo recreation and adaptation.

In North America, Canada has been struggling with what Ronald Watts described as “three decades of political and constitutional crises, rooted deeply in its fundamental cultural cleavages”. Her neighbour, United States has her issues to deal with as the national and state governments clash. Mexico has its own issues, just like Argentina, Brazil, and Venezuela in South America. The situation is the same in Australia, countries in Europe, India and of course, in Africa as well.

While the nature of the stress in Nigeria, as to be expected, does differ from that of other places, that does not in any way vitiate the position that what is in practice in Nigeria is federalism, contrary to what some argue. It is simply a confirmation of the fact that federalism is a coat of many colours, with our green-white-green been one of the variants.

I recall that it was in the course of our conversations around federalism five years ago, that the distinguished Prince, Adekanmi Ademiluyi anchored his submission around a statement he attributed to the former Canadian Prime Minister, John Diefenbaker that ” Federalism means that you eat what you kill”. I disagreed with his position then and I, obviously, still do now. I don’t even think the essence of Federalism is about pulling apart, as the statement seems to suggest, as it is about pulling together. I do not think the essence of the coming together is that each might farm with the mind of self, by eating on the strength of the kill, rather I would suggest that it is more about broadening the collective base, that there might be enough for the collective good.

I have, however, only just decided to check up on the statement by John Diefenbaker to gain insight into the context in which he might have made it. Unfortunately, I have been unable to track it. Well, what does it matter? The statement provoked enough curiosity in me to have inspired this interrogation. Taking a second look at it, I cannot find grounds to agree with it. I would even argue that Diefenbaker must have been misled about what federalism to have made such a statement. What will be the point of a federation if it is all about self? Why will anyone want to be a part of a federation if the fundamental plank upon which a group, diverse in culture and other respects, is just to “eat what you kill”?

As I have repeatedly argued, federalism is primarily about pulling together, with accommodation for the interests and peculiarities of the component parts, with a view to widening the pool and leveraging on opportunities that come with size and other factors.

Indeed, there is the economic component embedded in the political shell of federalism and for some, it is about the political component tucked inside an economic shell, especially for federalist arrangements that started out as ‘customs unions’. I do not even think that the primary essence of federalism is about eating. Eating what one kills is not and cannot be the driver for federalism. Fundamental to the concept is shared duties and responsibilities with governance.

As we have come to see, the Nigerian elite has managed to make the arrangement here about eating, the same way everything else is reduced to food. That misunderstanding of the essence of Federalism is at the root of a lot of the crises – real, imagined or contrived. It is what is fueling the confusion around VAT. It is behind the divisive and bigoted positions increasing dominating the civic space. It is about people assuming themselves to be better endowed arguing that it should be about “eat what you kill”. If only the mentality can change from that to “eat what you need”.

The argument about eating what you kill is largely about revenue allocation. On that, I had this to say in 2017:

“Much has been made of the revenue allocation system which many see as rather lopsided in favour of the FG and have called for a review. One Senator declared the formula being used by the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMFAC) illegal’ by some weird deduction.

There is really nothing new to the debate as finding the most appropriate revenue allocation formulae, just like the debate, is an age-long one. Some recommendations have been made, just as reviews have taken place over time, especially In the last 40 years.

Before independence, there was the Phillipson Commission set up in 1946, the Hicks-Phillipson Commission of 1953, the Raisman Commission in 1958 and the Binn’s Commission of 1964, even after independence, all with the mandate to work out an acceptable formula, to no satisfaction of any group.

There was the Dina Commission in 1968, the Aboyade Technical Committee of 1977 and there was the Okigbo Commission which largely influenced the 1981 Revenue Act which allocated 55% to FG, 30.5% to State Governments, 10% to LGs and 4.5% for Special funds.

Modifications were further made in 1984 and 1992 which allocated 48.5% to FG, 24% to State Governments, 20% to LGs and 7.5% for Special funds, of which 1% for mineral-producing states on the basis of derivation.

By virtue of the current formula, about 52.68 % is allocated to the federal government from the Federation Account, 26.70% to the 36 states and 20.60% to the local government councils in the Federation.

Please note that sharing revenue among State governments and local governments were done on the basis of 4 principles, with different weights attached to each – population; equality of states or LGs, as the case might be; social development factor, revenue factor.

Also note how the allocation to Local Governments, in terms of percentage, going from 10% to 20%, even when many argue that the LGs are mostly non-functional, delivering very little in value.

So, by and large, there have been only marginal reviews in the structure of the allocation formula, over the years, especially the vertical aspect of it.

That, in spite of the fact that experts like Prof Okigbo and others have worked on it. So, when some reduce this to a North-South thing or hide behind the finger of restructuring to push it, it is obvious that they are not as guided on process or details behind some of the issues they pick up or simply echo”.

So, am I saying that there is nothing wrong with the system as it is? Far from it. The point I make is that Federalism is a work in progress and that as the journey goes on, what people do is engage in the process of negotiation to navigate into a more acceptable arrangement. It is not about seeking to bring the roof down. Our undue obsession with who eats what, when and how, makes our conversations convoluted and unhelpful. How we redirect the conversation to enlarging the pot, rather than wanting to have a bigger spoon or even making away with the pot should be of greater concern, as I think that is what federalism is supposed to foster.

There is nothing to suggest, either from the historical, ideological or philosophical premise, that federalism is supposed to be a closed shop arrangement, which locks one variant in and a different type out. It makes allowance even for hybrids, with quasi-federalist arrangements as well receiving the nod, as fundamental to the adoption of federalism is the desire to seek accommodation for forces seeking to pull and push. That being the case, where each federation finds its solution and how it adopts it will be up to it, as long as it is democratic, for Adele Jinadu maintains that “democracy is a condition of federalism”.

The challenge with some of our conversations is not just a defective recollection of history but the tragedy of assumptions about a number of things. This time, it is about what federalism is. I would suggest that the real essence of Federalism is in the traditional motto of the US – “e pluribus unum” which means “out of many, one. At the end of the day, we must remember the words of J.J. Linz that “federalism can only assure that nobody could be fully unhappy but certainly not that everybody will be happy with the solution.”

In Football, not everyone in the squad can make the team, not everyone in the team makes the field at once. Perhaps, there is something there as a cue. It should always be about what is in the best interest of the collective. As someone says, federalism can be a flexible system if the partners themselves are capable of flexibility.

Simbo Olorunfemi can be reached via simboor@yahoo.com.

By Rabiu Muhammad Gama

Introduction

Have you ever wondered why Americans go on vacation while Brits go on holiday? I am sure you have. Or haven’t you ever heard that American kids like candy while British kids are crazy about sweets? Our Law of Contract lecturer, who was so lucky to do his PhD in England, once told us how nice his flat was when he was in England. On the other hand, one of our learned professors, who was privileged to have some training from Harvard Law School, lamented that he suffered before he could afford an apartment during his stay in the US. Curious?  Well, I can’t actually blame you for that. I think all these go to show us how beautiful the English language is.

British and American English

That famous Irish playwright, George Bernard Shaw, once said, “the United States and the United Kingdom are two countries divided by a common language.” That was Shaw. And he wasn’t entirely wrong.

There are many varieties of English today: American English, British English, Australian English, Canadian English, Caribbean English, to mention but a few. However, for some historical and accidental factors, American and British Englishes are the most widely used across the globe today. These two Englishes,  I am confident you may be aware of, are not always the same. However, they are not very different either. As far as this article is concerned, American English is that variety of the English language widely written and spoken in the United States and some parts of Canada. While British English, just as the name hints, is the standard dialect of the English language spoken and written in the United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland).

The most noticeable areas where British and American Englishes differ are vocabulary, spelling, grammar, and, though very rarely, idiomatic expressions. Forget about pronunciation; it does not count – as far as Standard English is concerned, pronunciation is not an accurate barometer for measuring “good English”. Ask around if you doubt me.

Vocabulary

This is arguably the most significant area where the two Englishes differ. Americans don’t say lifter; they say elevator. It’s the Britons that call it lifter. Had Leonel Messi moved to Manchester City rather than Paris Saint-Germain, he would have been playing football by now. But, if he were to move to any football team in the US, say, the indomitable Seattle Sounders or the New York City FC, he would be playing soccer. Donald Trump, the most confused American president in recent history, is crazy about expensive automobiles. It may shock you to hear that the current Prime Minister of England, Boris Johnson, doesn’t know how to drive a car! If you go to the US, you will need an airplane to commute from Orlando to Las Vegas (the Sin City) because the cities are very far from each other. Go to the UK afterwards; you won’t need an aeroplane to move from Liverpool to Manchester – the two cities are only a stone’s throw from each other.

Spelling

There are many spelling differences between American and British English. Words like color, labor and honor are found only in American English. In England, they would write these words as colour, labour and honour, respectively. In words like these, where the Americans use an “o”, the Britons would use “ou”. Where an American would ask you if you know any good theater, a Briton would ask you if you know any good theatre, “er” in American English changes to “re” in British English. The Britons organise programmes, but the Americans only organize programs. I am sure you got this last point, too, don’t you?

Grammar

In addition to spelling and vocabulary, there are specific grammar differences between British and American English. For instance, collective nouns are considered singular in American English, while they’re mostly treated as plural in British English. For example,  where an American would tell you that “his family is large”, a Briton would, most likely, tell you that “his family are large.” The Americans always take a shower, while the Britons mostly have a shower. The word “gotten”, the past particle of “get”, is now dead and buried in British English. Surprisingly enough, the word is still alive and kicking in American English.

On a final note, American English is the child of British English. Nonetheless, the former is the most widely written and spoken English today, thanks to America’s technology and robust economy. So, don’t be shocked whenever you read that the Brits actually introduced the language to the Americans because it’s true. Anyway, it is not uncommon to see a child that overshadows his dad. It’s, however, very unusual, perhaps unprecedented, to see a child reporting his mom to an anti-graft agency!

Rabiu Muhammad Gama is a level 300 Law student and  English Enthusiast. He can be reached on rabiuminuwa327@gmail.com or 09061912994.

By Muhammad Sabiu

The United Arab Emirates has declared thirty-eight individuals wanted, of which six are Nigerian citizens.

The declaration is in connection to allegations of involvement in terrorism and related activities, which had the names of the individuals included on the country’s terror designation list.

A foreign news platform, Al Arabiya, reports, “The decision, WAM stated, comes within the framework of the UAE’s efforts to target and disrupt networks associated with the financing of terrorism and its associated activities.”

Other individuals on the UAE’s terror list are from Iran, Iraq, India, Russia, Jordan, Britain and others.

According to the Daily Trust newspaper, the six Nigerians are Abdurrahaman Ado Musa, Salihu Yusuf Adamu, Bashir Ali Yusuf, Muhammed Ibrahim Isa, Ibrahim Ali Alhassan and Surajo Abubakar Muhammad.

By Abubakar Isah Baba

The misrepresentation of northern Nigeria ranges from distorting and falsifying reality, profiling, underreporting, and not reporting about the region by media outlets owned and controlled by others. Apparent and alarming as this is, it has been going on for a long time. This requires no evidence or justification; it is a growing trend, especially when the country propagates alienation over harmony. But who cares? Even those who have the responsibility to do so are busily aggrandising their powers.

But how long it will take the sick region to learn from this great proverb: Until the lion has a historian, the story of the hunt will always favour the hunter. The North was painted black with negative phrases, tales of violence, poverty, unemployment, irresponsible marriages, out-of-school children and whatnot as if there were no other positive realities.

John Campbell attests to the above mischaracterisation in his book, Nigeria: Dancing on the Brink, that “The Nigerian media, mostly headquartered in the Southern part of the country, is routinely insensitive and simplistic in its reportage about Northern Nigeria. And it is the Nigerian media that colors the too-often superficial Western view of the North.” This has a significant effect on the economic decline in the North as no investor will invest in the region that is dangerous, volatile and unpromising.

Apart from the traditional cores of mass communication, which include informing, educating, and entertaining, it is also used for propaganda to gain support or sympathy from the public or authority. EndSARS saga is an indicator of the power of propaganda, for it taught the north a lesson that “Dokin mai baki ya fi gudu” – the South has a much louder voice. Please don’t confuse my lamenting with Afghanistanism (a term used in journalism to describe journalists who shun the problem of their community but go extra-mile in condemning others), far from it. I suggest North should define itself and tell its version of the story; represent itself properly as bias in the news is often backgrounded. Others could not define us nor report us properly. 

Traditional rulers, political leaders, scholars, and concerned people in Northern Nigeria should speedily and strategically address this problem of bad press and misrepresentation of the North through investing in the media and utilising it for the good of their people. With Daily Nigerian, Sahelian Times, Nigerian Tracker and recently The Daily Reality (TDR), we need to see more outlets so we can ship our information without thinking about sinking. Recently, TDR’s publications have changed the North’s fate. Remember CBN and the reopening of the NIRSAL site, Netflix and the Kannywood, etc.

Abubakar Isah Baba writes from Kano. He can be reached via abubakarisahbaba01@gmail.com.

By Ibrahiym A. El-Caleel

Saner climes aren’t saner climes for nothing. They seem to have broader perspectives on life. They acknowledge success wherever it is and not getting unnecessarily fixated on just one thing. 

In Nigeria and several African countries, academic qualifications and honorary titles are seen as the only testimonial to weigh your level of intellect, level of exposure, degree of societal awareness and overall social image. So, if you want to be seen as a “rare gem” and the next human being to have sense since Plato, then you must accumulate as many academic qualifications as possible and have titles. 

Several people laughed at my comment elsewhere on Africans and their love for titles. I reminded us that the official name of the former Gambian President was, His Excellency Sheikh Professor Alhaji Dr Yahya Abdul-Aziz Awal Jemus Junkung Jammeh Naasiru Deen Babili Mansa. You may please count the number of titles there. If you are a meticulous fellow like the academics, you would want to follow each of these titles to see how Yahya Jammeh got them. In most of the titles, you’ll see that they are either honorary or just self-assigned. 

The truth is, you don’t need all those titles before you can become an effective President. At the same time, across saner climes, America’s President was simply “Barack Obama”; UK’s Prime Minister was simply “Theresa May”; Turkish Prime Minister was simply “Recep Erdogan”. Yet all these countries were doing far better than the country whose president accumulated more titles than his name. 

Do not get me wrong. If you have titles, please feel free to assemble them before your name at birth. It is said that titles are adornments. If you have terms, flaunt them to everyone’s eyes! If you don’t have them, work hard to get them and then exhibit them. But do not get so obsessed with titles and attach them to your name; then, when it is time for verification, it will seem as if people are just envious of you or hate you. People want to verify things that aren’t so clear to them. It is in the spirit of filtering contents before they go into history. The unborn generation deserves to read truthful content. We owe them that. 

With all this Dr Pantami’s issue going on, I continuously kept visiting his official Facebook page to see what he might have to say. But, unfortunately, there was nothing there to read on the issue. 

As an academic, professorial chair is the pinnacle of your career. How would someone attain such great success and not be overwhelmed with joy to the extent of announcing it to us, his lovers and admirers? Isn’t such a promotion what we should celebrate with our loved one? Don’t we deserve to be let aware from the horse’s mouth? Do we deserve to be let in the hands of “envious academics” and polemicists who churn out narratives and counter-narratives as the clock ticks? 

I think lovers and fans deserve better treatment. With the level of energy dissipated, silence is not golden. The silence is graduating to the approval of the professorial appointment or promotion or whatnot. 

On the one hand, if the professorial appointment is genuine and legit, Dr Isa Pantami will only clarify the inconsistencies on his number of peer-reviewed papers and the number of years spent in active service. Whatever it is that the Federal University of Technology, Owerri (FUTO) used as a legit fulcrum to promote him, that is just what he will explain, and the world will have to live with it. 

On the other hand, if the promotion is just the sensationalism of overzealous fans, then Dr Isa Pantami only needs to clarify so to ask the public to disregard it. Because his silence would imply an integrity defect which is bad for his image first as a reputable Islamic scholar and second, as a distinguished compatriot of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. 

Ibrahiym A. El-Caleel writes from Zaria and can be reached via caleel2009@gmail.com.

By AF Sesay

When we talk of politicians, we mostly regard them as aliens or spirits from the evil forest. We often see them as people who came with their own set of beliefs, attitudes, approaches to life and different perspectives on divine justice and the torture of Hell. We talk of erstwhile compassionate friends who entered politics and suddenly became monsters. We speak about them like we do of cold, callous aliens whose race is bent on inflicting the greatest damage possible on the human race. But wait…who are these politicians?

Let’s keep the answer in the brain and move on to something urgent: the design of governance experience. Do we really see this as something we should do better? Should leaders and followers look at governance from the lens of user experience design? I think they should!

If every product, starting with the Constitution to the Curriculum, was designed with the people who this will affect in mind, I am pretty sure the outcomes will be different. Hardly anybody will look at the current Constitution and Curriculum and say: “Yes, these were designed with empathy, love and responsiveness to the needs of the citizens”.

If the guy who presses the button at NEPA or, more recently, NEDCO/KEDCO have the empathy to think that with every touch of the red buttons somebody is going out of business, a baby is dying in the hospital; an investor is packing his bag to leave Nigeria for good, a boy is missing vital lessons because he can no longer cope with doing his assignment in the dark, a family is exposing their lives to carbon monoxide generated by Generators. If he ever approaches his work as a user experience designer…

If the northerner or southerner stealing from the public treasury realises that with every kobo stolen a citizen dies, this corruption-induced death is agnostic of region, religion or tribe. Suppose every Contractor realised that every badly-designed road is a graveyard for his fellow citizens.

If every Nigerian who had the opportunity to lead ten people or more or even less realised that these micro leadership tasks are a microcosm of the overall leadership output of the nation. Suppose every employer knew that every right violated is the beginning of bad governance. Then, you would have seen around you thoughtful and resourceful leaders who would eventually emerge as national leaders.

If every young person on Twitter knew that every tweet could potentially destroy a life, even if it looks like catching a cruise. Suppose every journalist knew that every fake report opens bigger wounds and increases the pain point of his readers. Then, you would have had cause to verify less news and have less regrets for sharing harmful and divisive contents.

When we start seeing this problem as a design problem and not just problems caused by some aliens or foreign species, then we will be mentally ready to ask the right questions.

While scratching at the surface for the past 60 years has given some temporary relief, ousted leaders we hate, brought our tribesmen to power and opened doors to stupendous wealth, the truth is that the problems have compounded.

At the mention of Nigeria, everybody becomes an expert. But most of this expertise only hit the surface, compounding the problem with false claims, unverified and alternative truths, faulty assumptions, stereotypes, bigotry, and received “wisdom”.

We have got to wake up and smell the coffee. There is a design problem out here. Until we are heavy on researching root causes and being genuinely interested in knowing all the whys of the problem, until we see ourselves beyond the just-a-citizen mindset to the mindset of restless inventors, these problems are only growing bigger and more complex regardless of who is at the top.

We have got to build a culture of research and replace that with assumptions and stereotypes. Research could actually confirm some of our beliefs, by the way. But, until we see the products of today as collective input of everybody who played a role, no matter how little, until the people in power (from Local Government to Federal Government)  create a mechanism to capture feedback and seek continual improvement regularly, we will still have to come to these basics many years later.

Go to the archives and read headlines of the ’70s and ’80s and compare them to today’s headlines; you will observe a pattern that will shock you. In short, the design process is faulty, but we are finding it difficult to rethink the process, because thinking itself is going to require an effort that we are not yet ready to put in!

AF Sesay is a writer based in Lagos. He can be reached via amarasesay.amir@gmail.com.

By Muhammad Abubakar

Technology has changed the world of education. It provides quicker ways of accessing learning materials in varieties. Indeed, this is a brilliant opportunity. Technology provided cyber-libraries, fully occupied with every knowledge in every fabric of human endeavour. From sciences to humanities, all is available over the internet. There they are available, every time, every day, everywhere and for everyone.

Knowledge with the help of the internet has become accessible and very cheap for almost everyone. With very affordable data, one can download as many reading or learning materials as he wishes to possess in every literature genre—poetry or prose. Moreover, the technology is beyond providing a reader with the recently published works; much older works, dating five, six, seven or more hundreds years back, can be found and be successfully downloaded.

Often I say, “If you want to see the world naked, fall in love with books.” Only through reading and writing the recorded history of the past nations and communities reside in these days; only through it would we record the present as a documentary to the younger ones and the future generations to come. A good reader would have an excellent knowledge of the past, present and can predict the future. Readers have eyes to see the unborn days. If readers didn’t read and write, we might not have lived a complete account of life.

Reading culture died among young people these days. However, in the past three to four decades—albeit I was not part of the days there, I collided with authentic histories of how the predecessors [students] of those days suffered in seeking knowledge. I academically encountered examples of good students—who came through the doors of past days, whose education, knowledge and experience are beyond the curriculum. They are well educated and well trained. They read, write and speak better than 21-century students. Despite their meagre technological resources, short-planned curriculum, reading and learning materials scarcity, they are far more developed than us.

Twenty-first-century students’ poor reading habits lead to many crying stories and anti-social behaviour—for instance, school violence, massive failure and examination malpractice. The massive failure of the 2021 UTME in Nigeria is an example of bad elements generating by poor reading culture.

Students don’t read, and they need high quantity certificates. This century provides an excellent opportunity for students in reading, self-development and intellectual development. But we prefer utilizing our time in other options than reading. We spend most of our time; exhaust most of our data: gossiping and uploading pictures to appreciate others.

Technological advancement has a role in adjusting our reading attitudes. Students should adopt the habit of utilizing most of the time reading. The difference between the past students and these of the present is befriending books. Our being online on Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, Tik Tok, and other media platforms should be less—and if necessary, let’s use it positively. It’s crystal-clear that our habits show that we hate reading. Despite the resources we possess in today’s world [21 century], most secondary and tertiary institutions students can not effectively write a letter of any format.

For example, PDF Drive provides any kind of material students can require to learn, curricular or extracurricular. University of People also delivers lectures on every topic need. You don’t need to be constantly reading, and every time, twenty to thirty pages of a book every day will suffice you. Better too late than never. If you’re finding reading boring—read simple stuff, gradually you will make it.

I recommend we should promote reading culture among ourselves through reading and writing challenges. For example, organizing poetry and prose contest, book chats and reading sessions can help. Reading culture would be rapidly promoted among students [young and older ones] in our communities through these means and others.

In conclusion, during our leisure time, weekends and breaks—let’s train our younger siblings; divert their zeal to books. Coach and guide them towards their curricular and beyond. Read them stories, poems, and lots more. Ask them to practice writing—and make simple competitions to them regarding reading and writing. Let’s no go and leave the young generation behind.

Muhammad Abubakar can be reached via muhammadabk1097@gmail.com.