Nyesom Wike

By Abba Hikima

It is clear to even the most daft Nigerian that Nyesom Wike, a serving member of President Tinubu’s Federal Executive Council, is only in the PDP to sabotage it and clear the path for his benefactor, the President, come the 2027 elections. What may not, however, be clear is the extent to which Wike’s tactics and antics can undermine Nigeria’s democracy.

Whether you are APC, PDP, ADC or even politically indifferent, Wike’s actions should bother you, as long as you dream of a truly democratic Nigeria where institutions transcend whimsical meddling of the few.

From any angle, one sees a deliberate pattern that systematically seeks to dismantle the country’s main opposition party and tilts the political landscape dangerously toward one-party dominance.

The recent Federal High Court injunction, restraining the PDP from holding its planned November 15 National Convention, issued by Justice J. Omotosho, only reinforces this pattern. It aligns with a string of judicial outcomes and political manoeuvres that have consistently favoured Wike’s factional interests, all at the expense of Nigeria’s fragile democratic balance.

Between 2023 and 2025, Wike’s loyalists seized the PDP’s national secretariat at Wadata Plaza, installed their own acting chairman, and plunged the party into even deeper crisis. Earlier, he had been linked to moves to demolish the PDP headquarters in Port Harcourt and to lawsuits that derailed planned conventions.

These deliberate acts of sabotage are calculated to dismantle opposition structures and weaken the political alternatives that every democracy relies on. In Nigeria today, prominent political opposition actors are crosscarpeting from their political parties to the ruling APC, not because the APC is doing better, but to salvage their seats and realise their aspirations, which appear rather vivid with the APC.

In saner climes, inclusion of opposition figures within ruling governments is a laudable means of promoting national unity and bridging gaps. But in Nigeria’s case, Wike’s dual role, serving as a federal minister while wielding extraordinary control over an opposition party, is clearly a means of manipulation.

It blurs ethical boundaries and deprives citizens of genuine democratic alternatives.

Even more disturbing is Wike’s perceived closeness to certain segments of the judiciary- what Professor Chidi Anselm Odinkalu aptly described as a “pathological fixation.”

From 2019 to 2025, at least five major cases tied directly or indirectly to Wike’s interests have been heard before the same judge, fueling concerns of judicial clientelism —a scenario where powerful litigants can select their forums by proxy.

The danger goes far beyond politics.

If political elites can manipulate opposition parties while simultaneously bending judicial processes to their favour, then democracy becomes mere theatre. A performance that preserves power and erodes accountability.

Having said this, the National Judicial Council should randomise the assignment of politically sensitive cases and ensure that no single judge repeatedly handles matters involving the same litigants. A stronger ethical firewall must also be built between judicial officers and politically exposed persons.

Politically, Nigeria must introduce conflict-of-interest rules that bar sitting ministers or presidential appointees from exerting control over opposition parties. Democracy cannot thrive when the same hand both governs and manipulates its opposition.

Coming this far, we must accept that reform is not optional; it is existential.

Abba Hikima, Esq. wrote from Kano, Nigeria.

By Anas Abbas 

Abuja may soon face a sanitation crisis as contractors responsible for cleaning the city have threatened to suspend operations from September 25 over the non-payment of nine months’ wages.

The Association of FCT Solid Waste and Cleaning Contractors (AFSOWAC), which oversees sanitation services across 44 lots in the capital, raised the alarm in a letter to the Coordinator of the Abuja Metropolitan Management Council.

“Despite our loyalty and sustained service delivery, we have not received payments since January 2025,” the group said. “We have reached a point where passion and commitment alone cannot sustain this essential service. Without payment, we cannot continue.”

According to the association, its members clear more than 1,000 tonnes of refuse daily using over 100 refuse trucks and 60 tippers, while engaging more than 3,000 workers. Many of these workers, it said, depend solely on the job for their livelihoods.

AFSOWAC disclosed that contractors had kept operations afloat by borrowing heavily from banks and informal lenders, but warned that such means had been exhausted. It added that the Abuja Environmental Protection Board (AEPB), which supervises their contracts, had continued issuing daily directives without addressing the financial challenges.

The contractors further lamented the deteriorating state of the Gosa dumpsite, describing it as “deplorable” and urging urgent intervention to improve access roads and equipment.

They also called on the FCT Administration to expedite the procurement process initiated in October 2024 and review payment rates to reflect current economic realities, such as the removal of subsidies and the devaluation of the naira.

The association warned that a strike would trigger a rapid build-up of waste in Abuja, a city renowned for its relative cleanliness, and could expose residents to serious public health risks.

“We can no longer guarantee uninterrupted services in the Federal Capital City without urgent payment,” AFSOWAC cautioned.

By Salisu Uba KofarWambai 

The latest buzz in Nigeria’s political arena is nothing short of explosive: former President Dr. Goodluck Jonathan is reportedly set to return and contest under the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). The revelation has sent shockwaves across the nation and beyond. But beneath the headlines, a critical question lingers — what is the real motive behind this sudden political twist?

Before the emergence of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) as a viable coalition platform for the opposition, Nigerians had grown increasingly frustrated with what they saw as a weakened opposition front. The PDP, once a vibrant counterforce, had been reduced to what critics call a “toothless bulldog,” accused of being manipulated by President Bola Tinubu through Nyesom Wike, a PDP member who openly works in favour of the ruling party and now holds a position in Tinubu’s government.

Wike’s influence, according to party insiders, has been anything but peaceful. His repeated interventions and internal disputes have reportedly destabilised the PDP, a strategy many believe cost the party dearly in the 2023 general elections. With the backing of the current administration, Wike has consistently won key legal battles, tightening his grip on the PDP’s power structure.

Recognising the deepening crisis, several PDP heavyweights, including the party’s last presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, abandoned the PDP ship, aligning under the ADC banner to form a credible opposition. This development was warmly received by many Nigerians disillusioned by the ruling APC’s economic policies, from the sharp devaluation of the naira to the painful removal of fuel subsidies, policies they say have deepened poverty nationwide.

Alarmed by the growing acceptance of the ADC among struggling Nigerians, the APC-led government appears to be dusting off an old playbook. Just as they allegedly did with the Kwankwasiyya movement in 2023, they now seem ready to field a high-profile figure to split the opposition vote. This time, the role is reportedly being handed to none other than Jonathan — a move seen by many as orchestrated to weaken the ADC’s momentum.

For political observers, the pattern is clear: divide the opposition, consolidate power, and keep the electorate distracted, all while avoiding a united front that could unseat the government in 2027. What stings for some Nigerians is the idea of Jonathan, once the principal, now accepting political direction from his former protégé.

Whether Jonathan’s alleged return is a personal decision or part of a calculated strategy by the ruling party remains to be seen. But one thing is sure: the stage is set for a high-stakes political drama, and Nigerians will be watching closely to see how and where this political gunshot will be fired.

By Abdullahi Mukhtar Algasgaini

The Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, has declared his intention to lead the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) campaign in the 2027 general elections. He made the statement on Monday during a media interaction in Abuja, dismissing claims that he was undermining the PDP while serving in President Bola Tinubu’s cabinet.  

“I am still in PDP. I worked hard for the party,” Wike said. “No one can question my membership because nobody has contributed more than I. I will lead the PDP campaign in Rivers in 2027.”  

Wike, a former Rivers State governor, has faced criticism from PDP members for his role in the All Progressives Congress (APC)-led government. However, he defended his actions, stating that he takes pride in making tough decisions, even if they upset powerful figures.  

“I step on the toes of big men, and it makes me happy,” he said. “If you don’t do the right thing, too bad. I don’t care.”  

On the political crisis in Rivers State, Wike denied any personal rift with Governor Siminalayi Fubara and stated that he would have opposed a state of emergency if consulted by the president.  

“I don’t have any crisis with Fubara,” he said. “If Mr. President had asked me, I wouldn’t have agreed to a state of emergency.”  

Wike’s remarks come amid growing tensions within the PDP, with his loyalty remaining a contentious issue among party members.

By Uzair Adam 

The Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, has ordered a full crackdown on unregistered hospitals and quack medical personnel operating within the territory.

The minister’s media aide, Lere Olayinka, disclosed this in a statement on Saturday, following the death of a pregnant woman at a private facility in Durumi, Abuja, after undergoing a caesarean section.

According to the statement, Wike warned that anyone found operating an illegal health facility or working in an unregistered hospital would be arrested and prosecuted.

He described the incident as regrettable, especially given that vulnerable groups, including pregnant women, are eligible for free registration under the Federal Capital Territory Health Insurance Scheme (FHIS). 

He noted that despite this opportunity, many pregnant women were still patronising unlicensed and unsafe facilities.

“In the FCT, vulnerable persons, including pregnant women, enjoy free enrollment into the FHIS, granting them free access to services covered under the basic minimum health package through primary healthcare centres,” he said.

Olayinka added that, in support of the federal government’s ‘Renewed Hope Agenda’ and the FCT Administration’s zero tolerance for maternal mortality, several hospitals—including Gwarinpa, Nyanya, Abaji, and Kuje General Hospitals—have been designated as comprehensive emergency obstetric and neonatal care centres, offering free cesarean sections.

He urged pregnant women to utilise these government services instead of risking their lives by seeking care from quacks and unregistered facilities.

The statement also recalled that on Friday, 35-year-old Chekwube Chinagorom was brought dead to the Asokoro District Hospital after a caesarean section at the unregistered facility in Durumi. 

Although the baby survived and was referred for further care at the Asokoro hospital, the incident raised alarm over the activities of illegal operators.

The Private Health Establishments Registration and Monitoring Committee (PHERMC) investigated and confirmed that the hospital was unregistered. 

Only one staff member, Mr. Simon Godiya, a junior community health extension worker, was found on duty during an inspection.

Godiya informed officials that Murtala Jumma performed the surgery alongside another unidentified person. Efforts to reach Jumma have so far been unsuccessful.

The PHERMC team, accompanied by police officers from the Durumi Divisional Headquarters, subsequently handed over the case to the police for further investigation.

By Blaise Emeka Okpara

If recent events in Nigeria’s body politic are anything to go by, then one would be right to conclude that our democracy is headed for the rocks. At no time in our nation’s history has such a calamity of monumental proportions befallen us! What is worse, we are witnessing for the first time an unholy alliance between the three arms of government. What this portends is that the people, who should be the primary concern of governance, are now being relegated to the background.

There is great danger, and from the look of things, it might not get better anytime soon. The current reality in Nigeria, where both the legislature and judiciary have collapsed their structures into that of the executive, has created an atmosphere of distrust and hopelessness among Nigerians. There is a disconnect between the government and the people. This dichotomy exists due to the nonchalance associated with the current crop of political leaders.

Of great concern is the recent declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State, which saw the suspension of a duly elected governor and the appointment of a sole administrator. While it is undeniable that the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, in Section 305, bestows upon the President the power to declare a state of emergency, it does not grant him the power to remove an elected governor. 

More disheartening was the speedy ratification by the Senate through a voice vote. How, on earth, did the Senate determine a two-thirds majority through a voice vote? These and many other questions continue to bug the discerning.

As if that were not enough, the Attorney General of the federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi SAN, was vociferous  in his outburst, threatening that the President would not hesitate to declare more states of emergency in any state if it becomes necessary. In a democracy! Such unguarded utterances should not be encouraged because they go against the principles of democracy. 

Moreover, from all indications,it seems that the days of healthy debates in the national assembly are gone. Today, Nigeria has a  national assembly that functions as an extension of the executive. One wonders what might become of our democracy if President Ahmed Tinubu decides  to prolong his stay in office beyond the constitutionally required terms. With the antecedents of this current national assembly, one might conclude that it is a done deal. 

Sadly, the judiciary is not exempt. At a time when Nigerians look to the judiciary as the bastion of democracy, the institution has been so undermined that it no longer inspires confidence among the populace. Brazen disregard for justice, driven by monetary inducement, has become the norm. This is even more evident in the audacity with which Nigerian politicians now instruct aggrieved individuals to go to court. 

Outcomes of judicial processes can easily be predicted by simply observing those involved. When a nation has a judiciary that takes orders from the executives, where then lies the hope for the common man? One can only find judges hobnobbing with politicians in a compromised judiciary.  

The return to constitutional democracy was met with great expectations and optimism from Nigerians after years of military rule. However, more than two decades later, it seems Nigeria is gradually drifting towards a darker era where only a privileged few individuals manage the affairs with little or no regard for the people.

There is a pervasive feeling of helplessness among Nigerians that those in positions of authority can do and get away with anything. As scary and unsavory as this may sound, it is the truth, given recent occurrences. It reeks of a lack of empathy for a President to declare the removal of the subsidy on the day of his inauguration without considering the impact on the people. To this day, Nigerians are still reeling from the effects of that hasty decision. Needless to say,millions of Nigerians were plunged into poverty as a result. 

Unlike in 2013, when the then-President removed the fuel subsidy and Nigerians had the freedom and courage to take to the streets, the reverse is now true. In fact, during the last “Hunger protest,” most protesters were teargassed by the police, and some were arrested. The criminalization of protests in Nigeria by the current administration has instilled fear among citizens. When citizens are frightened by the government of the day, it’s not a democracy.

The usual refrain by the police that protests would be hijacked is purely a calculated attempt to suppress dissenting voices. This confrontational approach to peaceful protesters is undemocratic because it contradicts citizens’ rights to freedom of expression as enshrined in section 39 of the 1999 constitution (as amended). If citizens’ rights to protest are being trampled upon, then it is correct to conclude that we are gradually sliding back to the despotic years of the military, where speaking truth to power was considered an act of bravery. 

Conclusively, most of those in positions of authority today, like the sitting President, often wax lyrical about their heroics during the NADECO days of the military. President Tinubu was among the major organizers of the “occupy Nigeria” protests, which saw his party, the All Progressive Congress(APC), come to power. If protest was fashionable then,why is it not now? 

Democracy thrives on fundamental principles such as the separation of powers among the three branches of government to ensure checks and balances, fundamental human rights, the rule of law, popular participation, and, most importantly, legitimacy. 

Only the people can bestow this legitimacy through periodic elections. When these core principles are abused,democracy is in danger. Political office holders need to engage in introspection to curtail their high-handedness and save our democracy from imminent collapse. To be forewarned is to be forearmed.

Blaise Emeka Okpara writes from Abuja and can be reached at: emyokparaoo1@gmail.com.

By Bilyamin Abdulmumin, PhD

When the PDP began its first tenure in 1999, there was a level of humility and fairness. But it was in their second tenure that their invincibility began to take shape.

As a former military Head of State, Olusegun Obasanjo did not help matters. For the second time in Nigeria’s history, he declared a state of emergency in Ekiti and Plateau and threatened several other states. During this period, the legislature was allegedly weaponized for political control, and allegations extended even to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), a respected anti-graft agency. 

Arguably, the PDP reached its zenith in 2007 and became so confident that it could “do and undo. ” The opposition could no longer hold any chance; instead, they covertly or overtly carried out the bidding of the powerful PDP. This exuberance and excesses of the then-ruling party culminated in a ditch for democracy: reports indicated that the 2007 presidential election results were declared while the collation was still ongoing. 

In 2011, Goodluck Jonathan’s administration continued its escapade. Allegations of corruption and mismanagement ran rampant, and the PDP became a haven for anyone singing its praises. This perception was palpable, and the public echoed that anything labelled ‘dubious’ came from the party. 

Complacency eventually led them to boldly declare that the party would remain in power for sixty years. Instead of sixty, the PDP barely added another six years. Even the former party chairman, who initiated the sixty-year maxim, considered leaving the party in 2015. 

Never mind the masses’ outrage, founding fathers decrying maltreatment, and bigwigs, including governors, decamping to the opposition. PDP could not see the handwriting; they thought it would be normal. 

The death of the PDP would be slow, with several deep cuts. One of them was shunning them by decamping opposition. Shehu Sani, Nasir El-Rufa’i, Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, and Peter Obi should all naturally have considered the PDP as an alternative. 

Another blow to the slowly fading party is an internal crisis. One crisis after another continues to shake the once-indomitable party, providing those looking to defect a compelling reason to change sides. 

Perhaps the deepest cut was Nyesom Wike’s presence, who actively undermined the party from within. As Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Wike not only revoked the PDP land title of the new secretariat but allegedly facilitated a Supreme Court victory for his ally, Mr Samuel Anyanwu, against the current party secretary.

History is replete with the downfall of the mighties. Leaders, nations, and brands often reach a status where they seem invincible, only to succumb to the very excesses that caused their rise.

By Anwar Usman 

The Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, hosted suspended Rivers state house of assembly lawmakers in the United Kingdom on Monday.

The Senior Special Assistant to the Minister on Public Communications and Social Media, Lere Olayinka, posted on X.com on Tuesday that the lawmakers, who are in the UK for “legislative capacity building,” were hosted to a dinner by the minister.

He stated that “Yesterday, the FCT Minister, Nyesom Wike, hosted Rivers State House of Assembly members who are in the United Kingdom for Legislative Capacity Building, to a dinner.

Reports have it that on Sunday, the suspended Rivers lawmakers, led by the Speaker, Martins Amaewhule, departed Nigeria for a tour in the United Kingdom.

Amaewhule was said to have declared open the 10th Rivers Assembly Legislative Tour of the United Kingdom on Friday.

He emphasized that the legislative tour would allow the House to learn new things outside Nigeria, which would improve members’ capacity for the tasks ahead.

On March 18th, President Bola Tinubu declared a state of emergency in Rivers State and suspended Governor Siminalayi Fubara, Deputy Governor Prof Ngozi Odu, and members of the state House of Assembly.

By Bilyamin Abdulmumin, PhD

Buhari was largely viewed as reluctant, whereas Tinubu engaged in tit-for-tat responses. Tinubu has demonstrated decisiveness on many occasions. For instance, when there was a public outcry over his Kano ministerial nominee, Maryam Shettima, he swiftly replaced her with Dr. Mariya Mahmoud, who enjoyed greater public approval. Buhari likely would have retained Shettima.

A few months after the ministers assumed office, the Minister of Humanitarian Affairs, a ministry infamous for waywardness—was caught in multiple scandals. In a swift response to public outrage, Tinubu suspended Betta Edu, and from all likelihood, she has gone for good.

No situation highlights the difference between Tinubu and Buhari more than the ongoing political crisis in Rivers State involving Governor Fubara and his former benefactor, Nyesom Wike. While Buhari would have turned a deaf ear to the situation, Tinubu reacted decisively. Those who once criticised Buhari for his passive leadership should now give a standing ovation to Tinubu’s stern control and decisiveness.

Nevertheless, Tinubu’s speech during the emergency declaration was notably one-sided. He sided with his FCT Minister, Nyesom Wike, heaping blame on Fubara for demolishing national assembly structures and failing to address pipeline bombings—while completely ignoring Wike’s role in the crisis. These reinforced accusations of federal government highhandedness in Nigeria’s most populous states.

Some argue that the federal government is involved in the debacles affecting Rivers, Lagos, and Kano due to its fear of losing these key states to the opposition. However, as the APC states, the allegations of internal conflicts in the Lagos government do not hold up. Since the state is governed by the ruling party, it seems to be just another political facade from the federal government.

A major issue for Tinubu’s camp is their position on Fubara and Uba Sani. If they oppose Fubara, they should also oppose Uba Sani. You cannot support Wike in Rivers while opposing El-Rufai in Kaduna. The two scenarios bear a striking resemblance.

Reflecting on how Nigerians criticized Buhari for lacking swiftness and displaying full control as the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Nigeria, it is fair to say that Tinubu has now met that expectation.

Bilyamin Abdulmumin, PhD wrote via bilal4riid13@gmail.com.

By Zayyad I. Muhammad

I strongly disapprove of Governor Siminalayi Fubara’s betrayal of his political godfather. Fubara entered the political arena without established structures, financial resources, or widespread recognition; he was relatively unknown. 

Former Governor Nyesom Wike provided him with the platform, support, and influence that ultimately led to his rise as governor. Yet, despite this, Fubara has turned against the very person who paved the way for his political ascent. 

Both sides should share the blame for not shifting grounds. The declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State came at a critical time to address rising insecurity and unrest that threatened to spiral out of control. Left unchecked, the situation could have led to a resurgence of militancy and severely disrupted oil exploration activities, which are vital to both the state and national economy. 

Beyond the economic implications, the deteriorating security situation also risks derailing governance and has somehow ‘assisted’ Governor Fubara in escaping impeachment. President Tinubu may justify his decision—he has access to security intelligence and reports that the general public does not.

However, although addressing security concerns is essential, suspending an elected governor and members of the state assembly is not only unconstitutional but also sets a dangerous precedent for Nigeria’s democracy. This issue goes beyond the 2027 elections; it strikes at the heart of democratic governance and the principle of electoral legitimacy. 

Our democracy has matured to a point where a sitting governor can be removed only through due process, as outlined in Section 188 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended). If we are not careful, one day—God forbid—a president or his allies could create chaos in a state simply to justify declaring a state of emergency and unseating an elected governor for political gain. Such actions would undermine democracy and erode public trust in the electoral process. They pose a danger to our future. 

The Rivers state or any political conflicts should be resolved within the framework of the law, not through forceful interventions that threaten democratic stability.

The key actors in Rivers State must set aside their personal and political grievances to prioritize reconciliation. Prolonged instability is unacceptable, as it harms the people, governance, and economic progress. A peaceful resolution is the only path forward.

An elected Governor’s mandate is sacrosanct and must be respected. He is the top citizen in the subnational.

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