Peter Obi

By Usman Muhammad Salihu

In Nigerian politics, defections are no longer surprising. What is surprising now is how quickly they happen and how easily political actors move from one platform to another.

The recent defection of Peter Obi and Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso from the African Democratic Congress (ADC) to the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) is not just another political adjustment. It is a bold move. But bold does not always mean safe.

At first glance, the decision appears strategic. Internal crises within the ADC, legal uncertainties, and the pressure of electoral timelines make stability a priority. From that angle, shifting to a new platform may seem like a necessary step, an attempt to secure political ground ahead of a highly competitive 2027.

There is also strength in the alliance itself. The coming together of Obi and Kwankwaso brings national attention, regional balance, and an existing base of supporters. On paper, that is not just movement; it is potential consolidation.

But politics is not played on paper. It is played among the people. And this is where the real challenge begins.

The Nigeria Democratic Congress is still largely unfamiliar to many Nigerians. Beyond political circles and elite discussions, its presence at the grassroots remains limited. For a significant number of voters, especially at the lower levels, NDC is not yet a known political identity.

And in Nigerian elections, familiarity matters. Voters do not just choose candidates. They choose what they recognise. They choose what they trust. They choose what they understand. That is the gap this move must overcome.

Beyond visibility, there are emerging concerns about the platform’s stability. Reports suggest that the Nigerian Democratic Congress may be grappling with internal legal disputes. If proven true, this introduces an even more delicate risk. Moving from one troubled platform to another does not resolve instability; it simply transfers it. And in politics, uncertainty is a cost few can afford at this level.

Because this is no longer just about transferring political influence, it is about building voter awareness from the ground up within a limited time frame. That is not a small task. It is one thing to move with loyalists. It is another thing to move with the electorate. And history has shown that the two do not always align.

There is also a deeper concern. Frequent political movement, no matter how strategic, raises questions of consistency. When platforms change too often, voters begin to look beyond the movement itself and ask a more difficult question: What exactly is constant? Is it ideology? Is it vision? Or is it simply positioning?

These questions matter because today’s voter is less passive than before. There is growing awareness, scrutiny, and an expectation for clarity. So while this move may be necessary from a political standpoint, it is also risky from a public perception angle.

Because speed in politics can be a double-edged sword. Move too slowly, and you lose relevance. Move too quickly, and you lose trust. And right now, this move feels fast. Perhaps calculated. Perhaps unavoidable. But still fast.

So, is this a strategy or a survival tactic? It is arguably both. Strategy, because the timing aligns with political realities. Survival, because unstable platforms leave little room for hesitation.

From another angle, this move is not just a strategy or a matter of survival; it is a gamble. A calculated one, no doubt, but a gamble, nonetheless. It rests on the assumption that political influence can be transferred faster than voter trust can be built. And in a system where recognition often shapes voting decisions, that assumption may prove too optimistic.

But beyond both lies a more uncomfortable possibility: That this could be a leap into a platform that has yet to fully exist in the minds of the people. Because, in the end, political strength is not measured by alliances alone, but by acceptance. And acceptance cannot be transferred overnight.

So, while the move may look bold in Abuja, its real test will come far away from strategy rooms, in markets, in villages, and at the polling units. Where names are remembered, where symbols are recognised, and where unfamiliar platforms are often rejected.

And if that gap is not closed in time, what appears today as a strategy may tomorrow be seen as a miscalculation. Because in Nigerian politics, you can move ahead of the system, but you cannot move ahead of the people. And when that gap exists, even the most calculated move can quickly turn into a costly gamble.

Ultimately, this move will be judged by one metric: conversion rate. How many Obidients and Kwankwasiyya become NDC members, not just in spirit but on the ballot? If the answer is “most,” then history will call it strategy. If the answer is “some,” then it was survival. If the answer is “few,” then it was a miscalculation dressed as ambition. The voters are watching, and their silence right now is louder than any endorsement. For Obi and Kwankwaso, the real campaign did not start in Abuja. It starts the day a trader in Aba and a farmer in Gaya can point to the NDC logo and say, “That is us.”

Usman Muhammad Salihu was among the pioneer fellows of PRNigeria and writes from Jos.

muhammadu5363@gmail.com.

By Abdulhamid Abdullahi Aliyu

As Nigeria moves gradually toward the 2027 general election, the most consequential political drama may not be unfolding within the ruling party, but among those seeking to unseat it. Across the opposition space, there is visible movement: coalition talks, strategic meetings, defections, counter-defections, legal disputes and renewed ambitions. Yet beneath all the activity lies an old and stubborn question: can Nigeria’s opposition finally unite around a credible alternative, or will familiar rivalries once again deliver victory to the incumbent?

The latest controversy surrounding Senator Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso’s political future has brought that question sharply into focus. Reports recently circulated that the former Kano State governor and his political associates were considering leaving the African Democratic Congress (ADC) for another platform, the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), citing fears that the ADC had become vulnerable to legal complications and possible political sabotage. The speculation intensified after statements from individuals linked to the Kwankwasiyya movement suggested fresh political calculations were underway.

Kwankwaso himself later issued a clarification. He stated that no final decision had been taken regarding his political future or that of his associates, while confirming that consultations were ongoing with stakeholders across multiple parties. It was a carefully worded intervention. It neither closed the door to the ADC nor ruled out future movement elsewhere. In effect, it confirmed what many political observers already suspected: Nigeria’s opposition remains in a season of negotiation rather than consolidation.

For many Nigerians dissatisfied with the current direction of governance, the ADC had recently emerged as a possible umbrella for a broad anti-incumbent coalition. With the Peoples Democratic Party weakened by years of internal crisis and the Labour Party still struggling to convert popularity into a nationwide structure, the ADC appeared to offer something useful: a relatively fresh platform around which major opposition actors could gather.

But Nigerian political history offers a warning. Coalitions are easiest to announce and hardest to sustain.

The challenge before the ADC was never simply about attracting prominent names. It was always about managing them. Once major political figures occupy the same platform, difficult questions naturally arise. Who gets the presidential ticket? Which region should produce the candidate? Who controls party machinery? Who funds mobilisation? Who steps down for whom? These are not procedural details. They are often the very fault lines that break apart coalitions.

Kwankwaso’s position illustrates this reality. He remains one of the most significant opposition actors in northern Nigeria, with a loyal political base that has survived multiple party transitions. The Kwankwasiyya movement has demonstrated unusual cohesion and emotional commitment over the years. That makes him valuable to any coalition seeking national competitiveness.

Yet his role also generates tension. Admirers see him as experienced, disciplined and electorally relevant. Critics see him as a strategic power broker whose bargaining posture can complicate broader unity efforts. Social media reactions to the latest controversy reflect this divide. Some accuse him of prioritising leverage over coalition stability. Others argue that he is merely refusing to lead his supporters into another uncertain political arrangement.

Both arguments contain elements of truth. No serious opposition coalition can ignore Kwankwaso’s political weight. But no coalition can thrive if every major actor insists on maximum personal advantage.

Peter Obi presents a different but equally important dimension of the opposition equation. He commands strong youth enthusiasm, urban support and reform-minded voters who remain deeply invested in his message. His appeal extends beyond conventional party structures and taps into a wider demand for cleaner governance and fiscal discipline.

But Obi’s popularity also raises difficult coalition questions. Can a politician with genuine national momentum agree to play a subordinate role in a unity arrangement? Can rival blocs accept him as lead candidate? Can supporters who see him as a transformative figure embrace compromise for strategic reasons?

This is where opposition politics in Nigeria repeatedly encounters its greatest obstacle. Many leaders endorse unity in theory, but hesitate when unity demands sacrifice in practice.

Perhaps the most revealing aspect of Kwankwaso’s recent statement was the emphasis on legal uncertainty. He referenced court rulings, disputes over party legitimacy and fears that political platforms could be weakened through prolonged litigation. Whether one accepts that interpretation or not, the perception itself is politically significant.

In politics, uncertainty can be as damaging as defeat. If opposition actors begin to believe that party platforms are unstable or vulnerable, they will spend more time shopping for alternatives than building durable institutions. Time that should be used to mobilise voters gets consumed by legal consultations. Energy that should be spent presenting policy alternatives is diverted into internal survival battles.

While opposition figures debate platforms and personalities, the ruling All Progressives Congress quietly benefits from something often underestimated in Nigerian politics: structure. Incumbency provides access to nationwide networks, state-level influence, mobilisation machinery and the psychological confidence that comes with power.

The APC does not necessarily need the opposition to disappear. It only needs the opposition to remain divided.

That is why many analysts argue that the greatest ally of incumbency is not popularity, but fragmentation among rivals. If 2027 becomes a contest between one organised ruling machine and several competing opposition ambitions, the arithmetic naturally favours the government. If it becomes a disciplined one-on-one contest built around a credible coalition, the political equation changes considerably.

The decline of the PDP has made this moment even more significant. Once the dominant national platform for anti-government sentiment, the party now appears burdened by unresolved disputes, declining elite confidence and repeated internal turbulence. That vacuum created the opening for newer coalition experiments such as the ADC.

But replacing the PDP as a headline platform is easier than replacing it as an electoral structure. National parties are built ward by ward, polling unit by polling unit, not merely through high-profile defections and conference-room agreements. The opposition still lacks a clearly dominant institutional vehicle.

If opposition leaders are serious about challenging the APC in 2027, three urgent tasks stand before them. First, they must settle on a credible platform early and avoid endless migration between parties. Constant movement signals instability to voters. Second, they must resolve leadership questions through transparent negotiation rather than ego-driven public contests. Third, they must move beyond elite arithmetic and present a practical agenda on inflation, jobs, insecurity, electricity and governance reform.

Many Nigerians are frustrated with present realities. But frustration alone does not automatically translate into votes for the opposition. Citizens may desire change and still distrust the alternatives before them.

The latest Kwankwaso controversy is therefore not merely about one politician considering another party. It is about a deeper truth in Nigerian politics: opposition forces often agree on what they oppose, but struggle to agree on what they want to build.

That remains the central dilemma of 2027.

If unity prevails, the election could become genuinely competitive. If ambition prevails, the ruling party may receive another gift from its opponents—without having to ask for one.

Abdulhamid Abdullahi Aliyu is a journalist and syndicate writer based in Abuja.

By Abdullahi Mukhtar Algasgaini

Former Kano State Governor, Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, and former presidential candidate, Peter Obi, are reportedly planning to exit the African Democratic Congress (ADC), according to sources close to the matter.

Political insiders revealed that former President Olusegun Obasanjo is spearheading efforts to forge a political alliance between the two prominent opposition figures. The move is seen as part of a broader realignment strategy ahead of the 2027 presidential election.

Tensions rose earlier today when some of Kwankwaso’s key political associates, known as the Kwankwasiyya movement, were seen defecting from the ADC in the morning.

This development comes at a critical time as the country edges closer to the 2027 general elections, with top politicians scrambling to reposition themselves for maximum political leverage.

By Mohammed Usman (Noble-pen)

Let’s talk beyond political party affiliation. Let’s tell ourselves the brutal truth.

Believing that all these people under the shade of one political party, ADC, and many more to move into it, are after the interest of the poor, the masses, instead of themselves, is the gravest mistake one will ever make. 

All these people have their own vested and individual interests, which spurred them to cross-carpet into the party, which seems to them promising, full of potential, and offering vistas for achieving those interests. And you know what? The poor, the masses, are the last thing they think of. Let alone the country’s future. 

Let me give you a practical, relatable elaboration on this by picking the few and the major points among them. Maybe, that way, you will understand what I am trying to say here.

1. Atiku Abubakar 

This person has been investing heavily and persistently in his ambition to become the country’s president. He never reneged since he started. He had been spending billions of naira on it. Therefore, do you sensibly think working for the poor, the masses, will be his top priority when he attains the power he has been so adamantly vying for, instead of looking for a return on his financial and material investment for years before? Don’t forget, he is a business-oriented person. And you should know what I mean. 

2. Nasir El-Rufai 

This person was once one of the cocks of the work of the current brutal government under the auspices of the APC. They entrenched it with their sweat and blood. And he never felt sorry for the poor suffering under the coarse, clueless policies of the government until the government, headed by Tinibu, betrayed him and denied him the opportunity he was dying for: a ministerial post and a place at the driving force of the government. That marked the genesis of his enmity towards the government and turned him into one of its most blunt and fierce foes. Hence, his decision to move to SDP, which refused him, then to ADC. His mission is purely to take vengeance on the government which made him an outcast rather than to save the poor masses from the bondage and shackles of poverty and insecurity, which they have been grappling with for donkey’s years.

3. Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso 

Just like El-Rufai, Kwankwaso is being driven by the force of spite and vendetta over the betrayal he suffered at the hands of his once political apprentice accomplice, Abba Gida Gida. His mission is driven solely by the quest to uproot the government of Abba Gida Gida, rather than by the welfare of the people of Kano State. However, he is a politician with very, very good antecedents. No one can deny that. But he is not into ADC for the masses. No. 

4. Nasiru Gawuna 

This was once an accomplice to the current merciless APC government, who fought a political battle—over his inspiration for the Kano state gubernatorial office—with Kwankwaso and his boy, Abba Gida Gida, but lost to them. He was once their worst enemy. But today, he and the Abba’s boss kwankwaso have leagued up as sweet friends in another political party (ADC) each with different and individual vested interest: kwankwaso to dislodge the assumed betraying government of Abba Gida Gida as well as to occupy an influencial office in the presidency; while Gawuna, to use it as an opportunity to become the kano state governor which he failed to in his previous opposition party APC. 

4. Peter Obi 

This person has the worst political andecedent, being the former governor of Anambra State and has—allegedly— a strong affiliation to IPOB, being the terrorist and outlawed political group in Nigeria, which had been perennially insurgent and rebellious to successive Nigerian governments with their impossible mission of dividing the country and taking their own share, which they aimed to call BIAFRA. So Peter Obi might clearly have this scheme hidden in his mind to, when he tapped the supreme power —presidency—become instrumental for the IPOB to finally make it possible to see the last light —they have been dying and killing people for—at the end of the tunnel, and reach their daydreamed-promised land. Polarising the country is the plot of his horizon. 

Likewise, if you pay very close attention to the other people who will be cross-carpeting into the party, ADC. You will notice that they were once fundamental figures in the previous governments who failed the masses and never took concrete, robust action to save their lives and property. Let alone improving their welfare and standard of living. Tell me, when did they change to be trusted with our mandates and entrusted with our lives once again, simply because they moved into another political party? The same applied to the others who are beneficiaries of the current APC government and are now quitting it for the shining party of the day, ADC.

Let me wrap up by telling you the secret of these Nigerian politicians. 

The fact is, they are always the same set of people.  They only switch color and identity by jumping from one political party to another— using the very public funds they looted while occupying the public offices they were once either elected or appointed into — with romanticized manifestations to sway the minds of the poor masses and pave a wider way for themselves to achieving their vested and selfish interest; increasingly impoverish the already poor masses, steal their future and the future of their children and grandchildren; while enriching themselves, their children and grandchildren, making their lives and future always the brighter.

And mind you, they switch political parties based on their analysis of which political party the poor masses lean their attention and hope towards. This means that it’s always the previous, unchanging enemies the masses mistake for their beloved ones and the beacon of hope, revolution, and transformation. 

Therefore, until the poor citizens of Nigeria understand these Nigerian politicians’ Machiavellian formula and devise a way to dismantle it—instead of continuing with their primitive thinking that their problems lie with one political party and that the solutions are in another—they shall continue to live in bondage, suffering, humiliation and destitution.

Mohammed Usman (Noble-pen) is the Author Of “Butterfly’s Wings.”

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, a presidential aspirant of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), has affirmed his readiness to back whichever candidate emerges as the party’s flagbearer for the 2027 presidential election.

Speaking in an interview with DW Hausa, Atiku dismissed claims that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) could undermine the ADC, noting that the party continues to grow in popularity across the country.

The INEC had announced on Wednesday that it would stop further communication with the ADC leadership and would not oversee the party’s national convention scheduled for April 14. The electoral body cited a court ruling for its decision. However, the ADC rejected INEC’s position, accusing the commission of misinterpreting the ruling, and vowed to proceed with its planned convention and other activities.

On the party’s presidential ticket, Atiku stated: “We will support and endorse whoever emerges as the flag bearer. How many are we (presidential aspirants), three or four? In the PDP, more than ten of us contested.”

Atiku also highlighted the ADC’s commitment to youth and women participation. “The youths have taken over the party. Most of those seeking elective positions, from councillor to state assembly, national assembly and House of Representatives, are young people. We have always said our party belongs to youths and women. Our role is to create the opportunity and hand it over to them,” he said.

Asked if he could support a young presidential candidate, Atiku replied: “Yes, why not. Allah has done everything for me. I have brought my sons and grandchildren home. What will be their future and that of their children?”

He expressed confidence that Nigerians are ready for change amid worsening economic and security challenges. “We are confident that Nigerians are yearning for change. They are ready for it. They are being pushed to the wall and are prepared to do even more than they did in the previous elections,” Atiku said.

The former vice president also linked rising insecurity, particularly in northern states, to youth unemployment and limited access to education. “Insecurity is more severe in the northern states, largely due to youth unemployment and lack of access to education. When you go round the region, you see that education is not receiving the attention it deserves. It has been relegated. Governments have not ensured that children enrol in school, and even when they graduate, there are no jobs or business opportunities. I have never witnessed a period like this in Nigeria,” he said.

Atiku further accused the government of tolerating corruption, saying: “There is also embezzlement on the part of government and corruption is rampant. The government has turned a blind eye because it is involved.”

This statement underscores Atiku’s positioning within the ADC as the party prepares for its national convention and the 2027 general elections.

By Uzair Adam

Prominent opposition figures in Nigeria have paid a visit to the residence of Kwankwasiyya leader, Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso.

Those present at the visit included former Labour Party presidential candidate Peter Obi, Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde, and Senator Seriake Dickson, among other political stakeholders.

In a post shared on his Facebook page, Kwankwaso stated that the politicians were at his residence on a Sallah homage.

Kwankwaso, a leading figure in the opposition New Nigeria Peoples Party, is widely speculated to be considering a move to another political party.

This follows the recent defection of Kano State Governor, Abba Kabir Yusuf, from the NNPP to the ruling All Progressives Congress.

Meanwhile, Peter Obi recently confirmed his official move to the African Democratic Congress, while Governor Makinde remains one of the few governors still in the Peoples Democratic Party, alongside his Bauchi State counterpart.

By Professor Abdussamad Umar Jibia

The year 2023 was a remarkable year in Nigeria’s history. Just like the year 1993, an election was held that generated a win for a Muslim candidate with another Muslim as his running mate.

In both 1993 and 2023, the presidential candidates were warned against choosing a Northern Christian as a running mate. Christians constitute not just a tiny minority in the North, but many of them have also proven to be very bad neighbours in their relations with their Muslim compatriots.

Wherever Christians constitute the majority, they display an unforgivable hate and marginalisation against their Muslim neighbours. A handy example is Plateau state, the home state of the current APC Chairman. The way Muslims are sidelined in Plateau state is enough to show what we should expect if Christians were the majority in Nigeria.

His Excellency Peter Obi was misled into believing that a combination of Igbo and Northern Christians could make him the President, and he moved from one church to another to campaign, only to end up in third place. 

The 2023 election was thus a religious census in disguise that showed the numerical superiority of Muslims over Christians in Nigeria. 

But no sooner had Bola Ahmed Tinubu won the 2023 presidential election than he began to sideline Muslims, the very group that brought him to power, in his appointments. Last year, we saw him personally going to the Vatican with what the state house described as a “bragging right of 62% Christian appointees”. 

We watched as he appointed a Northern Christian as the SGF. Of course, President Muhammadu Buhari did the same. President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua appointed a Northern Christian to lead the National Assembly. They did not deserve any of these, given their small number. However, Muslims gave them out of magnanimity. Or is it foolishness? They would never do the same if they were in our position. 

Many of us became disappointed when we saw a Northern Christian being chosen to lead the ruling party. This means two of the most important positions at the federal level have been given to Christians from the North Central, a geopolitical zone that is overwhelmingly Muslim. Worse still, our politicians in and outside the ruling party, our emirs and Islamic scholars are silent. When have we become animals who only care about eating food and sleeping with women?

As if that is not enough, speculation is that the President wants to drop his VP and choose a Northern Christian as his running mate in next year’s election. I commend the Honourable Minister of Culture, Hajiya Hannatu Musawa, for publicly telling the truth to Mr President. But it shouldn’t have reached this level. The decision of the President to appoint Northern Christians as SGF, Party Chairman and INEC Chair should have been opposed in the first place.

We are still expecting Mr President to correct the imbalance that favours the very tiny Northern Christians. North Central is predominantly Muslim. The only Christian majority states, where, of course, Muslims have been marginalised, are Plateau and Benue. Niger, Nasarawa, Kogi and Kwara are Muslim states. That Muslims in those states have been left out by Mr President in the above-mentioned strategic appointments is unfortunate.

Professor Abdussamad Umar Jibia wrote from the Department of Mechatronics Engineering, Bayero University Kano, via aujibia@gmail.com.

By Hadiza Abdulkadir

Former Labour Party presidential candidate Peter Obi has warned that the conviction of IPOB leader Mazi Nnamdi Kanu could worsen insecurity in the country. Obi issued the warning in a statement posted on his social media accounts, saying the development comes at a time when Nigerians are already struggling with economic hardship and widespread violence.

Obi said Kanu’s arrest, detention, and now conviction represent “a failure of leadership,” arguing that the concerns raised by the IPOB leader could have been addressed through dialogue and inclusive governance rather than coercion.

He cautioned that the government’s approach risks aggravating tensions in the South-East and further stretching security agencies already battling multiple crises nationwide.

According to him, nations facing similar internal tensions often adopt political solutions and negotiated settlements when legal processes alone cannot guarantee stability.

Obi urged the Presidency, the Council of State, and respected national figures to intervene and pursue reconciliation, warning that only justice, fairness, and meaningful engagement can prevent the situation from escalating into a deeper security challenge.

By Abdullahi Mukhtar Algasgaini

Peter Obi, the 2023 Labour Party presidential candidate, has strongly criticized the Federal Government’s plan to spend $1 billion (approximately ₦1.5 trillion) on modernizing the Apapa and TinCan Island Ports in Lagos, labeling the continued neglect of other major ports as “economic sabotage.”

In a statement posted on his X (formerly Twitter) handle on Friday, Obi accused the government of perpetuating a dangerous “economic imbalance” by excessively concentrating infrastructure investments in one region.

He warned that this policy sidelines critical maritime hubs in other parts of the country, specifically naming the ports in Warri, Port Harcourt, Calabar, and Onne.

The former Anambra State governor argued that equitable development of ports across the nation’s geo-political zones is essential for enhancing productivity, creating jobs, and stimulating regional economic growth that could lift millions out of poverty.

“While any effort to improve efficiency and embrace technology in our maritime sector is commendable, such an initiative must be guided by accountability, transparency, and fairness,” Obi stated.

“The Lagos modernisation project, though laudable, underscores a troubling trend of concentrating major national infrastructure in one region.”

Obi emphasized that for Nigeria to build a truly robust national blue economy, its growth must be inclusive, actively involving every region.

He also used the opportunity to call for broader reforms in the sector, including curbing corruption, streamlining bureaucracy, and implementing a paperless port system to boost global competitiveness.

Concluding his remarks, Obi urged the Tinubu administration to adopt principles of fairness and equity in its infrastructure policies.

“If prudently managed, the Lagos modernization project could serve as a model for national maritime transformation,” he conceded.

“But Nigeria must rebuild with justice, integrity, and a vision that turns us from a consuming nation into one driven by production and shared prosperity.”

By Sabiu Abdulahi

Former Labour Party presidential candidate, Peter Obi, has said that many young Nigerians involved in internet fraud, commonly called Yahoo boys, are actually intelligent individuals who require proper guidance instead of outright condemnation.

Obi, who spoke in Onitsha, Anambra State on Saturday, explained that those engaged in such activities possess creative minds but have been misled due to lack of direction.

He noted that if their energy and innovation were properly channeled, they could contribute positively to the nation’s progress.

According to him, while the pursuit of money is common, real wealth should be measured by integrity, purpose, and character.

He stressed that true prosperity should empower people and uplift communities.

“Some of our so-called Yahoo boys are geniuses who need redirection, not condemnation,” Obi stated.

He added that their resourcefulness could be used to promote national development if given the right mentorship and support.

“Their creativity and courage, if properly guided, can drive innovation and national development. Real wealth uplifts both the individual and society, promotes education, reduces poverty, and creates opportunities for others to live dignified lives,” he said.

Obi maintained that redirecting the talents of such youths toward productive ventures would not only benefit the country’s economy but also help reduce crime and unemployment.