National President of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), Nasir Issa-Fagee has explained the specific reasons for which the union embarked on its current industrial action.
According to Fagee, the Federal Government has not only been insincere in its dealings with the union over matters of critical importance to the education sector, it has only honoured two of the nine commitments contained in its 2009 Agreement with the union.
Below is a full statement of ASUU’s grievances against the Federal Government, contained in a press release by Fagee
Gentlemen of the Press,
At the National Executive Council (NEC) meeting of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) held at the Olabisi Onabanjo University (OOU), Ago-Iwoye between 29th and 30th June 2013, a number of issues were raised on developments affecting the country’s education system and the Nigerian nation as a whole. These include the lingering crisis at the Rivers State University of Science and Technology (RSUST), the continued violation of the rights of the re-engaged 49 academics at the University of Ilorin, and the non-release of the White Paper on Special Visitation to the University of Abuja. Others include the parlous state of the economy, and Government’s disregard for its agreements with our Union.
The Nigerian Educational Logjam
Gentlemen of the Press, the crisis affecting the Nigerian education sector stems largely from the failure of Nigerian governments, over the years, to boldly address the suffocating challenges, which have stymied the development of the sector. It seems that while the Government is fully aware of the enormity of the infrastructural, personnel and other forms of decay at all levels, it does not have the courage to tackle these challenges for the good of the nation. This attitude on the part of Government has given critics the impression that perhaps Government is more comfortable with the uneducated class than it is with the educated one.
To compound this problem, the impression is often given that we are not in control of our educational policies, as external and other influences have tended to show a national inclination to a weakened intellectual class, which in turn prognosticates a desire for an ideologically barren, colonially dependent and financially deprived structure that is not primed for the growth and development of the system. ASUU challenges the Federal and State Governments, and other stakeholders who have responsibility for the education of the Nigerian people, to show great courage in implementing decisions, policies and agreements produced over time so as to put Nigerian education back on the fast lane. This should lead to the liberation of the Nigerian education system from the cloud of despair and despondency.
Gentlemen of the Press, you will recall that ASUU recently issued a Press Release over the untimely death of some Student Union leaders who were on their way to the University of Uyo. We used the opportunity to call for the common struggle to enthrone democratic governance in our tertiary institutions, with full respect for the rights of students to unionize. While this must be invigorated, we wish to note the unfortunate situation on our campuses today wherein most Student Union leaders, especially at the level of NANS, are possible drop-outs, government agents, Youth Corp members, and other questionable characters being foisted on genuine undergraduates in our universities by politicians and other officials of the state.
As a Union with a stake in the future of our youth and our nation, ASUU shall use her networks to monitor and identify the true status of those who currently parade themselves as student leaders nationwide. We are determined to indigenize student unionism on our campuses. This is the only way the Student Union Movement can genuinely engage issues of non-commercial education with access to all; allocation of at least 26 per cent of yearly budgets to education; declaration of emergency on the whole education system, revitalization of University system, etc.
The Crisis at RSUST
Gentlemen of the Press, you will recall that the crisis at River State University of Science and Technology, Port Harcourt, has become a recurring decimal at our interactions with the media since August 2012 because it is an issue that is very close to our hearts. We remain steadfast in our support and solidarity with our members at RSUST in their principled struggle against poor governance and maladministration being perpetrated by the vice-chancellor and the Governing Council of the University.
It has become more evident that Visitor to RSUST, Governor Rotimi Chibuike Amaechi is brazenly adamant in his refusal to respect the laws establishing the university. The assault and harassment of our members in that university has continued unabated since, because of his determination to stick with the re-appointment of Prof. B. B. Fakae as Vice-Chancellor, after serving an undeserved first term which did not follow due process. The most worrisome dimension is the scandalous involvement of security agents in this show of shame.
Today, at RSUST, there is widespread abuse of university statutes and mind-boggling illegalities: unqualified lecturers teach postgraduate courses while examinations are conducted without respect for requisite requirements. It is disheartening to observe that the Nigerian Universities Commission (NUC) has been playing an active role as an accomplice in the desecration of our University system by giving its approval to these despicable acts at RSUST. NUC’s continued disregard for its statutory responsibility as a regulatory agency, with the responsibility of maintaining the highest level of ethical and academic standard in Nigerian universities, as evident in RSUST, creates a grave cause for concern among the membership of our Union. We call on the National Assembly, through its oversight functions, to conduct a comprehensive investigation into the role of NUC in the shameless acts of executive obduracy at play in RSUST.
Re-engaged University of Ilorin Lecturers
You would recall that 49 lecturers of the University of Ilorin were unjustly sacked for participation in a nationwide strike action of our Union in 2001. Despite the Supreme Court judgment, which revalidated their right to unionize and removed the toga of criminality woven around union activities by Unilorin authorities, their entitlements are still denied them. Three years after the landmark judgment, the University still withholds the salary and allowances of some of the affected staff while their entitlements for sabbatical leave and promotions have not been addressed.
We, once again, call on authorities at Unilorin to desist from gagging our members and pitching academics against themselves. A university scholar cannot creatively engage knowledge in an atmosphere of rancour and sponsored bitterness. Neither can they auspiciously fulfil their obligations as agents of change and transformation in their micro community and the wider context of humanity. We shall, therefore, continue to use all legitimate means available to us to protect and defend the interests of academics at the University of Ilorin.
The Seemingly Intractable University of Abuja Crisis
Gentlemen of the Press, it is becoming crystal clear that the Government is insincere in resolving the crisis at the University of Abuja. As you are possibly aware, the Special Visitation Panel that looked into the monumental crisis that engulfed the university last year submitted its report in September 2012. However, the visitor to the university, President Goodluck Jonathan has continued to vacillate on what to do with the report of the panel. Meanwhile, Uniabuja’s Vice Chancellor, Prof. Samuel Adelabu continues to operate like a lord and master whose words are laws!
ASUU-NEC calls on the Visitor to Uniabuja to release the White Paper on Special Visitation to Uniabuja without further delay. It is only by doing so and implementing the recommendations of the Visitation Panel that the university can be given a new lease of life that befits a 25-year old university.
IMF/World Bank and Nigeria’s Economic Development
Gentlemen of the Press, as you are well aware, the Nigerian economy is fraught with contradictions and inconsistencies. Unfortunately, it is glaringly under the jugular clutches of Western economists, experts and interests who promote an exogenous (external) instead of endogenous (internal) model of development. This model took a firm root when, in “the early 2005 a group of economists, mainly from the Breton Woods Institutions introduced the concept of Inclusive Growth (IG) to replace the erstwhile notion of Growth and Development (GD).” What is most significant about the IG model is its “attempt to run away from the need to accelerate economic development through deliberate policy interventions so as to move millions of humanity out of poverty”.
Having imposed the IG on the country by agents of the World Bank and IMR, it is little surprising that today “economic growth” does not equate to “Nigeria’s development” and prosperity of Nigerians. Key sectors that ought to provide the planks for development and prosperity such as education, power/energy, agriculture and health are in dire state. Government at all levels rather hoists frivolities over the essentials. As recently observed by Prof. Akpan Ekpo, “The implementation of the Transformation Agenda does not preclude the fact that the economy today is characterized by high and rising rate of unemployment particularly among the youths, decayed public school system at all levels, lack of quality public health system, massive corruption, security challenges, among others”.
ASUU-NEC rejects externally imposed models of economic growth that discounts human elements in the equation. The Bretton Woods experts can only further under-develop Nigeria and pauperize her citizens. This is because IG “stresses productive employment rather than income redistribution”; implying that the tiny rich Nigerians will continue to get richer while the mass poor will become poorer.
A non-insulated economy will only be a subservient economy. The solutions to our problems as a nation must be wholly Nigerian-based, Nigerian-driven and Nigerian-centred. The current reliance on the veiled but obvious drivers of our “envelop economy” being presided over and supervised by agents of the IMF/World Bank will only leave us in a worse state than the IBB era. The current jigsaw dilemma of economic blueprints of NEPAD, Vision 20 2020, Transformational Agenda, etc. are bound to fail in so far as they are not based on any indigenous economic paradigm.
2009 FGN/ASUU Agreement
You will recall that ASUU declared a total, indefinite and comprehensive strike on 4th December 2011 in order to prevail on government to sincerely and judiciously implement the 2009 Agreement it freely entered into with our Union. Specifically, ASUU identified the following key areas that were yet to be implemented:
i. Funding requirements for Revitalization of the Nigerian Universities
ii. Federal Government Assistance to State Universities
iii. Establishment of NUPEMCO
iv. Progressive increase in Annual Budgetary Allocation to Education to 26 per cent between 2009 and 2020
v. Earned Allowances
vi. Amendment of the Pension/Retirement Age of Academics on the Professorial cadre from 65 to 70 years
vii. Reinstatement of prematurely dissolved Governing Councils
viii. Transfer of Federal Government Landed Property to Universities
ix. Setting up of Research Development Council and Provision of Research Equipment to laboratories and classrooms in our universities.
However, the strike was suspended on 2nd February 2012. As our Union noted then, “NEC decision had been taken in the interest of the revitalization of the Nigerian Universities. To achieve these goals, ASUU expects the government to fulfil its obligation in respect of funding and all other matters contained in its offers.” When the strike was suspended, ASUU drew attention to the fact that the unimplemented agreement was due for renegotiation in June 2012.
Following the suspension of the strike, government responded by setting up a Committee via TETFund to assess the needs of Nigerian Universities in terms of infrastructure and required quantum of fund. Government also mandated the Implementation Monitoring Committee (IMC) to document and compute the financial implication of implementing the 2009 FGN/ASUU Agreement. At ASUU’s insistence, many of these conditions have now been met. Yet, Government has continued to dilly-dally on the implementation.
Out of nine items earlier highlighted, only two of the commitments — reinstatement of Governing Councils and the Amendment of Retirement Age Act — were met. For the past 16 months, several steps, including formal and informal consultations, meetings, personal contacts, have been employed to avert resumption of the suspended action. We seem to have now exhausted all available options. Our members cannot understand why a government finds it difficult to fulfil an Agreement voluntarily entered into with the Union in 2009 as well as the MoU that was introduced following ASUU’s protest against government’s demonstration of bad faith in 2012.
Gentlemen of the Press, one key aspect of the Agreement where Government has demonstrated insincerity is on the Earned Academic Allowances (EAA). Components of these allowances include responsibility allowances to Heads of Department, Deans of Faculties and other functionaries of the university system.
After the MoU of 26th January 2012, Government accepted in principle to pay EAA. As if to demonstrate its commitment, the IMC under the chairmanship of Dr. Wale Babalakin, was assigned the responsibility of working out practical and sustainable ways to do this. When the IMC submitted its recommendations on this aspect of the Agreement, which has run into almost four years, however, the Government suddenly began to give excuses. And, finally, it set aside the recommendations of the IMC on the account of financial difficulties; these were recommendations that came out of serious engagements with officials from relevant Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs). Our Union sees this sudden reversal of gears as a betrayal of trust.
From all indications, it appears Government is yet unprepared to address the challenges facing the Nigerian university system with the urgency that is required. This trend is dangerous, as it constitutes a threat to the relative peace in Nigerian universities. There can be no justification for Government’s position given what all Nigerians know about the management of the nation’s resources. It is evident that Government is highly deceptive and is not interested in sustaining relative stability in our universities. If Government can betray our Union on the 2009 Agreement, where is the basis of trust for the impending review that was due for 2012?
It is in the light of the above, especially having exhausted all other options, that ASUU-NEC at its meeting in Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye, between 29th and 30th June 2013 resolved to call out all its members on a nationwide strike action beginning from Wednesday, 3rd July, 2013. The strike action is comprehensive and total. Our members shall withdraw their services until Government fully implements all the outstanding aspects of the 2009 Agreement, and commences the process of review of the same Agreement.
Concluding Remarks
Gentlemen of the Press, the time has come to rise in defence of the true liberation of our country. We believe this liberation must begin with education, which is a veritable weapon for socioeconomic transformation. The IMF/World Bank and their local collaborators would make Nigerians believe that “basic” or little education is good enough for the children of the poor. It is a ruse.
Our Union counts on the renewed support of the media in challenging agents of underdevelopment who deny less-privileged Nigerians quality higher education, health, employment and other life-transforming elements of development. We equally invite labor activists, students, traders, professional groups, civil society organizations and other progressive segments of the public to join our determined efforts to save Nigeria from her captors.
Thank you for your kind attention.
Nasir Issa-Fagee
National President, ASUU
 |
|
Lagos State Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu has reportedly asked the Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of the Lagos Waste Management Authority (LAWMA), Dr Muyiwa Gbadegesin, to resign amid growing concerns over the accumulation of refuse across the state.
The reported move follows mounting complaints about waste collection, with heaps of garbage littering roads, residential areas and drainage channels in several communities.
An unnamed source within the agency disclosed that the governor had become dissatisfied with the pace of waste evacuation and the implementation of his directives to address the situation.
According to the source, the governor's frustration reportedly intensified following his visit to the Olusosun Dumpsite in Ojota about a month ago, where he assessed operations and called for urgent measures to improve waste management.
Despite the directive and the subsequent declaration of a state of emergency on waste management, the source claimed that the governor remained concerned about the limited visible progress.
The source further alleged that Sanwo-Olu asked Gbadegesin to resign over the weekend, adding that the LAWMA chief had reportedly been seeking the intervention of influential figures in Lagos to retain his position.
Refuse Accumulation Raises Sanitation Concerns
Residents in several parts of Lagos have continued to experience waste collection challenges, with refuse reportedly accumulating along major roads, medians, residential streets and drainage channels.
Affected areas include Mushin, Egbeda, Surulere, Ajegunle, Ikorodu, Ojo, Obalende, Apapa and Mile 2.
The situation has raised concerns about environmental sanitation, public health risks and the potential impact on businesses and daily activities.
The state government had earlier announced emergency measures to tackle the problem and improve waste collection across the metropolis.
In September, Sanwo-Olu declared a state of emergency on waste management following an inspection of the Olusosun Dumpsite. The visit was attended by Deputy Governor Dr Obafemi Hamzat and other stakeholders in the waste management sector.
During the inspection, the governor acknowledged delays in waste evacuation and attributed some of the challenges to the failure of Private Sector Participation (PSP) operators to meet their obligations in recent weeks.
He also identified fires at dumpsites and ongoing waste-compaction projects as factors affecting operational efficiency.
According to the governor, the completion of projects at the Olusosun and Solous 3 dumpsites would increase their capacity, allowing each facility to receive approximately 450 trucks of municipal waste daily.
The planned improvements are expected to strengthen disposal operations and support more efficient waste collection by PSP operators.
LAWMA Reports Progress in Clearance Operations
Amid growing concerns over the waste situation, Gbadegesin announced on Saturday that clearance operations had recorded progress in several locations across Lagos.
In an update shared on his X account, the LAWMA chief said Mile 2 had been cleared, while three additional trucks had been deployed to Doyin-Orile and surrounding communities.
He also reported continued daily waste collection along Ijesha Road and Itire–Ikate, clearance operations at Bucknor–Ijegun, and ongoing collection activities in Ogolonto and Igbokusu.
According to the update, Okeira and Oluodo had been placed under interim LAWMA services following the termination of their PSP arrangements, while clearance operations continued at Iraye.
However, the agency was still awaiting field updates from four routes: Apapa, Abesan Estate, Idimu–Ejigbo Road and the Isheri–Igando corridor.
Gbadegesin said the agency's objective was to move beyond emergency clearance operations and establish consistent waste collection to prevent refuse from accumulating again in areas that had already been cleared.
Government Yet to Confirm Reported Resignation Request
As of the time of reporting, there had been no official confirmation of the alleged resignation request.
Efforts to obtain a response from Lagos State Commissioner for Information, Gbenga Omotosho, were unsuccessful, as an aide said the commissioner was attending a meeting and advised that contact be made later.
Gbadegesin was reappointed as LAWMA managing director by Sanwo-Olu following the governor's re-election.
The reported development comes as the state government faces continued pressure to address waste collection challenges and improve environmental sanitation.
Whether the alleged resignation request will result in a leadership change remains unclear, while residents continue to await sustained improvements in refuse evacuation across Lagos.
News
Ayobami Oyalowo, Executive Director of Finance and Administration at the Ogun-Oshun River Basin Authority, has said reforms implemented under Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor Olayemi Cardoso have improved the foreign exchange market, strengthened external reserves and enhanced the resilience of the banking sector.
Assessing Cardoso’s three-year tenure, Oyalowo said the apex bank had shifted towards a more orthodox monetary policy framework, prioritising price stability, market discipline and stronger financial sector supervision.
Cardoso assumed office in September 2023 amid significant economic challenges, including foreign exchange market distortions, declining external buffers and rising inflation. Headline inflation stood at 25.80 per cent in August 2023, while multiple exchange rates, foreign currency shortages and accumulated foreign exchange obligations weakened business confidence.
According to Oyalowo, the reforms marked a departure from the CBN’s extensive involvement in intervention programmes across sectors such as agriculture, aviation and power.
He recalled that Cardoso disclosed at the November 2023 Annual Bankers’ Dinner that the CBN had injected more than ₦10 trillion into the economy through various intervention programmes.
Oyalowo said the scale of the interventions raised concerns about excess liquidity, policy effectiveness and the central bank’s involvement in activities that could be better handled by fiscal authorities and development finance institutions.
“The economic significance of this shift lies in restoring consistency between the CBN’s objectives and its policy instruments,” he said.
Forex Market Reforms and Reserve Growth
Oyalowo identified the foreign exchange market as one of the major areas affected by the reforms, following years of multiple exchange rates, restricted access to foreign currency and accumulated obligations.
He said the CBN’s measures were designed to improve price discovery, enhance liquidity and rebuild confidence in the official market.
Among the key initiatives, he highlighted the Electronic Foreign Exchange Matching System, introduced in December 2024, and the Nigerian Foreign Exchange Code, launched in January 2025. Both measures were aimed at improving transparency, accountability and market conduct.
He also pointed to the settlement of verified foreign exchange obligations from an inherited backlog estimated at $7 billion, noting that the move helped address concerns among international investors, airlines and multinational companies over capital repatriation and legitimate financial claims.
However, Oyalowo acknowledged that the adjustment came at a significant economic cost, including sharp naira depreciation, higher import costs, increased production expenses for manufacturers and mounting pressure on household purchasing power.
On external reserves, he said Nigeria’s gross foreign exchange reserves increased from approximately $33 billion when Cardoso assumed office to about $55 billion in October 2026.
He added that net external reserves had risen to approximately $46 billion, compared with $34.80 billion at the end of 2025 and $3.99 billion at the end of 2023, citing figures disclosed by the CBN.
Oyalowo also referenced the CBN’s 2025 Annual Report, which showed that aggregate foreign exchange inflows rose by 13.81 per cent to $109.86 billion in 2025, from $96.53 billion in 2024.
Net foreign exchange inflows stood at $60.81 billion, while autonomous sources accounted for approximately 64 per cent of total inflows.
He described the growing contribution of autonomous sources as significant, explaining that private-sector inflows, export earnings and remittances could provide a more sustainable supply of foreign exchange than administrative allocation.
Improved Credit Outlook and Investor Confidence
Oyalowo further cited improvements in Nigeria’s international credit assessments as evidence of renewed confidence in the country’s economic direction.
He noted that S&P Global upgraded Nigeria’s sovereign credit rating from ‘B−’ to ‘B’ with a Stable Outlook in May 2026. Fitch Ratings also affirmed Nigeria’s ‘B’ rating in October 2026 and revised its outlook from Stable to Positive.
He said Nigeria’s return to the FTSE Russell Frontier Market classification in September 2026 reflected improvements in foreign exchange market accessibility and capital repatriation.
Despite these developments, Oyalowo acknowledged that Nigeria’s sovereign credit ratings remained below investment grade.
He also cited National Bureau of Statistics data showing that capital importation increased to $23.22 billion in 2025, compared with $12.32 billion in 2024.
Portfolio investment accounted for approximately $19.74 billion, representing 85 per cent of total capital importation, while foreign direct investment stood at about $923 million.
According to him, the figures indicated renewed investor interest but underscored the need to attract more long-term capital into manufacturing, infrastructure, energy and technology.
Inflation, Interest Rates and Household Pressures
On inflation, Oyalowo said the CBN had maintained a restrictive monetary policy stance through higher interest rates and liquidity management measures.
He noted that headline inflation moderated to 15.39 per cent in August 2026, from 15.43 per cent in July and 25.80 per cent in August 2023.
However, he cautioned that the rebasing of the Consumer Price Index in 2025 meant historical inflation comparisons needed to be interpreted carefully.
“Moreover, lower inflation does not mean prices have returned to previous levels,” he said, stressing that households continued to bear the cumulative effects of earlier price increases.
He added that while tighter monetary policy could help contain inflationary pressures, high borrowing costs had made it more expensive for businesses to access credit, potentially constraining investment and economic expansion.
Bank Recapitalisation Strengthens Financial Sector
Oyalowo also highlighted the CBN’s banking sector recapitalisation programme, introduced in March 2024, as a major component of the reforms.
The programme raised minimum capital requirements to ₦500 billion for commercial banks with international authorisation, ₦200 billion for national banks and ₦50 billion for regional banks.
By March 2026, he said, 33 banks had met the revised requirements, collectively raising ₦4.65 trillion in fresh capital.
Domestic investors contributed 72.55 per cent of the capital raised, while international investors accounted for 27.45 per cent.
According to Oyalowo, the recapitalisation exercise had strengthened banks’ capacity to absorb financial shocks and finance larger transactions.
However, he emphasised that increased capital must be supported by sound governance, effective risk management and responsible lending practices.
“Stronger balance sheets must be accompanied by sound governance, effective risk management and responsible lending,” he said.
He noted that the challenge for policymakers was to balance financial sector resilience with affordable access to credit, particularly for businesses operating under restrictive monetary conditions.
CBN, Finance Ministry Deepen Policy Coordination
Oyalowo identified the September 18, 2026, Memorandum of Understanding between the CBN and the Federal Ministry of Finance as another important development.
He said the agreement established a framework for closer coordination between fiscal and monetary authorities, covering government cash management, debt issuance planning, liquidity forecasting and macroeconomic analysis.
According to him, the arrangement could reduce the risk of fiscal and monetary policies working at cross-purposes, particularly where government borrowing and spending influence inflation, liquidity conditions and access to credit.
He added that the framework recognised the structural factors driving inflation in Nigeria, including food supply constraints, energy costs, transportation and logistics expenses.
Consolidating the Gains of Reform
Three years into Cardoso’s tenure, Oyalowo said the CBN had recorded measurable changes in foreign exchange market accessibility, external reserves, banking sector capitalisation and investor participation.
He maintained that the governor’s emphasis on monetary orthodoxy had provided the apex bank with a clearer institutional direction, while acknowledging the economic costs associated with the adjustment process.
He stressed, however, that sustaining the gains would require consistent policies, stronger productive investment and measures to ease the pressure on households and businesses.
“The next responsibility is to consolidate these reforms, preserve the gains in macroeconomic stability and create conditions for stronger productive investment, more affordable credit and improved living standards,” Oyalowo said.
Business
In The Spotlight
While delivering the 2026 edition of the Annual Omolayole Management Lecture, President, Chartered Institute of Directors and immediate past Managing Director of 11 PLC, formerly Mobil Oil Nigeria Plc, Adetunji Oyebanji, presented President Bola Tinubu with something to think about.
He declared, “Based on a 2025 normal Gross Domestic Product baseline of approximately US$290.79bn, Nigeria would need to sustain a compound growth rate of approximately 28.02 per cent over the five-year period from 2026 to 2030” to achieve the $1tn economy.
He added, “This rate far exceeds Nigeria’s historical performance and underscores the scale of economic expansion required,” and “Rather than serving as a forecast, this calculation establishes the benchmark against which future economic performance may be assessed.”
As if the priest spoke and thunder rumbled, Nigeria’s National Bureau of Statistics reported that Nigeria’s year-on-year GDP growth rate for the second quarter of 2026 was 4.43 per cent, while the World Bank projected 4.3 per cent growth rate for Nigeria in 2026, up from nearly 4.0 per cent recorded for 2025.
As Oyebanji observed, Nigeria’s economy experienced low growth rates and reversals in the last decade: from 2.65 per cent in 2015, to -1.62 per cent contraction in 2016, a modest 2 per cent rebound in 2017, another reversal, of -1.79 per cent occasioned by Covid-19 in 2020, to a positive rebound of 3.87, or nearly 4, per cent in 2025.
If anyone says President Tinubu has a yeoman’s job ahead of him, they’re spot on. And if he merely coveted the $1tn economy by faith and not with data, it would appear that the President is planning to fail.
And somebody should tell the Comptroller-General of the Nigeria Customs Service, Adewale Adeniyi, who pledged to support the President’s ambition to build the $1tn economy, not to confuse government revenue with a country’s economy.
Oyebanji recognised “governance as the central determinant of success” in the $1tn economy quest, and identified oil, gas and energy; agriculture and agro-processing; manufacturing and industrial development; technology, digital economy and innovation; infrastructure; solid minerals; and services and the creative industry as the sectoral drivers.
But it appears that only the digital, mineral resources mining, service and creative sectors can thrive in the current Nigerian economic environment, and the real sector, agriculture and manufacturing, that produce the strategic consumer goods that are mostly imported at the moment, cannot thrive yet.
The governance structures that Oyebanji suggests for the takeoff of the $1tn economy are macroeconomic stability through disciplined fiscal and monetary policies, consistency of policies, rapid investment in infrastructure and nifty tinkering with the economic environment.
These are the direct opposites of the current negatives: power supply deficit, infrastructure gap, inefficiency in the oil sector, an unstable foreign exchange rate, a low tax-to-GDP rate, insecurity, policy inconsistencies and a huge human capital deficit that compromise the capacity of the real sector and even the service industry.
If the President really wants the $1tn economy to become a reality in 2030, he should review Oyebanji’s perspectives, data and prescriptions and seek competent economists, management and financial planning experts to help him articulate a clear path to achieving this laudable economic prosperity.
Some experts, convinced he may not achieve his objective within the period he has earmarked, think he could at least set himself on the way by making ambitious efforts in electricity, security and logistics, including extensive road, railway, water and air travel networks.
Nigeria’s current electricity generating capacity is somewhere between 4,500 and 5,400 megawatts, whereas it is projected that Nigeria probably needs to generate anywhere between 20,000 and 28,000 megawatts for its 230 million population.
Some even argue that 28,000 megawatts of electricity won’t service the population of Nigeria that is projected to increase to 262 or 270 million by the magical 2030 that the President has set as a deadline for the $1tn economy.
If the electricity infrastructure is not addressed pointedly by the Federal and the state governments that have now been enabled by the transfer of electricity from the Exclusive Federal List to the Concurrent List of the Nigerian Constitution, the economy will not lift off as expected.
The declaration by the Nigerian Constitution that security and the welfare of the people of Nigeria is Job Number One of government confirms the nexus or relationship between public security, public order and the nation’s economic wellbeing.
The classic definition of the state, which is the final, supreme, absolute coercive power within a political realm, speaks to the place of the state, whose public face is the government, as both the arbiter and safeguard of the lives and economic livelihoods of the citizens of a country.
The current inability of the state or the government, which is supposed to have a monopoly on police and military force within the country, is consistently having a negative impact on the security and the economies of the North-East, North-West, North-Central and some corridors of Southern Nigeria.
The rural areas, where insurgency, terrorism, banditry, herder-farmer clashes, and kidnapping have become rampant, are unsafe for lives and unconducive for the farmers who produce the food consumed by the citizens and the cash crops that provide the raw materials for the growth of agro-allied and chemical industries.
Maybe it bears repeating that in addition to preventing harvests from the farms, insecurity is disrupting the transportation of food to the dining tables of Nigerian homes, as well as the cash crops that provide the raw materials for Nigerian industries.
The third basic aspect of the Nigerian economy that the President must take a long, hard look at, if he really wants to make the $1tn economy a reality, is logistics, which is already taking a beating from the insecurity running through most of Nigeria.
The Federal Government must find the funds and speed up the completion of Lagos-Calabar Coastal Road, the Sokoto-Badagry Expressway, the Calabar-Abuja Superhighway and additional longitudinal and lateral highways to link Nigerian farms, industries and homes.
No one can deny that roads encourage the founding and development of modern communities that later become metropolises. Look at the organic growth of urban communities from the Berger end of the Lagos-Ibadan Expressway to the Shagamu Interchange.
To prepare for the heavy lifting necessary to realise the $1tn economy, President Tinubu needs to study and take the best of the railway systems of America, which has the longest rail network in the world; China, with the largest high-speed rail network; Russia, the leader in heavy freight; and India, with the highest passenger rail network.
Cargo airports are more than necessary for quick evacuation of fresh agricultural produce from the farm gates to the urban centres where they will be consumed fresh or converted into raw materials for the agro-allied industries.
The President must find a way to harness the strength of Nigeria’s inland rivers not only to generate hydroelectric power, but also as an integral part of a transportation network that will include roads, railways and airports.
If electricity, security and logistics are taken care of, it shouldn’t be too difficult for the $1tn economy to take off organically.
By Lekan Sote
In The Spotlight
There is a question President Bola Ahmed Tinubu must answer before the 2027 presidential election: if he wants another four years in Aso Rock, why should Nigerians not expect him to stand before them, state by state, and defend his record?
His decision not to accompany his campaign team to every state has ignited a political storm, drawing criticism from opposition leaders, activists and ordinary citizens, while others insist that governance must not grind to a halt because of electioneering. The President argues that Nigeria’s pressing needs demand his attention and that members of the All Progressives Congress (APC) Presidential Campaign Council can carry his message to voters nationwide.
That argument is not entirely without merit. A sitting president has constitutional responsibilities that do not disappear during an election campaign. Government must function, security must be addressed, and the business of the nation must continue.
But there is a dangerous flaw in the President’s position: governance is not an escape route from accountability, and a campaign surrogate is no substitute for the candidate whose record is on trial.
Tinubu is not seeking a ceremonial extension of his stay in office. He is asking Nigerians to entrust him with another four years of power. That request demands more than carefully choreographed rallies, rehearsed speeches and party loyalists singing his praises. It demands answers.
What has happened to the promises made in 2023? What tangible relief have millions of struggling households received? How should Nigerians assess the consequences of petrol subsidy removal and naira reforms? What is the administration’s scorecard on electricity, food prices, employment, insecurity and the cost of living?
These are not questions that can be wished away by delegating campaign appearances to governors and party leaders. They are questions that belong to the President.
THE PEOPLE ARE NOT FOOLS
Across the country, the mood is unmistakable: Nigerians want to be heard. From the trader counting the dwindling contents of her purse to the worker whose salary struggles to survive the month, from the farmer threatened by insecurity to the young graduate searching desperately for employment, the public is entitled to demand a reckoning.
For many citizens, the election will not be an abstract contest of political slogans. It will be a verdict on their lived experience.
That is why Tinubu’s proposed absence from some campaign stops has struck such a sensitive nerve. To his critics, it suggests an unwillingness to confront public anger. Some have questioned his physical fitness; others believe he may be reluctant to defend his administration’s performance. These are allegations, not established facts. The President’s decision alone does not prove that he is unwell or afraid of voters.
Nevertheless, he should understand the political consequences of leaving such questions unanswered. In politics, a vacuum rarely remains empty. Suspicion rushes in where explanation is absent.
If the President is physically capable of discharging his duties, he should have no reason to leave Nigerians guessing about his willingness to engage them. If health or other legitimate considerations constrain his campaign schedule, he should communicate his plans clearly. Nigerians deserve honesty, not speculation.
Silence may be convenient, but it is a poor campaign strategy.
GOVERNANCE IS NOT A SHIELD
The argument that the President must remain focused on governance sounds reasonable. Indeed, Nigeria cannot afford a government that abandons its responsibilities whenever politicians hit the campaign trail.
But the same argument raises another question: what exactly is the President doing with the time he saves by skipping campaign stops, and how will Nigerians see the benefits?
If governance is the priority, then the evidence should be visible in improved security, greater economic stability, reliable electricity, better access to essential services and a meaningful reduction in the hardship confronting ordinary families.
The President cannot invoke the demands of governance as a shield against political scrutiny while asking the same citizens to renew his mandate. The two responsibilities are not mutually exclusive. A president can govern and explain his governance. He can attend to national business and still make himself available to voters.
Nor should the APC confuse the ability to organise rallies with the ability to win public confidence. Party machinery can mobilise crowds. Governors can deliver speeches. Spokespersons can defend policy. But none of them can erase the consequences of decisions taken by the President.
The mandate belongs to Tinubu. So does the responsibility to defend it.
THE OPPOSITION MUST DO MORE THAN SHOUT
Opposition figures, including former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi, have seized on the President’s position to question his commitment to accountability. The Labour Party and the Makinde/Daura Presidential Campaign Organisation have also criticised the plan.
Their central argument—that a president seeking re-election should personally defend his record—is persuasive. But criticism alone is not a credible alternative to leadership.
The opposition must do more than exploit public frustration. It must present workable policies, credible economic proposals, a serious security strategy and a clear plan for restoring public confidence. Nigerians deserve alternatives, not merely louder accusations.
Claims about poverty, economic failure, insecurity and government performance should be supported by verifiable evidence, not inflated for political effect. A campaign that demands accountability from the incumbent must be prepared to practise it itself.
Democracy suffers when the ruling party evades scrutiny. It suffers equally when opposition parties substitute rhetoric for substance.
THE PRESIDENCY IS NOT A PARTY HEADQUARTERS
There is another troubling issue in this controversy: the use of the Presidential Villa for the inauguration of the APC Presidential Campaign Council.
The Presidency is a public institution, not the private property of a political party. The President is entitled to lead his party and campaign for re-election, but the distinction between official state functions and partisan political activities must remain clear.
Public institutions must not be made to appear subordinate to party interests. The symbolism matters, particularly in a democracy where public trust is already under pressure. The appropriate rules governing the use of official premises and public resources must be respected without exception.
The President should set the standard, not leave Nigerians wondering whether the lines between state and party have become dangerously blurred.
FACE THE PEOPLE
Tinubu is under no obligation to conduct an exhausting, state-by-state campaign simply to satisfy political theatrics. Campaign schedules must accommodate legitimate security, administrative and personal considerations. No responsible editorial judgment should demand that a president jeopardise his health or neglect urgent national duties for the sake of appearances.
But there is a difference between not visiting every state and refusing to account for one's stewardship.
The President can publish a transparent record of his administration’s achievements and failures. He can hold substantive town halls, grant unscripted interviews, answer questions from citizens and journalists, and ensure that his campaign team presents verifiable evidence rather than political slogans. He can also visit a representative cross-section of states while explaining clearly why other stops may not be possible.
What he cannot reasonably expect is that Nigerians will accept delegation as a substitute for accountability.
Ultimately, the 2027 election must be about more than who can draw the biggest crowd or deliver the most electrifying speech. It must be about performance, policy, integrity and the willingness to answer difficult questions.
Tinubu has the right to seek another term. Nigerians have an even more fundamental right to scrutinise that ambition.
A second-term mandate is not a gift to be collected. It is a verdict to be earned.
The President should therefore face the nation with candour, defend his record with evidence and explain why he deserves another four years. If his achievements speak for themselves, let him present them. If his policies have delivered the promised gains, let him demonstrate them. If mistakes have been made, let him acknowledge them and explain what he intends to do differently.
No surrogate can do this convincingly on his behalf.
In the final analysis, the campaign may belong to the APC, but the verdict belongs to Nigerians. Their hardship cannot be delegated. Their questions cannot be outsourced. And their votes cannot be commanded.
Tinubu must face the people—not because every campaign rally is sacred, but because accountability is.