Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Attahiru Jega, expressed gratitude to all observers accredited in the forthcoming general elections, describing them as partners in progress with the country.
Jega gave the commendation making a speech at the briefing of accredited observers for the elections on Thursday.
He described the work of the observers as a means of providing INEC with dispassionate and rich assessments of the electoral process, which he said, adds value to the Commission's work.
Jega mentioned four factors that define the relationship between the observers and INEC as either conflictive or cooperative.
He said the factors are history or relationship, the perception of the country's commitment to the electoral process, the level of consolidation of the electoral process in a country and the specific individual attitudes of the leadership of both the Election Management Body and observer groups.
Read the full speech below:
« I would like to commence by thanking all of you for accepting to participate in this briefing of accredited election observers for the 2015 general elections. My gratitude is particularly founded considering that the elections had to be rescheduled when many of you, particularly the international observers, had started deployment in February. As a Commission, we deeply regret the inconvenience that may have caused you. However, we believe that in the circumstances that decision was necessary. Still, I hope that in spite of the problems you may have encountered, the rescheduling afforded you the opportunity to better contextualize the elections, improve your understanding of the environment and properly study INEC’s level of preparedness.
I must say that as a Commission, we greatly value our partnership with election stakeholders, particularly election observers. Your participation in elections often provides us with dispassionate and rich assessments of the electoral process, which add value to our work as a Commission. In fact, Observers’ reports on the 2011 general elections, many of which were produced by some of you in this room, have been like guidebooks for our preparations for the 2015 general elections. Often, relations between the EMBs like INEC and election observers in a fledgling democracy like ours oscillates between cooperation and conflict. A number of factors shape whether these relations are conflictive or cooperative. The first factor is the history of relations between election observers and the specific EMB. If that history has been one of suspicion, pressure and misunderstanding, observation of elections is likely to be repeatedly conflictive. Usually, there is a defining moment in these relations that entrenches this conflict dynamic. This is most likely to be an event in which observers and the EMB disagree fundamentally, which is not subsequently resolved. Once this threshold of conflict is crossed, it is always difficult to reverse the conflict dynamic. The irony is that the specific event that creates this conflict dynamic may only be related to one observer group. Yet, it could define the manner in which observers and EMB perceive each other for a long time.
The second factor is the broad image of the country and perceptions about whether the country and the EMB are truly committed to the democratic and electoral processes. Where a country is perceived not to be committed to conducting free, fair and credible elections, election observers are likely to be more aggressive, assertive or inquisitive, while the EMB would tend to deny access and cooperation.
The third factor is the level of consolidation of the electoral process in a country. Observers are likely to adopt more aggressive attitudes to a country’s election and its managers in early post-authoritarian elections. Subsequently, especially if election management keeps improving, the relations are likely to improve and become more cordial. Finally, the specific individual attitudes of the leadership of both the EMB and observer groups are important in defining their relations. Leaders on both sides must be willing to talk to each other, not talk at each other. Openness is central in forging cordial relations.
Luckily, at INEC we have enjoyed very cordial relations with both domestic and international observers since the 2011 general elections. This has been partly shaped by three things. In the first place, we established a transparent procedure for selecting observer groups. Calls for applications and/or the selection criteria are usually published in newspapers and our websites. The criteria are strictly applied and groups are ranked before selection is made.
Secondly, we developed comprehensive guidelines for election observation. The INEC Guidelines For Election Observation, which is available in both print and on our website, is based on global norms, standards and sources. Among these are the ECOWAS Principles of Democratic Elections, which is established by the ECOWAS Supplementary Protocol on Democracy and Good Governance of 2001, the African Union Declaration on the Principles Governing Democratic Elections in Africa of 2002 and the Cotonou Agreement signed between the European Union and the Africa, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) States in 2000.
The guidelines cover such things as processes of selection and accreditation of observers, code of conduct, responsibilities of both observers and INEC, as well as detailed description of the political and electoral processes in Nigeria. These guidelines are the normative basis for INEC’s engagement with foreign and local observers. The existence of these guidelines ensures that all parties recognize that election observation is a cooperative exercise in which all sides have rights and duties, which collectively ensure that the highest democratic standards apply.
Through its guidelines on election observation INEC seeks to frame three essential normative principles namely, rights, responsibilities and conduct of observers. Rights generally signify the entitlements of observers, responsibilities are the duties they bear, while conduct refers to behaviour and actions expected of them. Among the rights of observers are adequate security and protection, adequate information; free access to voting facilities, free movement and civil treatment. On the other hand, the responsibilities of observers include respecting the sovereignty and laws of Nigeria, abiding by guidelines and regulations of INEC, attendance at briefings, careful, dedicated observation and to issue honest report on the election. In their conduct, observers are also expected to declare any conflict of interest, be impartial and unobtrusive, ensure that their reports and conclusions are evidence-based, eschew prejudgment of the process, always carry proper identification, be careful about comments in the media, be prudent in receiving gifts and favours and avoid involvement in disputes. I implore you be conversant with the provisions of the Guidelines as you deploy to the field in the days that follow.
The third factor that has improved relations between observers and the Commission since 2011 is the establishment of the INEC Situation Room. This has made it possible for the Commission to respond rapidly to certain urgent observations made by observers. In other words, unlike in the past, the Commission does not have to wait for months after elections to receive reports, when it could intervene during elections to solve problems. The real-time report of events in the field to the Situation Room and the rapid intervention of the Commission when necessary have improved the quality of the electoral process and improved confidence between observers and the Commission.
I would like to draw your attention to one cardinal distinction that INEC makes through its guidelines for election observation. That is the distinction between election observation and election monitoring. According to the INEC Guidelines for Election Observation, there is a fundamental difference between the two. An election monitor is an integral part of the election management structure and has a role in the administration of the election. In Nigeria, only the Independent National Election Commission (INEC) and its duly authorized personnel are empowered to monitor elections. An Observer on the other hand does not have any role in the administration of the election nor any control or oversight functions. To further simplify these points:
An election monitor exercises some level of lawful authority over the conduct of elections as well as over officials involved; an Observer has no such powers.
· In Nigeria, a monitor must be a duly authorised personnel of the INEC; an Observer is independent and reports only to his or her organisation
· A monitor can issue instructions and take decisions on behalf of INEC and to that extent would ordinarily possess a greater technical knowledge of the election process than an Observer.
· To enable them fulfil their functions effectively, INEC is responsible for training election monitors on election administration. The training of election Observers is the responsibility of the organisations that deploy them.
· The roles, powers and functions of monitors are created and regulated and the authority so exercised is clearly spelt out.
It is important to clarify these because observers in the past sometimes overreach the limits of our conception of observation, which often results in tension and disagreements. Indeed, the Nigerian legal system expressly states that a cardinal function of INEC is to monitor the electoral process.
I would like to end this address by giving you a brief update on our preparedness for the elections in order to assure you that we are on course. I am aware that there are still lingering concerns on whether the elections would hold or not. Let me say that I do not see any indication from any quarters of any wish to further postpone the elections. After the rescheduling of the elections, the Commission met, reviewed the situation and decided on how best to utilize the six-week extension to add value to operational and logistical preparations for the elections. We believe that effective utilization of the period of extension would enable INEC to a vastly improved 2015 general elections. The highlights of the decisions, which are already being implemented, are as follows:
1. Field Evaluations: National Commissioners to visit all the State offices between February 11 and 19, 2015, they conducted evaluations and comprehensively determined levels of preparations in the field.
2. Headquarters Evaluations: Following the field visits, on February 20th and 21st, the Commission, together with heads of Departments, Directorates and Units, met and reviewed the field assessment and determined what specific additional things need to be done before March 28th.
3. On February 24th, a meeting of the Inter-agency Consultative Committee on Elections Security (ICCES), was held to discuss security arrangements for the rescheduled elections.
4. On March 7, field demonstration of the Card Reader were held in all Polling Units in sampled Wards in 12 states, 2 from each of the 6 geopolitical zones.
5. On March 11, a meeting of the Commission with Resident Electoral Commissioners (RECs) will hold to review progress of additional things done and to finalize arrangements for the March 28 and April 11 elections.
Prioritized areas of focus for the six-week period of extension are as follows:
a. Collection of PVCs: the period for the collection was first extended by 4 weeks to March 8, and subsequently further extended to March 22. We have been making every effort to ensure that the maximum numbers of voters possible collect their PVCs before the elections. We have also been providing regular updates to the public on various aspects of the collection, particularly the rate and distribution of collection. We are glad that these efforts have yielded fruits, with PVC collection increasing to a national average of over 81% in the last four weeks.
b. More public demonstration of the Card Readers in each geo-political zone was conducted on March 7. The demonstration entailed the full process of accreditation such as would take place during the elections proper. Twelve States, two from each of the six geopolitical zones, were used for the demonstration namely, Delta, Rivers, Nasarawa, Niger, Anambra, Ebonyi, Kebbi, Kano, Lagos, Ekiti, Bauchi and Taraba States. One Ward (Registration Area) was randomly selected in each State and all the Polling Units in the Ward were then used for the demonstration. For a mock demonstration, the turnout was satisfactory, with close 17,000 voters nationwide. The demonstration was also largely satisfactory with close to 100% verification and 60% authentication. The result of biometric authentication for Ebonyi was unusually low and we have not only been thoroughly investigating this, we also repeated the demonstration on March 14 with better results. Measures are being taken to address the challenges observed, which seem to be responsible for the observed low level of authentication.
c. Additional training for ad hoc staff, especially for those who are going to handle the Card Readers is currently going on. All SPOs have had one day additional refresher training while POs and APOs handling Card Readers are undergoing a 2-day additional hands-on training. Innovative training materials, including downloadable videos and phone apps have been developed to make for easier and effective learning.
d. Intensify voter education and public enlightenment on Election Day procedures. We acknowledge and appreciate the intervention of the EU through JDBF, DGD II Programme.
e. Arrangements for Election Day logistics to be intensified by RECs, especially transportation in consultation with the NURTW, in the context of the MOU already signed with the Union.
f. Wide consultations and interactions with stakeholders have also been held. Apart from the meeting with ICCES, the Commission has also held several interactions with civil society organizations, development partners and the diplomatic community. In addition, it has met with political parties and briefed the National Assembly on diverse aspects of the elections. Finally, the Commission has established a weekly press briefing by the National Commissioner in-charge of publicity. This provides an opportunity to share information and answer various concerns of members of the public. On Tuesday March 24, a National Stakeholders Summit is scheduled for ‘last minute’ Briefing preceding the elections.
In addition to the above areas, the Commission has made arrangements to enable IDPs to vote. This will apply to IDPs from areas that are worst hit by the insurgency, specifically in Adamawa, Borno and Yobe States. The plan is to create voting Centres in safe areas.
In conclusion, INEC deeply appreciates the positive roles of both domestic and foreign observers in Nigeria’s electoral process. We welcome you to freely observe the 2015 general elections in accordance with existing guidelines and the laws of the land. The Commission looks forward to your reports as it continues to work to improve the electoral process and democratic practice in Nigeria. I wish you the very best as you deploy across the country.
Thank you.
 |
|
Former Anambra State governor and presidential candidate Peter Obi has disagreed with Atiku Abubakar’s proposal to restore Nigeria’s fuel subsidy if elected president in 2027.
Speaking on Monday at the Nigerian Bar Association conference in Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Obi argued that removing the subsidy was necessary but faulted the Federal Government for failing to properly manage the resources generated from its removal.
Atiku, who supported the removal of fuel subsidy during the 2023 presidential election, has since indicated that he would reconsider the policy and restore the subsidy if he wins the 2027 election.
Obi, however, maintained that reversing the policy would not address the underlying problems. According to him, the major failure has been the poor management of the funds saved after the subsidy was removed.
He said the government should have accompanied the policy with measures designed to reduce the hardship faced by Nigerians and should have channelled the resulting savings into productive areas of the economy.
“What we should have done is that when we removed it, we should have given the people alternative usage for the subsidy,” Obi said.
He further alleged that the funds recovered from subsidy removal had not been adequately accounted for, claiming that the resources were being “mismanaged and stolen.”
Obi said he had advocated a more structured approach to subsidy removal before the 2023 election, arguing that the savings should have been deliberately invested in areas capable of improving the lives of Nigerians and strengthening the economy.
“Go to my manifesto, I said it before, I said I will do it in an organised manner and whatever we recover would be invested appropriately,” he said.
President Bola Tinubu announced the removal of petrol subsidy during his inauguration on May 29, 2023. The decision led to a significant increase in petrol prices and intensified concerns over inflation and the rising cost of living.
While the Federal Government has defended the policy as necessary to reduce pressure on public finances and redirect government resources, the implementation of the reform and the management of the resulting savings remain contentious issues.
With the 2027 election approaching, the contrasting positions of Obi and Atiku have added fuel subsidy to the growing debate over how Nigeria should manage its economy, protect vulnerable citizens and use public resources more effectively.
News
The Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC) has warned the 31 companies that emerged successful in the 2025 oil and gas licensing round to pay their required signature bonuses within the statutory timeframe or risk losing their provisional awards.
The warning comes one month after the commission conducted the commercial bid conference in Abuja, where the successful bidders were announced for 37 oil and gas blocks.
In a notice issued on Sunday, the NUPRC said the compliance process had commenced following the issuance of provisional award letters to the successful companies.
The commission stated that bidders who failed to meet the payment deadline in accordance with the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) would forfeit their bid guarantees and have their provisional awards transferred to the next-ranked reserve bidders.
“Exactly a month ago, the NUPRC hosted the 2025 commercial bid conference in Abuja where 31 companies emerged winners of 37 oil and gas blocks. Having issued the winners with the provisional awards, compliance with the payment of signature bonuses has already begun,” the commission said.
The 37 blocks awarded in the licensing round cover several areas, including the Niger Delta onshore and shallow-water fields, deep offshore assets and frontier basins.
The assets include PPL 2A29 to PPL 2A62 in the Niger Delta, PPL 2010 in the deep offshore, PPL 308 in the Benin Basin, PPL 900 to PPL 903 in the Anambra Basin, PPL 700 in the Chad Basin, and PPL 800 and PPL 801 in the Benue Trough.
The NUPRC also released the names of the 31 successful companies, together with the ranked reserve bidders for each of the 37 blocks.
A total of 143 companies participated in the licensing exercise, submitting about 200 bids for the assets on offer. However, 13 of the 50 blocks originally listed for the round received no bids.
Under the PIA and the applicable licensing guidelines, successful bidders are required to pay signature bonuses ranging from $3 million to $7 million for each awarded block.
In addition to the signature bonus, the companies must provide the required guarantees, pay first-year rents and fulfil other post-award obligations within the prescribed period.
Failure to satisfy these requirements will result in the forfeiture of the affected company's bid guarantee and the revocation of its provisional award. The block will then be offered to the designated reserve bidder.
The NUPRC Chief Executive Officer, Oritsemeyiwa Eyesan, had previously urged the successful bidders to complete their payments promptly and move ahead with the development of their awarded assets.
The commission has advised bidders, industry stakeholders and members of the public to consult the 2025 Licensing Round portal for additional information on the awards and compliance requirements.
Under the applicable PIA framework, successful bidders have 90 days from the issuance of their provisional awards to complete the required payments and other conditions.
With the provisional awards issued following the July 21, 2026 commercial bid conference, the 90-day compliance period expires on October 19, 2026.
As of August 23, 2026, 33 days of the 90-day period have elapsed, leaving 57 days for the successful companies to complete their statutory obligations.
Companies that fail to pay their signature bonuses and first-year rents within the deadline risk losing both their bid guarantees and the provisional awards. The affected blocks would subsequently be reassigned to the respective reserve bidders in line with the licensing rules.
The NUPRC's latest notice therefore signals that the successful bidders have entered the final stages of the award process, with compliance now required before the provisional awards can progress toward full development of the assets.
Business
In The Spotlight
Vanguard recently published pathetic pictures of the Benin-Sapele-Warri Expressway; and Punch revealed to us what happens to the Lagos-Calabar Expressway, not even 15 per cent completed, each time there is a heavy downpour in the Lekki peninsula.
The road becomes so flooded, it becomes barely usable. Morning shows the day. If Tinubu-Umahi’s legacy road already shows evidence of long-term stress, pity the Nigerians who will ply that road ten years from now.
The Minister was in Lagos State recently, half-begging, half attempting to blackmail Governor Sanwo-Olu to cough up funds to repair the mistakes made by Engineer Umahi and the contractors who hastily embarked on the road without Environmental Impact Assessment. He is building in Lagos and coastal states the sort of rickety roads he left in Ebonyi State. He has the right President for that sort of shoddy business. Right now, parts of the road have been vandalized – even before completion. Fellow Nigerians are not paying attention as they should. Pity.
Vanguard, Punch and Daily Trust have been doing Nigerians a favour by pointing to one of the greatest failures of the Tinubu administration – the maintenance of federal highways under Minister David Umahi – whose major achievement in three years had been attracting attention to himself through a scandal involving homicide. On the whole, Nigerian roads, federal and state, have not been receiving the attention they deserve in the last eleven years; the neglect just got worse.
Experience on Nigerian roads from 1974-2019
“Hit the road, Jack”. Advice from my Sales Manager, in Boston, USA, 1968.
My first full time job was in selling. It was as a salesman for a leading pharmaceutical company, Lederle Laboratories, in 1968, that Mr. Al, for Albert, Abby, came into my life. As my Sales Manager, he monitored my activities and also as my mentor. He drilled into my head the idea that a salesman’s work consists of being on the road as much as possible; in order to meet customers. By the time I arrived in Nigeria, in 1974, to start work as the Marketing Manager of Abbott Laboratories, marketers of SIMILAC baby food, being on the road 70 per cent of the time had become routine. It was new to my sales staff, but proved rewarding for all concerned – company, staff and especially me.
Until August 1974, Ughelli, Delta State, was the farthest distance I ever traveled in Nigeria. I hit the road. By August 1975, I had covered all the 12 State capitals created by General Gowon, at least three times; and the trips had just begun. By 1998, after Abacha had increased the number of states to 36, I was in charge of Circulation in Vanguard; and my annual itinerary called for visiting all the offices at least once a quarter. In fact, I opened new Vanguard Offices in Ado-Ekiti, Yenagoa, Abakaliki, Gombe, Damaturu, Birnin Kebbi and Dutse. From 2001 to 2007, I traveled to all the stations at least three times a year. Over 80 per cent of the trips were by road – even though flight options were available to me. I got to know Nigerian roads as nobody I have ever met knew them. Divorce was threatened by the occupants of the home front. There was no major road constructed, expanded or diverted which I was not familiar with. By 2017, the trips were reduced to about 20 states every year.
Thus, each time a new Minister of Works is appointed, at least until 2019, I know the problems he faces. Shortly after President Jonathan assumed office, I published an article titled Nigeria’s 70 Most Important roads. These are the roads over which 70 to 80 per cent of goods are transported every day. Lagos-Ibadan Expressway remains the first one in all respects. I went further. The biggest map available at the CMS Bookshop was obtained and all the 70 roads were identified for the Minister in charge of roads with the advice: “take care of these roads and Nigerians will never forget you”. I wasted my time and effort; and Nigerians have been paying dearly for it. Since then, two Ministers of Works were appointed; each left Nigerian roads infinitely worse than when he started.
Three years of Umahi, more of the same
“It aint the things you don’t know that cause the problem; it’s things that you think you know that aint so.” Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1803-1882
To the best of my knowledge, no Minister of Works has been appointed in Nigeria, with the exception of late General Mamman Kontagora, who can be said to have had a fairly good knowledge of Nigerian roads by the time he was appointed. Consequently, we have selected so many good men; but, for the wrong task. Many people, including me, would have protested if Fashola was not appointed Minister by Buhari after his sterling performance as Governor of Lagos State. But, he failed dismally as Minister of Works. So, in all fairness to Umahi, many of the roads in terrible condition were inherited from past administrations. That said; it is also a fact that every new appointee is not compelled to accept the offer; and “if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen”. Umahi inherited several death traps; but, like all members of the All Progressives Congress, APC, he also helped to conceal the truth from Nigerians. Now, he is holding the bag; with all the incriminating evidence of poor performance. Umahi should also be excused for the failure to establish priorities. His boss, without consultations, despite all the lies told, had already conceived of a new road – the Lagos-Calabar Expressway – and the preferred contractor was determined, without bidding. The Minister spent his first year defending a decision made without his input. He added his own.
Umahi started out sounding like a “know-it-all”. He is an Engineer; so he knows all there is about road construction. He even dictated that all federal roads, irrespective of terrain, would be paved with cement – without consideration for the impact on the price of cement; which is essential for building construction.
Perhaps, not establishing objective priorities was his biggest blunder. Some Nigerian roads carry most of the heavy loads and require more attention. The Lapai-Bida, the Benin-Sapele and the Asaba-Onitsha roads each carry more loads than all the Federal roads in Taraba, Ebonyi and Kebbi states put together. I could not agree more with Senator Adams Oshiomole who recently carpeted Umahi for lack of priority in his selection of roads receiving his attention. The Okene-Auchi-Benin road carries the largest load of cement heading for Southern States, as well as fuel tankers moving North. Without prioritizing the most important federal roads, we are indirectly slowing down economic development, making products made in Nigeria less competitive and entrenching poverty. In the absence of rail nationwide, roads constitute the life-blood of our nation. They are soaked now with our blood.
By Dele Sobowale
In The Spotlight
How many fake agencies can the Tinubu Presidency go after at a time? When I posed this question in my column in early August, I intended it as rhetoric. The fake agencies and their operators apparently took it as a challenge.
On Friday evening, the ICPC Chairman, Dr Musa Aliyu, SAN, emerged from his second meeting with the President in 48 hours to announce the discovery of yet another fake agency, grandly named the National Brands Development and Made-in-Nigeria Special Project Office and promoted by one Prince George Buchi Nwabueze.
Side note: Because of the length of these agency names, I’ll refer to them by their promoters, who happen to be ‘Princes’. Say, Prince Adeyemi’s PFIFC or Prince George’s agency. Okay?
So, I sat there among my colleagues, listening to Aliyu reel out another episode of an ongoing soap opera whose production studio is in the Nigerian civil service. We were arguably the first set of ears to get the gist, a privilege that comes with the burden of sharing it with the rest of the world.
Twenty-four hours earlier, I spotted the ICPC chairman making his way through the corridors leading to the President’s office for the umpteenth time. Aliyu had since become a standard feature at the State House since revelations about Prince Adeyemi’s fake agency, the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council, first went public.
Draped in a white agbada, Aliyu sounded fulfilled as he announced another big catch, Prince George. Unlike his counterpart in the PFIFC, Prince George did not settle for a spot in the Federal Secretariat. No! He operated from inside the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation. He was also found to operate under at least five variations of his own name, which is fitting. A fake agency deserves a fake agency’s worth of aliases.
The President ordered his immediate arrest and suspended three permanent secretaries: M.S. Danjuma, Nadungu Gagare and Richard Pheelangwah.
If you are keeping count, you would have counted six fake agencies or actors in the past few months. Four! First came Prince Adeyemi’s now-dissolved PFIFC. Then the ICPC’s interim report of August 6 unearthed two more: the FCT Investment Promotion Agency and the Foreign Investment Promotion Agency and Public-Private Partnership.
There is also the Presidential Implementation Committee on the Alienation of Federal Government Properties, a body created in 2000 under Obasanjo to manage the sale and lease of federal landed assets.
Though now dissolved, its erstwhile secretary, B.S. Dutsin-Ma, had continued operating. In early August, the Presidency directed him to cease acting on behalf of the committee and the Federal Government.
Last September, the Presidency distanced itself from Mr Fegho Umunubo, an erstwhile Special Assistant on Digital and Creative Economy in the Vice President’s office, whom it warned was still acting in his old capacity despite being let go.
Now Prince George’s outfit makes six similar instances in under a year. At this rate, the fake agencies and actors may soon require their own coordinating ministry. And who knows if the next ‘Prince’ may be found operating from the Presidential Villa itself?
Lest we think this plague is new, history says otherwise. You see, Nigeria has always had people who understood that in a country where government is everywhere, the most profitable business is to impersonate it. From the 1980s and 1990s, there are tales of fake recruitment syndicates selling appointment letters into the Army, Customs and NNPC from rented offices with convincing letterheads. Some past regimes responded with periodic raids, tribunals and occasional decrees. But the racket always reincarnates.
Over the years, the ICPC and EFCC have busted fake job-racketeering “ministries” in Abuja that interviewed hundreds of applicants and collected “processing fees” for years before anyone really noticed. The sobering reality is that we have always chased the “Princes” one at a time. And there will always be another ‘Prince’ to sit on that throne.
Also, it is not uniquely a Nigerian thing. In California in 2015, authorities uncovered a self-declared “Masonic Fraternal Police Department”, a policing outfit with its own badges, uniforms and a website claiming a 3,000-year history. It was run by three “Princes” until the state of California charged them with impersonating officers.
The difference is not that other countries breed fewer fraudsters than we do. It is that their systems make the fraud quite short-lived because the list of legitimate agencies is knowable by the public, leaving the fake ones to glow in the dark.
Moreover, if government ministries, departments and agencies were fewer than they are now, there would be fewer hiding places for the fakes.
Which brings me, once again, to one document still gathering dust on the President’s desk: the Oronsaye report. Commissioned in 2011 and submitted in 2012, Steve Oronsaye’s committee found 541 federal parastatals, commissions and agencies and recommended pruning them to about 263. It recommended mergers, scrapping, subsuming and anything else that could shrink that number.
To his credit, President Tinubu revived it in February 2024, ordering full implementation. Two and a half years later, however, the rathole of redundant agencies has only widened, and now fake ones are camouflaging among the real ones. Implementing Oronsaye would arguably leave fewer agencies with clearer supervision and a slimmer cost of governance. Again, it is not a silver bullet. Matter of fact, the report is 14 years old; some recommendations would need fresh legislation. But why chase rats one by one when we can fumigate the entire network of holes?
While the ICPC is hunting “Princes”, President Tinubu is assembling his Avengers. According to the APC Presidential Campaign Council list the Presidency released on Saturday morning, Tinubu will sit as chairman; Vice President Kashim Shettima and party chairman Nentawe Yilwatda will co-chair the council. Ex-Zamfara governor Abdulaziz Yari will serve as DG, and Hope Uzodimma, still fresh from surviving the storm that rocked the Progressives Governors’ Forum months ago, will serve as secretary.
Senate President Godswill Akpabio, Speaker Abbas and Governor Buni will serve as zonal heads; Oshiomhole will head mobilisation, while James Faleke will return to his 2022 role in election planning.
The media directorate already looks like a special-purpose media house of its own. Information Minister Mohammed Idris will coordinate alongside Dr Dele Alake, Bayo Onanuga, Issa-Onilu, Mr Tunde Rahman, Dr Sunday Dare, Daniel Bwala and Felix Morka.
By Stephen Angbulu