Sources in Washington DC have told Huhuonline that the United States government is mounting pressure on President Muhammadu Buhari to reopen the bribery case relating to the $6 billion liquefied natural gas (LNG) project at Bonny Island in the Niger Delta involving several companies that led to one of the highest ever bribery settlements in corporate history. Halliburton and its former subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR) paid a record $579 million in fines after the TSKJ consortium -comprising Japan's JGC Corp (1963.T) Italy's Snamprogetti, KBR Inc. (formerly part of Halliburton) and France’s Technip admitted to offering bribes to secure the Nigerian LNG contract.
According to the US Justice Department, the bribes- some delivered in briefcases stuffed with $100 bills - were paid to Nigerian government officials as well as officials in the Nigerian National Petroleum Corp, (NNPC). France’s Technip, the US group KBR, Japan’s JGC and the Italian group Snamprogetti all paid bribes amounting to $180 million to Nigerian officials to win the contract to build the facility. The bribes were shelled out during the administration of late Gen. Sani Abacha, Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar and President Olusegun Obasanjo. The scheme involved money wired through banks in Amsterdam and New York to accounts in Switzerland and Monaco and KBR used shell companies in Portugal to hide the operations. The scheme was masterminded by UK-based consultant Jeffery Tesler, who was hired to administer a slush-fund created “to maintain favorable relationships” between the TSKJ and government officials. Tesler was paid an outrageous $32.5 million for his services in administering the consortium slush-fund via two personal bank accounts in Switzerland and Monaco.
The US Federal Bureau of Intelligence (FBI) which investigated the scandal noted that it reached the highest levels of the administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo. According to the FBI, Tesler's Gibraltar-based firm, Tri Star, paid TSKJ bribes to Nigerian government officials in several installments: $40 million in 1994, $60 million in 1995, $37.5 million in 1999, $21 million in 2001 and $23 million in 2002. From these amounts, there have also been revelations about the recipients of some of the payments: $40 million to Gen. Sani Abacha in November 1994; $2.5 million into Swiss bank accounts held by Petroleum Minister Dan Etete; under a false name between 1996 and 1998; $75,000 (in two installments) to a former Inspector General of Police; $2.4 million to officials of Nigeria's Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) in 2001 and 2002 to obtain favorable tax treatment; $1million to NNPC officials in August 2002; $500,000 worth of Nigerian Naira to an NNPC official; and in excess of $1.8 million for visas between 1997 and 2004.
To avoid trial in the US, Technip and ENI, parent company of Snamprogetti, chose to pay a fine of nearly €500 million. KBR and Halliburton agreed with the Justice Department to pay $402 million fine, with Halliburton paying $382 million. Halliburton agreed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to disgorge $177 million in profits to settle parallel criminal charges that KBR violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. But although the companies admitted to bribing Nigerian officials and paid the hefty fines, not a single Nigerian official has been prosecuted, even after the Nigerian Senate passed a motion on March 24, 2009, urging the Federal Government to take all necessary steps to expose and prosecute citizens involved in the Halliburton bribery scandal.
According to sources in Washington, the American government is bringing what one Justice Department official qualified as “amicable pressure” to bear on President Buhari, to reopen the case. The American authorities hope that in taking office Buhari, who was elected largely on his promise to eradicate corruption, will re-open the case. Officials in the Justice department under the new no-nonsense Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, confided to Huhuonline that the US will pursue a more aggressive policy in combating trans-national corruption. Asked why the US was targeting Nigeria, a source pointed to the election of Buhari and his reputation for zero-tolerance on corruption.
The source noted that the Obama administration was miffed that while US corporate executives who bribe foreign officials for lucrative contracts face prosecution and conviction in America, their partners in crime in Nigeria freely enjoy the proceeds of corruption and graft with impunity. As if that was not provocation enough, Nigerian officials have continued to grant more contracts to these foreign companies even after they faced conviction and fines in their home countries. Not even the sentencing of Nigeria's former petroleum minister, Dan Etete, for laundering Halliburton bribes in France was sufficient to attract the attention of Nigeria's government. “We have made it clear to the new administration that this kind of impunity is unacceptable,” the source said.
Asked what specifically, the US wanted Buhari to do, the source said the US Justice Department wants Buhari to implement the findings of the House Committee on Public Petition that investigated the Halliburton scandal in August 2004, and unanimously recommended that "all companies forming part of the TSKJ consortium and all Halliburton companies in Nigeria should be excluded from any contracts and businesses. That Committee, which was headed by Chudi Ofodille, lambasted Halliburton for its refusal to cooperate, describing its attitude as a contemptuous "hide-and-seek game" to avoid revealing the names of Nigerian officials who received the bribes.
The possible implication of President Obasanjo, under whose government a huge chunk of the slush-fund was paid, raises fundamental questions about corruption during his tenure as President from 1999-2007. US officials took umbrage at OBJ’s self-righteous indignation after Halliburton and its corporate partners pled guilty and agreed to the staggering $579 million settlement, the then Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Michael Aondoakaa, instead chose to sued Halliburton and its partners seeking $10 billion in damages as remedy to the harm done to Nigeria's reputation. US Justice Department officials are at a loss to understand why instead of prosecuting the Nigerian government officials who received the bribes –and by implication, violated Nigerian anti-graft laws, “no mutual legal assistant requests were filed from the Attorney General's office” to obtain the names of the officials. Aondoakaa's strategy was to” play to the gallery” noted the source.
American officials want Buhari to probe the Nigerian side of the scandal in view of the assertion of Chudi Ofodille, Chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Pubic Petitions, which investigated the matter in 2004, that "the forces of reaction in Government and NNPC were bent on shielding Halliburton and by extension, themselves. Every attempt to seek collaboration with the Executive branch failed." At the height of such frustration was the June 8, 2005 proposed meeting with President Obasanjo, during which Hon. Ofodille was barred from participating in a meeting with the Halliburton team (led by Andy Lane) and the NNPC team (led by then-Group Managing Director, Funsho Kupolokun).
The Obama Justice Department has expressed bitter disappointment that while appropriate legal measures were taken by the US, the issue was never on the agenda of neither President Yar'Adua nor Jonathan’s administration. In their view, the Halliburton-KBR scandal begs the question of how aggressively the new administration will tackle the Nigerian corruption industry; and is a litmus test to the credibility and anti-corruption credentials of the new President. If Buhari does not reopen the bribery investigation, it will illustrate the extent to which Nigeria has lost its capacity for self-regulation and exposed the country as a place with highly dysfunctional institutions where "anything goes" in terms of business practices.
In addition, the US government wants the Buhari administration to undertake a review of the contracts awarded to Halliburton and its consortium partners, including the building of the Topsides of the FPSO for Agbami Deep offshore field, owned by NNPC, ChevronTexaco, Petrobras and Statoil, which was awarded to KBR, as well as the contract for the construction of the Escravos Gas to Liquid Project owned by NNPC and ChevronTexaco, which was awarded to Halliburton's KBR and other partners in the scandal: Snamprogetti SpA and Japanese Gasoline Corporation (JGC). Revisiting the Halliburton scandal will identify and bring to justice culpable Nigerian officials. Such actions would be consistent with the ICPC and EFCC Acts, as well as the UN Convention against Corruption, which requires countries to take proactive steps to investigate allegations of corruption, prosecute suspected perpetrators and fully recover the money involved. Such efforts will not only demonstrate the extent of President Buhari's commitment as truly harboring "zero-tolerance for corruption," but will also prove that it takes more than being the good man Buhari is often touted, to be an effective president.
Nigeria's liquefied natural gas project was conceived to build the world's largest gas export plant, in Bonny Island in the eastern part of the Niger Delta. Its purpose was to mitigate the waste and pollution created by gas flaring during oil production and to increase the country's export earnings and revenue base. The initiative, known as the Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas (NLNG) project, was incorporated in 1989 as the Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas Limited. It has four main shareholders: Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) with 49%, Shell Production Development Company (SDPC) with 25.6%, TotalFinaElf with 15%, and Agip International-ENI with 10.4%. The contract for the construction of the gas export project was awarded in 1995, while the work was undertaken between 1996 and 2004.
 |
|
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on Friday said the removal of fuel subsidy by his administration saved the country from imminent bankruptcy and laid the foundation for the gradual recovery of the nation’s economy.
He spoke when he hosted state governors who came to celebrate with him the Sallah and the third anniversary of the administration.
In attendance were the Governors of Lagos, Nasarawa, Jigawa, Sokoto, Kebbi, Taraba, Niger, Ekiti, Delta, Ondo, Edo, Adamawa, Benue, Enugu, Ogun, and Kogi States, as well as the deputy governors of Borno and Kano.
President Tinubu acknowledged that the decision to remove the subsidy was difficult and painful for many Nigerians, but stressed that it became necessary to rescue the country from fiscal collapse and restore economic stability.
According to the President, the country had spent enormous resources for years on unsustainable subsidy payments that benefited only a few while denying critical sectors of the economy the investments they needed.
"It was challenging at the time, but we survived. We face litigation and accusations. We survived them. Instead of bankruptcy, Nigeria has survived. The economy has recovered. It is growing. Agriculture is booming.
"Today I was watching some clips of the Sokoto -Badagry axis. Imagine how many dams on that corridor for irrigation, for farm land, for electricity. Well, many of you have survived and promoted the perseverance of many of our people, asking them to trust this government, and you have built that trust around one person: my leadership. I thank you very much’’ the President said.
President Tinubu also thanked Nigerians for their patience, resilience and understanding, assuring them that the difficult phase was gradually yielding positive outcomes.
The President said ongoing reforms in infrastructure, agriculture, social investment, foreign exchange management and fiscal discipline were beginning to restore investor confidence and improve economic prospects.
President Tinubu also commended the Governors for their cooperation, support and commitment to national development, noting that the partnership between the federal and state governments played a vital role in stabilising the economy.
`` I'm glad governors are no longer borrowing from the federal government and asking for interventions and not knowing how to survive, how to pay salaries, no more. You kept the spirit, you kept the hope. You persuaded our people to be patient and endure these three years of painful reform, during which we put the economy on a reset. Today, the benefits are showing.
`
"The economy has recovered. Macroeconomic indices are doing very well. Construction is ongoing on roads and infrastructure; the ones abandoned have been rehabilitated.
"The housing industry is coming on very well. Agriculture will prosper again. We will achieve food sovereignty if we utilise the land that is in your possession and in your various states effectively,’’ he said.
The President assured Nigerians that his administration would continue to implement people-oriented policies aimed at reducing hardship, creating jobs, strengthening food security and ensuring inclusive economic growth.
Vice President Kashim Shettima commended the President's doggedness, tenacity and courage in confronting corruption in Nigeria's oil industry in the name of the fuel subsidy.
`` Your Excellency, Mr President, this is the essence of your leadership. You did not come to power in the season of ease. You came at a time when the house required more than a canter. It required a builder with the courage to examine the foundation you inherited.
``In that defining hour, you choose not to postpone the surgery. You choose not to massage the wound. You choose to confront the contradictions that have held this country hostage for 50 years; that is the miracle of your courage.
“What you have done is not simply to administer a government. You have begun the difficult work of re-engineering a nation. You have reminded us that the reform is not a bank; it is a battlefield. It is not a picnic for the chicken-hearted. It is a covenant with the future,’’ Shettima said.
Kwara State Governor, Abdulrahman Abdulrazaq, who spoke on behalf of the Nigeria Governors` Forum, commended the policy initiatives of President Tinubu, which significantly enhanced the capacity of subnational governments to meet their obligations and execute critical developmental projects.
Abdulrazaq stated that the removal of the fuel subsidy and fiscal reforms led to an increase in revenue accruing to states, enabling them to offset outstanding salaries, pensions, and other financial commitments, as well as to embark on landmark infrastructural and social investment programmes.
"I think the nation was shocked by the audacity of Mr President to implement that serious policy, but today, it benefited immensely from that policy.
"Many states were subject to issuing bonds and borrowing money. Today, states are not going to borrow money; they're not going to issue Bonds. In fact, we're reducing our debt. I urge your Excellency to let them discuss moving the minimum wage to a minimum of N100,000’’ he said.
The Chairman of the Progressive Governors Forum and Imo State Governor, Hope Uzodinma, thanked the President for stabilising the nation's economy through bold reforms.
"We are the frontline beneficiaries of the innovative approach you brought to bear in governance. We came to join you in thanking Almighty God who made this thing possible. You have virtually recovered Nigeria from the brink of collapse to a state of stability and survival.
"Your Excellency, we, the field officers at the subnational level, are indeed very grateful. We have assessed your performance, Mr President, and I'm happy to announce that we have scored it a 100 per cent. We thank you for the genius you are, the fatherly role you have played, your interventions in terms of our needs and your vision for the country, moving forward,’’ Uzodinma said.
Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu had earlier welcomed his colleagues to Lagos to celebrate Sallah with the President. He also thanked them for their continued support for the President and urged them to sustain the momentum.
News
The trouble with reform is that eventually it collides with reality. For two years President Bola Tinubu's administration has sought to convince investors that Nigeria's oil industry is turning a corner. Fuel subsidies have been scrapped. Exchange-rate distortions have been reduced. The Petroleum Industry Act is finally being implemented. The Nigerian National Petroleum Company (NNPC) has been rebranded as a commercial enterprise rather than a government department. International oil companies have been encouraged to remain invested. Indigenous firms have been urged to take a larger role in the sector. Now comes the Nestoil affair.
A Federal High Court in Lagos granted sweeping receivership and asset-freezing orders against Nestoil Ltd, one of Nigeria's most prominent indigenous oil-services companies, and its affiliate, Neconde Energy. The orders stem from claims by a consortium of banks seeking to recover debts reportedly exceeding $1bn and ₦430bn. Police officers have already sealed the company's Lagos headquarters as receivers move to take control of assets and operations. Ordinarily, this would be a large corporate insolvency story. In Nigeria, it is something bigger. The dispute arrives at a delicate moment for an industry undergoing one of the most significant restructurings in its history. Indigenous operators were supposed to be the beneficiaries of Nigeria's oil-sector transformation. As international majors gradually divested onshore assets, local firms stepped forward as buyers, operators and contractors. Nestoil was among the most visible symbols of that transition.
Founded in 1991 by Ernest Azudialu-Obiejesi, the company grew into one of Nigeria's largest indigenous engineering, procurement and construction firms. Through Neconde Energy, it expanded into upstream production, acquiring interests in OML 42 alongside the Nigerian Petroleum Development Company, a subsidiary of NNPC. Its rise reflected a broader policy ambition: Nigerian ownership of Nigerian hydrocarbons. Its distress now exposes the risks beneath that ambition.
Many indigenous firms expanded during periods of high oil prices and easy credit. They borrowed heavily, often on the assumption that production growth, asset appreciation and government support would continue. Instead, they encountered oil theft, pipeline sabotage, foreign-exchange volatility, declining output and chronic payment delays across the industry. The result is an uncomfortable reality. Some of the very companies that were meant to demonstrate the success of indigenous participation now find themselves struggling under mountains of debt. That matters for NNPC. The state-owned energy giant is in the middle of a complicated metamorphosis. The Petroleum Industry Act envisioned NNPC as a commercially driven corporation capable of attracting investment, managing partnerships transparently and operating according to market principles. For years critics argued that political interference prevented precisely that. Yet commercialization carries consequences.
A genuinely commercial NNPC cannot simultaneously demand market discipline from partners while ignoring contractual failures, unpaid obligations or unfinished projects. Reports that NNPC has pursued compensation claims relating to pipeline infrastructure and contractual disputes therefore present a dilemma. Investors want evidence that contracts will be enforced. They also want assurance that enforcement is predictable, impartial and insulated from political influence. The distinction is crucial.
If Nestoil's difficulties are the result of ordinary commercial failures, then creditors have every right to pursue recovery. Markets depend on such discipline. If, however, powerful state institutions are perceived as selectively applying pressure against distressed firms, investors will draw a different conclusion. That risk extends beyond Nestoil.
Nigeria's oil sector is increasingly dependent on indigenous operators, private capital and complex financing arrangements. Banks already carry substantial exposure to energy assets. A prolonged wave of debt enforcement could place pressure on lenders, contractors and upstream operators simultaneously. Joint ventures may face uncertainty. Projects could be delayed. Financing costs may rise. None of this is what the Tinubu administration wants. Its strategy depends on persuading investors that Nigeria is becoming a more predictable place to do business. Recent approvals of international asset sales, efforts to increase production, reforms at NNPC and attempts to attract fresh investment all rest on the same proposition: that commercial decisions will increasingly be governed by rules rather than politics. The Nestoil case is therefore more than a court battle. It is a test.
A test of whether Nigeria's financial system can resolve large corporate failures without destabilizing the broader industry. A test of whether NNPC can behave like a commercial company while retaining public legitimacy. And a test of whether the government's reform narrative can survive the inevitable conflicts that emerge when debt, politics and oil collide. For years, Nigeria's energy sector suffered because contracts were not enforced consistently. Investors complained of uncertainty. Governments promised reform. Now enforcement has arrived. The question is whether the market will regard it as evidence of institutional maturity—or as another reminder that, in Nigeria's oil business, commercial disputes rarely remain merely commercial.
Business
In The Spotlight
Nigeria has many problems. A shortage of public holidays is not among them. The latest example came when the federal government declared two public holidays for Eid-el-Kabir. Not one day. Two. A few weeks earlier came another nationwide holiday for Workers' Day. Before long there will be more. By the end of the year, Nigeria will once again have spent a remarkable number of working days celebrating itself, its religions, its workers and its historical milestones while wondering why productivity remains stubbornly low. The official justifications are invariably solemn. The government wishes to demonstrate its "profound respect" for the faith of millions of Nigerian Muslims. Citizens are encouraged to pray, reflect and seek divine guidance for national prosperity. Such sentiments are unobjectionable. The assumption that they require the closure of Africa's largest economy is another matter entirely. Nigeria has confused respect for religion with state-sponsored idleness.
The first thing to note is that there is nothing in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria requiring Eid-el-Kabir, Eid-el-Fitr, Christmas, Easter or any other religious observance to be designated as federal public holidays. The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion. It does not mandate government-sponsored days off work for religious celebrations. These are political choices, not constitutional obligations. That distinction matters. A secular state demonstrates neutrality by protecting the freedom of citizens to worship, or not worship as they choose. It does not demonstrate neutrality by repeatedly suspending economic activity to accommodate every major religious festival. The right to celebrate a religious holiday and the right to compel an entire nation to stop working are not the same thing. Nigeria's political class rarely acknowledges the cost.
Every public holiday represents millions of lost working hours. Government offices close. Courts adjourn. Administrative processes stall. Businesses delay transactions. Ports slow down. Schools suspend instruction. Banks operate on restricted schedules. Economic activity does not disappear entirely, but it is disrupted. One holiday may seem harmless. The cumulative effect of many is not. The irony is particularly rich in a country that routinely laments low productivity, weak competitiveness and sluggish economic growth. Ministers urge citizens to work harder while simultaneously announcing additional days on which they cannot work at all.
No serious company seeking to maximize output would behave this way. Yet governments persist because public holidays are among the cheapest forms of political generosity. They cost politicians little while appearing generous to voters. The beneficiaries are not always those whom politicians imagine.
Public holidays are a luxury more easily enjoyed by salaried workers in the formal sector than by the vast informal economy where many Nigerians earn daily incomes. The market trader who closes her stall loses revenue. The transport operator loses fares. The small manufacturer loses production. The civil servant receives a paid day off. The distribution of benefits is less egalitarian than politicians suggest.
Religious holidays are particularly revealing.
Nigeria is home to hundreds of ethnic groups and multiple faith traditions. The state cannot possibly place every sacred observance on the national calendar. It therefore privileges certain religious celebrations over others. What begins as inclusion inevitably becomes a political exercise in deciding whose holy days deserve national recognition. A wiser arrangement would separate private observance from public administration. Allow Muslims to celebrate Eid. Allow Christians to celebrate Christmas and Easter. Protect those rights robustly. Permit employees to take religious leave. Encourage flexible workplace arrangements. Let communities celebrate according to their traditions.
But why should a Muslim entrepreneur who wishes to keep his factory open be unable to do so because Abuja has decided that everyone must stop work? Why should a Christian-owned business be compelled to close because of a Muslim festival, or vice versa? Why should a secular citizen or atheist be drawn into the same arrangement? Freedom includes the freedom not to participate. Other successful economies have long understood this distinction. They maintain a limited number of national holidays tied to statehood and civic identity while leaving much religious observance to individuals, families and communities. The result is not less religious freedom but more personal choice. Nigeria has instead drifted in the opposite direction.
Each year brings fresh declarations, fresh congratulations and fresh appeals for prayerful reflection. Yet the government still cannot explain why a country struggling with inflation, unemployment, low investment and fiscal pressures should continually reduce the number of productive days available to address them. Nor has anyone explained why religious devotion becomes more authentic when endorsed by a government gazette. The defenders of the current system will accuse critics of insensitivity to religion. They miss the point entirely. The argument is not against religion. It is against the assumption that religious observance requires nationwide economic suspension. Faith is strongest when it is voluntary. It requires neither bureaucratic validation nor ministerial proclamation.
Nigeria's public-holiday culture reflects a deeper national habit: the preference for symbolism over substance. It is easier to declare a holiday than to improve schools. Easier to issue congratulatory statements than to reform institutions. Easier to close offices for prayer than to make those offices function efficiently when they are open. The country does not suffer from a shortage of ceremonies. It suffers from a shortage of productivity. A government serious about economic growth would ask a simple question before announcing yet another public holiday: Is this celebration important enough to justify shutting down part of the economy? Increasingly, the answer is no. Respect religion. Protect religious freedom. Allow people to celebrate as they wish. But let Nigeria get back to work.
Opinions
In The Spotlight
When the Electoral Act 2026 was passed into law in February 2026, the expectation was that it would be the deus ex machina (the fool-proof, mechanical, solution as in complex Greek tragedies of old) to Nigeria’s electoral problems since the return to civilian rule in 1999, but the newest law merely followed the old pattern, incomplete and inadequate in its provisions, suspicious in terms of its intentions, creating fresh problems of its own, and proving that there is apparently no definite solution to Nigeria’s electoral problems. By this time next year, there can be no doubt that we would be talking about another round of electoral reform, and that still won’t solve our problems with elections because it is now clear that it is not laws that create credible and transparent elections, or democracy. The problem is with the people, the institutions, the processes and the politicians themselves. There is no law, no matter how well framed that Nigerians cannot sabotage, compromise, violate. And we need not seek further afield for proof than the recent, and on-going party primaries in the political parties participating in the 2027 electoral process. What we see is that our politicians have not learnt any lessons. They are not ready to change.
Nigeria is a victim of personal ambitions and the greed for power. Nigeria is one country that is resistant to reform even when the incumbent administration mouths reform as a slogan and definitive banner. We must be worried that Nigeria’s 2027 process may end up as a big gamble, where it is the smartest, the most privileged, the most devious that will run away with a special form of calculated elite enrichment, and privilege, while we the people, would have absolutely no input. The game is on, and I have argued elsewhere that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is emerging as the owner of the game, not because his party, the All Progressives Congress (APC) is the very best, or the ruling party, but because he has used the power of incumbency to create the impression of a swirling momentum that wrongfoots every other political party – 20 additional ones. I have also argued that a Bola Ahmed Tinubu School of Politics and Strategy is in the making before our very eyes. You will have to ask me about the values, the motivations and the curriculum of that school, but that is not the primary purpose of this commentary and you might as well provide your own answers.
In the past few days, we have been having party primaries ahead of the January 2027 elections – the PDP, the APC, and the ADC, other parties are bound to follow. Despite a recent court judgement from the Federal High Court of Justice Mohammad G. Umar, sitting in Abuja, which nullified INEC’s membership deadline, parties are expected to conclude their nomination processes by May 30, and for now the parties are complying with the status quo ante bellum (nobody knows exactly what storm will come after), but for now, the APC has concluded its primaries by May 23, the Peoples Democratic party will follow by May 26, the Labour party on May 29, the NNPP by May 26, the Social Democratic Party (SDP) and the African Democratic Congress (ADC) by May 28. But what have we seen so far? Protests. Confusion. Violence. Intra-party crises. Fears and anxieties about the 2027 process and a reaffirmation of the opening suggestion that Nigeria is a country in search of citizens and patriots. With elite competition reduced to selfish interests, this is a country that is groaning in pain. The people do not matter and the people are their own problems too. How did we end up with this lot who would willingly and gladly trade off their own happiness, so cynically, so carelessly? Hunger? Apathy? Cynicism? Resignation? Acquiescence?
On Saturday, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and his ever-supportive wife, Senator Remi Tinubu took part in the APC Presidential Primary at Ward E in Ikoyi, Lagos State. He was in town throughout the APC primaries in Lagos, by the way, and has done his best so far not to disrupt traffic, except for some indigent APC supporters who have taken over the frontage of his Bourdillon Street house, and there are so many of them, arriving in buses and with walking sticks, in anticipation of Sallah gifts. The poor are perpetually begging for food to eat – a sign of the times. They should be attended to promptly and sent off. The President on voting day was said to have described the APC primaries as “peaceful and well-organized,” good evidence of “internal democracy” within the APC, and that he is “very satisfied” with the performance of the state governors from congresses to local government accreditation, membership registration, and delegates accreditation. He scored democracy at a high level and said: “I’m just excited. They challenge me more”. Those reportedly challenging him are his supporters within the APC. With about 31 Governors and the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, a political amphibian called Nyesom Wike (part PDP, part APC) supporting him, President Bola Tinubu recorded a landslide victory in his party’s presidential primaries. This was expected. It is now certain that President Tinubu will run for a second term and that he is the choice of his party in a landslide victory. The plan by opposition parties to come together and field a single candidate collapsed long ago – another master stroke by President Tinubu.
The APC Presidential primaries took place in 8, 809 wards across 36 states and the FCT. Tinubu won with 10, 999, 967 votes as announced by Senator Pius Anyim Anyim at the Tinubu International Conference Centre in Abuja on Sunday, May 23. They didn’t choose the Eagle Square. The announcement had to be in a building named after Tinubu himself!. To lend the entire process a veneer of legitimacy, competition and credibility, Tinubu was challenged by a relatively unknown Stanley Osifo from Edo State, described in one report as an “obscure businessman”. President Tinubu scored about 11 million votes, Osifo got a meagre 16, 504 votes, and in actual fact, he had zero votes in quite a number of states - Kwara, Ebonyi, Gombe, Sokoto, Rivers, Edo, Delta and Kogi. I consider him a man of courage. He is very bold indeed. He, Stanley Osifo, actually believed that he could challenge President Tinubu. He should be rewarded for his unique sense of humour and self-deprecation. He paid N100 million into APC coffers for the Presidential contest. I think, I am serious, I am actually not joking, he should be given a refund, and if the party is not willing, President Tinubu should appreciate him. It takes some courage for a man in whom blood flows to embrace an exercise in such futility, if not open stupidity, with such brazenness.
But this is not just about Osifo. There were other APC members who left their former parties and joined the APC, in the expectation that they would get due rewards. Many of them were disappointed. They lost out. Before the primaries, the APC had 242 members in the House of Representatives, and 88 Senators. Over 70 of these persons are not going to be part of the 2027 process. 14 key APC Senators failed to secure return tickets. They were either screened out, outsmarted or defeated. Dr. Ajibola Bashiru, Secretary General of the APC had said all results would be declared centrally from the party secretariat. Nobody listened to him. The results were collated and announced on site. Many of the losers have appealed the outcome, to the party’s administrative system for that purpose, but even when a recent ruling says they can move to other parties till September 2026 because INEC acted ultra vires with regard to Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act, they should not get over-excited. INEC is determined to challenge Justice Umar’s judgment. President Tinubu said the primaries were “peaceful and well organized.” That is not true. The APC primaries were marked by protests, cash inducement and violence. In Ondo Central, for example, Senator Adeniyi Adegbonmire almost lost life at Okilisa Ward 5 in Akure when gunmen hijacked the process. Many party members are also aggrieved. In Rivers State, Gov. Simi Fubara was screened out because he fell out of favour with a Godfather who is not even a member of the APC, but a friend of the APC President. In Surulere Constituency 1 in Lagos, Desmond Elliot has been weeping inconsolably because his local Godfather said he had to be replaced, and so it has been decided. On another note, seven serving Governors and 12 former Governors are planning to go to the Senate on the platform of the APC, a reminder once again that the Senate has become a retirement home for tired Governors who have nothing else to do with their lives. The process is available for the aggrieved to file petitions and many have done so, five so far from Delta state, but the truth is that many APC members have lost faith in the party’s system. In the course of the APC primaries, the officiating teams could not even count properly. There were no registers, no proper checks, party members just showed up and the officiating personnel just jumped from No 1, 11, 20, to 1, 000, 5, 000 in defiance of all known rules of elementary arithmetic. The Electoral Act 2026, at Section 84(2) prescribes consensus and direct primaries to avoid the menace of selected party delegates, and open up the process, but even this new formula is openly fraudulent.
But it is not just the APC that is guilty as charged, and which by its conduct has shown what Nigerians are likely to face in the 2027 elections. In the African Democratic Congress (ADC) there have been two congresses. Dumebi Kachikwu has been declared the Presidential candidate of one faction, even while the David Mark-faction was choosing its own candidate from a list of three: Atiku Abubakar, Rotimi Amaechi and Mohammed Hayatudeen. In the ADC primaries, there were battles and disagreements in Kano, Benue, and Plateau states. In Adamawa in particular, the withdrawal of former Governor, Muhammadu Jibrilla Bindow from the governorship process caused an upset. As at the time of this writing, Atiku Abubakar of the ADC appears to be coasting home to victory in the ADC Presidential Primary in Bauchi, Zamfara, Kaduna, Niger, Kebbi, Abia, Gombe, Sokoto, Enugu states and elsewhere. What next then, for example, for former Governor/Minister Rotimi Amaechi who says he is in the race because he wants to be President? But even the ADC failed the test of simple arithmetic, thus not having the moral right to condemn the rival APC party. It would be interesting to see what happens subsequently in all the other political parties too but one thing is clear: Nigeria’s professional political class is yet to learn any lessons and may never do so. The people are compromised and would rather do the bidding of the highest bidder during political seasons, not minding whatever suffering awaits them in a show of accustomed cynicism which is the worst thing that can happen to a democratic process. The pundits had predicted voter apathy, but that has not been seen during the primaries across Nigeria. This however does not guarantee that there will be no apathy during the general elections in 2027. The factions in the ADC and the PDP would soon begin a fresh round of battles, court drama, and defections.
Altogether, the political party primaries on the basis of what has been seen so far is enough reason for concern and anxiety about much of what is to come. The political parties failed their own members. The people failed themselves. A heavy atmosphere of mistrust and anger has been created. They all failed the accountability and integrity test. With President Tinubu’s 11 million votes in the APC, far more than his total votes in the 2023 Presidential election of 8, 805, 475, the suggestion is that he would get more votes in the general election in 2027 out of INEC’s original number of about 94 million voters. Tinubu gained more votes in Imo, Adamawa and Gombe, and scored less in the South West with the exception of Lagos. Look closely, there is already a demonstration effect and an auto suggestion in the strategy. This is without prejudice to the fact that a party primary may not necessarily reflect what happens in a main election which would be guided by competition and other rules of the game: both local and external: in this instance, ethnicity, religion, money, geopolitical external interventions, turn out, institutions and especially, the electoral umpire. The only thing Nigeria has going for it, is its resilience and the people’s endless optimism. Nigeria has a way of drawing close to the precipice and pulling back from the brink at the people’s expense. This pattern may be no different in 2027, when it would be clear that the biggest area in need of reform has been left behind.