ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

It is no longer news that the APC Ekiti State National Assembly Primary Election Panel declared the primary election for Ekiti North I (Ikole/Oye) Federal Constituency inconclusive following petitions reportedly arising from Erelu Kemi Elebute-Halle, who claimed that there were irregularities in her Ward 10 in Ikole Local Government Area. Former House of Representatives member, Hon. Bimbo Daramola, also reportedly petitioned the panel, alleging that Rep. Akintunde Rotimi Jr. announced himself winner of the exercise, despite the absence of any verifiable evidence or public record to support the claim.

The decision of the panel to declare the exercise inconclusive has, however, not altered the widespread view among close watchers of the contest that the final outcome would eventually be resolved in favour of the incumbent lawmaker based on the overwhelming evidence from the conduct of the election across the constituency.

Observers who monitored and reported the exercise insist that Rep. Rotimi recorded a commanding lead in the primary election, winning convincingly across the wards in Ikole and Oye local government areas, with video evidence showing that the primaries were validly conducted and concluded in the constituency. It was therefore surprising to many stakeholders and observers when the process was subsequently declared inconclusive.

Journalists who covered the exercise had, in fact, projected the incumbent as the clear winner based on results collated from the various wards and the visible margin of support recorded throughout the constituency.

Many political analysts have also pointed out that, even without prejudice to the eventual findings of the election panel, the voting strength of Ward 10 in Ikole alone is insufficient to alter the overall outcome of the primary election, considering the scale of Rep. Rotimi’s showing across the constituency. According to party stakeholders, even under the most generous mathematical assumptions in favour of the petitioner, the margin established by the incumbent remains difficult to overturn.

The strong performance of Rep. Rotimi in the primaries has largely been attributed to the widespread support he enjoyed from party stakeholders across Ekiti State ahead of the election.

Only days before the exercise, a major endorsement gathering was held in Ilupeju-Ekiti, where chairmen of all eight local governments and Local Council Development Areas in Ekiti State, councillors, ward chairmen, women leaders, youth leaders, and other critical stakeholders of the APC publicly endorsed the lawmaker’s return bid.

The endorsement meeting was widely interpreted as a decisive political statement reflecting the confidence of the APC structure in Rep. Rotimi’s representation and leadership within the constituency.

In addition, the race had begun to narrow before the primaries after three aspirants — Chief Mrs. Funke Owoseni, Mr. Kayode Omoboya, and Barr. Yemi Ayodele Ayeni — reportedly stepped down and endorsed the incumbent. Engr. Olaoluwa Dawodu had also reportedly stepped down and opted not to obtain the nomination form, further consolidating support around the incumbent.

The election itself was keenly contested, with notable aspirants including former member of the House of Representatives, Hon. Bimbo Daramola; Erelu Kemi Elebute-Halle; Mr. Gbenga Joseph; Prince Ayorinde Ejioyo; and Engr. Ayo Omotosho participating in the exercise.

However, Prince Ayorinde Ejioyo and Engr. Ayo Omotosho had also publicly congratulated Rep. Rotimi after the election was concluded, with the result widely projected in his favour.

Meanwhile, supporters of Rep. Rotimi have dismissed allegations making the rounds in some quarters that the lawmaker “self-declared” victory in the aftermath of the exercise.

According to them, there is no record on any of Rep. Rotimi’s official communication platforms indicating such a declaration. They insist that the allegation is entirely unsubstantiated and unsupported by any verifiable evidence.

Attention has also been drawn to reports circulated by a platform known as “Ekiti Reformer,” which attempted to portray the outcome of the primaries as a political defeat for Governor Biodun Abayomi Oyebanji, alleging that Rep. Rotimi defeated the Governor’s candidate.

Party stakeholders have described this narrative contained in the now-deleted posts as false, mischievous, and potentially divisive, designed to create unnecessary tension between the lawmaker and his benefactor, the Governor. However, insiders maintain that the lawmaker has consistently and publicly expressed support for the Governor and has also noted after the exercise that his strong showing at the primary was only possible with the broad support of the party structure in the state, of which the Governor is the leader. They further argue that the narrative lacks coherence, noting that if the Governor had a preferred candidate in the race, it would have been Rep. Rotimi.

According to insiders within the APC, Governor Oyebanji maintained neutrality throughout the process. However, they note that the broader APC structure across the state, with the Governor as its leader, openly worked in support of Rep. Rotimi’s candidacy, largely due to his performance in office, accessibility to constituents, and growing influence within the National Assembly as Spokesman of the House of Representatives.

For many constituents across Ikole and Oye Federal Constituency, the expectation now is that the APC Election Panel will eventually affirm what they describe as the clearly expressed will of party members at the primaries.

Until then, political observers continue to regard Rep. Akintunde Rotimi Jr. as the candidate with the clearest mandate from one of the most closely watched House of Representatives primary elections in Ekiti State.

Obadero Olanipekun writes from Ikole-Ekiti

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Public procurement lies at the heart of governance. It is the bridge between policy intent and public impact. When procurement fails, roads crumble before completion, hospitals remain unequipped, and classrooms stand empty despite billions spent on construction.

In Nigeria, where procurement accounts for nearly 30 per cent of the national budget, typically over $30 billion annually, this is not merely a procedural concern. It is a make or break determinant of national development.

As the Director-General of the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP), Dr Adebowale Adedokun, has repeatedly made clear, Nigeria is confronting a silent but urgent crisis in this critical sector. Across Ministries, Departments, and Agencies (MDAs), procurement responsibilities are still handled by personnel who are often overburdened and undertrained. Many have not been exposed to modern procurement methods, let alone equipped to lead reforms in an increasingly digitised and globally benchmarked environment. The consequences are visible all around us.

According to the BPP Audit 2024, 63 per cent of federal contracts miss their delivery deadlines. The Nigeria Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (NEITI) estimates that ₦4.1 trillion has been lost to inflated contracts since 2020. A NOIPolls survey conducted in early 2025 further showed that only 22 per cent of Nigerians believe procurement processes are conducted transparently.

This is not merely a question of capacity. It is a question of credibility. Without professionals capable of navigating today’s procurement complexities, ranging from environmental compliance to digital tendering, Nigeria risks slowing reform while simultaneously deepening public distrust.

To appreciate the scale of the challenge, one only needs to consider the Abuja-Lokoja Highway. The project reportedly required redesigning at an additional cost of ₦217 billion because of poor contract supervision. That is only one example among many. World Bank estimates suggest that a one per cent reduction in procurement inefficiency could save Nigeria as much as ₦900 billion annually. That is not a rounding error. It is a national opportunity.

The Sustainable Procurement, Environmental and Social Standards Enhancement (SPESSE) Project was designed to take that opportunity. Supported by the World Bank and the sustainable procurement node driven by the BPP, SPESSE represents Nigeria’s most ambitious response yet to the country’s procurement skills deficit.

The SPESSE baseline survey exposed troubling gaps. About 71 per cent of procurement officers lacked competence in e-procurement tools. Only 18 per cent of MDAs conducted environmental impact assessments before awarding major contracts. Worse still, 43 per cent of awarded contracts reportedly failed to comply with competitive bidding requirements under the Public Procurement Act.

To confront these realities directly, the SPESSE project established six Centres of Excellence hosted by six Nigerian universities: the University of Lagos, the University of Benin, Ahmadu Bello University, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, the Federal University of Agriculture, Makurdi, and the Federal University of Technology, Owerri.

These centres are not ceremonial additions to the academic landscape. They are practical engines of reform. Their programmes range from short professional courses for officers already in service to master’s degrees in procurement science and executive programmes tailored for senior decision makers.

The curriculum itself reflects the demands of modern governance. Contract management courses are reinforced with AI driven simulations. Environmental and Social Governance (ESG) compliance is taught through World Bank Environmental and Social Framework case studies. Procurement data analytics includes practical training using platforms such as the National Open Contracting Portal (NOCOPO). This is not theoretical instruction. It is professional preparation for a rapidly evolving governance environment.

The impact is already beginning to emerge. More than 4,000 procurement specialists are expected to receive full certification by 2027, while another 21,000 personnel will benefit from structured training programmes. At the same time, an estimated 12,000 new jobs could emerge across procurement auditing, ESG compliance, and digital contract administration. SPESSE is, therefore, not only a capacity building intervention, it is also a potential employment pipeline.

The challenge now is clear. Nigeria finally has a funded and operational response to a problem that has crippled public sector efficiency for decades. But unless government acts decisively to support and scale the initiative, the opportunity could once again be squandered.

That is why the Director-General of the BPP has called on the Executive to ring fence budgets for annual MDA training quotas and to make professional certification mandatory for procurement officers by 2026. He has also urged the National Assembly to consider strategic amendments to the Public Procurement Act, including procurement licensing requirements and a dedicated annual five per cent training allocation within MDA budgets.

Because procurement reform is central to the Renewed Hope Agenda of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Nigeria’s development partners also have an important role to play. This is the moment to deepen support for procurement education and institutional reform. Scholarships can help extend procurement education to officers in underserved and rural areas. Global best practice tools such as the Open Contracting Data Standard can also be deployed more extensively.

More importantly, Nigeria has an opportunity to build a generation of procurement professionals capable of competing with their peers in countries such as Rwanda, Morocco, and Vietnam, where certification rates are significantly higher and e-procurement systems are far more advanced.

Naturally, some concerns have emerged around the implications of mandatory certification. Some public servants fear that new standards may threaten existing jobs. The BPP, however, appears conscious of this anxiety and has adopted what it describes as an inclusive transition strategy. Through reskilling programmes, mentoring frameworks, and incentives for early adopters, the agency hopes to transform resistance into opportunity. As highlighted during the Director-General’s June 2025 engagement with the Association of Public Procurement Practitioners, this change management approach is central to the implementation plan.

Citizens, too, have a role to play. Through platforms such as NOCOPO, Nigerians can monitor procurement projects in real time, report irregularities through digital channels, and hold institutions accountable. Transparency is not merely a government obligation. It is a democratic right.

During a recent visit to the Lagos-Ibadan rail corridor, an engineer reportedly remarked to the BPP Director-General: “We cannot build 21st century infrastructure with 20th century procurement.”

That observation captures the issue perfectly.

Procurement is no longer a back office administrative function. It is now a frontline instrument of economic development, institutional credibility, and public trust. SPESSE is, therefore, not just about training individuals. It is about building a culture in which procurement excellence becomes part of Nigeria’s governance identity.

The cost of inaction will be severe: more abandoned projects, more waste, more delays, and deeper public cynicism. But the rewards of getting it right are equally enormous: better roads, smarter schools, properly equipped hospitals, and citizens who can finally see tangible value for every naira spent by government.

The time for hesitation has passed. Nigeria cannot afford to postpone the future of a modern, digitally enabled, citizen responsive procurement system. The country must now commit itself to building the talent, systems, and standards required for serious national development.

■ Sufuyan Ojeifo is a journalist, publisher, and communication consultant.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

By Rt Hon Eseme Eyiboh

The controversy surrounding the recent amendment to the Senate Standing Rules has generated more heat than light. Unfortunately, much of the public conversation has been framed around personalities rather than principles, and emotions rather than institutional logic. Yet the real issue before the Senate is neither about Senator Godswill Akpabio nor Senator Adams Oshiomhole. It is about whether legislative institutions should evolve, strengthen themselves, and create continuity mechanisms that deepen parliamentary stability.

Every serious institution in the world periodically reviews its rules, procedures, and qualifications in response to emerging realities. Legislatures are not exempted from this process of institutional self-correction and growth. In fact, the refusal to review procedures in the face of experience is often a sign of stagnation, not democracy.

The recent amendment requiring senators seeking certain presiding and principal offices to possess a minimum level of legislative experience should therefore be viewed through the broader prism of institutional development rather than through narrow political calculations.

Parliamentary leadership is not merely ceremonial. The office of Senate President is one of the most sensitive and technically demanding constitutional offices in Nigeria. It requires not only political popularity but also deep familiarity with parliamentary traditions, legislative procedures, negotiation dynamics, committee systems, constitutional interpretation, and intergovernmental relations. Experience matters.

Around the world, mature legislatures often evolve unwritten and written traditions that favour institutional memory and legislative continuity. Such measures are not necessarily designed to exclude people; they are often intended to preserve stability, reduce avoidable turbulence, and ensure that those entrusted with managing highly sensitive parliamentary processes possess sufficient procedural grounding.

Critics who fear that experience requirements create a closed, self perpetuating oligarchy are not entirely without reason. Many legislatures have, at various points, used procedural thresholds to entrench incumbents rather than protect institutional wisdom. But the answer to that legitimate concern is not to abandon minimum standards altogether. It is to ensure that the bar is set at a reasonable, not prohibitive, level. A requirement of, say, one full term or demonstrated committee leadership is a safeguard against chaos, not a moat against renewal. The Senate must therefore commit to reviewing this threshold periodically, lest a tool of stability calcify into a ceiling on ambition.

Experience without openness becomes arrogance; openness without experience becomes amateurism. The amendment under scrutiny tilts toward the latter’s correction, but it must not be understood as a final word. What truly elevates an institution is not a single rule change but a culture that values both seasoned judgment and fresh perspective. That means pairing experience requirements with transparent mechanisms for advancement, seniority systems that reward competence, not mere longevity, and leadership elections that remain genuinely contested, not coronations.

Seen from this perspective, the amendment is neither unusual nor inherently anti democratic. Rather, it reflects the Senate’s attempt to refine its internal processes based on accumulated experience.

It is therefore inaccurate to reduce the issue to the suggestion that the amendment was crafted merely to “shrink competition” or protect personal interests. Institutions do not become stronger by permanently freezing their rules in time. They grow by learning from experience and adjusting procedures where necessary to protect efficiency, order, and continuity.

Even more problematic is the argument suggesting that because the new qualification threshold did not exist when Senator Godswill Akpabio emerged as Senate President, he should now resign if the new rule is adopted. Such reasoning fundamentally misunderstands one of the oldest principles of jurisprudence and democratic governance: laws are generally prospective, not retroactive.

A law or rule takes effect from the point of enactment forward unless expressly stated otherwise. The amendment cannot logically invalidate a mandate that was legitimately acquired under previously existing rules. Senator Akpabio contested and emerged as Senate President under the constitutional and procedural framework that existed at the time. To argue otherwise would amount to applying today’s standards to yesterday’s circumstances, which is neither legally sustainable nor institutionally rational.

Following that logic, every constitutional amendment would invalidate previous actions taken under earlier provisions, thereby throwing governance into perpetual instability.

What should matter now is whether the amendment serves the long term interest of the institution. That is the proper question, not whether it benefits or disadvantages any single individual in the immediate moment.

Interestingly, many of the world’s strongest democratic institutions evolved precisely through incremental procedural reforms. Rules governing tenure, committee leadership, succession, seniority, and qualification standards were not static from inception; they emerged through continuous refinement driven by practical governance realities.

It is also important to note that continuity in leadership structures is not necessarily an enemy of democracy. Stability can strengthen democracy when balanced with fairness and openness. A legislature perpetually trapped in leadership uncertainty, procedural inexperience, and internal volatility weakens not only itself but the democratic process as a whole.

Every rule amendment asks the same underlying question: whom does the institution trust to lead it? When a legislature decides that a Senate President should have served a minimum period as a legislator, it is making a quiet but profound statement about the nature of political authority. It is saying that raw popularity or executive favour is not enough, that the stewardship of a co equal branch requires earned familiarity with its rhythms and restraints. That is not elitism. It is institutional self respect. And in a democracy, institutions that do not respect themselves are unlikely to be respected by the public they serve.

This is why the current debate should rise above personal disagreements or chamber theatrics. Nigerians expect lawmakers to approach institutional reforms with intellectual honesty and statesmanship rather than framing every procedural amendment through the lens of political rivalry.

Senator Adams Oshiomhole is entitled to his views, as every senator is. Debate is healthy in democracy. Dissent is legitimate. However, the conversation should be anchored on whether the amendment strengthens the Senate as an enduring institution, not whether it immediately advances or obstructs the ambitions of specific politicians.

Ultimately, institutions outlive individuals. Senate Presidents will come and go. Senators will rise and fall. But the rules and traditions established today may shape legislative stability for decades to come.

That is why this matter deserves to be viewed not through the narrow window of self interest, but through the wider lens of institutional maturity, continuity, and the long term health of Nigeria’s parliamentary democracy.
Experience matters.

Rt Hon Eseme Eyiboh, mnipr, is a former member and spokesperson of the House of Representatives and currently Special Adviser on Media/Publicity and Official Spokesperson to the President of the Senate.