Connect with us

Opinion

BABANGIDA, HIS MEMOIR, AND HIS CRITICS,

Published

on

By Kassim Afegbua

The at-long-last-decision to write his memoirs, was quite a daunting one for General Babangida, who has over the years, refused to capitulate to pressure demands for him to write one. His reason was predicated on the fact that some people, and especially his itinerant critics would accuse him of writing at a time that some of the dramatis personae have exited this putrid plane; he wanted to let sleeping dogs lie. He said to me, “Prince, your colleagues in the media and civil society would ask pointedly, why now?”

And, I told him his response should be why not now? Either way, nobody can take away his authorial stamp from his impressions, for telling stories that elucidate his trajectory in life’s bramble forest- stories that are essentially first hand accounts, and not innuendos. Those who accuse him of not telling the whole truth can pick up from where he stopped, and to add to what he has written; that we all may know the whole truth. Indeed, what is written in his 420-page memoirs are snippets of who IBB truly is, what he actually represents, and the totality of his roles in the leadership of Nigeria, dictated by his career in the military throughout his military presidency of Nigeria for eight years. Babangida is a colossus; an encyclopaedia of ideas and knowledge; and he applied these, when he called the shots.

I am stimulated by several interpretations that readers have given to the book, and the hasty conclusions drawn by some who have read only snippets, and not the entire book; and particularly amused by the claims of one Mr. Femi Falana who boasted of seeking legal redress for the noisy recognition, saying that he remains an actor for the civil society groups. We are still waiting for his litigation. The comments of those who have read the book and ran informed commentaries about the several anecdotes that formed the central kernel of the accounts captured in the memoir, are not lost on me. Our former President, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo predicted these outcomes, saying that the book would exude the good, the bad and the ugly.

Advertisement

That exactly is what is happening today. IBB’s book is not intended as a polemic; those who derive joy from attacking IBB for whatever it is worth are welcome to have fun. Some will, even if they see IBB leading a crusade to better the society and add value to our collective aspirations, still agonise with patented anger and bad blood. But all of this remonstration does not bring diminution to Babangida’s humanity and benevolence of his engagements and relationships with people. I have had a very close relationship with him and his family for very long now, and can conclude without a whimper, that IBB is antipodal to these numerous stigmas that some members of the public are wont to thrust on him.

Albeit, anything IBB, is always “controversial” and usually meat for the season. When he talks, it is loud and resonates across the land. When he grants interviews, they receive widespread attention. When he keeps silent, there is a high desire to hack into his mind to know his thoughts. When he breaks his silence, his comments are given different connotations. All these look like good reckoning to me. IBB is consistent in “controversy” nevertheless he is that man that has contributed greatly to establishing democracies in some West Africa countries when he was in power and outside of power. He has helped to stabilize troubled countries that suffered from political tensions and unrest for so long using the ECOMOG.

He cultivates relationships and sustains same with remarkable prowess. He has a way with people and a charm and aura; his personality distinguishes him. Hate him or like him, you cannot deny IBB’s infectious and warm personality; and, he always shows that his persona is at home with his person. He’s a human being and not a human doing; and is bound to make mistakes. As a responsible leader, he accepts responsibility and credit for the ills and gains of his eight-year government. The under-current of his leadership emanations as a military president remains seminal, and suffice it to say that, at a time when coups and counter-coups were fashionable in Africa, some of the decisions taken by his administration were instructively woven around common sense, tact, diplomacy and better judgment.

IBB is always a contemporary item on the menu list of Nigeria’s political drudgery. His relevance remains unchanged at over eighty, his sense of recall and perspicacity on a wide variety of matters is still acute. He has a deep understanding of the human mind; a trait which is borne of his depth in human relations and interactions with people across the different socio-political strata of the society. He tells of the vanity of human creations, and why he loves his perceived and or real enemies, the same way he loves his friends. According to him, “we are living in an imperfect world, if I decide to snub my critics, how will I learn from my mistakes?” That’s IBB for you!.

Advertisement

THE JUNE 12 STORY

Since the official release of his memoir, the “June 12” account has undoubtedly received the highest volume of attention and criticism; topping all else in that book. Even those who were not yet born then, discuss the June 12 story as though they were participants. Others, who though alive at the time, but have no information about the annulment of the election, speak with seeming authority as though they were eye witnesses. They bridle at IBB’s assertions, as if they ran the seat of government with him. Some say his story is convenient, because of the fact that some of the major actors are now dead, and cannot controvert his account. Some derisively called him a “coward”, and a “weakling”, who presented himself as helpless before a rampaging General Sani Abacha during the June 12 orchestra.

They have debased IBB and called him all manner of unprintable names but the man, given his leadership orientation, remains stoic, unfazed, and unruffled by the torrents of ugly commentaries being hurled at him. This though is a sign of reckoning. Only those who are not productive are ignored. Between two mango trees, one bearing fruits and the other without fruits: at harvest season, the one with fruits will be visited by everyone, with pebbles and sticks, trying to pluck the fruits; but the barren one will be free from attack. That’s the ordering of life and the inherent danger in being worthy.

IBB ran a military government after a successful coup on 27 August 1985. Late Abacha was his accomplice during that operation. Late M.K.O Abiola was one of the sponsors of the coup and was also the one who reportedly told his friend King Abdallah of Saudi Arabia to extend an invitation to General Tunde Idiagbon and his eleven year old son to come for Holy Pilgrimage as his personal guests. That was how they got Idiagbon out of the scene, making it easy to remove General Muhammadu Buhari as Head of State, in a bloodless manner. Earlier, M.K.O Abiola had gotten involved in the 1983 coup that ousted president Shehu Shagari. In April 1990, during the Gideon Orkar coup in Dodan Barracks, Late Abacha also participated in helping to checkmate the boys and succeeded in coordinating with the president to dislodge the coupists.

Advertisement

IBB had escaped to Ojuelegba, in the Surulere area of Lagos, from where he contacted General Abacha. Unable to reach Abacha, he got his son, Ibrahim, who later went to alert his father at his guest House of the hovering danger. Abacha was in his familiar terrain, hobnobbing with his female friends, a habitual hobby to unwind. Duly informed of the putsch, he coordinated with his boss and president, IBB to dislodge Orkar and his boys. That was sheer fealty and such cooperation was not lost on IBB. This and other actions imprinted Gen Abacha in IBB’s heart. General Abacha also knew the implications of his actions, knowing full well that IBB had his “boys” also, in the Army. As an armoured corps officer, Babangida was reputed for his gallantry during the civil war and his boldness in quelling the Dimka coup with sheer tact, diplomacy and “bare hands”. He was a grounded officer. So, to call him a coward by latter day critics in an attempt to exercise their freedom of speech, is completely out of tune.

After the Orkar coup, the relocation of the seat of power to Abuja occupied a high pedestal in IBB’s mind. He felt the Dodan Barracks residence of the president had become vulnerable. He grieved over the loss of his Aide-de-Camp, U.K Bello. The escape of his immediate family to Captain Gusau’s residence within the precincts of Dodan Barracks was also a delicate adventure in the face of shelling by the coupists.The execution of the coup before the very eyes of his immediate family was traumatic for him. On the one hand was the promise to return to civil rule by 1990, which the Political Bureau had set for the new structure being envisaged; and on the other hand was the extension of that date, based on the feasibility or viability in the face of the then challenges.

The need to shift the date for return to civil rule became compelling; and as democratic and electoral activities were ongoing, relocation to Abuja was realized. By this time, IBB had concluded plans to stay for the usual two terms; thus, a new terminal date was set for 1993. Elections into State Government and National Assembly were already concluded. While IBB had his eyes set on his exit date, General Abacha had a different plot. The entire June 12 annulment was a coup within another coup. The desire by IBB to exit power was genuine, but he was bested by his friend’s plan. He applied tact and diplomacy. It was clear to him that Gen Abacha had come payback time. M.K.O Abiola, also IBB’s friend was one thing, and Nigerians yet another. Late General Abacha was inexorable in his quest. How to choose one and certainly be against the other required great deft and resolve. IBB read the writing on the wall. A medical doctor once said to me that, if a man contemplated taking his own life, he was almost certain to have mental ill health. IBB proved that he wasn’t mentally ill. He was alive, strategic and calculative.

The subject matter was power! A crazy aphrodisiac! These two men were going for it headlong! For the roles that Abacha had played in the life of his administration, he loved Abacha; and Abacha enjoyed the mollycoddling of one that is loved. General Abacha was ready to play the spoiler role, to ascend to the power that he so desirously wanted. This drive was unchecked. “Why didn’t you sack him, as you were the Commander-in-Chief? I interjected, “It is not an act of cowardice to indulge a man who has been with you, so to speak. In certain situations, you need to behave unusual to survive the unusual.” That was the day I remembered what that doctor said to me about suicide. If anyone follows the history of assassinations the world over, it is difficult to easily unravel the hatchet man. He may be your closest friend or a distant foe. Under military regimes, in such an intriguing world of politics, having survived a day, count that day as a blessing or bonus. Continuing he tutored, “the real Commander-in-Chief are the gun-wielding body guards around you all the time. You hardly know where their loyalty lies or their cabal within the military; and in any security formation, there is always a lone ranger whose nuances are not easily predictable; so we were taught.”

Advertisement

“While it is convenient for you civilians to run your commentary under a democratically elected government, it is not the same under a military government; so, it is difficult to know where a man stands in that circumstance.” It obviously took tact, strategy and diplomacy, not cowardice, to survive eight years as a military president, judging by General Babangida’s revelations. The man in the center and his government it seems, were always under existential threats. All these considerations formed part of why IBB mollycoddled Abacha by which means Abacha aborted the plan to return to civil rule, with effrontery. And by the time the final unsigned statement was issued, it marked the end of an era and the beginning of several invidious plots to stabilize the ship of state. This time, there was already in place, a polarised military; the top echelon was sharply divided along both ethnic and ranking lines. This situation became a fertile ground for recruiting like-minds for caucuses of “fellow Nigerians.” So, in summary, IBB was caught between the devil and the blue sea, hence he applied the first law of nature.

We all know who exactly the culprit was in this whole episode of the June 12 annulment. In addition, some Yoruba Obas compounded the plots. They allegedly accused M.K.O Abiola of “snatching” their wives like the late Owa Obokun of Ilesa, Oba Aromolaran. Others who were predominantly Awoists didn’t want the success of Abiola at the election. They leveled allegations against him including his alleged role in thwarting the electoral success of Awolowo in 1983, citing the establishment of Concord Newspaper as a deliberate ploy to antagonise the late sage. Chief Obasanjo had also stated in Zimbabwe that M.K.O Abiola was not the messiah being awaited. Others accused him of being chief sponsor of several coups in Nigeria, also; and thus should not be made to reap from his ills by heading a democratic dispensation. They stood against their brother.

IBB was buffeted with so many conspiracy theories which all combined to give Abacha some kind of upper hand and soft landing by the time he finally eased out Late Earnest Shonekan, the head of the interim government. Abiola jettisoned the suggestion of IBB to make him head the ING, and found good company, albeit naively, with General Abacha. The “overthrow” of the ING had the imprimatur of Chief M.K.O Abiola, who even nominated some ministers to join General Abacha to “prepare” the way for his own triumphant entry, he hoped. The rest, as it is often said, has become history. Surely, June 12 epitomized the intricacies and complex web that come with the struggle for power- the plots and counter-plots, the coups versus palace coups and a combination of back-stabbing and survivalist instincts turning out to be the most delicate period of Nigeria’s political history.

Yes, IBB has tendered his apology and has accepted full responsibility for whatever happened during his eight years; especially on the annulment of the June 12 election. That is the Hallmark of leadership. It is commendable also, that he has now mentioned some of those who played critical roles to thwart that exercise, chief of whom was his late friend, General Abacha. Let the truth of history be known. Nigerians should not forget yet another factor: the NRC, the political Party that fielded Bashir Tofa as its own presidential candidate also petitioned the whole exercise, describing the election as unacceptable; and raised concerns that Chief M.K.O Abiola’s dress on the day of election had the logo (a horse) of his party. They claimed that it was tantamount to campaigning on the day of election. They called for the outright cancelation of the election, a contestation that led to the setting up of a 25-member committee headed by Late General John Shagaya. The parties were directed to put forward eight members apiece. The NRC never agreed with the outcome of the election. So, the June 12 debacle had its peculiar rhythms and currents, steamed by those who never wanted an Abiola presidency. When the star finally snapped, it was a denouement of some sort, a rehearse of sun-set at dawn, before the curtain finally fell. June 12 has become a watershed in the political history of Nigeria and with IBB’s memoir, the actors have been unveiled.

Advertisement

THE FEBRUARY 20, ABUJA GATHERING

Nigeria is undoubtedly a very interesting country full of side attractions and sound bites. On the one hand, they want history to be taught in schools, on the other hand, they bridle at history being written and elucidated. IBB has decided to build a presidential library in Minna, Niger state. Proceeds from the book launch would be ploughed into this laudable project, to sustain and preserve history. The choice of the book reviewer was as apposite, just as the venue of the event was. Transcorp Hotel remains one of IBB’s legacies which has now been privatized. Relocation and building up of Abuja is another enduring legacy. So, while I listened to some critics shouting “crucify him,” my inner defense was mollified by the many legacies of IBB spread across the entire country including the Third Mainland bridge in Lagos. I looked at the growth of the eleven states he created, I looked at the several infrastructure, the private sector he initiated and engineered, the private broadcasting he introduced and licensed, the private airlines he initiated, the local governments he created, the many individuals he empowered through laudable policies he enunciated, the programs, the robust engagements, and his pan-Nigeria orientation, I feel the strong impact of his achievements. Added to these were the establishment of National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA), NAFDAC, the Federal Road Safety Commission, (FRSC), the Code of Conduct Bureau, the Code of Conduct Tribunal, the Raw Materials Research Council, the Revenue Mobilization Commission, the National Economic Reconstruction Fund, (NERFUND), the defunct Peoples’ Bank, the Micro-Finance Banks, the several airports built to ease mobility, MAMSER, and the decentralization of the uniform control in the Police Force, amongst several others too numerous to mention. IBB moved Nigeria forward. Beyond June 12 and the political struggle for power, he built a country.

The gathering of February 20 therefore, was a veritable referendum on whether or not IBB is a good man and good leader. Nigerians truly united; that Abuja gathering was a pan-Nigeria gathering that spoke volumes about IBB’s recognition. He unveiled a doctrine of national cohesion and not of parochialism, myopism and nepotism. It underscored the theme of unity in diversity, as we all watched a book launch event that was loud like the author, attended by the who is who of this country all under one canopy. All for IBB, the man they love to hate, and hate to love. He lives in a world of his own, not deterred by the criticisms of a handful, but encouraged by the collective endorsements he gets every now and again, in appreciation of his intervention in re-engineering the socio-economic and political components of Nigeria. He may have failed to transit properly to civilian rule, and the lessons of a credible election he conducted, ought to be a reference point for today’s democracy; but is it? How many of our elections today wear the garb of credibility in the true sense of the word? The increasing number of political litigations does not speak to a healthier electoral process thirty-two years after June 12, elections are still being annulled through the courts. We’ve seen some unsavory scenarios and judgments that belie logic, and a concatenation of several possibilities that naturally awes the electorate. You may blame IBB for the errors of June 12, but have we learnt any lessons as a consequence of that? Have we imbibed the spirit of credible election since then? Have we eliminated the problem of thuggery and violence in political contestation, factors which necessitated IBB’s formation of the two-party system ab initio?

ABACHA, HIS CHILDREN AND THE STRUGGLE FOR POWER

Advertisement

I have read a couple of responses from late Abacha’s family, his children and grandchild. They even issued a shameless press statement trying to make their voices heard. The first thing I will say to them by this medium is that Nigerians don’t hold anything against them but their father. Since IBB launched his book, some of them have called him a “weakling,” others said “coward,” and some said he wasn’t in charge during the June 12 debacle. An officer of the armoured corps orientation, who fought in the 30-months civil war, got injured, and still carries shrapnel lodged in his lungs; that description of a coward and weakling, does not match IBB. He may have chosen to ignore the strange political movements of his subordinates, for exigent reasons at that time, but he’s by no stroke a weak man. A man who dislodged the Dimka coupists, and served in the Supreme Military Council at a much tender age, could not have been a weakling. Though the outcry of the Abachas is understandable, their description of IBB is wrong; and again I say to them, they should find peace in shame.

Their father and benefactor took over the rein of power through a palace coup, and activated a self-succession plan that generated so much hoopla during the period. He railroaded five political parties of same “leprous hand” to endorse him, and shut out every voice of descent. After his untimely death, his level of acquisition and conquistadorial behaviour became public knowledge. Till date, repatriation of stolen funds is still ongoing. I doubt if anyone can controvert this truth. I wonder how they all feel each time they hear of their father’s loot being repatriated. In profiling the dark goggled General Abacha, his role in the June 12 debacle should occupy a prime place; irrespective of what the family thinks about their “hero.” The account of Professor Humphrey Nwosu on the role of Abacha in the build up to the June 12 debacle in his book was pellucid; and that account is now corroborated in IBB’s memoir. It could not have been IBB’s deliberate contrived “blackmail” of his late friend. Far from it. During the five years when Abacha called the shots, he held Nigerians by the jugular, as we all gasped for breath to endure his self-transmutation plots. The palpable fear that gripped Nigerians during his tempestuous rulership was a direct opposite of IBB’s subliminal humanity. That character index of IBB is part of why the man remains impregnable till date.

To state that Abacha was afraid of his shadow is to understand why he was busy arresting people and hurling them into jail. There was a rise in high-profile assassinations at that time: Kudirat Abiola, Pa Alfred Rewane, Shehu Musa Yar’dua and others. Replay the tapes of Sergeant Barnabas Rogers, you will easily understand the enormity of Abacha’s torture and killer camp orchestrated to send fear in the hearts and consciences of Nigerians. Remember Ken Saro-Wiwa and the Ogoni Nine, the gory details of man’s wickedness and heartlessness will stare you in the face. Former President Obasanjo spent four years in jail over flimsy accusations, Col. Bello Fadile and a few others also suffered similar fate and torture. When there’s such a tempestuous atmosphere of national anomie, it will leave tales of regret, hisses and sighs in the consciousness of the people. Rather than sympathise and empathise, when Abacha suddenly exited this sinful world, there was widespread jubilation on the streets. That signaled where he would be positioned in history and maybe also, where he was headed. For his grandchild to have disrespectfully described a man old enough to be his own grandfather as a “weakling,” tells of his poor home training and crass indiscipline; themes that sit at the epicentre of the Abachas.

IBB, WE NEED ANOTHER MEMOIR

Advertisement

The Babangida memoir, still owes us explanations about scenarios that were not properly captured. The Obasanjo “Third Term Agenda” and the plots that rendered it prostrate need to be reported by those who played significant roles to quench the political greed of that era. There were stories abound of money being distributed by the presidency at that time, to railroad the lawmakers to validate what was a serious breach of the constitution. The desire of Chief Obasanjo to stay longer than was constitutionally guaranteed became a thorn in our collective psyche. One tale had it that on 13 September 2006 a meeting was consummated in the Villa by the following: Andy Ubah, Chris Ubah, Chief Iwuayanwu, Chief Tony Anenih and Chief Obasanjo himself as president, where it was decided that certain steps be taken to sell the agenda. Chief Anenih warned against the plan. Chief Iwuayanwu was to visit New York to sell the plan to the gathering of the World Igbo Day. When he got there, the mood was not right to speak in that direction, and it was aborted. To foist that plot, vehicles were distributed to some prominent Nigerians: two SUVs to Chief Iwuayanwu, one to the Ooni of Ife, Oba Sijuade, one to Chris Ubah, and some other recruits in the third term agenda plot.

About the same period, IBB, Atiku Abubakar, Aliyu Gusau and General Abdulsalami met with Chief Obasanjo, also at Obasanjo’s behest. When they got there, Chief Obasanjo kept them waiting for thirty minutes, and by the time he sauntered into the arena, his message was clear; “I want a little bit of extension.” Benumbed by his magisterial conduct in delivering the message, the four of them reportedly looked at themselves, and IBB was expectedly called upon to speak on behalf of the G4. “Baba, IBB started, it is true we made you President in 1999, but since you became president, you have made new friends, and we expect that these your new friends will deliver your third term to you.” A pin-drop silence was said to have sounded loudly amidst tension. The president was said to have asked, “is that the position of the group?” And they all concurred. That was when Chief Obasanjo realized that his third term agenda would hit the rocks.

When they made to leave, former President Obasanjo accused IBB of supporting General Buhari in securing the ticket of the APP. And wondered why IBB should toe that path. IBB told him that it was not good to play politics of humiliation, even against one of their own. IBB had to personally prevail on the seven APP aspirants to step down for General Buhari; Senator Ahmed Sani, Chief Rochas Okorocha, Pere Ajuwa, Bukar Abba Ibrahim and others. And that was how the script was acted. Former President Buhari emerged as an unopposed presidential candidate which left Chief Obasanjo most peeved. Obasanjo then chose Late Umaru Yar’dua, as a fall back option in the wake of the failure of his third term plan. He had thought that Umaru Yar’dua’s ill-health will be his shortest route to an extension of his (OBJ) administration. As God would have it, Yar’dua spent three more years before his creator called him home. I asked IBB, why he didn’t document his role in the aborted third term agenda plot in his book and his reply was vintage; “I left that for you; you have the details. I have done my part; continue from there.” So many people and political actors played one role or the other in that “Third Term Agenda,” it was a hotbed of revolt and dissension; and it fell apart, like the mustard seed that produced nothing. It was true though that Chief Obasanjo wanted a third term, he was outsmarted in the process. The forces against him held sway, and he couldn’t have his way.

CONCLUSION

Advertisement

Before I come your way again, let me make the point that military rule has its own peculiar intrigues. The politics in the under-prop of military regimes is usually not as discerning as in democracies. IBB has written his memoir and set the tone for his Presidential Library Project, those who are not satisfied must now seek another body of knowledge to dissect the issues that dominated the discourse. One inalienable right of IBB’s, is his authorial impressions. He was his own eye witness, anybody that has a superior account or story to tell about IBB’s journey in service, should please come forward with another version to enrich what has been written. To try to hijack IBB’s right to write his memoir, is akin to denying him his inalienable right, which is fully guaranteed under the constitution of the Federal Republic of NIgeria. Those who must taint and mottle the IBB regime with shadows, will soon see that history will be kind to IBB. The “June 12“ item is just one of many things in his score card; and in those many areas, his achievements are till date, inimitable.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

OF ABUJA INVESTMENT COMPANY, TAMUNO, WIKE, AND TINUBU’S “RENEWED HOPE” AGENDA

Published

on

By

BY BOLAJI AFOLABI

Established in 1994 by the military administration of late General Sani Abacha, the Abuja Investments Company Limited, (AICL) is positioned as a government-owned investment enterprise charged with the responsibility to drive economic development in the federal capital territory. Its primary goal is to promote strategic investment and boost realistic economic growth of the FCT through different platforms and various approaches. Key functions of the AICL include Business Development; Investment and Development; Public-Private Partnership; Facility Management; and Infrastructure Development. The AICL has several subsidiaries and associates including Abuja Property Development Company, (APDC); Abuja Markets Management Limited, (AMML); Abuja Urban Mass Transport Company, (AUMTCO); Abuja Technology Village Free Zone; Abuja Film Village International Limited; PowerNoth/AICL Equipment Leasing Company. Others include Aso Savings and Loans PLC; Abuja Power Company Limited; Abuja Leasing Company; and Abuja Downtown Mall.

From 1994 till the exit of the military from national governance in 1999, the AICL recorded few achievements. During this period, the AUMTCO, and Aso Savings and Loans were established. With the dawn of democratic government in 1999, it was expected that the FCT, being an emerging federal capital will benefit hugely from the activities of the AICL. However, nothing much was achieved between 1999 and 2003. Somehow, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, who administered the FCT from July 2003 to July 2007, was able to change the tide. Under his watch, the AICL came alive, recorded some measure of visibility and attracted positive public perception. Sadly, the AICL took a downward slide thereafter. None of the past ministers; Aliyu Modibbo Umar, Adamu Aliero, Bala Mohammed, and Muhammed Musa Bello provided the necessary political will and support for the AICL to maximally attain full potential. Indeed, it got worse between 2015 and May 2023 that many residents forgot that the company was still existing.

Many critical stakeholders were worried about the depth of neglect, static state, and institutional damage that the AICL was subjected to. Patterned after similar agencies in some developing nations, where measurable strides are achieved, the reverse happened with the AICL, that it became recurring causes of worries, and regrets to many people. Alhaji Aminu Mohammed, a former staff member of FCTA said, “it was shameful that the company remained largely dormant for many years.” Corroborating, Mr. Gilbert Gyang, an Abuja based investment expert declared, “the AICL, especially during the last administration was arguably comatose. It merely existed on paper, there was no visible investment initiative geared towards economic growth in the federal capital.” For Ms. Winifred Anosike, former banker, and development consultant, “it’s painful that the company was practically inactive for years. It was not only affecting economic growth in Abuja but impacted negatively on people and firms with result-driven initiatives who desired to contribute actively to the development of the capital city.”

Advertisement

With the emergence and subsequent inauguration of President Bola Tinubu on May 29, 2023, key players in the investment sector were hopeful that, the AICL may breathe again. Many hinged their thoughts on Tinubu’s background and experiences in accounting, financing, investment, governance, and leadership. Though with caveats; the choice of who minister’s FCT will be pivotal. Convinced that the AICL should be the “engine room” of economic growth and development of the capital city, many hoped that Tinubu will deploy the appropriate person to oversee the strategic ministry. Some stakeholders concluded that a wrong choice may consign the AICL into the “wilderness of inactivity” and likely extinction. Somehow, key players in the investment sector, at different fora and platforms were upbeat that Tinubu will pick the right person, who they hope will lead the way towards enabling the AICL to get back its mojo.

In August 2023, the deployment of Barrister Nyesom Ezenwo Wike as the Minister of the FCT; the 8th since Nigeria’s return to democratic government elicited public endorsement. Tinubu’s choice was largely celebrated by many stakeholders, as it renewed optimism about the prospects of AICL reviving its activities. Cognisant of Wike’s legendary achievements, as Rivers state Governor where he embarked on massive infrastructure development and more, turning the “Treasure Base” to the central investment hub in the South South zone, and emerging as second to Lagos state, many were confident that “light will come” to the AICL. A similar spate of enthusiasm and expectations was prevalent in and around the AICL. Many of the staff members also shared the positions.

The atmosphere at the Garki District offices of AICL on April 7, 2024 was ecstatic when news filtered in that Wike had appointed Dr. Maureen Tamuno as the Group Managing Director. A few hours later, it turned to frenzy after goggle checks were done by some staff members to have glimpses of her profile. Impressed, and satisfied with her multi-disciplinary academic background, and multi-faceted careers, her appointment was described as well-thought, and well-deserving. The unanimity of opinion was that, being a round peg in a round hole, the AICL will leverage on her far-reaching experiences and exposures as a former lawmaker, seasoned diplomat, public administrator, and boardroom strategist.

Aware and ready for the challenges ahead, many staff members were visibly excited when Tamuno assumed office the following day. Thus emerging as the first female chief executive of the AICL, since its 30 years of existence. Described as an accomplished technocrat with identifiable achievements in leadership, strategy, diplomacy, administration, and consulting, Tamuno, in her maiden speech confirmed the postulations of staff members. She emphasized her, “commitment to open-door policy to all staff, urging everyone to operate at the highest standard of transparency, confidentiality, accountability, and ethical business practices.” Continuing, she assured staff members that her, “strategic approach and consumer-centric philosophy are expected to propel the AICL to new heights of success.”

Advertisement

From reports, challenged by the enormity of the task ahead, conscious of the hugely untapped potential of the AICL, buoyed by the political support of Wike, and encouraged by the passion of the staff members, Tamuno literally hit the ground running. As a globally-recognized business development, management, and investment professional, she approached her assignment with iron-cast resolve, and the precision of a surgeon. First off, she embarked on critical reviews and overview of the AICL trajectory from inception; identified germane issues; evolved strategies for re-positioning the company; enunciated quick-wins, short-term, medium-term, and long-term measures for development, and some others. All these were geared towards delivering (or surpassing) the Ministerial mandate, and also ensuring that the AICL contributes its quota to Tinubu’s “Renewed Hope” agenda.

Indeed, it is imperative to note that the AICL, under the superintendent of Tamuno has literally drawn water out of rocks; which before now was largely unthinkable. That the soft-spoken and resourceful amazon; and her team were able to make noticeable impact within just one year, speaks volumes about her ingenuity, and indomitable spirit. In a broad sense, these achievements include encouraging economic diversification; expanding investment opportunities; exploring business and investment exchanges; deepening subsidiaries collaboration; and fostering diplomatic relationships.

In practical terms, the AICL, through some landmark initiatives has provided the platform for the promotion of trade and commerce, as well as economic growth and sustainable investment in the FCT. It is imperative to recall some of these laudable and trail-blazing projects. A few days back, the solar powered Farmers Market in Utako District and Kugbo International Market were commissioned by the FCT Minister of State, Dr. Mariya Mahmud. Speaking at the epoch making events, Mahmud eulogized Tamuno for completing the first-of-its-kind projects which, “would provide employment opportunities for a wide range of people in line with the “Renewed Hope” agenda.” While explaining that the projects are under the Public Private Partnership initiative of the AICL, Tamuno promised that, “under the Build Operate and Transfer (BOT) arrangement, the government will combine with the private sector to create profitable and sustainable public infrastructure. We identified Small and Medium Enterprises, (SMEs) as the backbone of any prosperous economy, because they create jobs that drive sustainable economic growth.” To underscore AICL’s commitment towards encouraging the informal sector, shops were gifted to some hardworking traders from all the six Area Councils of the FCT.

In October 2024, the AICL organized a two-day Abuja Business and Investment Summit with the theme: “Optimizing Investments Through Partnership.” The event, geared towards promoting investment opportunities in the FCT, was attended by major stakeholders in finance, investment, manufacturing, and other sectors. Participants opened new alliances, partnerships, and collaborations for new opportunities and innovations that will lead to micro and macro development. Tamuno, who by the way was one-time Nigeria’s Ambassador to Jamaica is leveraging on her diplomatic credentials and network to re-position the AICL. She is regularly engaging, and exploring investment opportunities with foreign countries through their diplomats in Nigeria. Through her participation at the maiden Nigeria-Kazakhstan Business Conference which was held in Abuja, in 2024, there are advanced plans for the establishment of city-to-city flights between both countries, as well as collaborations in agriculture, education, technology, logistics, and more.

Advertisement

Agreed, the journey is somewhat far but the AICL, under the new chief executive has shown unbridled commitment, and unflinching fervor in elevating the status, and relevance of the company towards engendering meaningful growth and development of the FCT. Tamuno has shown relentless drive and boundless energies towards justifying the confidence reposed in her by Wike. Posting an encouraging report-card in one year deserves commendations and encouragement. Mr. Olugbenga Okanlawon, an Abuja based public affairs analyst declared that, “she has shown that she is the right person for the job. Considering what the AICL has achieved in one year, it is clear that more grounds will be covered in terms of growth and development.” A frequent caller to the AICL who preferred anonymity said, “the GMD has brought a new lease of life to the place, and everybody has imbibed her can-do-it spirit with much pride, and belief.”

* BOLAJI AFOLABI, a Development Communications specialist was with the Office of Public Affairs, The Presidency, Abuja.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Dismantling the false Narrative of a “Coup” in Rivers State

Published

on

By

By Jones Onyereri

The assertions that President Tinubu’s intervention in Rivers State constitutes an unconstitutional power grab or a “military coup in civilian disguise” fundamentally misrepresent the legal, political, and security realities that necessitated federal action. Far from being a partisan maneuver, the declaration of a state of emergency and subsequent measures were lawful, proportionate, and grounded in the imperative to prevent a total collapse of governance and public order. Below is a thorough rebuttal to the allegations:

The Nigerian Constitution explicitly empowers the President to declare a state of emergency under Section 305 when there is a clear threat to public safety or a breakdown of governance. The escalation of pipeline vandalism by militants—which crippled economic activity, endangered lives, and exacerbated environmental degradation—coupled with the Supreme Court’s February 18 judgment highlighting governance failures in Rivers State, provided incontrovertible justification for federal intervention. The claim that “no emergency existed” ignores the state government’s demonstrable inaction in addressing these threats, which risked spiraling into wider violence. Emergency powers are, by design, temporary and exceptional, aimed at restoring stability, not undermining democracy.

The appointment of Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas as Sole Administrator aligns with constitutional provisions for federal intervention during crises. Section 11 of the Constitution permits the National Assembly to legislate for a state in extraordinary circumstances, and the President’s action enjoys implicit legislative backing as a stopgap to avert anarchy. Admiral Ibas, a retired military officer with no overt political ties, was selected for his administrative expertise, not as a proxy for any faction. His mandate is strictly limited to stabilizing the state, facilitating the return to democratic governance, and ensuring the security forces can operate without partisan interference. To equate this with a “military coup” is hyperbolic and disregards the transparent, legal framework guiding his role.

Advertisement

Critics allege defiance of Supreme Court orders regarding state funds, but this misinterprets the interplay between judicial mandates and emergency executive authority. While the Court initially restricted financial flows to Rivers State due to governance disputes, the escalation of the crisis necessitated federal release of funds under the “doctrine of necessity” to sustain critical services like healthcare, education, and infrastructure. The Constitution prioritizes the security and welfare of citizens (Section 14(2)(b)), and the President’s duty to uphold this principle supersedes rigid adherence to procedural norms during emergencies.

The Sole Administrator’s actions, including the formulation of regulations and restructuring of local government administrations, operate within the bounds of his provisional mandate. These regulations require approval by the Federal Executive Council (FEC), ensuring oversight and accountability. The replacement of local government officials was not a “power grab” but a necessary step to dismantle networks complicit in revenue diversion or inefficiency. The Supreme Court’s insistence on democratically elected local governments remains sacrosanct, but interim appointments during emergencies are globally recognized mechanisms to restore functionality before elections can be organized.

Claims that the Administrator has overstepped by preparing a budget or appointing a Secretary to the State Government (SSG) ignore the practical realities of governance. In the absence of a functional State Assembly, provisional budgets based on existing frameworks ensure continuity of public services. Similarly, the appointment of an SSG—a routine administrative role—falls within the Administrator’s authority to maintain bureaucratic operations. These measures are neither permanent nor unconstitutional; they are transitional tools to prevent total institutional paralysis.

The narrative that this intervention serves Minister Wike’s political interests is speculative and distracts from its stated purpose. Restructuring boards and commissions, including the Rivers State Electoral Commission, aims to depoliticize institutions vital to free and fair elections. The focus on “Wike loyalists” assumes nefarious intent without evidence, whereas the Administrator’s appointments could equally reflect efforts to engage experienced personnel familiar with the state’s administrative landscape. The assertion that federal actions target Governor Fubara’s allies conflates routine accountability with persecution; in crises, restructuring is inevitable to eliminate inefficiency or bias.

Advertisement

Regarding the House of Assembly reconstruction, federal involvement ensures the project adheres to timelines and standards, avoiding further delays that could destabilize legislative functions. The Governor’s progress, while commendable, does not negate the need for independent oversight in a volatile environment.

President Tinubu’s intervention is neither indefinite nor authoritarian. Emergency measures will lapse once security is restored, and democratic structures are reinstated. The National Assembly retains the authority to review and curtail these actions under Section 11, ensuring checks and balances. To frame this as a “2027 political takeover” is a cynical distortion of a lawful, necessary intervention to prevent Rivers State from descending into chaos.

In conclusion, the allegations of a “civilian coup” or unconstitutional power grab disregard the constitutional safeguards and urgent pragmatic considerations guiding federal actions. The President’s duty to protect lives and livelihoods in Rivers State transcends political expediency. While vigilance against overreach is prudent, dismissing all stabilization efforts as partisan machinations undermines the legitimate pursuit of peace and order. The people of Rivers State deserve functional governance, not perpetual crisis—and federal intervention, however imperfect, is a constitutional means to that end.

Rt Hon Sir Jones Onyereri PhD, KSP, FCIPAN
April 12, 2025

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Opinion

Tik Tok gets another lifeline from being banned

Published

on

By

By Sonny Aragba-Akpore

On Saturday April 5,United States President Donald Trump announced an extension of 75 days for Tik Tok on his Truth Social platform, saying the TikTok deal “requires more work to ensure all necessary approvals are signed.”
He said he is signing an executive order “to keep TikTok up and running for an additional 75 days.”
With this development, the 170 million subscribers connected to Tik Tok in the United States of America (USA) have another 75 days to meander on the App unhindered.
This new deadline which an Executive Order covers follows the expiration of the first 75 days Order on April 5.
Tik Tok owners,ByteDance of China, have these 75 days to divest completely from the American operations or risk being sent to the dark or being banned.
China faces a 54% aggregate tariff on goods imported into the US, and has retaliated with 34% in counter tariffs.
Reports suggest several potential buyers for TikTok have cropped up in recent days.
Amazon has put in a last-minute offer to the White House to acquire the platform, according to Agency reports though the firm has declined comment.
Several other potential buyers include billionaire Frank McCourt, together with Canadian businessman Kevin O’Leary. Alexis Ohanian, who co-founded Reddit, has said he has joined Mr McCourt’s bid.
Computing giant Microsoft, private equity giant Blackstone, venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz and search engine Perplexity AI are also reportedly in the running for a stake.
Trump has said his administration was in touch with four separate groups interested in a potential TikTok deal, though he has not named them.
Vice-President JD Vance is spearheading the administration’s effort to find a buyer.
The president has also suggested the US could offer a deal where China agrees to approve a TikTok sale in exchange for relief from US tariffs on Chinese imports.
“We hope to continue working in Good Faith with China, who I understand are not very happy about our Reciprocal Tariffs,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.
He added that the trade levies are “the most powerful economic tool, and very important to our national security”.
Trump granted TikTok a second 75-day extension to comply with a law that requires the hugely popular video app to either sell its US operation or face a ban in the country.
“We do not want TikTok to ‘go dark’,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “We look forward to working with TikTok and China to close the Deal.” The platform is currently owned by Chinese company ByteDance.
Trump’s first extension was granted after he took office in January and this expired on Saturday,April 5,2025.
In a statement on Friday, April 4,ByteDance said it had been in discussion with the Trump administration, but “an agreement has not been executed”.
“There are key matters to be resolved. Any agreement will be subject to approval under Chinese law,” a spokesperson said.
Former US President Joe Biden’s administration had argued that TikTok could be used by China as a tool for spying and political manipulation.
Congress passed a bipartisan law last year that gave ByteDance six months to sell its controlling stake in TikTok or see the app blocked in the US.
Opponents of a ban have cited freedom of speech as a reason for keeping the platform open.
But the new extension comes as the Trump administration tries to broker a deal to bring the social media platform under American ownership, and keep the popular app running in the US.
“The Deal requires more work to ensure all necessary approvals are signed,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform on Friday.
The social media platform, which says it has more than 170 million users in the US, must close in the US under a law passed by Congress – unless a buyer is found.
Agency reports that a TikTok deal was nearly finalised on Wednesday last week but fell apart after Trump on the same day announced sweeping global tariffs, including on China.
Agency reports further explained that ByteDance representatives contacted the White House to inform them China would no longer approve the deal unless negotiations on the tariffs could take place .
Unnamed sources said the plan had been for Trump to sign an order initiating a 120-day period for closing the deal, allowing time to finish paperwork and secure financing.
The agreement had won approval from existing investors, new investors, ByteDance, and the US government, but China backed out once Trump imposed the global import taxes.
The Chinese embassy in Washington DC said in a statement that it “opposed practices that violate the basic principles of the market economy”.
A federal law signed by former President Joe Biden in 2024 effectively banned TikTok if it remained under Chinese ownership. The initial law called for the app to permanently go offline on Jan. 20, but Trump signed an executive order extending the deadline by 75 days.
The US TikTok ban, which received overwhelming bipartisan support, required TikTok’s parent, ByteDance, to divest the short-form video app over US concerns that it posed a national security threat.
US officials have long argued that the Chinese government, which is designated as a US adversary, could gain access to Americans’ TikTok user data for nefarious purposes or use the platform to spread propaganda.
The US law banning TikTok forces web service providers to stop hosting the app and requires Apple and Google to pull it from their app stores.
TikTok took a challenge to the law all the way to the US Supreme Court, arguing that it infringed on the company’s First Amendment and other constitutional rights. A group of TikTok users made similar claims in a companion case, claiming they, too, had been deprived of constitutional protections.
But the high court ruled in favor of the government, reasoning that TikTok, as a foreign entity, wasn’t entitled to constitutional protections and that national security concerns outweighed the government’s restriction on TikTok use. The court also said the law was limited in its infringement on free speech because social media users could access and post on other social media platforms.
The Act to ban Tik Tok if it did not divest its operations in the USA was signed with broad support from Republicans and Democrats.
Although some lawmakers had urged President Joe Biden to grant a reprieve to prevent TikTok from going dark in the U.S. as soon as Jan. 19,2025 ,the TikTok ban had already resulted in a number of “TikTok refugees” who moved to another Chinese app, RedNote, short for “Little Red Book.” RedNote became the most downloaded app in Apple’s app store in the U.S. the week leading up to the Supreme Court’s decision. If this trend continues, this “migration” to a similarly situated app might defeat the purpose of the Act. The TikTok ban illustrates how U.S. regulatory actions are designed to mitigate potential threats posed by foreign adversaries, significantly increasing compliance requirements for cross-border investments and technology operations. Particularly, the Supreme Court’s decision upholding the TikTok ban underlines the trend of intensifying scrutiny of foreign-controlled entities that collect or handle sensitive data in the U.S.
Although it’s not clear whether there will be a reprieve for Tik Tok,there are strong indications that the Trump administration needs more time to understand the situation and perhaps to be the one to implement the ban.
TikTok has 1,925 billion users globally, with 170 million monthly active users in the United States.
The average daily time spent on TikTok has more than doubled from 27 minutes in 2019 to 58 minutes in 2024.
The most popular categories on TikTok are Entertainment, Dance, and Pranks, with billions of views each.
Top influencers on TikTok include Charli D’Amelio, Khabane Lame, and Addison Rae, each with tens of millions of followers.
TikTok’s user base has grown exponentially from 133 million in 2018 to over 1,925 billion in 2024.
Daily active users on TikTok have skyrocketed into the millions, reflecting the platform’s ability to engage users on a daily basis.
In the year 2020, Trump issued an executive order citing TikTok’s ability to capture vast amounts of user data as a significant national security threat. The order sought to prohibit certain transactions involving ByteDance but was blocked by federal courts.
Subsequently, the Trump Administration directed ByteDance to divest its U.S. TikTok operations and user data, but these efforts were stalled as negotiations with the president Joe Biden Administration aimed at a nondivestiture agreement failed to resolve the government’s concerns.
ByteDance’s proposed national security agreement was ultimately deemed insufficient to mitigate risks posed by Chinese control. Against this backdrop, Congress enacted the sale-or-ban law, further targeting TikTok and similar applications.
> According to the Supreme Court’s finding, TikTok’s ultimate parent company, ByteDance, is a privately held company that has operations in China. ByteDance owns TikTok’s proprietary algorithm, which is developed and maintained in China. The company is subject to Chinese laws that require it to assist or cooperate with the Chinese government’s intelligence work and to ensure that the Chinese government has the power to access and control private data that the company holds.
Underscored in the decision, TikTok’s extensive data collection from more than 170 million U.S. users could be exploited for surveillance, public influence campaigns or other harmful purposes that threaten national security. The Act and the holding reflect Congress’ and the Supreme Court’s efforts to address growing concerns over foreign adversary-controlled applications through the access to sensitive data of U.S. nationals and the resulting potential risks to U.S. national security.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2024 Naija Blitz News