December 20th 2013
His Excellency,
Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, GCFR
Agbe L’Oba House, Quarry Road,
Ibara, Abeokuta.
Re: Before it is too late
I wish to formally acknowledge your letter dated December 2, 2013 and other previous correspondence similar to it.
You will recall that all the letters were brought to me by hand. Although both of us discussed some of the issues in those letters, I had not, before now, seen the need for any formal reply since, to me, they contained advice from a former President to a serving President. Obviously, you felt differently because in your last letter, you complained about my not acknowledging or replying your previous letters.
It is with the greatest possible reluctance that I now write this reply. I am most uneasy about embarking on this unprecedented and unconventional form of open communication between me and a former leader of our country because I know that there are more acceptable and dignified means of doing so.
But I feel obliged to reply your letter for a number of reasons: one, you formally requested for a reply and not sending you one will be interpreted as ignoring a former President.
Secondly, Nigerians know the role you have played in my political life and given the unfortunate tone of your letter, clearly, the grapes have gone sour. Therefore, my side of the story also needs to be told.
The third reason why I must reply you in writing is that your letter is clearly a threat to national security as it may deliberately or inadvertently set the stage for subversion.
The fourth reason for this reply is that you raised very weighty issues, and since the letter has been made public, Nigerians are expressing legitimate concerns. A response from me therefore, becomes very necessary.
The fifth reason is that this letter may appear in biographies and other books which political commentators on Nigeria’s contemporary politics may write. It is only proper for such publications to include my comments on the issues raised in your letter.
Sixthly, you are very unique in terms of the governance of this country. You were a military Head of State for three years and eight months, and an elected President for eight years. That means you have been the Head of Government of Nigeria for about twelve years. This must have, presumably, exposed you to a lot of information. Thus when you make a statement, there is the tendency for people to take it seriously.
The seventh reason is that the timing of your letter coincided with other vicious releases. The Speaker of the House of Representatives spoke of my “body language” encouraging corruption. A letter written to me by the CBN Governor alleging that NNPC, within a period of 19 months did not remit the sum of USD49.8 billion to the federation account, was also deliberately leaked to the public.
The eighth reason is that it appears that your letter was designed to incite Nigerians from other geopolitical zones against me and also calculated to promote ethnic disharmony. Worse still, your letter was designed to instigate members of our Party, the PDP, against me.
The ninth reason is that your letter conveys to me the feeling that landmines have been laid for me. Therefore, Nigerians need to have my response to the issues raised before the mines explode.
The tenth and final reason why my reply is inevitable is that you have written similar letters and made public comments in reference to all former Presidents and Heads of Government starting from Alhaji Shehu Shagari and these have instigated different actions and reactions. The purpose and direction of your letter is distinctly ominous, and before it is too late, my clarifications on the issues need to be placed on record.
Let me now comment on the issues you raised. In commenting I wish to crave your indulgence to compare what is happening now to what took place before. This, I believe, will enable Nigerians see things in better perspective because we must know where we are coming from so as to appreciate where we now are, and to allow us clearly map out where we are going.
You raised concerns about the security situation in the country. I assure you that I am fully aware of the responsibility of government for ensuring the security of the lives and property of citizens. My Administration is working assiduously to overcome current national security challenges, the seeds of which were sown under previous administrations. There have been some setbacks; but certainly there have also been great successes in our efforts to overcome terrorism and insurgency.
Those who continue to down-play our successes in this regard, amongst whom you must now be numbered, appear to have conveniently forgotten the depths to which security in our country had plunged before now.
At a stage, almost the entire North-East of Nigeria was under siege by insurgents. Bombings of churches and public buildings in the North and the federal capital became an almost weekly occurrence. Our entire national security apparatus seemed nonplussed and unable to come to grips with the new threat posed by the berthing of terrorism on our shores.
But my administration has since brought that very unacceptable situation under significant control. We have overhauled our entire national security architecture, improved intelligence gathering, training, funding, logistical support to our armed forces and security agencies, and security collaboration with friendly countries with very visible and positive results.
The scope and impact of terrorist operations have been significantly reduced and efforts are underway to restore full normalcy to the most affected North Eastern region and initiate a post-crisis development agenda, including a special intervention programme to boost the region’s socio-economic progress.
In doing all this, we have kept our doors open for dialogue with the insurgents and their supporters through efforts such as the work of the Presidential Committee on Dialogue and the Peaceful Resolution of the Security Challenges in the North-East. You also know that the Governor of Borno State provided the items you mentioned to me as carrots. Having done all this and more, it is interesting that you still accuse me of not acting on your hardly original recommendation that the carrot and stick option be deployed to solve the Boko Haram problem.
Your suggestion that we are pursuing a “war against violence without understanding the root causes of the violence and applying solutions to deal with all the underlying factors” is definitely misplaced because from the onset of this administration, we have been implementing a multifaceted strategy against militancy, insurgency and terrorism that includes poverty alleviation, economic development, education and social reforms.
Even though basic education is the constitutional responsibility of States, my administration has, as part of its efforts to address ignorance and poor education which have been identified as two of the factors responsible for making some of our youth easily available for use as cannon fodder by insurgents and terrorists, committed huge funds to the provision of modern basic education schools for the Almajiri in several Northern States. The Federal Government under my leadership has also set up nine additional universities in the Northern States and three in the Southern States in keeping with my belief that proper education is the surest way of emancipating and empowering our people.
More uncharitable persons may even see a touch of sanctimoniousness in your new belief in the carrot and stick approach to overcoming militancy and insurgency. You have always referred to how you hit Odi in Bayelsa State to curb militancy in the Niger Delta. If the invasion of Odi by the Army was the stick, I did not see the corresponding carrot. I was the Deputy Governor of Bayelsa State then, and as I have always told you, the invasion of Odi did not solve any militancy problem but, to some extent, escalated it. If it had solved it, late President Yar’Adua would not have had to come up with the amnesty program. And while some elements of the problem may still be there, in general, the situation is reasonably better.
In terms of general insecurity in the country and particularly the crisis in the Niger Delta, 2007 was one of the worst periods in our history. You will recall three incidents that happened in 2007 which seemed to have been orchestrated to achieve sinister objectives. Here in Abuja, a petrol tanker loaded with explosives was to be rammed into the INEC building. But luckily for the country, an electric pole stopped the tanker from hitting the INEC building. It is clear that this incident was meant to exploit the general sense of insecurity in the nation at the time to achieve the aim of stopping the 2007 elections. It is instructive that you, on a number of occasions, alluded to this fact.
When that incident failed, an armed group invaded Yenagoa one evening with the intent to assassinate me. Luckily for me, they could not. They again attacked and bombed my country home on a night when I was expected in the village. Fortunately, as God would have it, I did not make the trip.
I recall that immediately after both incidents, I got calls expressing the concern of Abuja. But Baba, you know that despite the apparent concern of Abuja, no single arrest was ever made. I was then the Governor of Bayelsa State and the PDP Vice-Presidential candidate. The security people ordinarily should have unraveled the assassination attempt on me.
You also raised the issues of kidnapping, piracy and armed robbery. These are issues all Nigerians, including me are very concerned about. While we will continue to do our utmost best to reduce all forms of criminality to the barest minimum in our country, it is just as well to remind you that the first major case of kidnapping for ransom took place around 2006. And the Boko Haram crisis dates back to 2002. Goodluck Jonathan was not the President of the country then. Also, armed robbery started in this country immediately after the civil war and since then, it has been a problem to all succeeding governments. For a former Head of Government, who should know better, to present these problems as if they were creations of the Jonathan Administration is most uncharitable.
Having said that, let me remind you of some of the things we have done to curb violent crime in the country. We have reorganized the Nigerian Police Force and appointed a more dynamic leadership to oversee its affairs. We have also improved its manpower levels as well as funding, training and logistical support.
We have also increased the surveillance capabilities of the Police and provided its air-wing with thrice the number of helicopters it had before the inception of the present administration. The National Civil Defence and Security Corps has been armed to make it a much more effective ally of the police and other security agencies in the war against violent crime. At both domestic and international levels, we are doing everything possible to curb the proliferation of the small arms and light weapons with which armed robberies, kidnappings and piracy are perpetrated. We have also enhanced security at our borders to curb cross-border crimes.
We are aggressively addressing the challenge of crude oil theft in collaboration with the state Governors. In addition, the Federal Government has engaged the British and US governments for their support in the tracking of the proceeds from the purchase of stolen crude. Similarly, a regional Gulf of Guinea security strategy has been initiated to curb crude oil theft and piracy.
Perhaps the most invidious accusation in your letter is the allegation that I have placed over one thousand Nigerians on a political watch list, and that I am training snipers and other militia to assassinate people. Baba, I don’t know where you got that from but you do me grave injustice in not only lending credence to such baseless rumours, but also publicizing it. You mentioned God seventeen times in your letter. Can you as a Christian hold the Bible and say that you truly believe this allegation?
The allegation of training snipers to assassinate political opponents is particularly incomprehensible to me. Since I started my political career as a Deputy Governor, I have never been associated with any form of political violence. I have been a President for over three years now, with a lot of challenges and opposition mainly from the high and mighty. There have certainly been cases of political assassination since the advent of our Fourth Republic, but as you well know, none of them occurred under my leadership.
Regarding the over one thousand people you say are on a political watch list, I urge you to kindly tell Nigerians who they are and what agencies of government are “watching” them. Your allegation that I am using security operatives to harass people is also baseless. Nigerians are waiting for your evidence of proof. That was an accusation made against previous administrations, including yours, but it is certainly not my style and will never be. Again, if you insist on the spurious claim that some of your relatives and friends are being harassed, I urge you to name them and tell Nigerians what agencies of my administration are harassing them.
I also find it difficult to believe that you will accuse me of assisting murderers, or assigning a presidential delegation to welcome a murderer. This is a most unconscionable and untrue allegation. It is incumbent on me to remind you that I am fully conscious of the dictates of my responsibilities to God and our dear nation. It is my hope that devious elements will not take advantage of your baseless allegation to engage in brazen and wanton assassination of high profile politicians as before, hiding under the alibi your “open letter” has provided for them.
Nevertheless, I have directed the security agencies and requested the National Human Rights Commission to carry out a thorough investigation of these criminal allegations and make their findings public.
That corruption is an issue in Nigeria is indisputable. It has been with us for many years. You will recall that your kinsman, the renowned afro-beat maestro, Fela Anikulapo-Kuti famously sang about it during your first stint as Head of State. Sonny Okosun also sang about corruption. And as you may recall, a number of Army Generals were to be retired because of corruption before the Dimka coup. Also, the late General Murtala Mohammed himself wanted to retire some top people in his cabinet on corruption-related issues before he was assassinated. Even in this Fourth Republic, the Siemens and Halliburton scandals are well known.
The seed of corruption in this country was planted a long time ago, but we are doing all that we can to drastically reduce its debilitating effects on national development and progress. I have been strengthening the institutions established to fight corruption. I will not shield any government official or private individual involved in corruption, but I must follow due process in all that I do. And whenever clear cases of corruption or fraud have been established, my administration has always taken prompt action in keeping with the dictates of extant laws and procedures. You cannot claim to be unaware of the fact that several highly placed persons in our country, including sons of some of our party leaders are currently facing trial for their involvement in the celebrated subsidy scam affair. I can hardly be blamed if the wheels of justice still grind very slowly in our country, but we are doing our best to support and encourage the judiciary to quicken the pace of adjudication in cases of corruption.
Baba, I am amazed that with all the knowledge garnered from your many years at the highest level of governance in our country, you could still believe the spurious allegation contained in a letter written to me by the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), and surreptitiously obtained by you, alleging that USD49.8 billion, a sum equal to our entire national budget for two years, is “unaccounted for” by the NNPC. Since, as President, you also served for many years as Minister of Petroleum Resources, you very well know the workings of the corporation. It is therefore intriguing that you have made such an assertion. You made a lot of insinuations about oil theft, shady dealings at the NNPC and the NNPC not remitting the full proceeds of oil sales to the of CBN. Now that the main source of the allegations which you rehashed has publicly stated that he was “misconstrued”, perhaps you will find it in your heart to apologize for misleading unwary Nigerians and impugning the integrity of my administration on that score.
Your claim of “Atlantic Oil loading about 130, 000 barrels sold by Shell and managed on behalf of NPDC with no sale proceeds paid into the NPDC account” is also disjointed and baseless because no such arrangement as you described exists between Atlantic Oil and the Nigeria Petroleum Development Company. NPDC currently produces about 138, 000 barrels of oil per day from over 7 producing assets. The Crude Oil Marketing Division (COMD) of the NNPC markets all of this production on behalf of NPDC with proceeds paid into NPDC account.
I am really shocked that with all avenues open to you as a former Head of State for the verification of any information you have received about state affairs, you chose to go public with allegations of “high corruption” without offering a shred of supporting evidence. One of your political “sons” similarly alleged recently that he told me of a minister who received a bribe of $250 Million from an oil company and I did nothing about it. He may have been playing from a shared script, but we have not heard from him again since he was challenged to name the minister involved and provide the evidence to back his claim. I urge you, in the same vein, to furnish me with the names, facts and figures of a single verifiable case of the “high corruption” which you say stinks all around my administration and see whether the corrective action you advocate does not follow promptly. And while you are at it, you may also wish to tell Nigerians the true story of questionable waivers of signature bonuses between 2000 and 2007.
While, by the Grace of God Almighty, I am the first President from a minority group, I am never unmindful of the fact that I was elected leader of the whole of Nigeria and I have always acted in the best interest of all Nigerians. You referred to the divisive actions and inflammatory utterances of some individuals from the South-South and asserted that I have done nothing to call them to order or distance myself from their ethnic chauvinism. Again that is very untrue. I am as committed to the unity of this country as any patriot can be and I have publicly declared on many occasions that no person who threatens other Nigerians or parts of the country is acting on my behalf.
It is very regrettable that in your letter, you seem to place sole responsibility for the ongoing intrigues and tensions in the PDP at my doorstep, and going on from that position, you direct all your appeals for a resolution at me. Baba, let us all be truthful to ourselves, God and posterity. At the heart of all the current troubles in our party and the larger polity is the unbridled jostling and positioning for personal or group advantage ahead of the 2015 general elections. The “bitterness, anger, mistrust, fear and deep suspicion” you wrote about all flow from this singular factor.
It is indeed very unfortunate that the seeming crisis in the party was instigated by a few senior members of the party, including you. But, as leader of the party, I will continue to do my best to unite it so that we can move forward with strength and unity of purpose. The PDP has always recovered from previous crises with renewed vigour and vitality. I am very optimistic that that will be the case again this time. The PDP will overcome any temporary setback, remain a strong party and even grow stronger.
Instigating people to cause problems and disaffection within the party is something that you are certainly familiar with. You will recall that founding fathers of the Party were frustrated out of the Party at a time. Late Chief Sunday Awoniyi was pushed out, Late Chief Solomon Lar left and later came back, Chief Audu Ogbeh and Chief Tom Ikimi also left. Chief Okwesilieze Nwodo left and later came back. In 2005/2006, link-men were sent to take over party structures from PDP Governors in an unveiled attempt to undermine the state governors. In spite of that, the Governors did not leave the Party because nobody instigated and encouraged them to do so.
The charge that I was involved in anti-party activities in governorship elections in Edo, Ondo, Lagos, and Anambra States is also very unfortunate. I relate with all Governors irrespective of political party affiliation but I have not worked against the interest of the PDP. What I have not done is to influence the electoral process to favour our Party. You were definitely never so inclined, since you openly boasted in your letter of how you supported Alhaji Shehu Shagari against Chief Obafemi Awolowo, Chief Nnamdi Azikiwe and others in the 1979 presidential elections while serving as a military Head of State. You and I clearly differ in this regard, because as the President of Nigeria, I believe it is my duty and responsibility to create a level playing field for all parties and all candidates.
Recalling how the PDP lost in states where we were very strong in 2003 and 2007 such as Edo, Ondo, Imo, Bauchi, Anambra, and Borno, longstanding members of our great party with good memory will also consider the charge of anti-party activities you made against me as misdirected and hugely hypocritical. It certainly was not Goodluck Jonathan’s “personal ambition or selfish interest” that caused the PDP to lose the governorship of Ogun State and all its senatorial seats in the last general elections.
You quoted me as saying that I have not told anybody that I will seek another term in office in 2015. You and your ambitious acolytes within the party have clearly decided to act on your conclusion that “only a fool will believe that statement” and embark on a virulent campaign to harass me out of an undeclared candidature for the 2015 presidential elections so as to pave the way for a successor anointed by you.
You will recall that you serially advised me that we should refrain from discussing the 2015 general elections for now so as not to distract elected public officials from urgent task of governance. While you have apparently moved away from that position, I am still of the considered opinion that it would have been best for us to do all that is necessary to refrain from heating up the polity at this time. Accordingly, I have already informed Nigerians that I will only speak on whether or not I will seek a second term when it is time for such declarations. Your claims about discussions I had with you, Governor Gabriel Suswam and others are wrong, but in keeping with my declared stance, I will reserve further comments until the appropriate time.
Your allegation that I asked half a dozen African Presidents to speak to you about my alleged ambition for 2015, is also untrue. I have never requested any African President to discuss with you on my behalf. In our discussion, I mentioned to you that four Presidents told me that they were concerned about the political situation in Nigeria and intended to talk to you about it. So far, only three of them have confirmed to me that they have had any discussion with you. If I made such a request, why would I deny it?
The issue of Buruji Kashamu is one of those lies that should not be associated with a former President. The allegation that I am imposing Kashamu on the South-West is most unfortunate and regrettable. I do not even impose Party officials in my home state of Bayelsa and there is no zone in this country where I have imposed officials. So why would I do so in the South West? Baba, in the light of Buruji’s detailed public response to your “open letter”, it will be charitable for you to render an apology to Nigerians and I.
On the issue of investors being scared to come to Nigeria, economic dormancy, and stagnation, I will just refer you to FDI statistics from 2000 to 2013. Within the last three years, Nigeria has emerged as the preferred destination for investments in Africa, driven by successful government policies to attract foreign investors. For the second year running, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Investments (UNCTAD) has ranked Nigeria as the number one destination for investments in Africa, and as having the fourth highest returns in the world.
Today, Nigeria is holding 18 percent of all foreign investments in Africa and 60 percent of all foreign investments in the ECOWAS Sub-Region. Kindly note also that in the seven years between 2000 and 2007 when you were President, Nigeria attracted a total of $24.9 Billion in FDI. As a result of our efforts which you disparage, the country has seen an FDI inflow of $25.7 Billion in just three years which is more than double the FDI that has gone to the second highest African destination. We have also maintained an annual national economic growth rate of close to seven per cent since the inception of this administration. What then, is the justification for your allegation of scared investors and economic dormancy?
Although it was not emphasized in your letter of December 2, 2013, you also conveyed, in previous correspondence, the impression that you were ignorant of the very notable achievements of my administration in the area of foreign relations. It is on record that under my leadership, Nigeria has played a key role in resolving the conflicts in Niger, Cote d’Ivoire, Mali, Guinea Bissau and others.
The unproductive rivalry that existed between Nigeria and some ECOWAS countries has also been ended under my watch and Nigeria now has better relations with all the ECOWAS countries. At the African Union, we now have a Commissioner at the AU Commission after being without one for so long. We were in the United Nations Security Council for the 2010/2011 Session and we have been voted in again for the 2014/2015 Session. From independence to 2010, we were in the U.N. Security Council only three times but from 2010 to 2015, we will be there two times.
This did not happen by chance. My Administration worked hard for it and we continue to maintain the best possible relations with all centres of global political and economic power. I find it hard therefore, to believe your assertions of untoward concern in the international community over the state of governance in Nigeria
With respect to the Brass and Olokola LNG projects, you may have forgotten that though you started these projects, Final Investment Decisions were never reached. For your information, NNPC has not withdrawn from either the Olokola or the Brass LNG projects.
On the Rivers State Water Project, you were misled by your informant. The Federal Government under my watch has never directed or instructed the Africa Development Bank to put on hold any project to be executed in Rivers state or any other State within the Federation. The Rivers Water Project was not originally in the borrowing plan but it was included in April 2013 and appraised in May. Negotiations are ongoing with the AfDB. I have no doubt that you are familiar with the entire process that prefaces the signing of a Subsidiary Loan Agreement as in this instance.
Let me assure you and all Nigerians that I do not engage in negative political actions and will never, as President, oppress the people of a State or deprive them of much needed public services as a result of political disagreement
I have noted your comments on the proposed National Conference. Contrary to the insinuation in your letter, the proposed conference is aimed at bringing Nigerians together to resolve contentious national issues in a formal setting. This is a sure way of promoting greater national consensus and unity, and not a recipe for “disunity, confusion and chaos” as you alleged in your letter.
Having twice held the high office of President, Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, I trust that you will understand that I cannot possibly find the time to offer a line-by-line response to all the accusations and allegations made in your letter while dealing with other pressing demands of office and more urgent affairs of state.
I have tried, however, to respond to only the most serious of the charges which question my sincerity, personal honour, and commitment to the oath which I have sworn, to always uphold and protect the interests of all Nigerians, and promote their well-being.
In closing, let me state that you have done me grave injustice with your public letter in which you wrongfully accused me of deceit, deception, dishonesty, incompetence, clannishness, divisiveness and insincerity, amongst other ills.
I have not, myself, ever claimed to be all-knowing or infallible, but I have never taken Nigeria or Nigerians for granted as you implied, and I will continue to do my utmost to steer our ship of state towards the brighter future to which we all aspire.
Please accept the assurances of my highest consideration and warm regards
GOODLUCK EBELE JONATHAN
 |
|
Every institution has its defining scandal. For some, it is corruption. For others, incompetence. For a few particularly unfortunate organizations, it is both. The latest controversy engulfing Nigeria's Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) belongs to a more modern category of institutional failure: the inability to protect the very information entrusted to its care.
According to the commission itself, the confidential voter information of the actor and politician Emeka Ike appears to have been accessed through the misuse of authorized internal credentials and subsequently found its way into the public arena. The particulars of the investigation remain to be established. Yet the broader significance of the affair is already clear. The issue is not Emeka Ike. The issue is that over 90 million Nigerians have handed their personal information to an institution that now appears uncertain whether it can keep that information secure.
One of the curiosities of Nigerian public life is that institutions are often judged not by their formal powers but by their accumulated reputations. The police may possess impressive legal authority, but citizens judge them by roadside encounters. Anti-corruption agencies may wield extensive statutes, but the public measures them by whom they prosecute; and whom they do not. INEC is no different. Its constitutional authority is immense. Its credibility is not. For years, the commission has struggled under a burden familiar to many Nigerian institutions: the persistent suspicion that it is less independent than its title suggests and less competent than its responsibilities require. The latest episode does nothing to lighten that burden.
The commission's immediate response was predictable. There will be investigations. There will be audits. There will be disciplinary proceedings. There will be solemn assurances that systems remain secure. There always are. Modern bureaucracies have developed a remarkable talent for announcing investigations into failures that citizens would prefer had never occurred in the first place. The problem for INEC is that confidence, once lost, cannot be restored through press releases. It is difficult to overstate the seriousness of the allegation. Electoral commissions occupy a unique position in democratic societies. Banks safeguard money. Courts safeguard justice. Electoral commissions safeguard legitimacy itself.
Citizens surrender their personal information to such institutions because they assume it will be protected by rigorous procedures, professional ethics and strict accountability. When information allegedly escapes from within the institution itself, the damage extends beyond privacy. It reaches into trust. And trust is the only truly irreplaceable asset an electoral commission possesses. The irony is particularly painful because Nigeria is approaching another election cycle. The closer the country moves toward 2027, the more important public confidence becomes. Elections are not merely contests of votes. They are contests of legitimacy. Citizens must believe not only that ballots will be counted correctly but that the institutions overseeing the process are impartial, competent and secure.
An electoral commission that cannot convincingly explain how sensitive data found its way into political combat is an electoral commission inviting uncomfortable questions. What else can be accessed? Who can access it? How often has this happened before? How many other records have been viewed, shared or exploited without public knowledge? These questions may prove unfair. That is precisely the problem. Trustworthy institutions are not forced to answer such questions because citizens assume the answers are reassuring. Distrusted institutions are compelled to answer them because citizens assume the opposite. The affair also illuminates a deeper malaise within INEC. The commission has spent years defending itself against accusations of bias, incompetence, technological failures and administrative inconsistency. Each controversy, considered individually, may be survivable. Together they create a corrosive cumulative effect. The public begins to suspect that dysfunction is not episodic but structural.
The danger for Professor Joash Amupitan is that he may discover that he inherited more than an institution. He inherited a reputation. And reputations are far harder to reform than procedures. His predecessor spent years assuring Nigerians that technology would strengthen electoral integrity. Yet technology is only as trustworthy as the people entrusted with it. The most sophisticated database in Africa becomes worthless if insiders can allegedly access sensitive information for political purposes. Cybersecurity failures are often described as technical problems. They are not. They are governance problems. They reveal weaknesses in oversight, discipline, accountability and institutional culture.
The truly alarming possibility raised by this affair is not that a rogue individual may have acted improperly. Every large organization contains rogue individuals. The alarming possibility is that such behavior might have been considered sufficiently normal, sufficiently risk-free, or sufficiently consequence-free to occur at all. That would represent not merely a breach of data. It would represent a breach of culture. Professor Amupitan now faces a test that will define his tenure more than any speech, workshop or strategic plan. Nigerians do not need another committee. They need proof. Proof that the commission knows who was responsible. Proof that meaningful sanctions will follow. Proof that political connections will not serve as a protective shield.
Proof that voter information is secure. And above all, proof that INEC understands the gravity of the trust placed in it. For an electoral commission occupies a peculiar position in a democracy. Citizens may dislike governments. They may distrust politicians. They may quarrel endlessly over parties and ideologies. But they must believe in the referee. When the referee begins to look compromised, every future contest becomes suspect. That is why this controversy matters far beyond one actor, one leaked record, or one alleged misuse of credentials. It concerns the institution that certifies democratic legitimacy in Africa's largest democracy.
News
In the impatient age of quarterly capitalism, where executives are judged by immediate returns and investors demand instant gratification, patience has become one of the rarest commodities in business. Yet patience, more than brilliance or bravado, has always distinguished the true institution-builder from the mere opportunist. Few contemporary African businessmen embody this distinction more convincingly than Tony Elumelu.
As Heirs Insurance Group marks its fifth anniversary in June 2026, the milestone is significant not merely because of the company’s rapid ascent within Nigeria’s notoriously underpenetrated insurance sector, but because its story is, fundamentally, a meditation on endurance. Behind the celebratory speeches, growth metrics and corporate accolades lies a less glamorous but more revealing reality: the operational licenses that birthed Heirs Insurance took eight years to secure. Yes, you read it correctly. Eight years.
In most corporate boardrooms, eight years of regulatory limbo would have been sufficient to extinguish enthusiasm, redirect capital elsewhere and bury the idea quietly beneath the sediment of abandoned ambitions. Yet Tony Elumelu persisted. That persistence now appears less like stubbornness and more like strategic foresight.
The launch of Heirs Insurance in 2021 alongside the commissioning of Heirs Towers was never merely the unveiling of another financial-services company. It was the extension of a wider philosophical project that has animated Elumelu’s business career for decades: the conviction that African-owned institutions can achieve scale, sophistication and competitiveness comparable to any global peer.
Today, barely five years later, Heirs Insurance serves nearly two million customers across Nigeria. The Financial Times recently ranked Heirs Life Assurance seventh and Heirs General Insurance forty-first among Africa’s fastest-growing companies, a remarkable feat in a sector that has historically struggled for relevance in Nigeria’s economic life.
The statistics become even more impressive when placed against the broader context of the Nigerian insurance industry itself. Insurance penetration in Nigeria remains below one per cent of GDP, one of the lowest rates globally. In practical terms, this means millions of Nigerians continue to rely on informal family structures, religious solidarity and personal improvisation as substitutes for formal risk protection. Insurance, for many, remains distant, misunderstood or distrusted. It is precisely this structural weakness that Heirs Insurance identified as an opportunity.
Rather than replicate the orthodox models of legacy insurers—many of which remain trapped in bureaucratic inertia and elite urban markets—the company pursued a strategy built around accessibility, technology and scale. Digital onboarding replaced cumbersome paperwork. Mobile-first products lowered entry barriers. Microinsurance products targeted demographics long ignored by traditional operators. Insurance was repositioned not as an elite financial abstraction, but as an everyday instrument of economic dignity.
This was not accidental innovation. It reflected a broader understanding of Africa’s evolving economic realities. Across the continent, formal banking, telecommunications and digital commerce have expanded most successfully where firms adapted products to local realities rather than imported rigid Western templates. Heirs Insurance belongs firmly within this new generation of African institutions that understand scale emerges not from exclusivity, but from inclusion.
Equally significant has been the ecosystem advantage engineered through Heirs Holdings itself. Cross-selling synergies involving UBA, Transcorp and Heirs Energies have accelerated customer acquisition and institutional visibility in ways standalone insurers would struggle to replicate. It is an illustration of strategic integration rarely executed successfully within African conglomerates, where diversification often degenerates into incoherence. Under Elumelu, however, the architecture appears deliberate: finance, energy, hospitality and insurance reinforcing one another within a broader continental vision.
Yet perhaps the most important aspect of the Heirs Insurance story lies not in balance sheets or rankings, but in what it reveals about Tony Elumelu’s peculiar temperament as a builder of institutions. Modern business culture frequently glorifies disruption, aggression and velocity. Elumelu’s approach has often been more measured, almost old-fashioned in its emphasis on staying power. He has long understood that enduring institutions are not constructed through viral moments, but through sustained discipline, strategic patience and reputational consistency.
This philosophy has become increasingly rare in contemporary Africa, where political instability, policy unpredictability and weak institutions often encourage short-term extraction over long-term investment. The temptation for many investors is to maximize immediate returns while minimizing exposure to systemic uncertainty. Elumelu, by contrast, has repeatedly chosen the more difficult route of institutional permanence.
The eight-year wait for licensing is therefore not a footnote to the Heirs Insurance story. It is the story. For what distinguished the venture was not merely the availability of capital, but the willingness to remain committed during prolonged uncertainty. Capital, after all, is abundant globally. Conviction is scarcer. Operational leadership from senior Heirs executives such as Niyi Onifade and Wole Fayemi has undoubtedly translated vision into execution. But execution alone does not create institutions. Institutions emerge when leadership combines operational competence with philosophical clarity about purpose and time horizon.
Elumelu’s broader advocacy for raising Nigeria’s insurance penetration to three per cent of GDP similarly reflects a strategic understanding that no company can thrive sustainably within a weak ecosystem. The ambition is not merely corporate expansion, but sectoral transformation itself. If achieved, such growth would deepen financial inclusion, expand long-term domestic capital pools and strengthen economic resilience across households and businesses alike.
At a deeper level, Heirs Insurance also represents something symbolic within the African corporate imagination. For decades, African financial sectors were dominated either by foreign multinationals or by indigenous firms constrained by insufficient scale, technological weakness or governance deficiencies. The emergence of globally competitive African-owned institutions capable of combining technological sophistication with continental ambition marks an important psychological transition.
It is this larger symbolism that makes the Heirs Insurance anniversary noteworthy beyond corporate ceremony. Five years may appear brief in the lifespan of institutions. But within those five years lies evidence of something increasingly consequential in African capitalism: the emergence of patient capital guided not merely by opportunism, but by vision. Tony Elumelu’s enduring lesson is therefore deceptively simple. Institutions are not miracles. They are acts of sustained belief.
In an era intoxicated by immediacy, Heirs Insurance stands as a reminder that the most important revolutions are often quiet ones; built patiently, painstakingly and almost stubbornly over time until what once seemed improbable becomes inevitable.
In The Spotlight
Every nation eventually confronts defining moments when history demands not hesitation, but courage.
Nigeria has arrived at such a moment. Across the country today, fear has become an unwelcome companion of ordinary existence. Farmers abandon fertile farmlands because criminal gangs roam forests with impunity. Parents send children to school with silent prayers of safe return. Rural communities organize crude vigilante systems because the state’s formal security presence is either distant, overstretched or entirely absent. Highways have become theatres of dread. Entire villages sleep with one eye open. In a nation constitutionally established to guarantee the security and welfare of its citizens, this condition is neither sustainable nor morally defensible.
At the center of this national anxiety lies a difficult but unavoidable truth: Nigeria’s policing architecture no longer corresponds with Nigeria’s realities. A federation of more than two hundred million people, sprawling across vast ethnic, linguistic and geographic complexities, cannot continue to rely exclusively on a policing framework designed for a far smaller and less complicated post-colonial state. Terrorism, banditry, kidnapping, cybercrime, cultism, farmer-herder violence and transnational criminal enterprises now operate with terrifying sophistication, exploiting terrain, technology and local intelligence far more effectively than the state itself.
And yet, policing remains excessively centralized. This contradiction has become one of the great absurdities of Nigerian governance. The tragedy is that Nigeria once understood better. Before military centralization dismantled the federal balance after January 1966, the regions exercised substantial authority over local security administration. The Western Region under Chief Obafemi Awolowo appreciated a principle that successful federations across the world have long embraced: security is most effective when institutions are closest to the people they serve.
A police officer who understands the language of a community, its customs, geography, conflict patterns and informal intelligence networks possesses an immeasurable operational advantage over one dispatched from a distant command unfamiliar with local realities. Criminality is often local before it becomes national. Intelligence is most valuable at the point closest to its origin. Security delayed is security denied.
For decades, constitutional conferences, security experts, governors, traditional rulers and civil society groups have repeatedly argued for State Police. The recommendation has survived successive administrations because the logic underpinning it has become increasingly undeniable. What is remarkable is not that Nigerians continue demanding State Police. What is remarkable is that Nigeria has delayed so long in accepting the obvious.
The objections, naturally, are familiar. Critics warn about potential abuse by state governors. They invoke memories of regional political intimidation during the First Republic. They fear the emergence of partisan security structures weaponized against political opponents. Such concerns are legitimate. But they are not sufficient grounds for paralysis.
Every democratic institution carries the possibility of abuse. Legislatures abuse power. Courts sometimes err. Elections are manipulated. Yet civilized societies do not abolish institutions because of potential misuse. They construct safeguards, oversight mechanisms and constitutional restraints to minimize abuse while preserving functionality. The answer to institutional weakness is reform, not fear.
Indeed, Nigeria already entrusts states with enormous responsibilities affecting citizens’ liberties and livelihoods: education, healthcare, transportation, taxation and judicial administration. To argue that states are mature enough to run universities but too immature to participate meaningfully in policing reflects a curious inconsistency. What Nigeria requires is not reckless decentralization, but intelligent constitutional engineering.
Independent police service commissions, legislative oversight, transparent recruitment standards, judicial accountability, federal supervisory mechanisms and clearly defined operational jurisdictions can provide necessary safeguards against abuse. Successful federations across the world have demonstrated that local policing and national cohesion are not contradictory principles.
The United States, Canada, Germany and Australia all operate layered policing systems balancing local responsiveness with federal coordination. Their experiences demonstrate a fundamental truth of federalism: effective governance is rarely governance concentrated entirely at the center. It is governance distributed intelligently.
Section 14(2)(b) of Nigeria’s Constitution states unequivocally that “the security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government.” That provision is not decorative constitutional poetry. It is an enforceable moral obligation imposed upon the state itself. Any institutional arrangement that persistently fails to fulfill that obligation must eventually submit itself to reform.
This is why the State Police debate transcends politics. It is ultimately about survival, constitutional responsibility and the moral legitimacy of governance itself.
And this is where President Bola Ahmed Tinubu now stands before history. Long before becoming president, Tinubu consistently advocated restructuring and a more functional federal arrangement. He repeatedly argued that over-centralization weakened governance efficiency and undermined national development. Unlike many politicians who discovered federalism only after leaving office, Tinubu’s position on restructuring predates his presidency by decades. Today, he possesses a rare opportunity granted to very few leaders: the opportunity to transform a long-deferred constitutional aspiration into reality. Leadership is ultimately tested not by rhetoric, but by whether difficult reforms are pursued when politically inconvenient.
For decades, State Police existed largely as intellectual consensus trapped inside conference reports, constitutional memoranda and policy debates. Many leaders acknowledged its necessity privately while lacking the political courage to confront the complexities publicly. President Tinubu appears determined to alter that trajectory. By opening serious constitutional engagement around State Police, he has initiated what may become one of the most consequential federal reforms since Nigeria’s return to civilian rule in 1999. The significance extends far beyond policing itself. At stake is the larger philosophical question of whether Nigeria genuinely intends to operate as a federation or merely preserve the appearance of one.
Federalism is not merely about geography. It is about trust. It is the recognition that local communities possess legitimate capacities for self-governance within a unified national framework. It is the understanding that national strength often emerges not from excessive concentration of power, but from the effective distribution of responsibility. Nigeria’s insecurity crisis has already exposed the limitations of hyper-centralization. Vast forests remain ungoverned. Rural communities increasingly rely on self-help mechanisms. Kidnappers negotiate ransoms openly. Farmers abandon agricultural production. Citizens lose confidence in the state’s protective capacity. No democracy can indefinitely survive such conditions without institutional adaptation.
This is why the current moment matters profoundly. If implemented with constitutional wisdom, professional safeguards and national sincerity, State Police could become one of the most important democratic reforms of the Fourth Republic. It could restore confidence in governance, improve intelligence gathering, strengthen community policing and finally align Nigeria’s federal structure with contemporary security realities.
But beyond policy outcomes lies something even larger: legacy. History seldom remembers leaders merely for occupying office. It remembers those who solved problems previous generations postponed.
Should President Tinubu successfully advance this reform responsibly and constitutionally, he may ultimately be remembered as the leader who completed one of the most important chapters in Nigeria’s unfinished federalism. For the measure of a federation is not how much power accumulates at its center. It is how effectively it protects the lives, liberties and dignity of its people.
And the measure of leadership is not merely preserving inherited structures, but possessing the courage to improve them before collapse makes reform impossible. That is now the challenge before Nigeria. And that is the historic opportunity before President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
Opinions
In The Spotlight
“Thank God it is over”
“Yes oh. Now, Arsenal players and their fans can now allow all of us to rest. They have their Premier League trophy. PSG have taken the Champions League. History made on both sides. Heroes made.”
“Who is talking about Arsenal or PSG? Why is it that you, Nigerians are always so unpatriotic? Before you think of your own country, you are more concerned about what is happening in other parts of the world. When I say it is over, I am referring to the party primaries that have just been concluded in Nigeria’s political space. The INEC deadline expired on May 30.”
“Oh, I see. But it is not correct to say it is over. The correct thing to say is that Nigeria is now on a path to a new beginning, a return to high-wire politics that could have serious implications for the future. The end of the primaries is merely the commencement of warfare which Nigerian politics is.”
“Yes. Yes. I know that there will be fall-outs. After all, there have been very loud complaints about the mode of the primaries, consensus arrangements that marginalized many eligible participants and direct primaries that were openly rigged, shamelessly too. And I dare say, no party is innocent.”
“Well, well, well, I have not heard of any complaints from the African Action Congress which chose Omoyele Sowore by popular acclamation, Accord Party which announced Gbenga Olawepo-Hashim, the People’s Redemption Party (PRP) that selected former Governor Donald Duke, Governor Seyi Makinde’s Allied People’s Movement, Action Democratic Party where you have Aliyu Bin Abbas, and of course the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) which produced Peter Obi. In these parties, the choice of the flagbearers has been relatively peaceful. It is only in the APC, the PDP, and the ADC that we have had controversies.”
“Not true. There have been issues in all the parties. And this is the point that Minister Wike was making during his media chat on TV yesterday. He said those politicians in ADC and NDC who claim they know how to run Nigeria are all liars, because ordinary party primaries they could not even organize successfully.”
“Are you still taking that one serious?”
“But he has a point. No opposition party has been able to show that their party is better than the APC. We are faced with the same of the same. Wike is right to laugh at them.”
“Peter Obi, the ADC Presidential candidate has promised to generate 10, 000 MW of electricity in 4 years of the single term that he is proposing. He will also empower MSMEs and address youth unemployment. That is something different.”
‘I beg. Is power generation the problem? Electricity is a value chain. How about transmission and distribution? How about tariffs, liquidity? Leakages, wastages. And where were you when failed aspirants in the Democratic Leadership Alliance (DLA) and the Labour Party (LP) were asking for a refund of monies paid into the party’s coffers. In Imo State, one APC aspirant wept openly and on social media claiming that he had spent over N100 million to buy forms for the House of Representatives slot only for the party to impose a woman who never bought any form. He said it will never happen.”
“Did you say an APC aspirant?”
“Yes, from Owerri”
“If he knows what is good for him, he will keep quiet and sulk in silence. The ticket belongs to the party. Even the aspirant that challenged President Bola Ahmed Tinubu for the APC Presidential ticket is now singing his praise. And what does your Imo friend want the 14 lawmakers in the Lagos State House of Assembly who have been sent away to do, and all the Ministers who resigned their positions to run for one elective office or the other. Maybe only one of them succeeded. The Godfather system that they run in the APC simply means you have to obey and accept whatever you are given by the powers-that-be.”
“But that is not democracy. That is tyranny.”
“Who told you there is a universal model of democracy?”
“There are principles.”
“I know. Take the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) founded by countryman Senator Seriake Dickson. The party is now the beautiful bride. That is why Peter Obi and Dr Kwankwaso left the ADC and ran there.”
“Wike says Peter Obi is a food-is-ready politician! He will run to any party that others have worked hard to build.”
“Don’t mind him. They are all the same. What I am saying is that for you to join the NDC, you have to go to Seriake Dickson’s house. To get an expression of interest form, you also have to go to his house. Major meetings are also held in his house, except may be the party’s convention and that must have been due to reasons of space. That too is democracy. And look at Wike. He gave a directive to events owners and hoteliers in Abuja not to allow any “illegal political groups” to use their premises, otherwise their licenses and land titles will be revoked. The David Mark faction of the ADC fought back but the Turaki faction of the PDP ended up holding their event at an open field. I guess that too is democracy.”
“No, that is against the principles of fair play and equal access. But what do you think will happen now?”
“To be honest, I see a lot of confusion. So much uncertainty. Out of 22 registered political parties, only 11 have announced their Presidential candidates. I doubt if anyone has made any submissions to INEC
by the deadline of May 30. The deadline for moving from one political party to the other was set at May 10. Long after that deadline, we have now seen politicians moving from one party to the other. Babachir Lawal for example has dumped the ADC. Senator Ovie Omo-Agege has moved out of the APC in protest to join the NDC.”
“I believe this is because of the two conflicting judgements in the Federal High Court. Abuja Division. Youth Party vs INEC by Justice Mohammed Umar and SDP vs INEC by Justice James Omotoso. INEC has since gone to the Court of Appeal and has applied for a stay of execution. Meanwhile, everything is in abeyance. Even the lawyers are taking one side or the other, offering conflicting interpretations.”
“Whether we like it or not, Nigeria’s 2027 general elections will be determined by the courts, not by the voters. Look at the confusion in the parties, especially the ADC which has three factions, three Presidential candidates – the Nafiu Bala Gombe faction with Chris Uba, the Kachikwu faction with Dumebi Kachikwu and the David Mark-led faction with Atiku Abubakar. Then the PDP with two factions, two Presidential candidates – the Wike faction with Senator Sandy Onor and the Kabiru Turaki faction with President Goodluck Jonathan.”
“I don’t even understand why President Jonathan will allow anybody to drag him into this state of confusion. He is an international statesman. He is a man of stature, widely respected locally and internationally. He should stay above partisan politics.”
“Wike says nobody drags anybody into politics. It is only when you show interest that people will come and offer you what they think you want.”
“The way you keep quoting Wike this, Wike that, I hope there is nothing. You better don’t waste your time. Wike no send anybody oh. But I agree with you on President Jonathan. He is legally eligible, constitutionally and by all means as recently decided by the Federal High Court of Justice Peter Lifu. But it is not advisable for him to get involved in the PDP crisis. There are two Federal High Court cases in contention: the Court of Justice Uche Agomoh in the Ibadan Division, and the court of Justice Joyce Abdulmalik at the Abuja Division on the basis of which INEC recognized the Wike faction. Wike served President Jonathan as Minister of State over 10 years ago. No. No. No. He cannot be seen to be dragging anything with his own subordinates. He is too distinguished for that.”
“But in the United States, President Trump left office and he still came back and was re-elected. In Ghana, President Mahama left and returned.”
“The situations are not so similar. President Tinubu vs President Jonathan. It will look too messy. It will be too complicated. There is also the constraint of time. We are just about seven months to the elections. Not enough time to mobilize.”
“I think that there is even more than enough time. With the right momentum, 24 hours is a long time in politics. I imagine that with the seven months gap ahead, many politicians will even run out of cash. Many will sell their grandparents homes to keep up with the unrelenting pressure of campaigns and politicking. I even hear that it is Tinubu sponsoring Jonathan. But if I were President Jonathan, and I want to dare everything, I will choose a man like Nasir El-Rufai as my running mate.”
“Stop making suggestions that will not work and do not make sense. Why would President Jonathan want to dare everything? He is not that kind of person. He will not do anything to disorient the country because of personal ambition. He is a leader, not a food-is-ready politician.”
“Then let him issue a strongly worded statement to dissociate himself from partisan politics. No, thank you are three simple words in English. Let him come and say that he is not running for office in 2027.”
“Okay then, let us just sit down and look. But by the way, did you go to Ijebu Ode for the Ojude Oba after Sallah?”
“No. But I followed everything on social media. Very impressive as usual. The colour. The Equestrian displays, the pageantry and the paraphernalia, even in the absence of the Awujale. I like the fact that the festival is community-based and family-based as well and many families stood up to be counted: the Adesoyes, the Kukus, the Adeshiles, the Ashirus, and there was enough space for the traditional societies, the Regberegbes to promote Ijebu nationalism. The good thing is that other Ijebu communities are beginning to have similar celebrations: in Ososa, Ijebu Igbo, and Ago-Iwoye for example. Nigerians have a way of stealing laughter from the jaws of despair. Think of the Durbar in Ilorin and the Bariki Sallah celebration in Bida All good.”
“I also enjoyed the Ojude Oba, I liked seeing the King of Steeze, Farooq Oreagba and his son in action. But what I could not figure out was one woman who showed up this year, Toyin Olushile, whom they called the Queen of Steeze, all the way from New York City. She had a big tobacco pipe in her mouth and she was puffing smoke into the air like a locomotive train. I did not find that funny. The Ojude Oba should not be used to promote smoking of any type. There are children involved and they are watching.”
“Well, it was all part of the show. But talking about children, this past weekend was a sad one for me.”
“Me too. I watched the video of Mrs Alamu pleading for help, from captivity, and my heart sank. I saw her husband, a Professor, kneeling down and pleading with the Oyo State Government to do something to rescue all the 46 children and teachers in captivity, and I felt for him. In Borno state, Askira Uba Local Government, 45 students were also abducted. Same day, May 15, in the same coordinated fashion. Something sinister is happening.”
“Governor Seyi Makinde has tried. He went to the community to empathise with the people. The Federal Government has also sent a delegation. What I do not understand is why the state and the Federal Government had to respond separately. They could have co-ordinated their efforts. Nobody should play partisan politics with human lives. Governor Makinde went to the community on Saturday. The Federal Government delegation showed up on Sunday in a helicopter. The politics was too obvious.”
“Yes. Both the states and the Federal Government should always work together. Human lives are at stake in Oyo, in Borno and other parts of the country.”
“I really couldn’t enjoy the UCL Champions League final.”
“Forget about Champions League. The Super Eagles were playing in the Unity Cup finals against Jamaica at the Valley Stadium in London, the same day. They defeated Jamaica, 4 -0. You are here talking about Arsenal and PSG.”
“Congratulations to the Super Eagles. Gunners ForEver!”
“How about Enugu Rangers?”.
“Rangerrs. Who are they?”
“They won the Nigerian Football League.”
“Oh. Sorry. Never heard of them.”
“Of course”.