Frustrated Governor Ibikunle Amosun of Ogun State has vowed not to take things easy with members of the National Assembly from his state planning to thwart his ambition for a second term in office henceforth.
In a letter, titled Pulling down the House to Protect a Corner: A Note of Caution dated 18th January 2014, and addressed to the legislators and copied top party members of the All progressives Congress (APC), the governor said he would bring his official powers against the lawmakers for their disrespect.
There has been a lingering crisis of supremacy between the governor and former Governor Olusegun Osoba, who is also a party leader in the state. The political battle between the two is fast polarising the party structure, with many, including the legislators, supporting Osoba.
Huhuonline.com learnt that the trouble first began when, in a bid to take over full control of the state, Amosun upstaged Osoba in political appointments and offices. Osoba no longer has even a councillor, as all his nominees were discarded by the governor.
In the heat of the crisis, the legislators converged last week and passed a vote of no confidence on Amosun, declaring that they would not support his second term ambition, a declaration that infuriated the governor, who defected into the party from the All Nigeria People Party (ANPP).In the letter warning the lawmakers, Amosun accused them of planning to render the state ungovernable for him, saying he would do everything to protect the mandate given to him by the people of the state. He revealed that he had briefed all security agencies in the state to be more vigilant and prevent any breach of peace in the state, and therefore warned the lawmakers to tread softly within the ambit of the law or face the consequences.
“It is with considerable hesitation that I write this letter to you, especially a few minutes after I called and spoke with you on the phone over the crisis arising from your programme in Ewekoro Local Government Area on Thursday, 16th January 2014”, Amosun wrote.
“However, after a thorough consideration of information obtained on the same issue prior to and subsequent to the telephone conversation with you from some mutual friends, security agencies and state officials, some of whom you had also spoken with on the same issue, I decided to reduce my thoughts to writing in order to put the issues in clear perspective and also for record purposes. It has even become more imperative to write because I have since realised that the positions and approaches you espouse in discussions with me are always at great variance with your true disposition on the same issues, both in words and actions, while with other people.
“Your different and inconsistent narratives around the event have now confirmed to me that what happened in Ewekoro was indeed part of a premeditated, choreographed and coordinated but needless crisis in our great party, All Progressives Congress (APC), in Ogun State with the National Assembly members elected on the platform of the party as the major agents provocateur, working in concert with other elements within and outside the party. By the benevolence of God and the support of the good People of Ogun Central, I was elected a Senator in 2003 and will continue to hold in the very high esteem the institution of the Senate, in particular, and the National Assembly of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in general.
“This letter is directed to you as the contact point for your colleagues from Ogun State in the National Assembly because you are the one currently occupying the same seat in the Senate that I occupied a decade ago. It is regrettable that despite all my efforts to warm up to you and your colleagues since your nomination as party candidates and up till now, it is obvious that your group has always had scant regard for me and my office because you believe that I played no role in your emergence as party candidates and subsequent elections in 2011 and will play no role in your re-election. This explains why you continue to rebuff all my initiatives to make us work together as a team in the overall interest of our party and the good People of Ogun State. Nonetheless, I remain undeterred in the search for unity. You are therefore at liberty to share the content of this letter with your colleagues”.
Itemising all the issues for discussion, he wrote:
“1. My Understanding of the issues. In the last few months, I have received security reports and information from credible sources, including party faithful, leaders, mutual friends and utterances directly emanating from your group, indicating that you and your colleagues were planning to precipitate a crisis in our party in pursuit of your personal agenda.
“I dismissed the reports with a wave of hands in the knowledge that no member of the party, much more so members of the National Assembly, would do anything that will impact negatively on our administration’s mission to rebuild our dear state. Besides, I thought the formation of the All Progressives Congress (APC) from the merger of the legacy parties, including the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) on which platform we were all elected into various offices, would address outstanding integration challenges. It is my belief that the new platform, the APC, offers an opportunity of a fresh beginning.
“However, the unfortunate events of the last few weeks, with their intensity and frequency, have lent credence to reports and information I earlier disregarded. Two instances will suffice here. The violence that accompanied the botched attempt by your group on Thursday 9th January 2014 to foist a handpicked so called “Harmonisation Committee” on the party in the state now seems to be the opening glee in a well-scripted series. For the avoidance of doubt, the “Harmonisation Committee”, even if properly constituted, clearly has no role in the forthcoming party membership registration exercise.
“The second incident was the event of Thursday, 16th January 2014 in Ewekoro Local Government Area, organised by you to purportedly sensitise party members in Ogun Central Senatorial District on the forthcoming party registration exercise but ostensibly a manifestation of another scene in the series. It is curious that a day in which the interim National Chairman of our party, Chief Bisi Akande, was being honoured in Lagos was the day you chose to hold your sensitisation event. I was at the ceremony with members of the State Executive Council, Speaker, other members of the State Assembly and Chairmen of our Local Government Areas, including that of Ewekoro. These two events are just exactly one week apart and in between there were other activities by your group all aimed at achieving the desired objectives. I understand that these actions and incidents, that are part of a larger plot that will be highlighted below, are designed to achieve two primary objectives:
“The first objective is the quest of your group to control the structure of our party in the state, commencing with the hijack of the party membership registration exercise, hence the attempt to foist a “Harmonisation Committee” on the party in the State. The second objective is the desire of all the National Assembly members from our state and some members of the House of Assembly to secure automatic second-term tickets for the general elections in 2015, without regard to the opinions of the generality of members of our great party in Ogun State.
In order to get the support of the unwary, these personal agenda of the very few have been couched and packaged as altruistic party issues and deliberately orchestrated to attract national attention.“2. The plot against the state. The plot to achieve the narrow objectives of your group has many elements that I initially considered to be unlikely and far-fetched. However, your recent actions and utterances have all the trappings of these elements with the precision and approach foretold. Let me highlight some of these elements that will certainly not be strange to you: instigation of pockets of violence to create a sense of disunity in our party and insecurity in the state as a whole. This approach will include deliberately perpetrating arsons and symbolic harms on the property and persons of some members of your group and then blame the actions on me and our administration.
“Demonisation of my person and our administration through a well-oiled smear campaign in the media that will evoke the ugly memory of the immediate past. Already, some of your supporters, especially allies in the State Assembly, have been instigated to start circulating text messages alleging threats to their lives. Distraction of the attention of the Government from governance so that the programmes and projects that have endeared the Administration to the good People of Ogun State will be stalled. The intended consequence is to reduce the popularity of the government with the populace. Blackmailing me and the National Leadership of our party to undermine the integrity of the party leadership to intervene as impartial umpires, should the need arise. Generally making the state ungovernable, including precipitating crisis in the State House of Assembly through a plan to forcefully change the leadership and continuous disruption of legislative proceedings.
“A further orchestration of the ‘crises’ aimed at creating a window for your group to move motions in the two chambers of the National Assembly designed to embarrass the State Government. Disruption of the impending party membership registration exercise, knowing full well that the exercise may expose the shallow followership of your group across the state. Even this noble exercise that is expected to develop our great party will also not be spared of the smear campaign to discredit the process. Joining forces with the opposition, who are known ‘Masters of Violence’ in an unholy alliance to help re-enact the immediate inglorious past.
“The overall thrust is to force a negotiation to secure an undeserved advantage that could not be otherwise achieved through the internal party democracy. What is more disturbing is that in this venture, no tool is considered too crude to use, no weapon too unconventional to deploy, and no approach too demeaning to adopt. I learnt that you and your colleagues have indeed been boasting that the nationwide destruction of our great party, the APC, will be kick-started from Ogun State.
“3. The Implications for the State and our Party (APC). It is important to always remember where our state was, before the inception of our administration on 29th May 2011 so that your ambitions to control the party and secure your second term in office at all costs do not becloud your sense of judgement. The implications of your actions are grave and are far greater for our State and the party, than for me as the Governor or our administration. Whatever offices we hold now, many have done so before us and many will still do after. Therefore, the larger interest of our state must take overriding position at all times. Power is transient and all of us will be accountable to the people, posterity and God Almighty”.
He noted that the implications of these actions include rollback of the achievements attained by the party and his administration in the onerous task of rebuilding Ogun State, particularly the widely acknowledged peace and security that pervade the state. He added that the state has received many national and international honours and awards in this regard, including the recent one — the Most Secure State in Nigeria (2013) — by CLEEN Foundation, a foremost Non-Governmental Organisation with focus on security in the country.
“Some of the achievements, such as increase in the state’s Internally Generated Revenue from paltry N750 Million monthly to about N3 Billion, will be undermined. The image of our party (APC) as a party of peace and progress will be negatively affected”, he wrote on.
“It will amount to taking the support of our people for granted. Worse still, your actions, if not curbed, will lead to an unfortunate return to the inglorious era of the immediate past”.
In conclusion, he wrote: “My Brother, you will recall some of my efforts and initiatives to forge unity and harmony in our party. These are well-documented and predate my assumption of office as Governor. Since inception, I have remained committed to the vision of building a virile, united and harmonious party with equity, justice and inclusiveness. As a member of the 5th Senate myself, I have constantly extended my hands of fellowship to you and your colleagues, including my personal invitations to all our programmes. The most recent initiative to achieve greater unity in the party was the formation of Consultative and Advisory Councils in all our twenty Local Government Areas. This body comprises party elders, elected members (including National Assembly and State Assembly Members), and political appointees. It provides platform for closer interaction amongst all the stakeholders, fosters unity and engenders mutual understanding. The composition, as you know, is inclusive. Regrettably, you and your colleagues have declined participation in the activities of the Consultative Assembly in your respective Local Government Areas.
“I remain resolute to building bridges within the party and even beyond. Far from being a sign of weakness, this is a demonstration of our commitment to general peace and security in the state. Any discord in the state or any critical segment or group, political or otherwise, takes away from this commitment. I swore to an oath which primarily requires me to protect life and property of all citizens and residents of Ogun State and remain unwavering in our commitment to ensure that the Mission to Rebuild Ogun State continues unhindered. While I will continue to make overtures for peace and pursue initiatives to forge party unity and harmony, I will not abdicate my responsibility as the Chief Security Officer of the State.
“In this respect, I have re-emphasised to the chairmen of the Local Government Areas that they will be held accountable for any breach of peace in their respective areas. Furthermore, I have briefed, as always, all security agencies in the State to be more vigilant and prevent any breach of peace in our State. In the same vein, my expectation is that all political gladiators will conduct themselves peacefully within the ambit of the law as any breach of peace and security that our administration jealously treasures will be viewed seriously. For emphasis, the full wrath of law will be visited on anyone whose conduct is capable of returning our State to the inglorious days of the immediate past.
“The citizens of the state have made it clear to us that they enjoy the current peaceful atmosphere that pervades the State in almost three years of our administration and that they will not accept any further ugly development that casts a dark shadow on our atate. As the custodian of their legitimate and freely given mandate, I intend to keep faith with them in this regard. It is my hope that your actions and utterances henceforth will be in consonance with this simple wish of the good People of Ogun State. It is not too late for you and your group to retrace your steps by putting a stop to the plot against the state and allow good reasons prevail.
“Democracy may not be perfect for human and societal organisation, but it is not for nothing that it remains the most preferred form of government worldwide. It has its tenets, the most profound being that it is a game of numbers. In this wise, I urge you and your colleagues to take full advantage of the forthcoming registration of party members by mobilising your supporters to register. This is the path true democrats adopt and it is also the path of honour.
“It is certainly more honourable than following the script of “what we can’t get, we destroy”. The plan to foment trouble in our great party, the APC, while hobnobbing and nurturing opposition parties as alternative platforms to realise your personal ambitions is an ill-wind that blows no one any good. I intend to continue to devote substantial focus to what the good People of Ogun State elected me to do – good governance – without allowing active partisan politics to become a major pre-occupation and distraction, as some would rather wish.
Once again, my Dear Senator Obadara, please accept the assurances, as always, of my highest regards”.
 |
|
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”.