Former Governor of Kwara State and current senator, Dr. Bukola Saraki has described the 2014 budget proposal of the President Goodluck Jonathan administration as full of inconsistencies that would condone serious fraud and impunity.
He said this in a critical analysis of the budget posted on his website.
Among other such inconsistencies, Saraki mentioned situations such as plans to buy units of desktop computers as N2 million each. He also disclosed that many items in the budget were listed repeatedly and money allocated to them on each occasion, while in some other situations, some of the items are very mysterious as they as ambiguous.
Read the full analysis below:
My Submission on The 2014 Budget
1) THE BUDGET THEME
The proposed budget christened Budget for Job Creation and Growth’ represents N100 billion reduction from the N4.7 trillion that was budgeted for last year.
Key assumptions of the budget include: crude oil 2.3mbpd, crude oil price $77.5pb, exchange rate of N160 to a dollar and a GDP growth of 6.75%
The budget proposes a recurrent expenditure of N2.4 Trillion and a capital expenditure of N1.1 Trillion. This translates to 76.3% of the budget for recurrent expenditure and just 23.7% for capital expenditure.
Aside infrastructure, there is a clear indication that the oil market is evolving fast with the entry of the Shale Oil from regions, which we considered to be our oil market main stay; countries like the US, China and even the UK are vigorously pursuing shale oil. What this means is that there is need to diversify our economy radically.
It is hard to see how the capital outlay expected here will galvanize this economic shift or movement away from oil.
ROUTINE BUDGETING WITH LITTLE IMPACT
It is regrettable to note that our National Budget process, which should have a lot of development implications, is fast becoming a mere procedural ritual to fulfil a legal condition rather than a scrutiny on efficient resource allocation and use for the welfare of our people.
Let’s be frank and admit that our budget process has been inadequate. And a lot of the failure of the budgets in the past cannot be completely ascribed to the executive alone. We, too, have a low pass mark on the budget ourselves, as we have not guarded our budget process effectively and have shielded away from vesting it with the right integrity assurance value it deserves. Today, we have a situation where even civil servants find no hesitation in abusing the provisions of the budget with impunity.
This 2014 budget may be our last opportunity to redeem ourselves and correct this budget anomaly. If we don’t seize this opportunity and put things right, soon it may begin to appear that National Assembly budget no longer matters. Why do I say so?
In recent years, we have seen a growing trend where the budget is scorned and hardly executed above 50%. Take the 2012 and 2013 budgets for instance, the percentage of implementation of the 2012 and 2013 budget has continued to dwindle while the level of extra-budgetary expenditure in the system unauthorized either by the appropriation Act or any other Act of the National Assembly has continued to rise.
It is the duty of the National assembly to rein in public expenditure and ensure probity through budgeting and oversight. It is an open secret that the levels of public revenues expended through extra-budgetary means have continued to grow at a frightening dimension.
Take the issue of revenues for e.g., how do we explain the expenditure of N700m daily on kerosene, even when there was no line item on the budget for kerosene subsidy in the 2013 budget. Again, the waste this exposes the budget to is not just as to the amount involved, but also the fact that the product is not available to Nigerians. How is it that this barefaced fleecing of the country and an unapologetic violation of the budget of this magnitude continue without any response from the National Assembly?
Another example is the parallel government called NNPC. Yes, it has become a parallel government. Otherwise how do you explain this- NNPC has openly told us that they had spent the missing $10bn (this is after questions were asked about unexplained shortfalls in remittances) of public revenue without appropriation? This is an amount far in excess of the national capital budget for the year 2014. No one would have known and NNPC would not have bothered to explain had there not been an enquiry over revenue shortfalls. Indeed, it is fair to say that what we have today is that we have two parallel government budgets, one that is authorized by the National Assembly and another running as extra-budget expenditures.
Part of the problem in my view is the process of budgeting. Our budget process lacks thorough scrutiny and deliberation and there is no consequence for budget violation- a matter considered high crime in other countries.
My attitude is this, if we the National Assembly, make the mistake of going into the 2014 the same way we have been doing we are doomed to fail. We must open our budget process a little further to allow for deliberation and scrutiny.
A situation where aside our committee budgets it’s hard for senators to contribute to and understand budgets covering other sectors as there is very little debate on sectarian basis for allocation made and how such is finally utilized. We hardly know the impact of our budget on senatorial basis.
There is little time to review how our budget affects our states, our farmers, market women, family budget, small-scale entrepreneurs our people in general.
A situation where as chairmen or members of committees assigned to scrutinize budget allocation to committee area of jurisdiction you cannot explain or be responsible for the finally approved budget within your area of scrutiny is a grave situation that requires attention.
It is no longer unheard of for third parties to infiltrate the budget process and inject things into the budget but it is happening and could happen again.
Make no mistake about it. A violation of the budget either during passage or implementation of the budget it is a gross abuse of office.
No matter how you look at it, a situation where an agency of government can, without qualms and bare-facedly claim to spend in extra-budgetary discretion the sum of $10bn an amount far greater than the entire federal capital budget for all government agencies and programs including education, health, roads, aviation, power, for the year in a manner that the National Assembly has no say about, calls to question the relevance of the National assembly in the revenue and expenditure process of our governance and more so whether our 1999 Constitution is the source of all authority in Nigeria.
For the avoidance of doubt, the 1999 Constitution declares in Section 1(1) and says, “This Constitution is supreme and its provisions shall have binding force on all authorities and persons throughout the Federal Republic of Nigeria. It goes further to provide in Section 80(1) that “All revenues or other moneys raised or received by the Federation (not being revenues or other moneys payable under this Constitution or any Act of the National Assembly into any other public fund of the Federation established for a specific purpose) shall be paid into and form one Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Federation.
(2) No moneys shall be withdrawn from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Federation except to meet expenditure that is charged upon the fund by this Constitution or where the issue of those moneys has been authorised by an Appropriation Act, Supplementary Appropriation Act or an Act passed in pursuance of section 81 of this Constitution.
(3) No moneys shall be withdrawn from any public fund of the Federation, other than the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Federation, unless the issue of those moneys has been authorised by an Act of the National Assembly.
(4) No moneys shall be withdrawn from the Consolidated Revenue Fund or any other public fund of the Federation, except in the manner prescribed by the National Assembly.”
While acknowledging that the executive have a pivotal role to play, the constitution recognizes the danger of allowing such a very important and onerous duty to be performed only by the executive and demanded rightfully that the National Assembly, the representative of the people approve the budget.
Our fellow Nigerians expect us to not just do that but that we do a thorough job of scrutinising the budget and ensuring that our scare resources are spent wisely and efficiently for the sole purpose of the welfare of our people.
I am happy that the SP has laid down the ground rule for this year’s budget consideration in his speech that this year’s budget “consideration will be robust and meticulous”; that we will “insist on accountability, probity and transparency. We will not wring our hands in apathy … we will work to ensure that the developmental goals underpinning the budget are fully realized”.
We can no longer allow ourselves to cave into the pressure to rush through for expediency sake in a job that requires rigor, thoroughness and cool-headedness consequently we create a budget that is hard to implement and when implemented produce unintended and incongruent consequences.
If we want budgets approved by the National Assembly to be faithfully implemented, then we must ensure that the process is deliberately exhaustive and followed. A situation where we have a revenue drop of over 40% is not good and shows lapse in budgeting. It means that the executive is not doing a thorough job before presenting to us the budget they seek approval for. We have allowed this situation to go on for long. The MTEF was passed without due process. The Fiscal Responsibility Act requires that mandatory and proper consultations with the states be carried out before the MTEF is prepared and presented. This did not happen. Last year’s capital releases came to not more than N900bn out of a total capital outlay of 1.4bn.
IMPORTANCE OF SCRUTINY
Much has been said about the need for further scrutiny but let us consider the present draft budget before us.
This budget even without much work reveals far too many costly inconsistencies. From the outset there are cost inconsistencies all over the budget and it would appear that there is a lack of meaningful attempt at efficient procurement evident in the entire budget. Some of the simplest is exemplified in a few reoccurring procurements all over the budget. Take for example the purchase of desktops where a unit is listed for 2m the same line item wherever listed under the budget of the Ministry of Education, a unit is put at N2m in the market while the market reality will show that N200, 000 will be efficiently utilised to purchase a unit. On the same budget for Works, desktop were listed to cost N1m per unit.
There are however a few noticeable exceptions which are to be commended where capital expenditures were more or less efficiently appropriated. These include agriculture and rural development that allocates N35.1b to capital and N31.4b to recurrent respectively; water resources, N30.6b and N7.7b; power N59b and N3.3b; transport, N29.3b and N8.1b; works, N100.1b and N28.5b; lands and housing, N12.8b and N5.6 and aviation N26.1b and N6.1b.
The rest of the 42 ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs) will spend more on their recurrent than on capital and in some instances the difference is so huge. Here are a few cases: the Ministry of Interior is expected to spend N144.7b in recurrent and just N6.29b on capital; Police formation and commands, N285.5b and N6.79b; Education including UBEC, N443.9b and N49.5b and Health, N216.4b and N46.3b.
(2) INEXPLICABLE BUDGET PRIORITIES AND DISPARITIES
Last year, N90.9m was budgeted for this item; what has happened or expected to happen this year that will propel this level of spending. Yet, this is aside N188.3m to be spent on office stationery and computer consumables (for which N507.9m was budgeted last year).
The education budget is the same. An e.g. is a line budget to procure 15 desktop computers for N30m, which translates to N2m per unit. There is no desktop computer costing over 500,000 naira in the open market. In fact since most of these will be bulk purchases the cost is expected to come down. More importantly, there is no suggestion that what is needed is the highest end of desktop computers.
A peep into the budget for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs brings its own excitement. For instance, there is plan to spend money for the maintenance of plants and generators in several of our foreign missions, including the one in London.
The foreign ministry’s headquarters would part with N201.7m for fumigation and cleaning services during the year. Some others that illustrate the priority dichotomy are highlighted below:
Construction of a VIP Wing at the State House Clinic: N705 Million
Total Capital Budget for Obafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospital: N328 Million
Total capital budget for University of Ilorin Teaching Hospital: N310 Million
Total Capital Budget for NOMA Children Hospital, Sokoto: N 89 M
Total capital budget for The Institute of Child Health, University of Benin Teaching Hospital, and Benin City: Nil
It is clear from the foregoing that to the formulators of the budget, the VIP Wing at the State House clinic is superior in terms of cost, priority and efficient allocation of resources to 2 teaching hospitals, a National Children’s Hospital and a Pediatric Research Institute combined.
(3) DEFENCE AND SECURITY BUDGET
The budget proposal rewards banditry and encourages militancy at the expense of the fighting men and women of the Nigerian military. Set forth below are comparative figures from various elements of the budget associated with defence and national security:
Stipends and Allowances to 30,000 Niger Delta Militants under the Presidential Amnesty Programme: N23.6 Billion (twenty three billion, six hundred million Naira)
Reintegration of Transformed Ex Militants: N35.4 Billion (Thirty Five Billion, Four Hundred Million Naira)
Total Capital Budget for the Nigerian Army: N4.8 Billion (Four Billion, Eight Hundred Million Naira)
Total Capital Budget for the Ministry of Defence Headquarters, Army, Navy and Air Force: N34.2 billion (Thirty Four Billion, Two Hundred Million Naira)
Total capital budget for ALL Police formations and commands: N6 Billion (Six Billion Naira)
4) DISCRETIONARY SPENDING COST INSENSITIVITYThere is too much discretionary spending in the system, which are hard to put in context. E.g. the use of the phrase ‘Welfare packages’, which will gulp as much as N40.4m in the headquarters of the Ministry of Water Resources? This is seen in many places. It is good to note that the said figure is not for the entire ministry and agencies under it, rather for the headquarters. Welfare package typically appears in the budget of every MDA and one wonders who audits this spending.
Other heads of interest demanding explanation include ‘Cleaning and fumigation services’ (for which the Headquarters of the Foreign Affairs Ministry would spend N201.7m and the Niger Delta Ministry will spend N25m on) and ‘Anniversaries and celebrations (for which the Ministry of Women Affairs will spend N71.6m)’. There are also budgetary heads for ‘Printing of security documents’; ‘Printing of non-security documents’; ‘Field and camping materials supplies’ (N4.39m in the Ministry of Women Affairs); ‘Uniforms and other clothing’; ‘Refreshments and meals’ (N16.7m in the Ministry of Women Affairs); ‘Honorarium and sitting allowance’ and ‘consultancy services for budget preparation’
In the State House Headquarters there is a line item to purchase an embalming machine at the cost of N1.65m and a hydraulic post-mortem table at N4m.
General maintenance in the State House will cost N1.19b of which N138.9m will go for motor vehicle and transport equipment maintenance.
N907m will be spent for office and residential building maintenance; N17.4m for office furniture maintenance and N40m to maintain office and IT equipment.
5) THE BUDGET IS FULL OF DISTORTIONSThe budget is full of distortions. In some areas items are simply restated verbatim several times and amounts allocated as many times as they are repeated. In the ministry of Education some university budgets are simply restated. In one case a university budget is simply re-pasted as another university budget.
Also, in the Foreign Affairs ministry budget, there are plans to spend N834.4m to purchase and freight 40 ‘representational cars’ to 40 of our foreign missions. This translates to N20.86m as average cost for the cars. Wouldn’t this cost be reduced if these cars were bought in the locations they are to be used?
Another example in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will suffice. For e.g. there are provisions for office equipment repeated five times and several allocations made for the same item repeatedly and the distortion is compounded by the fact that provisions are made for the same purpose but captured using other framing. In other cases items are included that are not measurable or executable. E.g. the Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution will be spending N9m for ‘building democracy as an instrument of peace’.
 |
|
INEC Removes 1.6m Invalid Voter Records, Fingers 54 Officials in Registration Scandal
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has removed 1,608,660 invalid voter registrations from Nigeria’s preliminary voters’ register following a nationwide verification exercise ahead of the 2027 general elections.
The commission also disclosed that 1,749 records belonging to deceased persons had been identified and removed, while 54 individuals across ten states were implicated in alleged violations of established voter registration procedures.
INEC Chairman, Prof. Joash Amupitan (SAN), announced the development on Monday during a briefing with journalists on the outcome of the review of the preliminary register generated from the 2025/2026 Continuous Voter Registration (CVR) exercise.
Amupitan said the commission received 11,088,238 registration records from the three phases of the exercise but subsequently uncovered millions of questionable entries during its verification process.
He explained that the commission’s Automated Biometric Identification System initially flagged 1,545,052 records for further investigation, stressing that the automated flagging did not automatically invalidate the registrations.
According to him, 1,277,052 registrations were confirmed invalid and excluded before the preliminary register was published.
The commission subsequently reviewed additional cases following complaints, claims and objections submitted by Nigerians during the seven-day public display of the register between October 9 and 15.
Amupitan said 268,000 cases were subjected to adjudication, resulting in 217,722 registrations being declared invalid and removed, while 50,278 were cleared and retained.
He added that further screening identified another 113,886 invalid registrations, bringing the additional removals to 331,608 and the overall number of invalid records removed to 1,608,660.
The chairman said the exercise also uncovered serious irregularities involving duplicate registrations, suspicious photographs, unusual names and entries belonging to deceased persons.
He disclosed that INEC’s technical assessment revealed deliberate attempts to circumvent established registration procedures, including the misuse of provisions designed for exceptional registration circumstances, particularly those relating to persons with disabilities.
“Fifty-four persons across ten states have been identified as complicit, and necessary disciplinary action will be taken against them, including possible prosecution,” he said.
Amupitan said the affected records had been identified and subjected to verification and remediation, while personnel allegedly connected with the infractions had been marked for further administrative investigation.
He, however, warned that the latest clean-up had not completely resolved the integrity concerns surrounding the national voters’ register, noting that several irregularities predated the latest registration exercise.
According to him, many of the complaints involving multiple registrations and suspicious photographs circulating on social media relate to historical records captured between 2011 and 2023.
He explained that the national register had evolved through successive registration and continuous voter registration exercises since 2011, with biometric and demographic information captured using different technologies, operational arrangements and quality standards.
Although the register had undergone previous cleansing and biometric comparisons, he said significant historical integrity concerns remained and required a systematic response.
The INEC chairman also clarified that the commission’s decision to postpone its proposed nationwide voter revalidation exercise until after the 2027 elections did not suspend its existing mechanisms for identifying and removing invalid registrations.
He said the commission had resolved to address outstanding duplications in the historical register, directing that records flagged through public complaints and obvious cases identified internally should be removed after proper verification.
The clean-up followed public outrage over alleged irregularities in the preliminary register, with some Nigerians and civil society organisations questioning the credibility of entries containing suspected artificial intelligence-generated photographs, duplicate identities and records of deceased persons.
Citing Section 19(2) of the Electoral Act, 2026, Amupitan said INEC was required to receive and consider objections, claims and complaints submitted by members of the public following the display of the preliminary register.
The commission is expected to publish the cleaned-up National Register of Voters in December ahead of the 2027 general elections.
News
Elumelu: Africa’s Next Growth Story Must Be Owned by Africans – and Women
Africa’s next economic transformation must be financed by Africans, driven by private enterprise and powered by women, Tony Elumelu, Chairman of Heirs Holdings, has declared.
Delivering the keynote address at the 25th Annual Conference of the Women in Management, Business and Public Service (WIMBIZ), Elumelu challenged African business leaders, investors and policymakers to move beyond conversations about the continent’s potential and take ownership of its economic future.
“The world needs what Africa has,” he told delegates, insisting that the continent’s greatest asset is not its oil, lithium, agricultural land or mineral wealth, but its people.
And women, he argued, represent one of Africa’s most underutilised economic assets.
Speaking on the conference theme, _“Rooted, Rising, Ready: Born in Africa, Built for the World,”_ Elumelu identified African capital formation, reliable electricity, industrialisation, regional trade and strong institutions as critical pillars for unlocking the continent’s economic opportunities.
He also delivered a pointed message to corporate leaders: Africa cannot compete globally while systematically underutilising half its talent.
Africa’s opportunity – and the ownership question
Elumelu described Africa’s demographic advantage, mineral resources and expanding consumer market as one of the greatest commercial opportunities of the century.
By 2050, the continent’s working-age population will have expanded significantly, positioning Africa as a major source of global labour, consumption and economic growth.
But he warned that natural resources and demographic advantages alone would not deliver prosperity.
Drawing comparisons with Singapore and South Korea, he argued that economic transformation comes from building institutions, developing human capital and converting resources into productive industries.
He identified three major constraints holding Africa back: inadequate electricity, limited domestic value addition and insufficient investment capital.
“Factories cannot run without electricity. Hospitals and schools cannot function without it. And the AI economy everyone is talking about has two basic ingredients: power and connectivity,” he said.
On industrialisation, he challenged African countries to stop exporting raw commodities and importing finished products.
“Why ship raw lithium, raw cocoa, raw crude out of this continent? Refine it. Process it. Brand it. Then sell it to the world.”
He said Africa must transition from being a supplier of raw materials to becoming an active participant in global value chains.
African capital must finance African businesses
A central message of Elumelu’s address was the urgent need to mobilise domestic savings and institutional investment to finance African enterprises.
He argued that aid, while historically important in supporting vulnerable populations, cannot substitute for investment capable of creating businesses, jobs and ownership.
“The future is investment and trade, not aid,” he declared.
He called on African pension funds, insurance companies, banks and family offices to increase their investment in businesses across the continent.
However, he stressed that capital formation requires a supportive business environment, consistent economic policies, trusted financial institutions and growing domestic savings.
“Africa will not just offer solutions, but finance those solutions,” he said.
Citing Heirs Holdings’ investment in Seplat Energy, the London- and Nigerian-listed energy company, Elumelu highlighted the potential of African investment to create value for African investors.
He noted that Seplat’s share price had risen from approximately £3 to £9 since his investment, with its market capitalisation reaching about $7 billion at the time of his address.
He also referenced Aliko Dangote’s efforts to mobilise African retail investors around the proposed Dangote Refinery public offering as evidence of growing domestic participation in major African businesses.
For Elumelu, the objective is clear: African capital must increasingly finance African ambition.
The $120m investment in African entrepreneurs
Making a strong case for inclusive economic growth, Elumelu presented the results of the Tony Elumelu Foundation, which he co-founded with his wife, Dr Awele Elumelu.
Over 15 years, the Foundation has deployed more than $120 million in seed capital to 24,633 entrepreneurs across all 54 African countries.
Women account for 48 per cent of beneficiaries.
According to Elumelu, these entrepreneurs have collectively created more than 1.5 million jobs and generated over $4.2 billion in revenue.
He emphasised that the Foundation's selection process is merit-based, with entrepreneurs assessed on the quality of their business proposals rather than gender quotas.
He highlighted three women whose businesses demonstrate the commercial impact of relatively modest seed investments.
Princess Adeyinka Tekenah received $5,000 in 2015 and built Happy Coffee, an integrated coffee business sourcing beans from women farmers in Taraba State. Her enterprise has created more than 1,000 jobs and is positioning itself as a potential publicly listed Nigerian coffee brand.
Olamide Ayeni-Babajide, another $5,000 beneficiary in 2016, built a recycling enterprise focused on converting tyre waste into commercial value. Her business has recorded more than twenty-fold revenue growth and trained 15,000 people, most of them women and girls.
Nkem Okocha used her $5,000 seed funding to build Mama Moni, a financial technology social enterprise providing access to finance for low-income female entrepreneurs in rural and urban communities.
For Elumelu, their achievements reinforce a fundamental economic argument: women are not merely beneficiaries of development; they are drivers of enterprise, employment and wealth creation.
He disclosed that 265,529 young Africans applied to the Foundation's entrepreneurship programme this year, but only 3,200 could be funded.
That means just one in every 83 applicants received support.
The scale of unmet demand, he argued, exposes Africa's real problem.
“It is not a shortage of entrepreneurial talent; it is a shortage of capital.”
Women must move from participation to ownership
Elumelu also challenged corporate Nigeria to accelerate women's representation in executive leadership and boardrooms.
Using his own business group as evidence, he highlighted the leadership roles occupied by women across Heirs Holdings and its portfolio companies.
His wife, Dr Awele Elumelu, co-founded Heirs Holdings and chairs several businesses, including Avon HMO, Avon Medical, Heirs Insurance Brokers, Transcorp Hotels and Heirs Energies.
He also cited Owen Omogiafo, whom he supported for appointment as President and Group Chief Executive of Transcorp Group in 2020, making her the first woman to lead the conglomerate.
Under her leadership, he said, Transcorp strengthened its presence in power, hospitality and energy.
Following her elevation, Uzo Oshogwe became Managing Director and Chief Executive of Transcorp Hotels, while Awele Elumelu serves as chairperson.
He further highlighted the leadership of Somachi Chris-Asoluka at the Tony Elumelu Foundation, alongside other female executives across the Heirs Holdings portfolio.
At UBA Group, he pointed to women leading subsidiaries and regional operations across several African markets.
His message to business leaders was direct: appointing women to leadership positions should be driven by competence and commercial performance, not public relations.
“Women’s economic leadership is not a concession to fairness. It is a requirement for competitiveness,” he said.
“No serious economy can afford to systematically underutilise half its talent.”
Intra-African trade: The next frontier
Beyond investment and women's economic participation, Elumelu identified regional integration as another critical driver of Africa's growth.
He lamented that moving goods from Lagos to Liverpool can be easier than moving them from Lagos to Luanda, reflecting the persistent infrastructure and regulatory barriers limiting intra-African commerce.
He called for greater investment in roads, railways, ports, payment systems and efficient customs procedures to make the African Continental Free Trade Area commercially meaningful.
African businesses, he argued, must begin to see the continent as their natural home market rather than remain confined by national boundaries.
He cited UBA's expansion into 20 African countries as evidence that cross-border African business is achievable.
“We cannot build a continental market merely by signing documents,” he said.
He called for African banks to finance regional expansion, manufacturers to develop cross-border supply chains and technology companies to build solutions that serve the entire continent.
Strong institutions, stronger economies
On governance and institutional development, Elumelu said investors consistently assess markets based on the reliability of contracts, predictability of regulation, effectiveness of the courts and availability of infrastructure.
“Capital goes where it is safe, and it stays where it is respected,” he said.
He urged African governments to focus less on international investment roadshows and more on creating the conditions that attract and retain capital.
But he also challenged the private sector to accept responsibility for building strong institutions.
Businesses, he said, cannot demand accountability from governments while tolerating poor governance within their own organisations.
Paying taxes, publishing accurate accounts, promoting employees on merit and maintaining effective corporate boards are all part of institution-building.
'Do not wait'
Concluding his address, Elumelu returned to the central message of the WIMBIZ conference: the geography of opportunity is changing, and Africans must take ownership of that transformation.
He urged women entrepreneurs and professionals to pursue leadership, deploy capital, build businesses and create opportunities for the next generation.
“No one but us will develop Africa. Not the donors. Not the multilaterals. Not the partners, however welcome they are. Us.”
Addressing younger women in the audience, he challenged them to see themselves as the next generation of corporate leaders and business owners.
He also called on WIMBIZ to make its next 25 years even more ambitious, arguing that while advocacy had helped women gain access to decision-making spaces, capital was now essential to moving them into positions of ownership and influence.
“Advocacy got women into the room. Capital will get them to the head of the table,” he said.
His closing message captured the central argument of his address:
“Born in Africa. Built for the world. The world needs what Africa has. And what Africa has, more than oil, more than lithium, more than land, is you.”
Editorial note: Before publication, I recommend verifying the Seplat share-price and market-cap figures, the Foundation's cumulative funding and impact statistics, the 2026 application figures, and the executive titles and production figures. These are material business claims and should be independently substantiated.
Business
In The Spotlight
2027: Is Tinubu Fit to Run? The APC's Evasive Response to Nigerians' Questions
When the health of a sitting president becomes a national political controversy, party propaganda cannot replace public confidence. Nigeria deserves more than political declarations, campaign theatrics and dancing on stage._
There are questions that politics cannot silence. There are concerns that party loyalty cannot bury. And there are national conversations that no amount of political gymnastics can make disappear.
One of them is now staring Nigeria in the face: **Is President Bola Ahmed Tinubu fit to seek another four years in Aso Rock in 2027?**
The question has become so politically uncomfortable that the All Progressives Congress (APC) appears determined to answer it before Nigerians even finish asking it.
Enter Professor Nentawe Yilwatda, the party's national chairman, with a categorical declaration that Tinubu is fit to go. His argument? The President is capable, and his appearance dancing at an APC rally in Akwa Ibom is apparently enough to silence those questioning his health.
But hold on!
Is Nigeria's presidency now a dancing competition? Has the threshold for presidential fitness been reduced to the ability to shake one's shoulders before an enthusiastic crowd? Is the capacity to dance at a political rally the new qualification for governing a country of over 200 million people?
If that is the APC's standard, Nigerians have every reason to be worried.
A dancing president is not necessarily a working president. A smiling president is not necessarily a healthy president. And a president who can mount a campaign stage must still demonstrate the capacity to discharge the enormous responsibilities of his office.
Let us not pretend that the question emerged from nowhere. Tinubu's health and physical capacity have been subjects of public discussion, particularly in the context of his foreign medical trips, public appearances and occasional absence from important political engagements. Such developments have generated questions, speculation and competing political narratives.
But rather than confront the issue with maturity, some voices within the ruling party seem more interested in dismissing the questioners than addressing the underlying concern.
That is a political mistake.
Nigeria is not a private estate belonging to the APC. The presidency is not a party trophy. And the health of the man occupying the highest political office in the country is not an inconsequential subject that can be brushed aside with a wave of the hand.
Of course, Tinubu is entitled to dignity, privacy and the presumption that he is capable of performing his duties. No responsible person should turn unverified rumours into established medical facts. But the public also has a legitimate interest in knowing whether its president can sustain the demands of the office.
There is a difference between invading someone's privacy and demanding accountability from someone entrusted with the destiny of a nation.
The APC chairman should understand that difference.
THE DANCE THAT RAISED MORE QUESTIONS
Yilwatda's reference to Tinubu dancing at the Akwa Ibom rally may have been intended to project confidence and political strength. But it also exposes the weakness of an argument that attempts to answer a serious question with a theatrical demonstration.
Dancing for a few minutes is not the same as presiding over marathon cabinet meetings, confronting national emergencies, managing complex international relations and making consequential decisions under enormous pressure.
The presidency is not a weekend recreational activity. It is a 24-hour national responsibility.
Nigeria needs more than occasional appearances. It needs sustained leadership.
And this is where the APC must stop playing politics with a subject that deserves seriousness.
If the President is fit, the party should have the confidence to address legitimate questions without turning every inquiry into an opposition conspiracy. If the President is capable of another term, Nigerians should be able to evaluate that claim through credible information and his record in office.
Political declarations cannot manufacture public confidence.
BUT IS THE APC RUNNING AWAY FROM THE BIGGER QUESTION?
Perhaps the more important issue is not simply whether Tinubu can contest in 2027. It is what Nigerians are being asked to endorse if he does.
What has the President achieved since May 2023? What has happened to the purchasing power of ordinary Nigerians? Have the economic reforms delivered the relief citizens were promised? Has insecurity been brought under control? Are millions of struggling families better off today?
These are not opposition talking points. They are questions arising from the everyday experiences of Nigerians.
For many households, the cost of living is not a political debate. It is a daily battle. For communities threatened by banditry, terrorism and kidnapping, security is not a campaign slogan. It is a matter of survival.
For unemployed young people, the future cannot be measured by the number of political rallies attended by the President.
The APC must therefore resist the temptation to turn 2027 into a referendum on Tinubu's ability to withstand political criticism. The real referendum should concern his performance, policies, leadership and the future he offers the country.
A second term is not an entitlement. It is a request for another mandate.
And no incumbent, however powerful, should expect Nigerians to surrender their right to question that request.
THE OPPOSITION MUST ALSO BE HONEST
Yet, the opposition should not celebrate this controversy as though raising questions about Tinubu's health automatically disqualifies him from seeking another term.
That would be equally irresponsible.
Political opponents must distinguish between documented facts and speculation. They must resist the temptation to weaponise personal health issues or exploit unverified claims for electoral advantage.
If there are credible concerns, they should be raised responsibly. If there is evidence, it should be presented. Nigeria's political discourse is already drowning in propaganda; it does not need another flood of conjecture.
The country deserves an honest debate, not a political wrestling match over the President's body.
2027 MUST BE ABOUT NIGERIA, NOT JUST TINUBU
There is something profoundly troubling about a political establishment that appears more preoccupied with defending its leader than explaining its record to the people.
The APC chairman can declare Tinubu fit to go. Party loyalists can sing his praises. Supporters can celebrate his dancing, his speeches and his political survival.
But none of these things answers the most fundamental question: What does another four years of Tinubu mean for Nigeria?
That is the question that should dominate the political conversation.
Nigerians must not be distracted by the theatre of political declarations. They must demand a serious account of the administration's performance, its failures, its achievements and its plans for the future.
The President, too, must recognise that public confidence is not secured by the volume of applause at party rallies. It is earned through transparency, performance and the ability to inspire confidence in the country's future.
The APC cannot turn a national question into a party chant. It cannot dance away public concerns. And it cannot expect Nigerians to confuse political loyalty with evidence.
So, is Tinubu fit to go in 2027?
Yilwatda says yes. The opposition has its doubts. Nigerians must assess the available facts without surrendering to propaganda or speculation.
But perhaps the most important question is this: Is Nigeria getting the leadership it deserves?
Because, at the end of the day, the country does not need a president who can merely dance through campaign rallies. It needs one who can confront its problems, shoulder its responsibilities and deliver a better future for its citizens.
Aso Rock is not a dance floor. The presidency is not a talent show. And the future of more than 200 million Nigerians is too important to be decided by political choreography.
In 2027, the real test must be leadership, not theatrics; performance, not propaganda; and accountability, not applause.
The APC should remember one thing: Nigerians are watching. And this time, they want answers, not another dance.
By Emmanuel Emeke Asiwe(EEA), Publisher/Editor-in-Chief
In The Spotlight
US election fallout: Democrats may impede; will they impeach?
For millions of Americans, life under President Donald Trump has become an arduous struggle against the relentless pressures of economic survival. Despite the great promises made by the American president at the advent of his second term cycle, from the cost of groceries to the price of gasoline, from hospital bills to housing payments, the American household is confronting a financial squeeze that political rhetoric cannot wish away.
For these Americans, economic prosperity is not measured by the bullish exuberance of Wall Street but by the ability to put food on the family table without breaking the bank. The ordinary citizen is less concerned about the thunderous declarations emanating from Washington than about the dwindling purchasing power of the dollar in his pocket. No one pays mortgages with presidential proclamations or settles hospital bills with partisan propaganda. Ordinary Americans cannot eat political promises on the dinner table. It was in anger and frustration that the people went to the polls last Tuesday to demand a change in the disturbing dynamics of government as Trump faced significant dissatisfaction over his handling of the economy, immigration, healthcare, foreign policy and presidential power. The midterm election was effectively a referendum on Trump’s second term as president. The American President became the central issue.
Many Americans believe their cost of living has not improved under his leadership. In his second coming as president, Trump had promised economic improvement, but many voters feel that the benefits have not reached their homes.
And then came the war with Iran. Many nations around the world largely agree that Iran must not have a nuclear weapon. But as millions of Americans grappled with the excruciating pressures of economic survival, the war with Iran became the isolating icing on an already crumbling economic cake. It was a military adventure that threatened to estrange America from its international partners while deepening disaffection among citizens at home. At a time when ordinary Americans were demanding economic succor, Washington appeared more preoccupied with flexing military muscles abroad than alleviating financial misery at home. Voters questioned the human, financial and strategic costs of the war with Iran. Others worry about continued military involvement abroad. Many believe that the war was not worth its cost.
Although border security remains popular, critics argue that Trump’s immigration enforcement has become excessively aggressive. Americans were increasingly repulsed by the implementation of Trump’s hardline immigration policies. Armed to the teeth and operating under the banner of national security, the sight of gun-toting immigration enforcement agents stirred outrage and apprehension across communities. They became symbols of fear as fatal encounters raised haunting questions about whose lives were being protected and whose were being imperiled. Reports of eerie encounters involving federal immigration personnel intensified public anger, raising disturbing questions about excessive force, constitutional protections, and the sanctity of human life. What was ostensibly designed to secure America’s borders became a troubling spectacle of fear, intimidation, and government overreach in the eyes of many critics.
Many Americans believe Trump has exercised presidential authority too aggressively and worry about democratic institutions, accountability and checks and balances. Trump’s frequent confrontational rhetoric and political approach were seen as divisive, and his leadership perceived as provoking national polarization and divisiveness.
On Tuesday, Democrats tore through the seemingly impregnable, ironclad strongholds of the Republican Party. From Maine to Mississippi, from Texas to Kansas, the electoral landscape trembled under the weight of an extraordinary inevitable political revolt. An unmistakable message was sent that affordability matters, putting food on the family table matters, keeping businesses afloat matters, and economic survival matters more than partisan grandstanding and presidential garrulousness. The election produced astonishing upsets, shattered longstanding political barriers, and rewrote chapters of American electoral history. In Georgia, Keisha Lance Bottoms became the first Black woman ever elected governor of an American state. In my backyard of Wisconsin, David Crowley made history as the state’s first Black governor. In the Republican bastion of Texas, Gina Hinojosa shattered another political glass ceiling, becoming the first Latina elected governor of the Lone Star State.
And the political earthquake did not stop there. In Texas, James Talarico demolished a Republican stranglehold on a US Senate seat that Democrats had not won in nearly four decades. The young Democrat garnered more than five million votes, delivering a stunning rebuke to a political establishment that had long considered Texas an impregnable Republican fortress.
These were not ordinary electoral victories. They were political thunderbolts reverberating across America’s political landscape and rattling the foundations of Republican dominance. Americans may tolerate political theatrics for a season, but when economic hardship begins to threaten their survival, even the strongest partisan loyalties can buckle under the weight of daring discontent and strangulating disenchantment.
The ballot box became the battleground where economic anguish overwhelmed political allegiance, and the once-impregnable Republican fortresses crumbled under the weight of metastatic malcontent.
Will Democrats use their newly acquired congressional power to impeach Trump, impede his agenda, or improve the lives of struggling Americans? Under the US Constitution, the House needs only a simple majority to impeach a president. The Senate requires a two-thirds majority of senators present to convict. Why would Democrats bother impeaching President Trump when they know they are unlikely to secure the 67 Senate votes necessary to convict and remove him? Why embark on an impeachment voyage when the destination is already known? If the Senate cannot muster the votes to convict, is impeachment a constitutional necessity, a political spectacle, or merely an exercise in legislative futility? Perhaps the opposition would accomplish more by checking presidential excesses than by chasing an impeachment conviction it cannot secure. Democrats must decide whether their priority is to punish Trump’s alleged misconduct through constitutional proceedings or to constrain his policies through congressional oversight and legislative power. The power of the purse is one of Congress’s most formidable weapons. Under Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution, federal money generally cannot be withdrawn from the Treasury without appropriations authorised by law. A Democratic-controlled House could refuse to approve funding for certain Trump administration initiatives, demand spending restrictions, or negotiate changes to federal programs. Democrats could refuse to pass Trump’s proposed legislation on taxation, immigration, energy, healthcare, and other domestic policies.
A president can win the White House and still lose the legislative cooperation necessary to implement his agenda. A Democratic House could investigate alleged misconduct, conflicts of interest, misuse of public funds, or questionable administrative decisions. Such investigations could expose problems, generate public pressure, and force the administration to defend its actions. Congressional Oversight does not require impeachment. Committees could examine the activities of federal agencies, investigate implementation of executive orders, and question cabinet officials about their policies. Will democrats choose only to impede Trump’s agenda but not impeach the president? We keep our fingers crossed.
By Fola Ojo