The crisis rocking the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is far from over as the sacked National Secretary, Prince Olagunsoye Oyinlola, has appealed his destitution by the Federal High Court amid the intrigues and backdoor maneuvers with President Goodluck Jonathan battling former President Olusegun Obasanjo for the conscience of the party and the 2015 Presidential ticket.
These are certainly trying moments for President Jonathan and not the best of times for the PDP. While its leadership is still grappling with the crisis of confidence plaguing the party over the stalemate in the quest for a new Board of Trustees (BoT) Chairman and acceptable executive committee in Adamawa State, the Federal High Court in Abuja sacked its National Secretary, Prince Olagunsoye Oyinlola, from office providing the National Working Committee (NWC) with the badly needed pretext to replace him with his Deputy, Solomon Onwe, in an acting capacity.
The unfolding crisis is a litmus test for President Jonathan’s leadership as he has been called in to play expected and unexpected roles in the course of which his protégé; Dr. Bamanga Tukur has come under attack from PDP Governors who want him sacked as national chairman; his preferred candidate for the BoT chair, Chief Anthony Anenih has been totally rejected while Jonathan’s position as President and leader of the PDP is being called to question. The battle lines have been drawn and the stage set for a major political showdown as Jonathan has decided to take the battle to Obasanjo’s home turf - to seize control of the party in the South-West from Obasanjo. Since history is written by the victors, the outcome of this crisis will be one for the record books.
Genesis of the Crisis
It all began with a meeting of the 98-man body of the BoT to elect a chairman to replace Obasanjo who resigned last year. The signs were ominous when it became evident that for the first time, the BoT would pick its chairman through a contest. Second Republic Vice President and first BoT Chairman, Dr. Alex Ekwueme, and his successors, including Obasanjo, emerged through consensus; which was almost the norm, until the emergence of OBJ, which created some bad blood among party faithful.
Obasanjo, had in the twilight of his administration, failed to get the National Assembly to endorse his tenure elongation project. After that misadventure, Obasanjo, driven by the desire to still remain relevant after his presidential tenure, instigated an amendment to the PDP constitution to ease his emergence as BoT chairman. That was the joker that knocked out the then incumbent BoT chairman, Tony Anenih in 2007. On account of this, OBJ practically snatched the job from Anenih.
Following a protest by principal officers of the party in the National Assembly, the draconian provision was expunged from the PDP constitution. OBJ resigned in anger and frustration in April 2011 after holding the post for about four years with the excuse that his international engagements have become more demanding. Sources however tell Huhuonline.com that the late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua introduced some radical changes in the conduct of affairs of the party that demystified and consigned the position of BoT chair to political irrelevance.
As a matter of fact, former Senate President Ken Nnamani who was one of those who spearheaded the campaign that led to the amendment of the PDP constitution in 2009 had cause to complain about the way things were done and his position was supported by the late Yar’Adua. A PDP National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting scheduled at noon at the headquarters in Abuja was delayed for over five hours because the “leader of the party” then President Yar’Adua was running late. Huhuonline.com learnt that when the meeting finally started, a furious Nnamani barred his mind, making it crystal clear to anyone who cared to listen that using the title “leader of the party” for any president produced by PDP was misleading because such a title was anathema to the PDP constitution. “The leader of our party is the national chairman while state chairmen of the party are the leaders of the party at the state level and down the ladder,” Nnamani said to a standing ovation. Yar’Adua commended him for the bold explanation and added that it was not enough for anybody to call himself or herself leader. It is on record that since that meeting, OBJ has never attended any other NEC meeting.
The Ghost of 2015
Article 12.76 of the PDP constitution provides for the BoT as an organ of the party and the same section provides that a member of the organ shall not be less than 50 years while the chairman and the secretary of the organ shall serve a single term of five years. In the countdown to the BoT meeting, something strange happened. Perhaps it was deliberate, perhaps accidental, but election billboards appeared in the business district of Abuja calling on Jonathan to stand for re-election in 2015. This opened the political season of the New Year.
Jonathan’s Spokesman Reuben Abati improbably claimed that the President’s political team had no involvement. Aso Rock insiders told Huhuonline.com that Jonathan is unlikely to announce his intentions until late 2014. The probability is that Jonathan will seek the candidacy of the PDP, even if he has to face opposition from northerners.
It was against this backdrop of 2015 that the BoT meeting held at the Presidential Villa, presided at by Jonathan. Huhuonline.com learnt that a group within PDP advised Jonathan to endorse a South-South aspirant for the BoT post because that will oil his 2015 machinery. Jonathan subsequently threw his weight behind Chief Tony Anenih, but the PDP Governors declined to support him.
The Governors are divided on the issue as many of them believe that allowing the BoT chairman to emerge from the same zone as Jonathan will be a masterstroke that will make it practically impossible to wrestle the presidency from Jonathan. Anenih, fondly called ‘Mr. Fix it’ has not been able to fix a lot of things lately in PDP, particularly in Edo State, his home. Some analysts said his recent appointment, as chairman of Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) board, was a strategy to placate the man.
As negotiations and horse trading intensified, other PDP top brass amongst them former Senate President, Ken Nnamani supported by the legislators and Alhaji Shuaib Oyedokun, the former Deputy National Chairman of the party threw their hats into the ring thereby further polarizing the political arena. When the curtains came down, at least 12 candidates were postulating for the BoT chair. From the South East included: Alex Ekwueme, Ken Nnamani and the publisher of Champion newspapers, Chief Emmanuel Iwuanyanwu.
From the South-South came Chief Tony Anenih and Chief Don Etiebet. The aspirants from the North Central geo-political zone included former PDP national chairman, Rtd. Colonel Ahmadu Ali while the South West had former PDP Deputy National chairman, Alhaji Shuaibu Oyedokun. Others are Senator Bode Olayinka, Chief Yekeen Adeojo, Senator Onyeabor Obi, Chief Harry Akande and Chief Shuaibu Oyedokun. With these razz mattazz of candidates, the battle of egos for the conscience of the PDP was launched and nobody can easily predict how and when it will end.
Political Calculations, Intrigues and Maneuvers Galore
Amidst the conflicting assertions and claims, OBJ held most of the aces as he is approbating and re-probating at the same time. OBJ worked behind the scenes to ensure that the meeting to elect the BoT chairman was postponed because of his indecision on who to support as his candidate for the position. It is believed that he wants to pick his own candidate, regardless of what the other members think.
There is the belief that the Presidency and PDP leaders preferred Anenih, at least to compensate him for the loss of the same position in 2007. At a meeting held at the residence of Bamanga Tukur, it was suggested that all the other candidates should step down for Anenih because he enjoys the respect of the party top brass and would be a great asset in the 2015 election. But they declined. If the possibility of having Anenih (who comes from the same geopolitical zone as the President) as BoT chairman; is slim; if Anenih, with all the influence he wields within PDP is having such opposition on account of where he comes from, then the case of Chief Don Etiebet can be best imagined.
Huhuonline.com equally learnt that most of the party members would prefer Alex Ekwueme; having served in that capacity before, and as someone who contributed immensely to the founding and building of the PDP, Ekwueme was in the position to help the rebuilding process, which the party leadership has so much canvassed. But at 80 years, Ekwueme is tottering on the borders of senile decay. It is equally believed that the party has given Ekwueme a sensitive assignment of leading 53 other prominent PDP members to carry out reconciliation and that is enough to engage his attention.
For Ken Nnamani, many see him as a man who can effect radical changes and his record speaks volumes. It was during his tenure as Senate President that Obasanjo burnt his fingers when he wanted to secure the tenure elongation, which came to be known as ‘Third Term’ project. The singular role he played as a factor to thwart Obasanjo’s ambitions worked against him, especially among Obasanjo’s loyalists in the BoT. Sources said that Nnamani is also counting on his colleagues in the National Assembly who are members of BoT to do the magic. One other way that Nnamani could buffer his case is to leverage the support of his colleagues from the South East, Ekwueme and Iwuanyanwu to back him. Emmanuel Iwuanyanwu, a one-time PDP presidential aspirant feels that he has paid his dues in the PDP and that it is time for him to lead the conscience of the party.
OBJ loyalist and former PDP chairman, retired Col. Ahmadu Ali has indicated interest in the BoT chair but OBJ is uncertain if it will be a wise political decision to allow someone from the North to hold the position. Ali’s candidacy appears to be the most controversial of all. Most of the PDP members see him as an extension of Obasanjo’s administration a surrogate that is over 100% committed to OBJ’s course and would do anything for him. They feel that if truly Ali is vying for the position, then it is a matter of presenting to the party, a pig in pork. Ali’s candidacy is not opposed only by those from the South West that feel that they have been marginalized in the PDP equation, but also by those in his own region. There is a strong feeling that the Senate president is vehemently opposed to the candidacy of Ali, as his being the chairman of BoT will adversely affect his own political influence.
If by some strange happenstance Ali becomes the BoT chairman, the implication is that the North would be adding another strategic position to its kitty. Currently, they are holding the office of the Senate President, Speaker of the House of Representatives, the General Secretary of the party, the national chairman of the party, the secretary of the BoT and the publicity secretary of the party. It will therefore, become apparent that the entire North will hold the PDP making it near impossible to stop them from taking the presidency in 2015.
But the South West is stiffly opposed to his candidacy. They are supporting one of their own, Alhaji Oyedokun and are persuading OBJ to withdraw his support for Ali and invest on Oyedokun, whose last office was National Deputy Chairman of the party some five years ago and has been in hibernation since then. Coming from the South West, OBJ is being persuaded by the party leaders in the zone to drop Ali for Oyedokun, being a kinsman. With the cry of marginalization from the South West, many are guessing OBJ will be the pillar on which Oyedokun can anchor his aspiration. Some BoT members argued against Oyedokun citing his brief sojourn outside the party after he led a group to operate a parallel PDP called ‘The Original PDP in 2006.’ OBJ dislodged the group.
With all these geo-political calculations, it is evident that if Jonathan is nursing an ambition to seek re-election in 2015, he has to demonstrate deft political shrewdness because his opponents are making the ground very swampy and slippery and extremely difficult for him to muster sufficient support that would earn him a second term in office.
OBJ & GEJ: Clash of the Titans
A sprawling view of Abeokuta lies prostrate from his hilltop mansion, a metaphor for the clout of its owner, a man whose sheer strength of character held an impossible Nigeria in the palm of his hand for eight long years. It is not for nothing that he is called Baba, yet another aphorism for some sort of a hard-to-get-to-know paterfamilias, whose offspring would usually approach with great trepidation, not knowing exactly what to expect.
Long after he left office, as President of the Federal Republic, General Olusegun Obasanjo’s home is still like a pilgrimage abode, with hordes of visitors, trooping in and out, to hold court for one reason, or the other - Baba’s opinion, influence and wise counsel, still count. The man is, indeed, an enigma. Playful, as a kitten, wise, as an oracle, hard, as a tornado-nail, and wily, as a fox, you have to watch your step - every step of the way - with the General. OBJ is the one man now standing between Jonathan and the 2015 elections.
The relationship between OBJ and GEJ has been anything but cordial. OBJ is insisting that for any reconciliation between him and the president to be meaningful, on the election of the BoT chairman, the president, as the leader of the party, must avail him the privilege to nominate and present his successor. That was the condition he gave Jonathan for participating in the reconciliatory moves initiated by the president to shore up the diminishing cordiality between them that had rapidly degenerating into verbal wars and invidious political maneuvers.
Huhuonline.com learnt from sources that OBJ also requested that his successor must be of South West extraction, but at the time of the election, OBJ had not found a credible candidate from the South West that would effectively represent the zone and manage the affairs of the party at that level, so he absented himself and ensured that the election did not hold.
Facing the battle for his own political survival, GEJ has decided to call off the bluff by taking the battle for the soul of the PDP to OBJ’s home State of Ogun, with a view to wrestling the party from the grips of Baba. GEJ considers the South-West as strategic to his presidential ambitions in 2015 and the general elections. The South-West may not produce a presidential candidate for the PDP in 2015 but block votes from the zone could determine the eventual winner of the presidential election. To which end, the PDP leadership headed by Tukur is planning to organize a fresh congress in the South-West to definitely replace Oyinlola. This explains why even though Oyinlola is battling his destitution in court, Tukur went ahead and replaced him with his successor since GEJ does not want him to return as national secretary.
The PDP, in Obasanjo’s home state, is divided into two factions with Baba supporting the Senator Dipo Odujurin- led executive, while business magnate, Chief Buruji Kashamu is backing the Adebayo Dayo-led executive. The Kashamu-led faction initiated the legal battles with the Obasanjo-backed faction, which culminated in the removal of Oyinlola. GEJ is building strategic alliances with strange political bed-fellows in Ogun State. Former Ogun State Governor, Otunba Gbenga Daniel, has been having unfettered access in the Presidency. GEJ recently appointed one of Daniel’s loyalists, Alhaja Salimot Badru, as a member of the Federal Capital Development Authority. He has also nominated an ex-convict and PDP warlord, Chief Olabode “Bode” George, as a member of the Adamawa State Reconciliation Committee. Both Daniel and George are at loggerheads with Baba.
Things Fall Apart…
After the BoT passed up the opportunity to elect its new chairman because of its inability to choose name a consensus candidate from the dozen aspirants, a special committee to appropriately realign membership of the BoT to ensure credibility of the planned election was created with Professor Jerry Gana as chairman. The committee was given three weeks to submit its report.
But even before Gana and his committee could go to work, the National Working Committee (NWC) of the party threw a spanner in the works by recanting itself on its earlier sack of the PDP Adamawa State Executive Committee, recalling them after caving in to pressure from the party’s governors. Tukur was absent from the NWC meeting that took the decision. It was a face-saving move for the NWC, which the governors were threatening to sack and replace with a caretaker committee if the sacked executives were not reinstated.
The recall of the committee reignited the supremacy battle between Tukur and the Governor of Adamawa State, Murtala Nyako, which formally began in October 2012 when the NWC dissolved the Adamawa State party executive, chaired by Alhaji Umaru Kugama, replacing it with a nine-man caretaker committee headed by Amb. Umar Damagun. In dissolving the executive last year, the party’s National Publicity Secretary, Chief Olisa Metuh had announced that its members “flagrantly disregarded and shown serial disobedience to the decisions of NWC.” He accused the dissolved exco of conducting illegal local government elections and submitting a list of candidates to the Adamawa State Independent National Electoral Commission without obtaining clearance from the NWC.
The dissolution was a slap on the face of Adamawa Governor Nyako who tried in vain to reverse the decision. Face with a fait accompli, Nyako referred the matter to the Nigerian Governors Forum (NGF). The NGF led by its chairman Governor Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers State then joined Nyako in seeking a reversal of the sack and after they were rebuffed, they decided to handle it the tough way. They told Jonathan in no unflattering terms that Tukur the PDP national chairman must resign! Tukur was not their candidate during the party’s convention but was imposed on the party by the President. To save face, Jonathan ordered the NWC to reverse its earlier decision and disavow Tukur.
Esau’s voice, Jocob’s Hand
In the face of the strong-arm tactics by the governors, Jonathan came under pressure from hardliners within his own camp who asked him to call the governors’ bluff by disbanding the Nigeria Governors’ Forum saying it had become a vehicle for confusion. A statement issued by the chairman of the Nigerian Renewal Group, consisting of young professional men and women members of the PDP, noted “with great concern the discordant tunes emanating from the ruling party, the PDP. We are concerned because the governors elected on the PDP platform, who constitute the majority, have practically abandoned their primary responsibilities in their various states. They have turned themselves into an unholy pressure group and trade union under the inglorious Governors Forum.”
“Indeed, we view the Governors Forum as a club for idle talk and mischief making. Our stand is validated by the recent gang-up of PDP Governors against the PDP National Chairman, Alhaji Bamanga Tukur. We hold no brief for the elder statesman, but we are worried that if these governors are not checked, they will soon hold the nation’s political apparatus to ransom. That will not augur well for good governance and democracy,” the statement read in part.
Armed with renewed confidence, Jonathan decided it was time to take the bull by the horns. The President is believed to have influenced the decision of the court to sack Oyinlola from office. And to put paid to this assertion, Jonathan instructed Tukur to go ahead and replace Oyinlola with his Deputy, Solomon Onwe even though Oyinlola’s lawyer had filed an appeal for a stay of execution of the non-declaratory judgment. Tukur then washed his hands off in a tepid statement saying his action was in fulfillment of the PDP constitution, explaining that the party had no hand in the removal of Oyinlola as its National Secretary.
Stressing that there was no rift between Tukur and Oyinlola, the party said: “For the avoidance of doubt, we want to say unequivocally that there is no personal rift between Alhaji Bamanga Tukur, as the National Chairman of the Party, and Prince Olagunsoye Oyinlola to warrant the sensational headlines that have been published in newspapers on the issue. In any event, reports have indicated that Prince Olagunsoye Oyinlola has appealed the Court judgment and the NWC wants to say that as soon as the appeal is decided, the party will, in the same way as it did in the case of the Federal High Court ruling, obey the appeal decision.
After replacing Oyinlola, the party’s leadership headed by Tukur made a spectacular U-turn on its perceived rush to get Oyinlola out of the way by filing an application for stay of execution of the court judgment which sacked Oyinlola from office. Investigations showed that as Tukur had adopted strategies to ensure that Oyinlola did not return as national secretary, most members of the National Working Committee were determined to save him. As part of measures to seize the control of the party in the South-West from Obasanjo and the PDP governors, Tukur planned to hold a congress in the South-West, where Oyinlola’s replacement would be picked. But Huhuonline.com understands that while the PDP chairman is loyal to Jonathan, most members of the NWC are backed by PDP governors and former President Olusegun Obasanjo.
Meanwhile, as the horse-trading continues, Tukur has secured the backing of PDP lawmakers after the leadership of the House of Representatives led by the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker, Aminu Tambuwal and Emeka Ihehioha paid him a solidarity visit and pledged their support for the party’s transformation agenda. Tukur assured the South West geopolitical zone that it would not lose in the distribution of benefits.
The End Game
The crisis rocking the PDP will make or break Jonathan’s 2015 presidential ambitions. There will be winners as well as losers but the political equation will never be the same again. Already, the governors elected on the platform of the party have called for the immediate convening of the National Executive Committee meeting of the party where they are planning to pass a vote of no confidence on Tukur. They have also endorsed the decision of the NWC rescinding the dissolution of the PDP Adamawa State Executive and reaffirmed their recognition of the Kugama-led executive elected in March 2012 and endorsed by the national convention.
To add insult to injury, 10 of the 12 members of the NWC disowned the action of the party’s Chairman, Dr. Bamanga Tukur, on the crisis rocking the Adamawa State chapter of the party. Tukur, who is from Adamawa, is alleged to be preparing one of his sons as the governor of the state in 2015. The NWC members, led by the party’s Deputy National Chairman, Dr. Sam Jaja, said ongoing local government and ward congresses in the state were not authorized by the NWC. They also restored the Executive Committee of the party in the state, which was sacked by the NWC last October 17.
Jonathan: the end justifies the means
As the melodramatic elements of this unfolding crisis reach a rising crescendo, Jonathan must make a decision. He can choose to stand by the embattled and beleaguered Tukur and alienate the NWC and the NGF or ditch Tukur as part of a grand bargain with the NGF that will secure him the 2015 PDP ticket. The governors have nothing against Jonathan; he has incurred their wrath because of his stubborn support for Tukur. There has been no love lost between Tukur and Adamawa State Governor Murtala Nyako since the former assumed the chairmanship of the party March last year.
There are no easy options but the best case scenario will be for Jonathan to pick the next PDP national chairman from a non-PDP state. PDP governors are too powerful and they exert much influence in the polity. It is political suicide to ignore the power play between a national chairman and his governor. In the North-East where the PDP currently zoned its chairmanship, only Borno and Yobe states are non-PDP states. It makes good political sense for Jonathan to abandon the embattled Tukur and go for a younger candidate without as many enemies as Tukur.
In the coming weeks, Tukur will know his fate. Already, Jonathan is under pressure to abandon Tukur to his fate and to consider picking Tukur’s successor from Borno or Yobe, in order to avoid the usual power tussle between the party’s national chairman and his state governor. The question is whether Jonathan is prepared to abandon his friend at his greatest moment of need. The answer is obvious: in politics, there are no permanent friends or enemies; only permanent interests.
 |
|
Shettima at UNGA: Africa Demands a Seat at the Global Table
Nigeria has taken its campaign for a bigger African voice in global affairs to the heart of the United Nations, with Vice President Kashim Shettima demanding sweeping reform of the UN Security Council and permanent representation for Africa.
Delivering President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s address at the **81st United Nations General Assembly** in New York on Thursday, Shettima said the international system created after World War II could no longer adequately reflect the realities of the modern world.
Nigeria called for **at least two permanent seats for Africa**, with the full rights and responsibilities of permanent membership, including veto rights for as long as the veto remains part of the Security Council, alongside **five non-permanent African seats**.
The demand puts Africa's long-standing campaign for greater representation at the centre of Nigeria's message to world leaders.
1945 cannot define 2026’
The Nigerian delegation argued that the distribution of power established in 1945 has left Africa under-represented in the institution responsible for some of the world's most consequential decisions on peace and security.
For Abuja, the issue is not simply about seats at the UN. It is about giving African countries a greater role in decisions that directly affect the continent.
Nigeria anchored its position on the **Ezulwini Consensus**, the African Union's common position on Security Council reform.
CONFLICTS: NIGERIA CALLS FOR DIPLOMACY
Shettima's address also turned to the conflicts confronting the international community.
Nigeria called for stronger diplomacy, respect for international law and protection of civilians, while urging greater international efforts to resolve conflicts, including the crisis in Sudan.
The Nigerian position was that lasting peace cannot be secured solely through military action and that diplomacy, dialogue and negotiated settlements remain essential tools for resolving conflicts.
TERRORISM: ‘NO COUNTRY CAN FIGHT ALONE’
With Nigeria continuing to confront terrorism and other forms of transnational crime, the address placed international security cooperation high on the agenda.
Nigeria called for stronger intelligence-sharing, action against terrorist financing and greater cooperation to prevent illicit weapons from crossing borders.
But Abuja also linked security to development, pointing to education, economic opportunity, accountable governance and protection of citizens** as important elements of long-term stability.
AFRICA’S WEALTH: FROM RAW MATERIALS TO INDUSTRIAL POWER
The Nigerian message went beyond politics and security.Tinubu's address, delivered by Shettima, called for Africa to transform its vast natural resources into industrial and economic opportunities by expanding **local processing, manufacturing, technology and value-added production**.
Nigeria also highlighted the African Continental Free Trade Area as an opportunity to expand intra-African trade and build stronger regional supply chains.
The message was clear: Africa's resources should generate greater value, jobs and investment within the continent rather than being exported largely in raw form.
CLIMATE AND DEVELOPMENT
Nigeria also reaffirmed its commitment to climate action, including its 2060 net-zero target, while stressing the need for financing, technology transfer and international support for developing countries.
Abuja argued that climate action and economic development should be pursued together, particularly in countries still struggling to provide reliable energy and economic opportunities for rapidly growing populations.
THE NIGERIAN MESSAGE
From the UN podium in New York, Shettima delivered a message that combined Nigeria's foreign-policy priorities with its wider vision for Africa: **greater representation, stronger security cooperation, economic transformation and a more inclusive international system.**
For Nigeria, the Security Council reform campaign remains a central part of that agenda.
The demand from Abuja is straightforward: **Africa should have a permanent voice in the room when decisions affecting international peace, security and global governance are made. And Nigeria says it intends to keep making that case.
News
CBN Slashes Interest Rate to 23% in Major Policy Adjustment
The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has reduced its benchmark interest rate from 26.5 per cent to 23 per cent, marking a significant shift in its monetary policy direction.
CBN Governor, Olayemi Cardoso, announced the decision on Tuesday following the conclusion of the Monetary Policy Committee’s (MPC) 307th meeting in Abuja.
According to Cardoso, the committee reviewed developments in both the global and domestic economies, assessed emerging risks and considered their potential implications for monetary policy before reaching its decision.
“The Committee decided as follows: reset the monetary policy rate at 23 per cent,” the governor said.
The latest move represents a 350-basis-point reduction in the Monetary Policy Rate (MPR). It follows two consecutive MPC meetings at which the rate was left unchanged, after the committee lowered it by 50 basis points in February 2026.
In addition to cutting the MPR, the committee adjusted the standing facility corridor to +50 and -300 basis points around the new benchmark rate.
However, the CBN retained existing Cash Reserve Requirement (CRR) levels at 45 per cent for deposit money banks, 16 per cent for merchant banks and 75 per cent for non-TSA public-sector deposits.
Cardoso explained that the changes were designed to improve the effectiveness of monetary policy by strengthening the transmission of policy decisions through the financial system.
He said the adjustment was also part of efforts to restore the MPR as the primary signal of the CBN’s monetary policy and improve the operation of the monetary policy framework.
According to the governor, the MPC viewed the recalibration as an operational adjustment rather than a fundamental shift in the bank’s monetary policy stance.
“The Committee emphasized that the duration of the corridor does not constitute a change in the current monetary policy stance, but rather an operational reset to enhance the effectiveness of monetary policy and support the transition to an inflation targeting framework,” he said.
The committee also noted ongoing efforts by the CBN to strengthen its monetary policy implementation framework. Cardoso said transaction-based operational benchmarks had improved the transparency of money-market operations.
The MPC consequently concluded that resetting the MPR and adjusting the policy corridor would bring the monetary policy framework more closely in line with prevailing market conditions.
The committee said the changes are expected to improve policy transmission and reinforce the MPR’s role as the central benchmark for monetary policy.
Members further maintained that the latest adjustments should be viewed primarily as an operational realignment of the framework and not, in themselves, as a change in the underlying monetary policy stance.
Business
In The Spotlight
Editorial:Trump @ UNGA: Power Is Not a Substitute for Strategy
President Donald Trump came before the United Nations this week with a message that has defined much of his second presidency: The United States is powerful, it intends to use that power, and it will not permit international institutions to place limits on American sovereignty.
There was little ambiguity in the message. Trump celebrated military strength, demanded greater control over America’s borders, challenged international institutions and portrayed American technological leadership as a strategic necessity. On Iran, Gaza, immigration, the International Criminal Court and artificial intelligence, the president returned repeatedly to the same principle: Nations must defend their own interests, and the United States must remain free to act.
That is a coherent philosophy. But coherence is not the same as effectiveness.
The question raised by this speech is not whether America should be strong. No serious foreign policy can begin from the premise that American power is irrelevant. The question is what that power is for — and whether it is being used in ways that make the United States more secure over the long term.
Trump's remarks on Iran illustrated the dilemma.
He reaffirmed that Iran cannot be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon and paired the possibility of diplomacy with warnings of devastating military consequences.
Deterrence has always depended partly on credibility. But credibility is not measured only by the willingness to threaten force. It is also measured by the ability to achieve a political outcome once force has been used.
Wars can begin with clear objectives and end with consequences no government anticipated. The history of American foreign policy offers ample evidence that military superiority does not automatically translate into political control.
That is why diplomacy cannot simply be regarded as the alternative to strength. At its best, diplomacy is one of the instruments through which strength is converted into durable agreements.
The same distinction matters in Trump's approach to the United Nations.
The president has argued that international institutions have become too costly, too bureaucratic and too willing to intrude upon national sovereignty. His administration has pursued reductions in America's financial and institutional commitments to the United Nations.
There is nothing inherently wrong with demanding accountability from an international organization. The United Nations deserves scrutiny. Its bureaucracy can be inefficient, its member states often disagree and its institutions can fail to prevent the very conflicts they were created to address.
But the choice is not simply between an ineffective United Nations and an unconstrained America.
International institutions exist in part because some problems cannot be solved effectively by individual nations acting alone. Nuclear proliferation is one. Global pandemics are another. Artificial intelligence increasingly belongs on that list.
Trump's comments about AI therefore deserve particular attention. He emphasized American technological leadership and warned against international regulation that could restrain innovation.
The United States has obvious reasons to remain at the forefront of AI development. But technological leadership and international coordination are not necessarily opposing objectives. The challenge is to develop rules that protect security without freezing innovation.
That requires American leadership, not American isolation.
The president's immigration argument followed the same pattern. He presented control of the border as an essential expression of national sovereignty and rejected the notion that international norms should prevent governments from determining who may enter their territory.
A sovereign nation plainly has an interest in controlling its borders. But sovereignty also carries responsibilities. The United States, like other countries, must reconcile border enforcement with its legal and humanitarian obligations.
The difficult work of governing begins where slogans end.
That is ultimately what was missing from the most sweeping parts of Trump's speech: not conviction, but attention to the institutional machinery required to turn conviction into lasting results.
America can impose costs on adversaries. It can withdraw from agreements. It can reduce contributions to international organizations. It can threaten overwhelming force. It can use its enormous economic and technological advantages.
But power has a second dimension that is easier to overlook: the ability to persuade allies, maintain coalitions, preserve diplomatic channels and build institutions capable of surviving changes in leadership.
The United States did not become the world's leading power merely because it possessed the world's strongest military. It built alliances. It established institutions. It cultivated economic relationships. It persuaded other countries that American leadership could serve interests beyond America's own.
Trump's speech represents a different emphasis.
It places sovereignty before institutions, pressure before accommodation and national interest before international consensus.
There is a legitimate debate to be had over whether the postwar international system has become too cumbersome, too expensive or insufficiently accountable. But reforming that system and weakening it are not the same thing.
The distinction will matter greatly in the years ahead.
A stronger America is not necessarily an America that stands alone. Nor is international cooperation synonymous with surrendering sovereignty.
The enduring challenge of American foreign policy is to combine power with restraint, independence with alliances and national interest with the recognition that American security is inseparable from the wider world.
Trump's speech made clear which side of that debate he occupies.The more consequential question is what happens next.
History will not ultimately judge the speech by its applause lines, its threats or its declarations of American strength. It will judge the policy that follows — and whether that policy produces a world in which the United States is not merely more powerful, but more secure.
Power matters. But power, by itself, is not a strategy.
In The Spotlight
Who Is in Charge? Tinubu Is in Paris, Shettima Is in New York
By now, Nigerians deserve more than explanations. They deserve clarity. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is in Paris. Vice President Kashim Shettima is in New York.
And Nigeria is in Abuja, Lagos, Kano, Port Harcourt, Maiduguri and everywhere else Nigerians are dealing with the daily business of surviving, working and waiting for government to deliver. So, a simple question is becoming increasingly difficult to avoid:Who is in charge?
Before anyone dismisses that question as opposition politics, let us establish the facts. Tinubu left Nigeria on August 30 for what the Presidency described as a working vacation. He subsequently moved from London to Paris and, on September 21, the Presidency announced that he had extended his stay by a few days and would return at the weekend.
Shettima left Nigeria on September 20 for New York, where he is representing the President and leading Nigeria's delegation to the 81st United Nations General Assembly.
The government says there is no vacuum. It says Tinubu remains in contact with officials at home and continues to direct the affairs of government. It also says Shettima has been given the President's mandate to represent Nigeria at the UN.
Fine. But that does not make the question disappear.It makes the question more important.
A country cannot run on “trust us”
Government is not supposed to operate on whispers, assumptions or political reassurance.It operates through institutions.
It operates through constitutional authority. It operates through clearly defined responsibilities. And when the President is abroad for an extended period while the Vice President is also outside the country, Nigerians have every right to ask where executive authority is located and who is exercising it.
This is particularly relevant because Nigeria's Constitution provides a specific mechanism for a President who is proceeding on vacation or otherwise unable to discharge the functions of office.
That mechanism exists for a reason.It is designed to prevent uncertainty.It is designed to prevent a vacuum.It is designed toensure that, at every moment, Nigerians know who is constitutionally responsible for the presidency.
So why should Nigerians have to debate the issue?
The Presidency says everything is fine
The government insists that there is no disruption to governance.The Presidency says Tinubu has remained engaged from abroad. It points to decisions taken by the President while away and says the Vice President's trip to New York is an official assignment.
There is nothing inherently unusual about a Nigerian president travelling abroad.There is nothing unusual about a vice president representing the country at the United Nations.
The problem is the combination.The President is away. The Vice President is away. And the country is being told that everything is perfectly normal.
Perhaps it is.But if it is, then proving it should be easy.Tell Nigerians clearly who is exercising presidential authority.
Tell Nigerians whether the constitutional procedure has been followed.Tell Nigerians who is accountable for presidential decisions while both men are outside the country.This should not be difficult.
Leadership is also about presence
There is a difference between saying government is functioning and demonstrating that leadership is present.Nigeria is not short of challenges.
The cost of living remains a major concern. Security remains a national issue. Unemployment and economic hardship continue to affect households. Nigerians are demanding better public services and greater accountability.
At such a moment, leadership cannot be reduced to whether instructions can be transmitted from one continent to another.
Leadership is also about visibility. It is about being present when the country needs reassurance. It is about being accessible when difficult questions arise. It is about giving citizens confidence that somebody is firmly in control. A president does not have to sit permanently in Aso Rock to govern Nigeria. But Nigerians should never be left wondering whether anyone is sitting firmly at the controls.
Paris is not Abuja
There is another uncomfortable truth.Nigeria's political class has become remarkably comfortable governing from airports, hotel suites, foreign capitals and conference rooms.The rest of the country does not have that luxury.
The Nigerian worker cannot take a working vacation from inflation.The small business owner cannot take annual leave from electricity costs.The parent struggling with school fees cannot postpone the bills until the President returns. The young graduate without a job cannot simply wait for the government to reconnect with reality.
For ordinary Nigerians, the country does not go on vacation.That is why the optics matter.While the President is in Paris and the Vice President is in New York, millions of Nigerians remain at home confronting the consequences of government policy every day.
This is bigger than Tinubu
The danger is that this debate becomes another partisan shouting match. Supporters will say the President is working.
Opponents will say the government has abandoned its responsibilities. Both sides can shout themselves hoarse.
But the Constitution does not work by volume. The question is not whether Tinubu's supporters are satisfied.The question is not whether his opponents are outraged.The question is whether the constitutional chain of executive authority is clear. That is an institutional question, not a party question. And the National Assembly has a role to play in ensuring that Nigerians are not left guessing.
Nigeria deserves an answer
There is something deeply unhealthy about a democracy in which citizens have to ask social media, political parties and television commentators who is exercising presidential power.
The answer should be official.It should be constitutional.It should be unambiguous.If Tinubu is fully exercising the powers of President from Paris, say so.If Shettima is exercising presidential functions under the constitutional provisions governing presidential absence, say so.If there is no constitutional problem, explain precisely why.
But please, stop treating a legitimate question as an attack on the government.A government confident in its constitutional position should welcome clarity.
Who is in charge?
This is ultimately not about Paris.It is not about New York.It is not even primarily about Tinubu or Shettima. It is about the Nigerian presidency. A republic of more than 200 million people should not have an invisible question mark hanging over its executive authority.
Tinubu can travel.Shettima can travel.Government can continue. But constitutional responsibility must remain visible.
Because when both the President and Vice President are outside the country, Nigerians should not have to look at a map to figure out where their government is.
They should be able to look at the Constitution.And the answer should be unmistakable.Who is in charge? Nigeria deserves to know.
By Emmanuel Emeke Asiwe, Publisher/Editor-in-Chief