Osun State Governor, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola, an exemplary gentleman, in this interview conducted by Huhuonline.com publisher, Emmanuel Emeke Asiwe and Managing Editor, Valerian Agbaw-Ebai bares his mind on mind-boggling issues bothering on his challenges in governance vis-a-viz his performance amid criticism, security in Northern Nigeria and many other national issues.
Huhuonline.com: For about a year, you ran Osun State without a cabinet. Is this an innovation in governance?
Rauf Aregbesola: No, it was not up to a year, I was sworn in November, 2010 and constituted my cabinet in August of 2011. It was about nine months. I ran the government without a cabinet because we had no money to pay wages. The state was bankrupt; I inherited an N18.3bn debt overhang. The debt overhang would not have been an issue if it were not a short-term debt with stringent terms. Every month for the state to meet its wage bill, the state had to take N1bn loan to augment whatever was left in terms of its revenue to settle salaries and wages. That was the state we met and; because of my commitment to the large pool of unemployed youth, I had to do something.
Rather than hold on to that critical need, I moved on the implementation of my youth empowerment programme and postponed the composition of the cabinet.
Please before you go further, ask yourself, is there any time line for cabinet composition in an executive government? For parliamentary system of government, of course there can`t be a government without a composition of cabinet. But in the executive government structures, it is usually unnecessary
Utilizing the same latitude the constitution provides, I was busy reorganizing my finances to meet pressing needs and critical programmes such as the youth empowerment scheme and again sufficiently building up reserve with which I will prosecute other important progammes as well as fund cabinet.
Cabinet is not just gathering of people, whether competent of incompetent. In my own case, I took time to select competent people. It is constituting a body; it is having the resources to make them do what they are supposed to do in government and provide them the wherewithal to serve in their respective positions. That, we struggled to do, which aided their performance when they were sworn in 12th August 2011.
Huhuonline.com: Your plan to introduce Ifa studies in secondary schools in your state has enraged parents, many of who now want to withdraw their wards from public schools. How do you plan to address this?
Rauf Aregbesola: First of all, I will not engage on religion, because when you reduce issues to emotions, not much is gained. You should therefore run away from sentiments and emotions. Religion is sensitive, emotive and could be sensational, to that extent I will not go into but I will answer your question. Before assuming office, I told the people that we would be fair to all manners of men. In my oath of office, it is so clear, it is constitutional that whoever occupies the position I occupy must shun discrimination of whatever nature, that is summarizing it. That particular line in the constitution says you should be fair to all manners of men regardless of any distinction be it gender distinction, shift distinction. You swear.
You must swear as part of oath of allegiance and duty to the people to be fair to all men. The question we must ask ourselves is, are there people in Osun State who are adherents of Ifa? We have to be careful when these issues come up. Don’t reduce it to religion. My religion does not accept Ifa, I don`t patronize Ifa. But the question we must ask ourselves are there people in Osun who are adherents of Ifa, if the answer is yes, then we ought to be careful. They are citizens; they are not sub citizens. They are full citizens deserving recognition, including government support just as you have Christians, Muslims, and atheists, who don’t believe in anything.
What do you call discrminatiom? Discrimination is conscious act against the interest of somebody who is equally recognized by constitution to have what you are denying them. I want to see the injury to anybody if as I have done, we recognize the rights of others.
Today in Osun, we recognise traditional religion in all official functions, so when a Muslim prays, a Christian prays also; traditional worshipers also pray. Initially it was offensive to the two dominant religions. But later they got to understand that it was indeed hypocritical for any government produced by plurality of votes to limit recognition of faith to just two. In the same manner, we are not forcing anybody in private institution to study anything.
What we are simply doing to the extent public school is for all those who believe in God and those who don`t believe in God- Those who worship God through Christian method and those who worship God through Muslim method and those who worship traditionally. It is our duty to allow them to worship the way they choose to worship and have knowledge of how they worship.
The question I expect from you and several other media practioners is, are we making Ifa studies compulsory? The answer is no. Just as we are not making the study of the Bible compulsory or study of the Quran compulsory. We can`t make study of Ifa compulsory. It is optional!
Can anybody legislate faith? When people talk I just laugh. If up till now in Nigeria. CRS( Christian Religious Studies) and IRK(Islamic Religious Knowledge) are not legislated in public schools, why would Ifa be legislated in schools.
We tend to glamorize rubbish- by seeing issues in their clear and reasonable perspective but attempt to confuse what has been done. CRS has been on for as long as we have had western education. Same with the IRK. But no government has ever given recognition to traditional religious studies. Thus we don’t even have teachers to teach Ifa religion.
All we have done is develop a system of electronic learning, in the system we have all examinable subjects that are taught in High School in Osun. This includes CRK, an examinable subject, and IRK, another examinable subject.
Besides those examinable subjects, the only other place you can have any semblance of Ifa knowledge is in Yoruba. There will be some mention, reference to Ifa but there is no exposure to Ifa. CRK as a subject is distinct from Bible. You may say Bible is the source. There is no doubt about that. IRK has its source from the Quran, but its distinct from the Quran.
For those who want to know about Ifa, we have provided a reference material in the “tablet of knowledge.” just like we did with Bible and Quran.
In the usual annual prayers, we have been having in Osun, one of the priests raised the issue of recognition of traditional religion and I informed him that it not just a question of recognizing traditional religion, we have in the “tablet of knowledge” that we shall be distributing Quran, Bible and Ifa.
That does not mean that Ifa is made compulsory; it is an elective, it’s uploaded in this electronic device for whoever cares to know read about it.
Ifa religion is morals- the course content are importance of patience, importance of money, sex education, roles of language in society, dangers in polygamy, awareness and appreciation of God.
Religion is a touchy subject. In our society are people who do nothing but worship Ifa, just as you feel about your own religion, they too feel bad that their children are taught CRK and IRK. If we want to strip it of any arrogance, what is it that gives one the right to think his religion is superior to others? It is bigamy, prejudice conditioned and forced by those who have been managing our affairs. We cannot be so enslaved for life.
I am Muslim, my religion tells me it is the only religion, only way of life. The question which we should ask ourselves is, is that permitted in modern civilized society? The answer is no. No matter how hard I feel about my religion, I can only have such say for myself. I can’t impose it on you. That is the ethos of modernity that is civilization; that is what we call socialization in modern time: accommodation and acceptance of differences between you and the other. If that becomes relevant, we must be able tolerate those with varying opinions on faith. You don’t have more rights than the man who does not believe anything. What must not be done to you is for your child to be compelled to study Ifa. At that time, you must say no, because it is against your belief. So also it is against the belief of Ifa adherents to have their children forced to learn Bible or the Quran.
Huhuonline.com: Can we say, the governor has taken in terms of public policy, take the least common denominator and say ok, this issue is controversial and heat up the polity, let us take way religion whether western or indigenous out public space.
Rauf Aregbesola: Listen, If we remove the study of IRK and CRK, there will be more hoopla. It may be difficult for you to accept, but your mind tells you this man is telling you the truth. What is called civilization? It is matured relationship. That is the capacity to absorb the nuances and excesses of the other man without taking offence because you know in the public space you have the right. Somebody can be Agnosium, It unethical, unhealthy, but the best you can is to move away from him. I had to make that point to know that what is called civility is the ability to accommodate others. The point I’m trying to make is, what is it is about Ifa that offends so badly?
Ifa teaches about the importance of patience. Let’s read what it says: “In Yoruba traditional religion, patience and perseverance in every human endeavor is held in high esteem. They believe that for one to excel in life one needs to endure a more challenging encounter to one’s journey to success.”
If indeed governance is about creation of awareness, popularization of culture, promote accommodation of differences, I think it perfectly in order to allow students know their culture very well and not screened of an aspect of their lives, that is as relevant to them regardless of their faith.
Huhuonline.com: Your Excellency, you seem to court controversy. Recall that you were in court for three years, trying to reclaim your mandate; you were accused of masterminding a bombing; and more recently, you were alleged to have ties with a radical Moslem group linked with the Boko Haram Islamist sect. Do you actually have ties with Boko Haram?
Rauf Aregbesola :You claimed that I have been linked with radical Islam, How? I won a popular mandate. Even going by your own admission, which I say is false. How can somebody win a popular mandate if he is identified with a radical sect, which is in the minority? When was the phenomenon of Boko Haram? When was my mandate? Boko Haram became a phenomenon in 2009, I ran for office in 2007. So where is the link?
You went further to say I was linked with a bombing incident, honorably speaking, nothing can be more fallacious; there was no such thing anywhere; they’re just your own fabrication. And I want to appeal to people in the media that it is in our collective interest to take pain to crosscheck our facts before putting them in public domain, because once they are in the public domain they are permanent; because we do not want misinform the public. This is high responsibility, which we must all seek to be conscious of before we launch out, otherwise we will be injuring people unnecessarily while propagating rubbish and falsehood. But I will put the issues in context. Rauf Aregbesola is confidently and unpretentious a Muslim. And that is a right I have, just as very one the right to bear the faith they profess.
Rauf Aregbesola, however, from school, had always proclaimed the amiable right of everybody to freely profess their religion and on that ground I can lay down my life to ensure that nobody is disallowed from professing his religion. I don’t understand anything that we mean by radical Islam; criminals are criminals, whether they are Christians or they are Muslims. A criminal is a criminal. Whoever takes life for any reason either in the course of posolisation or robbery for material gain is a criminal and must be seen as such. That you must understand and that you must see from the fact that I will defend the right of anybody to profess their faith
Thirdly, it is unfortunate that we are very quick to hold on to allegations even when several statements have been issued to debunk those allegations. You read the allegation that I was sponsoring radical Islam, One will like to you to equally make reference to our rebuttal to the allegations.
Huhonline.com: That is why we are giving you this opportunity.
Rauf Aregbesola: If you have read it, you will not even bother asking such questions, because SSS denied issuing that statement. I went to the DG of SSS and said to him, I read this about my person, please for goodness sake, let me have your proof. And he asked me, did I ever contact you that any such statement was made? So why are you accusing us.
I was interviewed in the premises of SSS, and I told the world that the SSS Czar denied issuing such statement.
Huhuonline.com: Excellency, The SSS lie a lot !!!
Rauf Aregbesola: Why was that statement issued? We told the world! Our opponents, believing that if were so stigmatized, it would help them, went about the campaign of calumny, submitting falsehood. We did not stop there; we told the whole world that a man that will accused of Islamisation must be seen in its total form. I have cabinet of 36 members. Cabinents are not formed by elections, cabinets are formed by choice. So a man interested in Islamazation will surround himself with muslims. I have six Muslims among 36 cabinet members. I had a choice when I was running to pick a Muslim as my running mate; I picked a fire brand Christian as running mate, a member of Mountain of Fire and Miracles. That is not all, we have 26 members in the state house of assembly, 10 or less are Muslims.
Huhuonline.com: Your Excellency, Assembly members came in by elections, anyway.
Rauf Aregbesola : Listen, now, you will say that the man wanted to run a faith-based government. You know I am the governor, don’t miss it. Don`t forget I was already a governor before they were elected, before they even ran for the election. Don`t try to reduce the impact of my influence if I wanted to do otherwise. I became a governor in 2010, Assembly election was 2011. I had enough time. Don’t ever gloss over it, please, it is important, because when you want to tell people that I am simply mischievous, you can`t just close it down. If you do, you are mischievous, too.
We have 31 executives at the local government level, sworn in by me, as caretaker committee members, only 10 are Muslims. When you now sum this up, where then is the meat of this allegation? Probably what they are telling you.
Huhuonline.com: It is what we read.
Rauf Aregbesola: What they are telling you, you now take hook line and sinker, in a clime where it is almost a crime to appear as Muslim, I do with relish. In a clime where public office is already seen as a caucus for conformity, a non-conformist is there, who does not give any nonsense about his own faith. I therefore appear in the public sometimes as traditional Yoruba person, sometimes as a Muslim. I concede to others the right to be who they are within the law. I think I have a right to be who I am within the law. That is all.
Huhuonline.com: Do you wear your religion on your sleeve?
Rauf Aregbesola: What makes you think you don’t wear yours on your sleeve?
Huhuonline.com: I don’t hold public office, you are the governor.
Rauf Aregbesola: (Laughter) everything about me is liberal, unless when you want to be openly mischievous.
You met me yesterday; did anything suggest to you that I am a fundamentalist? Nothing, it is a question of perception and the impression you want to have. I said there can’t be a more determined advocate of accommodation than me. In all public statements and outings, I tell people that what you call life has no other definition than service, and service has no colour of religion or colour of nationalism, either ethnic or general nationalism. Service is service, so if that is my ethos, which I preach, which I live by, which I demonstrate, where is this absolute falsehood of somebody being what he is not.
This is not my first time in public office. I was in public office for eight years; I have not changed a bit, in either my public appearance or attitude. I have been like this. I appear in the way that I believe is best suited, for as long as it does not offend the laws of the land. I want to believe just I expect of others; I want to believe everybody has the right to live by his own code, which does not offend the general code of society. I don`t know how well I have responded to you.
Huhuonline.com: In the last presidential election, your state voted against President Jonathan, despite your party`s stance, which made it possible for the presidential candidate of the ruling party to win the presidential election in all ACN-controlled states. What informed this decision, and if the same scenario reoccurs in 2015, will you tow the same line?
Rauf Aregbesola: I don’t know where got you this information from, Can you let me have the categorical endorsement of Jonathan by the ACN. There was no open or secret endorsement of President Ebele Jonathan by my party. My party fielded a candidate, and what we did in Osun was to tow the party line. People must not forget that National Chairman of my party, Chief Bisi Akande is from Osun and sensitive and all important election like that it will have been difficult for the party not to give total support to the most senior person, to the highest leadership of the party as exemplified by Chief Bisi Akande. So without any doubt or cause to want to reduce the decision of the party in Osun as well as the overwhelming support that the party enjoys, I want to tell you that we simply voted for our party to justify the level of popularity that we enjoy in the state.
Huhuonline.com: What is your take on the present security challenge in Nigeria? what does Nigeria needs to overcome the security problems, particularly in the North?
Rauf Aregbesola: In all my public statements on the instability in Northern Nigeria, I have all ways been very didactic. When you are didactic about a thing, you are not just superficial. I have spoken at two public events, specifically on the challenges of security in Northern Nigeria. I said that in any environment where disparity exists in the economic status of the people there to the extent that some have more than what they need and a large majority wallow in poverty, unless you bridge the gap, tension, social tension crisis and all sorts of criminality cannot be avoided.
Today, the insurgency in the North is such that we must embark on an immediate youth empowerment programme that will remove the social base for the recruitment of disempowered, disaffected, angered youths that readily gravitate to the misdirected sponsors of the violence. That was why rather than go about forming cabinet even in my own state, in spite of my challenges in funding I pursued aggressively Youth empowerment and I am the first government in the history of Nigeria to develop mass youth empowerment programme that engages 20,000 able-bodied, educated unemployed youths. The programme has been adjudged as the best social safety net by the World Bank. When I began that, am still talking about that, I expect social commentators to readily link my position on the economy and the consequences of solving the economic ethos in the Nigerian polity as the antidote to removing the tension, instability and insecurity.
 |
|
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