December 20th 2013
His Excellency,
Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, GCFR
Agbe L’Oba House, Quarry Road,
Ibara, Abeokuta.
Re: Before it is too late
I wish to formally acknowledge your letter dated December 2, 2013 and other previous correspondence similar to it.
You will recall that all the letters were brought to me by hand. Although both of us discussed some of the issues in those letters, I had not, before now, seen the need for any formal reply since, to me, they contained advice from a former President to a serving President. Obviously, you felt differently because in your last letter, you complained about my not acknowledging or replying your previous letters.
It is with the greatest possible reluctance that I now write this reply. I am most uneasy about embarking on this unprecedented and unconventional form of open communication between me and a former leader of our country because I know that there are more acceptable and dignified means of doing so.
But I feel obliged to reply your letter for a number of reasons: one, you formally requested for a reply and not sending you one will be interpreted as ignoring a former President.
Secondly, Nigerians know the role you have played in my political life and given the unfortunate tone of your letter, clearly, the grapes have gone sour. Therefore, my side of the story also needs to be told.
The third reason why I must reply you in writing is that your letter is clearly a threat to national security as it may deliberately or inadvertently set the stage for subversion.
The fourth reason for this reply is that you raised very weighty issues, and since the letter has been made public, Nigerians are expressing legitimate concerns. A response from me therefore, becomes very necessary.
The fifth reason is that this letter may appear in biographies and other books which political commentators on Nigeria’s contemporary politics may write. It is only proper for such publications to include my comments on the issues raised in your letter.
Sixthly, you are very unique in terms of the governance of this country. You were a military Head of State for three years and eight months, and an elected President for eight years. That means you have been the Head of Government of Nigeria for about twelve years. This must have, presumably, exposed you to a lot of information. Thus when you make a statement, there is the tendency for people to take it seriously.
The seventh reason is that the timing of your letter coincided with other vicious releases. The Speaker of the House of Representatives spoke of my “body language” encouraging corruption. A letter written to me by the CBN Governor alleging that NNPC, within a period of 19 months did not remit the sum of USD49.8 billion to the federation account, was also deliberately leaked to the public.
The eighth reason is that it appears that your letter was designed to incite Nigerians from other geopolitical zones against me and also calculated to promote ethnic disharmony. Worse still, your letter was designed to instigate members of our Party, the PDP, against me.
The ninth reason is that your letter conveys to me the feeling that landmines have been laid for me. Therefore, Nigerians need to have my response to the issues raised before the mines explode.
The tenth and final reason why my reply is inevitable is that you have written similar letters and made public comments in reference to all former Presidents and Heads of Government starting from Alhaji Shehu Shagari and these have instigated different actions and reactions. The purpose and direction of your letter is distinctly ominous, and before it is too late, my clarifications on the issues need to be placed on record.
Let me now comment on the issues you raised. In commenting I wish to crave your indulgence to compare what is happening now to what took place before. This, I believe, will enable Nigerians see things in better perspective because we must know where we are coming from so as to appreciate where we now are, and to allow us clearly map out where we are going.
You raised concerns about the security situation in the country. I assure you that I am fully aware of the responsibility of government for ensuring the security of the lives and property of citizens. My Administration is working assiduously to overcome current national security challenges, the seeds of which were sown under previous administrations. There have been some setbacks; but certainly there have also been great successes in our efforts to overcome terrorism and insurgency.
Those who continue to down-play our successes in this regard, amongst whom you must now be numbered, appear to have conveniently forgotten the depths to which security in our country had plunged before now.
At a stage, almost the entire North-East of Nigeria was under siege by insurgents. Bombings of churches and public buildings in the North and the federal capital became an almost weekly occurrence. Our entire national security apparatus seemed nonplussed and unable to come to grips with the new threat posed by the berthing of terrorism on our shores.
But my administration has since brought that very unacceptable situation under significant control. We have overhauled our entire national security architecture, improved intelligence gathering, training, funding, logistical support to our armed forces and security agencies, and security collaboration with friendly countries with very visible and positive results.
The scope and impact of terrorist operations have been significantly reduced and efforts are underway to restore full normalcy to the most affected North Eastern region and initiate a post-crisis development agenda, including a special intervention programme to boost the region’s socio-economic progress.
In doing all this, we have kept our doors open for dialogue with the insurgents and their supporters through efforts such as the work of the Presidential Committee on Dialogue and the Peaceful Resolution of the Security Challenges in the North-East. You also know that the Governor of Borno State provided the items you mentioned to me as carrots. Having done all this and more, it is interesting that you still accuse me of not acting on your hardly original recommendation that the carrot and stick option be deployed to solve the Boko Haram problem.
Your suggestion that we are pursuing a “war against violence without understanding the root causes of the violence and applying solutions to deal with all the underlying factors” is definitely misplaced because from the onset of this administration, we have been implementing a multifaceted strategy against militancy, insurgency and terrorism that includes poverty alleviation, economic development, education and social reforms.
Even though basic education is the constitutional responsibility of States, my administration has, as part of its efforts to address ignorance and poor education which have been identified as two of the factors responsible for making some of our youth easily available for use as cannon fodder by insurgents and terrorists, committed huge funds to the provision of modern basic education schools for the Almajiri in several Northern States. The Federal Government under my leadership has also set up nine additional universities in the Northern States and three in the Southern States in keeping with my belief that proper education is the surest way of emancipating and empowering our people.
More uncharitable persons may even see a touch of sanctimoniousness in your new belief in the carrot and stick approach to overcoming militancy and insurgency. You have always referred to how you hit Odi in Bayelsa State to curb militancy in the Niger Delta. If the invasion of Odi by the Army was the stick, I did not see the corresponding carrot. I was the Deputy Governor of Bayelsa State then, and as I have always told you, the invasion of Odi did not solve any militancy problem but, to some extent, escalated it. If it had solved it, late President Yar’Adua would not have had to come up with the amnesty program. And while some elements of the problem may still be there, in general, the situation is reasonably better.
In terms of general insecurity in the country and particularly the crisis in the Niger Delta, 2007 was one of the worst periods in our history. You will recall three incidents that happened in 2007 which seemed to have been orchestrated to achieve sinister objectives. Here in Abuja, a petrol tanker loaded with explosives was to be rammed into the INEC building. But luckily for the country, an electric pole stopped the tanker from hitting the INEC building. It is clear that this incident was meant to exploit the general sense of insecurity in the nation at the time to achieve the aim of stopping the 2007 elections. It is instructive that you, on a number of occasions, alluded to this fact.
When that incident failed, an armed group invaded Yenagoa one evening with the intent to assassinate me. Luckily for me, they could not. They again attacked and bombed my country home on a night when I was expected in the village. Fortunately, as God would have it, I did not make the trip.
I recall that immediately after both incidents, I got calls expressing the concern of Abuja. But Baba, you know that despite the apparent concern of Abuja, no single arrest was ever made. I was then the Governor of Bayelsa State and the PDP Vice-Presidential candidate. The security people ordinarily should have unraveled the assassination attempt on me.
You also raised the issues of kidnapping, piracy and armed robbery. These are issues all Nigerians, including me are very concerned about. While we will continue to do our utmost best to reduce all forms of criminality to the barest minimum in our country, it is just as well to remind you that the first major case of kidnapping for ransom took place around 2006. And the Boko Haram crisis dates back to 2002. Goodluck Jonathan was not the President of the country then. Also, armed robbery started in this country immediately after the civil war and since then, it has been a problem to all succeeding governments. For a former Head of Government, who should know better, to present these problems as if they were creations of the Jonathan Administration is most uncharitable.
Having said that, let me remind you of some of the things we have done to curb violent crime in the country. We have reorganized the Nigerian Police Force and appointed a more dynamic leadership to oversee its affairs. We have also improved its manpower levels as well as funding, training and logistical support.
We have also increased the surveillance capabilities of the Police and provided its air-wing with thrice the number of helicopters it had before the inception of the present administration. The National Civil Defence and Security Corps has been armed to make it a much more effective ally of the police and other security agencies in the war against violent crime. At both domestic and international levels, we are doing everything possible to curb the proliferation of the small arms and light weapons with which armed robberies, kidnappings and piracy are perpetrated. We have also enhanced security at our borders to curb cross-border crimes.
We are aggressively addressing the challenge of crude oil theft in collaboration with the state Governors. In addition, the Federal Government has engaged the British and US governments for their support in the tracking of the proceeds from the purchase of stolen crude. Similarly, a regional Gulf of Guinea security strategy has been initiated to curb crude oil theft and piracy.
Perhaps the most invidious accusation in your letter is the allegation that I have placed over one thousand Nigerians on a political watch list, and that I am training snipers and other militia to assassinate people. Baba, I don’t know where you got that from but you do me grave injustice in not only lending credence to such baseless rumours, but also publicizing it. You mentioned God seventeen times in your letter. Can you as a Christian hold the Bible and say that you truly believe this allegation?
The allegation of training snipers to assassinate political opponents is particularly incomprehensible to me. Since I started my political career as a Deputy Governor, I have never been associated with any form of political violence. I have been a President for over three years now, with a lot of challenges and opposition mainly from the high and mighty. There have certainly been cases of political assassination since the advent of our Fourth Republic, but as you well know, none of them occurred under my leadership.
Regarding the over one thousand people you say are on a political watch list, I urge you to kindly tell Nigerians who they are and what agencies of government are “watching” them. Your allegation that I am using security operatives to harass people is also baseless. Nigerians are waiting for your evidence of proof. That was an accusation made against previous administrations, including yours, but it is certainly not my style and will never be. Again, if you insist on the spurious claim that some of your relatives and friends are being harassed, I urge you to name them and tell Nigerians what agencies of my administration are harassing them.
I also find it difficult to believe that you will accuse me of assisting murderers, or assigning a presidential delegation to welcome a murderer. This is a most unconscionable and untrue allegation. It is incumbent on me to remind you that I am fully conscious of the dictates of my responsibilities to God and our dear nation. It is my hope that devious elements will not take advantage of your baseless allegation to engage in brazen and wanton assassination of high profile politicians as before, hiding under the alibi your “open letter” has provided for them.
Nevertheless, I have directed the security agencies and requested the National Human Rights Commission to carry out a thorough investigation of these criminal allegations and make their findings public.
That corruption is an issue in Nigeria is indisputable. It has been with us for many years. You will recall that your kinsman, the renowned afro-beat maestro, Fela Anikulapo-Kuti famously sang about it during your first stint as Head of State. Sonny Okosun also sang about corruption. And as you may recall, a number of Army Generals were to be retired because of corruption before the Dimka coup. Also, the late General Murtala Mohammed himself wanted to retire some top people in his cabinet on corruption-related issues before he was assassinated. Even in this Fourth Republic, the Siemens and Halliburton scandals are well known.
The seed of corruption in this country was planted a long time ago, but we are doing all that we can to drastically reduce its debilitating effects on national development and progress. I have been strengthening the institutions established to fight corruption. I will not shield any government official or private individual involved in corruption, but I must follow due process in all that I do. And whenever clear cases of corruption or fraud have been established, my administration has always taken prompt action in keeping with the dictates of extant laws and procedures. You cannot claim to be unaware of the fact that several highly placed persons in our country, including sons of some of our party leaders are currently facing trial for their involvement in the celebrated subsidy scam affair. I can hardly be blamed if the wheels of justice still grind very slowly in our country, but we are doing our best to support and encourage the judiciary to quicken the pace of adjudication in cases of corruption.
Baba, I am amazed that with all the knowledge garnered from your many years at the highest level of governance in our country, you could still believe the spurious allegation contained in a letter written to me by the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), and surreptitiously obtained by you, alleging that USD49.8 billion, a sum equal to our entire national budget for two years, is “unaccounted for” by the NNPC. Since, as President, you also served for many years as Minister of Petroleum Resources, you very well know the workings of the corporation. It is therefore intriguing that you have made such an assertion. You made a lot of insinuations about oil theft, shady dealings at the NNPC and the NNPC not remitting the full proceeds of oil sales to the of CBN. Now that the main source of the allegations which you rehashed has publicly stated that he was “misconstrued”, perhaps you will find it in your heart to apologize for misleading unwary Nigerians and impugning the integrity of my administration on that score.
Your claim of “Atlantic Oil loading about 130, 000 barrels sold by Shell and managed on behalf of NPDC with no sale proceeds paid into the NPDC account” is also disjointed and baseless because no such arrangement as you described exists between Atlantic Oil and the Nigeria Petroleum Development Company. NPDC currently produces about 138, 000 barrels of oil per day from over 7 producing assets. The Crude Oil Marketing Division (COMD) of the NNPC markets all of this production on behalf of NPDC with proceeds paid into NPDC account.
I am really shocked that with all avenues open to you as a former Head of State for the verification of any information you have received about state affairs, you chose to go public with allegations of “high corruption” without offering a shred of supporting evidence. One of your political “sons” similarly alleged recently that he told me of a minister who received a bribe of $250 Million from an oil company and I did nothing about it. He may have been playing from a shared script, but we have not heard from him again since he was challenged to name the minister involved and provide the evidence to back his claim. I urge you, in the same vein, to furnish me with the names, facts and figures of a single verifiable case of the “high corruption” which you say stinks all around my administration and see whether the corrective action you advocate does not follow promptly. And while you are at it, you may also wish to tell Nigerians the true story of questionable waivers of signature bonuses between 2000 and 2007.
While, by the Grace of God Almighty, I am the first President from a minority group, I am never unmindful of the fact that I was elected leader of the whole of Nigeria and I have always acted in the best interest of all Nigerians. You referred to the divisive actions and inflammatory utterances of some individuals from the South-South and asserted that I have done nothing to call them to order or distance myself from their ethnic chauvinism. Again that is very untrue. I am as committed to the unity of this country as any patriot can be and I have publicly declared on many occasions that no person who threatens other Nigerians or parts of the country is acting on my behalf.
It is very regrettable that in your letter, you seem to place sole responsibility for the ongoing intrigues and tensions in the PDP at my doorstep, and going on from that position, you direct all your appeals for a resolution at me. Baba, let us all be truthful to ourselves, God and posterity. At the heart of all the current troubles in our party and the larger polity is the unbridled jostling and positioning for personal or group advantage ahead of the 2015 general elections. The “bitterness, anger, mistrust, fear and deep suspicion” you wrote about all flow from this singular factor.
It is indeed very unfortunate that the seeming crisis in the party was instigated by a few senior members of the party, including you. But, as leader of the party, I will continue to do my best to unite it so that we can move forward with strength and unity of purpose. The PDP has always recovered from previous crises with renewed vigour and vitality. I am very optimistic that that will be the case again this time. The PDP will overcome any temporary setback, remain a strong party and even grow stronger.
Instigating people to cause problems and disaffection within the party is something that you are certainly familiar with. You will recall that founding fathers of the Party were frustrated out of the Party at a time. Late Chief Sunday Awoniyi was pushed out, Late Chief Solomon Lar left and later came back, Chief Audu Ogbeh and Chief Tom Ikimi also left. Chief Okwesilieze Nwodo left and later came back. In 2005/2006, link-men were sent to take over party structures from PDP Governors in an unveiled attempt to undermine the state governors. In spite of that, the Governors did not leave the Party because nobody instigated and encouraged them to do so.
The charge that I was involved in anti-party activities in governorship elections in Edo, Ondo, Lagos, and Anambra States is also very unfortunate. I relate with all Governors irrespective of political party affiliation but I have not worked against the interest of the PDP. What I have not done is to influence the electoral process to favour our Party. You were definitely never so inclined, since you openly boasted in your letter of how you supported Alhaji Shehu Shagari against Chief Obafemi Awolowo, Chief Nnamdi Azikiwe and others in the 1979 presidential elections while serving as a military Head of State. You and I clearly differ in this regard, because as the President of Nigeria, I believe it is my duty and responsibility to create a level playing field for all parties and all candidates.
Recalling how the PDP lost in states where we were very strong in 2003 and 2007 such as Edo, Ondo, Imo, Bauchi, Anambra, and Borno, longstanding members of our great party with good memory will also consider the charge of anti-party activities you made against me as misdirected and hugely hypocritical. It certainly was not Goodluck Jonathan’s “personal ambition or selfish interest” that caused the PDP to lose the governorship of Ogun State and all its senatorial seats in the last general elections.
You quoted me as saying that I have not told anybody that I will seek another term in office in 2015. You and your ambitious acolytes within the party have clearly decided to act on your conclusion that “only a fool will believe that statement” and embark on a virulent campaign to harass me out of an undeclared candidature for the 2015 presidential elections so as to pave the way for a successor anointed by you.
You will recall that you serially advised me that we should refrain from discussing the 2015 general elections for now so as not to distract elected public officials from urgent task of governance. While you have apparently moved away from that position, I am still of the considered opinion that it would have been best for us to do all that is necessary to refrain from heating up the polity at this time. Accordingly, I have already informed Nigerians that I will only speak on whether or not I will seek a second term when it is time for such declarations. Your claims about discussions I had with you, Governor Gabriel Suswam and others are wrong, but in keeping with my declared stance, I will reserve further comments until the appropriate time.
Your allegation that I asked half a dozen African Presidents to speak to you about my alleged ambition for 2015, is also untrue. I have never requested any African President to discuss with you on my behalf. In our discussion, I mentioned to you that four Presidents told me that they were concerned about the political situation in Nigeria and intended to talk to you about it. So far, only three of them have confirmed to me that they have had any discussion with you. If I made such a request, why would I deny it?
The issue of Buruji Kashamu is one of those lies that should not be associated with a former President. The allegation that I am imposing Kashamu on the South-West is most unfortunate and regrettable. I do not even impose Party officials in my home state of Bayelsa and there is no zone in this country where I have imposed officials. So why would I do so in the South West? Baba, in the light of Buruji’s detailed public response to your “open letter”, it will be charitable for you to render an apology to Nigerians and I.
On the issue of investors being scared to come to Nigeria, economic dormancy, and stagnation, I will just refer you to FDI statistics from 2000 to 2013. Within the last three years, Nigeria has emerged as the preferred destination for investments in Africa, driven by successful government policies to attract foreign investors. For the second year running, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Investments (UNCTAD) has ranked Nigeria as the number one destination for investments in Africa, and as having the fourth highest returns in the world.
Today, Nigeria is holding 18 percent of all foreign investments in Africa and 60 percent of all foreign investments in the ECOWAS Sub-Region. Kindly note also that in the seven years between 2000 and 2007 when you were President, Nigeria attracted a total of $24.9 Billion in FDI. As a result of our efforts which you disparage, the country has seen an FDI inflow of $25.7 Billion in just three years which is more than double the FDI that has gone to the second highest African destination. We have also maintained an annual national economic growth rate of close to seven per cent since the inception of this administration. What then, is the justification for your allegation of scared investors and economic dormancy?
Although it was not emphasized in your letter of December 2, 2013, you also conveyed, in previous correspondence, the impression that you were ignorant of the very notable achievements of my administration in the area of foreign relations. It is on record that under my leadership, Nigeria has played a key role in resolving the conflicts in Niger, Cote d’Ivoire, Mali, Guinea Bissau and others.
The unproductive rivalry that existed between Nigeria and some ECOWAS countries has also been ended under my watch and Nigeria now has better relations with all the ECOWAS countries. At the African Union, we now have a Commissioner at the AU Commission after being without one for so long. We were in the United Nations Security Council for the 2010/2011 Session and we have been voted in again for the 2014/2015 Session. From independence to 2010, we were in the U.N. Security Council only three times but from 2010 to 2015, we will be there two times.
This did not happen by chance. My Administration worked hard for it and we continue to maintain the best possible relations with all centres of global political and economic power. I find it hard therefore, to believe your assertions of untoward concern in the international community over the state of governance in Nigeria
With respect to the Brass and Olokola LNG projects, you may have forgotten that though you started these projects, Final Investment Decisions were never reached. For your information, NNPC has not withdrawn from either the Olokola or the Brass LNG projects.
On the Rivers State Water Project, you were misled by your informant. The Federal Government under my watch has never directed or instructed the Africa Development Bank to put on hold any project to be executed in Rivers state or any other State within the Federation. The Rivers Water Project was not originally in the borrowing plan but it was included in April 2013 and appraised in May. Negotiations are ongoing with the AfDB. I have no doubt that you are familiar with the entire process that prefaces the signing of a Subsidiary Loan Agreement as in this instance.
Let me assure you and all Nigerians that I do not engage in negative political actions and will never, as President, oppress the people of a State or deprive them of much needed public services as a result of political disagreement
I have noted your comments on the proposed National Conference. Contrary to the insinuation in your letter, the proposed conference is aimed at bringing Nigerians together to resolve contentious national issues in a formal setting. This is a sure way of promoting greater national consensus and unity, and not a recipe for “disunity, confusion and chaos” as you alleged in your letter.
Having twice held the high office of President, Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, I trust that you will understand that I cannot possibly find the time to offer a line-by-line response to all the accusations and allegations made in your letter while dealing with other pressing demands of office and more urgent affairs of state.
I have tried, however, to respond to only the most serious of the charges which question my sincerity, personal honour, and commitment to the oath which I have sworn, to always uphold and protect the interests of all Nigerians, and promote their well-being.
In closing, let me state that you have done me grave injustice with your public letter in which you wrongfully accused me of deceit, deception, dishonesty, incompetence, clannishness, divisiveness and insincerity, amongst other ills.
I have not, myself, ever claimed to be all-knowing or infallible, but I have never taken Nigeria or Nigerians for granted as you implied, and I will continue to do my utmost to steer our ship of state towards the brighter future to which we all aspire.
Please accept the assurances of my highest consideration and warm regards
GOODLUCK EBELE JONATHAN
 |
|
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