The crisis rocking the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is far from over as the sacked National Secretary, Prince Olagunsoye Oyinlola, has appealed his destitution by the Federal High Court amid the intrigues and backdoor maneuvers with President Goodluck Jonathan battling former President Olusegun Obasanjo for the conscience of the party and the 2015 Presidential ticket.
These are certainly trying moments for President Jonathan and not the best of times for the PDP. While its leadership is still grappling with the crisis of confidence plaguing the party over the stalemate in the quest for a new Board of Trustees (BoT) Chairman and acceptable executive committee in Adamawa State, the Federal High Court in Abuja sacked its National Secretary, Prince Olagunsoye Oyinlola, from office providing the National Working Committee (NWC) with the badly needed pretext to replace him with his Deputy, Solomon Onwe, in an acting capacity.
The unfolding crisis is a litmus test for President Jonathan’s leadership as he has been called in to play expected and unexpected roles in the course of which his protégé; Dr. Bamanga Tukur has come under attack from PDP Governors who want him sacked as national chairman; his preferred candidate for the BoT chair, Chief Anthony Anenih has been totally rejected while Jonathan’s position as President and leader of the PDP is being called to question. The battle lines have been drawn and the stage set for a major political showdown as Jonathan has decided to take the battle to Obasanjo’s home turf - to seize control of the party in the South-West from Obasanjo. Since history is written by the victors, the outcome of this crisis will be one for the record books.
Genesis of the Crisis
It all began with a meeting of the 98-man body of the BoT to elect a chairman to replace Obasanjo who resigned last year. The signs were ominous when it became evident that for the first time, the BoT would pick its chairman through a contest. Second Republic Vice President and first BoT Chairman, Dr. Alex Ekwueme, and his successors, including Obasanjo, emerged through consensus; which was almost the norm, until the emergence of OBJ, which created some bad blood among party faithful.
Obasanjo, had in the twilight of his administration, failed to get the National Assembly to endorse his tenure elongation project. After that misadventure, Obasanjo, driven by the desire to still remain relevant after his presidential tenure, instigated an amendment to the PDP constitution to ease his emergence as BoT chairman. That was the joker that knocked out the then incumbent BoT chairman, Tony Anenih in 2007. On account of this, OBJ practically snatched the job from Anenih.
Following a protest by principal officers of the party in the National Assembly, the draconian provision was expunged from the PDP constitution. OBJ resigned in anger and frustration in April 2011 after holding the post for about four years with the excuse that his international engagements have become more demanding. Sources however tell Huhuonline.com that the late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua introduced some radical changes in the conduct of affairs of the party that demystified and consigned the position of BoT chair to political irrelevance.
As a matter of fact, former Senate President Ken Nnamani who was one of those who spearheaded the campaign that led to the amendment of the PDP constitution in 2009 had cause to complain about the way things were done and his position was supported by the late Yar’Adua. A PDP National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting scheduled at noon at the headquarters in Abuja was delayed for over five hours because the “leader of the party” then President Yar’Adua was running late. Huhuonline.com learnt that when the meeting finally started, a furious Nnamani barred his mind, making it crystal clear to anyone who cared to listen that using the title “leader of the party” for any president produced by PDP was misleading because such a title was anathema to the PDP constitution. “The leader of our party is the national chairman while state chairmen of the party are the leaders of the party at the state level and down the ladder,” Nnamani said to a standing ovation. Yar’Adua commended him for the bold explanation and added that it was not enough for anybody to call himself or herself leader. It is on record that since that meeting, OBJ has never attended any other NEC meeting.
The Ghost of 2015
Article 12.76 of the PDP constitution provides for the BoT as an organ of the party and the same section provides that a member of the organ shall not be less than 50 years while the chairman and the secretary of the organ shall serve a single term of five years. In the countdown to the BoT meeting, something strange happened. Perhaps it was deliberate, perhaps accidental, but election billboards appeared in the business district of Abuja calling on Jonathan to stand for re-election in 2015. This opened the political season of the New Year.
Jonathan’s Spokesman Reuben Abati improbably claimed that the President’s political team had no involvement. Aso Rock insiders told Huhuonline.com that Jonathan is unlikely to announce his intentions until late 2014. The probability is that Jonathan will seek the candidacy of the PDP, even if he has to face opposition from northerners.
It was against this backdrop of 2015 that the BoT meeting held at the Presidential Villa, presided at by Jonathan. Huhuonline.com learnt that a group within PDP advised Jonathan to endorse a South-South aspirant for the BoT post because that will oil his 2015 machinery. Jonathan subsequently threw his weight behind Chief Tony Anenih, but the PDP Governors declined to support him.
The Governors are divided on the issue as many of them believe that allowing the BoT chairman to emerge from the same zone as Jonathan will be a masterstroke that will make it practically impossible to wrestle the presidency from Jonathan. Anenih, fondly called ‘Mr. Fix it’ has not been able to fix a lot of things lately in PDP, particularly in Edo State, his home. Some analysts said his recent appointment, as chairman of Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) board, was a strategy to placate the man.
As negotiations and horse trading intensified, other PDP top brass amongst them former Senate President, Ken Nnamani supported by the legislators and Alhaji Shuaib Oyedokun, the former Deputy National Chairman of the party threw their hats into the ring thereby further polarizing the political arena. When the curtains came down, at least 12 candidates were postulating for the BoT chair. From the South East included: Alex Ekwueme, Ken Nnamani and the publisher of Champion newspapers, Chief Emmanuel Iwuanyanwu.
From the South-South came Chief Tony Anenih and Chief Don Etiebet. The aspirants from the North Central geo-political zone included former PDP national chairman, Rtd. Colonel Ahmadu Ali while the South West had former PDP Deputy National chairman, Alhaji Shuaibu Oyedokun. Others are Senator Bode Olayinka, Chief Yekeen Adeojo, Senator Onyeabor Obi, Chief Harry Akande and Chief Shuaibu Oyedokun. With these razz mattazz of candidates, the battle of egos for the conscience of the PDP was launched and nobody can easily predict how and when it will end.
Political Calculations, Intrigues and Maneuvers Galore
Amidst the conflicting assertions and claims, OBJ held most of the aces as he is approbating and re-probating at the same time. OBJ worked behind the scenes to ensure that the meeting to elect the BoT chairman was postponed because of his indecision on who to support as his candidate for the position. It is believed that he wants to pick his own candidate, regardless of what the other members think.
There is the belief that the Presidency and PDP leaders preferred Anenih, at least to compensate him for the loss of the same position in 2007. At a meeting held at the residence of Bamanga Tukur, it was suggested that all the other candidates should step down for Anenih because he enjoys the respect of the party top brass and would be a great asset in the 2015 election. But they declined. If the possibility of having Anenih (who comes from the same geopolitical zone as the President) as BoT chairman; is slim; if Anenih, with all the influence he wields within PDP is having such opposition on account of where he comes from, then the case of Chief Don Etiebet can be best imagined.
Huhuonline.com equally learnt that most of the party members would prefer Alex Ekwueme; having served in that capacity before, and as someone who contributed immensely to the founding and building of the PDP, Ekwueme was in the position to help the rebuilding process, which the party leadership has so much canvassed. But at 80 years, Ekwueme is tottering on the borders of senile decay. It is equally believed that the party has given Ekwueme a sensitive assignment of leading 53 other prominent PDP members to carry out reconciliation and that is enough to engage his attention.
For Ken Nnamani, many see him as a man who can effect radical changes and his record speaks volumes. It was during his tenure as Senate President that Obasanjo burnt his fingers when he wanted to secure the tenure elongation, which came to be known as ‘Third Term’ project. The singular role he played as a factor to thwart Obasanjo’s ambitions worked against him, especially among Obasanjo’s loyalists in the BoT. Sources said that Nnamani is also counting on his colleagues in the National Assembly who are members of BoT to do the magic. One other way that Nnamani could buffer his case is to leverage the support of his colleagues from the South East, Ekwueme and Iwuanyanwu to back him. Emmanuel Iwuanyanwu, a one-time PDP presidential aspirant feels that he has paid his dues in the PDP and that it is time for him to lead the conscience of the party.
OBJ loyalist and former PDP chairman, retired Col. Ahmadu Ali has indicated interest in the BoT chair but OBJ is uncertain if it will be a wise political decision to allow someone from the North to hold the position. Ali’s candidacy appears to be the most controversial of all. Most of the PDP members see him as an extension of Obasanjo’s administration a surrogate that is over 100% committed to OBJ’s course and would do anything for him. They feel that if truly Ali is vying for the position, then it is a matter of presenting to the party, a pig in pork. Ali’s candidacy is not opposed only by those from the South West that feel that they have been marginalized in the PDP equation, but also by those in his own region. There is a strong feeling that the Senate president is vehemently opposed to the candidacy of Ali, as his being the chairman of BoT will adversely affect his own political influence.
If by some strange happenstance Ali becomes the BoT chairman, the implication is that the North would be adding another strategic position to its kitty. Currently, they are holding the office of the Senate President, Speaker of the House of Representatives, the General Secretary of the party, the national chairman of the party, the secretary of the BoT and the publicity secretary of the party. It will therefore, become apparent that the entire North will hold the PDP making it near impossible to stop them from taking the presidency in 2015.
But the South West is stiffly opposed to his candidacy. They are supporting one of their own, Alhaji Oyedokun and are persuading OBJ to withdraw his support for Ali and invest on Oyedokun, whose last office was National Deputy Chairman of the party some five years ago and has been in hibernation since then. Coming from the South West, OBJ is being persuaded by the party leaders in the zone to drop Ali for Oyedokun, being a kinsman. With the cry of marginalization from the South West, many are guessing OBJ will be the pillar on which Oyedokun can anchor his aspiration. Some BoT members argued against Oyedokun citing his brief sojourn outside the party after he led a group to operate a parallel PDP called ‘The Original PDP in 2006.’ OBJ dislodged the group.
With all these geo-political calculations, it is evident that if Jonathan is nursing an ambition to seek re-election in 2015, he has to demonstrate deft political shrewdness because his opponents are making the ground very swampy and slippery and extremely difficult for him to muster sufficient support that would earn him a second term in office.
OBJ & GEJ: Clash of the Titans
A sprawling view of Abeokuta lies prostrate from his hilltop mansion, a metaphor for the clout of its owner, a man whose sheer strength of character held an impossible Nigeria in the palm of his hand for eight long years. It is not for nothing that he is called Baba, yet another aphorism for some sort of a hard-to-get-to-know paterfamilias, whose offspring would usually approach with great trepidation, not knowing exactly what to expect.
Long after he left office, as President of the Federal Republic, General Olusegun Obasanjo’s home is still like a pilgrimage abode, with hordes of visitors, trooping in and out, to hold court for one reason, or the other - Baba’s opinion, influence and wise counsel, still count. The man is, indeed, an enigma. Playful, as a kitten, wise, as an oracle, hard, as a tornado-nail, and wily, as a fox, you have to watch your step - every step of the way - with the General. OBJ is the one man now standing between Jonathan and the 2015 elections.
The relationship between OBJ and GEJ has been anything but cordial. OBJ is insisting that for any reconciliation between him and the president to be meaningful, on the election of the BoT chairman, the president, as the leader of the party, must avail him the privilege to nominate and present his successor. That was the condition he gave Jonathan for participating in the reconciliatory moves initiated by the president to shore up the diminishing cordiality between them that had rapidly degenerating into verbal wars and invidious political maneuvers.
Huhuonline.com learnt from sources that OBJ also requested that his successor must be of South West extraction, but at the time of the election, OBJ had not found a credible candidate from the South West that would effectively represent the zone and manage the affairs of the party at that level, so he absented himself and ensured that the election did not hold.
Facing the battle for his own political survival, GEJ has decided to call off the bluff by taking the battle for the soul of the PDP to OBJ’s home State of Ogun, with a view to wrestling the party from the grips of Baba. GEJ considers the South-West as strategic to his presidential ambitions in 2015 and the general elections. The South-West may not produce a presidential candidate for the PDP in 2015 but block votes from the zone could determine the eventual winner of the presidential election. To which end, the PDP leadership headed by Tukur is planning to organize a fresh congress in the South-West to definitely replace Oyinlola. This explains why even though Oyinlola is battling his destitution in court, Tukur went ahead and replaced him with his successor since GEJ does not want him to return as national secretary.
The PDP, in Obasanjo’s home state, is divided into two factions with Baba supporting the Senator Dipo Odujurin- led executive, while business magnate, Chief Buruji Kashamu is backing the Adebayo Dayo-led executive. The Kashamu-led faction initiated the legal battles with the Obasanjo-backed faction, which culminated in the removal of Oyinlola. GEJ is building strategic alliances with strange political bed-fellows in Ogun State. Former Ogun State Governor, Otunba Gbenga Daniel, has been having unfettered access in the Presidency. GEJ recently appointed one of Daniel’s loyalists, Alhaja Salimot Badru, as a member of the Federal Capital Development Authority. He has also nominated an ex-convict and PDP warlord, Chief Olabode “Bode” George, as a member of the Adamawa State Reconciliation Committee. Both Daniel and George are at loggerheads with Baba.
Things Fall Apart…
After the BoT passed up the opportunity to elect its new chairman because of its inability to choose name a consensus candidate from the dozen aspirants, a special committee to appropriately realign membership of the BoT to ensure credibility of the planned election was created with Professor Jerry Gana as chairman. The committee was given three weeks to submit its report.
But even before Gana and his committee could go to work, the National Working Committee (NWC) of the party threw a spanner in the works by recanting itself on its earlier sack of the PDP Adamawa State Executive Committee, recalling them after caving in to pressure from the party’s governors. Tukur was absent from the NWC meeting that took the decision. It was a face-saving move for the NWC, which the governors were threatening to sack and replace with a caretaker committee if the sacked executives were not reinstated.
The recall of the committee reignited the supremacy battle between Tukur and the Governor of Adamawa State, Murtala Nyako, which formally began in October 2012 when the NWC dissolved the Adamawa State party executive, chaired by Alhaji Umaru Kugama, replacing it with a nine-man caretaker committee headed by Amb. Umar Damagun. In dissolving the executive last year, the party’s National Publicity Secretary, Chief Olisa Metuh had announced that its members “flagrantly disregarded and shown serial disobedience to the decisions of NWC.” He accused the dissolved exco of conducting illegal local government elections and submitting a list of candidates to the Adamawa State Independent National Electoral Commission without obtaining clearance from the NWC.
The dissolution was a slap on the face of Adamawa Governor Nyako who tried in vain to reverse the decision. Face with a fait accompli, Nyako referred the matter to the Nigerian Governors Forum (NGF). The NGF led by its chairman Governor Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers State then joined Nyako in seeking a reversal of the sack and after they were rebuffed, they decided to handle it the tough way. They told Jonathan in no unflattering terms that Tukur the PDP national chairman must resign! Tukur was not their candidate during the party’s convention but was imposed on the party by the President. To save face, Jonathan ordered the NWC to reverse its earlier decision and disavow Tukur.
Esau’s voice, Jocob’s Hand
In the face of the strong-arm tactics by the governors, Jonathan came under pressure from hardliners within his own camp who asked him to call the governors’ bluff by disbanding the Nigeria Governors’ Forum saying it had become a vehicle for confusion. A statement issued by the chairman of the Nigerian Renewal Group, consisting of young professional men and women members of the PDP, noted “with great concern the discordant tunes emanating from the ruling party, the PDP. We are concerned because the governors elected on the PDP platform, who constitute the majority, have practically abandoned their primary responsibilities in their various states. They have turned themselves into an unholy pressure group and trade union under the inglorious Governors Forum.”
“Indeed, we view the Governors Forum as a club for idle talk and mischief making. Our stand is validated by the recent gang-up of PDP Governors against the PDP National Chairman, Alhaji Bamanga Tukur. We hold no brief for the elder statesman, but we are worried that if these governors are not checked, they will soon hold the nation’s political apparatus to ransom. That will not augur well for good governance and democracy,” the statement read in part.
Armed with renewed confidence, Jonathan decided it was time to take the bull by the horns. The President is believed to have influenced the decision of the court to sack Oyinlola from office. And to put paid to this assertion, Jonathan instructed Tukur to go ahead and replace Oyinlola with his Deputy, Solomon Onwe even though Oyinlola’s lawyer had filed an appeal for a stay of execution of the non-declaratory judgment. Tukur then washed his hands off in a tepid statement saying his action was in fulfillment of the PDP constitution, explaining that the party had no hand in the removal of Oyinlola as its National Secretary.
Stressing that there was no rift between Tukur and Oyinlola, the party said: “For the avoidance of doubt, we want to say unequivocally that there is no personal rift between Alhaji Bamanga Tukur, as the National Chairman of the Party, and Prince Olagunsoye Oyinlola to warrant the sensational headlines that have been published in newspapers on the issue. In any event, reports have indicated that Prince Olagunsoye Oyinlola has appealed the Court judgment and the NWC wants to say that as soon as the appeal is decided, the party will, in the same way as it did in the case of the Federal High Court ruling, obey the appeal decision.
After replacing Oyinlola, the party’s leadership headed by Tukur made a spectacular U-turn on its perceived rush to get Oyinlola out of the way by filing an application for stay of execution of the court judgment which sacked Oyinlola from office. Investigations showed that as Tukur had adopted strategies to ensure that Oyinlola did not return as national secretary, most members of the National Working Committee were determined to save him. As part of measures to seize the control of the party in the South-West from Obasanjo and the PDP governors, Tukur planned to hold a congress in the South-West, where Oyinlola’s replacement would be picked. But Huhuonline.com understands that while the PDP chairman is loyal to Jonathan, most members of the NWC are backed by PDP governors and former President Olusegun Obasanjo.
Meanwhile, as the horse-trading continues, Tukur has secured the backing of PDP lawmakers after the leadership of the House of Representatives led by the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker, Aminu Tambuwal and Emeka Ihehioha paid him a solidarity visit and pledged their support for the party’s transformation agenda. Tukur assured the South West geopolitical zone that it would not lose in the distribution of benefits.
The End Game
The crisis rocking the PDP will make or break Jonathan’s 2015 presidential ambitions. There will be winners as well as losers but the political equation will never be the same again. Already, the governors elected on the platform of the party have called for the immediate convening of the National Executive Committee meeting of the party where they are planning to pass a vote of no confidence on Tukur. They have also endorsed the decision of the NWC rescinding the dissolution of the PDP Adamawa State Executive and reaffirmed their recognition of the Kugama-led executive elected in March 2012 and endorsed by the national convention.
To add insult to injury, 10 of the 12 members of the NWC disowned the action of the party’s Chairman, Dr. Bamanga Tukur, on the crisis rocking the Adamawa State chapter of the party. Tukur, who is from Adamawa, is alleged to be preparing one of his sons as the governor of the state in 2015. The NWC members, led by the party’s Deputy National Chairman, Dr. Sam Jaja, said ongoing local government and ward congresses in the state were not authorized by the NWC. They also restored the Executive Committee of the party in the state, which was sacked by the NWC last October 17.
Jonathan: the end justifies the means
As the melodramatic elements of this unfolding crisis reach a rising crescendo, Jonathan must make a decision. He can choose to stand by the embattled and beleaguered Tukur and alienate the NWC and the NGF or ditch Tukur as part of a grand bargain with the NGF that will secure him the 2015 PDP ticket. The governors have nothing against Jonathan; he has incurred their wrath because of his stubborn support for Tukur. There has been no love lost between Tukur and Adamawa State Governor Murtala Nyako since the former assumed the chairmanship of the party March last year.
There are no easy options but the best case scenario will be for Jonathan to pick the next PDP national chairman from a non-PDP state. PDP governors are too powerful and they exert much influence in the polity. It is political suicide to ignore the power play between a national chairman and his governor. In the North-East where the PDP currently zoned its chairmanship, only Borno and Yobe states are non-PDP states. It makes good political sense for Jonathan to abandon the embattled Tukur and go for a younger candidate without as many enemies as Tukur.
In the coming weeks, Tukur will know his fate. Already, Jonathan is under pressure to abandon Tukur to his fate and to consider picking Tukur’s successor from Borno or Yobe, in order to avoid the usual power tussle between the party’s national chairman and his state governor. The question is whether Jonathan is prepared to abandon his friend at his greatest moment of need. The answer is obvious: in politics, there are no permanent friends or enemies; only permanent interests.
 |
|
Bamanga Tukur to Be Buried Sunday in Yola
Former Governor of the old Gongola State and former National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Bamanga Tukur, will be buried in Yola, Adamawa State, on Sunday, September 13, 2026.
Tukur, a prominent elder statesman and businessman, died in Abuja on Saturday, according to a statement issued by his family.
His son, Awwal Tukur, the Secretary to the Adamawa State Government, announced the burial arrangements in a statement released in Yola on Saturday.
According to the statement, the remains of the deceased will be brought to Yola on Saturday ahead of the funeral.
The funeral prayers are scheduled to take place at the Lamido’s Palace in Yola at 10:00 a.m. on Sunday, after which the late politician will be laid to rest.
Tukur died just three days before his 91st birthday.
He was a prominent figure in Nigeria’s political and economic history, having served in several key public positions during a career spanning more than six decades.
Among other positions, he served as Chief Executive of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA), Governor of the former Gongola State and Minister of Industries. He also served as National Chairman of the PDP between 2012 and 2014.
Beyond Nigeria, Tukur played a role in promoting African economic development through organisations including the Africa Business Roundtable and the NEPAD Business Group.
The late elder statesman is survived by two wives and 18 children, including Awwal Tukur, the Secretary to the Adamawa State Government.
Northern Governors Mourn
The Northern Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NNGF) has expressed grief over the death of Tukur, describing his passing as a significant loss to the North and Nigeria as a whole.
In a condolence message issued on behalf of the forum, its Chairman and Governor of Gombe State, Muhammadu Inuwa Yahaya, described Tukur as an experienced public servant, political leader and advocate of economic development.
Yahaya said Tukur’s contributions to public administration, politics and business had left a lasting mark on the country.
He highlighted the deceased’s extensive public service record, including his tenure at the Nigerian Ports Authority, his leadership of the old Gongola State and his service as Minister of Industries.
The NNGF chairman also recognised Tukur’s involvement in continental economic initiatives and his leadership of the PDP between 2012 and 2014.
“Alhaji Bamanga Tukur lived a long and impactful life, serving Nigeria in several critical capacities and contributing significantly to the growth of our economy, institutions and political development,” Yahaya said.
He added that Tukur’s experience, wisdom and dedication to public service would be greatly missed.
Yahaya extended his condolences to the Adamawa State Government, the Tukur family, friends and associates of the deceased.
He prayed that Allah would forgive Tukur’s shortcomings, reward his contributions to humanity and grant him Aljannatul Firdaus.
News
Where & How to Buy Dangote Refinery IPO Shares
The Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE is set to offer shares to the Nigerian public, giving individuals an opportunity to become shareholders in one of Africa’s largest refineries.
The public offer is expected to open on Monday, September 14, 2026, and close on October 13, 2026, subject to the final offer documents.
The offer comprises 4.1 billion ordinary shares at ₦525 per share, with a minimum subscription of 10 shares, costing ₦5,250.
Who Can Buy Dangote Refinery Shares?
The IPO is designed to give ordinary Nigerians an opportunity to invest in the refinery. Investors can subscribe through approved banks, fintech platforms, mobile operators, and NGX Invest.
However, investors should only use channels officially approved for the offer and should avoid sending money to individuals, agents, or platforms that are not listed in the official offer documents.
Approved Channels for the Dangote Refinery IPO
Banks
Access Bank
Ecobank
FCMB
Fidelity Bank
FirstBank
Globus Bank
GTCO
Jaiz Bank
Keystone Bank
Lotus Bank
PremiumTrust Bank
Providus Bank
Stanbic IBTC
Sterling Bank
TAJ Bank
UBA
Union Bank
Wema Bank
Zenith Bank
Fintech Platforms
Bamboo
Flutterwave
InvestNaija
Ladder
Moniepoint
Paga
Payaza
PiggyVest
Vetiva Invest
we.yan
Mobile Operators
Airtel SmartCash
MTN MoMo
Nigerian Exchange
NGX Invest
How to Buy Dangote Refinery IPO Shares
Step 1: Choose an Approved Platform
Select one of the banks, fintech platforms, mobile operators, or investment platforms officially approved to process subscriptions.
If you already use one of the approved platforms, check whether the IPO application option is available through your existing account.
Step 2: Open or Activate Your Investment Account
Investors generally need an investment or brokerage account to participate in the offer.
Depending on the platform, you may be required to provide identification, your BVN and other Know-Your-Customer information.
Step 3: Set Up Your CSCS Details
Shares listed on the Nigerian Exchange are held electronically through the Central Securities Clearing System (CSCS).
Your broker or participating investment platform should guide you through the process of opening or linking the necessary CSCS account.
Step 4: Fund Your Account
At ₦525 per share, the minimum subscription is:
10 shares × ₦525 = ₦5,250
If you want to purchase more shares, calculate the total amount based on the number of shares you intend to request and check the final prospectus for the applicable subscription rules and fees.
Step 5: Apply When the Offer Opens
The public offer is expected to open on September 14, 2026.
Log into your approved platform, select the Dangote Refinery public offer, enter the number of shares you want to subscribe for, review your information and submit your application.
Step 6: Keep Your Confirmation
After submitting your application, keep your application reference, receipt or confirmation for your records.
Step 7: Wait for Allotment
Applying for shares does not necessarily mean you will receive every share requested.
If the offer is oversubscribed, investors could receive fewer shares than they applied for. Any applicable excess funds should be handled according to the terms of the final offer documents.
Step 8: Monitor Your Shares After Listing
Once the shares are listed on the Nigerian Exchange, successful investors can monitor their holdings through their broker or investment platform.
The market price may rise or fall after listing, depending on the company’s performance, investor demand, market conditions and other factors.
Important Warning for Investors
Do not pay anyone personally to “secure” Dangote Refinery shares for you.
Before sending money or providing your financial information, verify that the platform you are using appears on the official approved list and that the application process matches the final prospectus and offer documents.
Investors should also review the official prospectus carefully, particularly the offer terms, fees, allotment rules, deadlines and risk factors.
Investment involves risk. The fact that an IPO is associated with a well-known company does not guarantee that the share price will rise after listing.
Business
In The Spotlight
Editorial: PFIPC: The Scandal Is Bigger Than Gbajabiamila (2)
The first question was: Who created PFIPC? Now Nigeria must ask a more frightening one:Who allowed it to look real? That is the question the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council scandal can no longer escape.
The controversy has already produced denials, accusations, official disclaimers, investigations and criminal proceedings. The Presidency has maintained that PFIPC was fictitious and that its alleged promoter, Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew, was falsely presenting himself as a government appointee. The Office of the Chief of Staff says it alerted security agencies as far back as October 2025 over alleged forged appointment letters.
Fine.Let the courts determine the criminal allegations.Let investigators establish who forged what, who authorised what and who benefited from what. But there is now another problem that cannot be dismissed as the work of one alleged impostor. The paper trail.
Because this story became truly explosive when reports emerged that the name PFIPC, alongside the Presidential Economic Advisory Council, appeared in the 2026 federal budget with an allocation of about ₦1.3 billion. Other reports also said the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation had approved recruitment for hundreds of positions linked to the council.
If those records are authentic, then Nigerians are entitled to ask a brutally simple question:
How does a supposedly non-existent organisation get into government paperwork? That question is bigger than Gbajabiamila. Much bigger.And it is precisely why this matter must not become a convenient contest between political camps.
The easiest thing to do now is to make this a story about whether the Chief of Staff was framed, whether he was wrongly accused, or whether his denials should be believed.
Those questions matter. But they are not enough. Because even if Gbajabiamila is completely cleared, the country will still be left staring at the same institutional wreckage.Somebody, somewhere, appears to have been able to give a questionable entity the appearance of government legitimacy.That is not a small administrative mistake.That is a security problem.
It is a governance problem. It is a financial-control problem.And, potentially, it is a national credibility problem. Think about the implications. An organisation carrying the word “Presidential” can sound powerful enough to impress businessmen, foreign investors, civil servants and even government officials.
A letter carrying the right government language can appear authentic.A title can sound official. An office address can create confidence. A meeting can create legitimacy.A photograph can create legitimacy. A budget line can create legitimacy.
And once enough of these pieces come together, fiction can begin to acquire the appearance of fact.That is the frightening part.The Nigerian state cannot afford to be protected by appearances. It must be protected by verification.
If PFIPC was indeed fabricated, then the sophistication of the alleged deception deserves serious attention. The Presidency itself said the alleged organisation had been presented as a government agency and that purported appointment letters carried falsified signatures, reference numbers and seals.That is not merely somebody printing a fake business card.That is an alleged attempt to manufacture the appearance of state authority. And the state must answer accordingly.
Who checked the documents? Who checked the appointment? Who checked the organisation's legal foundation? Who checked its place in the public service structure? Who checked its bank accounts?Who checked its office?Who checked its recruitment?Who checked its budgetary status?Who checked the officials supposedly running it?And, above all:Who had the power to stop it?Those are not partisan questions.They are state questions.
They belong to every Nigerian.This is why the PFIPC affair should now be treated as an institutional stress test. The result is uncomfortable.
The Nigerian government has demonstrated that it can publicly declare an organisation non-existent while questions simultaneously arise over how that same name appeared in official-looking government records.
Whatever the eventual explanation, that contradiction demands daylight.Not spin.Not political warfare.Not another round of accusations on television.Daylight.
If the budget entry was an administrative error, explain it.If it was inserted improperly, explain how.If recruitment approval was improperly obtained, explain who authorised it.If documents were forged, prosecute those responsible after due process.
If legitimate government officials were deceived, identify where the verification system failed.If insiders assisted the operation, expose them.And if no government insider was involved at all, then demonstrate clearly how outsiders were able to penetrate the machinery of government so deeply.
Nigeria deserves that answer.Because there is a dangerous habit in public life: once a scandal becomes embarrassing, the instinct is to find one person to carry it away.
Blame the impostor.Blame the politician.Blame the civil servant.Blame the opposition.Blame the media.Then move on.
That will not do this time.A country does not become safer because one alleged fraudster is prosecuted.It becomes safer when the system that made the fraud possible is repaired.That is the real test.
The PFIPC controversy has exposed a vulnerability that cannot be buried beneath another headline.
Government authority is an asset.It must be guarded.
The presidential name is an asset.It must be protected.Official documents are an asset.They must be secured.
The national budget is an asset.It must be beyond manipulation.And public confidence is perhaps the most valuable asset of all.
Once Nigerians begin to wonder whether an organisation can be invented, dressed in presidential language and somehow find its way into official channels, the damage extends beyond the immediate scandal.It reaches the credibility of the state.It reaches Nigeria's relationship with investors. It reaches the credibility of official correspondence.It reaches the confidence of foreign missions.It reaches the reputation of the civil service.And it reaches the fundamental question of whether government records mean what they say they mean.
That is why the authorities must resist the temptation to declare victory simply because an individual has been accused, investigated or prosecuted.
The deeper victory would be institutional.Find the loophole.Close it.Find the accomplices, if any.Expose them.Find the forged documents.Trace them. Find the money.Follow it. Find the approvals.Explain them.
Find the officials who failed in their duties.Hold them accountable, where evidence and due process establish responsibility.And then build a system in which the next PFIPC cannot happen.
Because there will always be fraudsters.There will always be con artists.There will always be people willing to manufacture influence. The real question is whether the Nigerian state makes their work easy.That is what Abuja must answer.
And this is where the story moves beyond Femi Gbajabiamila.If he is innocent of the allegations against him, then say so and let the evidence stand.But do not confuse the clearing of one man with the clearing of the system.One man can be innocent while a system is still guilty of negligence.That distinction matters.
Nigeria does not need another political scapegoat.It needs an audit of its gates.Who enters?Who leaves?Who signs?Who approves?Who verifies?Who pays?Who watches?And who answers when nobody watches?Those questions are now unavoidable.
The PFIPC scandal began as a dispute over an alleged organisation.It has become a test of something much larger:whether the Nigerian state can recognise itself when someone tries to impersonate it.That is not a scandal about one man.It is not even a scandal about one organisation.It is a warning about the machinery of government itself.And warnings ignored have a way of returning as disasters.
So let the investigation continue.Let the courts do their work.Let evidence—not political loyalty—determine responsibility.
But let nobody close this file merely because one powerful name has been cleared.The name may be cleared.The questions are not.
And until Nigerians know how an allegedly non-existent presidential body could acquire the appearance, paperwork and institutional oxygen of legitimacy, the PFIPC scandal remains unfinished. The mask may have been exposed. Now Nigeria must find out who opened the door.
In The Spotlight
Rethinking Policy From The Ground (II)
Last week, this column began with a simple proposition: Nigeria’s public policy conversation is often conducted at the wrong altitude. We examined why citizens encounter the state most directly through schools, primary health centres, rural roads, markets, transport systems, environmental services and local government offices. We also argued that a policy problem must first be understood before it is solved. Today, the column continues that argument. If knowing the problem is the beginning, the next question is what happens when a carefully diagnosed problem enters the political and administrative machinery of government. This is where incentives, institutions, competing values and frontline discretion determine whether a promising policy becomes a public good or another abandoned initiative.
From Problems Towards Choices
A government rarely chooses between a good option and a bad option. It usually chooses among imperfect alternatives, each benefiting some citizens, imposing costs on others and carrying uncertainties.
That reality should make policy analysis more rigorous. William K. Bellinger’s work on economics for policy analysis provides a useful discipline: the relevant question is not simply whether government can afford an intervention, but whether its social benefits justify the resources sacrificed elsewhere. Every new road competes with a school. Every government factory competes with health spending. For state policymakers, the essential question is therefore: what else could this money achieve? A N10 billion expenditure should be evaluated against the outcomes forgone by not spending that money elsewhere. That is the difference between accounting for expenditure and analysing public value.
How Incentives Change Behaviour
This reasoning becomes sharper when we consider how citizens respond to government decisions. Lee S. Friedman’s microeconomic approach to policy reminds us that people respond to prices, rules, risks, information and incentives.
Consider local taxation. A local government that increases market levies may expect higher revenue. But if the burden becomes excessive, traders may relocate, evade payment or operate outside formal markets. The government may collect less while economic activity becomes harder to monitor. Similarly, multiple charges on farmers, transporters or small manufacturers can make formal activity less attractive.
The same logic applies to environmental regulation. If government prohibits indiscriminate dumping without providing affordable waste collection, households may continue dumping illegally because the lawful alternative is inaccessible. Enforcement alone cannot solve an incentive problem created partly by inadequate service provision. Good regulation combines rules with feasible alternatives. The objective should be to make desirable behaviour easier, not merely punish undesirable behaviour.
Why Politics Shapes Outcomes
But incentives alone do not explain policy outcomes. Deborah Stone’s work on policy paradox reminds us that public decisions are contests over values as much as calculations of efficiency. Nigerian policymakers operate where questions of distribution are inseparable from development. Who gets the road? Which community receives the hospital? Whose land is acquired? Which informal operators are displaced?
These are political questions with technical dimensions. A policy that is economically efficient may still fail if it is perceived as unfair. A reform that improves aggregate welfare may provoke resistance from groups bearing concentrated losses. Politically intelligent policy design must therefore anticipate winners, losers and the narratives through which both interpret reform.
Urban transportation illustrates the point. Formalising informal transport can improve safety and service standards, but simply removing existing operators can create hardship for drivers and passengers. Successful reform recognises the economic lives embedded in existing arrangements and provides credible transition pathways.
Institutions Carry Policy Forward
Michael Howlett, M. Ramesh and Anthony Perl of the Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy remind us that policy is not a single decision, but a process involving agenda setting, formulation, adoption, implementation and evaluation. A brilliant policy document can therefore become a poor programme because institutions lack coordination, information, authority or capacity.
Nigeria’s federal structure makes this especially difficult. Responsibilities are distributed across federal, state and local institutions, while financing and administrative capacity are uneven. A primary school may depend on one level for teachers, another for infrastructure and another for complementary interventions. A primary health centre may receive medicines through one channel, personnel through another and capital investment through a third. When outcomes are poor, each institution can point elsewhere.
The answer is not simply to redraw constitutional boundaries. For policymakers, this means resisting the temptation to treat political urgency as evidence. Urgency can justify action, but it cannot substitute for diagnosis, comparison, measurement and institutional realism and learning. It is to make responsibility visible. Citizens should know which institution is responsible for which service, what standard it must meet and where complaints should go.
Frontline Officials Make Policy
Perhaps nowhere is this more important than where policy meets the citizen. Research on street-level bureaucracy shows that frontline officials possess discretion because formal rules cannot anticipate every circumstance. Teachers decide how struggling pupils are treated. Nurses prioritise patients. Extension workers decide which farmers receive information. Environmental officers determine which violations receive attention.
Where incentives are weak and supervision poor, discretion can become rent extraction. But discretion can also enable adaptation. A teacher may develop a practical method for reaching struggling pupils. A health worker may reorganise patient flow to reduce waiting. A local official may find a simpler way to process applications. The challenge is therefore not to eliminate discretion, which is impossible, but to create conditions under which it serves public purposes.
States should pay closer attention to the working environment of frontline officials. If a policy assumes that an extension agent will visit remote farms without transport, or that a teacher will improve learning without materials, or that a health worker will provide reliable services without medicines, the policy is not ambitious. It is institutionally unrealistic.
Governments Must Learn Systematically
Nigeria has no shortage of programmes, strategies and reforms. What it lacks is a sufficiently systematic process for deciding which interventions deserve to survive. Governments often scale programmes because they are politically attractive, not because they have demonstrated results. Others abandon useful initiatives when administrations change. This produces institutional amnesia, with each government behaving as though it is starting from zero.
States should identify what they believe will happen, establish measurable indicators, test interventions, compare results and revise assumptions. Local governments should become sources of operational knowledge rather than administrative endpoints. Successful innovations should be documented and adapted before scaling. Failures should be examined rather than concealed.
A state may discover that feeder roads produce larger gains in farm incomes than subsidised inputs in one agricultural zone, while another finds that irrigation, storage or market aggregation is the binding constraint. The goal should be a common commitment to evidence, with flexibility for different solutions.
Good public policy requires more than money, political will or impressive documents. It requires an accurate understanding of reality, careful choices among alternatives, attention to incentives, sensitivity to political values, institutions capable of implementation and systems that learn from results. States and local governments are where these conditions either converge or collapse.
Next week, the conclusion of this three-part series will move from diagnosis to action. The final column will set out practical policy recommendations and ways forward for state and local government policymakers, focusing on education, primary healthcare, rural livelihoods, rural industrialisation, transportation, and ease of doing business among several others.
By Abdulrauf Aliyu