press9jatv:
Adeleke is a goner, you don’t understand Osun State politics at all. The handwriting of Adeleke defeat is on the wall already.

press9jatv:
Hmm 🤔 politics is very deep. Funny enough, Adeleke too will be rejected in the poll. 2026 election will be tough

Former Delta State governor, Chief James Ibori has hailed President Bola Tinubu for approving the construction of Lagos-Port Harcourt-Calabar Coastal Superhighway.

The Federal Executive Council, FEC,.on Monday, approved the construction of the superhighway at its meeting.

In a series of messages posted on his Facebook and X handles, Ibori said Tinubu has once again, demonstrated courage and determination towards the development of the Niger Delta region.

Going down memory lane, the former governor said in 2001, Tinubu, as governor of Lagos State, hosted a meeting of South West and South-South governors, in Marina where the need for the construction of the superhighway was deliberated upon.

Ibori said: “Mr President, I want to applaud your courage and determination for the development of the Niger Delta region as exemplified by the Federal Executive Council’s approval of the construction of Lagos-Port Harcourt-Calabar Coastal Superhighway.

“I recall that as governors, we deliberated on the need for the construction of the Coastal road during our meeting of South West and South-South governors which you hosted in Marina as Lagos state governor in 2001.

“This project will enhance interconnectivity and boost the economy of the coastal states”.

AdamouEmeka:
Then leave your marriage

holocron:


From your comment you are not too different from the boys in question. Na why buhari call them lazy youth. Food has been provided but for you to reach out to eat it, you still cry out for assistance.

xpressionx:



IPOB never endorsed Obi.

It was the reasonable youths and professional Nigerians that knew Obi would be a game changer and endorsed him.

The political elites used the rigging machinery to declare a fraud winner.

I ask people who are unbiased this question.

If Tinubu truely won the election, why was almost the whole nation mourning?
only the hand dew of his boys and supporters were celebrating.

When Buhari won in 2015 when social media is not as it is now,we saw celebration across different regions,why did we not see that with Tinubu despite social media being more popular now?

HIGHESTPOPORI:
Not with a stolen mandate

Turkey's biggest election of its post-Ottoman era confounded pollsters and threw up surprises that underscored the difficulty of gauging the mood of the sharply polarised country.

President Recep Tayyip Erdogan came within a fraction of a percentage point of defeating secular challenger Kemal Kilicdaroglu in the first round.

Neither one's ability to break the 50-percent threshold sets up a historic May 28 runoff -- Turkey's first -- that Erdogan enters as the strong favourite.

Kilicdaroglu's performance was the opposition's best of Erdogan's two-decade rule.

But the 74-year-old former civil servant had to assume the role of consoler-in-chief instead of president-elect on Monday.

"Don't despair," he told his despondent supporters.

AFP looks at Sunday's main surprises.

- It wasn't the economy -

"It's the economy, stupid," strategist James Carville famously told future US President Bill Clinton when trying to come up with a battle plan for his 1992 election campaign.

Turkey's case proved that mantra had caveats.

Erdogan entered the election battling Turkey's worst economic crisis since the 1990s.

The official annual inflation rate touched 85 percent last year. The unofficial one calculated by economists -- and trusted by most Turks -- approached 200 percent.

Erdogan fought it by refusing to drop his unconventional theories and instead handed out incentives and pay rises to various segments of the population.

Analysts estimate the cost of his pledges at billions of dollars.

"The last-minute spending promises -- like the 45-percent wage hike for 700,000 public servants -- have helped," said Verisk Maplecroft analyst Hamish Kinnear.

"Erdogan's promise to rebuild areas devastated by the earthquake also appears to have cut through to voters."

Erdogan maintained high levels of support in almost every region hit by the deadly February disaster.

- Kurdish problem -

Turkey's long-repressed Kurdish community accounts for almost a fifth of the population and more than 10 percent of the vote.

It largely supported Erdogan in his first decade of rule and turned against him in the second.

Some analysts felt that the main pro-Kurdish party's decision to formally endorse Kilicdaroglu could put him over the top.

But Erdogan used it against him by telling voters that the opposition was taking orders from the PKK Kurdish militia.

"Erdogan's strategy of linking the opposition to the PKK and the terrorist movement paid off," Bayram Balci of the CERI Sciences Po institute said.


Istanbul housewife Leyla Gurler said the opposition's courtship of the pro-Kurdish HDP party concerned her.

"If the opposition had won, it would have been because of the HDP and the PKK," said the 57-year-old. "They stood together with the PKK. They made a mistake there."

- 'Unadulterated ultranationalism' -

Erdogan's chances on May 28 are helped by the unexpected rise of little-known ultra-nationalist Sinan Ogan.

The 55-year-old picked up 5.1 percent of the vote as an independent.

He was once a member of an ultra-nationalist party that forms part of Erdogan's parliamentary alliance and represents voters who have more in common with Turkey's leader than the leftist Kilicdaroglu.

Analyst Umut Ozkirimli said nationalism has been a "constant" component of Turkish politics since the 1990s.

Various nationalist and far-right groups picked up 22 percent of the vote in Sunday's legislative ballot.

"The fact that Sinan Ogan won above five percent of the vote underlines that unadulterated ultranationalism is well and alive in Turkey," political risk consultant Anthony Skinner said.

"It would be a surprise if Ogan decides to place his support behind the moderate Kilicdaroglu for the second round of the presidential election. Erdogan is in pole position on 28 May."


- Biased pollster -

Turkey's pollsters emerged as one of the day's biggest losers.

Only a small fraction predicted an Erdogan victory. Some put Kilicdaroglu ahead by 10 percentage points.

"Staggering how bad the polls and most of the secular analysts were in calling this one," emerging markets economist Timothy Ash remarked.

The veteran Turkey watcher attributed it to pollsters' inherent political bias in a country with sharply polarised and deeply entrenched views.

"I have to say all the analysts I trust, who are closer to the (ruling party), were saying 50-50, too close to call, with a bias to Erdogan."

Skinner noted that Kilicdaroglu's party had spent part of Sunday night claiming to be ahead in the election and disputing the results published by state media.

Opposition "officials still have to explain why they were so bullish as the voting progressed. Were their models fundamentally flawed or was something else at play?" Skinner told AFP.

dfrost:


Nice read. Wow! Just wow! Kindly point me to the original article. Thanks in advance.

Richard Akinjide’s Hindsight: Why You Can’t Win Presidential Election Petition!

March 13, 2023

Jide Ajani

In matters of election petitions, Richard Osuolale Abimbola Akinjide remains a legend.

Having successfully determined the letters and spirit of the Electoral Decree of 1977, proving to the courts that Section 34 (A) (l) (c) (ii) of the Electoral Decree, means that two-thirds of a state is synonymous with votes cast in two – thirds of votes cast in the territorial or physical areas of the state and, thereby, handing Usman Aliyu Shehu Shagari the presidential election victory of 1979, Akinjide remains very relevant to jurisprudential matters in Nigeria.

Practising his law at over 70 years, Akinjide still appears in court – he’s about the most visible minister in the Second Republic who is not only in politics but has his professional calling as first love.

Therefore, Sunday Vanguard decided to seek his opinion on the seeming futility of a political party pursuing an election petition in a presidential election, especially in the face of the punishing Doctrine of Substantial Compliance.

This legal luminary agreed with Sunday Vanguard that an election petition at that level is no more than a fool’s errand (Read Prologue) – a wasted effort

Excerpts:

Can we have a flawless election anywhere in the world?

No! Anywhere in the world, whether it is Europe, America or even in Africa, it is accepted that in a normal democracy, it is impossible to conduct a flawless election. It is humanly impossible and that is why you have the doctrine of substantial compliance that is written into all election laws in all countries.

The doctrine of Substantial Compliance! What does it mean?

With the doctrine of substantial compliance, it is implicit and conceded that there must be flaws in the election but that once there is substantial compliance, then the election should be accepted as having substantially complied with the laws and the return should not be upset.

But why shouldn’t an election be upturned if there are flaws?

If you look at what happened in 1960 in the United States when John Fitzgerald Kennedy defeated Richard Nixon, there were flaws in the election in Chicago; there were flaws in the elections in Texas. The majority of Kennedy over Nixon was very thin and supporters of Nixon urged him to file a petition but Nixon said no.

He explained that if he filed an election petition and he won, it would damage, forever, the United States and the legitimacy of the office of the president of the United States.

Nixon went on to say that it is better for Nixon not to be president than for an American institution to be damaged and, therefore, he refused to file a petition against Kennedy’s victory in 1960 – I was in New York at that time. This is a lesson which our leaders here should learn.

But there is a difference between the two countries…?

Yes, there is a difference and the difference between the United States and Nigeria is that the United States is a nation while Nigeria is a country and not a nation. Many people who file election petitions here don’t look at it from a national perspective but from a sectional point. You want to be president of Nigeria and not the president of the East, West or Delta or North and that is the critical difference between us here and the countries of the West.

Let’s even find out, would you take a case to appeal an election victory or a presidential election at that? Would you come forward and prove that an election did not substantially comply with the provisions of the law?

Is that based on principles or on the understanding of the letters and spirit of the law?

I will not and the lawyers who are advising the would-be petitioners should be very, very careful and also put not only the law into consideration but also the national interest and the consequences of any debacle.

That an election was flawed and a winner has emerged is enough debacle! So, what other debacle?

Good question! The new president has to summon the first meeting of the National Assembly and that is the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Now, if there is no president, the National Assembly can not meet and the previous president can not summon that assembly because his term has expired so he can not. It is the new president that would do it.

So, in the event that there is no president who would do it! There would be total anarchy and chaos in the land. The same thing applies in the state where the new governor is expected to inaugurate the state house of assembly.

That doctrine…?

Apart from the Doctrine of Substantial Compliance, there is also a Doctrine of Consequences, the Doctrine of Consequences, was applied during the election debacle between George Bush and Al Gore because of the problem of Florida. The United States can not afford not to have a president and by voting of five to four, the United States of America’s Supreme Court said Bush was validly returned and the moment the court said that Gore just picked up his phone and called up Bush to congratulate him and with that call gave validity and legitimacy to Bush as president.

These are the things we should learn and not party interest or personal interest or sectional interest.

Within the context of our own environment and contestation for power, we have heard politicians say openly that they would rather rig and win rather than be the one to file a petition, that they would rather be the defendant of a flawed electoral victory than be the litigant who would be saddled with the burden of proving that an election did not substantially obey the law. In this context, is the law not creating an environment where people would just go ahead to rig, win and wait for the other party to come and prove that there was no substantial compliance?

If you look at the process in Europe, the United States and other civilised countries, they put a searchlight on aspirants. This is because the private lives of a would-be public servant is of national interest because those countries would not want to put a crook in power, one that would put sectional or private interests above national interests or the common good.

Therefore, in my view, the present electoral law is too cumbersome, it should be simplified and emphasis should be placed on character and on national interests. India as the greatest democracy in the world, you would not hear some of this rubbish we seem to be used to here. You will not see somebody in office after a year or two and an election petition is still going on; that is absolute rubbish. But it is not the fault of the people it is the law. During the Tafawa Balewa and Shehu Shagari time, the electoral law was simplified and simple such that all election petitions are concluded before swearing-in.

Our laws say the litigant must prove that the elections are flawed. Using substantial compliance doctrine, how easy would it be for a litigant to prove that an election did not substantially comply in a presidential election in Nigeria?

The law is the law because when you go to court even on any matter, you must prove your case.

The onus is on you whether it is an election matter or a land matter you’ve gone to court so you must prove your case. When you say somebody has stolen money, you must prove it. So when you go to court to say an election was flawed, then you must prove your case.

In 1979, the contention was about what constitutes two-thirds. Give a summary of that great trial?

My defence against Chief Awolowo’s petition was predicated on three critical points. One is that there was total compliance in accordance with the electoral law. In the alternative, there was substantial compliance.

Thirdly, in any event, the electoral petition and the reliefs sought were flawed and Justice Otutu Obaseki highlighted that very thoroughly.

So, from the point of view of total compliance or substantial compliance or the way the petition was presented, we won.

Professor Reid, of the University of London, wrote to me and also told me that what I did has made a notable contribution to constitutional law all over the world.

There is no doubt that the case of Awolowo Vs Shagari has been cited in many electoral petition cases in the country because I hear of some rubbish in some places that the judgment should not be cited. That is absolute rubbish.

Richard Akinjide’s Hindsight: Why You Can’t Win Presidential Election Petition!

March 13, 2023

Jide Ajani

In matters of election petitions, Richard Osuolale Abimbola Akinjide remains a legend.

Having successfully determined the letters and spirit of the Electoral Decree of 1977, proving to the courts that Section 34 (A) (l) (c) (ii) of the Electoral Decree, means that two-thirds of a state is synonymous with votes cast in two – thirds of votes cast in the territorial or physical areas of the state and, thereby, handing Usman Aliyu Shehu Shagari the presidential election victory of 1979, Akinjide remains very relevant to jurisprudential matters in Nigeria.

Practising his law at over 70 years, Akinjide still appears in court – he’s about the most visible minister in the Second Republic who is not only in politics but has his professional calling as first love.

Therefore, Sunday Vanguard decided to seek his opinion on the seeming futility of a political party pursuing an election petition in a presidential election, especially in the face of the punishing Doctrine of Substantial Compliance.

This legal luminary agreed with Sunday Vanguard that an election petition at that level is no more than a fool’s errand (Read Prologue) – a wasted effort

Excerpts:

Can we have a flawless election anywhere in the world?

No! Anywhere in the world, whether it is Europe, America or even in Africa, it is accepted that in a normal democracy, it is impossible to conduct a flawless election. It is humanly impossible and that is why you have the doctrine of substantial compliance that is written into all election laws in all countries.

The doctrine of Substantial Compliance! What does it mean?

With the doctrine of substantial compliance, it is implicit and conceded that there must be flaws in the election but that once there is substantial compliance, then the election should be accepted as having substantially complied with the laws and the return should not be upset.

But why shouldn’t an election be upturned if there are flaws?

If you look at what happened in 1960 in the United States when John Fitzgerald Kennedy defeated Richard Nixon, there were flaws in the election in Chicago; there were flaws in the elections in Texas. The majority of Kennedy over Nixon was very thin and supporters of Nixon urged him to file a petition but Nixon said no.

He explained that if he filed an election petition and he won, it would damage, forever, the United States and the legitimacy of the office of the president of the United States.

Nixon went on to say that it is better for Nixon not to be president than for an American institution to be damaged and, therefore, he refused to file a petition against Kennedy’s victory in 1960 – I was in New York at that time. This is a lesson which our leaders here should learn.

But there is a difference between the two countries…?

Yes, there is a difference and the difference between the United States and Nigeria is that the United States is a nation while Nigeria is a country and not a nation. Many people who file election petitions here don’t look at it from a national perspective but from a sectional point. You want to be president of Nigeria and not the president of the East, West or Delta or North and that is the critical difference between us here and the countries of the West.

Let’s even find out, would you take a case to appeal an election victory or a presidential election at that? Would you come forward and prove that an election did not substantially comply with the provisions of the law?

Is that based on principles or on the understanding of the letters and spirit of the law?

I will not and the lawyers who are advising the would-be petitioners should be very, very careful and also put not only the law into consideration but also the national interest and the consequences of any debacle.

That an election was flawed and a winner has emerged is enough debacle! So, what other debacle?

Good question! The new president has to summon the first meeting of the National Assembly and that is the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Now, if there is no president, the National Assembly can not meet and the previous president can not summon that assembly because his term has expired so he can not. It is the new president that would do it.

So, in the event that there is no president who would do it! There would be total anarchy and chaos in the land. The same thing applies in the state where the new governor is expected to inaugurate the state house of assembly.

That doctrine…?

Apart from the Doctrine of Substantial Compliance, there is also a Doctrine of Consequences, the Doctrine of Consequences, was applied during the election debacle between George Bush and Al Gore because of the problem of Florida. The United States can not afford not to have a president and by voting of five to four, the United States of America’s Supreme Court said Bush was validly returned and the moment the court said that Gore just picked up his phone and called up Bush to congratulate him and with that call gave validity and legitimacy to Bush as president.

These are the things we should learn and not party interest or personal interest or sectional interest.

Within the context of our own environment and contestation for power, we have heard politicians say openly that they would rather rig and win rather than be the one to file a petition, that they would rather be the defendant of a flawed electoral victory than be the litigant who would be saddled with the burden of proving that an election did not substantially obey the law. In this context, is the law not creating an environment where people would just go ahead to rig, win and wait for the other party to come and prove that there was no substantial compliance?

If you look at the process in Europe, the United States and other civilised countries, they put a searchlight on aspirants. This is because the private lives of a would-be public servant is of national interest because those countries would not want to put a crook in power, one that would put sectional or private interests above national interests or the common good.

Therefore, in my view, the present electoral law is too cumbersome, it should be simplified and emphasis should be placed on character and on national interests. India as the greatest democracy in the world, you would not hear some of this rubbish we seem to be used to here. You will not see somebody in office after a year or two and an election petition is still going on; that is absolute rubbish. But it is not the fault of the people it is the law. During the Tafawa Balewa and Shehu Shagari time, the electoral law was simplified and simple such that all election petitions are concluded before swearing-in.

Our laws say the litigant must prove that the elections are flawed. Using substantial compliance doctrine, how easy would it be for a litigant to prove that an election did not substantially comply in a presidential election in Nigeria?

The law is the law because when you go to court even on any matter, you must prove your case.

The onus is on you whether it is an election matter or a land matter you’ve gone to court so you must prove your case. When you say somebody has stolen money, you must prove it. So when you go to court to say an election was flawed, then you must prove your case.

In 1979, the contention was about what constitutes two-thirds. Give a summary of that great trial?

My defence against Chief Awolowo’s petition was predicated on three critical points. One is that there was total compliance in accordance with the electoral law. In the alternative, there was substantial compliance.

Thirdly, in any event, the electoral petition and the reliefs sought were flawed and Justice Otutu Obaseki highlighted that very thoroughly.

So, from the point of view of total compliance or substantial compliance or the way the petition was presented, we won.

Professor Reid, of the University of London, wrote to me and also told me that what I did has made a notable contribution to constitutional law all over the world.

There is no doubt that the case of Awolowo Vs Shagari has been cited in many electoral petition cases in the country because I hear of some rubbish in some places that the judgment should not be cited. That is absolute rubbish.

Nigerians in diaspora under the auspices of Advocates for Good Governance have assured of technical support for the incoming administration to be led by the President-elect, Bola Tinubu, and his Vice, Senator Kashim Shettima.

The group stated this when its General Coordinator, Chief Charles Obinna paid a courtesy visit to All Progressives Congress, APC, Professionals Council, National Director General, Seyi Bamigbade, noting that the incoming president and his vice will not disappoint Nigerians as they adequately understand the needs of the nation and are ready to confront them for the benefit of all.

They congratulated the incoming President-elect, Tinubu and his vice, Shettima for their victory at the poll, saying “they are the best choice for the country at the moment.”

The group said the February 25 presidential poll in Nigeria produced a winner that is so accepted across the country and who is prepared to confront the country’s challenges with his years of experience in governance.

According to Obinna, “[i]The group is ready to offer logistics and technical support to the incoming administration to tackle seemingly knotty issues, especially in pulling Nigerians out of poverty through economic empowerment and the need to harness the potentials of the country’s young population for national development.”

He also commended key stakeholders of the party for the role they played in securing victory for APC in the presidential election.

Obinna particularly thanked the Minister of State for Labour and Employment and spokesperson of the Presidential Campaign Council, Festus Keyamo for providing the needed support that assisted in giving the party victory.

He also lauded the National Director General of APC Professionals Council, Bamigbade, as well as the Secretary of the APC presidential campaign council Abiodun Faleke for their roles before, during and after the presidential election.

Justice Hamza Muazu of the Federal Capital Territory High Court has refused to vacate an interim order restraining the National Chairman of the Labour Party, Mr Julius Abure, the National Secretary, Farouk Ibrahim and two others from parading themselves as leaders of the party.

He rather fixed April 20 to take all applications in respect of the case amidst a call by counsel of the embattled national officers of the party to have the matter heard speedily.

The counsel to Abure, Alex Ejesieme, had prayed the court to vacate the interim order and restore a semblance of sanity after a takeover of the Labour Party national secretariat by another faction.

The senior lawyer said the division in the party following the interim order has worsened to the point that four groups in the Imo State chapter of the Labour Party held parallel primaries.

Justice Muazu by way of intervention however ordered all parties in the suit to ensure speedy filing of their processes for a speedy hearing of the case.

The Labour Party (LP) in Imo State is holding parallel primaries at two different locations in Owerri, the state capital.

The two factions are laying claims to the authenticity and legality of the primaries.

A faction headed by Onyekwulisi Festus is conducting its primaries at Andreas Hotel along MCC Road while another group which has former National President of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) Professor Ukachukwu Awuzie is conducting its own at the Landmark Event Centre in Owerri and has the Abia state Governor-Elect Dr. Alex Otti as the Returning officer and chairman of the electoral panel.

While accreditation is ongoing at the MCC Road, the primaries are yet to commence at the Landmark Event Centre as delegates and contestants are arriving one by one.

A total of about 14 governorship aspirants are to contest in the different primaries ahead of the November 11 governorship elections.

10th April, 2023

By Ifeanyi Olannye

Delta Government has explained why it returned 32-year-old Ogochukwu Nwabude, who always clutched a baby begging for alms at the Inter Bau Roundabout on Asaba-Okpanam Road of Asaba, the state capital to her hometown of Anambra.

Nwabude has been begging at the spot with her small baby for about two weeks before she was allegedly taken away by officials of Delta State Government are returned to Anambra State.

They denied reports that it deported a female alms beggar, allegedly constituting nuisance in Asaba, the capital city.

However, the Delta State Government denied claims that that the woman was deported by Gov. Ifeanyi Okowa.

The Chief Press Secretary to the Governor, Mr Olisa Ifeajika, refuted the alleged deportation in a statement on Sunday in Asaba.

According to Ifeajika, a check was conducted on the woman by officials of the State Ministry of Women Affairs and Social Development.

“After observing her for a period, it was revealed that she was stable and of sound mind, but needed financial help.

“And moved by her need, and as with standard procedure in handling such matters, the ministry gave her some assistance, especially as she was with a baby.

“Thereafter, it returned her to its counterpart Ministry of Women Affairs and Social Development in Anambra for necessary support,” he added.

Ifeajika explained that the measure was a routine activity on similar cases, which often transpired among states in the country and the Federal Capital Territory.

“Anambra State Government was grateful to its Delta counterpart for the effort and promptly began the process of assistance to the woman.”

“The Delta Government acted in good faith and within the ambits of regulations, which Anambra Government acknowledged with gratitude,” he stated.

Ifeajika added: “It is necessary to state that other states in the country had returned some of our citizens to us at different times and still do.

“It is a normal routine that should not be politicised because it bothers on serious humanitarian service.

“What Delta Government did was the routine procedure in rehabilitating persons of that nature and it is the standard practice among states in the country.

“We provided her with some assistance and returned her to her state of origin to ensure that she is properly re-integrated into society.”

(NAN)

March 31, 2023

It is often said that if any country should have the taste of per minute troubles like Nigeria, it will collapse with a speed of light. That being said, the future of Nigeria is still dangling with the dangers of the uninformed lads across the length and breadth of the country.

Having access to information ought to be an added advantage to a number of people but unfortunately, that has caused a seamless trouble for people of this country. In 2020, when some citizens in the course of a protest demanded for the reformation of the Nigeria Police, the level of heat received by the Nigerian government was so enormous. This ranged from the rigorous physical protest to online campaign in and outside the country.

While those campaigns were ongoing, a frontline EndSARS influencer (Doctor) who is based in UK wrote on his twitter page ‘I heard according to UN Constitution any protests that reaches 30days will make UN intervene in that country’ and that tweet with nearly twenty thousand retweet, contributed to the continuous and aggressive protest in Nigeria.

Surprisingly, none of the educated folks with access to the tweet could paste the message on google to authenticate the post. Although that wasn’t the first time misinformation and fake news would be spread in the country, the truth is that the magnitude of attacks the nation witnessed during the EndSARS protest and yet, survived was huge.

There is no law to the effect that one cannot choose or pick a side, be it at work, family or political gatherings, neither is this freedom of choice a crime

The question therefore is, can the nation continue to survive the numerous attacks from its citizen who are hell bent on enforcing their unfounded personal opinion on it?

In 1932, Bonnie Eizabeth Parker and Clyde Chestnut Barrow, well-known criminal couple started terrorising the towns in the United States of America by robbing, killing and maiming. They headed the popular gang robbery, stealing money and foods from banks, restaurants, gas stations etc.

They told the people a version of their story, convinced them that they robbed only from the rich and not the poor. Their activities and mayhem continued for two years and during that period, the people of America worshipped them, which made it more difficult for the government’s Special Task Force to locate them.

As a matter of fact, on a particular occasion when the couple went for shopping in one of the cities, the whole town came out rejoicing and hailed them until they left the town. Eventually, when the law caught up with them and they were killed, over fifty thousand American citizens attended the burial ceremony of the couple.

Clearly, Bonnie and Clyde were able to garner pity and fame from the people by taking advantage of the fact that America was going through depression in those years. This is similar to the situation in Nigeria which went through series of economic crisis from 2019 till earlier this year.

From a serious rise in inflation, Covid-19 pandemic to EndSARS protest, the country had battled with a whole lot of issues which made certain persons come out like saviours as Bonnie and Clyde did in America. One among many is the product marketing of the Labour party presidential candidate, Mr Peter who was sold as a new kid in the block. No doubt, Mr. Obi is eligible to contest the last general election.

However, if history is well researched, some of the quality ascribed to him should have been trashed. We should not forget that he was a two-term Governor of Anambra state under APGA before he cross-carpeted to the Peoples Democratic Party, where he was appointed as an Economic Adviser by the Goodluck Jonathan led administration.

Also, as at the time he indicated interest in the race, his name had not been cleared from the Pandora Paper. More interesting, at the one-year anniversary of Mr Charles Soludo, the Executive Governor of Anambra State, he mentioned that the same Anambra State which Mr. Obi governed is the erosion capital of the world and the state is shrinking due to the previous governments’ inability to construct perfect roads with drainages.

It should only be obvious to even a blind man that Mr. Obi appears cool and perfect on a face value whereas in reality, he is more like bad goods packaged and sold.

In the build up to the presidential election, some of the prominent religion leaders lend their voices in the campaign, for or against the current government. Pastor Poju Oyemade who happens to coordinate the yearly political discuss in the country via ‘The Platform’ had invited the candidate of the Labour Party, Mr. Obi on countless occasions which made him a bit popular as some of his usual magical solutions to Nigeria penetrated the heart of his audience. In one of the events, Mr. Obi claimed that he wears only one wristwatch, which portrayed him as being economical and frugal.

The Platform afforded him a great deal of image branding for Mr. Obi but unfortunately, this could not continue late last year when the pastor made a personal observation on the political dynamics of Nigeria. Some of the pastor’s choice of words didn’t go down well with the uncontrolled mob garnered by the leading candidate.

Pastor Poju was verbally attacked, threatened and eventually bullied to delete those statements from his official twitter handle. Questions started to well up in the hearts of people who could think for themselves and those who aren’t swayed with the online rhetoric’s and biases on why people should be bullied for having a diverse opinion on issues.

Then, it went far more with various online attacks on the General Overseer of the Redeemed Christian Church of God, Pastor Adeboye whom they insisted must make his political stance known otherwise he is automatically one of those responsible for the problems of the country.

Notwithstanding that the General Overseer ignored all the threats, the one of 20th February 2023 by a Jnr. Lambo who demanded that if the church doesn’t make a bold statement, he would remove sound equipment and lighting he donated to the church caught the attention of many.

Oftentimes, you will wonder if truly the country is a religious nation as being portrayed in the world. Research shows that the country has over 85 million Muslims and 80 million Christians, (that’s more than 82% of the country) worshiping God every weekend.

In about a week to the election, many Nigerians decide to come to the country to exercise their civil responsibility to vote since the National Assembly hasn’t passed the law to enable Nigerians in the diaspora to vote from their end. As Nigerians trooped into the country from different destinations to vote for their preferred candidates, many supporters of Mr. Obi went on to attack those who indicated on their page to vote for another candidate, wishing them bad luck on their journey etc. Celebrities like Olawale Brymo and Toyin Abraham were made to go through hell.

Then, you start questioning if any of the holy books teaches us to be that vile and wicked against one another. One can truly imagine if some citizens of this country aren’t anarchist, with the ways and manners they address issues. Amazingly, there is no law to the effect that one cannot choose or pick a side, be it at work, family or political gatherings, neither is this freedom of choice a crime.

As funny as it may sound, the overzealousness and flagitious actions of the young people can be excused but what could be said of elder statesmen? It was a bit shocking to everyone when Chief Ezeife Chuckwuemeka made a bold statement on Arise TV that the President-Elect won’t be sworn in on May 29.

In fact, it took the intervention of the TV host for him to retract his statement. We cannot continue to live in a country where everyone issued threat on issues they feel not satisfied with, when alternatives methods are multitudinous.

Obviously, we can’t have a peaceful nation when the elders in our society who ought to direct the young ones on a better path are already entrenched in bigotry and hate. Now, the anger in the land has been systematically built over the years with only the exclusion to a weapon, which is like holding the nation from exploding from within.

The question then is, if our citizens ignore the message from the revered men of God and other sane elders but only listen to the hate poured out from some elders, where do we go from here? The painful part is that the hate inside some Nigerians within and outside the country continues to fester because how do you explain the cases of citizens of this country who had relocated more than a decade and are happy funding insurrection in the country?

Where do we go from there? What are the chances that Nigeria will continue to survive this internal attacks from its unpatriotic citizens who are hell bent on seeing things only through their prism but none other person. How do we wake up the brilliance and curiosity of every Nigerians to verify fakes news which they can smell on their own.

One would think that the ‘Change Begins with Me’ campaign the introduced by the Ministry of Information in 2016 would go a long way in addressing this. However, the implementation was a bit shoddy. It therefore seems the government needs to get back to the drawing table, to enlighten its citizens on crucial responsibilities for a greater Nigeria.

The National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS) has warned that it will resist any attempt to stop the inauguration of President-Elect Bola Tinubu as Nigeria’s president on 29, May 2023.

NAN said this in reaction to claims of ongoing plot to stop the inauguration of Tinubu, with installation of an interim government.

A statement by its Vice President (External Affairs) Akinteye Babatunde Afeez said: “Following the recent reports coming from the quarters of the Nigerian DSS that there are frantic efforts and devilish plots by some scrupulous elements in the Nigerian political space to truncate the Nigerian political system by stopping the inauguration of Sen. Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the president-elect with an illegal installation of an interim government; the Nigerian Students considers this as a SHAM and we say in all factual senses that IT CANNOT WORK.

“It is laughable in all ramifications that an election was organized by INEC and the result of the presidential election produced a PRESIDENT-ELECT and this winner was announced by the same body – INEC that conducted the election then a group of sycophants would come together to plan to shortchange the fragile peace of the nation for their selfish interests.

“This will be totally unacceptable by all and sundry. The entire Nigerian students would go against this with every power within and without. Gone is the era of June 12, 1993 when Nigeria was still in a dark age and most Nigerians didn’t know their rights and privileges as citizens.

“Gone is such an era of militarization and affront impunity, where someone or a group of few people can just come up with plans and actualize them against the will of the people. Gone is the era where the Nigerian Students and youth would sit and watch some people decide for us to our detriment as citizens and as a nation. We are all wiser now. This will not work.

NANS said candidates who are not satisfied with the outcome of the presidential election to seek redress in the court of law.

“As a matter of urgency, I hereby call upon the Nigerian Students, the Nigerian youth and the entire citizens of Nigeria to be ready to resist every form of oppression or manipulation that would send Nigeria backwards in the comity of nations and any installation that would tamper with the peace and tranquility that Nigeria is enjoying in recent times after the heat of the just concluded election.

“In the capacity of the leadership of the Nigerian Students, I want to emphatically say that the Nigerian Students shall fight back venomously any form of unnecessary interim government installation or every plot to stop the inauguration of the president-elect come May 29, 2023.

“We will let these selfish and egocentric leaders know that their times are gone and that we are in the era of Nigerians, most especially Nigerian Students taking their destinies in their hands and holding their stakes firmly in the way their country is run and directed.

“We will stand firm against every form of oppression and intimidation from any quarters and make sure that the right things are done at every point in time in our dear nation, Nigeria.

“I strongly advise that any candidate or any political party who is not satisfied with the outcome of the presidential election should seek redress in the court of law and desist from inciting violence of any form in any way so that Nigeria can move forward.”