₦airaland Forum

Find just one friend who can at least always have your back say 85% of the time. You go need friends

Please The Mods, Kindly Push Forward, These are important issues to be discussed. Thank you

THE NIGERIAN PRIVATE-SCHOOL TEACHER: CELEBRATED TODAY, STRUGGLING TOMORROW


WHEN TEACHING BECOMES A SURVIVAL JOB IN NIGERIA


By Writer X

Today, we celebrate teachers.

Social media will be filled with beautiful pictures, appreciation messages, gifts, prayers and words such as

“Teachers are nation builders.”

And rightly so.

But behind the celebration is a difficult conversation that we must be willing to have—particularly concerning teachers working in Nigeria's private schools.

Because for some of them, the problem is no longer simply whether they enjoy teaching.

It is whether teaching can provide a decent and sustainable livelihood.



WHEN THE SALARY DOES NOT MATCH THE RESPONSIBILITY

A private-school teacher may be responsible for teaching several classes, preparing lessons, marking assignments and examinations, supervising students, attending staff meetings, participating in extracurricular activities, completing administrative tasks and sometimes taking on responsibilities far beyond the classroom.

Yet some teachers receive remarkably low salaries.

In June 2026, the Registrar of the Teachers Registration Council of Nigeria (TRCN), Dr. Ronke Soyombo, publicly raised concerns about the remuneration of private-school teachers and stated that some were earning as little as ₦20,000 per month.

That figure should make us pause.

Not because every private school pays ₦20,000.

Not because every school proprietor is deliberately exploitative.

And certainly not because ₦20,000 represents the average salary of private-school teachers in Nigeria—it does not.

Rather, it is significant because a senior official of the professional body responsible for regulating Nigeria's teaching profession publicly identified such remuneration as a problem.

And the question becomes

How long can we continue asking teachers to build the future while making it difficult for some of them to build a stable present?


A DELAYED SALARY CAN BECOME A DEBT PROBLEM

There is another part of this conversation that deserves much more attention:

When a teacher's salary is delayed, the teacher's expenses do not automatically stop.

Rent still has to be paid.

Transportation still costs money.

Food still has to be purchased.

Bills still arrive.

Family responsibilities continue.

So when income is delayed, a worker may have to borrow to bridge the gap.

If this happens repeatedly, what began as a payment problem can develop into a debt problem.

The important point is not to claim that every teacher whose salary is delayed will necessarily fall into debt.

Rather, it is to recognize the obvious economic reality:

When wages are not received when expected, the financial burden does not disappear. It is transferred to the worker.



And for a worker already earning a modest income, even a short delay can create serious financial pressure.

That is why timely payment deserves to be treated as an important part of decent employment—not merely as a favor from an employer.



BUT WHAT HAPPENS WHEN TEACHERS FINALLY SAY, “ENOUGH”?


This is where the conversation becomes even more important.

A qualified and experienced teacher who repeatedly encounters poor remuneration, delayed wages or difficult working conditions may eventually reconsider the idea of permanent employment.

They may ask

“Why should I commit myself exclusively to one school if the financial reward does not justify that commitment?”



That does not mean every teacher will make that decision.

But it is a potential consequence worth taking seriously.

One possible response is part-time teaching.

Instead of working permanently for one school, a teacher may choose to teach periods in two or more schools, or combine school work with private tutoring or another source of income.

From the teacher's perspective, this may be a rational economic decision.

If one employment cannot provide sufficient income, multiple engagements may offer a way to earn more.

But for schools, there can be consequences.


THE DANGER OF LOSING THE COMMITTED TEACHER

A permanent teacher who has spent years in a school can develop valuable institutional knowledge.

They become familiar with the school's

curriculum

students

assessment systems

expectations

academic goals

disciplinary procedures

teaching culture and

internal processes.


That familiarity takes time to build.

When experienced teachers repeatedly move between schools, that continuity can become more difficult to maintain.

A teacher who works across several institutions may understandably have limited capacity to participate deeply in the wider development of any one school.

This does not mean that part-time teachers are necessarily less competent or less committed.

Far from it.

A part-time teacher can be highly professional and effective.

The concern is institutional continuity.

When a school cannot retain experienced teachers for reasonable periods, it may lose knowledge, stability and long-term educational relationships.

And ultimately, students can feel the effects of constant staff changes.


THEN COMES THE DANGEROUS SHORTCUT


There is another possible consequence.

If qualified and experienced teachers become unwilling to accept the salaries being offered, some schools may be tempted to ask:

“Who can do the job for less?”



This is not a claim that all private schools are already doing this.

It is a warning about what could happen when a system places continuous pressure on staffing costs.

A school attempting to reduce its wage bill could potentially prioritize cheaper labour over experience or qualifications.

That may provide a short-term financial benefit.

But education is not simply about filling classrooms at the lowest possible cost.

If teacher qualifications and experience are compromised, there may eventually be consequences for:

lesson delivery

classroom management

assessment

student engagement

academic continuity

teacher retention and

overall educational quality.


The principle is simple

If we continually reduce the quality and experience of the professionals delivering education, we should not assume that educational quality will remain unaffected.



THE VICIOUS CYCLE

This is perhaps the most important warning in this discussion:

Poor remuneration

|

Teacher dissatisfaction

|

Teachers seek additional or multiple engagements

|

Reduced institutional continuity

|

Higher turnover

|

Difficulty retaining experienced teachers

|

Pressure to recruit cheaper staff

|

Possible increase in less-experienced or inadequately qualified personnel

|

Potential decline in educational quality

|

Good teachers become even harder to retain

|

The cycle continues.

This is why the remuneration of private-school teachers should not be dismissed as merely a complaint about money.

It is potentially an education-quality issue.


SO, IS IT WICKEDNESS?

This may be the most uncomfortable question.

We should be careful before accusing every private-school proprietor of wickedness.

Some schools genuinely struggle financially.

Some operate in communities where parents have limited ability to pay.

Some proprietors face significant costs involving rent, salaries, electricity, maintenance, security, learning resources, taxes and other obligations.

Some are doing their best to keep their schools operating.

So, low pay does not automatically prove wickedness or exploitation.

But there is another side to the argument.

What happens when a school has the financial capacity to provide better conditions but consistently chooses to minimize the cost of professional labour?

At what point does “business reality” become an excuse?

At what point does cost-cutting become unfair?

And at what point should society begin asking whether the business model itself is sustainable?

These questions cannot responsibly be answered through assumptions.

We need evidence.


We need better information about

what private-school teachers actually earn;

how regularly they are paid

what school fees look like

teachers' qualifications

working hours

workload

employment contracts

teacher turnover

and the financial realities facing different categories of private schools.


Without such information, we risk arguing from isolated experiences.



WHO IS RESPONSIBLE?

This is where the conversation must move beyond social-media outrage.

Nigeria has different institutions with different responsibilities within the education, professional and employment systems.

The Teachers Registration Council of Nigeria (TRCN) regulates the teaching profession, including registration, licensing and professional standards.

Labour authorities have responsibilities relating to employment and wages.

State education authorities have responsibilities concerning the establishment, approval and quality assurance of private schools.

These responsibilities are related—but they are not identical.

So the question should not simply be

“Why are teachers poorly paid?”



It should be

“What mechanisms exist to ensure that private-school teachers and schools operate within applicable professional, labour and educational standards—and how effective are those mechanisms?”



That is a much bigger question.

And it deserves a serious answer.


BECAUSE TEACHERS ARE NOT JUST AN EXPENSE


Perhaps private-school owners need to rethink one fundamental thing.

A teacher is not merely another item on the payroll.

A good teacher can be an institutional asset.

When a school retains an experienced teacher, it retains:

knowledge.

experience.

familiarity with students.

curriculum knowledge.

institutional memory.

stability.

And potentially, quality.

When that teacher leaves because the employment conditions are unsustainable, the school does not simply lose a name from its staff list.

It may also lose years of accumulated experience.

Recruiting someone else may fill the vacancy, but it does not instantly recreate everything the previous teacher contributed.


THE QUESTION WE AS A COUNTRY SHOULD BE ASKING THIS TEACHER'S DAY


Instead of only asking

“How do we celebrate our teachers?”



perhaps we should also ask

“How do we make teaching a profession that a qualified person can realistically build a life around?”



Because if teachers continually encounter conditions that make permanent employment financially unsustainable, some may naturally look for alternatives.

And if that happens on a large scale, we could eventually see a private-school system where:

experienced teachers move frequently;

teachers combine several jobs simply to survive;

schools struggle to retain their strongest staff;

and cost rather than competence increasingly influences recruitment decisions.

That is a future we should be careful not to create.


THIS IS NOT A WAR AGAINST PRIVATE-SCHOOL OWNERS


This distinction is important.

The purpose of this conversation should not be to portray private-school proprietors as enemies of teachers.

Nor should it encourage teachers to abandon professionalism.

The objective should be to ask whether the economics of private education can be structured in a way that protects the sustainability of the school while also protecting the dignity of the teacher.

Both sides matter.

A school must survive.

A teacher must also survive.

The children must receive quality education.

Parents must receive value for their money.

And regulators must ensure that the system operates within the law and established standards.

These interests should not be enemies.



THE CONVERSATION MUST CONTINUE

Teacher's Day gives us an opportunity to celebrate.

But it also gives us an opportunity to reflect.

If we genuinely believe teachers are nation builders, then we must be willing to discuss the conditions under which those nation builders work.

Not with anger.

Not with blanket accusations.

Not with unverified statistics.

But with facts, data, laws, accountability and honest conversation.

Because the ultimate question is not simply

“How much can we get a teacher to work for?”



It is

“What kind of education system are we building when qualified professionals may struggle to build a stable life from the profession we depend on to educate our children?”



And perhaps that is the conversation we should begin after the Teacher's Day celebrations are over.

Because appreciation is important—but appreciation alone cannot create sustainable employment.



HAPPY TEACHERS

Mankind2024:
"Because in banking, as in life, the loudest voice does not necessarily win the argument. The balance sheet does".

An exemplary and e,extraordinary written piece, I salute you on this one.

🎬🔥 WELCOME TO MEDIA CREATIVE LAB! 🔥🎬

We warmly welcome you all to MEDIA CREATIVE LAB — a creative space where technology, storytelling, and imagination come together.

Here, we are focused on teaching you how to professionally create high-quality AI videos from idea to final production — even if you are just starting out.

🚀 WHAT WE WILL EXPLORE:

✅ AI Cinematic Video Production
✅ Professional AI Video Creation
✅ Nollywood-Style Movies & Drama
✅ Nigerian Stories & African Folktales
✅ AI Animation & 3D-Style Videos
✅ AI Music & Sound Production
✅ Advertisement & Promotional Videos
✅ Storytelling & Script Development
✅ AI Character Creation & Consistency
✅ Cinematic Scene & Video Prompting
✅ Voiceovers, Sound Design & Editing

🎥 FROM IDEA TO FINISHED VIDEO

Throughout this training, you will learn how to develop an idea into a complete visual production — writing the story, creating characters, designing scenes, generating cinematic videos, adding voices and music, and professionally editing everything into a finished project.

This is not just about learning AI tools.

It is about learning how to think like a filmmaker and creative director while using AI as your production partner.

💡 Whether you want to create movies, YouTube content, advertisements, animations, music videos, African stories, social media content, or commercial productions, Media Creative Lab is here to help you develop the skills to bring your ideas to life.

🔥 THIS IS A PRACTICAL CREATIVE COMMUNITY.

We will learn.
We will experiment.
We will create.
We will improve.
And most importantly, we will bring our ideas to life.

So, once again…

🎬 WELCOME TO MEDIA CREATIVE LAB!

Learn the tools. Master the craft. Create the impossible.

🚀 Welcome to the future of digital content creation.

IF YOU ARE INTERESTED DROP A COMMENT

And you all sit behind phones, some youths elsewhere are actually coming out to speak out and fight for their future. SMH

In other words, why should a seller sell?
. The answer is in their profession... Sell..... am!

And its not just apple, it's everyone, the tech industry is buzzing with new technology and all.. Just yesterday, i watched china expo, a company has produced an ev battery that only needs 4 mins total to charge.

In tech, you snooze, you lose!

Men know what they want but don't know what to give.

Women know what to give but don't know what they want.

This is man's greatest paradox of choices

Someone once said, running a marathon is like trying to suffocate your self.. Most of you have no idea what level of endurance every runner goes through the lane.

Your real opponent in running a marathon is oneself... Defeat yourself and you win.

Her body fought her and she won.

Congratulations to her.

The Restaurant Owner Who Begged People NOT to Come to His Restaurant

Imagine owning a restaurant and suddenly becoming so popular that you start begging people not to come and eat your food.

Sounds crazy, right?

But this actually happened in China for real.

A popular food blogger with millions of followers visited a small restaurant owned by a man known as Mr. Mo. Normally, any restaurant owner would be excited about millions of people seeing their business.

But Mr. Mo had a different reaction.

Instead of saying, “Please come and patronise me,” he practically begged people not to come.

“Please, don't come!”

He was worried that if the food blogger's video went viral, too many customers would arrive and he wouldn't be able to handle the crowd.

But social media had other plans.

People became even more curious.

“If the owner himself is telling us not to come, then what exactly is going on there?”

The restaurant eventually went viral, and the crowds became so massive that customers reportedly waited for hours outside just to eat there.

The funniest part?

The man who was begging people not to come ended up getting the publicity every business owner dreams of.

It got me thinking

Can reverse psychology actually be a powerful marketing strategy, or was Mr. Mo simply lucky?

And more importantly...

If a restaurant owner tells you, “Please don't come here,” would you actually stay away—or would curiosity make you go there immediately?

Let's hear your thoughts.

You Can Have ONLY ONE — Which Would You Choose?


Imagine you are 35 years old. You have just lost your job, your savings are almost gone, and you have 12 months to completely rebuild your life.

You are offered ONE of these three advantages


A. 🧠 KNOWLEDGE
You receive exceptional knowledge and problem-solving ability in your chosen field. You learn extremely fast, understand systems, people and business, and can become highly competent—but you receive no money, special connections or guaranteed opportunities.

B. 💰 WEALTH
You receive ₦500 million legally and tax-free, but you cannot inherit any additional money or receive financial help from anyone. You have no special business knowledge beyond what you currently know.

C. 🤝 CONNECTIONS
You gain access to a powerful network of 100 highly influential people—business owners, politicians, investors, executives and professionals. They are willing to give you introductions and opportunities, but they will not give you money or do the work for you. You still need competence and results to keep those opportunities.

Here's the catch

You are starting from almost nothing.

You cannot transfer your advantage to another person, sell it, or combine it with the other two.

Which one gives you the highest probability of becoming genuinely successful over the next 20 years?

🔘 Knowledge 🧠

🔘 ₦500 Million Wealth 💰

🔘 Powerful Connections 🤝

And don't just vote—defend your choice.

Racoon:
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2026/09/average-nigerian-can-live-on-n3000-daily-reno-omokri/

Reno Omokri’s ₦3,000 argument reveals a disturbing disconnect from reality

proving that a Nigerian can survive on ₦3,000 for a day is not proof that ₦3,000 is enough to live on—it is proof of how far Nigerians have been forced to stretch their limited income, and mistaking survival for a decent standard of living is precisely the problem.

I know people have a certain mindset about loans, i do too. However for most people like me, sometimes a loan saves.

Yesterday,after me and my wife reviewed some things necessary for the home without been paid for the month past at my work, I had to take that loan.

Its sad really, I keep remembering how We had to clear the previous and was bent on not going back, due to the excessive charges

But after calling one or two people some even prefer nor to pick your call.

I made two decisions.

I will take the loan and I will figure out when to start looking for another job.

Not everyone is happy about taking a loan, certainly not me.

But what do you do? When you have got nothing or no one to aid you?

Almost all ministries and public corporations are littered with so much loop holes that it is almost impossible not to be corrupt.
So many go unaudited, unchecked and mismanaged. No proper control framework.
I am very sure, there are so many public corporations even the government has no idea are still present and receiving funds monthly.

saintbillion:
Looking at the pics below, which is more. To me I think it's the ear.

If we're judging by typical pain intensity, rather than individual experience, I’d rank the images roughly:

1. D — Childbirth 👑 — generally the most intense, especially during active labor and contractions.


2. B — Severe finger infection/abscess — can be extremely painful because pressure builds in a confined space. This is why the comment in the screenshot isn't completely exaggerated.


3. C — Severe tooth decay/cavity — dental nerve pain can be excruciating, particularly if the pulp/nerve becomes involved.


4. A — Boil/skin abscess — painful, but usually more localized and less intense than the others.



But there's an important distinction

Pain threshold ≠ pain tolerance.

Pain threshold: the point at which a person first perceives something as painful.

Pain tolerance: how much pain they can endure.

Pain intensity: how severe the pain feels.


So there isn't a scientifically valid universal answer that says “B is X% more painful than D.” People's nervous systems and circumstances vary enormously.

If the question is “which one can produce the most severe pain?” → D (childbirth) is the safest general answer.

If the question is “which one can feel surprisingly unbearable?” → B is a very strong contender. Finger infections can hurt disproportionately because swelling/pressure occurs in a small, confined area.

SirIsaacus:
I think what you're suggesting is what south Africans were initially complaining about before they resorted to xenophobic attacks

You said all o think i needed to say, so let's see who are the real hypocrites here

Some time ago, I got a tutoring gig through a church friend honestly then I was like "God send me a helper"

He called me and said, “Guy, there’s this family that needs someone to teach their children Mathematics and English.”

I said, “No problem, problem solved"

So I went there, and honestly, the family was doing quite well. The father was an executive in a bank and they lived in a very nice environment in Lagos. Big man stuff.

I met the mother, she looked like a mother in every way.

the type children know they have been found out before committing an offense.

The type that will question my nationality and political affiliation before asking for my driver's license and pop out the question of "where I want to be in the next five years"

After the interrogation and all, we settled my fee and I was introduced to the children.

There were two children I was going to teach, while the third was already much older.

On my first day, I arrived on time - very early in my best pro clothe ironed twice and perfumed for extra softness, I must have looked like I was going to my own wedding.

I taught the children, and everything went smoothly.

But during the lesson, I noticed the mother kept coming in and out of the room.

I did my calculations in my head and held my peace, man got to trust himself.

She would check on the children.

Check what I was teaching.

Check the children again.

At some point, I was like

"Madam, I hope my Mathematics is still Mathematics or do you want to take next period?"

Anyway, I finished the lesson and was about to leave when one of the children called me.

“Mr. D, my mum wants to see you.”

I said, “Okay.”

Immediately, my brain started running a diagnostic test. My heatt started checking for more oxygenated blood to pump

What happened? Did I teach the wrong topic? Did I confuse fractions with algebra? Did one of these children report me? Did I not smile enough? I hope I didn't use my real voice?

I went to meet her.

She thanked me and said she was impressed with my teaching.

For my mind, I said "But......"

She also asked me a few questions about myself.


Again, "After Waec comes Jamb abhi?" I thought.


Then came the gbaz gboz part.

She said

“Teacher, please, there is something I want you to do for us.”

I said, “Okay, ma.”

She continued

“Please, when you want to call my children, call them by their names.”

I paused.

That was when I realized something.

I had been using pet names and familiar expressions like “Dear,” “My dear,” and so on. To be honest, at that time, I was used to that expression.

And apparently, this family doesn't do that.

In their house, the children are called by their actual names.

No “Sweetie.”

No “Darling.”

No “Baby.”

No “My dear.”

No “Princess.”

No “Champ.”

Just their names. I found out later.

And interestingly, the children also didn't call me “Uncle.”

It was always

“Mr. D.”

“Mr. D, please…”

“Mr. D, I don't understand this question.”

😂

I later told some of my friend about it, and he said.

“sorry guy, Those children are on government-issued names. No nickname allowed in that house, they don't approve of it.” 😂

But honestly, beyond the funny part, something about that experience stayed with me.

I noticed that the children had very strong biblical names. They didn't have those complicated combinations of five names that you sometimes see on school registers. 😂

And it made me think about how much importance their parents placed on names.

I started thinking about how often we casually rename people because we feel we are being affectionate.

We call our children

“My baby.”

“Sweetheart.”

“Princess.”

“Handsome.”

“My little man.”

“My dear.”

And there is absolutely nothing wrong with affection oh. Me myself had a bunch of names that could fill a register growing up. Everyone is just giving their own, left to right. Lol

But perhaps we should also remember to call people by their names.

A name is more than just what appears on a school register or birth certificate.

For many people, their name carries history, identity, family, culture, and sometimes even a prayer from their parents.

So this experience taught me something for real

Pet names are sweet, but don't let the pet name replace the person's actual name.


Mr. D has received the memo.

Call people by their names.

What do you think—are parents right to insist that people call their children by their actual names, or are pet names just a normal part of showing affection?

fergie001:
Daniel Bwala
Tinubu's SA on Policy Communication

The irony is that he complains about “sentiments and vitriol” while offering almost no argument against the substance of the message. If Peter Obi visiting a church and discussing national problems is automatically “campaigning,” then the same standard must apply to every politician who attends religious, traditional, community, or public events.

Calling him a “content creator,” claiming that previous platforms “found him out,” and speculating about Pastor Selman being his “new customer” are not rebuttals; they are personal insinuations designed to avoid the actual issues being discussed.

If the argument is that Obi is wrong, then demonstrate where he is wrong, provide the figures, challenge the policy proposals, and present the evidence.

Otherwise, reducing political debate to insults, motives and imagined conspiracies says considerably more about the weakness of the argument than it does about Obi.

Know This and know Peace

Kuginzi:
https://punchng.com/four-reasons-us-shouldnt-release-my-fbi-records-tinubu/

Summarized in simpler terms :

Absolutely. The easiest way to understand this is to separate what happened historically, what Greenspan is asking for now, and what Tinubu's lawyers are arguing in court.

The whole matter in very simple English

An American transparency activist named Aaron Greenspan wants the US government to release documents held by the FBI and DEA concerning President Bola Tinubu.

The documents reportedly include things such as:

FBI records concerning Tinubu.

Interview records from around 1992–1993.

Other law-enforcement records in which his name appears.


Tinubu's lawyers are not simply saying, "these documents don't exist."

Their main argument is:

> Even if the FBI and DEA have these records, US law allows the government to keep private information about an individual confidential, and Greenspan has not shown a sufficient legal reason for forcing the government to release the unredacted material.



That distinction is very important.


---

1. What started the controversy?

The background goes back to the early 1990s.

In 1993, there was a US civil forfeiture case involving about $460,000 in an account associated with Tinubu.

US authorities alleged that the money was connected to narcotics trafficking or prohibited financial transactions.

The important legal point is this:

Civil forfeiture is NOT automatically a criminal conviction.

Think of it this way:

Criminal case:

> "We believe this person committed a crime. We are prosecuting the person."



Civil forfeiture:

> "We believe this particular money/property is connected to unlawful activity, so we want the property forfeited."



Therefore, the fact that the $460,000 was forfeited does not by itself mean Tinubu was criminally convicted of drug trafficking.

This distinction became important during Nigeria's 2023 presidential election litigation.


---

2. What did the Nigerian election court say?

The opposition argued that Tinubu's history in the US should disqualify him from being president.

But the Presidential Election Petition Court concluded in September 2023 that the petitioners had not established that Tinubu had been:

arrested,

arraigned,

convicted, or

sentenced


in a criminal case in the United States.

So, in simple terms:

> The Nigerian election court did not find that Tinubu had a US criminal conviction for drug trafficking.



That does not necessarily mean every question about his US records was answered. It means the evidence before that court did not establish the criminal conviction alleged by the petitioners.


---

3. So what does Aaron Greenspan want?

Greenspan went to a US court and essentially said:

> "I want the FBI and DEA to release their records concerning Tinubu."



He relied on something called FOIA — the Freedom of Information Act.

FOIA is basically a US transparency law.

Think of FOIA as:

> "The American public has a legal mechanism for asking the government to show us what it is doing."



For example, someone might ask:

> "Show me the government's records concerning how it handled a particular investigation."



The government generally has to consider the request.

But FOIA has exceptions.

And that's where the legal battle begins.


---

4. Why didn't the FBI simply release everything?

Because US law protects certain types of information.

One of the important provisions mentioned here is:

FOIA Exemption 7(C)

In very simple terms:

> Law-enforcement records containing personal information can sometimes be withheld if releasing them would invade someone's privacy.



Imagine the FBI has a 500-page file.

It might contain:

names,

addresses,

telephone numbers,

witness information,

interview statements,

investigative details,

information about other people,

investigative methods,

allegations,

confidential sources.


The government doesn't necessarily have to publish all of that just because someone submits a FOIA request.

It can redact information.

Redaction simply means:

> The government blacks out information before releasing the document.



For example:

> "Mr. ______ was interviewed on ______ regarding ______."



The blacked-out sections are the redactions.


---

5. What exactly are Tinubu's lawyers arguing?

There are several layers to their argument.

Argument 1: FOIA is about government activities, not digging into private people's lives

This is probably the most important argument.

Tinubu's lawyers are relying on a US Supreme Court case called Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.

Their argument is essentially:

> FOIA exists primarily so citizens can understand what the government is doing.



Not:

> "Give me everything the government has ever collected about a particular person."



So they are saying:

Greenspan isn't really asking:

> "What did the FBI do?"



He is asking:

> "What does the FBI have about Tinubu?"



The lawyers say that is fundamentally different.


---

6. But isn't Tinubu the President?

This is where the argument becomes interesting.

Greenspan's position is essentially:

> "This isn't an ordinary private citizen. This man is the President of Nigeria, a country of more than 230 million people. Nigerians have an interest in knowing his background."



That sounds like a powerful argument.

But Tinubu's lawyers respond:

> That isn't necessarily the type of "public interest" that US FOIA law recognizes.



This is a very important legal distinction.

Greenspan is talking about:

Political/public interest

"People in Nigeria deserve to know about their president."

Tinubu's lawyers are talking about:

FOIA's legally recognized public interest

"Will releasing this information tell Americans something meaningful about the conduct of the US government?"

Those aren't necessarily the same thing.


---

7. The lawyers are basically saying: "Being president doesn't cancel privacy rights."

Their position is that Tinubu still has privacy rights under US law.

Their argument is essentially:

> "Just because this person became president of another country doesn't mean every private law-enforcement record about him automatically becomes public."



This is one of the central legal issues.


---

8. What about the argument that Nigerians deserve to know?

Greenspan's argument is basically:

> "This information could be important because Tinubu is Nigeria's president."



Tinubu's lawyers respond:

> "FOIA doesn't exist to settle Nigerian political disputes."



They believe Greenspan's request is being used to obtain information that could be useful in Nigerian politics.

In their view:

> The FOIA system shouldn't become a tool for opposition politicians or political activists to investigate an individual simply because that individual holds political office.



That's why the lawyers describe the request as having an ulterior motive.


---

9. What does "ulterior motive" mean?

It simply means:

> The lawyers believe Greenspan has another objective beyond the stated reason for requesting the documents.



Their suggestion is:

> "Greenspan says this is about transparency, but we believe the real purpose is to obtain information about Tinubu for political purposes."



However, that's their argument, not a final court finding that Greenspan actually has improper motives.

That's an important distinction.


---

10. What about the claim that the records could reveal a secret prosecution?

Some people have suggested that the FBI records might reveal something more serious — perhaps an investigation, prosecution, agreement, or decision by US authorities not to prosecute Tinubu.

Tinubu's lawyers are saying:

> There isn't enough evidence for those claims.



In plain English:

> "You cannot tell the court, 'Maybe there's a secret criminal case in those files,' and then use that speculation as a reason to force the government to reveal someone's private records."



They want Greenspan to provide evidence that there was actually government misconduct or something significant that justifies disclosure.


---

11. What does "burden" mean here?

You will see this phrase frequently in legal cases:

"The plaintiff has the burden."

It simply means:

> The person asking the court to do something has to provide enough legal and factual evidence to justify it.



Here:

Greenspan = plaintiff

He is the person asking the court to order greater disclosure.

Tinubu's lawyers are saying:

> "Greenspan hasn't met the legal standard necessary to force the release of these law-enforcement records."




---

12. What is a "Glomar response"?

This is one of the most confusing parts.

A Glomar response basically means:

> "We can neither confirm nor deny whether we have records responsive to your request."



Imagine you ask the FBI:

> "Do you have a file on John?"



The FBI could say:

> "We can't confirm or deny whether we have a file on John."



Why?

Because sometimes even confirming that an investigation or file exists could reveal sensitive information.

For example:

"Yes, we have a file on him."

could itself reveal:

> "The government investigated him."



So agencies sometimes use a Glomar response.


---

13. What happened to the Glomar response in this case?

This is significant.

According to the article, in April 2025, Judge Beryl Howell ordered the FBI and DEA to stop relying on the Glomar response.

In simple language:

> The judge said the agencies could no longer simply refuse to confirm or deny the existence of responsive records in that manner.



Instead, the agencies were directed to process the records and apply the appropriate legal exemptions.

That doesn't mean:

> "Release everything."



It means more like:

> "Go through the records, determine what can legally be released, and redact or withhold what the law protects."



That's a major distinction.


---

14. So are the documents being released?

Not necessarily in full.

The FBI has apparently been processing the material but is seeking to keep some portions secret.

It has cited exemptions involving things such as:

law-enforcement information,

personal privacy,

investigative techniques,

safety of individuals.


So you can think of the process as:

Greenspan:
"Give me the records."

⬇️

FBI/DEA:
"We can't give you everything."

⬇️

Court:
"You can't simply use the Glomar response. Process the records properly."

⬇️

FBI:
"Okay, we'll process them, but we'll redact information protected by law."

⬇️

Greenspan:
"Those redactions/withholdings are improper. Release more."

⬇️

Tinubu's lawyers:
"No. The privacy and FOIA exemptions allow those portions to remain secret."

⬇️

Court:
Still has to decide the disputed legal issues.


---

15. What does "summary judgment" mean?

The article says Tinubu's lawyers asked the court to reject Greenspan's motion for summary judgment.

Don't let that phrase scare you.

In simple English:

Summary judgment

means:

> "Judge, the important facts aren't genuinely disputed, so you should decide the legal issue now without needing a full trial."



Greenspan apparently asked the court to rule in his favour regarding access to the records.

Tinubu's lawyers are asking the judge to reject that request.


---

16. The really important legal question

The case isn't simply:

> "Did Tinubu commit a crime?"



That is NOT what this particular FOIA case itself establishes.

The actual legal question is closer to:

> "Under US transparency and privacy laws, must the FBI and DEA release these records, or are they legally allowed to withhold/redact them?"



That is a completely different question.


---

17. Does this case prove Tinubu was involved in drug trafficking?

No.

This is extremely important.

The FOIA case itself does not establish that Tinubu committed drug trafficking.

The article says there was a historical US civil forfeiture proceeding involving $460,000 and allegations concerning narcotics-related proceeds or prohibited financial transactions.

But:

Civil forfeiture ≠ criminal conviction.

And the 2023 Nigerian election court found that the petitioners had not established that Tinubu had been arrested, arraigned, convicted or sentenced in a US criminal case.

So we should not turn:

> "There are FBI/DEA records"



into:

> "The FBI/DEA records prove he committed a crime."



Those are two completely different propositions.


---

18. But why is the case still important?

Because the records could potentially contain information that isn't currently public.

That's why people are interested.

The records could potentially shed light on:

what US law-enforcement agencies investigated,

what information they gathered,

what interviews occurred,

what decisions agencies made,

what information was considered relevant,

and whether some material remains undisclosed.


But until the court orders disclosure, we don't know what the withheld portions actually contain.

This is where people need to be careful.


---

19. The simplest possible summary

If I reduced the entire article to five sentences, it would be this:

> An American activist, Aaron Greenspan, wants the FBI and DEA to release their records concerning Bola Tinubu. Tinubu's lawyers are asking a US court to allow the agencies to continue withholding or redacting parts of those records because US law protects personal privacy and certain law-enforcement information. They also argue that FOIA is intended to expose government activities, not to give people private information about individuals for political purposes. A US judge has already rejected the agencies' ability to simply say "we can neither confirm nor deny" whether responsive records exist and ordered them to process the records under applicable exemptions. The case is about whether US law requires disclosure of the records; it is not itself a criminal case against Tinubu and does not establish that he committed drug trafficking.



And the key distinction to remember:

1993:
US authorities pursued forfeiture of about $460,000 associated with Tinubu.

2023:
Nigerian election litigation examined whether this amounted to a criminal conviction/disqualification; the election court said the petitioners had not established a US criminal conviction.

2025:
A US judge ordered the FBI/DEA to move beyond the "we can neither confirm nor deny" position and process the records.

Now:
The fight is largely about how much of those records can legally remain secret under US privacy and FOIA exemptions.

So the headline "Tinubu fights release of FBI/DEA records" should not be interpreted as "Tinubu has been found guilty of something." The current legal battle is fundamentally a records-disclosure/privacy dispute under US law.

kfasian:
5 STRONG REASONS WHY I SUPPORT ATIKU’S POSITION ON FUEL SUBSIDY

Opinion:

By PastorKay



PastorKay is a
Public Commentator and Social Activist

A FACT-BY-FACT REALITY CHECK ABOUT SUBSIDY

The post by pastor kay sounds compassionate, but economically it confuses the need to protect Nigerians with the need to restore a fuel subsidy that was demonstrably expensive, opaque and poorly targeted.

1. “Nigerians need relief, therefore restore subsidy.”

Yes, Nigerians need relief. But the relevant question is which form of relief gives the greatest benefit to the greatest number of Nigerians?

The World Bank found that Nigeria's petrol subsidy was costly, regressive and opaque, with better-off households capturing a disproportionate share of the benefit. Between 2019 and 2022 alone, the subsidy cost Nigeria more than ₦8.6 trillion.

So the argument cannot simply be

“People are suffering, therefore subsidise petrol.”

It must answer

Why should scarce public money be used to subsidise a product in a way that disproportionately benefits people who consume more fuel?

2. “Cheaper petrol will make food cheaper.”

This sounds logical, but it is not that simple.

Fuel is only one component of food prices. Farmers also face fertiliser costs, labour costs, insecurity, storage losses, electricity costs, exchange-rate pressures, financing costs and poor transportation infrastructure.

The World Bank itself acknowledged that subsidy removal contributed to inflationary pressure and significantly increased gasoline prices, but it simultaneously argued that the old subsidy was fiscally unsustainable and that Nigeria needed to redirect resources toward infrastructure, social protection and productive investment.

Therefore, cheaper petrol does not automatically equal cheaper food. Not in this economy not in any economy, sir.

If it did, Nigeria would have solved its food crisis years ago simply by keeping petrol artificially cheap.

3. “Nigeria is an oil-producing country, therefore Nigerians deserve cheap fuel.”

This is emotionally compelling but economically incomplete.

Nigeria produces crude oil; it does not mean every litre of petrol can be supplied to Nigerians below its economic cost without somebody paying the difference. This one, we always get wrong when we argue why are we paying much for what we produce.

If government sells petrol below cost, the subsidy must ultimately come from somewhere and yes it is taxes, oil revenue, borrowing, reduced public spending, or monetary financing.

And Nigeria already demonstrated the danger.

The World Bank reported that Nigeria's subsidy could exceed ₦5 trillion in 2022, while warning that the subsidy primarily benefited wealthier households and crowded out spending on health, education and social protection.

So the question is not “Does Nigeria have oil?”

The question is

“Is subsidising petrol the most efficient way to transfer Nigeria's oil wealth to the poorest Nigerians?”

The overwhelming evidence says a capital NO.

4. “The subsidy enriched middlemen, so create a better subsidy.”

This is actually the strongest part of the issue —but it undermines the argument for a broad subsidy rather than strengthening it.

If the problem was corruption, opacity and rent-seeking, why recreate the same enormous financial pipeline and simply promise that this time it will be transparent?

The better solution is targeted intervention

public transport support, targeted cash transfers, agricultural logistics, mass transit, cheaper energy for productive businesses and investment in domestic refining.

The World Bank explicitly recommended expanding social protection and targeted support to cushion vulnerable households rather than returning to the old subsidy structure.

5. “But subsidy removal has made Nigerians poorer.”

This criticism has genuine merit, no lies on that—but it does not prove that subsidy restoration is the answer. I don't believe because it lacks evidence.

The World Bank itself acknowledged that the reforms produced severe short-term pain. Petrol prices rose by an average of 163% following the initial reform, while inflation reached 33.7% in April 2024.

The same World Bank, however, concluded that Nigeria needed to stay the course on subsidy reform while strengthening social protection, cutting government waste and redirecting resources toward development.

In other words

The evidence supports cushioning Nigerians from the consequences of subsidy removal—not resurrecting the subsidy itself.



The Pastor Kay says Nigeria must not “enrich middlemen.”

Agreed.

But a broad fuel subsidy historically required enormous public expenditure to keep pump prices below market-linked costs.

So where is the evidence that a new subsidy mechanism will avoid the very leakage, opacity and distributional problems that made the previous system so controversial?

Who gets the subsidy?

How much does each litre receive?

Who verifies actual consumption?

How are fraudulent claims prevented?

Who audits the subsidy account?

What happens when international crude prices rise?

What happens when the naira depreciates?

What is the annual fiscal ceiling?

And most importantly

what expenditure will government sacrifice to finance it?

Those questions cannot be answered with “Nigerians are suffering.”

7. The uncomfortable numbers matter.

The World Bank estimated that Nigeria's petrol subsidy cost more than ₦8.6 trillion between 2019 and 2022 and described it as benefiting relatively better-off consumers while contributing to black-market activity and smuggling.

That money could have financed enormous amounts of infrastructure, healthcare, education and targeted poverty programmes.

This is why the argument must go beyond emotion.

Nobody should celebrate hardship.

Nobody should dismiss Nigerians who cannot afford transportation.

Nobody should pretend subsidy removal has been painless.

But badly designed relief is still bad economic policy simply because it feels compassionate.

Nigeria needs to protect poor Nigerians without recreating a fiscal black hole.

If Atiku's proposal is for a strictly temporary, transparent, capped and independently audited intervention, with measurable benefits going specifically to vulnerable households and productive sectors, then present the numbers.

Show the financing model.

Show the beneficiaries.

Show the anti-corruption mechanism.

Show the fiscal ceiling.

Show what happens when oil prices fall.

Show how the subsidy will not again become another trillion-naira rent-seeking machine.

My Take On This.

My Nigeria, My Nation

I believe this is stage 4 trauma speaking through her.
My prayers are with her and her children.

This was a well deserved victory for The Osun People, congratulations Mr Governor

He shock everyone, Victory for the people of Osun and Nigeria

More concepts designs, kindly like and share thanks.

More concepts for the designs, which do you like

More designs for Close Up, I was thinking of Going against the traditional pack

Hi, I made some concept designs for Close Up please rate, thanks.
Kindly note
These are AI although I have my sketches and references images for my designs. Thank you.