Opinion
Tinubu’s Subsidy Removal And The Albatross Hunting Nigerians, by Rayyan Alhassan
Fuel subsidy removal by the present administration of President Bola Tinubu has come with a thunderous alarm. Although the intention may be good, pure and sincere, and in fact it is even noble but the reality now is that it is severely haunting everyone. adsbygoogle || []).push({}); googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js"> Both the haves and haves-not are wailing. It is dealing a fatal knockout punch on teeming citizens, whose lives have since been made miserable and wretched. The Nigerian economy had almost strangulated them.
But it appears that the ‘ill-conceived’ idea to abruptly end the payment of subsidy by the Federal Government will finish the ‘job’. Less than two months after the ‘Petrol Subsidy is Gone’ proclamation by the President, on the occasion of his May 29 inauguration as Nigeria’s 16th leader, life has become unbearable and hopeless for many Nigerians.
Survival is now only for the fittest. The hope that their ugly fortunes will turn around under a Jagaban Presidency may just be fading away, or so it seems. The hue and cry over the subsidy removal may have since simmered. But the painful groaning by citizens will not just end. Nigerians are already battling to cope with the new normal of soaring transportation costs, and food prices’ inflation, among other negative impacts of the subsidy policy review.
With the harsh economic reality now starring everyone on the face – except the political class, possibly – the few men and women of good conscience left among us, who additionally have Tinubu’s ears must not remain docile. If it is possible, they should impress Mr. President to totally backtrack his decision on fuel subsidy. It will be patriotic, if not exemplary.
Tinubu has no choice but to wade in. He must arrest the socio-economic bedlam, triggered by not only the subsidy removal he singularly orchestrated. But the recent hike in the price of Premium Motor Spirit, PMS. On Tuesday, 18th July 2023, the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited, NNPCL, offered Nigerians a ‘sumptuous desserts’.
But the desserts were not the ones that will be nutritious to the body. That is just how we should describe the hike of fuel price to N617 from N537, by the NNPCL. The NNPCL and its apologists have attributed the latest increment to market forces at play.
But the organized Labour and other workers’ unions, together with some prominent Nigerians won’t stomach it. The Nigerian Labour Congress, NLC, described the recent increase in pump price as a threat to the socio-economic well-being of the citizens. It feared that the price of fuel would hit N1,000 per litre soon.
As for the Nigerian Union of Journalists, NUJ, the new price regime of PMS is an “over kill”. “We are saddened by the fact that today, most people can hardly commute to work or other places of business without too much stress, because the embarrassing sudden surge in petrol prices has made it so,” the NUJ said, in a statement issued by Shuaibu Usman Liman, its National Secretary.
The arbitrary hike of fuel cost to N617 will absolutely hurt Nigerians, and in many diverse ways too. For instance, it will make a large section of the country’s population fall deeper below the poverty net, while consumer spending’, and purchasing power will depreciate.
On one hand, the petrol hike has the potential to prevent manufacturers from producing below their targeted capacities, even as so many firms operating as private sector organisations will be forced to downsize their workforce. As things stand now, the cost of most goods and services have already hit the rooftop. And if care is not taken, Nigeria should be preparing to battle looming food insecurity, together with other life-tormenting emergencies.
With Boko Haram fighters, the Islamic State of West African Province (ISWAP) terrorists, armed bandits, oil thieves, kidnappers and a host of other criminals already holding the country to ransom, this hike will blow only an ill wind. It is verily going to escalate all sorts of criminalities in the land, as many youths and citizens get impoverished. This should not be what is heralding the Tinubu era, in Nigeria’s modern evolution.
Meanwhile, contrary to what many of us are forced to believe, Nigeria is not the only country in the world that subsidizes energy products like petrol or even some basic public services that its citizens enjoy. In fact, developed or advanced nations like the United States, France, Germany and the United Kingdom, UK, also do.
About $50 billion is what the United States is estimated to be spending annually to subsidize fossil fuel energy derivatives, including petrol and diesel for its citizens. Last year alone, two world superpowers – China and Russia – expended a mind-boggling $130 billion and $30 billion to subsidize energy, respectively for their citizens. And this is because they prioritize energy security as a matter of national security.
How about the UK? It has a $100 billion rolling subsidy scheme [energy price cap] for energy consumers in the country. Germany, on the other hand, is proposing to spend €5 billion this year alone, in subsidizing energy for manufacturers. Norway, another European nation, has already extended subsidy on electricity for its citizens into 2024.
It is ironic that Nigerian government officials, some ignorant citizens and arm-chair economists are hailing Tinubu for ending the subsidy regime. How they fail to realize that abrogating subsidy is the surest way of impoverishing teeming Nigerians. But they need to be enlightened.
Unlike Nigeria, oil-producing countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Angola, Venezuela and Iran are not contemplating doing away with it (subsidy), at least for now. On the contrary, they are providing generous subsidies for a range of fossil fuel energy derivatives like petrol, diesel and cooking gas for their citizens, as benefits of their natural endowments with hydrocarbons.
Let everyone who cares to listen, especially our leaders, know that corruption, low productivity, insecurity and mismanagement of Nigeria’s oil and gas assets and resources, are chief reasons the country is finding it difficult to meet its obligation of energy security to its citizens, unlike the aforementioned countries.
The idea of dishing out palliative items and provisions to distraught citizens will be welcomed, at any time. But only an insensitive government would have gone ahead with the disbursement of the proposed N8,000 handout as palliative to a phantom 12 million low-income Nigerians.
That President Tinubu eventually made a volte-face on the ‘sharing’ of the worthless N8,000 to some ‘poor citizens’ is one informed decision that has saved his government’s face. But it won’t be erasing the scar of bruises or heal the injury of the subsidy removal, many Nigerians suffered.
That is why Mr. President must think out-of-the-box in engineering a practical solution to the hardship citizens have been experiencing, since the Day One of his administration, following a pronouncement made without careful thought for the masses and their plights. To yearn for the days of the fuel subsidy will be wishing Nigeria doom.
But of what use is a policy directive that inflicts only pain, rather than ameliorate the collective hardship citizens are facing? I will leave that to you, the reader, and then of course, those who are presently saddled with the responsibility of sailing the Nigerian ship to the Promise Land, to ponder over.
As for our dear President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, an ample opportunity is still waiting for you to correct one perceived wrong against Nigerians. I am talking about ending fuel subsidy payments, without putting in place necessary measures to cushion the prevailing socio-economic turmoil in our polity.
Mr Alhassan, a social critic, wrote from Abuja
Author Profile
Latest entries
OpinionNovember 4, 2025#Ebinpawa: Nigerians Decry Tinubu’s Anti-social Policies, Ask — Can Awolowo Ever Do This?
NewsNovember 2, 2025Nnamdi Kanu: US-Based Cleric Demands His Immediate Release, Cite Reason
PoliticsJuly 6, 2025Kogi Mass Defection: Ex-Gov Yahaya Bello the Master Strategist
PoliticsJuly 5, 2025Mass Defection: Ododo’s Promise to APC Bears Fruit as Thousands Join Party In Kogi
Opinion
Rep Members Do Not Sell Contracts: Boniface Adie Must Cease the Barefaced Lies Against Hon. Peter Akpanke
By Clement Abuo
Marcus Tullius Cicero (106–43 BCE), the renowned Roman orator, lawyer, statesman, and philosopher, once observed that “as fire, when thrown into water, is cooled and extinguished, so also a false accusation, when brought against a man of pure and holy character, boils over, dissipates, and vanishes.
adsbygoogle || []).push({});
”
This timeless reflection aptly captures the nature of the unfounded and misleading allegations recently made against Hon. Peter Akpanke. Lies, no matter how loudly proclaimed or persistently repeated, cannot outweigh truth, integrity, and a record of noble character.
It is therefore unsurprising that the accusations leveled against Hon. Peter Akpanke collapsed under the slightest scrutiny. No reasonable or fair-minded individual can take seriously allegations coming from a man who openly admits to fraudulent conduct and then paradoxically turns around to claim victimhood.
Such contradictions strip the accusations of credibility from the outset.
To state the facts clearly and unequivocally, members of the House of Representatives—just like their counterparts in the Senate—do not sell contracts. They do not own contracts, they do not bid for contracts, and they do not execute contracts. Their constitutional role is limited to nominating constituency projects, after which the relevant ministries, departments, and agencies handle procurement and execution in line with established procedures. Any claim suggesting otherwise is either born out of ignorance or driven by deliberate malice.
Against this backdrop, one is compelled to question the motive behind Boniface Adie’s hurried dash to the public space with such poorly constructed allegations. He openly admitted to giving out money to “buy” contracts, without pausing to consider the legal, moral, and logical implications of such a claim. How does one admit to an act of corruption and then expect public sympathy? More importantly, how does one claim to buy what does not exist in the custody of a legislator?
Boniface Adie further attempted to emotionally blackmail the public by dragging Hon. Peter Akpanke into his family matter, citing the illness and eventual death of his brother. He admitted that Hon. Akpanke showed concern and reached out, yet he argued that the Honourable Member was obligated to shoulder the entire medical expenses simply because he represents the constituency. This line of reasoning is not only illogical but also reveals a gross misunderstanding of the responsibilities of a lawmaker.
A member of the House of Representatives cannot possibly attend to every personal challenge faced by constituents while simultaneously performing legislative duties—participating in debates, sponsoring bills, raising motions, and advocating for infrastructure and development. Such expectations are unrealistic and, frankly, unreasonable.
Despite this, Hon. Peter Akpanke has consistently gone beyond the limits of his constitutional mandate. He has organized general health outreaches across his constituency, offering free medical services to individuals facing serious health challenges and who cannot afford even basic check-ups.
Those requiring treatment have received care, while others in need of medication support have been assisted financially. These humanitarian gestures, though not required by law, have been undertaken voluntarily and with genuine compassion.
It is therefore deeply uncharitable and misleading to suggest that Hon. Peter Akpanke must personally shoulder every hardship faced by every constituent.
In what can only be described as desperation, Boniface Adie went as far as urging a television station, during a live broadcast, to call the wife of Hon. Peter Akpanke to explain an alleged contractual transaction. One must ask: since when do contractual dealings between two consenting adults require spousal interrogation—especially on live television?
This action exposes the extent to which sensationalism and blackmail were being prioritized over truth and ethics.
Boniface Adie attempted to justify this reckless behavior by claiming that Hon. Peter Akpanke was unreachable. This claim is disingenuous, as he was fully aware of the Honourable Member’s office address and had, by his own admission, contacted him repeatedly, sometimes through his aide.
The decision by the television station to proceed with the broadcast despite knowing that Hon. Akpanke was unavailable raises serious ethical questions. Should Hon. Akpanke later establish his innocence conclusively, how does one undo the reputational damage caused by such premature and one-sided accusations?
Equally troubling is Boniface Adie’s claim that he was approached to buy contracts to fund his election after a failed attempt to become a local government chairman. According to him, this approach was made by someone he identified as “Charlie Emeji,” allegedly an aide to Hon. Peter Akpanke. However, there is no individual by that name serving as an aide to Hon. Akpanke. This fact alone casts significant doubt on the authenticity of the entire story.
Furthermore, Boniface Adie admitted that the so-called meeting took place without the presence of Hon. Peter Akpanke. If that is the case, then it is only logical to conclude that impersonation with the intent to extort may have occurred. Anyone can claim to be an aide to a public office holder, especially when such impersonation serves personal gain.
Boniface Adie must therefore clarify his contradictory claims.
In one instance, he said he paid money to buy contracts; in another, he said the money was meant to facilitate contracts. Both claims are mutually inconsistent and unsupported by verifiable evidence. As already established, members of the House of Representatives do not own contracts and cannot sell or facilitate what is not within their authority.
It would have been more prudent to allow room for peaceful and amicable resolution of any perceived grievance, rather than embarking on a smear campaign fueled by speculation, inconsistencies, and political undertones.
As elections approach, it is not unusual for political opponents to clutch at straws in their bid to discredit perceived threats. Unfortunately, individuals of weak judgment often allow themselves to be used as tools for such schemes, lending their voices to narratives designed to mislead the public.
Hon. Peter Akpanke remains a dedicated, diligent, and hardworking representative of the Obudu/Bekwara/Akamkpa (OBA) Federal Constituency. He has consistently raised motions in the House and advocated policies aimed at improving the welfare of his people. His constituents continue to express satisfaction with his representation.
He has executed numerous constituency projects geared toward transforming infrastructure and improving living standards across OBA. In the education sector, he has supported students through scholarships, sponsorship of JAMB forms, renovation of classrooms, and other impactful interventions.
It is only fair and reasonable to allow Hon. Peter Akpanke to continue the work for which the people entrusted him with their mandate.
Boniface Adie must therefore desist from being used as a cheap instrument of blackmail by political actors nursing failed ambitions and plotting toward 2027.
Clement Abuo is an Abuja-based public affairs analyst and commentator. He can be reached at clemabuo@gmail.com.
Author Profile
Latest entries
PoliticsApril 20, 2026Kogi Central APC Stakeholders Kick Against Imposition of Unpopular Candidate Endorse Obaro
Steel and MineApril 19, 2026Nigeria Deepen Bilateral Ties With India to Develop the Steel and Mines Industry
NewsApril 6, 2026Easter: Nigeria Must Do Better, NGIJ Warns Amid Rising Insecurity
LegislativeApril 4, 2026NGIJ Targets Stronger Democracy Through Partnership with NILDS
Opinion
LIES VS FACTS: Revisiting The Aregbesola Years In Osun
By Gbenga Shaba
Public debates about Rauf Aregbesola’s time as Osun governor often swing between praise and criticism, but many arguments overlook the economic realities of that period. The nationwide recession from 2014 to 2016 hit state finances hard, with 23 states unable to pay salaries at all.
adsbygoogle || []).push({});
Osun faced a sharp drop in federal allocation and internally generated revenue, forcing difficult decisions.
One of the biggest misconceptions is that Aregbesola intentionally paid half salaries. In reality, the Labour Government Salary Apportionment Committee, which was made up of labour leaders and government officials, jointly agreed on a temporary modulated payment structure to prevent mass layoffs. Throughout the recession, over 70 percent of workers (junior staff, teachers, health workers and local government employees) continued receiving full salaries and pensions. The modulation applied mainly to senior officers and political appointees.
Another widespread falsehood is that Aregbesola’s successor, Gboyega Oyetola, inherited the salary modulation. Records show this is untrue. A few outstanding balances of the modulated salaries were already cleared before Aregbesola handed over, and full salary payment had resumed eight months before the end of his administration.
Beyond the salary debate, Osun continued major development programmes. The School Feeding initiative served 254,000 pupils daily and later became a national policy. Thousands of classrooms were constructed or rebuilt, the OYES youth programme absorbed unemployed youths, and road projects continued across the state despite the financial strain.
It is true that the recession created emotional and financial pain for many families, and their feelings are valid. But emotions cannot replace verified facts. Transparency was maintained throughout the crisis, and Aregbesola’s strong grassroots support today reflects public recognition of his long term developmental impact.
The Aregbesola years were a mix of economic challenges and visible transformation. Narratives based on half truths may trend online, but they cannot erase the documented reforms, infrastructural investments and social programmes that reshaped Osun during one of Nigeria’s toughest economic periods.
Author Profile
Latest entries
PoliticsApril 20, 2026Kogi Central APC Stakeholders Kick Against Imposition of Unpopular Candidate Endorse ObaroSteel and MineApril 19, 2026Nigeria Deepen Bilateral Ties With India to Develop the Steel and Mines IndustryNewsApril 6, 2026Easter: Nigeria Must Do Better, NGIJ Warns Amid Rising InsecurityLegislativeApril 4, 2026NGIJ Targets Stronger Democracy Through Partnership with NILDS
Opinion
Is Nigeria Becoming A Failed State Under President Tinubu?
By Gbenga Shaba
Nigeria is currently at one of the most troubling security crossroads in its history. The scale and frequency of violent attacks, mass abductions, territorial infiltration by bandits and terror groups, and the collapse of safety in many communities have raised serious questions about the capacity of the state to protect its citizens.
com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js">
When a government begins to lose the ability to secure lives, enforce law and order, and guarantee the safety of children in schools, the debate about state failure becomes unavoidable.
Across the northern region, the wave of kidnappings and attacks has forced governments to take drastic measures. Katsina State ordered the immediate closure of all government schools. Taraba State directed that all secondary schools should operate only as day schools. These decisions were not made out of convenience. They were made out of fear. They were made because students have become targets, and schools have become vulnerable grounds. Education, the foundation of national development, is now under threat.
In recent weeks, the scale of kidnappings has escalated sharply. In Niger State, 34 students and three teachers were abducted from a government secondary school. They spent several days in captivity, enduring harsh conditions with limited food and water. Negotiations for their release were tense, with parents and authorities working tirelessly to secure their safe return. In Kebbi State, more than 40 children and 10 staff members were abducted from a private academy. The victims described being blindfolded, bundled into vehicles, and transported through forested areas under armed guard. In several other incidents across Kaduna, Zamfara, and Katsina, hundreds of men, women, and children have been taken in separate attacks, some held for weeks before rescue or ransom payments were made.
As if that was not enough, just few hours ago, some residents of Isapa in Kwara were abducted. Pregnant women, nursing mothers and children were allegedly abducted.
The ordeal for these children and their families is traumatic. Parents live in constant fear of the next attack, and even when children are rescued, they often return home in shock and fear. Many students have developed anxiety about returning to school, and communities are traumatized, with the memories of abduction and violence lingering long after the victims are freed.
Even more worrying is the deepening culture of ransom payments. Reports indicate that over ₦1 billion has been paid to bandits in recent weeks alone. This alarming trend not only empowers criminal networks but also signals the state’s weakening control. When kidnappers see consistent payouts from the government or local authorities, it encourages further attacks, creating a vicious cycle of fear and extortion.
This raises a critical question: Is Nigeria drifting toward a failed state under the current administration?
A country moves toward failure when the government can no longer protect its citizens, secure its borders, enforce laws, provide essential services, and maintain public confidence. Judged by these indicators, Nigeria is showing many worrying signs. The strength of non-state armed groups is rising. Large parts of the country are becoming ungoverned spaces. Communities are living under constant fear. Schools are shutting down. Businesses are relocating. Farmers are abandoning their fields. Ordinary Nigerians no longer trust the state to safeguard their lives.
President Tinubu came into office with promises of firm action on security. Nearly two years later, the practical reality suggests that insecurity is expanding faster than the response to it. Despite efforts by the security agencies, violent groups remain active and resilient. The lives of citizens are increasingly threatened, and the confidence in government’s capacity to reverse the trend is weakening.
It is therefore understandable when analysts conclude that the government is failing in the area of security. Citizens like Deacon Olanrewaju have voiced what many Nigerians feel: children are now staying at home not because of a pandemic but because of fear. Communities are shutting down not because of a virus but because of terror. The country is experiencing a form of paralysis driven by violence and fear.
Just like COVID-19, insecurity is gradually locking Nigeria down.
During the COVID era, movement was restricted, economic activities were disrupted, and schools were forced to close. Today, Nigeria is witnessing the same pattern, but the cause is not a global disease. It is insecurity. Communities are avoiding travel. States are closing schools. Businesses are shrinking their operations. Citizens live indoors once the sun sets. The sense of national freedom is shrinking under the weight of fear.
Nigeria may not yet be officially classified as a failed state, but the signs are becoming too visible to ignore. Without urgent, intelligent, and coordinated action, the country risks sliding deeper into a security crisis that will be harder to reverse.
Just like Simon Kolawole recalls what President Bola Tinubu said years ago. I recall that on November 5, 2014, in Ilorin, Kwara State, at a rally organised by Governor Abdulfatah Ahmed to declare his second-term bid, the APC leaders spoke one after the other about insecurity in Nigeria. Among those in attendance were Gen Muhammadu Buhari, then a presidential aspirant, Alhaji Abubakar Atiku, also an aspirant, Rt Hon Aminu Tambuwal, then speaker of the house of reps, and Alhaji Lai Mohammed, then the APC spokesman. Tinubu, who was the national leader of the party, said I saw the sea of refugees caused by the Boko Haram insurgents and the lies coming from Jonathan’s administration. They have exhibited failure, lack of capacity, vision and creativity.
He went further. The lies of yesterday are what they repeat today and are what they will repeat tomorrow. If you control the armed forces and you are the Commander-in-Chief, why should any part of this country be under occupation? And you give us excuses every day. In any civilised country, Jonathan should have resigned. But if he will not resign, he should wait for our broom. We will sweep him away.
They swept Jonathan away. But here we are, a decade later.
Tinubu is now the Commander-in-Chief, but Nigeria remains under siege. We could poke fun at the APC today and say they are only getting a dose of their own medicine. But it is human lives, the lives of Nigerians, that we are talking about here. We are talking about a reign of terror, about helpless Nigerians being abducted, about hapless Nigerians being killed for fun. If nothing else, it should make us sober. If nothing else, we should learn from our past and put politics aside regarding matters of security.
This is the moment for honest reflection and decisive leadership. What Nigeria faces today is not just a temporary challenge. It is a test of the state’s ability to protect its people and preserve its sovereignty. The longer this insecurity wave continues, the closer the nation moves toward the edge of failure.
Author Profile
Latest entries
PoliticsApril 20, 2026Kogi Central APC Stakeholders Kick Against Imposition of Unpopular Candidate Endorse ObaroSteel and MineApril 19, 2026Nigeria Deepen Bilateral Ties With India to Develop the Steel and Mines IndustryNewsApril 6, 2026Easter: Nigeria Must Do Better, NGIJ Warns Amid Rising InsecurityLegislativeApril 4, 2026NGIJ Targets Stronger Democracy Through Partnership with NILDS