News

[OPINION] BUHARI: The Man Who Missed Redemption

Published

10 months ago

July 16, 2025

By Israel Adebiyi

In literature, few tales haunt the conscience as profoundly as that of Jean Valjean in Victor Hugo’s Les Misérables. A former convict hardened by the cruelty of the world, Valjean was presented a second chance—one forged in grace, offered through the kindness of a Bishop. That moment became the fulcrum on which his life turned, from darkness to light, from bitterness to redemption. Hugo’s message was clear: second chances, rare and divine, must not be squandered.

Sadly, Nigeria’s former President, Muhammadu Buhari, squandered his.

Twice gifted with the reins of power—first as a military Head of State from 1983 to 1985, and later as a democratically elected President from 2015 to 2023—Buhari had before him a canvas few in history are offered. He had the rare privilege of rewriting his story, of cleansing the stain of his authoritarian past with the balm of democratic growth, reform, and inclusion. But instead, Nigerians witnessed a man whose second coming bore frightening resemblance to his first.

As a military leader, Buhari ruled with an iron fist, cloaked in the garb of national discipline. His regime dismantled civil liberties, wielded decrees like cudgels, and created a climate where dissent was criminalized. The infamous Decree Number 2 gave the state security service the authority to detain individuals indefinitely without charge—essentially legalizing tyranny. Decree Number 4, arguably more draconian, muzzled the press, silenced truth, and enshrined fear.

The civil service was purged, not reformed. About 200,000 workers were reportedly shown the door in a wave of retrenchment that carried no clear vision for recovery or sustainability. Strikes were banned. Musicians like Fela Kuti were jailed. Corruption trials, while applauded by some, often bore the unmistakable scent of vendetta. Public officers were bundled into prison cells—some deservedly, others questionably. The National Security Organization (NSO) became a state-sanctioned menace.

It was in this furnace of repression that Buhari carved his reputation as rigid, unyielding, and unlistening.

Three decades later, Buhari returned, this time cloaked in the hope of democracy. Nigerians, wearied by years of underperformance, chose to believe in the rebranded General. This was a man, they thought, who had tasted the winepress of power and would now offer water to a thirsty nation. In 2015, he was swept into office on a wave of hope. Eight years later, that wave had receded, leaving behind the wreckage of dashed expectations.

Under his civilian rule, the country found itself battered on all fronts. The economy floundered under inconsistent policies and excessive borrowing. Inflation rose with a vengeance, while unemployment surged. National insecurity expanded with an alarming boldness—banditry, terrorism, and kidnappings claimed thousands of lives. Entire communities vanished overnight. Farmers abandoned their lands. Parents mourned their abducted children. And the president remained largely aloof, a distant figure in the Villa, often silent when his voice was most needed.

Even the petroleum sector—Buhari’s personal portfolio as Minister—suffered under an opaque, inefficient regime. The refineries remained comatose, salaries paid for jobs not done, and fuel subsidies ballooned into bottomless pits of corruption. Nigeria, Africa’s top oil producer, couldn’t provide fuel to her citizens without long queues and inflated prices. It was an irony so cruel it could only be Nigerian.

Then came #EndSARS, the haunting proof that the voice of the Nigerian youth—brimming with pain, anger, and frustration—had reached its boiling point. Instead of dialogue, the administration responded with force. On October 20, 2020, at the Lekki Tollgate, gunshots echoed in a night of horror, and a nation’s hope was drenched in blood. The president’s silence was louder than the bullets. A moment for empathy and leadership was missed. It revealed a government disconnected from the emotional temperature of its people, especially the young who had dared to ask for better.

If that was emotional violence, then the Naira redesign policy was economic. Near the twilight of his administration, a sudden, chaotic push to swap the nation’s currency, allegedly to curb vote-buying and mop up excess cash, plunged Nigerians into financial paralysis. ATMs went dry, queues grew wild, and families scrambled just to afford food. Markets stalled, businesses collapsed, and citizens were humiliated in their own banks. It was a policy executed with such shocking lack of empathy that even his most ardent defenders found themselves bewildered. A president once sold as the messiah had returned as an indifferent king.

As his tenure crawled to a close, many looked back not with nostalgia, but with numbing relief. His second coming, hoped to be redemptive, proved retrogressive. Not only did he fail to correct the wrongs of the past, he institutionalized new ones: nepotism cloaked as federal character, ethno-religious favoritism masquerading as competence, and an inability to build bridges across the nation’s many divides.

Upon his passing, Nigeria did not weep with reverence, but reflected with resignation. The tributes that poured in were often polite, diplomatic, and carefully worded. But beneath them all was a collective sigh—a sense of a man who had been given everything, and yet changed very little.

In the end, Muhammadu Buhari’s tale reads not like that of a redeemer, but a ruler who walked twice through the corridors of power and left the halls colder than he met them. Even in death, his name has evoked more sighs than salutes.

He could have been the one to restore dignity to the Nigerian state, to reimagine governance, to redefine leadership. Instead, he will be remembered as the man who had two chances—and failed twice.

History will not be cruel to him—it will merely be truthful. And in that truth lies his legacy: not one of transformation, but of a tragic, missed redemption.

Adieu “Mai gaskiya”!

News

Xenophobic Attacks: Oshiomhole Tells FG To Retaliate Against South African Companies In Nigeria

Published

6 hours ago

May 5, 2026

Editor

Senator Adams Oshiomhole has called on the Federal Government to retaliate against South African businesses operating in Nigeria following the recent attacks on Nigerians in South Africa.

Speaking during plenary on Tuesday, Oshiomhole said the Federal Government should consider revoking the working license of South African owned companies such as MTN and DSTV.

He argued that Nigeria must respond firmly to what he described as persistent hostility against its citizens.

“I am not going to shed tears. If you hit me, I hit you. I think it is appropriate in diplomacy. It is an economic struggle,” Oshiomhole said.

He argued that while some South Africans accuse Nigerians of taking their jobs, Nigerians should return home and take over employment opportunities created by major South African companies operating in the country, including MTN and DSTV.

“When we hit back, the President of South Africa will not only talk but will also go on his knees to recognise that Nigeria cannot be intimidated.

“We will not condone any life being lost. If a crime has been committed under the South African law they have the right to bring any such person to justice, but to kill our people as if we are helpless, we will not allow that,” Oshiomhole added.

DAILY POST reports that several Nigerians in South Africa have reportedly been attacked, and their businesses destroyed, in ongoing xenophobic attacks in the country.

News

IGP Orders Officers Display Name Tag On Uniform, Gives Update On State Police

Published

6 hours ago

May 5, 2026

Editor

The Inspector General of Police, IGP, Tunji Disu, has ordered all police personnel to always have their name tags on their uniforms for easy identification.

Disu disclosed that only police personnel who are undercover are exempted from displaying their name tags.

Speaking on Tuesday, Disu said: “All police officers should have their name tags. All of us on the high table have our names apart from the undercover among us so if you look at all the Commissioners of Police we have our name tags, so it’s not our standard.

News

Court Orders SERAP To Pay DSS Operatives N100m For Defamation

Published

11 hours ago

May 5, 2026

Editor

The High Court of the Federal Capital Territory has ordered a non-governmental organization, the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, SERAP, to pay N100 million as damaged to two operatives of the Department of the State Services, DSS, for unjustly defaming them in some publications.

The court also ordered SERAP to tender public apologies to the defamed officers,
Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele, in two national newspapers, two television stations and its website.

Besides, the organization was also ordered to pay the two operatives N1 million as cost of litigation and 10 percent post-judgment interest annually on the judgment sum until it’s fully liquidated.

Justice Yusuf Halilu of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory gave the order on Tuesday while delivering judgment in a N5.5 billion defamation suit instituted against SERAP by the DSS operatives.

The judge found SERAP liable for unjustly defaming the two DSS operatives with allegations that they unlawfully invaded its Abuja office, harassed and intimidated its staff, in September 2024.

In the offending publication on its website and Twitter handle, SERAP alleged that the two operatives unlawfully invaded and occupied its office with sinister motives.

The judge held that the publication was in bad taste especially from an organization established to promote transparency and accountability, as nothing in the publication was found to be truthful.

The DSS staff had listed SERAP as 1st defendant in the suit marked CV/4547/2024. SERAP’s Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, was listed as the 2nd defendant.

In the suit, the claimants – Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele – accused the two defendants of making false claims that they invaded SERAP’s Abuja office on September 9, 2024..

Counsel to the DSS, Oluwagbemileke Samuel Kehinde, had while adopting his final address in the mater urged the judge to grant all the reliefs sought by his client in the interest of justice.

He admitted that although the names of the two claimants were not mentioned in the defamation materials, they had however established substantial circumstances that they are the ones referred to in the published defamation article by SERAP on its website.

The counsel submitted that all ingredients of defamation have been clearly established and the offending publication referred to the two officials of the secret police.

However, SERAP, through its counsel, Victoria Bassey from Tayo Oyetibo, SAN, law firm, asked the court to dismiss the suit on the ground that the two claimants did not establish that they were the ones referred to in the alleged defamation materials.

She said that SERAP used “DSS officials” in the alleged offending publication, adding that the two claimants must establish that they are the ones referred to before their case can succeed.

Similar arguments were canvassed by Oluwatosin Adefioye who stood for the second defendant, adding that there was no dispute in the September 9, 2024 operation of DSS in SERAP’s office.

He said that since SERAP in the publication did not name any particular person, the claimants must plead special circumstances that they were the ones referred to as the DSS officials.

Besides, he said that there is no organization by name Department of State Services in law, hence, DSS cannot claim being defamed adding that the only entity known to law is National Security Agency.

The claimants had in the suit stated that the alleged false claim by SERAP has negatively impacted on their reputation.

The DSS also stated, in the statement of claim, that, in line with the agency’s practice of engaging with officials of non-governmental organisations operating in the FCT to establish a relationship with their new leadership, it directed the two officials – John and Ogunleye – to visit SERAP’s office and invite them for a familiarization meeting.

The claimants added that in carrying out the directive, John and Ogunleye paid a friendly visit to SERAP’s office at 18 Bamako Street, Wuse Zone 1, Abuja on September 9 and met with one Ruth, who upon being informed about the purpose of the visit, claimed that none of SERAP’s management staff was in the country and advised that a formal letter of invitation be written by the DSS.

John and Ogundele, who claimed that their interactions with Ruth were recorded, said before they immediately exited SERAP’s office, Ruth promised to inform her organisation’s management about the visit and volunteered a phone number – 08160537202.

They said it was surprising that, shortly after their visit, SERAP posted on its X (Twitter) handle – @SERAPNigeria – that officers of the DSS are presently unlawfully occupying its office.

The claimant added, “On the same day, the defendants also published a statement on SERAP’s website, which was widely reported by several media outfits, falsely alleging that some officers from the DSS, described as “a tall, large, dark-skinned woman” and “a slim, dark skinned man,” invaded their Abuja office and interrogated the staff of the first defendant (SERAP).

John and Ogundele stated that “due to the false statements published by the defendants, the DSS has been ridiculed and criticised by international agencies such as the Amnesty International and prominent members of the Nigerian society, such as Femi Falana (SAN)”.

“Due to the false statements published by the defendants, members of the public and the international community formed the opinion that the Federal Government is using the DSS to harass the defendants.”

They added that the defendants’ statements caused harm to their reputation because the staff and management of the DSS have formed the opinion that the claimants did not follow orders and carried out an unsanctioned operation and are therefore, incompetent and unprofessional.

The claimants therefore prayed the court for the following reliefs: “An order directing the defendants to tender an apology to the claimants via the first defendant’s (SERAP’s) website, X (twitter) handle, two national daily newspapers (Punch and Vanguard) and two national news television stations (Arise Television and Channels Television) for falsely accusing the claimants of unlawfully invading the first defendant’s office and interrogating the first defendant’s staff.

“An order directing the defendants to pay the claimants the sum of N5 billion as damages for the libellous statements published about the claimants.

“Interest on the sum of N5b at the rate of 10 percent per annum from the date of judgment until the judgment sum is realised or liquidated.

“An order directing the defendants to pay the claimants the sum of N50 million as costs of this action.”