News

[OPINION] Lugard: 80 Years After

Published

5 months ago

April 7, 2025

Editor

By Lasisi Olagunju

On 9 June, 1913, Lord Friedrick Lugard minuted on a document that Lagos “could never be made a healthy place.” It was his reaction to a proposed sewage scheme estimated to cost £186,000. He believed that that amount was too vast to expend on an unworthy Lagos. He was Governor of Southern Nigeria at that time.

On January 1, 1914, Lugard became Governor-General of the whole of Nigeria. Thomas S. Gale, who was very critical of his ways, notes that one of Lugard’s first acts “was to close the popular Ereko dispensary in Lagos. He also approved the cancellation of plans for a badly-needed Lagos maternity home” because Lagos people” insisted that it be staffed with indigenous personnel.” Lugard always referenced what he described as “the inherent racial qualities of the coast negro” as justification for the ‘apartheid’ he prescribed for Lagos.

The soil is the crop; the planter the yield. That is why I am writing this. This week marks the 80th anniversary of the death of Lord Lugard. He was the British colonial administrator variously blamed – or praised – for ‘creating’ Nigeria and its principal structural problems. I read him each time I get exasperated by Nigeria; whenever I wonder why we are where we are.

From 1900 to 1906, Lugard was High Commissioner of the Northern Nigeria Protectorate. His blitzkrieg conquered the North but the North counter-conquered him with bewitching love. He was pleased with northern Nigeria and never hid his love for the region and his appreciation for its loyalty to him and to the British crown.

The southern part, particularly Lagos and its environs which he later added to his portfolio, Lugard found very insufferable. His words for the people there share meaning with savagery and its synonyms. Probably if we understand our leaders, past and present, we can design our escape route out of their failure and foibles.

MORE FROM THE AUTHOR: [OPINION] Omololu Olunloyo: An Egret Flies Home

What were Lugard’s legacies in the North? His North had no western schools when he got there and he did very little to alter that situation throughout his years there. Check paragraph 161 of his ‘Report on Amalgamation’ published in December 1919. He later established two schools for the Muslim area of the North. There were 43 mission schools which Lugard wrote were “confined to the non-Muslim districts.” These mission schools, he wrote, enjoyed neither government’s financial assistance nor inspection and control. Lugard did so ‘well’ here for the North such that “at the time of amalgamation, the total number of pupils in government or mission schools was between 700 or 800 out of a population of some nine million.” Those were his words.

The man was lucky. With no western educated elite, he had no opposition, and he did not have to worry about the emirs. They cooperated with him on everything and he reciprocated their good behaviour by not allowing western culture and its Christian missionaries to disturb their region and religion. Earlier in 1903, after he conquered Sokoto, his speech to the new Sultan and his people ended with a charge that he had no issues with Islam. When he conquered Bida “a walled town that had been giving trouble”, his final words were to the effect that “every man was free to worship God in his own way.” He was wise. He later empowered the emirs with indirect rule which came with lucrative salaries and other inducements.

He was wise. He had superior weapons but he didn’t use them after defeating the north in battle. For these, he was respected in palaces and on the streets. He became the lord of the north, his word was law. Then, he was made governor of southern Nigeria in 1912; he came down to Lagos and encountered a set of Africans – negroes who argued with him. He did not find it funny and he acted and reacted so throughout his years in power.

On 28 March, 1913, Lugard, apparently after encountering the educated elite of Lagos, strongly counselled against giving western education to Africans outside Africa. He wrote in a memo: “It appears to me that residence in Europe is bad for the African. He returns at best an insufferable prig; at worst he is a very objectionable person.”

The amalgamation he midwifed was not for any negro to enjoy. It was for his country’s treasury to breathe and for it to use one slave to sustain another in perpetuity. And he said so. In an August 16, 1915 memo, Lugard wrote that “a great native city lives its life as its forebears did and is little affected by progress. Such a community has no desire for municipal improvement. It neither appreciates nor desires clean water, sanitation, or good roads or streets.” He said more than this. You can read it and other things he said and did in Thomas S. Gale’s ‘Segregation in British West Africa’, page 502. That was the man who led northern Nigeria into today’s Nigeria.

MORE FROM THE AUTHOR: OPINION: Akpabio As Oliver Twist [Monday Lines 1]

If anyone thought the white man came to Africa to civilise the uncivilised and show the heathen the way to heaven, Lugard, as early as 1893 knew it was not so and he said so in black and white. He wrote: “It is in order to foster the growth of the trade of this country (Britain) and to find an outlet for our manufacturers and our surplus energy, that our far-seeing statesmen and our commercial men advocate colonial expansion… If our advent in Africa introduced civilisation, peace and good government, abolishes the slave trade, and effects other advantages for Africa, it must not be therefore supposed that this was our sole and only aim in going there. However greatly such objects may weigh with a large and powerful section of the nation, I do not believe that in these days our national policy is based on motives of philanthropy only.” You can read him in his ‘The Rise of Our East Africa Empire’ published in 1893, page 381-382. If that work is too far out of reach, go read Toyin Falola’s ‘Ibadan: Foundation, Growth and Change, 1830-1960’, page 290.

Before Nigeria, Lugard was in several places, doing things his own way. He was in Kenya; then he crossed into Uganda. He chose Kampala as the capital of Uganda and that was after he arrogantly turned down an offer of a camp site from Mwanga, king of the country. That was on the 13th December, 1890. Lugard’s own words best describe his action on this critical occasion: “I declined to accept it nor yet another place shown to me. Eventually I went to the top of a low, gravely knot of waste land and said I would camp there. Its name was Kampala. I got message after message from the king urging me not to use this spot, but I was obstinate and declined to move. Not only was it the only clean and healthy spot around, but I intuitively saw that if I was to do any good in this country it was essential that I should assert my independence from the first, and it appeared to me that Mwanga was even now already engaged solely in finding out to what extent he could order me about, and whether I was afraid of him. Later experience showed me that I had gauged his motives right, nor did he cease thus to endeavour to badger me and pit himself against me in matters of trivial importance, as well as in greater until he learned to his cost that his policy was a mistake.”

Lord Lugard is sorely hated in the South and, I think, very celebrated in the North. The man died on 11 April, 1945. He was 87 years old. When he died, a flurry of reactions and reviews followed his transition. His official biographer, Margery Perham, who wrote in 1945 that Lugard “stands out too far above human stature” denounced some liberals who denounced Lugard “as a dangerous buccaneer.” I saw that in Perham’s ‘Lord Lugard: A General Appreciation’ published in July 1945. The man’s other friends wrote beautiful tributes on him. I read ‘Lugard’ by H. R. Tate, John Eaglesome and Selwyn Grier; published in the July 1945 edition of ‘African Affairs’. If you are interested in what his critics thought of him, you should read ‘Lord F. D. Lugard: An Assessment of His Contribution to Medical Policy in Nigeria’ by Thomas S. Gale. It was published in 1976. For a deeper read of the man and his service to slaves, slavery and slave trade in Nigeria, read ‘Slow Death for Slavery: The Course of Abolition in Northern Nigeria, 1897–1936’ written by historian Paul E. Lovejoy and economist Jan S. Hogendorn. Or read the review ‘Lugard: the Devious Years’ by Barbara M. Cooper. When you read the last two here you can then imagine what sort of leader outlaws slavery without freeing slaves. What kind of man does that?

News

Edo Hospital Denies Complexity In Death Of Twin Babies

Published

5 hours ago

August 26, 2025

Editor

Management of the Med-Vical Medical Centre in Benin City, has denied allegations of medical negligence, secrecy and incompetence in the handling of the very ill extreme pre-term twin babies referred from another facility to them.

Med-Vical Medical Centre is specialized in paediatric and neonatal intensive care services with state of the art facilities for respiratory care and life support

The pre-term babies died on separate days at the neo-natal intensive care centre.

Parents of the babies, Mr. and Mrs. Jerry Sylvester had petitioned the Police calling for discreet investigation into the death of their babies.

They accused the hospital of taking one of the babies to the mortuary without informing them.

But the hospital said the babies were delivered pre-term in another hospital, but subsequently referred from a second private hospital to our facility at about 9pm on July 9th.

The Consultant Paediatrician/Neonatologist of the hospital, Dr. Enato Gertrude said she received the babies who were in a critical condition and diagnosed them to have severe prematurity, severe respiratory distress syndrome, severe neo-natal sepsis and peri-natal asphyxia.

Dr. Enato said despite the fact that the parents of the babies could not provide 50 percent of what was needed to start treatment, they commenced treatment in a race to save the babies.

She said the parents were counseled, informed and their consent sought on every step taken to treat the babies.

Dr. Enato said the first twin died after eight days of being admitted at the facility, while the second one died after three weeks.

According to her, “I wasn’t there at the delivery. I don’t know what transpired. I don’t know everything that happened until they got to our facility which was several hours after the children were born, because they came into our facility very ill.

“When the children came, we diagnosed them and put the babies on the machine and started treatment, there is a minimum deposit that is supposed to be paid. The babies needed tubings, surfactants and caffeine citrate, which are expensive. They are not even readily available over the counter.

“They’re actually specially ordered, specially packaged, and cold chain must be maintained with them. And they are quite expensive. I don’t produce them. I buy them to use for the babies. And it’s supposed to help these babies. So at this point, the parents didn’t have enough money for all of this. I think the father had less than 50% of the money because he said he couldn’t get the money at that time.

“He came to meet me and I just told the billing officer not to bother them, let’s attend to these babies first, collect what he had. So I think then he had just 250,000 or so for each baby. But we were not focusing on the money. We just needed to save the lives of the babies of which we continued the care.

“We placed both babies on the machine and we continued to give antibiotics and oxygen therapy. And at a point, we noticed that the respiratory distress was not getting better and we informed the parents.

“while on admission we noticed the babies had thrombocytopenia (low platelets) and immediately we told the parents to get what they call platelets. Due to the severe sepsis, we also requested for blood culture.

“At a point on day eight, we noticed that the thrombocytopenia for baby two was not getting better despite all that we had done. A diagnosis of severe neonatal sepsis with multiple organ dysfunction and disseminated intravascular coagulation was made.

“So we called the parents and counselled them that we needed to put the baby on the ventilator for complete life support but at this time the baby was bleeding from thrombocytopenia and we carried the parents along. They saw what happened. Despite all our resuscitation efforts for the baby, the baby succumbed to the illness. The father wasn’t happy after we explained everything to him. It was quite painful at that time for everybody.

“Following the passing of the first twin, the father became hostile and we tried to counsel him but he was difficult to get him to calm down. We even suggested referring the second twin to UBTH, but he quickly declined and pleaded for treatment to continue, as they had no where else they preferred to go to.

“We did a lot for these babies to ensure that the second baby continued to live but two weeks after the passing of the first baby, we noticed bleeding continued for the second one despite blood transfusion with platelets administration, and the baby needed a mechanical ventilator (life support).

“We counseled the mother and told the mother that at this point that the baby had poor prognosis. Chances of survival was slim and she said yes that we should continue to do everything she has faith that the baby will survive.

“On wednesday we saw a little bit of improvement but it declined again and the baby had to be continued on mechanical ventilator life support, but the baby succumbed to the illness.”

She said the parents were contacted, the mother came to see the corpse of the child, she left and didn’t return.

“Due to the delay in claiming the corpse after 12 hours of demise and after several attempts to reach the father to no avail, we decided to take the corpse to the mortuary. We never denied the parents access to their child’s corpse.”

The hospital further added that they are committed to transparency and accountability in their operations adding that at Med Vical Medical Centre, patients safety and well-being are top priorities as they strive to provide highest quality care.

News

OPINION: A Voyage To Caligula’s Rome

Published

7 hours ago

August 26, 2025

Editor

By Suyi Ayodele

Rome’s history offers timeless lessons for all nations to jealously guard their freedom. Consider one of its emperors, Caligula: Born Gaius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, he reigned from AD 37 to AD 41. Known as Little Boots, Caligula’s four-year reign epitomised tyranny.

Albert Camus captured his ruthlessness in his 1938 play “Caligula”, while Stephen Dando-Collins’ 2019 book, “Caligula: The Mad Emperor of Rome”, and Kate Zusmann’s article, “Roman Emperor Caligula: The Mad Tyrant of Rome”, give vivid portraits of his excesses.

Zusmann wrote: “Caligula’s reign lasted only four years, but his cruel and unpredictable behavior earned him a reputation as one of the most notorious emperors in Roman history… He engaged in construction projects to emphasize his power and divine status. He humiliated senators by forcing them into menial tasks or public spectacles.”

Though he initially presented himself as a noble leader, he soon became Rome’s worst emperor. He wielded taxation and reckless spending as weapons of control.

One account records: “Caligula squandered 2.7 billion sesterces in his first year and addressed the deficit by confiscating estates, levying fines, and even imposing the death penalty to seize wealth. He crippled the Roman Senate in the process.”

Freed from opposition, he built an extravagant bridge at Baiae and introduced crippling taxes on everything, taverns, artisans, slaves, food, litigation, weddings, even prostitutes and their pimps. Taxes doubled in just four years, leaving ordinary Romans broken and resentful.

Is this not eerily familiar? In some places in Nigeria today, task force agents harass even mourners transporting corpses. They must pay the State.

Caligula’s Rome is a warning. When opposition disappears, tyranny grows unchecked, and taxation becomes limitless. Nigeria is already on that path.

Read this report: “It was gathered that governors on the shopping list of the APC include the Enugu State governor, Peter Ndubuisi Mbah, Bayelsa State governor, Douye Diri, Plateau State governor, Caleb Muftwang and the Zamfara State governor, Alhaji Dauda Lawal.”

That was how the Nigerian Tribune concluded its lead story on page five of its Monday, August 25, 2025, edition, titled: “Tension grips PDP leaders as APC targets more govs.” Two riders followed: “South-East, South-South, North-Central govs on shopping list” and “Tinubu to receive another PDP gov on arrival.”

An average student of Nigeria’s political history should be deeply troubled by this report. The concern is not just the well-known fact that Nigeria’s political elite rarely show fidelity to principles, loyalty, or decency, but rather the imminent danger this trend poses to the survival of democracy and to the ordinary masses.

We must ask ourselves: what awaits the common man if Nigeria slides into a one-party state? Can the current wielder of power – the architect of this emerging no-opposition order – truly manage such a system? If today, under the pretense of multiparty democracy, impunity has already reached its peak, what happens when there is no one left to challenge those in power?

History warns us that we are about to repeat our mistakes. Nigeria has a peculiar habit of forgetting her sordid past. Some call it resilience; I disagree. What we parade as resilience is actually a battered psyche. Nigerians have been beaten into submission by those who weaponized poverty. With crumbs thrown here and there, leaders get away with political robbery. We have been conquered.

The sages warned us that thunder must not be allowed to strike twice in the same place. Their reasoning was simple: if bad history repeats itself, its second coming will be catastrophic – so tragic that no one will have the words to describe it.

That Nigeria is gradually sliding into a one-party state should raise an alarm. Euphemism has no place here. A one-party Nigeria under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is an invitation to disaster. The consequences will not stop with the opposition; even those within the president’s inner circle will eventually taste the venom. Tyrants spare no one—not even their favourites. We are headed down that perilous road.

Make no mistake: a one-party state will kill this democracy. It has happened before—not once, but twice. Some of us lived through it, others read about it. Nigeria lost two republics because those in power chose tyranny and crushed opposition.

The First Republic collapsed when the ruling Northern People’s Congress (NPC) attempted to monopolise political power. It formed alliances, coerced defections, and silenced dissent. Opposition leaders were detained on trumped-up charges. Resistance sparked the violent Operation Wetie in Western Nigeria in 1962. By January 15, 1966, the First Republic was dead.

What followed were the January and July 1966 coups, and then a 30-month civil war that consumed over two million lives. Yet we learnt nothing. When the chance came again in 1979, we squandered it.

MORE FROM THE AUTHOR:OPINION: KWAM1, KWAM2’ And Their Holy Water

By mid-1982, the ruling National Party of Nigeria (NPN) had perfected its plan to decimate opposition. It swallowed the PRP in Kano and Kaduna, captured the NPP in old Anambra, and went after the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN). Oyo and Bendel fell to its onslaught, while only Ondo resisted—and that resistance produced bloodshed. By December 1983, the Second Republic collapsed, swept away by the military coup of Major-General Muhammadu Buhari. For the next 16 years, Nigeria was under the jackboot.

Whichever way we spin it, the truth is clear: the destruction of opposition in both the First and Second Republics laid the foundation for their collapse.

Those who defend the current defections as freedom of association miss the point. We are not disputing that right. What we warn against is the danger of acquiescing while political and economic power concentrate in the hands of one man. As Aesop warned: “Those who voluntarily put power into the hands of a tyrant must not wonder if it be at last turned against themselves.”

Those who think they can collaborate with the ruling party, pledging loyalty in opposition but serving power in secret, should think again. When tyranny consumes a nation, no one is spared. As the proverb goes, when heaven falls, it falls on everyone; the rain has no enemy.

Caligula reigned until his own guards turned on him. Tyranny and rebellion are monozygotic twins. Let today’s plotters of a one-party Nigeria take note.

Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, in “How Democracies Die” (2018), explain it best: democracies rarely collapse through external invasion. They are destroyed from within, through the slow erosion of norms and the ambitions of authoritarian leaders. Nigeria is walking that path again.

Chude Jideonwo and Adebola Williams, in How to Win Elections in Africa (2017), observe that political parties in Nigeria are not built on coherent ideology but on opportunism. The APC, they argue, never stood on any deep philosophy; it merely capitalized on the weaknesses of the PDP. That explains why even serving PDP governors are defecting in droves to join it. But what exactly is the attraction? To answer that, let us revisit one of our old moonlight tales.

Long ago, when animals behaved like humans, Ikún, the deaf squirrel, desired to live as long as mortals. It went to a diviner to seek the Oracle’s blessing.

The divination was swift and stern: for Ikún to live long, it must avoid anything sweet that came from the enemy.

Ikún protested. Why should it shun sweet things when everyone knew it delighted in them?

MORE FROM THE AUTHOR:OPINION: Tinubu And His Northern Teachers

The Oracle replied with finality: What is sweet kills faster than anything else.

Ikún left, troubled. It wondered who its enemy could be. The only one that came to mind was the groundnut farmer, whose produce it relished. Resolving to obey the warning, Ikún avoided the groundnut farm.

The farmer soon noticed that Ikún no longer raided his crops. Suspicious, he tried several tricks. He attempted to smoke Ikún out of its burrow, but failed—for as elders say, òrò burúkú kii ká ikún mó’lé (misfortune never meets the squirrel at home). He tried hunting it at night, but that too failed—for ikún kii jé l’óru (the squirrel never ventures out at night).

At last, the farmer set a trap, using ripe banana as bait. The fruit was carefully placed over the blade, waiting to spring at the slightest tug.

Not long after, Ikún wandered by and spotted the banana. Overjoyed, it rushed forward. Banana was a delicacy, and its sweetness irresistible. Ikún took a bite, wagged its tail, and forgot all about the Oracle’s warning. It bit again, wagged its tail, and then tried to carry the whole banana away.

In a flash, the trap snapped. Ikún was caught between the jaws of death. Too late, it realised the truth: the sweet gift from the enemy was a lure to destruction. With its dying breath, it remembered the Oracle’s words.

Our elders, who preserved this tale, summed it up in the saying: ikun ńjẹ ògèdè, ikún ńrè’dí; ikún ò mọ̀ pé ohun tó dùn mà únpa ènìyàn (the squirrel wags its tail while eating banana, not knowing that what is sweet is what kills a man).

And that, precisely, is what the defecting governors are doing today. The banana from the ruling APC is sweet, but beneath its sweetness lies a deadly trap.

News

PHOTOS: Brazil Welcomes Tinubu With Full Military Honours In Brasília

Published

20 hours ago

August 25, 2025

Editor

Brazil on Monday rolled out full military honours at the Planalto Palace in Brasília to receive President Bola Tinubu.

Tinubu’s Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, disclosed this on X on Monday.

Onanuga said Tinubu was welcomed by his host, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.

He wrote, “More photos of the official reception for President Tinubu at the Planalto Palace in Brasília, Monday, August 25, 2025. Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva welcomed President Bola Tinubu with full military honours.”