News

OPINION: Tinubu, Atiku And The Lion’s Share [Monday Lines 2]

Published

1 year ago

December 16, 2024

By Lasisi Olagunju

Adrian Louis is a witness to what popcorn does in a movie theatre. The American poet’s poems are apparently for Nigeria, a nation in eternal transition: “We gave them corn which, once popped/ into miniature buttered clouds/ gave us the opportunity to watch ourselves: / bloodthirsty, slow-thinking and grunting.”

We need lots of popcorn as we go into the new year. An Atiku Abubakar vs Bola Tinubu spar started last week over where the next president should come from and who the person should be. Tinubu’s man, George Akume, fired the first salvo. He demanded that, “President Tinubu, as a southerner, should be allowed to have a second term, meaning that those eyeing the presidency from the North in 2027 should look beyond that year by waiting till 2031.”

Almost immediately, Tinubu’s ex-friend, ex-(political) bedmate, Atiku Abubakar, came out roaring. He counter-asked that the next president must come from his part of the country, the North, and queried Akume’s sense of justice. “Where, then, does true equity and fairness reside? By the year 2027, the South will have enjoyed 17 years of leadership—eight years under Obasanjo, five years under Jonathan, and four years under Tinubu—while the North will have experienced only 11 years, with Yar’Adua serving three and Buhari eight. This results in a disparity of six years between the North and South, casting a shadow over the balance of power.” That was from Atiku Abubakar.

Tinubu’s man said that Tinubu should be the sole beneficial owner of the future. Atiku spoke about “equity and fairness”. He said “the South will have enjoyed 17 years of leadership…” I read him two, three times and I was tempted to ask him: Did Nigeria start to exist in 1999 when his calculation started? If fairness is the talk, what would have been more equitable than starting our maths from independence, 1960? And, looking forward, why should the future be locked in for just those two lions in our jungle? Why must the future be a continuation of the story of those two who have been major (mis)writers of our democratic story since 1999? Should they forever think all others are stags, food for their lions?

MORE FROM THE AUTHOR: [OPINION]Farotimi: A Trial Of The Supreme Court

People who reason that way obviously think ‘the lion’s share’ should be for the lions. Aesop, storyteller of antiquity, puts what those two think of us in perspective. The story is reproduced here verbatim as told in folklore:

A long time ago, the Lion, the Fox, the Jackal, and the Wolf agreed to go hunting together, sharing with each other whatever they found.

One day the Wolf ran down a deer and immediately called his comrades to divide the spoil.

Without being asked, the Lion placed himself at the head of the feast to do the carving, and, with a great show of fairness, began to count the guests.

“One,” he said, counting on his claws, “that is myself the Lion. Two, that’s the Wolf, three, is the Jackal, and the Fox makes four.”

He then very carefully divided the meat into four equal parts and said: “I take the first portion because of my title since I am addressed as king; the second portion you will assign to me, since I’m your partner; then because I am the strongest, the third will follow me; and an accident will happen to anyone who touches the fourth.” The other animals kept quiet – they dared not talk, and got nothing for their efforts; the king of the jungle took all the benefits. That is the meaning of might; it is always right. It is also the root of ‘the lion’s share’ as an English expression.

MORE FROM THE AUTHOR: OPINION: Mass Murder On River Niger[Monday Lines]

Thomas Grey Wicker was an American political reporter and columnist. He spent a large chunk of his 85 years on earth reporting and writing books. He wrote ‘Facing the Lions’ – a political novel published in 1973. Before then, he wrote ‘The Kingpin’; he wrote ‘The Devil Must’; he wrote ‘The Judgment.’ Then he wrote ‘A Time to Die.’ He wrote many more books, three of them under the pseudonym ‘Paul Connolly.’ But it is to his ‘Facing the Lions’ I turn in discussing Tinubu and Atiku and their ambition to be boss forever. Charmaine Allmon Mosby’s ‘Among the Dog Eaters’, an excellent review of the novel, makes it easy for me to use Wicker here. I encounter in their character Bull Durham Anderson, a political leader who “plays upon the emotions of the masses for power, profit, and place…” and who “does not mind if the ends are contaminated by the means…” Mosby is surprised that the man “frankly admitted misuse of his power, and yet the voters repeatedly returned him to office…” Why? We ask that question here also in Nigeria. The answer may come tomorrow.

This and several other quotes from that novel could well have come from the page of an irreverent Nigerian newspaper columnist: “I’ve known men with good sense otherwise that would swear on the Bible that if (Anderson) stole a dollar he gave ten back in hell to the corporation…” At the man’s death, his son excuses everything he did; he says that his dad was merely “a man like you and me.” Then, he concludes that: “Every vicious thing he did, every law he broke, every man he bought and cheated and ruined, all that power he used for his own ends, the barnyard of corruption he made out of this state – just like it says on there, he was always a man. He did the things men do.”

Why should the next election be about Tinubu and Atiku again? When is rape enough? For daring to ask those questions, I will be asked to shut up and will be reminded that Atiku and Tinubu are doing with our democracy “things men do.” Their men think they are our husbands, and so, whatever they do with us, we are stuck with them just as Wicker’s world is to Durham Anderson. We wait to see. But, perhaps, more immediate is that in the new year, we need lots of popcorn in our theatre. There will be drama – comedy, tragedy, and a combination of both; a salad bowl of claps and raps.

News

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

Published

11 minutes 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

26 minutes 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

5 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.”