Author: user user

I will suggest X-rays of the affected foot to rule out the possibilities of some broken bones. If there are no broken bones, your doctor may need to prescribe some stronger pain killers for you. Make sure you take the drug with food in your stomach and with plenty of water to avoid developing stomach ulcer.

A few days before Nasir El-Rufar’s trending, impassioned September 23 letter talking about the ‘apparent silence’ of friends and family members he had ‘publicly stood by,’ I read social media posts lamenting Emir Muhammadu Sanusi I’s supposed betrayal of El-Rufai in his hour of need, especially in light of the role El-Rufai played in rescuing Sanusi from banishment.

I thought the assumption that Sanusi had abandoned his friend was unfair and that even El-Rufai would be reluctant to reach that conclusion because of the delicate position Sanusi occupies and the practical impossibility of reciprocating what El-Rufai did for him when Abdullahi Ganduje dethroned and banished him.

Then El-Rufai’s letter appeared. El-Rufai did not identify anyone by name, so any identification has to remain inferential. But Sanusi seems to me one of the likeliest people he had in mind.

Some of the other obvious possibilities can be eliminated fairly easily. El-Rufai has already publicly declared Nuhu Ribadu and Uba Sani as ‘former friends’ and accused them of working against him. They therefore hardly qualify as the friends whose true relationship with him revealed itself in his moment of personal adversity.

Tinubu is also an awkward fit because El-Rufai has publicly insisted that he and Tinubu were ‘never friends’ in the personal sense. In any case, he is being detained by Tinubu’s government with what seems like Tinubu’s express imprimatur.

And people such as Atiku Abubakar and Rotimi Amaechi have publicly spoken about El-Rufai’s predicament. Atiku and Amaechi have even put his name as a member of their presidential campaign council. That makes silence a poor description of their conduct.

Sanusi fits El-Rufai’s language more snugly. El-Rufai writes that some people may ‘deny our relationship or try rewriting history’ and says his experience may cause him to ‘reconsider the nature of certain relationships.’

He begins by referring to friends whom he had ‘publicly stood by.’ He recalls having ‘stood by people’ in difficult circumstances.

He says he expected no ‘gratitude or reciprocity.’ He then speaks of people he had supported making their own choices ‘now that circumstances are reversed,’ and says he bears no resentment toward anyone who chooses ‘not to do the same for me.’

Toward the end, he even invokes ‘ingratitude.’ Read as a whole, the letter keeps circling back to a very specific moral ledger, which is (1), standing by people when they were in trouble, (2), circumstances are now reversed and some of those people have chosen silence or indifference. That is precisely why Sanusi comes so readily to mind.

The language in the letter suggests a personal, not a political, relationship whose depth was publicly known, particularly one in which El-Rufai had conspicuously stood beside the other person during adversity. Again, Sanusi fits that description almost to a T.

On March 9, 2020, Ganduje’s government dethroned Sanusi as Emir of Kano and exiled him to Awe in Nasarawa State. A federal court later ruled that the banishment and restrictions on his movement were unlawful and unconstitutional.

El-Rufai responded almost immediately. On March 10, barely 24 hours after the dethronement, he appointed Sanusi vice chairman of the Kaduna Investment Promotion Agency. On March 11, he appointed him chancellor of Kaduna State University. On March 13, after a Federal High Court in Abuja ordered Sanusi released from confinement, El-Rufai traveled to Awe, met him and drove away with him.

El-Rufai’s words that day make the present moment especially poignant. He said Sanusi had been with him since their teenage years and had never left him. He added that he, too, could not leave Sanusi at such a moment.

With that history, it is easy to see why people would now look toward Sanusi and ask: Where is he?

I don’t know what El-Rufai, his family or his supporters may know that the rest of us don’t. Perhaps Sanusi has privately done nothing. Perhaps there are conversations and interventions the public knows nothing about. From the outside, though, the charge of betrayal strikes me as extremely unfair.

Sanusi does not possess anything remotely resembling the power El-Rufai had in 2020. He is merely emir, an influential cultural and religious figure, but a powerless symbol of a bygone past, nonetheless. He exercises no executive power. His throne itself exists within a political structure controlled by the Kano State government.

That vulnerability should be obvious from the precarity of his position. He was removed once by a governor and restored by another. Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf restored Sanusi in May 2024 and subsequently left the NNPP for the APC on January 26, 2026. When he did so, he unequivocally described the move as an alignment of Kano with the ruling party at the federal level.

That places Sanusi in a politically, even existentially, awkward position. A highly public intervention on behalf of a cantankerous former governor who is being prosecuted by federal authorities could easily acquire meanings beyond anything Sanusi intends.

El-Rufai is currently in ICPC custody under court-authorized remand while facing charges connected principally to investigations arising from the Kaduna State House of Assembly probe of his administration.

Sanusi therefore cannot reproduce El-Rufai’s 2020 gesture in any meaningful sense. He cannot drive to a detention facility, collect El-Rufai and take him away. He cannot appoint him to a state board.

He cannot use executive power to create an institutional refuge for him. All he has is his voice, his private access to people in power and whatever moral or symbolic authority the throne he sits on still possesses.

And even his voice is politically expensive. When El-Rufai stood by Sanusi in 2020, he did so from the security of an executive office. He was the sitting governor of Kaduna State, enjoyed constitutional immunity from criminal prosecution while in office and had substantial access to the Buhari presidency.

His intervention for Sanusi certainly carried political meaning, but there is no evidence that it threatened El-Rufai’s governorship or personal liberty.

Sanusi occupies a vastly more precarious position today.

His throne has already been taken from him once by political authority. His restoration itself came through another change in political power. It is unreasonable to pretend that an emir in such dicey circumstances has the same freedom of maneuver as a sitting governor.

If Sanusi were to be deposed this time because of an impolitic political gamble, there would be, ironically, no El-Rufai to save him from the certain fate of exile to a godforsaken wilderness in the middle of nowhere.

The absolute bravest thing Sanusi could probably do for El-Rufai is use whatever private access he has to President Tinubu to plead for fair treatment, bail or some accommodation within the law.

Even that would involve potentially self-immolating political risk because such an intervention could be interpreted as sympathy for a man who has become an outspoken adversary of the federal political establishment.

Public denunciation of his continued detention would carry even greater risks. This is why the arithmetic of reciprocity becomes difficult. El-Rufai could stand up for Sanusi without putting his governorship in obvious jeopardy. Sanusi cannot stand up for El-Rufai in precisely the same fashion because he possesses neither El-Rufai’s former power nor his former security.

You cannot sensibly demand symmetrical repayment from people situated in radically asymmetrical circumstances.

I understand why El-Rufai may feel wounded. Months in detention are hardly conducive to detached philosophical calculations about the limitations confronting friends outside. Adversity naturally rearranges one’s mental ledger of friendship. People remember whom they helped, who showed up for them and who vanished when the weather changed.

But Sanusi presents a harder case. If he speaks loudly, he risks turning himself into a political combatant when his throne is already inseparable from Kano’s combustible politics. If he remains quiet, people who remember Awe in March 2020 can easily see a treacherous, self-centered ingrate hiding behind royal robes.

Perhaps Sanusi deserves that judgment. Perhaps there are facts outside public knowledge that would justify it.

From what is publicly known, though, I am not there yet.

El-Rufai rescued a friend while standing on the firm ground of gubernatorial power. Sanusi is being asked to rescue that friend while standing on a shaky throne that Nigerian politics has already pulled from beneath him once. I would be slow to call self-preservation betrayal.

A weak recommendation letter can quietly undermine an otherwise excellent scholarship or graduate school application. The frustrating part is that many weak letters are not written by professors who dislike the student. They are written by professors who were asked too late, given too little information and left to rely on a generic template because they simply did not have enough material to write anything more specific.

Securing a genuinely strong reference is not about finding the most famous professor in the department. It is about choosing the right professor, giving them everything they need to write a detailed, credible letter and allowing enough time for them to do it well.

Give your professor structured brag sheet

One of the most effective things an applicant can do to improve the quality of a reference letter is to give the professor a structured summary of what to highlight, often called a brag sheet.

It should include your strongest grades and the courses they came from, the topic and key findings of your thesis or major project, any research or teaching assistantships and what you actually did in those roles, as well as a clear explanation of what you are applying for and why.

The goal is to reduce the amount of research the professor has to do. A professor who taught you two years ago may remember that you were a strong student without remembering the specific grade, project title or classroom moment that could make the letter vivid.

A well-organised brag sheet puts those details in front of them instead of requiring them to reconstruct your record from memory or search through old gradebooks.

The document also signals that you take the request seriously and have thought carefully about your academic trajectory. That can help a professor write a detailed and personalised letter rather than a serviceable but generic one.

Keep the brag sheet concise, however. A professor reviewing it between meetings needs the three or four most relevant and specific details, not an exhaustive list of every accomplishment since your first year.

Organise it around what the professor actually knows you for, whether that is your classroom performance, a particular research project or your work as a teaching assistant, rather than giving equal space to every part of your academic history.

Ask at least six weeks before the deadline

Professors, particularly those supervising research or teaching large courses, often receive multiple recommendation requests during application season. Asking only a week or two before the deadline puts them under unnecessary pressure.

Give them at least six weeks, and ideally more where possible. This allows them to write a considered letter around their existing teaching, grading and research responsibilities rather than trying to complete it during whatever spare hour they can find before your deadline.

Career centres and graduate programmes commonly recommend allowing four to six weeks for recommendation letters. Giving your recommender more time than that, where possible, can make the process easier for everyone.

A professor working under severe time pressure may be more likely to rely on a generic template or broad praise because there is less time to recall the specific details that distinguish a strong reference from an adequate one.

Timing also matters when following up. If a professor has not confirmed that they have submitted the letter as the deadline approaches, send a brief and polite reminder. It is better to frame the message as a helpful check-in or an offer to provide additional information than as repeated pressure.

Choose your recommenders with timing in mind, too. A professor who knows you well but is consistently slow to respond may present a greater risk when you have a firm deadline than someone who knows you slightly less well but reliably submits letters on time.

A strong recommendation that arrives after the deadline cannot help your application.

Understand why waiving your FERPA right matters

In the United States, applicants are typically asked whether they want to waive their right under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) to access a recommendation letter after enrolling at the institution that receives it.

Admissions offices and graduate schools generally encourage applicants to waive this right. Doing so signals confidence in your recommenders and can make the letter appear more candid to an admissions committee, since the professor knows the student will not be able to access the letter through that FERPA right.

Committees may also see whether an applicant chose to waive access. Choosing not to waive does not necessarily mean that a recommender wrote a negative letter, but it can affect how the letter is perceived.

The most important consideration is therefore choosing recommenders you trust to provide a strong and honest assessment of your abilities.

If you genuinely doubt whether a particular professor will support your application, retaining access to the letter does not solve the underlying problem. Where possible, it is better to choose a different recommender who knows your work well and is willing to provide a strong reference.

FAQs

Can a student use a recommendation letter from a professional employer instead of an academic professor? In most cases, yes. Graduate programmes generally accept letters from employers or supervisors, and for applicants who have been out of school for several years, or who are applying to professional and business-oriented programmes, an employer letter is often the strongest option available. The exception is research-focused academic programmes, particularly at the doctoral level, where at least one letter from someone who can directly assess your academic and research ability is usually still expected, so it’s worth having at least one academic reference alongside any employer letters where a research component is involved.

How should an applicant gently remind a busy professor about a looming scholarship deadline? Send a short, polite email that offers help rather than applies pressure, such as confirming the exact submission link or deadline, and offering to resend your brag sheet or any supporting documents in case they’re useful. Framing the message as being genuinely helpful, rather than as a nudge, keeps the tone respectful of the professor’s time and avoids putting them on the defensive, which matters both for this application and for any future letters you might need from the same person.

Does a recommendation letter need a physical ink signature if it is submitted through an online portal? It depends on the specific portal and field. Most academic scholarship and graduate school portals treat the recommender’s secure login as sufficient authentication and don’t require a scanned wet-ink signature, since the professor is submitting the letter directly under their own verified account. Some more conservative fields, medical school admissions through AMCAS being a commonly cited example, still expect a genuine signature unless the platform explicitly states that electronic signatures are accepted. When the instructions don’t specify either way, it’s worth confirming directly with the portal’s help documentation or the recommender rather than assuming.