Malam Bukar Zarma, the newly appointed Ag. Secretary General of the Arewa Consultative Forum, ACF, is a veteran journalist, newspaper editor, author and public affairs commentator whose career has spanned journalism, publishing, public service and socio-political advocacy in Northern Nigeria. In this interview, he said he has been part of the ACF right from day one, and opined that the constitution of the ACF requires some amendments to stop recurring clashes.
You’ve been appointed by the Board of Trustees of the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) as Acting Secretary-General. But just yesterday, the National Executive Council suspended the Chairman of the BOT that appointed you. So where does that leave you?
Thank you. First of all, the National Executive Committee (NEC) is an appointee of the Board of Trustees. Under the law, any organisation that is not limited by guarantee is owned by trustees. That is why trustees are described as having perpetual succession.
So, what the National Working Committee did was done in total ignorance of its role vis-à-vis the powers of the BOT. As far as the Board of Trustees is concerned, that action is ipso facto null and void and illegal. We do not even give it much thought.
Secondly, regarding the position of Secretary-General, the Board of Trustees does not actually have the sole power to appoint a Secretary-General. There is a due process. Whenever the position becomes vacant – either through expiration of tenure, resignation, or any other reason – a committee that has existed since 2007 comes into play.
This committee is called the Leadership Selection Committee. Its role is to scout for competent and suitable northerners who can make meaningful contributions to the ACF. You do not even have to be a long-time member of the ACF. If they believe someone is competent and suitable, they approach and persuade the person to serve.
The Selection Committee identifies suitable candidates and makes recommendations to the General Assembly. The General Assembly consists of both the BOT and the National Executive Council. The Chairman of the General Assembly is also the Chairman of the BOT, and only he has the power to summon a meeting of the General Assembly.
In my case, the Selection Committee, under the chairmanship of retired General Halilu Akilu, sat and recommended me as Acting Secretary-General. The recommendation was submitted to the BOT, which reviewed and ratified it. It was then meant to go to the National Executive Council for ratification before final approval by the General Assembly.
So, the process was ongoing until it was truncated by the actions of the National Executive Committee. As we speak, the process has passed through the Selection Committee and the BOT. What remains is ratification by the NEC and the General Assembly.
Is the Selection Committee a permanent body or an ad hoc committee?
Initially, it was described as an ad hoc committee for the identification and selection of suitable persons for leadership roles in the ACF. It was established in 2007 under the leadership of General Mahmoud Wushishi and included respected figures such as Abdullahi Ibrahim, former Minister of Education, Abu Gidado, former Deputy Governor, and several others.
Although originally ad hoc, it has operated continuously for nearly 19 years. In practice, it has remained relevant and useful under the leadership of respected ACF elders. There has been no need to disband or restructure it all these years.
Why are we witnessing this crisis in the ACF after so many years?
As a matter of fact, this is not the first time there has been friction among the different organs of the ACF. There have been disagreements, clashes, and power struggles before. However, I must admit that this is probably the most intense one so far.
It is also unfortunate that the timing has created certain impressions. But I am 100 per cent sure this crisis has nothing to do with money collected during the endowment fund drive. This issue has been brewing since last year, long before any endowment funds were collected.
The crisis revolves mainly around one person – the Secretary-General. He was first appointed in March 2020. Shortly after his appointment, the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted activities, and the leadership could not fully assume office until several months later.
By March 2023, his three-year tenure had technically expired, although operationally there had been interruptions due to the pandemic. During the next round of appointments, there was flexibility allowing some officers’ tenures to begin from the date of inauguration.
However, the Secretary-General had remained continuously in office since March 2020. By March 2026, he had completed six years, which is the constitutional maximum allowed by the ACF Constitution.
His argument was that he lost six months during the COVID period and should therefore benefit from the same flexibility granted to others. But the authorities maintained that he had occupied the office continuously for six years and therefore his tenure had ended.
The Selection Committee then determined that his tenure had expired and that he should vacate office. He refused. This led to intervention by ACF elders, including General Halilu Akilu, Mahmoud Yayale Ahmed, Bashir Dalhatu, and others, who convened a reconciliation meeting.
There are allegations that the BOT has taken over many responsibilities of the NEC and NWC, and that this is the root of the problem. Is that true?
I have heard those allegations many times. If you are on one side of the argument, you can cite several examples. But if you are neutral, you will see that many responsibilities assigned to the BOT overlap with those of the NEC.
The duty of the ACF is to rally northerners, foster unity, and strengthen the region’s collective interests. Whether you are Chairman of the BOT or Chairman of the NEC, you naturally consider it part of your responsibility to mobilise people and advance the objectives of the forum.
The complaint from some NEC members is that the BOT Chairman sometimes performs functions they believe belong to them, such as convening meetings and mobilising stakeholders. This has been a recurring source of conflict within the ACF.
The truth is that the work of the ACF is difficult to compartmentalise strictly. Everyone is essentially working toward the same goal.
Do you think the ACF Constitution is partly responsible for this recurring conflict?
I would agree that the structure contributes to the problem. What we currently have is similar to having two captains on one ship, so friction is almost inevitable.
This issue has been recognised for many years. There have been several attempts to review the constitution and streamline the leadership structure, but those efforts never materialised fully. In fact, the current Chairman of the NEC chaired a constitutional review committee about ten years ago, but the process stalled.
Over the years, there have always been efforts to address what many consider an anomaly in the structure.
There are also allegations regarding the endowment fund and the opening of an account with JAIZ Bank. Some say the funds were moved there instead of being kept in the ACF’s regular accounts. Is that true?
That is far from the truth. Let me clarify. The money kept in JAIZ Bank was not the money raised for the endowment itself. It was money connected to the endowment process, while operational funds for organising the event remained in the regular ACF accounts, such as Keystone Bank and First Bank.
The Chairman of the BOT and the Secretary-General decided that the endowment funds should be kept separately from the organisation’s operational funds. The intention was to warehouse the funds safely until a proper implementation framework was established.
No withdrawals have been made from that account. The funds were later moved from a regular current account into a fixed deposit account so they could generate interest. This was simply a financial management decision.
The funds were deposited in phases as donations came in gradually. That explains why transfers were made at different times into the fixed deposit account.
During the meeting held at NTI, the NEC advised that an audit should be conducted on the account and also alleged financial misconduct against the BOT Chairman. What is your reaction to that?
We welcome that. In fact, that was one of the few positive outcomes of that meeting. Despite the suspension issue, they also called for a forensic audit, and we fully support it.
I have already explained that the BOT Chairman is not a cheque signatory. It is not his duty to sign cheques. His role is mainly to approve certain payments or provide supervisory oversight.
The money in question was merely being warehoused. So, how can the person trying to safeguard the funds suddenly be accused of misusing them?
As I said, we are prepared for the bank to provide every detail if necessary. If there is going to be a forensic audit, then everything will come out clearly.
It is actually surprising to hear allegations against someone who does not directly spend the money. The Secretary-General has effectively been the principal signatory to most of the operational accounts. The other signatories are relatively junior officials who only append their signatures when required.
If you examine the ACF accounts closely, you will see that the Secretary-General has practically been the main operator of those accounts.
During our interview with the Secretary-General, he claimed that the transfer of about N1.4 billion into the investment account was done unilaterally by Alhaji Bashir Dalhatu without proper clearance. Does that not amount to malpractice?
No, it does not. You must understand how banking works, especially in situations where there is an established relationship between the customer and the bank.
There is what banks call ‘Know Your Customer’ (KYC). If a bank has confidence in a customer, certain instructions can be processed without unnecessary bureaucracy.
Besides, transferring money from one account to another within the same ownership does not amount to withdrawal. It is not the same thing as taking cash out or transferring money to an external party.
The money remained within the same account ownership structure. It was simply moved from a current account into a fixed deposit account based on the bank’s own recommendation so that the funds could yield interest instead of sitting idle.
So there was really no reason for the bank to seek multiple layers of clarification before carrying out that instruction. The bank itself had advised that the funds should be placed on fixed deposit.
We were also told that some members felt ambushed into approving the investment arrangement. There are claims that other banks were offering interest rates as high as 18 percent, compared to the 8 percent from JAIZ Bank. Did you hear anything about that?
That is mostly street talk.
Does it sound realistic to you that any credible and stable bank in Nigeria would safely offer 18 percent interest on such a huge deposit without significant risk?
Yes, during discussions, some people mentioned that certain struggling banks were offering very high rates – even 20 or 25 percent – simply because they were desperate for deposits. But the question is: how secure would your money be there?
Some of those banks were already under scrutiny from the Central Bank over capitalisation issues and other financial concerns. So, no serious person would consider them a safe option for funds belonging to an organisation like the ACF.
The idea was to prioritise safety, not reckless profit-making. Even First Bank was paying about one or two percent on fixed deposits at some point. So, getting eight percent from JAIZ Bank was already considered favourable and reasonable under the circumstances.
Are you concerned about the way this entire situation is unfolding, especially regarding the integrity and image of the forum?
We are deeply concerned – very deeply concerned. In fact, saying we are concerned is an understatement.
I can assure you that many efforts were made behind the scenes to prevent the situation from deteriorating to this level. There were several consultations, reconciliation meetings, and interventions by respected northern leaders.
For example, Alhaji Ahmed Yayale Ahmed hosted meetings in his house where key stakeholders were brought together to resolve the matter amicably.
Our hope now is that this crisis will serve as a wake-up call for the ACF. We may need to revisit the organisation’s structure and constitution once again because, as I said earlier, these conflicts have been recurring over the years.
There is clearly a need to review certain aspects of the structure to reduce friction and prevent future crises.
Finally, two questions in one. First, do you believe Alhaji Bashir Dalhatu is overbearing? Secondly, some people believe the ACF is being infiltrated because of the perception that it can influence northern votes politically. What is your view?
Before I answer your question on if Alhaji Bashir Dalhatu overbearing?
Let me tell you a simple story.
Before the assumption of office of Alhaji Bashir, the average attendance at meetings of the Board of Trustees in ACF was about seven or eight people per meeting at most, nine.
At times, they didn’t even know the last chairman of the BOT before him was Alhaji Shehu Malami Sarkin Sudan. He was there for two years. Of course, he had been sick, but in those two years, he held meetings about two or three times.
Each time there was a BOT meeting around that period, you would probably be lucky to get up to nine people from all over Northern Nigeria.
It was to correct that situation, and because of his capacity to mobilize, that you now have attendance at meetings of the Board of Trustees numbering up to 170 or 200 people from just nine.
Look at the calibre of people attending these meetings. That is one thing.
In those days, you would be lucky to have one deputy governor or some permanent secretary attending. Now, if you take a look at the attendance register of those coming for meetings, you are probably going to see former governors of Northern Nigeria, former ministers, former senators the very top level of leadership.
But how do you consider the provision of the Constitution? When I read it, it says every senatorial zone should have three people across the 19 Northern states. Some of these numbers you mentioned may actually be friends and family members who are not coming based on what the law says?
Thank you. Now you are talking.
I have just told you that before now, you would be lucky to have ten people. We have nineteen states, don’t forget, plus the FCT, making twenty. Yet, you either had nine people or ten people attending. That means you had barely half a person from each state. Is that what it means? Do you know what that means?
Now, somebody comes and says, ‘Please, come to ACF. Let’s sit down and discuss how to approach the problems facing Northern Nigeria.’
Maybe twenty people come from Kwara, maybe
No, they said mainly from Kano and Jigawa.
Yes, that was the allegation.
Because the chairman is from Kano/Jigawa, if he says, ‘Please come,’ his friends, associates, and others will naturally come.
But I want you not to forget the background or standpoint. The people making these complaints are just doing it out of ulterior motives.
I have been in ACF from day one. In 2000, considering my background as a former editor of New Nigeria, I saw ACF as a continuation of the kind of mission we pursued in New Nigeria that is, to promote and defend the interests of Northern Nigeria.
I went there from day one, and I have remained here up till today.
So, I can assure you that everything Bashir Dalhatu did was for the good of the organization. He revived it. He mobilized people to come, and the response has been overwhelming.
If only nine people were attending BOT meetings, you can be sure that not even one billion naira or even one hundred million naira could be collected for the Endowment Fund.
But because over 200 senior members and elders of Northern Nigeria have been attending, the message was sent out loud and clear. There was real mobilization of Northern Nigeria, and it is almost 100% due to him.
You can see that the organization has been doing really well in the last ten years. Rather than being grateful to him, some people say, ‘Ah, he has usurped our powers. We are supposed to be the ones doing this.’
Okay, do it now.
Let me tell you, this chairman of NEC comes from Benue. He has been there for two and a half years now. He has not been able to organize a visit. He has not been able to get his governor to give us an appointment to visit him in Benue.
For two and a half years, he couldn’t do it. He has never organized or facilitated a trip anywhere in the last two years.
He waits until Bashir Dalhatu initiates a move, then he comes back and complains that Bashir Dalhatu is usurping his powers.
Okay, do it.
He won’t be able to do it.
What about the infiltration by the APC group?
No, I don’t understand what you mean by ‘infiltration.’ Try to rationalize it.
That is, they are planting and instigating disagreement and conflict…
You know, they say that if you are known to be a thief, anytime there is theft in the neighborhood whether you are around or not people will say, ‘Ah, it is this guy. He must be the one who stole it.’
The APC government has a reputation for instigating crises in various organizations political parties and sociocultural organizations alike. They have that reputation, and it is very well known. In the minds of many people, they are already guilty.
But personally, I am not aware. I have no knowledge of how they trap ‘the thieves,’ or how they may do it if they want to. I don’t know. So I think these are allegations.
Is there anything you would have liked us to ask that we didn’t?
I think you should have asked me what ordinary Northerners feel about the problems and the rising crisis because I know that the average Northerner looks up to ACF as a stabilizing factor in Northern Nigeria. If nothing else, they can at least tell the world what is happening in Northern Nigeria.
Secondly, even during the 2023 elections, it was the ACF that organized a meeting between all the major presidential candidates in Kaduna to interrogate them about their plans for Northern Nigeria.
It was well attended. Tinubu was here, Peter Obi was here, everybody was here.
Unfortunately, when they responded to the requests and demands of ACF on behalf of Northern Nigeria, they quickly forgot them after getting into power.
For example, Tinubu, I don’t think he even remembers that he came to Kaduna to make pledges.
Maybe that is why some people allege that the APC may be trying to undermine ACF or prevent it from becoming stronger.
I think it would be music to their ears if they heard about trouble in ACF when members are at each other’s throats and unable to organize any viable challenge to them.
They would probably be happy to hear that.
But speaking as an insider, I can tell you that this is all mere speculation. I have no experience or knowledge of it, and I do not even see how it could have happened.
But if Tinubu were to say he would come and address ACF this time around, would you welcome him?
Well, we are always ready to listen.
We are disappointed with how things turned out after he won the election. We are totally disappointed because I helped write the demands of Northern Nigeria.
There were 23 demands, ranging from reviving Ajaokuta, dredging the River Niger for inland waterways, the Kaduna-Ajaokuta gas pipeline, and Kolmani.
There were 23 demands altogether, and he has not fulfilled any of them not even one.
So if you were to advise Northerners now, would you tell them they should vote for Tinubu?
No. What I would advise Northerners to do is to look at what Tinubu promised and compare it with what he has delivered. Then they can reach their own conclusion.