Asianet Pakistan Private Limited

The National Democratic Congress (NDC) will on Monday, October 26, inaugurate its National Campaign Council, present Certificates of Return to its candidates and commission a newly acquired national secretariat in Abuja.

The party disclosed this in a statement issued on Sunday by its National Publicity Secretary, Osa Director, Esq., outlining a three-part programme of activities scheduled to hold across the Federal Capital Territory.

The day’s activities will begin with a meeting of the party’s National Executive Committee (NEC) at 10 am at the JD Vance Centre, opposite A-Class Park, Kashim Ibrahim Way, Maitama, Abuja.

The party said attendance at the meeting would be strictly by invitation and limited to NEC members.

At 2 pm, the NDC will commission its newly acquired national secretariat in Jabi, Abuja, before proceeding to the inauguration of its National Campaign Council (NCC) at 5 pm.

The campaign council’s inauguration will be followed by the presentation of Certificates of Return to the party’s candidates and a dinner.

According to the statement, attendance at the NCC inauguration will be restricted to members of the National Working Committee (NWC), the party’s presidential candidate and running mate, governorship candidates and National Assembly candidates.

The packed schedule places the party’s executive meeting, secretariat commissioning and campaign council inauguration on the same day, bringing its leadership and candidates together for a series of activities in the capital.

The statement reaffirmed the party’s appreciation for the support and loyalty of its members nationwide, restating its slogan, ‘Together, we can make a New Nigeria Possible.’

Kamene Okonjo, a professor, renowned sociologist, women’s rights advocate and mother of Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, World Trade Organisation (WTO) Director-General, has died at the age of 96.

Okonjo, who was the matriarch of the Umu Obi Obahai Royal Family of Ogwashi-Uku Kingdom in Delta State, died on Friday, according to a statement issued on Sunday by Prince Ifeakanachukwu Emordi, palace secretary of the kingdom, on behalf of the royal family.

She was the wife of the late Obi Chukwuka Okonjo, a professor and former traditional ruler of Ogwashi-Uku, with whom she spent 66 years of marriage. She was also the mother of the kingdom’s current traditional ruler, Obi Ifechukwude Anishi Okonjo II.

The royal family described her as an accomplished scholar whose life was defined by academic excellence, service to humanity and a lifelong commitment to advancing women’s rights.

‘An internationally recognised and foremost sociologist, Professor Kamene Okonjo distinguished herself through her outstanding academic accomplishments, intellectual contributions and lifelong advocacy for women’s rights and empowerment,’ the statement said.

Despite her academic achievements and international recognition, the family said, she remained humble and compassionate.

‘She was a woman of exceptional intellect, yet possessed a rare gentleness of spirit, humility and grace that endeared her to everyone privileged to know her,’ it added.

Her influence extended beyond her academic work and royal responsibilities. The family described her as a devoted mother, grandmother and great-grandmother whose wisdom, kindness and strength helped shape generations of the Okonjo family.

Her children include Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, the former Nigerian finance minister who became WTO director-general in 2021, as well as Dr Njideka Okonjo-Udochi, Prince Onyema Okonjo and Prince Chichi Okonjo.

The royal family said her life represented the values of scholarship, motherhood, service and the advancement of women, leaving an example for younger generations to follow.

‘While we mourn her passing, we celebrate a life exceptionally well lived,’ the statement said.

The family extended its condolences to the reigning Obi of Ogwashi-Uku, her children and their spouses, grandchildren, great-grandchildren and the wider Okonjo royal family.

It also called on the people of Ogwashi-Uku to celebrate her life and contributions, describing her as a scholar and matriarch whose legacy would endure beyond her lifetime.

The family said it took comfort in its Christian faith and the belief that she was resting peacefully with the Lord after a life marked by distinction and service.

Akin Osuntokun’s latest intervention, titled ‘Atiku Abubakar Cannot Heckle His Way to the Presidency,’ published in THISDAY on October 16, 2026, is a curious mixture of selective history, political prejudice and recycled allegations masquerading as informed commentary. It is remarkable that at a time when Nigerians are grappling with unprecedented economic hardship, insecurity and growing uncertainty about their future, Osuntokun considers it more important to excavate alleged private conversations from over two decades ago in an attempt to disqualify former Vice President Atiku Abubakar from seeking the presidency.

Of particular interest is his resurrection of a story attributed to former Cross River State Governor Donald Duke, who claimed that former military President Ibrahim Babangida once told President Olusegun Obasanjo that Atiku could not rule Nigeria. This is precisely the sort of tale by moonlight that should have no place in serious political analysis.

According to the account, Babangida allegedly pretended to have forgotten his keys, returned to Obasanjo’s private study and whispered a warning about Atiku. We are then invited to treat this extraordinary recollection of a supposed private exchange as a definitive assessment of Atiku’s presidential suitability.

But where is the independent corroboration? Has Babangida publicly authenticated those precise words? Even assuming, without conceding, that the conversation occurred exactly as narrated, since when did an alleged private judgment made over twenty years ago become a permanent disqualification from democratic leadership?

The irony is that Osuntokun chooses to dwell on what Babangida allegedly said in private while conveniently sidestepping what Obasanjo subsequently declared in public. On October 11, 2018, Obasanjo openly endorsed Atiku for the presidency. He acknowledged their past disagreements, reconciled with his former deputy and offered an unambiguous assessment of his leadership credentials. His words deserve to be recalled: ‘You surely understand the economy better.’ Obasanjo went further, praising Atiku’s business experience, national and international reach, accessibility and capacity to provide leadership superior to that of the incumbent administration.

These were not anonymous whispers behind closed doors. They were public declarations made before political leaders, religious figures and the Nigerian media. Indeed, Obasanjo acknowledged that there had once been an understanding for Atiku to succeed him. That documented admission is considerably more relevant than Osuntokun’s speculative reconstruction of conversations from another political era. One would have expected a commentator concerned with historical accuracy to reconcile these facts rather than cherry-pick episodes that reinforce his preferred conclusion.

As for Babangida, any serious examination of his assessment of Atiku must account for the full history of their political relationship, including subsequent engagements, rather than elevate an uncorroborated remark into an eternal verdict. Neither Obasanjo nor Babangida holds a hereditary franchise to determine who may govern Nigeria. Whatever they may have thought about Atiku at different points in their political lives, the final authority belongs to the Nigerian electorate.

Osuntokun also suggests that Atiku’s age and repeated presidential contests should persuade him to surrender his ambition and become a mentor to younger politicians. This argument is as selective as it is unpersuasive. If age, experience and repeated electoral contests are legitimate subjects of political scrutiny, they must apply equally to all candidates, including President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. They cannot suddenly become disqualifying considerations simply because the candidate under examination is Atiku Abubakar.

Age does not confer competence, but neither does it automatically extinguish it. The appropriate questions concern judgment, capacity, policy, integrity and the ability to assemble a credible governing team.

Atiku has offered Nigerians his experience in public administration, economic management, enterprise development and national leadership. These credentials are open to legitimate scrutiny, just as Tinubu’s performance after more than three years in office must be subjected to rigorous examination.

On zoning, Osuntokun advances the argument that another northern presidency would violate an expectation that power should remain in the South for eight years. Regional balance is important to national cohesion. But zoning is a political arrangement, not a constitutional prohibition against qualified Nigerians seeking elective office. More importantly, it cannot become an instrument for shielding an incumbent from accountability.

Nigerians are entitled to consider regional equity alongside competence, performance, national security and economic survival. It is for voters, not columnists, to decide how these considerations should influence their ballots.

Osuntokun’s attempt to portray Atiku as the principal architect of opposition fragmentation is equally simplistic. The crisis within the opposition cannot credibly be attributed to one individual while ignoring the ambitions, choices and conduct of other political actors. Political parties are collective institutions, and responsibility for their successes and failures must be assessed accordingly. Atiku has participated in efforts to build a broader opposition coalition and now leads the ADC presidential ticket alongside Rotimi Amaechi. Whether that coalition persuades Nigerians is a matter to be settled democratically, not through predetermined assertions about his supposed unelectability.

Then there is Osuntokun’s fascination with Atiku addressing the President as ‘Bola.’ When did addressing a public official by his given name become a constitutional offence or a measure of political desperation? Bola is the President’s name, not an insult. Those who regard its use as an affront should explain why the substance of public accountability matters less to them than presidential titles.

The real political pollution is not calling a president by his name. It is the growing tendency to treat legitimate criticism of public officeholders as an act of disrespect. What Nigerians require from political commentators is a searching examination of governance. How have the administration’s economic policies affected household incomes? What has happened to the purchasing power of wages? How secure are communities? What measurable relief has reached ordinary Nigerians?

These questions deserve more attention than an alleged conversation about misplaced keys in Aso Rock more than twenty years ago. Osuntokun is entitled to his preferences, prejudices and political conclusions. He is even entitled to believe that Atiku should not be President. What he is not entitled to is the pretence that his personal judgment constitutes the verdict of the Nigerian people. In a democracy, presidential ambition is neither granted nor extinguished by the approval of political columnists.

On January 16, 2027, Nigerians will have the opportunity to examine the competing candidates, evaluate their records, consider their proposals and exercise their constitutional right to determine who governs them. They will not be required to consult Osuntokun’s preferred political history before casting their ballots. Atiku Abubakar does not require Akin Osuntokun’s permission to seek the presidency, any more than Bola Tinubu requires his endorsement to pursue re-election.

Both must submit themselves to the sovereign judgment of Nigerians. Ultimately, Atiku’s presidential fate will be determined by the votes of Nigerians, not by Akin Osuntokun’s biases, recycled anecdotes or tales by moonlight. That is democracy. And that is the verdict that matters.

After three decades in South Africa, HSBC has surrendered its banking licence, ending its presence in a market it entered in 1995. The South African Reserve Bank withdrew authorisation for the bank’s Johannesburg branch effective September 18, 2026. The notice appeared in the Government Gazette on October 23.

The exit marks the end of a long-standing foreign banking presence, but it does not necessarily signal a loss of confidence in South Africa. Rather, it reflects HSBC’s decision to focus on markets and businesses that better fit its global strategy.

Three decades come to an end

HSBC established its South African operations in 1995, serving multinational companies, institutional investors and businesses involved in cross-border trade and finance. Its Johannesburg branch connected local clients to the bank’s international network, particularly in corporate and investment banking.

The departure was not sudden. HSBC announced its decision to leave South Africa in September 2024, making the licence withdrawal the final stage of a planned exit.

The bank also took steps to maintain continuity for clients. Its corporate and investment-banking business, including related assets and liabilities, was transferred to FirstRand’s Rand Merchant Bank (RMB). Absa agreed to continue providing access to South African equities and securities-financing services. HSBC’s private-banking representative office was also closed as part of the withdrawal process.

These arrangements suggest a controlled wind-down rather than a breakdown in the bank’s operations.

Why HSBC chose to leave …

South Africa remains home to one of the continent’s most developed financial markets. However, the sector is dominated by established lenders such as Standard Bank, FirstRand, Absa, Nedbank and Capitec.

These banks have extensive local networks, established customer relationships and a strong understanding of the domestic market. Competing against them can be expensive, particularly for a foreign institution without the scale to challenge local lenders across multiple banking services.

For HSBC, maintaining a presence in South Africa may no longer have offered enough strategic value to justify the cost and complexity.

The decision also fits a wider shift among international banks, which have been reviewing operations and concentrating resources on businesses where they have a stronger competitive advantage. HSBC has placed greater emphasis on its international network, particularly in Asia and other markets important to its global corporate, wealth-management and trade-finance businesses.

Leaving South Africa does not mean the bank has abandoned international banking. It means it has chosen to serve its global clients without maintaining the same direct presence in every market.

What the exit means for Africa …

HSBC’s departure should not be interpreted as a verdict on Africa as a whole. The economics of one banking operation cannot explain the investment prospects of an entire continent.

But the decision offers an important lesson. International banks are becoming more selective about where they operate and how they deploy capital. A presence in a market is no longer enough; the business must generate sufficient returns and offer a clear advantage over competitors.

For African markets, this could mean greater emphasis on specific opportunities such as trade finance, cross-border transactions, capital markets and advisory services rather than broad competition with established domestic lenders.

South Africa, meanwhile, is not losing access to international finance simply because HSBC has left. RMB and Absa have arrangements covering parts of the departing bank’s business, while local institutions remain central to the country’s financial system.

The bigger question is whether other international banks will reach similar conclusions about their own operations.

For HSBC, the exit is a strategic choice. For South Africa, it is a reminder that even a sophisticated financial market must offer foreign institutions a compelling commercial reason to stay.

ýýMonday Okpebholo, governor of Edo State, has terminated the appointment of Nicholas Odamah as Regent of Ikpeshi/Egbegere Clan in Akoko-Edo Local Government Area of the state, barely 11 months after his appointment.

ýBusinessDay reports that the governor had, on November 13, 2025, removed Zaiki Luckman Momodu Odamah III, the erstwhile traditional ruler of the clan and appointed Nicholas Odamah as regent.

ýA statement issued at the time by Umar Musa Ikhilor, the Secretary to the State Government, said the removal of Luckman Momodu Odamah III followed a review of the circumstances surrounding the ongoing disputes over traditional leadership in the clan and kingdom.

ýIkhilor added that the action was taken in the interest of peace, stability and due process.

ýHe subsequently announced the appointment of Nicholas Odamah as regent of Ikpeshi/Egbegere Clan with immediate effect, pending the determination of the rightful occupant of the throne.

ýThe statement said the regent was expected to oversee the affairs of the clan pending further decisions.

ýHe was also mandated to oversee the clan’s affairs in a custodial capacity and ensure full compliance with government directives.

ýHowever, more than 11 months after the appointment, the state government, in a letter dated October 20, 2026, announced the termination of Nicholas Odamah’s appointment and the restoration of Zaiki Luckman Momodu Odamah III as the traditional ruler of Ikpeshi/Egbegere Clan.

ýThe letter, signed by Ikhilor, said the decision followed appeals from concerned indigenes of Akoko-Edo and the subsequent confirmation that the dispute over traditional leadership in the clan was already before a competent court of law.

ýAccording to the letter, the government decided to review and rescind its earlier decision in view of these developments.

ýThe statement read in part: ‘Consequently, the State Government hereby terminates the appointment of Mr Nicholas Odamah as Regent of Ikpeshi/Egbegere Clan and restores the status quo ante his appointment.

ý’All security agencies have been duly notified of this development and directed to maintain peace, law and order, as well as ensure the protection of lives and property in the affected communities.

ý’The Edo State Government remains committed to upholding fairness, justice and the rule of law, while preserving the state’s traditional institutions and values’, he said

ýThe government urged all parties to remain calm, exercise restraint and allow the judicial process to run its course.

ýIt would be recalled that the removed traditional ruler, Zaiki Luckman Odamah III, had petitioned Governor Monday Okpebholo and the Edo State House of Assembly, urging them not to confirm Roland Otaru as a commissioner in the state cabinet over alleged bias in the chieftaincy dispute.

ýOtaru, the current Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice in the state, is an indigene of the clan.

ýIn a petition addressed to the governor on August 29, 2025, the monarch argued that confirming Otaru would effectively place him in a position to judge his own case.

ýOdamah III alleged that Otaru had opposed his ascension to the throne following the death of his father on September 11, 2011.

ýAccording to him, ‘Otaru has, since the death of my father, HRH Momodu Odamah II, been working tirelessly against my nomination, traditional installation, and eventual appointment by the state government as a successor to my father.

ý’From 2012 till date, Otaru has been acting and continues to act as counsel to the Akoko-Edo traditional council that unsuccessfully challenged my appointment.

ý’To this end, he unsuccessfully opposed the suit I filed before the High Court, Igarra, which now has a pending appeal at the Supreme Court.

ý’In addition, in December 2020, Otaru, who is from the Emegbe family of Igun kindred, raised one Joseph Shuru Uduagbamen from his kindred and sought to impose him as the Zaiki of the Ikpeshi/Egbigere Clan. To carry out this plot, they filed a case before the Igarra High Court to set aside the gazette/declaration regulating the appointment of the traditional ruler.

ý’The suit was dismissed on March 16, 2022, and the Emegbe family proceeded to the Court of Appeal, Benin. From 2012 to date, Otaru has consistently opposed the position of the Edo State Government, the Attorney-General of Edo State, and the Commissioner for Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs in all court cases concerning my ascension to the throne, from the High Court to the Court of Appeal and now the Supreme Court.

ý’Thus, his membership of the State Executive Council will ultimately put him in a position that makes him a judge in his own case, that is, to supplant the lawful position of the Edo State Government that has never filed or accepted any contrary position to that contained in the chieftaincy declaration gazette,’ he added.

ýThe traditional ruler said his petition was intended to present the facts to the governor before Otaru assumed office as a commissioner.

ýHe added that the petition was aimed at ensuring that appointments of traditional rulers in the state complied fully with the relevant gazette or declaration enacted into law by the government.

ýIt would also be recalled that Governor Okpebholo had, on April 30, 2025, removed three traditional rulers in Edo North Senatorial District.

ýThe affected rulers were: Umoru Inusa Umoru, the Aidonogie of South Ibie; Lukman Akemokue, the Okuokpellagbe of Okpella; and George Oshiapi Egabor, the Okumagbe of Uwano Kingdom.

ýThe governor said that their removal was due to irregularities in their appointments, violations of customary succession laws and alleged involvement in kidnapping and insecurity.

ýHe subsequently reappointed Aliyu Kelvin Danesi as Aidonogie of South Ibie and appointed Michael Eshioronoya Sado as Okuokpellagbe of Okpella following his selection by the kingmakers.

ýThe appointment to the stool of Okumagbe of Uwano Kingdom was still pending at the time but has since been filled by Francis Alimikhena, a former senator who represented Edo North Senatorial District following the death of George Oshiapi Egabor.

To celebrate the beauty, power, and majesty of God through art, Fobally Gallery Ltd, in collaboration with Saviorite Limited and the Redeemed Christian Church of God, City of David, Lagos, has commenced a 2-week Christian art exhibition in Lagos.

The exhibition, which came under the theme, ‘Creation Speaks’, is a showcase of powerful artworks that reflect the beauty, glory and truth of God’s creation.

Speaking at the event, Creative Director of Fobally Gallery Ltd, Abiola Folasade, affirmed that the ongoing exhibition actually aimed at letting all artists know that the gifts, the artistic talent they have, were given by God.

According to her: ‘Most of the artists were born with that talent. They just up-skilled it through formal education. So, God is the giver of talent. The exhibition is a call for reflection for artists and for the people, the society at large’.

Highlighting the theme of the exhibition, ‘Creation Speaks’, Folasade said it was designed as a spiritual encounter, not just an art show.

‘As people walk through the exhibition, we pray that the weary will find rest; the discouraged will find hope; the lost will find Jesus and believers will be reminded of God’s faithfulness from Genesis to Revelation,’ she added.

While stating that art bypasses arguments and speaks directly to the heart, she said that the exhibition hoped to engage culture and redeem the arts for God’s kingdom.

‘God is the first Artist; creativity is divine. For too long, the Church has been silent in the art and culture space. This exhibition is our statement that excellence is worship and beauty is ministry.

‘We want to raise a new generation of Christian artists who know that their talent is a calling.

‘We also want to show the wider society that the gospel is beautiful, intelligent, and relevant’, she submitted.

On the collaboration between Fobally Gallery Ltd, Saviorite Limited, and RCCG City of David, Fobally Gallery Ltd boss said it models unity in the body of Christ, emphasising that the exhibition will also create a platform for artists to be celebrated and supported; families and schools to learn about God through creativity; the public to have a wholesome, uplifting experience in the city.

She expressed optimism that the exhibition will not just be seen, but heard adding, ‘the Holy Spirit will use colors, forms, and stories to speak to every visitor. That Lagos, and Nigeria, will see that the Church is a place of beauty, truth, and excellence.

‘The purpose of ‘Creation Speaks’ is to let God’s creation speak again of His glory, His gospel, and His call on our lives’.

Speaking also, the presiding Pastor of the Redeemed Christian Church of God, City of David, Victoria Island Lagos, Kayode Pitan who was represented by Trevor Akindele, described the exhibition as a unique platform to inspire faith and creativity through art.

While the Director Saviorite Limited, Jide Aiyegbusi, who also spoke at the event, had the Christian art exhibition as a direction from the Holy Spirit, noting that the theme of the exhibition was given to them by God.

To Aiyegbusi, who is an elder in the Redeemed Christian Church of God and a British trained Graphic Designer: ‘God has created us in His own image and in His own likeness. And whatsoever we have, God wants us to use it to honor Him, to glorify His name. God wants us to use whatever we have, our profession, our talent, our faith, to honor His name. And that is what we are here to do’.

On her part an artist, Stella Awoh Mofunanya, expressed excitement over what she described as the first Christian Art exhibition in the RCCG and added that it brought Christian artists together.

‘Some years back, some Christian artists were throwing away their works. Some said that it has to do with rituals, but this exhibition has given Christian artists opportunity to showcase their God’s given talents.’

However, she encouraged artists in the society to work harder adding, ‘art is money making machine now. People are buying artworks and they keep it like gold and resell. Art work is appreciated now.’

One of the exhibiting artists, Peacemaker described his art work as an expression of images that show the truth that God created the whole world.

‘This exhibition resonates well with the faith we preach that God made the whole world and Jesus Christ is the Son of the living God. Whom the world must receive’, he said.

Art works displaced at the ongoing exhibition include a curated collection of: Paintings- depicting biblical themes, nature, and God’s glory; Sculptures and Installations-reflecting on creation, redemption, and hope.

Others were; Mixed media – works that blend faith, culture, and contemporary expression and; Live art sessions and artist talks- insight into the creative process as ministry.

Nigeria stands at a defining moment in its national journey – a moment that demands clarity of thought, institutional sobriety, and a willingness to confront uncomfortable truths about how nations truly grow. For decades, we have been conditioned to believe that leadership change is the panacea for all national ailments. Every election cycle becomes a referendum on personalities rather than policies, and every transition ushers in a fresh wave of disruption, resetting the national compass before any reform has had the chance to mature. In my June 2026 column, I argued that Nigeria’s real challenge is not the frequency of leadership turnover but the fragility of the systems that underpin governance. Today, unfolding economic indicators reinforce that argument with unmistakable force: continuity in governance is no longer a political preference; it is an economic imperative.

Nigeria’s reform trajectory is beginning to attract the kind of global confidence that only stability can sustain. This is not a matter of partisan sentiment; it is a matter of managerial logic, institutional discipline, and economic realism. Nations that have successfully transformed their economies did not do so by constantly changing direction. They did so by staying the course long enough for reforms to take root, stabilise, and deliver prosperity.

Signals of confidence are emerging – And they are not accidental

In recent months, Nigeria has witnessed a series of developments that speak unmistakably to rising international confidence. Morgan Stanley’s decision to enter the Nigerian market is not a casual gesture; global financial institutions of that calibre move only when they detect credible policy direction and macroeconomic stabilisation. Similarly, Opay’s ambition to list on a major U.S. stock exchange signals that Nigerian-rooted digital enterprises are maturing into globally compliant, investor-ready corporations. These developments are complemented by the steady growth of both net and gross foreign reserves, as well as the increasing flow of foreign currency toward the country.

These signals are not accidental. They are the early fruits of structural reforms that require discipline, patience, and – above all – continuity to mature into broad-based national prosperity. They indicate that Nigeria is beginning to regain the trust of international markets, and that the reforms currently underway are being interpreted as credible, coherent, and worthy of long-term engagement.

For a nation that has long struggled with policy inconsistency, this moment is significant. It suggests that Nigeria is finally entering a phase where reform outcomes are becoming visible, where investor sentiment is shifting, and where the global community is beginning to recognise the country’s potential for sustained economic transformation.

Reforms are systems, not events

From the vantage point of an exemplary Chartered Manager, the logic is straightforward: structural reforms do not deliver prosperity overnight. They deliver stability first, then confidence, then investment, and finally broad economic benefit. This sequence is universal. It is the same path travelled by nations that have successfully transitioned from volatility to stability, and from stability to prosperity.

Nigeria is now in the most delicate phase of this cycle – the stabilisation phase. This is the period when markets quietly test policy credibility, investors watch for consistency, institutions adjust to new frameworks, citizens endure short-term discomfort, and long-term dividends begin to form beneath the surface. It is a phase that demands patience, discipline, and a refusal to succumb to the temptation of abrupt political resets.

To interrupt this moment with political discontinuity would be to uproot crops at the very point they begin to germinate. It would send a signal to investors that Nigeria remains trapped in its old cycle of disruption, where reforms are abandoned before they mature and where every new administration begins from scratch. Such a reset would not merely slow progress; it would reverse it.

Continuity is the bridge between reform and prosperity

The argument for continuity is not partisan; it is managerial. Nations that have successfully transformed their economies – from Singapore to South Korea – did so through policy consistency rather than constant political experimentation. Continuity offers what every reforming economy needs: predictability for investors, institutional learning that cannot occur under perpetual resets, and the maturation of policies long enough to reach their intended equilibrium.

Predictability is the most valuable currency in global investment. Investors do not simply seek favourable conditions; they seek conditions that will remain stable long enough for their investments to yield returns. Continuity provides that assurance. It signals that a nation is committed to its reform path, that it understands the importance of institutional memory, and that it is willing to prioritise long-term prosperity over short-term political theatrics.

Continuity also strengthens national resilience. Rising reserves enable the country to absorb external shocks, stabilise the currency, and maintain macroeconomic balance. As reforms mature, they begin to deliver human-level impact: stabilised markets translate into improved purchasing power, increased employment opportunities, and money flowing into household pockets. These are the outcomes that matter most to ordinary Nigerians, and they are the outcomes that continuity makes possible.

Nigeria’s current reform cycle has reached a point where disruption would not merely slow progress – it would reverse it. The nation must recognise that it is standing at a crossroads, and that the decisions made now will determine whether the country continues on its path toward stability or returns to the familiar cycle of volatility.

The evidence is emerging: Nigeria is stabilising

The signals are clear: international financial institutions are re-engaging, Nigerian companies are scaling into global markets, foreign-exchange reserves are strengthening, investor sentiment is improving, and regulatory systems are becoming more predictable. Taken together, these developments reinforce the thesis I advanced months ago – that Nigeria does not need another abrupt leadership reset, but rather the continuity required for reforms to mature into genuine, broad-based prosperity.

These developments also suggest that Nigeria is beginning to build the institutional credibility that has long eluded it. For decades, the nation has struggled to convince investors that it is capable of sustaining reform momentum. Today, however, the evidence suggests that Nigeria is finally beginning to break that cycle. The reforms currently underway are being interpreted as credible, coherent, and worthy of long-term engagement.

A nation must choose between perpetual planting and eventual harvest

Nigeria has spent decades planting – new leaders, new slogans, new promises – but it has rarely allowed reforms to mature long enough for harvest. The current administration’s structural reforms, though imperfect, are beginning to attract the kind of global confidence that only stability can sustain. The choice before the nation is therefore stark: return to the familiar cycle of disruption, where every election resets the national compass, or embrace continuity so reforms can stabilise the economy, strengthen institutions, and translate into real prosperity for ordinary Nigerians.

Continuity is not stagnation; it is the disciplined patience required for national transformation. It is the recognition that reforms must be allowed to mature, that institutions must be allowed to learn, and that policies must be allowed to reach their intended equilibrium. Nigeria must now decide whether it will remain a nation of perpetual planting or finally become one that stays the course long enough to reap what it has sown.

Conclusion: The courage to stay the course

Nigeria’s future hinges on its willingness to embrace continuity as a strategic national choice. The reforms currently underway are beginning to yield visible dividends, and the global community is responding with renewed confidence. To abandon this trajectory now would be to squander the progress made, undermine investor trust, and return the nation to its old cycle of volatility.

Continuity is not a political slogan; it is an economic strategy. It is the bridge between reform and prosperity, between potential and performance, between aspiration and achievement. Nigeria must stay the course – not because continuity is convenient, but because it is necessary. The nation stands at a defining moment. It must choose wisely.

Nigerian midfielder Alex Iwobi has matched Mohamed Salah’s Premier League appearance record among African players after featuring in Fulham’s 1-0 victory over Coventry City on Saturday.

Iwobi’s appearance took his Premier League tally to 328, drawing him level with Liverpool forward Salah as the joint-second most-capped African player in the competition’s history.

However, Salah has played more minutes in the league, accumulating 26,785 compared with Iwobi’s 22,898.

The Fulham midfielder could move into outright second place when the Cottagers travel to Aston Villa for their next league fixture, provided he features in the match.

Former Manchester City and Arsenal defender Kolo Touré holds the record for the most Premier League appearances by an African player, with 353.

Iwobi played 73 minutes in Fulham’s victory over Coventry, recording 60 touches, completing 51 passes and achieving a passing accuracy of 86.3 per cent.

The achievement puts the Super Eagles midfielder within reach of Touré’s record, with 25 appearances separating him from the former Ivory Coast international’s tally.

At 29, Iwobi has the opportunity to become the African player with the most Premier League appearances if he maintains his run of involvement for Fulham and surpasses Touré’s record.

His latest milestone places him alongside Salah, underlining the longevity of both players’ Premier League careers and bringing Iwobi closer to a record held by one of Africa’s most experienced defenders.

The Lagos Commodities and Futures Exchange (LCFE), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and other capital market stakeholders have urged young Nigerians to verify investment opportunities and beware of fraudulent schemes, particularly those promoted through social media.

The warning was issued at the LCFE’s sixth Annual Financial Literacy Seminar in Lagos on October 22, held to commemorate World Investor Week 2026 under the theme, ‘Invest Smart, Stay Alert: Protecting Investors from Commodity Investment Scams.’

The seminar brought together students from secondary schools and tertiary institutions, alongside representatives of key financial market institutions, to promote financial literacy, responsible investing and awareness of investment fraud.

Representing Akin Akeredolu-Akeredolu, Managing Director, LCFE, the Head of Operations, Nkechi Obi-Chidi, urged the students to become ambassadors for Nigeria’s capital market by promoting legitimate investment opportunities and encouraging others to verify investment schemes with the SEC before committing funds.

She emphasised the importance of distinguishing regulated investment opportunities from fraudulent schemes as young Nigerians increasingly encounter financial promotions across digital platforms.

Kelechi Azubuike-Luke, Senior Manager, Financial Literacy Technical Committee, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), who represented the Commission, cautioned participants against schemes promising guaranteed profits or unusually high returns. She advised investors to confirm the registration status of capital market operators through the Commission’s official channels and avoid making investment decisions based solely on peer pressure or social media endorsements.

Speaking on behalf of the Association of Securities Dealing Houses of Nigeria (ASHON), Athan Ogbozor, Executive Secretary,

ASHON commended the Exchange for sustaining the financial literacy initiative.

Ogbozor urged investors to question promises of unrealistic returns and verify the regulatory status of investment operators, noting that the growing use of social media to promote investments makes investor vigilance increasingly important.

Onome Komolafe, Divisional Head, Business Services and Client Experience at the Central Securities Clearing System (CSCS), stressed the need for investors to understand investment products before committing their money.

She encouraged young people to exercise patience and discipline in building wealth, adding that sustainable financial growth depends on knowledge, informed decisions and a clear understanding of investment risks.

The speakers agreed that investor protection requires collective responsibility among regulators, exchanges, market operators and the investing public.

A major highlight of the seminar was the presentation of awards to winners of the financial literacy essay competition, which challenged students to examine investment scams and demonstrate their understanding of responsible investing.

At the tertiary level, Sesugh Innocent Tyokosu, a 300-level law student of Rev. Fr. Moses Orshio Adasu University, Makurdi, Benue State, emerged first, while OdunmbakuDaniel Odunayo of the Department of Economics, Caleb University, Lagos, took second place.

In the secondary school category, Enilama Jesse, a Year 11 (SSS2) student of STandT Regency International School, won first place, while Oseremen Omoyemen Oseghale of Corona Day Secondary School, Lekki, finished second.

The competition provided a platform for students to engage with investment fraud, financial responsibility and the importance of investor protection, reinforcing the role of financial education in promoting informed participation in the capital market.

LCFE said its annual financial literacy programme reflected its continued commitment to educating the public about commodity markets, investment risks and the importance of dealing with appropriately regulated market operators.

The seminar ended with a call on young and prospective investors to verify investment opportunities, question promises of quick profits and prioritise informed financial decisions over the pursuit of unrealistic returns.

The road to 2027 is no longer a distant political calendar event. It is here. The gladiators are already in the arena, squaring up, guarding territories, testing alliances and deploying strategies that leave little doubt that the coming general election will be a winner-takes-all battle. In Nigerian politics, there is no prize for second place.

The entire political atmosphere is charged, tense, and transactional. The old cliché says all is fair in war and politics. But in a constitutional democracy, not all should be fair. There is supposed to be an umpire – the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) – whose constitutional duty is to checkmate excesses, guarantee a level playing field and protect the sanctity of the ballot.

What we are witnessing, however, suggests that the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), both at the federal and state levels, is not leaving anything to chance. Its body language, its control of public infrastructure, its relationship with security agencies and its apparent tolerance of anti-opposition actions at the sub-national level all point to a deliberate strategy to shrink the political space.

Politics is visual. Visibility creates viability in the mind of the electorate. Take Lagos as a case study. Lagos is arguably Nigeria’s most politically competitive state, with at least five major parties jostling for the presidency, governorship, Senate, House of Representatives and State Assembly. Yet, a tour of the city – from train stations to shopping malls, from Third Mainland Bridge to Ikeja, from Alausa to Lekki – shows a near-total dominance of the ruling party’s billboards, posters and insignias.

There is no law in Lagos that forbids opposition parties from erecting billboards. But billboard politics in Lagos comes with unwritten terms and conditions. Cost, approval bottlenecks, and political considerations determine who gets prime locations.

Even where opposition parties manage to hoist posters, their materials often do not survive 48 hours. Area boys tear them, security agents remove them on ‘environmental’ grounds, or they are simply blacked out overnight. The effect is psychological – to render opposition parties non-existent in the public consciousness. If people do not see you, they assume you are not contesting.

This is not unique to Lagos. It is a national pattern, only with local variations. In Abia State, reports indicated that the government fixed N200,000 for presidential billboards, N150 million for governorship, N100,000 for Senatorial, N50,000 for House of Representatives and N20,000 for State House of Assembly campaign materials before candidates could advertise.

In the Federal Capital Territory, there were unconfirmed reports in August 2026 that the Minister, Nyesom Wike, fixed campaign boards at N750 million. While both Abia and the FCT authorities denied or downplayed these figures, the perception they created was enough: politics is being priced beyond the reach of many. The figures cited are based on media reports and political claims and were not independently verified for this analysis.

What is happening fits perfectly into what political scientists call Machiavellianism – a doctrine propounded by Niccolò Machiavelli, the Florentine diplomat, in 1513 in his book ‘The Prince’.

Machiavelli argued that the end justifies the means. In its crudest political application in Nigeria, it translates to: It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both. A ruler may lie, deceive, manipulate, and be ruthless, so long as it keeps power. Morality is weakness in politics. What matters is result, not method. Keep your friends close and enemies closer. Use people as tools and Power must be retained at all costs.

The signs of a Machiavellian political actor are clear: manipulative, cunning, always ten steps ahead with a hidden agenda, devoid of conscience, able to commit political evil and sleep soundly because it favours his interest.

Since 1999, Nigeria’s electoral cycles have increasingly displayed these traits, but the road to 2027 appears to be its peak. The doctrine is no longer hidden; it is practised openly.

Machiavellian politics in Nigeria is not just about posters. It is about money and the selective application of law.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has repeatedly stated that vote-buying is a crime under the Electoral Act. Yet, in reality, vote-buying has become institutionalised. In off-cycle elections in Kogi, Bayelsa, Imo, Edo, Ondo and Osun, observers documented open cash distribution at polling units. Voters are given money, made to swear an oath, or asked to snap their ballot as evidence of compliance.

Whether the money eventually reaches the voter or is diverted by middlemen is a different discussion, but the culture of monetised elections has come to stay.

Similarly, the law appears to have two versions. One for the ruling party and another for the opposition. The most glaring example is local government elections. Across Nigeria’s 36 states, irrespective of which party controls the state, the ruling party in that state sweeps 100 percent of local government chairmanships and councillorships. Not 80 percent, not 90 percent – 100 percent. In a democracy with genuine competition, that is statistically impossible without manipulation.

No discussion of Machiavellian politics in Nigeria today is complete without examining the role of the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike.

Wike remains a member of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) but serves in an APC-led federal government. He openly declares that he will work for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s re-election while still influencing who becomes what in the PDP. Many opposition figures believe such dual loyalty cannot exist without tacit approval from the Presidency. It is the classic Machiavellian tactic: infiltrate the enemy camp, sow confusion, and keep it perpetually in crisis.

As a result, less than three months to the election, the PDP does not know who its presidential candidate is. INEC’s list, signed by its Secretary Rose Oriaran-Anthony, shows 18 candidates. It lists President Bola Tinubu for APC, Atiku Abubakar for ADC, Peter Obi for Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), Seyi Makinde for Allied Peoples Movement (APM), Sandy Ojang Onor for PDP, while another faction led by former Minister Kabiru Tanimu Turaki claims former President Goodluck Jonathan as its candidate. The matter is in court.

If the court overturns Sandy Onor’s candidacy close to the election, how will a replacement campaign nationwide? That uncertainty is itself a strategy – keep the opposition in court, not on the campaign trail.

Political actors and civil society groups point to four recurring methods: Police Summons and Criminalisation of Opposition: Former Kaduna Governor Nasir El-Rufai and ADC leaders were summoned by police for alleged criminal conspiracy and incitement; El-Rufai remains in detention till date.

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar described it as a coordinated assault on civic freedoms. The APC responded that no one is above the law. The pattern, however, shows that opposition figures are far more likely to face high-profile police invitations than ruling party figures facing similar allegations.

Restriction of public space

In Osun, Abia, and Akwa Ibom, opposition parties accused Governors Ademola Adeleke, Alex Otti, and Umo Eno of revoking leases of campaign venues, deploying police to seal rally grounds, or denying use of stadiums. Governments denied political motives, citing security or unpaid fees. But the timing, always close to major opposition rallies, raises suspicion.

Legislative and electoral friction

In the National Assembly, opposition lawmakers walked out over moves to make electronic transmission of results optional rather than mandatory. For them, it was a deliberate weakening of transparency safeguards introduced in the 2022 Electoral Act.

Human rights and civic space

Human rights organisations warn that clampdowns, arbitrary arrests of activists, and intimidation of journalists create a chilling effect that damages Nigeria’s democratic credentials.

To be fair, governments at federal and state levels deny all allegations of stifling opposition. Their counter-narrative rests on four pillars: First, that they are merely enforcing the law. Corruption investigations and police summons are not political, but legal duties. Second, that opposition is crossing from dissent to sabotage, spreading disinformation and inciting chaos that threatens national security.

Third, that opposition parties lack coherent policy alternatives and rely on constant lamentation and victimhood to remain in the news.

Fourth, that many reported incidents are actions of overzealous local officials, area boys, or state-level actors, not a centrally coordinated federal directive.

These defences cannot be dismissed entirely. In some cases, opposition figures do weaponise allegations to avoid legitimate accountability. But when the pattern is nationwide, simultaneous, and benefits only one side, the ‘isolated incident’ explanation becomes less convincing.

This concern was recently echoed by Oyo State Governor and APM presidential candidate, Engr. Seyi Makinde. Speaking in Uyo during the Makinde/Daura 2027 Presidency South-South Town Hall meeting, Makinde noted that before 2023, APC had no foothold in the South-South, but after winning the presidency, began a systematic drive to capture the zone by stifling opposition.

‘I can tell you they are doing everything possible to ensure that the opposition does not unite,’ Makinde said. His statement underscores a fear among opposition governors that federal might is being used to coerce defections and weaken structures.

History teaches us why Machiavellian monopoly is dangerous. The collapse of the First Republic in 1966 was precipitated by a combination of ethnic rivalry, electoral fraud, and the suppression of opposition. When a ruling party believes it can crush all dissent, it closes channels for peaceful change, leaving extra-democratic forces to fill the vacuum.

Nigeria is too large, too diverse and too complex to be governed as a one-party state. A democracy without a viable opposition is an autocracy in disguise. It breeds apathy, fuels agitation, and in worst cases, invites military incursion under the guise of ‘correcting’ the polity.

If in 2027, Nigerians go to the polls feeling that their voices do not count, that opposition has no say, that whatever government says is truth – even when it is obvious that government has made mistakes and then claims its voice was cloned or generated by artificial intelligence – then we have crossed a dangerous line.

We would have built a democracy where the masses have no say, where institutions are captured, and where government never comes clean.

Machiavellianism may win elections, but it does not build a nation. It creates fear, not legitimacy. It creates compliance, not consent.

The 2027 election offers Nigeria a choice: continue down the path where the end justifies any means, or return to the foundational principle that democracy thrives on competition, dissent, and respect for the opposition.

INEC, the judiciary, security agencies and the media must rise above partisanship. The ruling party must realise that allowing opposition to breathe is not weakness; it is strength. And the opposition must realise that unity, not litigation, is its only antidote to Machiavellian capture.

Otherwise, we risk a victory that costs us our democracy.