Connect with us

Latest News

Insecurity: A Major Minus To Good Governance In Nigeria

Published

on

Insecurity: A Major Minus To Good Governance In Nigeria

By

Raymond Oise-Oghaede

It is sad, painful and very unfortunate that we are still where we are as it pertains to the issue of insecurity ravaging the nook and cranny of our polity despite the concerns that were raised in the past to averting this calamitous situation. Though, our leaders have always been assuring us that they are on top of the situation; but, as it is, it appears that they are ‘very far’ from finding lasting solutions to the menace. In as much as this review is not meant to join in the blame trading that is now trending,  it will however, reflect on the nitty gritty of the problem  and ‘call a spade a spade’ in line with the guiding principle of the writer. Therefore, it will not be far from the truth to say that our leaders have not been united in the fight against insecurity; because, to a very large extent, most of them are currently enmeshed in underground horse trading (political maneuvering) preparatory to 2023 and beyond. So, instead of coming together to seeing the menace as a NATIONAL PROBLEM, they see it as a BUHARI’s PROBLEM or APC’s PROBLEM. As a result, the matter is not being tackled head-on as expected; because, the prevalence of mutual suspicion has divided them along the lines of political, religious and ethnic jingoism.

 

Presently, the issue has been ethnicized by some people; and, this has led to the ‘banishment’ of the ‘suspected culprits’ (the Fulani herdsmen) from different parts of the country. This dangerous dimension is gradually degenerating to ‘ethnic clashes and reprisal attacks’ which are capable of snowballing into full-blown civil disturbances. I saw the handwriting on the wall years back and I delved extensively on the subject matter in some of my numerous articles i.e.  “HERDSMEN AND THE STATE OF THE NATION” (published February, 2018); “FROM CHIBOK TO DAPCHI: LET’S STOP THE TREND” (March, 2018); “POLITICS OF INSECURITY IN OUR NATION” (July, 2018); “AT 58, OUR DEMOCRACY MUST BE SUSTAINED” (October, 2018); “THE REAL ENEMIES OF OUR NATION” (May, 2019); “INSECURITY AND THE PRESIDENTIAL IMPRECATION OF NECESSITY” (June, 2019); “MUTUAL SUSPICION AND WORSENING SECURITY SITUATION” (July, 2019); “THE POLITICS OF HAILERS, HATERS AND WAILERS” (July, 2019); “NIGERIA AT 59: SO FAR, SO…? (October, 2019}; and, “NIGERIA AT 60: LET’S END POLITICS OF MISTRUST” (October, 2020). Dishearteningly, nothing has changed because of the insincerity of those at the corridors of power who are very quick to politicizing advice (especially when such is not coated with honey and hypocritical praise-singing). Little wonder why similar warnings of prominent leaders and statesmen on the imminent dangers inherent in the growing state of insecurity in the country were trivialized and tagged as the “wailing of shakabula generals”.

 

Taking a closer look at the situation, it is obvious that the problem is multifaceted. Some people are indulging in these crimes to ‘make ends meet’ because of the rising rate of employment and the stifling economic situation; some are involved as a result of ‘conflict of interests amongst different groups’ (which is the root cause of the persisting herders/farmers clashes); while, some others are carrying out these criminalities ‘to cause disaffections amongst the people and destabilize the government’. So, whether it is pleasant to hear or not, the fact remains that as many Nigerians (across all ethnic, political, social and religious divides) are weeping and wailing as a result of their losses (loved ones and valuable properties), some are also laughing all the way to the bank with the proceeds from these nefarious activities (either as direct perpetrators, accomplices or beneficiaries of the precarious situation) and some others are boosting their electoral chances as a result of the unpleasant state of the nation. Thus, if we continue to tackle it sentimentally from ‘narrow angles’, we can only fail woefully or at best, achieve minimal success; while, the menace will continue to devastate the polity and make it almost impossible for the government to thrive. However, if we tackle it from ‘broader perspectives’ (as I have identified and proffered in my earlier referenced articles), then, we will definitely achieve excellent results.

 

Expectedly, our leaders and the citizenry are now disunited in the fight against ‘the monster’. Most people have been made to embrace the ‘general belief that the Fulanis are the major culprits’ of the heinous crimes across the length and breadth of the country due to the fact that they mostly traverse in the forests which have been identified as the ‘hideouts and operational bases’ of the ‘criminals’. So, whenever any crime occurs in that terrain, the Fulani herdsmen readily come to mind. At this point, the questions that require prompt responses should be as follows; “How many of ‘these Fulanis’ have been apprehended so far?”; Do we have credible evidence(s) to substantiate their culpability in the numerous incidents?”; If so, “How many of them have been apprehended and are currently in police custody?”; and, “what is delaying their arraignment, prosecution and conviction to date”? The honest answers to these questions are very germane and would go a very long way to helping us to unraveling/confirming the identities of the criminals and finding lasting solutions to the problem. It is only then that we can know and be sure whether they are truly ‘Fulani herdsmen’; or ‘Yoruba ritualists’; or ‘Igbo kidnappers’; or ‘Edo robbers’; and, or ‘whoever they are’.

 

Interestingly, I have posited in the past that the ‘agents of destabilization and enemies of our nation’ are very smart/strategic and they are capable of employing numerous tactics in carrying out their nefarious activities.  They sow seeds of hatred amongst the citizenry to cause disunity and restlessness in the polity. In this situation, the people will lack the needed unity and impetus to jointly tackle the problem squarely. These  unscrupulous elements have the capacity to perpetrate crimes and make them look as if they were carried out by any of the ‘ethnic nationalities’. In order to carry out and consolidate their destabilization agenda, they can attack the herders and rustle their cows in the morning, and come back in the night to destroy farm settlements in the same area to make it look like reprisal attacks by the former. They can set churches on fire in the morning, and return in the dead of the night to destroy mosques to balance the equation. They can destroy Igbo businesses in the morning and return in the night or few days after to do the same to Yoruba or Hausa businesses to cause confusion in furtherance of their set objective(s). From the few scenarios painted; you can now see that, it is very easy for the ‘enemies of our nation’ to cause disaffection amongst the citizenry. Presently, the Fulani herdsmen have been successfully painted as the ‘major criminals’; while, the ‘real criminals’ are walking freely amongst us.

READ ALSO: NAFDAC Approved AstraZeneca To Fight COVID-19

Unfortunately, ‘the hopelessness of the situation and the people’s survival instincts have driven some individuals and groups into embarking on self-help to defend themselves and their people’. In as much as these moves would not have posed any problem in an unambiguous situations where the real perpetrators are identifiable and known, it becomes problematic where such actions are hinged on ‘mere suspicions’ and ‘hearsays’. Therefore, there is the need to take a ‘lot of precautions’ so that ‘innocent people’ would not be made to suffer; otherwise, the law will catch up with whoever is adjudged by a court of competent jurisdiction to have infringed on other ‘innocent and law- abiding people’s rights’. So, we should all have it at the back of our minds that, ‘no matter how defective or unfriendly that the present constitution is said to be; its provisions are still sacrosanct and binding on everyone under its purview until when it is repealed and replaced’. Also, in the case of conflicts with other laws/statutes in the country, the constitution remains supreme. Thus, we must be guided accordingly in order not to become victims of avoidable and unfortunate circumstances where ‘our today’s heroes’ would end up as ‘tomorrow’s culprits’.  We should ensure that our actions do not send ‘wrong signals’ that could lead to ‘reprisal attacks’ on innocent and law-abiding nationalities from or in other regions. We are all in it together; and, we should be prepared to come together to tackle the problems together without parochial and myopic sentiments. Our focus should be on the flushing out of criminal elements from our polity (within the ambit of the law) regardless of their ethnic, political, religious and social affiliations.

So, if we truly wish to curtail the dangerous trend of insecurity in our nation, all hands must be on deck to supporting the government to achieve the feat.  We all know that it is the cardinal responsibility of the government to protect the lives and properties of its citizenry and other people within its territory. But the co-operation  of the people is required to achieving this feat. However, our case is very complicated because of the complicity of the people in the matter. For example, the security agencies need vital information from the people so that criminal activities can be nipped in the bud. But, in our today’s society, the  reverse is the case because, some people would rather give criminals information to successfully carry out their activities and avert the long arms of the law, than to give information that will expose them (criminals) to the police and other agents of government. In the same vein, rather than join hands with the government to finding solutions to the menace, the majority of our leaders across the political divide (depending on their political calculations/permutations) would prefer the lingering of the menace to make the government unpopular in the eyes of the electorate/citizenry and the international community. It would be recalled that the present administration also capitalized on the unpleasant security situation under the last regime to gain   support at the 2015 polls. This politics of tit for tat is very dangerous and undesirable in any progressive society; because, the electorate/citizens will always be the ‘ultimate losers’.

 

Consequent upon the aforementioned, you will agree with me that even if we continue to change our service chiefs on a monthly basis (with due respect to the suitableness/capableness of the past and newly appointed service chiefs), it will not solve the problems with the kind of ‘mindsets and attitudes of our people’. Thus, I wish to enjoin the people to jettison their old ways and join hands with other well-meaning people to finding lasting solutions to the problem of insecurity in our country for the benefit of all and sundry.

 

Our security agencies should be reorganized to make them more people-friendly. Bad eggs and negative influencers should be flushed out and others, re-orientated, adequately trained, fully equipped and bountifully remunerated. By so doing, the level of professionalism will be very high and people/citizenry would be comfortably disposed to giving them necessary information required to assisting them in carrying out their functions comprehensively. Today, many people are of the opinion that it is ‘unwise and unsafe’ to ‘say something when they see something’ and that is why criminal activities are flourishing in our society.

 

The proliferation of arms and ammunition in the country is also a contributory factor to insecurity. Therefore, the Joint Task Forces on border patrol must ensure that illegal immigrants and contrabands (especially weapons) are not allowed into the country. If our borders are secured (not closed), the influx of arms and ammunition will be a thing of the past. Today, it is commonly alleged that the criminals are usually armed with sophisticated weapons (which are not produced in the country), so, they were imported or smuggled into the country. Therefore, the agencies in charge of the borders and the Ministry of Interior have an ‘uphill task’ to handle. Also, if detailed investigations are carried out on weapons recovered from such criminals, the manufacturers and the eventual importers could be traced and made to explain how they got into the country and to wrong hands.

READ ALSO: Dealing With Procrastination

Also, the traditional rulers should be upright in the discharge of their functions as the ‘custodians of cultural values and true royal fathers to the people within their respective domains’. They should always operate an open door rulership whereby the locals/villagers/natives/settlers can feel free to give information in confidence without fear of repercussion(s). Otherwise, how is it possible (as an example) for ‘rustlers’ to successfully attack the herders (injuring and killing some in the process) ‘steal’ their cattle and disappear into thin air without the villagers/natives having an inkling of the crime? So, it is either, they are partners in crime; or, they opted to keep silent because of the fear of the ‘consequences of talking’. This explains how the herders graduated from ‘using sticks’ to ‘carrying guns’. However, that should not be a justification for using the weapons to committing crimes and that is why whoever is found guilty must be made to face the full wrath of the law.

 

Furthermore, the ‘real herders’ should also make it a point of responsibility to report and expose the criminal elements within their settlements carrying out kidnapping, murder, raping, wanton destruction of lives and properties to their leaders, rulers/elders of their host communities, and or the security agencies so that there would not be cases of ‘wrong accusation(s)’ which would make them become ‘victims of unfortunate circumstances’ as we have it today. In the same vein, the natives should also endeavor to say something when they see something rather than keeping quiet and allowing mutual suspicion degenerate to situations where ‘innocent people are made to pay for the crimes of others’.

 

Instructively, members of the National Assembly and State Assemblies should collapse all their ‘so-called juicy committees’ into the National and States Security Committees (respectively) to thoroughly and objectively deliberate on issues of insecurity bedeviling us, with the aim of unearthing/resolving the root causes such as the herders/farmers conflicts; high rate of employment; moral decadence amongst our youths which has greatly worsened criminalities and other societal ills; rising cases of cult clashes; issues of marginalization that has increased regional upheavals and quests for secession; the alleged Fulanization/Islamization agenda; police brutality; and, social imbalances that have, to a very large extent, hindered the  discharging of dividends of democracy to the people. My article on “THE 9TH ASSEMBLY AND OUR DEMOCRACY” (published in June 2019) is still very much relevant and crucial in this regard. This Security Committee should constantly liaise and follow up with the service chiefs on evolving security challenges with a view to proffering workable solutions together.

 

Also, members of the ruling parties and the opposition (at every level of governance) should come together to work together for the benefit of our country and the people regardless of their political differences. If you truly have the interest of the people at heart, you will jettison politics of bitterness/mistrust and work together for the overall benefit of the people.

 

In the same vein, the Governors Forum should also see the security challenges of one state as that of all other states. So, they should always come together regardless of their political and ethnic/regional affiliations to fight the menace as one indivisible family. There is no state that does not have indigenes in every other part of the country. As such, the governors should see and treat people from other states as their own. Therefore,  you must find a way of joining hands together to helping one another. The situation of leaving state governors to ‘carry their individual crosses’ on security issues is very wrong and should be discouraged. As it is presently, the governors are just the ‘chief security officers’ of their states ‘on paper’; they do not have absolute control over any of the major security agencies within their states.

 

Flowing from the above, the inspector general of police, the comptroller generals of immigration, customs, Nigerian Correctional Services; the commandant general of the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps; the director general of the DSS and other related agencies should always endeavor to promptly send crucial and urgent signals/directives to their respective States commissioners/comptrollers/ommandants/directors on the appropriate actions to take during complex and emergency situations. The chairman of the Governors’ Forum should constantly liaise/follow up with the presidency/service chiefs/heads of other security agencies on serious security challenges affecting any of the states.

 

The Federal Government should also operate an open door system to encourage all well-meaning and patriotic citizens to contribute their quotas towards ensuring that the issue of insecurity is put to permanent rest. The government belongs to all Nigerians and should not be seen as that of a particular political party and a section of the country or selected  few. Our leaders should welcome contributions from every reasonable quarter, and treat those on security matters very seriously and objectively.

READ ALSO: The Need for National Resilience Policy and Standard

Furthermore, all aggrieved and disgruntled freedom fighters should tread softly and be guided by the law in the execution of their fight against insecurity. They should avoid infringing on the rights of innocent and law-abiding citizens in order not to end up being caught in the web of lawlessness. This is also necessary to prevent reprisal attacks that could degenerate to unnecessary civil disturbances/war. “A word is enough for the wise”.

 

Journalists and social media influencers should desist from sensational reporting which is capable of compounding the already tensed atmosphere. This is not the time to want to be ‘hypocritically active’ for the purpose of ‘personal aggrandizement’. You must be highly professional and cautious in your reporting and circulations to avoid ‘pouring petrol on fire’.

 

To all those that are directly or indirectly fanning the embers of destabilization in our nation, you are enjoined to have a rethink and discontinue forthwith because the judgment day is very near. If you are no longer comfortable and happy with the government, you need to wait for the right time to do the needful with your ‘votes’. That is the beauty of democracy as “the government of the people, by the people, and for the people”.

 

Finally, I am calling on all well-meaning people to join hands together to save our country from ‘the pangs of insecurity that has deprived us of good governance over the years’.

 Oise-Oghaede writes from Suru-Lere, Lagos State, Nigeria. He can be reached via raymondoise@yahoo.com.

Read more authentic news on our social media platforms

 

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Latest News

Olaopa Charts Path To Development As University Teacher Okunade Turns 70

Published

on

Prof. Tunji Olaopa delivering his lecture during the event at the University of Ibadan,Oyo State on Wednesday.

The Chairman of the Federal Civil Service Commission ( FCSC), Prof. Tunji Olaopa, on Wednesday gave insight into a path that could be taken for national development.

Olaopa spoke at the Department of Political Science, University of Ibadan, during the valedictory lecture and the celebration of the 70th birthday of a Professor of Political Science , Adebayo Okunade. Olaopa spoke on “Is Leadership Sufficient for National Transformation in Nigeria? (Bayo Okunade, Leadership Question and Political Science Scholarship at Ibadan)”.

The celebrant, Prof. Adebayo Okunade, during the occasion.

Prof. Tunji Olaopa having a handshake with  Prof. Adebayo Okunade.

The professor of public administration who paid glowing tribute to Prof. Okunade as his teacher with a profound influence at Olivet Baptist High School and the University of Ibadan also used the occasion to critique his theorisation about leadership, national transformation and his “arbitrary privileging of the democratic administration over other possible regimes.”

To Olaopa , rehabilitating Okunade’s theory of leadership out of what he identified as a certain “quandary” requires first the undermining of the intrinsic assumption in Okunade’s theory, about the leader as a change agent with singular capacity to make people do what is needed.

According to Olaopa, this is evident, in Okunade’s inaugural lecture, from his assessment of leadership activities from Tony Blair and George Bush to Olusegun Obasanjo and Umaru Musa Yar’Adua. To Olaopa, this understanding of political leadership stifles the significance of the relationship between leadership, social change and infrastructural development.

He said: ” Indeed, it puts a lot of over-extended pressure on a political leader in terms of the expectation of magical transformation by a wave of the leader’s wand that turns poverty to prosperity.

“We must therefore ask, legitimately, if this understanding of political leadership is sufficient for national transformation. This question is justified when we take cognisance of Nigeria’s unique political sociology and how it throws up compromised leaders who are forced to play bad politics with the commonwealth to hold on to power.

“There is a one-to-one relationship between this skewed political sociology and the construction of elite nationalism in Nigeria, making elite consensus required to craft the philosophical construct and principles underpinning the Nigeria of the future.

Participants at the event at the University of Ibadan,Oyo State on Wednesday 

“The character of the political class defined by neopatrimonialism and prebendal proclivities further compounds the dynamic making the chances of a patriotic and inclusive development social formation problematic”.

Consequently, Olaopa notes that an alternative articulation of the nature and role of leadership can be found in the change space model of leadership. To him, the change space model is founded on the point that ‘ “organizational and social change emerges when there is acceptance, authority (and accountability) and ability to allow and catalyze ongoing as well as episodic adjustments’ (Andrews et al, 2010: 3). ”

“In other words, the change space is supposed to facilitate the capability of the institutions and systems of government to encounter and engage changes while factoring in contextual pressures and circumstances. Every change requires a leader as change agent who harvests the synergy of a critical mass of other change champions and agents to bring in values such as competences, resources and contexts. One channeled to facilitate genuine and transformational change through a problem-solving approach.

“This change space model of leadership helps us to move away from the idea of a leader as a strong man with singular capacity to get things done, to catalyze the dynamics of the development process sufficiently to achieve desired national transformation.

“With the change space conceptual framework, we are also able to make sense about the relationship between ‘leader’ and ‘leadership’ as the process of influencing and mobilizing ideas, resources and acumen to deliver desired development outcomes. Within the framework of the change space model, the political leadership is given the force required to push for progress within a distributed and multi-level leadership arrangement.

“The leadership is therefore expected to: (a) build coalition for change; (b) assemble a team with sufficient IQ, wisdom and commitment to initiate, implement and deliver the change; and (c) grant required authority, incentive and support, with accountability, to this team of leaders in their own right, so they could achieve optimal productivity, performance and impact, that will deliver the change.This is how I chose to weigh in on the Okunade ‘big challenge’ of political leadership in Nigeria which raises the seminal question of how to get a leader who has the capacity to build and motivate a change space populated by a mixed multitude of political, religious, social, technocratic, bureaucratic, and civil leadership corps.

“It is therefore safe to hypothesize that while a leader is key and critical factor in a nation’s transformation journey, it does not by him or herself alone resolve the myriads of predicaments and problems that bedevil the state and society. A leader as a change agent therefore requires a leadership framework that is distributed and multilevel to be able to engage with the various dynamic and challenges that the state faces”, he said.

According to Olaopa, there is the need to deepen the conversation on leadership to enable stakeholders to appreciate the ” context of mis-governance and how to outline a way out. In thinking about leading and leadership, we must consider it a dependent variable that cannot be isolated from overall governance context.”

Olaopa noted: “Prof. Okunade’s idea aligns with the conventional sense that a leader who will achieve significant transformation will fit into the strong man theory of leadership.The point that I have been making is that every leader is situated within a context of practice, which cannot be personalized nor contextualized all around an individual no matter how charismatic and heroic. The real heroic element derives from the capacity to influence, inspire and empower others – teams and groups – to peak performance. As James McGregor Burns argued, the transformational leadership practice is one in which the leader and followers are united in the collective dynamic of influencing one another to increasingly higher levels of morality and motivation.

“Leadership in the change space is a distributed and shared functionality across teams, networks, groups, coalitions, etc. The issue is therefore not who leads but how leadership occurs in actual strategic actors. In political theory, the developmental state model provides the leverage for example for the leadership to harvest and build internal experts’ capacities with emphasis on meritocracy as the defining principle to elevate the public service bureaucracy to become a part of the game changer coalition.”

To Olaopa, “Prof. Bayo Okunade’s theory of political leadership—a systematic articulation of Chinua Achebe’s diagnosis of the Nigeria problem—unarguably presents a research outline that speaks to the need for more theoretical and practical engagement with the leadership phenomenon in a postcolonial context like Nigeria. This is a significant challenge to the political science scholarship in Nigeria; the challenge of articulating theoretically feasible and nuanced understanding of what ails the Nigerian state, her leaders and leadership and her citizens.

“In celebrating Professor Adebayo Okunade the septuagenarian, we have to situate him fully within a continuum of excellence that has at one end the scholarly genius of Billy Dudley, Essien-Udom, Peter Ekeh, Bayo Adekanye, Tunde Adeniran, John Ayoade, Larry Ekpebu, Alex Gboyega, Fred Onyeoziri, Jimi Adisa, Eghosa Osaghae, Adigun Agbaje, Rotimi Suberu, and the host of other stellar personalities and scholars that lit up the credentials of the Department of Political Science and at the other end the aspiring scholarly enthusiasm of the newer faces that are eager to take up the intellectual torch and run with the gems of political science scholarship.

“The beautiful thing about intellectual continuum is that those who have gone before, and the ‘oldies’ who are still reflecting on the political situations and circumstances of the Nigerian state, have laid down a framework of theoretical argumentations that those coming behind have a responsibility to invalidate, rehabilitate or reinforce in order to keep refreshing our understanding of Nigeria and her political processes and structures. Prof. Bayo Okunade’s body of scholarly works becomes a testament to a remarkably erudite mind that still speaks to us from the trenches of critical observations and empirical researches about Nigeria and what she could still be”.

Continue Reading

Latest News

Falola To Inaugurate Annual Founders’ Lecture At Atiba University, Oyo

Published

on

Dele Jegede In Conversation With Prince Yemisi Shyllon

On Wednesday, March 19th, Professor Toyin Falola, Africa’s most decorated humanity scholar and Nigeria’s most preeminent historian, will inaugurate the Founders’ Day lecture at Atiba University. When contacted, he said he considers it an honor for the privilege the Management of Atiba University, Oyo State, Nigeria, extended to him to deliver a lecture to a team of highly cerebral teachers and students. On March 19, 2025, at 10 a.m. Nigerian Time, Falola will speak on “Rethinking Tertiary Education in Nigeria through Private Universities for Sustainable Development.”

In a paper already released to the media, Falola considers inadequate finance, crammed classes, declining quality, and a widening discrepancy between graduate competency and industry standards as the most significant or major challenges plaguing Nigeria’s public tertiary education ecosystem. Against the backdrop of the faltering inability of public universities to meet the demands for their offerings, he argues that private universities offer a viable alternative or substitute. Private universities provide students with contemporary facilities, a disciplined study atmosphere, and a curriculum tailored to worldwide standards.

In this significant maiden, Falola considers how private universities may support sustainable development through innovation, increased research possibilities, and closing the talent gap, thereby fostering private institutions. He looks at how they may improve access to educational options, fix government institution inefficiencies, and help the economy grow. This major lecture further discusses policy options for enhancing the quality of education given by private universities in Nigeria. He shows how policy actions will guarantee that education is reasonably priced and encourage alliances between the public and commercial sectors to raise educational standards.

He divided his talk into six parts. He briefly overviews the challenges in Nigeria’s tertiary education sector, with private universities emerging as a viable alternative and the importance of aligning higher education with sustainable development. He then moves to Part II, where he examines Nigeria’s state of tertiary education. Here, he looks at the challenges facing tertiary education in Nigeria, such as inadequate government funding and its impact on public universities, overpopulation in public institutions, declining academic quality, and the disconnect between academic curricula and industry demands. In Part III, Falola’s lecture analyzes the role of private universities in addressing these challenges. He considers some selling points of private universities, such as smaller class sizes and better learning environments; investment in modern facilities and technology-driven education; stronger links with industries for practical training and employability; and research and innovation contributions to national development, and how these make private universities a viable alternative to their public university counterparts.

Falola situates private universities within sustainable development, looking at how they contribute to sustainable development by producing graduates with relevant skills for Nigeria’s economy, encouraging entrepreneurship and self-sufficiency, fostering innovation through research and development, and enhancing global competitiveness in education. He offers policy recommendations: the government should support private universities through favorable policies, public-private partnerships to improve access and affordability, strengthening quality assurance and accreditation system, and encouraging investment in research and development. The lecture closes by making a call to action on stakeholders, including government, educators, and investors, while emphasizing the need for a collaborative approach to redefine tertiary education for Nigeria’s sustainable future.

Professor Sunday Olawale Okeniyi, the Vice-Chancellor, has invited all the members of the public to attend the lecture.

Continue Reading

Latest News

Falola To Deliver Memorial Lecture In Honour Of Olukotun

Published

on

Dele Jegede In Conversation With Prince Yemisi Shyllon
Prof. Toyin Falola

Lead City University, Ibadan, is set to host an inaugural memorial lecture in honour of the late renowned scholar and public intellectual, Prof. Ayo Olukotun.

Olukotun, an activist, public intellectual, erudite scholar, accomplished journalist, professor of Political Science, and a dedicated columnist for The PUNCH died on January 4, 2023 at age 69.

The event, scheduled for Tuesday, March 18, 2025, will hold at Adeline Hall within the university’s premises, starting at 10:30 a.m. The lecture, themed “Ayo Olukotun and the Nigerian Nation,” will be delivered by globally acclaimed historian and professor at the University of Texas at Austin, Prof. Toyin Falola.

According to Prof. Falola, “Ayo Olukotun was the voice of our nation. He has repeatedly screamed warnings into the ears of Nigerian leaders and citizens through his pen to rouse the nation from its slumber. The symposium aims to reflect on Olukotun’s intellectual prowess and its impact on nation-building.”

Speaking about the upcoming event, the Vice-Chancellor of Lead City University, Prof. Kabiru Adeyemo, said the lecture was a way to immortalise the legacy of Prof. Olukotun, whose works shaped the discourse around governance, media, and national development in Nigeria.

“Prof. Ayo Olukotun was a towering intellectual whose writings and contributions consistently challenged leadership and society to do better. This memorial lecture is not only to honour his memory but also to inspire a new generation of scholars to follow in his footsteps,” Adeyemo stated.

The Chairman of the occasion, Dr. Olorunnimbe Mamora, a former senator and seasoned public servant, commended Lead City University for hosting the event, describing Olukotun as “a scholar who combined academic brilliance with practical engagement in national discourse.”

The Registrar of Lead City University, Dr. Ayebola Ayeni, emphasised the university’s commitment to intellectual excellence, noting that “the choice of Prof. Toyin Falola as guest lecturer reflects the high intellectual standards the university upholds.”

The Chairperson of the Organising Committee, Dr. Igho Fayomi, encouraged both students and the general public to attend physically or join via Zoom, saying, “This lecture is a valuable opportunity to reflect on the life of a man who left an indelible mark on Nigeria’s intellectual and political space.”

Continue Reading

Top Stories