Opinion

NSA And Nigeria’s Security Missteps

Published

4 years ago

August 5, 2021

NewTimes

Emmanuel Onwubiko

There is a very commonly used catch phrase that goes thus: “Better soup na money kill am”, which means quality services take a whole lot of human and material resources. Another of such commonly used catch phrases also goes as follows: “Too many cooks spoil the soup”, meaning that for any endeavor to succeed, there ought to be respect for expertise.

These elementary wise sayings can be related to the general experiences of calamitous security issues that keep escalating by the day in Nigeria in spite of the fact that Nigeria runs a well-funded office of the National Security Adviser.

Besides, there is the unprecedented rise in insecurity around the country which has become much more troubling since the last batch of military chiefs embarked on voluntary retirements after putting in many years of illustrious and meritorious services and retired just when they were at the verge of a historic success against the terrorists.

A peculiar question that has lingered ever since the emergence of the President Muhammadu Buhari’s government but has become much more nightmarish since the exit of the immediate past military chiefs is why President Muhammadu Buhari has not considered it imperative to rejig his office of the National Security Adviser in spite of the collosal security problems especially in the area of achieving unanimity, harmony and strategic implementation of national security goals. The fact is that even when the immediate past military chiefs did their utmost best, without a thoroughly bred national security strategy which ought to emanate from the office of NSA, the individual efforts of the service chiefs will mean a little.

A reputable scholar who is based in the United States of America was recently in Nigeria on a research tour and sought to know from me why the office of the National Security Adviser is not effective and efficient. The lady who is actually a Nigerian/American citizen asked the question when it emerged that the administration of President Buhari was blocked from accessing some of the bulk defence assets the administration had ordered from the United States.

The professor of politics with a vast interest in counter- terrorism was of the opinion that if Nigeria has an efficient and an effective national security adviser then that office could have adequately briefed the United States Congress on the necessity of those military assets vis-à-vis the need to deploy them specifically to battle the terrorists that are tearing Nigeria apart in the North East and a large portion of the North West of Nigeria including the terrorists who recently shot down a military jet in Zamfara State.

The professor became even much more confused when the Information Minister Lai Mohammed and the Nigerian Senate spoke at cross purposes and cancelled each other on the same issue of the blockade of arms supply to Nigeria by the Congress of the United States of America. This my scholarly friend then asked: “Please does Nigeria have a national security adviser?”
Before attempting a response to the tepid and weak nature of the office of NSA in Nigeria now, let us have a review of this major global development on Nigeria in the last one week.

The first was the shocking news reportage that Nigeria can’t get the supply of nearly a billion dollars arms and military assets it had since ordered and paid for.

On July 29 , Reuters reported: “U.S. lawmakers have put on hold a proposal to sell almost $1 billion of weapons to Nigeria over concerns about possible human rights abuses by the government, three sources familiar with the matter said on Thursday.

“The proposed sale of 12 AH-1 Cobra attack helicopters made by Bell (TXT.N) and related equipment worth $875 million is being delayed in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and in the House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee, the sources told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity.

“Foreign Policy reported this week that the State Department had informally notified Congress of the proposed sale but that it was frozen in the Senate committee. The package includes the helicopters, spare engines, navigation systems and 2,000 precision-guided munitions, it said.

The hold could have an impact on Nigeria’s efforts to seek support to fight Islamic State West Africa Province and jihadist group Boko Haram in the northeast as well as armed bandits in the northwest of the country.

“However, the hold may not hinder Nigerian military capabilities on some missions.

“A U.S. government official said Nigeria recently took delivery of Embraer-made (EMBR3.SA) A-29 Super Tucanos, a slow-flying plane that can provide close air support to infantry much like a helicopter.

That deal, for a dozen of the turbo-prop planes, was notified under former U.S. President Donald Trump in 2017, and had a value of up to $593 million, according to Pentagon documents. A handover ceremony for those planes is slated for August, the official said.

“Under normal practice, the State Department tells Congress of proposed arms sales informally in advance to give lawmakers the chance to put a hold on the proposals to raise concerns. If Congress opposes a sale after a formal notification, it can pass legislation to block it.

“A State Department spokesperson said: ‘As matter of policy, we will not confirm or comment on proposed defense sales until they have been formally notified to Congress.’

The Senate and House committees both declined to comment on the issue. A spokesman for Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari also declined to comment.

Nigeria, Reuters says is also battling rising armed robberies and kidnappings for ransom where thinly deployed security forces have struggled to contain the influence of armed gangs.

U.S. officials last October complained of “excessive force” by Nigerian military forces on unarmed civilians and called for restraint after soldiers opened fire on protesters demonstrating against police brutality in Lagos.

The well articulated news coverage by Reuters then set out confusion within Nigeria’s official quarters because of the failing of the office of the national security adviser to effectively brief Nigerians on the official stand point.

Rather the minister of information unleashed torrents of confusion and conjectures when he denied a matter that had already become so notorious.

According to Lai Mohammed, the government was unaware of the development reported aforementioned.

The News Agency of Nigeria reports thus: “The Federal Government says it is not aware of any $875 million ammunition deal with the US which is being purportedly blocked by some lawmakers in that country.

“The Minister of Information and Culture, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, described the purported ammunition deal reported in some sections of the media as ‘fake news.’

“Speaking with the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) on Friday in Abuja, the minister said there was no contract of such nature and sum between Nigeria and the US

“There is no contract of arms between the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the United States of America today apart from the 12 Super Tucano Attack Helicopters of which six had been delivered.

“We are quite satisfied with the progress and cooperation that we received from the government of the US on this issue.

“As a matter of fact, six of the Tucano helicopter will be launched on Aug. 3, this year.

“We are not aware of the so-called 875million USD arms contract or some helicopters which they said some lawmakers in the US are trying to persuade the president of the US not to honour

”The relationship between Nigeria and the US is smooth and waxing stronger,’ ” he said.

READ ALSO: Letter To Chief Awolowo

The reports in some sections of the media had claimed that influential U.S. lawmakers were masterminding a hold on a proposed sale of ammunition and attack helicopters to Nigeria over allegations of human rights abuses and anti-democratic actions of the present administration.

The report listed the blocked proposed sale to include 12 AH-1 Cobra attack helicopters accompanied by defence systems, 28 helicopter engines produced by GE Aviation and 14 military-grade aircraft navigation systems made by Honeywell.

However, the embarrassment became apparent when the Nigerian Senate confirmed the development from the U.S congress.

On 31st July 2021 the National Assembly said it was billed to hold talks with the United States Congress over the stoppage of weapons sale to Nigeria, Saturday PUNCH reliably learnt.

“The Senate and the House of Representatives may be sending different delegations to meet with their American counterparts on how to successfully procure attack helicopters and other arms and ammunition in a deal valued at $875m (N360bn).

“The Chairmen of different security committees in the National Assembly, in separate interviews with one of our correspondents between Wednesday and Friday, confirmed knowledge of the deal’s stoppage and their readiness to seek legislative and diplomatic interventions.

“The US lawmakers are holding down a proposed sale of warplanes to Nigeria amid mounting concerns over the regime of the President, Major General Muhammadu Buhari’s (retd), human rights record as the country grapples with multiple security crises.

“The Senate Foreign Relations Committee of the Congress has reportedly delayed clearing a proposed sale of 12 AH-1 Cobra fighter jets and accompanying defence systems to the Nigerian military.The proposed sale also includes 28 helicopter engines produced by GE Aviation, 14 military-grade aircraft navigation systems made by Honeywell, and 2,000 advanced precision kill weapon systems – laser-guided rocket munitions, according to information sent by the State Department to Congress and reviewed by Foreign Policy Magazine.A report by the magazine on Tuesday said the behind-the-scenes controversy over the proposed arms sale illustrated a broader debate among Washington policymakers over how to balance national security with human rights objectives.

The hold on the sale also showcases how powerful US lawmakers want to push the Joe Biden administration to rethink US relations with Nigeria amid overarching concerns that Buhari is drifting toward authoritarianism as his government is besieged by multiple security challenges, including the Boko Haram insurgency.

Western governments and international human rights organisations have ramped up their criticisms of the Buhari regime, particularly in the wake of its ban on Twitter, systemic corruption issues, and the Nigerian military’s role in crackdowns on #EndSARS protesters last October.”

The details on the proposed sale were first sent by the US State Department to Congress in January before then Vice President Joe Biden was inaugurated as president, according to officials familiar with the matter.

Nigeria recently took delivery of six out of the 12 Super Tucano fighter jets purchased from the US government.

The Chairman of the Senate Committee on Army, Senator Ali Ndume, noted that the US lawmakers had expressed concerns over rights abuses in Nigeria.

He recalled that the American government raised similar concerns when Nigeria ordered 12 Super Tucano aircraft, part of which had been delivered.

Ndume said: “When we resume at the National Assembly, after consultations, we will know what to appropriately also do as the Nigerian National Assembly that appropriated such amount of money for those purposes…even if it requires our intervention… Definitely, this is based on information that was given (to the US) by one side.”

Asked if the National Assembly would engage the US Congress on the matter, the lawmaker said, “Yes, that is possible. That is what is right. If it requires that, we would do it.”

Ndume added :“What is going on (in Nigeria) and what the arms are needed for, every Nigerian knows. We are not acquiring arms in order to abuse human rights; we are acquiring so the Armed Forces of Nigeria and other security agencies can be armed because of the security challenges we are facing. These are two different things. Human rights and the fight against terrorism, banditry and other forms of criminality are different things entirely.

“So, I am surprised that the US Congress is mixing up the things. If it requires that they should hear from the side of the Nigerian Government – not even the executive because the Nigerian Government which we are in collectively is fighting against banditry, insurgency, which is terrorism, and which the American Government has even placed bounty on some of their (insurgents’) heads – they will.”

Speaking on funding for the Armed Forces, the lawmaker said it “is adequate for now, based on the resources at the disposal of the Nigerian Government.”

The lawmaker, however, stated that the country had serious challenges in terms of adequate equipment and platforms for the forces “while the government has appropriately responded.”

He also noted that the American Government had offered to assist Nigeria in the fight against insecurity.
“That is what the arms are meant for,” he stated.

Ndume added, “If you say you want to help somebody, it means that you have identified that they have a problem. So, when they want to solve the problem, they cannot do it with their hands. And then, when they want to use arms, they have to get them because Nigeria does not have the capacity to manufacture those things.”

Also, the Chairman of the House Committee on Defence, Babajimi Benson, said the lawmakers would deploy diplomatic means to resolve the issue.

Benson said, “There is what we call parliamentary diplomacy or advocacy. The US parliament is very strong and determines a lot of things. Plans have been in the works – not because of this – to visit the US parliament and explore ways of military cooperation and so on.

“Recently, we visited the base where the Super Tucano aircraft were manufactured and what we all agreed was to cut out human rights abuses; that we needed to be more precise and ensure precision in whatever inventory or equipment we use so that we don’t hit collateral targets or innocent citizens unnecessarily.

“If they don’t give us those armaments, it means that the human rights thing may worsen because there won’t be precision. One of the good things we got with the A-29 (Tucano) is that it is guided. But now, if they (US) are withdrawing, they are not helping us with reducing civilian mortality and building our human rights records.”

Asked if the executive in charge of the Armed Forces should be more concerned about the records of human rights abuses than the legislature, Benson noted that it was still the same government and “there is no difference in Nigeria’s reputation and security that is at stake now.”

The lawmaker added, “We as the people’s parliament need to ensure that when those in the executive go out defending the territorial integrity and internal security, they are more guided, and they need weapons to be well guided. And who produces the best weapons that can guide in this regard? It is them (US).

“As a matter of fact, they have also trained our forces on how to minimise collateral damage and ensure civilian protection. There is ongoing training on that. If they now deny us, they are creating a bigger problem, not solving it.”

Responding to a question of America wanting to see Nigeria walking the talk on human rights protection, Benson noted that the Lagos State Government “is doing a fantastic job” towards bringing closure to extrajudicial killings and human rights abuses by officers and men of the Nigeria Police Force.

Where then is the national security adviser of President Buhari? Mr. President Sir, where is your national security adviser?

To understand why Nigeria has faced several missteps in the strategy adopted to secure Nigeria, a reading of the piece on the qualities of a good national security adviser will suffice.This professional friend of mine then pointed my attention to the scholarly piece titled:

“What is the role of the National Security Adviser? And the following is his exact presentation: “The National Security Advisor, officially known as the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, serves as a chief advisor to the President of the United States on national security issues. The National Security Advisor serves on the National Security Council and is assisted by staff that produces research, briefings, and intelligence reports.

The National Security Advisor’s office is in the White House, near the office of the President, and during a crisis operates from the White House Situation Room updating the President on the latest events.

“The National Security Advisor is appointed by the President but not confirmed by the U.S. Senate, which protects the position to some degree from political controversy and partisanship. The role is not connected administratively to the Departments of State or Defense but offers independent advice, effectively creating a policy triad that the President may rely upon for advice. The National Security Advisor’s role and relative influence varies from administration to administration, and from advisor to advisor.

“The National Security Advisor plays a critical role in administration of the National Security Council (NSC), which advises and assists the President on national security and foreign policy issues. The Council also serves as the President’s principal arm for coordinating national security and foreign policies among various government agencies. The NSC is composed of the Vice President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Defense, and the National Security Advisor; the Council is chaired by the President.

“The NSC is also advised by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Director of National Intelligence, the White House Chief of Staff, the Counsel to the President, and the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy. The Attorney General and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget may be invited to NSC meetings pertaining to their responsibilities.

“The first National Security Advisor was Robert Cutler under President Eisenhower in 1953, and 20 different advisors have served every President since that time. Zbigniew Brzezinski, under President Carter, was the first National Security advisor to be elevated to cabinet-level status in 1977. President Reagan demoted the National Security Advisor from cabinet-level status and subordinated the role to the Secretary of State. Six National Security Advisors served under President Reagan, representing the highest turnover in the position in history.

“Brent Scowcroft is the only person to serve as National Security Advisor in two different administrations, under President Ford and President George H.W. Bush. General Colin Powell became the first African-American to serve as National Security Advisor, under President Reagan; and Condoleezza Rice the first woman to serve as National Security Advisor, under President George W. Bush.”

President Muhammadu Buhari stands on the threshold of history to make or mar his legacy for life. He has just two years to end the vicious circles of threats to national security.

He already has set the tone by publicising his targets that are deliverables by his new service chiefs. But these deliverables to secure Nigeria would not materialize if the president fails to reorganize the much important office of his national security adviser.

The ball is in the court of President Buhari to rescue Nigeria and reassure the global leaders that it is determined to wage law-based counter-terror war.

Mr. President let me drop some legal points I got from a well authored book by a military general. These are legal thresholds the NSA ought to monitor and then defend the administration in the area of adherence to human rights standards. The law expert and general of the Nigerian Army wrote thus: “The basic tenets of the rule of law are unequivocal as to the fact that calling out members of the Nigerian Armed Forces on an internal operation, does not confer on them more powers than those prescribed under the law of the country. Consequently, compliance with the rule of law demands that the rules should be adhered to by troops on all issues during the operations. Some of these issues and the rules applicable to them are addressed as follows:

“a. The Use of Minimum Force. The first thing troops have to bear in mind when engaged in internal operations is that force should only be used when absolutely necessary. Even then, the rule is that troops on such operations may only use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances.

There is no hard and fast rule to determine whether a particular degree of force is reasonable in any circumstances. The relevant and widely accepted objective test in determining the use of force is the popular saying that you ‘do not kill a fly with a sledge hammer’ or conversely, ‘you do not attack a lion with a pen knife’.

“Arrests. During an internal operation, it is usual for troops involved in that operation to carry out arrests. The suspects may include rioters or even more serious offenders like murderers, armed bandits or looters who are merely taking advantage of an upheaval or mishap. Whatever the circumstances, arrests are either conducted with a warrant of arrest, or without such a warrant. In practice, a warrant usually contains the following: The date of issue; a concise statement of the offence or matter for which it was issued; the name of the person to be arrested; an order to a law enforcement officer to apprehend the named person and bring him before the law; the signature of the magistrate or judge.” (Military Law in Nigeria Under Democratic Rule by Brigadier General T.E.C. Chiefe (Rtd) Ph.D).

Onwubiko is the leader of the Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA).

Read more authentic news on our social media platforms

Opinion

Stellenbosch: Senzeni Na And Decolonizing Secularity In Africa

Published

5 hours ago

March 11, 2025

NewTimes

Witch Burning, Impunity And Abuses Linked to Witchcraft Beliefs In Benue State

Dr Leo Igwe

By Leo Igwe

In December, I attended a workshop on Decolonizing Secularity in Africa. It was one of my best conferences because it highlighted issues that have worried me over the years. For the first time, I attended an academic conference on religion or secularism in Africa that featured a panel on atheism and humanism in Africa. Organized by Point Sud, this workshop was held at Stellenbosch in South Africa. Interestingly I did not know about Stellenbosch’s colonial history and significance. So I could say with the benefit of hindsight that the choice of Stellenbosch as a venue for this event was adequate. The goal of the workshop was, based on the coloniality of secularity, to interrogate the “liberating force of religion, the secular in ethnic nationalisms, and the ideologies of culturalization, not least in its current revenant, heritagization, in Africa and beyond”. It was great to meet, discuss, and exchange ideas on colonization, decolonization, religion, and secularity with scholars and activists from different parts of the continent and the world. Many issues that emerged at the conference have continued to agitate my mind. First is the so much emphasis on colonization. I have continued to wonder: Can’t we meaningfully discuss African issues without alluding to colonialism? Again, reference is always made to Western colonialism. What about Eastern and other forms? Many parts of America were colonized at one point or the other. Weren’t they? The same with Europe, Asia, and Oceania. But it is only in the case of Africa that there is an overemphasis on Western colonialism. Incidentally, many African scholars have unwittingly joined in explaining Africa through the lens of colonialism, western colonialism.

The fixation on colonialism is not without a reason. I attended an African studies conference some years ago and someone alluded to a comment by a Western scholar, that regarding Africa, before colonialism, there was nothing. There was nothing? I was shocked to hear that comment. Look, that I do not know or nobody knows about a period in history, does not mean that there was nothing. Is it not better to say I do not know than to make such a dimwitted statement? What applies to Africa, applies to other places in the world. There are stages in their histories nobody knows what happened. Or what is known is patchy. That should not be a reason to say that there was nothing.

One issue that engaged attendees was the meaning of ‘decolonizing’. What does it mean to decolonize? Some define decolonization as removing or undoing colonial elements and influences. And if that is the case, what do we remove or undo? And who does that and Why? how do we undo the Western colonial linguistic influence? What about the eastern and other colonial elements? Is it possible or feasible to remove or undo all colonial influences? By the way, is religion or secularity as introduced to Africa decolonized?

Some participants argued that decolonizing secularity implied going back in time before colonialism. So, how far can we go and why? In the process won’t we go back to that time “when there was nothing?” Can’t we decolonize without returning to the past? Can’t we decolonize looking forward and not backward? Is religion or secularity not an embodiment of layers of influences over the years? If we were to peel off these ‘colonial’ elements, what would be left? Some propose a return to the indigenous forms of secularity or religion as the case may be. The question is this: What does indigenous mean? Who defines or determines it? Is the indigenous the same for all? What is considered indigenous to South Africans may not be to Kenyans, Nigerians, or Malians. What is considered indigenous in a part of Nigeria may be a legacy of the colonial influence by another part of Nigeria. So what is indigenous to Africa is not monolithic and regionally applicable.

That leads me to another controversial issue that came up at the workshop, which is, one secularity or multiple secularities. Some of the participants especially those from the Department of Religion, at the University of Cape Town were of the view that there was one secularity, that is the western secularity is manifesting in other climes, in different forms. While other participants from Europe leaned towards the notion of multiple secularities highlighting forms of distinction and differentiation between religion and other social domains across cultures. Although secularism or secularity is Western in origin, what the concept represents manifests in other cultures and societies. Secularities predate Western secularity or manifest and feature in ways that do not fit into or align with Western secularity.

As I noted earlier, there have been colonialisms before Western colonialism. There have been secularities before Western secularity. Although Western colonialism brought the influence of western religion and secularity to bear on various cultures and societies, the colonial encounter does not negate the social differentiation of religion and other domains in these societies. It is only in seeing or articulating secularity in its multiple forms that these situations, dynamics, and intersections could adequately be captured. So, the concept of multiple secularities has enormous explanatory power. It is useful and helpful in highlighting the social distinction of religion and other domains in cultures and societies beyond the West.

For instance, western missionaries introduced christianity and the Christian god to Africa. What we have is one Christianity or Islam manifesting in different forms. Africans have adapted and reinvented the Christian religion over the years, hence the notion of African Christianities. Again while western Christian missionaries introduced Christian religion or religiosity, they did not introduce religion. religiosity, or the idea of god. There are other religiosities apart from and beyond Christianities/Christian religiosities. There are other gods and deities beyond the Christian god/deity. I think the idea of multiple secularities or multiple religiosities has much more descriptive value.

Another issue that came up at the event, not surprisingly so, was apartheid. One of the presenters analyzed the song, Senzeni Na (What have we done?) to buttress his point. I have never heard of the song. I didn’t know its relevance to the anti-apartheid struggle. In the course of the discussions, it was noted how other Africans including Nigerians are not conscious or sensitive to the pains of apartheid. I noticed from the expressions of some South Africans at the meeting that they were not happy with the nonchalant attitudes of Nigerians towards their experience. I believe that black South Africans are right to feel that way. The apartheid was a tragic experience that still hurts blacks in contemporary South Africa. The painful memories won’t quickly go away. Black South Africans should also understand that Nigerians have a different history and experience. They should also not forget that the Nigerian and other African governments contributed a lot to the anti-apartheid struggle. Nigeria supported Nelson Mandela and other heroes and heroines of the struggle.

Many South Africans do not relate to the tragedy of the Rwandan genocide as Rwandans do. They do not relate to the pain and trauma of the Nigerian civil war. In meetings and conferences, they treat these experiences and encounters lightly because these experiences were not a part of their history. As I noted during my conversations with some of the attendees, while I appreciate the pain and trauma of apartheid, Black South Africans must learn to move on because as they say in the Igbo language, Nke chi ka, meaning, the one yet to come, the future one, the one that belongs to tomorrow, is greater. The greatness of South Africa does not lie in the past but in its tomorrow, in its future. It does not mean that we should not refer or draw from the past. We should and we must. But South Africa is not returning to those days when Senzeni Na was sung. The country is forging ahead and moving towards a better and more glorious future.

This song provides a thrust for this forward and onward movement. It highlights the challenges that South Africans face and are facing. But more importantly, this song codifies the pain and suffering of all humans because all oppressed people everywhere; all who suffer persecution within and without South Africa are singing, Senzeni Na.

Igwe, PhD, was a co-convener of Decolonizing Secularity in Africa, Stellenbosch, South Africa, 9–13 December 2024.

Opinion

Commonwealth Day 2025: Together We Can End Witch Hunts And Ritual Attacks

Published

5 hours ago

March 11, 2025

NewTimes

Dr Leo Igwe

By Leo Igwe

As we mark Commonwealth Day 2025, the Advocacy for Alleged Witches protests witch hunts and ritual attacks in Commonwealth countries, and the refusal of the Commonwealth to speak out against these abuses. In many parts of Africa, Asia and Oceania witch hunting is not a thing of the past but an ongoing wave of abuses and violations. In Commonwealth countries such as Ghana, Nigeria, Kenya, Papua New Guinea, persecution of alleged witches rages with force and ferocity. In Ghana, witch persecution results in the displacement of accused persons who then flee to some make shift shelters known as “witch camps”. Those who could not flee to these places like Akua Denteh are murdered in cold blood.

Witchcraft accusation is a form of death sentence for the accused and accused people are sometimes extrajudicially killed despite existing legislations in these countries. Witch trials take place in many countries of the Commonwealth. Trial by ordeal and jungle justice are meted out to the accused. Some weeks ago, an elderly woman who had dementia was accused of witchcraft and beaten to death in Nigeria. In Malawi, alleged witches are stoned to death. In Zambia some political opponents suspected of trying to kill the president using ‘witchcraft’ are standing trial at the state court. Alleged witches, mainly women, children and people with disabilities are attacked, banished, lynched, buried alive or tortured to confess to the ‘crime of witchcraft’.

Witch hunting persists because many countries and groups of countries like the Commonwealth have refused to speak out against these atrocities. The Commonwealth should break its silence on witch hunts and ritual attacks in member countries. It should join the UN in condemning these horrific abuses. The Commonwealth should add its voice to this campaign. It should highlight witch persecution and witch hunting during its meetings and summits. It should call for an end to abuses linked to witchcraft beliefs and ritual attacks. The Commonwealth Day should be an opportunity to recommit to ending this menace. It provides a platform to rally all countries against these violations. No nation should be left behind in the quest to make witch hunting history around the globe.

Together we can end witch hunts and ritual attacks in Commonwealth countries.

Igwe, PhD, directs the Advocacy for Alleged Witches.

Opinion

Lead City @20: The Past And The Present

Published

6 hours ago

March 11, 2025

NewTimes

Dele Jegede In Conversation With Prince Yemisi Shyllon

Prof. Toyin Falola

By Toyin Falola

Our university is now an adult at 20!

About twenty-two years ago, the vision to redefine the frontiers of private education in Nigeria led to the conceptualization of the idea, which birthed a new direction for education. The thoughts and projections of like-minded educators and academic experts led to the establishment of Lead City University (LCU) as a beacon for progressive education in Nigeria. This development came when access to higher education was limited by rigid institutional structures and to federal, state, and a handful of private institutions.

At inception, LCU was envisioned as an academic environment that was expected to balance flexibility with skills and academic excellence. On this note, the university became fully operational in 2005, having scaled through necessary procedures for establishment. Since then, the university has positioned itself as an institution willing to break conventional norms by offering programs that blend theoretical learning with practical application. The goal was clear—to bridge the gap between academia and the real-world demands of the job market, ensuring that students graduated with certificates, competence, and confidence. Hence the word “enterprise graduate”.

Two decades later, Lead City University has become a household name in private tertiary education in Nigeria and earned the trust of parents, guardians, students, and the education community. From its humble beginnings with two campuses around Jericho and Challenge areas of Ibadan, the University has metamorphosed to its current state, reflecting the institution’s journey of ambition, resilience, and a commitment to continuous improvement. To reiterate, the university’s distinct blue, white, and pink colors symbolize the institution’s values for knowledge, human development, creativity and prestige, and excellence. At the same time, the university’s emblem, which depicts a fusion of knowledge, self-reliance, and technological orientation, is not just a design but a representation of LCU’s enduring promise to its students in equipping them with the tools they need to navigate life’s complexities.

In its formative years, Lead City University set itself apart by adopting an academic model that was both innovative and inclusive. Unlike conventional universities that adhered to a one-size-fits-all approach, LCU introduced learning structures that accommodated working professionals, non-traditional students, and young scholars eager for a more practical learning experience. This unique flexibility over time has attracted a diverse student population, making the university a melting pot of ideas and aspirations.

Significantly, and with every sense of humility, it is worth mentioning that the academic offerings at LCU have grown in milestones over the years. What started as a modest selection of undergraduate programs across the two campuses has expanded into a comprehensive curriculum spanning disciplines such as Business Administration, Law, Engineering, Social Sciences, Computer Science, and Mass Communication. More recently, the university reached a significant milestone with the approval and accreditation of its Medical and Health Science programs, including Medicine and Surgery, Pharmacy, and Physiotherapy.

These additions have broadened the school’s academic reach and cemented its credibility as a serious player in Nigeria’s higher education landscape. This has brought much credence to the school, its parent body, and every stakeholder within its system. This is because achieving accreditation for these highly sought-after courses required a high-level strategic investment in infrastructure, faculty recruitment, and curriculum development. The intensity of these has further proven LCU’s unwavering commitment to quality education.

Beyond the classroom, LCU has been at the forefront of promoting an education system that extends beyond academic achievements. It is an apparent recognition that learning should not be confined to lectures and textbooks. To achieve this, the university has integrated entrepreneurship programs, skill acquisition initiatives, and industrial partnerships into its curriculum as a proactive measure for students to withstand today’s competitive job market, where traditional employment opportunities are increasingly fizzling out. It is a welcome development for a 21st-century school, as graduates need more than theoretical knowledge. They need adaptability, innovation, and more practical experience to fit in. It gladdens the heart to know that LCU understands this reality and has taken deliberate steps to ensure its students are equipped with these critical skills.

A defining aspect of the university’s impact over the past two decades has been its emphasis on accessibility. The tradition before was that private universities in Nigeria were often perceived as elitist due to their tuition costs and the social class that enrolled. At one point, there were similar issues with enrollment, as many were not convinced that it was a school their wards could attend.

To mitigate this, LCU has consistently worked to change the narratives by providing scholarships and financial aid to deserving indigent students. These scholarships, awarded based on merit and financial need, remind the institution of its commitment to inclusivity. These opportunities have been life-changing for many students who might have otherwise been unable to afford higher education. By ensuring that education remains within reach for those who need it most, LCU has once again demonstrated its commitment to shaping futures.

Looking at the trajectory and quality of academic delivery obtained in the school, one cannot salute the decision to have a well-grounded faculty. Faculty development has been another cornerstone of LCU’s success. After all, an institution is only as strong as the quality of its educators. Hence, there is a deliberate commitment to recruiting experienced lecturers, researchers, and industry professionals for its academic team. Over the years, the university has built a faculty that blends theoretical expertise with real-world experience. This approach ensures that students are not just taught from textbooks but are mentored by individuals who have made significant contributions in their respective fields. By fostering an environment of mentorship and academic research, the university has maintained high teaching standards, preparing students for professional and educational pursuits.

The physical transformation of Lead City University over the past twenty years is also worth noting. The university, which began with a modest campus, has since expanded into a thriving academic hub, complete with modern lecture halls, state-of-the-art laboratories, well-equipped libraries, and recreational facilities embedded in an architectural design that reflects a blend of tradition and modernity, creating an environment that is both inspiring and conducive to learning. These infrastructural developments are a testament to the university’s long-term vision to make learning conducive in a friendly atmosphere.

However, LCU’s journey has not been without challenges. Like all private institutions, it has had to navigate the complexities of Nigeria’s educational sector, including regulatory policies, economic fluctuations, and the evolving expectations of students and parents. For instance, the unpredictability of the country’s economy has often made financial planning difficult for the institution and its students. Yet, through strategic planning and resilience, LCU has continued to evolve, adapting to changes while maintaining its core mission.

The role of technology in education has also become increasingly significant in recent years, and LCU has recognized the need to integrate digital learning into its academic framework. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted educational systems globally and became a wake-up call for institutions to adopt more technologically driven learning methods. LCU strengthened its digital learning infrastructure, enabling students to continue their education remotely. The university’s investment in e-learning platforms, virtual labs, and online course delivery models reflects its readiness to embrace the future of education.

At one point, the university displayed mastery of digital tools to drive enrollment. This was in the wake of low enrollments, especially as very few citizens of Oyo State see the school as a prospect. During this period, the university had a large number of its students coming from outside the state. In response, the dedicated marketing teams deployed various traditional and digital tools, effectively utilizing social media, newsletters, and email marketing to achieve outstanding results. This is but a display of innovative thinking by a core department in the school.

As Lead City University celebrates its 20th anniversary, it is at a critical juncture that demands an even more significant commitment to innovation, research, and global academic engagement. The next phase of its journey will undoubtedly require a stronger emphasis on technological integration, expanded research initiatives, and deeper collaborations with local and international institutions. The university has already laid a strong foundation, but the challenge is to build upon it, ensuring that the next twenty years bring even more outstanding achievements.

Lead City at 20 is not just a celebration of longevity but a testament to the power of vision, perseverance, and growth; from a promising idea to a respected institution, LCU’s story is one of transformation and impact.

Looking ahead, the university must continue to evolve, keeping pace with global academic trends while staying true to its mission. Whether through the expansion of its research capabilities, increased industry collaborations, or the continued development of its students, LCU’s future is filled with possibilities. The past twenty years have been remarkable, but the next two decades hold even more significant potential.

For students, alums, faculty, and stakeholders, Lead City University is more than just an institution—it is a community, a movement, and a legacy in the making. As the university steps into the future, it does so with the same ambition and resolve that fueled its inception. The journey is far from over; in many ways, it is only just beginning.

. Falola is Professor Emeritus in the Humanities Lead City University.