Opinion
Nigerian Elections: A Democracy In The Hands Of A Judiciary
Published
1 year agoon
![Dele Jegede In Conversation With Prince Yemisi Shyllon](https://www.newtimes.com.ng/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Toyin-Falola_Newtimes.com_.ng_-1.jpg)
By Toyin Falola
To run for an election in Nigeria, as you raise the money you need, now in billions of naira, remember one thing: divide the money into two—one for the elections and the other for legal matters. If you win, the loser will take you to court. If you lose, take the winner to court. If the winner had the money for the election and no money for the legal matters, his fortune would be reversed. Three sets of people now decide for us: the voters, the lawyers, and the judges. Democracy is no longer solely about the legitimacy of votes but also the legality of how those votes are obtained and counted. Legality is now above legitimacy. Please allow me to explain.
The history of elections in Nigeria has always been of interest, but that of its aftermaths creates crescendos of the former, far more important sometimes and far more disappointing most times. In several instances, a party’s candidate would be elected with some level of presumed or deductible public support, and when the lens or the “VAR” of the judiciary looks at it, the people’s results get dashed. Sometimes, the supposed winner could be one that does not have the people’s approval, and after much process of vetting, the judiciary installs who they want or think to have fulfilled the law the most. Some other times, there is not much difference.
The roles of the judiciary in pre- and post-election matters will never stop to beg the question of what should be held supreme: legality or legitimacy. Of course, both the two concepts semantically cross each other’s borders, but to what extent should the extremes of each be tolerated? What should decide legitimacy? Is it the quantum of legal compliance and due processes or the invested aggregated public interests? And should election results be held within the bustles of Electoral Acts, Constitutional Provisions, Court Rules, Practice Directions, and other legal reality checks? This dilemma has been a perennial occurrence and has severally and severely brought the people to some antagonistic vantage points, pitted against the Milord’s Temples of Justice.
For instance, it is close to a month since the results of the petition at the Court of Appeal against the supposed victory of the APC at the 2023 Nigerian elections, and the people of Nigeria are nowhere near satisfied. It is incredible how a country with a unique history of repeated final determination of election results at the courts, as opposed to the polls, still keeps getting it wrong. The situation is evidence that the people take the judiciary as a betting house and take the chaos of doubts to its temple, as this has run throughout the history of Nigerian democracy.
Take also, for instance, the notorious case of the 2019 Imo State Gubernatorial elections, where the Supreme Court annulled the victory of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) Candidate, Emeka Ihedioha, and installed the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, Hope Uzodinma as governor; a candidate who did not just lose to Ihedioha in the initial race but finished a distant fourth position and the reaction of the people to the situation. What about the Adeleke election saga in Osun State in recent history? This, however, seems to be an accepted decision by the people because of the supposed popularity of the candidate and the finesse of his dancing steps.
Another very controversial case was the court’s decision in the Bayelsa State elections, where the Supreme Court also annulled the victory of the winner of the elections because it was discovered that his running mate had presented some fake documents. He was, therefore, disqualified, and his opponent was installed as governor.
This history of judicial intervention in elections is no short one. Since the petition originating from the election between Shehu Shagari and Obafemi Awolowo in 1979, Nigerians have had to severally vest their hopes in the judiciary and watch as they act as umpires in matters that are originally designed to be settled by public vote.
There is a cross-road between legality that informs the court’s decision to the extent that irregularity would amount to fundamental decisions that would affect the fate of the people and aid an illegitimate and unpopular government. The people would then be left to struggle with a largely unwanted government or such that could not be ascertained to have won the popular confidence of the generality of the electorate. The court is the home of determining matters based on some objective parameters, explaining why laws are set to guide every matter brought before the court.
From history, it is quite clear that many decisions made on election and election-related matters are either won or dismissed based on irregularities, technicalities, and procedural errors that would deny justice on substantive matters. Of what benefit would a suit that was dismissed based on its lack of conformity with an established form or because it was instituted by a writ of summons rather than being brought by way of a petition? When a matter is determined based on this and other preliminary fulfillments or procedures, the substance, which goes to the root of the legitimacy and desires of the people, is buried or forgotten.
The Constitution and the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules have established that fundamental rights issues should not be discountenanced based on mere irregularities and that as sui generis issues, the standard of expectation should be brought lower compared to other matters before any court. Fundamental rights issues in Nigeria can be brought before the State High Court, Federal High Court, or National Industrial Court. It could also be brought by any means, making it quite easy for a person whose right has been trampled upon to seek justice.
But is a fraudulent election and mandates conferred on people unjustly not worth the similar care given to human rights issues? Where legality and procedures are reconsidered on cases from Chapter IV of the constitution, how many more issues are traced back to legitimacy, the people’s future, and the nation’s progressive projections? Isn’t an election fraud injustice to the generality of people and a collective breach of the collective rights of the people?
The consequence of elections to the sociopolitical consciousness of a people must not be taken lightly. Not just because elections are the system through which the next leader of a democratic nation is decided but because that system is in and of itself the embodiment or the defining expression of the democratic soul of the society. The iconic 16th president of the United States of America, Abraham Lincoln, famously defined Democracy as the “rule of the people, by the people and for the people”; a concise yet comprehensive capturing of the essence of the ideology.
No society can claim to be democratic in principle without having its people come together to decide who its leaders are. Because those elected are not just “leaders,” but in a more honest sense, are representatives of the people. And since they are representatives of the people, it would be an undeniable logical inconsistency, as well as a great political absurdity, if the people’s will were to be ignored in the selection of their next leader, no matter how legal, constitutional or judicially viable, that process of selection is. It is this understanding that should primarily guide the decision-making of the judiciary that elections are an expression of the will of the people, and so in their decisions, their foremost objective must be the protection and enforcement of that will.
When you see that the entire nation is not only interested but has a stake in the matter, one would expect that the judiciary takes a decision that is the most accurate reflection of the will of the people. Instead, we saw the judiciary dismissing what seemed to be worthy petitions because one preliminary matter was not filed or one issue arising from the whole pool of matters was supposed to be decided by another court. This system and mentality is an outright mockery of the people’s desires. They ignore important, weighty arguments on the grounds of minor, less significant matters of procedure, sacrificing Justice on the altar of technicalities.
My question to the Justices who sacrificed justice for technicality is this: was the law made for man, or man made for the law? The obvious answer to this question is a foundational concept of law, which ought to guide their reasoning. Law is very important to ensuring order and progress in society. But when that law is exalted at the expense of the best interests of the men it was created to serve, then that law is pointless and nothing more than a stumbling block to the progress of society. Law is good because it ensures legality. But man is ultimate because it is man that gives legitimacy. Legitimacy to other men, legitimacy to a government, and legitimacy to even the law itself. So, to all those who view the judiciary’s actions through the mediocre lens of legality, here is a better question: it may be legal, but is it legitimate? Do not get me wrong; I do not mean that the law should be thrown into the winds and disregarded at every instance; of course, “he who comes to equity must come with clean hands,” and “he who wants equity must do equity.” However, there should be a relaxed line so as not to run into the dangers of positivism.
The court must be able to see that what is more important at every point before making its decisions is the importance of legitimacy and popularity. The political and social consequences decisions of the court can cause. This is because every institution is established in the back of the people, and since people are the law themselves, the law should never be clogged to their wheel. The law should be for the men and not men for the law.
When questions like this are taken more seriously, we will begin to see changes in this country. Our democratic institutions need to be recalibrated and strengthened. Judicial recourse is useful, but when it becomes repeated, it insults and nullifies the point of the precious will of the people. Going forward, we must ensure that we fight to protect that will. All involved from the government to INEC, to the courts, must do better. To close, the preamble of the Nigerian constitution opens with “We the people of the Federal Republic of Nigeria…Do hereby make, enact, and give to ourselves the following constitution”. If it is we, the people, who give ourselves the law, then it must be we, the people, who give ourselves our government. We must defend that right, always.
You may like
-
Speaking Truth To Power: A Review Of Gbemisola Adeoti’s Stoning The Wind
-
Femi Badejo At 70 Lecture: Power, Privilege, And Philosophy In Africa
-
President Trump, Africa, And The Parable Of Uncertainties
-
Writing Biographies
-
Reflections On Moghalu’s Voice On African Leadership (2)
-
Trump’s Tenure And Africa’s Relation
Opinion
Reading List For Public Servants And Reform Managers
Published
5 hours agoon
February 5, 2025![](https://www.newtimes.com.ng/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Screenshot_20241216-1238532.png)
By Tunji Olaopa
Since its inauguration many decades ago, public administration has generated a permanent discursive framework that ensures that it has the theoretical and practical contents to sustain the professionalism and efficiency that the public service requires to complement the state everywhere. This becomes even more critical given that the democratic imperative keeps articulating and aggregating the significant political preferences of a citizenry that knows what it wants from a leadership and its administrative apparatuses. This therefore means that for public administration to fully and adequately complement the democratic imperative—for the public service to optimally aid democratic governance in any state—the public administrative discourse must always be in full swing to ensure it is not outstripped by the discourse on democracy.
This, I suspect, is not the real challenge. This is because the public administration discourse has remained fundamentally fecund in terms of its inner dynamics of responding to the challenges that confront public administration and the public service over the decades. From Max Weber to Woodrow Wilson, and from the new public management (NPM) to the new governance theory, public administration has kept up with the changing dynamics of the times that enables it to overcome critical hindrances and challenges from the first to the fourth industrial revolutions to the transformation of the nature of the state, and from artificial intelligences to the new normal instigated by the COVID-19 pandemic and the polycrises that have engulfed the world.
The real challenge, I think, derives from the capacity of public servants to keep up their intelligence quotient with the vast array of discourses that public administration throws up. The twenty-first century demands a public servant that is knowledgeable, intelligent, adaptable and a transformative leader with the preemptive capacity to articulate a vision, design a strategy and get things done. This challenge to the intelligent quotient of the public servant, like most issues, is again more crucial once we begin to speak about the postcolonial public servant caught within the dysfunctional grip of a postcolonial public service like Nigeria’s. This puts a double bind on such a public servant to do more in order to be able to live up to the national and global expectations of a twenty-first century public servant charged with the fundamental responsibility of crafting and implementing public policies with the tools of modern decision science.
One significant way, and a most difficult one at that, by which a postcolonial public servant and public manager in a country like Nigeria can keep abreast of the public administration discourse and the challenges of remaining effective sufficiently to man the new public service is to have an up-to-date reading list of books that embody the trajectories of the challenges, triumphs and directions of the public administration apparatuses, especially within a specific context. What I want to do within the limited space of this piece is to outline a few critical books that speak to how far public administration and the public service have advanced. And the methodology is to combine books that provide both global and national perspectives. This speaks to the necessity of inserting a public manager within a global-local context of operation that ensures that such a public manager can think globally and act locally with the discursive resources garnered from such critical intellectual and theoretical-practical resources.
The first book on my list is Zeger van der Wal’s The 21st Century Public Manager (2017). The book is fundamental because it is sufficiently situated in a time that captures the fundamental challenges of public administration in times of crisis (except that it is three years shy of one of the most fundamental challenges to humanity and public administration, the COVID-19 pandemic). However, the book recognizes that we live in a VUCA—volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous—time; a VUCA environment that was aggravated by the pandemic and polycrisis the world, and public administration, are currently confronting. The author was motivated to write a book that demonstrates that “public administration matters.” It is a book that was “hands-on, actor-driven, and speaking to the daily life of public managers who often operate in tough circumstances.” And with the book, the author meant to “speak to (aspiring) public managers across the globe. A book that would take their issues, pains, and challenges but also their optimism, clever solutions, and coping mechanisms as a starting point…. A book, above all, that would take senior practitioners seriously by providing them with examples, perspectives, and strategies grounded in the latest research evidence and best practices while being accessible and actor-driven at the same time. A book, lastly, that would be relevant and timely to public managers in the developing as well as the developed world, in the West and the non-West.”
In chapter four, van der Wal enumerates what he calls the “seven clusters of demands, dilemmas and opportunities” that public managers need to think through to operate optimally within the VUCA administrative environment. The first demand is that of “managing stakeholder multiplicity.” The new governance space now carries the burden of a multitude of stakeholders with diverse and often ambiguous demands, attitudes and styles. The dilemma is how to design and deliver a coherent administrative and managerial vision to such a diverse audience. The opportunity however derives from the benefits of leveraging the unlimited channels and supports that come from such diverse audiences to push through policy goals. The second demand is “Managing authority turbulence.” This implies that an average public manager is caught within an authority matrix that limits her capacity to utilize her formal power to enact critical decisions. The dilemma for the public manager is that of how to demonstrate collaborative capacity, even with those lacking the requisite skills while still holding on to critical authority. And yet, there is the opportunity of shared accountability that comes from the collective ownership of policies and programmes. The third demand for the twenty-first century public manager is “managing the new work(force)”. The public manager is confronted with the changing nature of work itself, and with an emergent workforce that incorporates new workforce, new worldviews and new generations, from Gen Z to Generation Alpha. This new workforce consists of a young, educated, knowledgeable, tech-savvy and assertive citizenry with a mind of its own. The dilemma is that of how to accommodate this new idea of work(force) while pushing it efficiently to achieve service delivery. The opportunity comes from the ability to remove bureaucratic constraints while achieving performance and productivity.
The fourth demand is that of “managing innovation forces.” Innovation forces are the critical resources, especially innovative technologies, that a public manager requires to keep the public service system as optimal and efficient as possible. The challenge however is that of being as innovative and entrepreneurial as possible within the ambit of budgetary limitations and ambiguous expectations from the politicians and the public. The opportunity that faces the public manager is that of experimenting with newer and developing innovation to achieve effective policies. The fifth demand is “managing ethical complexities.” Public administration is now embroiled within a global ethical governance framework that is enhanced by digital technologies and the need for accountability and transparency. The public manager therefore faces pressure from politicians, citizens, global innovations, and so on. The challenge is that of how to manage the public service ethically while facing enormous scrutiny from multiple publics with competing value sets. The opportunity comes from leading ethically in ways that achieve bureaucratic legitimacy for the state. The sixth demand comes from “managing short versus long time horizons.” This situates the public manager within the need to respond to the need for short-term goals by politicians and long-term planning for overall institutional resilience. The opportunity is that of deploying scenario-building techniques and technologies to anticipate future challenges.
The last demand is “managing cross-sectoral collaboration.” This is demanded by the new governance space that involves new and multiple stakeholders and non-state actors. The public manager needs to mediate this space to achieve extensive buy-in and ownership of ideas and policies, generate financial assistances and expertise, and tap into innovative ideas. The dilemma is how to balance this partnership while managing trust and power relations.
In Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector (1992), David Osborne and Teed Gaebler make the critical case that government can follow the logic of performance that have transformed capitalist corporation into performing better and achieving more efficient productivity result. And to make government work more efficiently and productively, the authors argue that government needs to be reinvented through the sweeping away of all bureaucratic bottlenecks that had made government too cumbersome to achieve democratic governance. An entrepreneurial government, as they call it, envisions some broad social goals and objectives, put in place performance management systems that strategize about these objectives, and employ people to sign performance contract to achieve the goals.
Osborne and Gaebler envision the responsibility of government as that of steering and not rowing; government’s responsibility is not to deliver services, but to articulate strategies that will enable the service delivery function to be outsourced to private contractors. Reinventing Government follows up on the managerial revolution brought about by the new public management and the objective of making government more flexible, lean and effective for the sake of performance. It demands that the public manager must be more than a thermostatic administrator who is merely gauging the institutional temperature of the public service. She must be more of a leader; a manager who anticipates challenges and coaxes the public service into more entrepreneurial and innovative performances.
In the 2007 book, The End of Government…As We Know It: Making Public Policy Work, Elaine Kamarck takes on the thread of the need to rethink how government business should be pursued for better result. The end of government as we know it is the end of the idea of government circumscribed by a bureaucracy that encumbers government from performing. It is the end of the traditional Weberian framework of government and its deadweights of hierarchies and red tapes. In the post-bureaucratic state, argues Kamarck, government needs to get tools that will facilitate the right connection between policy design and implementation. These tools are categorized into three: reinvented government, government by network and government by market. All three are meant to get the public sector to work in ways that involve externalities and outsourcing modalities that enable government to achieve efficient performance.
In its 2011 publication, The Future of Government, the World Economic Forum provides more recent contents that sum up the institutional reform objective of bringing the idea of government up to the requirement of the twenty-first century. What the managerial revolution demands is that government must be FAST—flatter, agile, streamlined and tech-enabled. The traditional structure of the bureaucracy, being rigid, inward-looking and founded on outdated competencies, must be modernized in ways that make it more collaborative, transparent, flexible and participatory. In other words, government and its public service must reflect the demands articulated by van der Wal in The 21st Century Public Manager.
The key issue that links all the preceding publications is that of public value that the new public service must create as a response to citizens’ informed demands. This is the focus of Mark H. Moore’s Creating Public Value (1995). In the book, Moore “sets out a philosophy of public management—an idea of what we citizens should expect of public managers, the ethical responsibilities they assume in taking offices, and what constitutes virtue in the execution of their offices.” Within the new managerial imagination, the public manager is more than an administrator who is supposed to look downward in terms of “the reliable control of organizational operations; she is rather meant to look outwards “towards the achievements of valuable results” or upwards “towards renegotiated policy mandates.” A public manager therefore becomes an explorer who is concerned with discovering, defining and producing public value.
These preceding books and publications sum up the global dimension of the materials that ground the postcolonial public managers and the public servants, especially within the Nigerian public service system, within the demands of public administration as a universal endeavor concerned with what the government does and the paradigms, trajectories of discourses and methodologies by which government can become more efficient and more productive. However, this global managerial imagination must be reckoned within the context of the inherited public service system Britain bequeathed to Nigeria. In my inaugural lecture, Big Bad Bureaucracy: Reinventing the Bureaucracy as a New Public Service in Nigeria (2018), I took all these preceding books, as well as my many years as a critical insider in the dysfunctional public service system in Nigeria seriously. The publication therefore becomes a critical leeway into how the Nigerian civil service system, founded on the traditional Weberian institution, works in stimulating what I have called bureau-pathologies that have compromised the search for a workable developmental state in Nigeria, post-independence. And how an insider perspective could enable a proper understanding of what ails the system, what needed to be done and how to go about reinventing the government from an approach that is not just universal, like Osborne and Gaebler’s, or Kamarck’s or Moore’s; but one that is rooted in contextual administrative dynamics. This provides a situational context by which public managers in Nigeria could begin to relate to what these non-Nigerian administrative theorists are saying about the nature of government and the reinvented mandates of the public manager.
This therefore makes even more fundamental the administrative memoir as a cogent introduction to how Nigerian public managers and public servants navigated the dysfunctionality of the postcolonial system while striving for a more efficient and optimal public service that will instigate developmental planning and democratic governance. Two of such memoirs are crucial, in my reckoning: Chief Simeon Adebo’s Our Unforgettable Years (1984) and Tunji Olaopa’s The Unending Quest for Reform (2023). Simeon Adebo represents a critical administrative figure in the emergence and consolidation of the public service and public administration discourse in Nigeria. He was one of the founding pioneers that ushered in what has been called the golden age of public administration in Nigeria. Indeed, his administrative commitment in the old western region led to the formulation of the Awolowo-Adebo paradigm of the politics-administration dichotomy, one of the defining dichotomies around which public administration emerged. Adebo’s public service reform efforts constitute a key framework for rethinking the institutional rehabilitating and reinvention of the civil service system in Nigeria. On the other hand, The Unending Quest for Reform articulates a challenging reaction to the bureau-pathologies that ate up the civil service system after the pioneering efforts of Adebo and his cohorts unfortunately went into critical debilitation. The Unending Quest for Reform serves the function of outlining what I consider a philosophy of institutional reform founded on many years of not only participating in the dysfunction of the civil service system, but also researching its root causes and administrative and political trajectories from pre-independence to date.
I am recommending these books—of course there are more—as the first level of challenging the intellectual acumen of any public manager who is willing to place herself within the VUCA and postcolonial environments of the public service in Nigeria, and dare to be critical sufficiently to become a significant part of the reinvention of the new public service as a world-class institution for making democratic governance productive for Nigerians. It is best to end this reflection about public administration discourse and the books public servants could start reading with Pablo Neruda, the Chilean poet-diplomat and politician: “The books that help you most are those which make you think that most. The hardest way of learning is that of easy reading; but a great book that comes from a great thinker is a ship of thought, deep freighted with truth and beauty.”
. Olaopa, Professor of Public Administration, is the Chairman,
Federal Civil Service Commission,
Abuja.
Opinion
Act Now To End Witchcraft Accusations And Ritual Attacks
Published
5 days agoon
January 31, 2025![Witch Burning, Impunity And Abuses Linked to Witchcraft Beliefs In Benue State](https://www.newtimes.com.ng/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/IMG-20210727-WA0004.jpg)
Opinion
Ritual Killings: Resurgence And Need For Urgent Action In Nigeria
Published
5 days agoon
January 31, 2025![](https://www.newtimes.com.ng/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/IMG-20240905-WA0033.jpg)
By Dooyum Dominic Ingye
Before the end of last year, I watched several video clips on TikTok in which some Nigerian youths boasted about engaging in money rituals to get rich. I vividly remember a video showing several young people gathered in the home of a traditional priest for consultation on money rituals. Furthermore, the internet was flooded with videos of young Nigerians declaring, “As 2024 no work for me, na rituals we go do for 2025.” These were disturbing signs of the events that would later define 2025.
Due to the number of ritual killings recorded in 2025, Nigeria’s House of Representatives urged the Federal Government to declare a state of emergency. This was partly in response to figures released by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), which indicated that over 150 ritual killing cases linked to young people seeking quick wealth had been recorded in the six months leading up to January 2025. Many of these cases occurred in the western part of Nigeria and the Federal Capital Territory.
For those wondering, ritual killings have always been practiced in Nigeria—from the Ogbuefi and Otu-Edo ritual killings in pre-colonial times to the Otokoto ritual killings in post-independence Nigeria. In 1910, British High Commissioner Sir Hugh Clifford documented various ritual killings in Southern Nigeria. Essentially, where superstitious traditional beliefs held sway, ritual killings were practised.
Prior to Nigeria’s return to democracy in 1999, most ritual killings were performed for so-called traditional religious purposes. However, contemporary Nigeria is characterized by exploitative ritual killings driven by superstition, greed, and power. Vulnerable people—such as women, children, and the elderly—are the primary targets.
Many youths who engage in money rituals today likely grew up in the early 1990s and 2000s, a period when Nollywood movies and the media romanticized or sensationalized money rituals. Films such as Living in Bondage (1992), Circle of Doom (1993), Idejimba (1995), Blood Money (1997), Rituals (1997), and Last Burial (2000) effectively promoted ritual themes that not only evoked strong catharsis in viewers but also solidified their belief in rituals and other superstitious nonsense.
During this period, Nigerians were still reeling from the effects of the Structural Adjustment Program, which caused widespread hardship and suffering. Many saw these movies as validation of the effectiveness of rituals, believing that they could be used to escape poverty. These fictional narratives became ingrained in the minds of children who grew up admiring actors such as Kanayo O. Kanayo, Clem Ohameze, Kenneth Okonkwo, Pete Edochie, and others as classic examples of the success of rituals. They aspired to become like the fictional characters these actors played.
Similarly, the release of Isakaba in 2001 actively promoted the belief in magical powers, particularly Odeshi—the belief that certain charms can make the human body impervious to bullets and machetes. Isakaba depicted a society plagued by crime, where the policing system had failed. The introduction of the Isakaba Boys, who possessed magical powers to apprehend and kill criminals, was portrayed as a welcome solution.
The impact of this movie was profound: it resonated with Nigerians’ real-life experiences, and many wished for a real-life Isakaba to deal with criminals. As a result, many Nigerians grew up believing that certain rituals could make them invincible.
Furthermore, Nigeria’s weak law enforcement system has allowed ritualists to operate freely. Corruption and lack of consequences have emboldened those who engage in money rituals, as they see no one willing or able to stop or prosecute them.
Coupled with increased economic hardship—especially in the last two years—and social media pressure, many young people have been driven to kill others for ritual purposes. In a country where wealth is glorified without question, where education lacks critical thinking, and where social values are eroded, the belief that human body parts can be used to attain wealth or power reigns supreme.
These beliefs have led to the deaths of many young Nigerians with promising futures.
For instance, in January 2025 in Ogun State, four teenagers were arrested for the murder of 20-year-old Sofiat Kehinde. They allegedly decapitated her and burned her head, intending to use it in a money-making ritual. In Ushata village, Nasarawa State, a suspect was arrested for allegedly killing his friend’s seven-year-old son for ritual purposes. The arrest followed a report by the boy’s father regarding his son’s disappearance. In Kwara State, Ismaila Saliu, a 25-year-old herbalist, and an accomplice were arrested by the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps for allegedly murdering Saliu’s 14-year-old brother for a money ritual. Reports indicate that he conspired with another herbalist and an accomplice to commit the act. In Abeokuta last month, Taiwo Yemitan was arrested by the Ogun State Police Command for possessing a fresh human head and dismembered body parts of a female victim. Last year, in Isua Akoko, Ondo State, Yusuf Adinohi was apprehended for allegedly possessing eight human skulls.
These killings have created fear and paranoia in communities. Feelings of trust and friendship have been completely eroded. Women and girls, who are often the victims, increasingly see men as dangerous predators. Worse still, ritual killings are now so rampant that ritualists kill their own wives and children, believing that sacrificing their loved ones will bring them wealth. The most sought-after human body parts for rituals include private parts, eyes, breasts, hearts, heads, tongues, and hands.
To address these issues, the government, as the major stakeholder, must take a decisive action by creating jobs and youth empowerment programmes to reduce desperation for quick wealth. There is a need to introduce stricter punishments for ritual-related crimes to deter offenders and to sponsor national awareness campaigns that educate Nigerians on the dangers of ritual killings. It is also necessary to address misconceptions around wealth and superstition by partnering with organizations such as the Advocacy for Alleged Witches (AfAW), which has spent the last four years addressing witchcraft accusations and ritual killings in Nigeria.
This year, AfAW launched the “Stop Witchcraft Accusations and Ritual Killings” campaign to tackle witch hunts and ritual killings by teenagers. Now is the right time for the government to support AfAW and end this menace once and for all.
Dooyum Dominic Ingye is the Program Manager of the Advocacy for Alleged Witches.
NEW TIMES CULTURE
![](https://www.newtimes.com.ng/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Screenshot_20241216-1238532-80x80.png)
Reading List For Public Servants And Reform Managers
![Pastor Adeboye Reveals Secret About Presidential Candidates](https://www.newtimes.com.ng/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/IMG_20230107_140740-80x80.jpg)
Don’t Say I Didn’t Tell You – Adeboye In New Revelation
![](https://www.newtimes.com.ng/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/images-1-80x80.jpeg)
Bisi Akande Drags Obasanjo Into Bola Ige’s Murder
Top Stories
-
Politics4 days ago
Bisi Akande Drags Obasanjo Into Bola Ige’s Murder
-
Lifestyle & Entertainment4 days ago
What To Do In Abusive Relationship – Chiwetala Agu
-
Latest News2 days ago
Don’t Say I Didn’t Tell You – Adeboye In New Revelation
-
Opinion5 hours ago
Reading List For Public Servants And Reform Managers