NIGERIA: THE COST OF BOLA AHMED TINUBU 2 BILLION DOLLARS

Nigeria’s debt to the World Bank’s concessional lending arm, the International Development Association, surged by $1.9bn in just one year to reach $18.7bn as of December 31, 2025, new financial data released by the institution show.

According to the IDA Management’s Discussion and Analysis for the period ended December 31, 2025, Nigeria’s exposure to the bank’s loan portfolio rose significantly from $16.8bn at end-2024, marking an 11.3 per cent year-on-year increase.

The sharp rise shows growing reliance on multilateral concessional financing as the Federal Government navigates tightening fiscal space amid global market volatility.

The latest figures place Nigeria as the third-largest borrower in the IDA portfolio, behind Bangladesh ($23.0bn) and Pakistan ($19.4bn), among the top ten countries with the highest exposures.

Together, these 10 countries accounted for 60 per cent of IDA’s total exposure as of December 31, 2025, the report said. A year earlier, the same cohort accounted for 61 per cent of total exposure.

The PUNCH observed that the $1.9bn uptick largely reflects continued project disbursements under Nigeria’s Country Partnership Frameworks and expanded commitments in key sectors such as health, education, and infrastructure.

While IDA financing is highly concessional, with long maturities and grace periods, the growing stock adds to Nigeria’s external debt obligations.

In the report, IDA emphasised the importance of monitoring such exposures in the context of repayment and future disbursement profiles, noting, “Monitoring these exposures relative to the SBL requires consideration of the repayment profiles of existing loans, as well as disbursement profiles and projected new loans and guarantees.”

The surge comes as IDA’s overall portfolio expanded. Net loans outstanding rose to $226.4bn as of December 31, 2025, from $205.8bn a year earlier, reflecting the broader scaling up of concessional resources under the institution’s hybrid financing model that blends member contributions with market borrowings.

IDA describes its mission as providing “loans, grants and guarantees to the poorest and most vulnerable countries to help meet their development needs.”

With Nigeria’s exposure now at $18.7bn, higher than other major African IDA clients such as Ethiopia and Tanzania, the country’s role in the World Bank’s concessional portfolio remains prominent.

Aside from the IDA, there is also the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, which is another lending arm of the World Bank for middle-income and creditworthy lower-income countries, raising funds on global capital markets through its AAA rating and providing sovereign loans, guarantees, and advisory support aimed at reducing poverty and promoting sustainable development.

While IDA loans offer more favourable terms than market borrowing, the steady accumulation of such debt adds to Nigeria’s overall public debt burden, raising questions about debt sustainability.

As of June 30, 2025, Nigeria’s external debt stood at $46.98bn, according to the Debt Management Office. Of this amount, the World Bank Group accounted for $19.39bn—comprising $18.04bn from the International Development Association and $1.35bn from the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

This means the World Bank holds 41.3 per cent of the total, reinforcing its outsized role in funding Nigeria’s development programmes.

Economist and CEO of the Centre for the Promotion of Private Enterprise, Dr Muda Yusuf, earlier said the rising World Bank commitments to Nigeria should be examined within the context of the country’s Medium-Term Expenditure Framework and annual budgets, which already provide for both domestic and foreign borrowing.

He noted that deficit financing is a common feature of budgets worldwide and is not inherently wrong, as it allows governments to make critical investments without waiting to generate all the required revenue upfront.

However, he stressed that borrowing should always be backed by sound economic reasoning and clear development priorities. Yusuf emphasised that the key issue is debt sustainability, which depends primarily on the country’s revenue capacity to service its obligations.

Without strong cash flow to meet repayment schedules, he warned, Nigeria risks falling into a vicious cycle of borrowing to service existing loans, thereby perpetuating fiscal vulnerability.

He said it is essential that projects funded by loans directly support the economy’s capacity to repay. According to him, Nigeria should be cautious about foreign loans due to the exchange-rate risks they pose, noting that domestic debt is generally easier to manage.

Excessive foreign borrowing, he warned, could put pressure on the country’s reserves and further weaken the exchange rate. He stressed that a disciplined approach to debt sustainability will be crucial for Nigeria to avoid long-term fiscal distress.

SAY NO TO SHARIA

Reports indicate that theses nine Muslims were arrested in Kano State for eating during Ramadan fasting hours by the Islamic police, known as Hisbah. This development raises serious constitutional and moral questions.

First, fasting is a religious obligation, not a civic law. It is an act of worship between an individual and God. When the state begins to police personal religious devotion, it crosses from governance into coercion. Faith loses its meaning when it is enforced by arrest.

Second, Nigeria is constitutionally a secular state. Secularism does not mean hostility to religion; it means neutrality. The state must not elevate one religious practice above another or compel adherence. If someone is fasting, that should be voluntary. If someone is not fasting, whether due to health, personal conviction, or belonging to another faith, that is equally their right.

Third, health and personal circumstances vary. As a former Muslim myself, I know some people are exempt from fasting in Islam itself - the sick, travelers, pregnant women, the elderly. Who determines a person’s medical condition on the street? Religious policing risks public humiliation and abuse of fundamental rights.

Fourth, freedom of religion also includes freedom from religious enforcement. A Christian cannot be compelled to observe Ramadan. A traditionalist cannot be compelled to comply with Islamic codes. Even among Muslims, matters of devotion should be guided by conscience, not force.

Fifth, introducing or expanding Sharia enforcement in a multi-religious country like Nigeria risks deepening division. Nigeria is religiously diverse - Muslims, Christians, traditional believers, and others coexist. The stability of the nation depends on protecting pluralism, not privileging one legal-religious system over others.

Sixth, state involvement in religious matters, including funding pilgrimages or enforcing fasting, blurs the line between governance and doctrine. Government exists to secure lives, property, justice, infrastructure, and welfare, not to regulate personal worship.

True faith is strongest when chosen freely. Compulsion breeds resentment, not righteousness.

A secular Nigeria protects everyone: It protects Muslims to practice Islam freely. It protects Christians to practice Christianity freely. It protects traditional worshippers. It protects those who choose no religion at all. That balance is what keeps a diverse nation stable.

My stand should not be seeing as attacking a religion, but about defending constitutional freedoms and peaceful coexistence.

Southwest should not go this low, please.

ALAAFIN’S ARROGANCE HAD CAUSED HIS DOWN FALL, AS THE PEOPLE OF AGỌ OJA RECLAIMED THEIR ANCESTRAL DOMAIN

We warned all the Ọyọ Atiba bloggers who were doing AI to curse OỌNI and anyone who shares the true history. See where it has landed you now, you have pushed historians to bring out factual history.

I commend you Baba Ìgbìyànjú The - Effort for this factual historical information below:

001 Oba in Oyo Town, Kabiesi Oloja of Ago-Oja Kingdom. Today's Oyo town, it is worth noting, does not belong to Atiba; rather, it is owned by the descendants of Ago Oja. As was characteristic of Atiba, who was known for repaying kindness with wickedness and taking what did not belong to him.

As you are aware, the saying 'an apple doesn't fall far from its tree' holds true meaning, eni bini laajo. Over 90 percent of the Atibas of today still follow the steps of their forefathers. Here is a brief account of Ago Oja before it was taken from them after Atiba sought refuge.

CHRONOLOGY OF THE AGO-OJA PEOPLE AND THEIR TRADITIONAL RULERS

The Ago-Oja people are the earliest known settlers of present-day Oyo Town. Their ancestral origin is traced to Ile-Ife, the cradle of the Yoruba race, through the Obàtálá lineage of the Aládìkún ancestry.

According to oral tradition, Lasílẹ̀ who was a descendant of Aladikun lineage begat Lasílọ̀. Lasílọ̀ was the father of Oja, Elebu, and Ailumo, making all three brothers. The family originally resided at Obate, where successive generations lived as hunters, warriors, and primarily farmers for a considerable period.

Due to unfavorable conditions at Obate—including poor soil fertility, food scarcity, and recurring diseases—Oja, also known as Olaboyede Oja, led his household and followers away from their ancestral settlement in search of a more habitable environment.

Around 1792, Oja established a new settlement through farming and hunting activities. This settlement became known as Ago-Oja, literally meaning “Oja’s settlement,” in recognition of its founder. Olaboyede Oja thus became the first Baalẹ̀ (Baale Ago-Oja) and the acknowledged founder and ruler of Ago-Oja.

TRADITIONAL RULERS OF AGO-OJA (CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER)

(1). Baale Olaboyede Oja

Founder of Ago-Oja and its first Baale. He established the settlement, instituted chieftaincy titles, and laid the foundation for governance, agriculture, and security.

(2). Baale Elebu

Brother of Olaboyede Oja and successor in leadership, who continued the consolidation and stability of the settlement.

(3). Ailumo (Baale-designate / First Asipa)

Brother of Olaboyede Oja and Elebu, Ailumo served as the first Asipa, representing a transitional phase in the leadership structure.

(4). Asipa Oyeniya

(5). Asipa Lajuori

(6). Asipa Logudu

(7). Asipa Lakojo

(8). Asipa Akanji

(9). Asipa Adisa

(10). Asipa Oyewusi

(11). Asipa Lalookun

(12). Asipa Oyedemi Olokonla

(13). Asipa Bello Oyekola

(14). Asipa Amuda Olorunkosebi

(15). His Majesty Oba Aleyeluwa Abdul Ganiyu Ajiboye Busari (Arogundade II)

(The present and recognized monarch of Ago-Oja, marking the evolution of leadership from Baaleship and Asipa administration to a full traditional kingship institution.)

SETTLEMENT AND REGIONAL RELATIONS

After the establishment of Ago-Oja, Olaboyede Oja became aware that his settlement was surrounded by other towns and villages such as Ojongbodu, Aawe, Iseke,Idode, Akeetan, Iseyin, Ikoyi, Ogbomosho and others. Despite this, Ago-Oja retained its distinct identity, autonomy, and territorial recognition under its leadership.

To ensure effective governance, Olaboyede Oja instituted a chieftaincy system, appointing chiefs to oversee administration, security, farming activities, and communal order—thereby laying the foundation for structured traditional governance.

Oral history further affirms that Olaboyede Oja maintained blood and kinship ties with the Soun of Ogbomoso, reinforcing historical relationships between Ago-Oja and neighboring Yoruba polities.

The Ago-Oja people are a well-organized agrarian and warrior community, firmly rooted in Ile-Ife origin, Obàtálá ancestry, and early settlement history within present-day Oyo Town. Their leadership evolved organically from the founding Baale to successive Asipas and ultimately to a recognized Obaship, reflecting continuity, legitimacy, and enduring cultural identity.

After reading it, wouod you still expect anyone to support the evil wickedness done to the people of AGỌ ỌJA? Nobody would support such.

ỌYỌ ATIBA can bring out their history too, let us know how ATIBA got to AGỌ ỌJA if you have the information. We cannot continue to bury history because we want to oppress some people and enjoy dominance. Do not repay evil for good in life, you will reap the rewards one day. 

Ire ooo

Ajetunmọbi Awolọwọ Ọba-Kọlawọle

THE FINAL GOODBYE: A FATHER'S LOVE IN THE FACE OF DEATH

In 1972, in the quiet town of Ajalli near Awka, in what is now Anambra State, a father made a choice that would be remembered not for defiance, but for love.

Stanley Enekwe, a young man and former Biafran soldier, had been convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to death by firing squad. His community insisted on his innocence, but their pleas were lost amid the harsh realities of a turbulent post-war era. Mercy was not forthcoming.

At the time, public executions were more than punishment—they were spectacles. Families of the condemned often stayed away, choosing silence and distance over association with shame. But Stanley’s father chose a different path. He refused to abandon his son.

On the day of the execution, as Stanley stood facing his fate, his father stood beside him. Not in protest. Not in anger. But in unwavering love. He did not turn away. He did not falter.

As the midday sun pressed down and the air thickened with fear and tension, the father reached for his son. With a trembling hand, he gently wiped the sweat from Stanley’s face—one final act of care, one last expression of fatherly devotion.

Then, in a voice calm and steady with faith, he whispered:

“Fear not. The Lord is waiting to receive you.”

In that moment, death lost its final sting. Love stood taller than fear. A father’s presence became his son’s last refuge, and his final gift was not despair, but the reassurance that he would not face the end alone.

SO LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT…

The UK just arrested former Prince Andrew on suspicion of misconduct in public office after millions of “Epstein files” were released showing he allegedly shared confidential trade documents with Jeffrey Epstein while acting as a government envoy.

Meanwhile in the United States, our government needed an entire “Epstein Files Transparency Act” just to force the DOJ to release some of the documents. They dragged their feet, blew the legal deadline, and then dumped out heavily redacted files with whole pages blacked out. The DOJ still has not released millions of files.

Across the ocean, a disgraced royal gets a dawn arrest and a full criminal investigation. Over here, the rich and connected mostly get their names buried under black ink, “no comment,” and years of inaction.

Tell me again how “no one is above the law"?

The Bank That Opened on Clay Street

It began in 1903, in Richmond, Virginia.

The charter was legal.

The barriers were not.

Financial power reshaped community confidence.

Maggie Lena Walker was 39 years old when the St. Luke Penny Savings Bank opened its doors on November 2, 1903. She was the daughter of a formerly enslaved mother. She had grown up in post–Civil War Richmond, where Jim Crow laws were tightening and white-owned banks rarely lent to Black customers.

Walker was already a leader inside the Independent Order of St. Luke, a Black fraternal organization founded in 1867 to provide burial insurance and mutual aid. By the late 1890s, the Order was struggling. Membership was falling. Funds were thin. Walker became Right Worthy Grand Secretary in 1899 and began rebuilding the organization’s finances and structure.

She believed the Order needed its own bank.

The logic was practical. Black workers in Richmond were earning wages as domestic laborers, dockhands, teachers, and tradespeople. Many had no safe place to deposit savings. Without access to credit, buying a home or starting a business required navigating institutions that either denied loans outright or charged punishing terms.

A bank would keep deposits inside the community.

Walker proposed the idea to the Order. It was not symbolic. It required a state charter, capital, officers, and compliance with Virginia banking law. In 1903, the St. Luke Penny Savings Bank received its charter. Walker became its president, making her the first Black woman in the United States to charter and serve as president of a bank.

The word “Penny” was intentional. Small deposits were welcome.

On opening day, customers arrived with modest sums. The bank operated out of St. Luke Hall on East Clay Street. Its early deposits were measured in dollars and coins, not large accounts. But each deposit represented trust in an institution controlled by Black leadership during an era when segregation was enforced by law and custom.

The bank extended mortgages. It financed homes in Jackson Ward, a thriving Black neighborhood sometimes called the “Black Wall Street of the East.” It supported businesses that could not secure loans elsewhere. Depositors became property owners. Property ownership translated into voting strength, school funding, and stability.

Walker insisted on careful management. The bank published reports. It required regular audits. It operated within the same regulatory framework as white-owned banks, even as it served customers excluded from them.

There were setbacks. The Panic of 1907 shook banks nationwide. Small institutions were vulnerable. St. Luke Penny Savings Bank survived, in part because depositors continued to support it and because the Order reinforced confidence among its members.

The institution was not only a bank. It was part of a system of Black self-help organizations that included newspapers, insurance companies, and schools. These institutions functioned as parallel infrastructure in a segregated economy.

Walker’s leadership extended beyond finance. She founded the St. Luke Herald newspaper. She advocated for education and civic participation. But the bank remained her most concrete intervention in economic exclusion.

In 1930, during the Great Depression, economic pressure forced consolidation. St. Luke Penny Savings Bank merged with two other Black-owned banks in Richmond to form the Consolidated Bank and Trust Company. Walker served as chair of the board. The merger was a strategy for survival in a period when thousands of American banks failed.

The original name disappeared. The mission did not.

Walker died in 1934 at age 70. By then, the bank she had founded had helped thousands of Black Richmond residents secure savings accounts and home loans. It had demonstrated that Black-led financial institutions could meet regulatory standards and serve communities systematically denied access to capital.

Her achievement was not framed as charity. Depositors were customers. Loans required repayment. The independence it built was contractual, not rhetorical.

In the decades that followed, federal policies like redlining and discriminatory lending would continue to restrict Black homeownership nationwide. The need for community-based financial institutions did not vanish. It adapted.

The building on East Clay Street still stands. It is now part of the Maggie L. Walker National Historic Site, preserved by the National Park Service. The bank’s records document ordinary transactions: deposits, withdrawals, mortgages issued and repaid.

History often celebrates speeches.

This story is about ledgers.

In 1903, in a segregated city, a Black woman secured a charter and opened a bank. People walked in with coins and walked out with receipts bearing their own names.

Financial power did not end discrimination.

It gave a community leverage inside it.

#BlackHistoryMonth #AmericanHistory #BlackHistory #World

AMERICAN HISTORY

"At midnight, he found tape on a door. Removed it. Two hours later, the tape was back.

He called police—and brought down a president. Died forgotten and broke.

A president fell because a night shift security guard refused to ignore tape on a door.

June 17, 1972. Frank Wills was working the graveyard shift at the Watergate office complex in Washington, D.C.—a sprawling building that housed offices, apartments, and the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee.

It was the kind of job people don't notice until something goes wrong. Security guard. Night shift. Minimum wage. The invisible work that keeps buildings secure while everyone else sleeps.

Around midnight, during his routine rounds checking doors and locks, Frank noticed something small but wrong: a piece of tape holding a basement door's lock mechanism open, preventing it from latching.

He removed the tape. Probably kids, he thought. A prank. Something harmless.

He continued his rounds and thought nothing more of it.

Two hours later, around 2 AM, Frank checked the same door again during his second round of the building.

The tape was back.

Someone had replaced it. Someone wanted that door to remain unlocked. Someone was still inside the building, deliberately maintaining unauthorized access.

Frank Wills was not a detective trained to investigate crimes. He was not a politician with connections to power. He was not protected by wealth or status. He was a 24-year-old Black man working security for $80 a week—about $580 in today's dollars—doing a job that most people in positions of power considered invisible.

He could have walked away. Could have decided it wasn't his problem, that getting involved might cause trouble, that whoever was inside the building probably had more power than he did and challenging them could cost him his job.

He could have ignored it, finished his shift quietly, gone home, and collected his meager paycheck.

Instead, Frank Wills picked up the phone and called the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Police Department.

That phone call changed American history.

Police arrived and found five men inside the Democratic National Committee headquarters on the sixth floor of the Watergate complex. The men were wearing business suits and surgical gloves. They carried sophisticated bugging equipment, cameras, and large amounts of cash in sequential bills.

Those five arrests led to an investigation that exposed a systematic burglary and wiretapping operation. That investigation revealed connections to President Nixon's Committee to Re-Elect the President (CREEP). That connection exposed a massive White House cover-up involving destroyed evidence, hush money payments, and obstruction of justice reaching the Oval Office itself.

That cover-up—and Nixon's role in it—ultimately ended Richard Nixon's presidency on August 9, 1974, when he became the first and only U.S. president to resign from office.

The entire Watergate scandal—one of the most significant constitutional crises in American history—began with Frank Wills noticing tape on a door and deciding it mattered enough to investigate.

History remembers Watergate as a political scandal about presidential abuse of power, media investigation, congressional oversight, and the limits of executive authority.

It should also be remembered as the moment one ordinary man, working a job society considered menial, chose integrity over silence and convenience.

For a brief moment after the arrests, Frank Wills became famous. He testified before the Senate Watergate Committee. He appeared on television news. For a few months, the nation knew his name and recognized his face.

He even played himself in the 1976 film ""All the President's Men,"" appearing in the opening scene recreating his discovery of the tape.

Then the cameras moved on, the way they always do. The media circus found new stories. The public's attention shifted. And Frank Wills returned to obscurity.

He lost his security job at Watergate. The exact circumstances are disputed—some accounts say he was laid off, others suggest he quit, still others hint he was pushed out. But the result is undeniable: the man whose vigilance saved American democracy couldn't find steady work afterward.

He struggled financially for years. He took odd jobs—whatever he could find, nothing secure or well-paying. He never received meaningful financial compensation for his role in history. No book deals. No speaking fees. No consulting positions. No pension beyond what any low-wage security guard might expect.

In 2000, Frank Wills died at age 52 in Augusta, Georgia. He died in relative poverty. He died without the recognition, the financial security, the comfortable retirement that others involved in Watergate received.

The journalists who reported the Watergate story—Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein—became legendary figures, bestselling authors, wealthy men celebrated for decades.

The prosecutors who built the criminal case became legal heroes, their careers enhanced by their role in upholding the rule of law.

The politicians who led congressional investigations became statesmen, their reputations burnished by their commitment to constitutional accountability.

The security guard who made the first critical phone call, who noticed what others might have ignored, whose decision set everything else in motion—he was forgotten.

Died broke. Died young. Died without the nation he served even remembering his name.

This is not just Frank Wills' story, though his story deserves to be told and remembered.

This is the story of who gets remembered and who gets erased from history. This is the story of whose heroism gets monuments and museum exhibits and whose gets ignored. This is the story of how power decides which acts of courage matter and which can be safely forgotten.

This is the story of whose contribution to democracy is celebrated and whose is treated as footnote or coincidence.

Frank Wills was not supposed to be important in the power structure of 1970s Washington, D.C. He worked the night shift at a building complex. He carried keys and a flashlight. He checked doors and wrote reports. He was the kind of person that powerful people—politicians, executives, journalists—train themselves not to notice or acknowledge.

He was meant to be invisible.

But he saw what was wrong. A small thing—tape on a door. Easy to ignore. Easy to rationalize away.

And he refused to look away. He refused to decide it wasn't his problem. He did his job with integrity, even though his job paid $80 a week and offered no protection if he made the wrong call.

American democracy held that night in June 1972 not because of eloquent speeches or brilliant strategy or perfectly designed systems of checks and balances.

It held because one ordinary Black man working for poverty wages decided that something as simple as tape on a door mattered enough to investigate. Because he trusted his instincts and did the right thing even though he had no way of knowing how significant that decision would become.

Power collapses when watched closely by people who refuse to be complicit through silence.

History changes when someone—anyone—does the right thing quietly, without expectation of reward or recognition, simply because it's right.

And heroes do not always wear expensive suits or stand at podiums giving speeches or publish bestselling books about their courage.

Sometimes they wear security guard uniforms. Sometimes they carry flashlights and check locks. Sometimes they work the night shift for minimum wage. Sometimes they notice small details that powerful people tried to hide.

Sometimes they make phone calls that bring down presidents.

And sometimes they die forgotten, without monuments or honors or financial security, while the people who built careers on their vigilance become wealthy and famous.

Frank Wills deserves better than history gave him.

He deserves better than dying at 52 in poverty while journalists and prosecutors who benefited from his phone call became millionaires.

He deserves to be remembered not as a footnote to Watergate, but as the person whose integrity made everything else possible.

Remember Frank Wills.

Say his name.

June 17, 1972. A security guard making $80 a week noticed tape on a door, investigated instead of ignoring it, and saved American democracy.

He died broke and forgotten.

That tells you everything about whose heroism we celebrate and whose we erase.

But it doesn't have to stay erased.

Tell this story. Remember this name.

Frank Wills. The night shift security guard who brought down a president by refusing to ignore tape on a door.

Hero."

#AmericanHistory #Watergate

BLACK HISTORY

Following the introduction of cattle into the Caribbean in 1493, during Christopher Columbus’s second voyage, cattle ranching proliferated along a series of frontiers across the grasslands of North and South America. While historians have recognized that Africans and their descendants were involved in the establishment of those ranching frontiers, the emphasis has been on their labor rather than their creative participation. In his recent book, Black Ranching Frontiers: African Cattle Herders of the Atlantic World, 1500-1900, historian Andrew Sluyter explores their creative contributions. In the article below he describes one such contribution, the balde sin fondo (bottomless bucket) and its role in cattle ranching on the Pampas of Argentina.

Africans did not play a creative role in establishing cattle ranching on the Pampas during colonial times. Yet by the early 1800s the presence of enslaved and free people from Senegambia (present-day Senegal and Gambia) on ranches resulted in the introduction of an African water-lifting device: the bottomless bucket, or balde sin fondo. With victory over Spain in 1818, Argentinean independence, and the opening of new export markets for livestock products, ranching expanded across the vast Pampas grasslands, and new practices dramatically changed the colonial herding ecology. Africans played a particularly creative role in a key aspect of that transformation, the supplying of drinking water to the herds as they expanded into pastures distant from major perennial streams. That challenge was familiar to Senegambian herders who had to supply water during the long drive southward from the fringes of the Sahara to the banks of the Senegal and Gambia rivers as the rains ended and the vegetation of the Sahel turned from green to brown.

The bottomless bucket provided the solution before windmills rendered it obsolete in the early twentieth century. The bottomless bucket lifted water from wells with the labor of a single person, even a child, on a horse. Observers at the time claimed that a single worker with a change of horses could use a bottomless bucket to water two thousand head of cattle in eight hours. It achieved that efficiency with a large, calfskin bucket that was open at both ends and had two ropes attached. A thick rope lifted the bucket and a thin rope held the bottom closed until it had emerged from the mouth of the well and could spill the water into a flume that then discharged into a drinking trough. It thereby had the capacity to raise three times as much water with each lift as the wells dating to the colonial period, which used a small bucket pulled up by hand on a single rope.

The conventional wisdom has long been that in the mid-1820s a Spaniard named Vicente Lanuza invented the original bottomless bucket. That claim was first made by Carlos Pellegrini, the head of Argentina’s Office of Industrial Patents, in 1853, years after Lanuza had died, in an article in the periodical Revista del Plata. Pellegrini based his conclusion on Lanuza’s patent application of November 1826. In his application, Lanuza claimed he had invented the bottomless bucket, and in December 1826 the government recognized his creativity by granting him the exclusive right of manufacture for a period of four years. So many economic, agricultural, and environmental historians have since uncritically repeated Pellegrini’s claim that Lanuza was the inventor of the bottomless bucket that it has become conventional wisdom.

Neither Pellegrini nor the many who subsequently repeated his claim seem to have realized that Africans have used nearly identical water-lifting devices for many centuries. They occur in a broad belt that stretches from India in the east to Morocco in the west and southward into the Sahel. And they date to at least the late seventeenth century, when Engelbert Kaempfer saw them in Iran and published an illustration of what appears remarkably like a bottomless bucket in his Amoenitatum Exoticarum Politico-Physico-Medicarum Fasciculi V.

That striking resemblance raises the possibility that one or more of the many African residents of the Pampas in the early nineteenth century transferred the idea of the bottomless bucket directly from Africa and that Lanuza appropriated rather than invented it. Sources ranging from newspaper advertisements and censuses to probate inventories and account ledgers all demonstrate that the rural Pampas had a substantial African and Afro-descended population from colonial times through the middle of the nineteenth century. An Argentine census of August 1815 provides the earliest detailed enumeration and reveals that Africans and Afro-descendants made up 13.6 percent of the population, 4,316 out of the 31,676 inhabitants of the rural districts that stretched from Buenos Aires southward to the frontier at the Salado River. Of the 1,402 inhabitants of African birth, some 64 percent came from West Africa, principally people of Guinea, Mina, and Hausa origin. Another 19 percent were from West-Central Africa: Angola, Congo, and Gabón. Only 2 percent came from Mozambique and Madagascar, in Southeast Africa. And 15 percent lacked any designation more specific than African.

The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database (http://www.slavevoyages.org) helps to further specify the Senegambian origins of many of the West Africans. That online database tabulates 67,246 disembarkations of enslaved Africans along the Río de la Plata between the 1650s and early 1830s, about half arriving before 1750 and the rest afterwards. Of the 34,280 disembarkations before 1750, 74 percent originated in West-Central Africa, 6 percent in Southeast Africa, and 20 percent in West Africa. That pattern shifted and became less concentrated after 1750, when out of 32,964 disembarkations only 29 percent originated in West-Central Africa, 45 percent in Southeast Africa, and 26 percent in West Africa.

The vast majority of the West Africans, both before and after 1750, were taken from the Gold Coast (present-day Ghana), the coast of the Bight of Benin (present day Togo and Benin), and the coast of the Bight of Biafra (present-day Nigeria) rather than Senegambia. Only 2,569 West Africans originated in Senegambia, a mere 3.8 percent of the total. Nonetheless, 85 percent of those Senegambians (2,175) arrived between 1800 and 1806 from fifteen vessels variously flying the Spanish, Portuguese, Danish, and United States flags. The African and Afro-descended population of 1,402 in 1815 therefore included many Senegambians who were brought to Argentina between 1800 and 1806.

The census provides much less information on the occupations of most of those rural Africans and Afro-descendants but does demonstrate that many were involved in ranching. Probate inventories from the late colonial and early national periods show some of them even owning small herds of cattle, awarded to them by wealthy ranchers to discourage escape from enslavement.

One or more of those Senegambians who arrived between 1800 and 1806, might have built a bottomless bucket based on their prior experience herding cattle across the Sahel, between the valleys of the Gambia, Senegal, and Niger rivers into the southern fringes of the Sahara. Impressed by the efficiency of their water hoist, Lanuza used his social power to appropriate the design as his own invention.

Much remains uncertain about the past, but no direct documentary evidence exists that Lanuza independently invented the bottomless bucket other than his own claim in a patent application through which he hoped to derive a financial benefit. Nor, by the same standard of evidence, does any direct documentary evidence exist that one or more of Lanuza’s slaves built the first bottomless bucket on the Pampas and that Lanuza appropriated that African knowledge and labor. The second possibility, however, seems the most likely because of the many Senegambians who worked on the ranches of the Pampas in the early nineteenth century and the likelihood that some were familiar with the nearly identical form of the bottomless bucket so common in the Sahel of West Africa.

Pellegrini’s claim that Lanuza invented the bottomless bucket seems the process that George Reid Andrews and other historians have shown whereby Argentinean elites consciously erased Africans and Afro-descendants from their nation’s history. With political independence from Spain the substantial African presence in Argentina began to decline. Between 1810 and 1887, their number in Buenos Aires fell from 9,615 to 8,005 and their proportion from 30 to less than 2 percent of the total population. Explanations for that decline include abolition, at least in law, of the slave trade in 1813 and the resulting reduction in the number of African arrivals. Parallel legislation emancipated children at birth and adult males through enlistment in the army, resulting in a disproportionately high death rate among enslaved males in the many regional and civil wars of the nineteenth century. Other causes for the decline of the population of African origin include disproportionately high death rates among them due to poverty and the overwhelming influx of European immigrants in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century.

Politics played a particular and peculiar role in this decline. Africans and Afro-Argentinians helped form the armies that kept the dictator Juan Manuel de Rosas in power from 1829 until 1852. The liberals who ousted Rosas, such as Pellegrini and Domingo Faustino Sarmiento, characterized Rosas and his gaucho, black, and indigenous supporters as categorically backwards. They minimized the roles of nonwhites in creating Argentinean culture and society and instead promoted it as a white, European, modern, and progressive nation. White Argentines like Pellegrini were the architects of this nationalist narrative. Thus Pellegrini uncritically attributed the invention of the bottomless bucket to Lanuza and subsequent historians and others have just as uncritically accepted and reiterated that claim for the past century and a half.

By becoming more critical of such received ideas about history, we can revise our understanding of how people of African origin contributed to the establishment of environmental, social, and cultural relations in the Americas. Such efforts to achieve a more accurate rendering of Argentine history as well as the histories of other multiracial societies in the New World, will allow us to understand how actors of African, European, indigenous, and mixed origins jointly participated in a creative process through which the distinct places of the Americas emerged over the colonial and early national periods.

Sources:

Andrew Sluyter, Black Ranching Frontiers: African Cattle Herders of the Atlantic World, 1500-1900 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2012).

#BlackHistoryMonth

ABIOLA INVITED ABACHA TO OVERTHROW SHONEKAN IN AGREEMENT TO HANDOVER TO HIM AFTER. - SDP Party Chairman

“I was returning from one of such trips to a prominent Emir one afternoon when I heard from my car radio Chief Abiola calling on General Abacha to come and ease Chief Shonekan as he eased out Babangida, I was shocked.

I called Chief Abiola and asked for an explanation of what I had just heard.

His reply was, “Mr. Chairman, I am very happy to have worked for you. You are a strong-willed man, but you see, if you want to go to Kano by road and you later decide to go to Kano by air, as long as you get to Kano, there is nothing wrong with that”.

At this time, the party did not know and I did not know Chief Abiola was having discussions with General Abacha who had promised him that if Chief Abiola supported, and if he, General Abacha, took over from Chief Shonekan today, he would hand-over the reins of Government to Chief Abiola the next day, and Chief Abiola bought the idea.

We later got to know that there were series of meetings in Ikeja where names of those who would serve in Abacha government were discussed and forwarded. When we found out that things were not moving well and that the interim government was a lame duck, I went to have a meeting with the then Secretary for agriculture, Alhaji Isa Muhammed, and I expressed my disgust at the way the government was being run.

On two occasions, I addressed the Federal Executive Council under Chief Shonekan when the two Chairmen were invited.

On the first occasion, I told Chief Ernest Shonekan that the relationship between the governors and the interim government left much to be desired as there was no discipline. Chief Shonekan picked up a copy of the constitution and said, “Chairman of SDP, I will go by this document. I have to obey this constitution. If any governor has misbehaved report him to the police”.

The second time we were called on an issue in the chambers when the Federal Executive Council was meeting, again I raised the alarm and I again told Chief Shonekan that one day, the military boys will come and drive him out of his seat.

Chief Adelusi Adeluyi (Juli Pharmacy) who was the Secretary for Health got up and told his colleagues that the Chairman of SDP had twice given warning signals and no one seemed to be taking the warnings seriously.

We again left and allowed the Federal Executive Council to continue its meeting. On this very day, I went to the Secretary for Agriculture, Isa Mohammed, and had discussions on the unsatisfactory state of affairs. He was a personal friend and he promised to see Chief Shonekan that evening with a promise to get back to me, no matter how late.

I waited until about 1 a.m. and slept off without hearing from him. In the afternoon the following day, I called him to remind him of our discussion and he said it was not possible to see Chief Shonekan the previous evening as there were too many visitors and friends. He added that they had just been called to the villa for an emergency meeting and that he would stay behind after that meeting to discuss with Chief Shonekan.

Isa Mohammed admitted that he too was also disturbed by the situation.

Immediately we stopped talking on the telephone, the British High Commissioner called me on my mobile and said, “Tony, something is happening”. And I just asked, “What is it?” He replied, “change of government” and just switched off.

I was with the Deputy Senate President, Senator Albert Legogie, when I got the message.

I went back to the house not knowing that General Abacha was taking over from Chief Shonekan which explains why the secretaries (Ministers) were called to the Villa for the emergency meeting. This was the end of the Interim Government.

It must be stated categorically here that when Chief M.K.O Abiola decided to wage war against the Interim National Government so he could take-over against the Government almost immediately Chief Shonekan was removed, he thus broke faith, not only with his party and its leadership, but also with the two political parties (SDP and NRC) which had laboured to set up the ING through effective resistance to the Federal Military Government of General Babangida.

Instead, Chief Abiola recruited “friends and supporters” who were not from the social democratic Party although some of them belonged to that party. This was to further his personal design for realizing that famous metaphor of going to Kano by air instead of road.

Immediately Abacha took over, Chief Abiola led his “friends” to pay a courtesy call on General Abacha to congratulate him. General Abacha took advantage of this and made sure that for the next two week, this courtesy call was aired on NTA Network News, to prove that Abiola had accepted his take-over of government. As stated already, the two parties had agreed in sharing ministerial offices with the reinstatement of Chief Abiola after the interim period. That arrangement, as far as Chief Abiola was concerned, was going to be too slow for his purpose.

His friends and supporters, not the party, were fully aware of the plan to topple Shonekan. They worked for it and canvassed for it. They were apparently not aware that in doing so, they were going to enthrone or ride on the back of a tiger. The long history of military rule in Nigeria and Abacha’s role in announcing most of the military coups would have been sufficient warning that they were parleying witha dangerous customer.

The tragedy of the Interim National Government was that Chief Shonekan never enjoyed the support of Chief M.K.O Abiola, the people of his home state and the people from his geo-political area, or the South-Western part of Nigeria. They did everything to bring Shonekan and his interim administration down from press attacks, to legal judgments, to hijacking of the A310 Air Bus, all in an attempt to create the atmosphere of lawlessness or the breakdown of law and order.

The Interim National Government fell due to the adroit manoeuvres of Chief Abiola, orchestrated attacks from Abiola’s supporters, as well as the lack of political base and support for Chief Ernest Shonekan who had good intentions for the country. In governance and politics, good intentions are not sufficient to sustain any leader in office. These have to be matched by effective control of the situation, ability to monitor the political pendulum to know which wat it swings at any time, as well as intelligent anticipation to develop strategies to confront emerging challenges.

Above all, political base and support are indispensable. Ernest Shonekan did not appear to have mastered the Nigerian situation, and when he was faced with scheming and planned hostility, he could not survive. In fact, his rule can be described as a tragedy of good intentions. Chief Shonekan is a good man but not a politician.

When the Abacha take-over was announced, there was jubilation by all those who knew of the “Agreement” between Chief M.K.O Abiola and General Abacha.

The Nicon Noga Hilton Hotel was in celebration mood as all those senators who had pre-knowledge of this so-called agreement, and who anticipated that Abacha would handover to Chief Abiola the next day or immediately, were shouting “M.K.O.! M.K.O.! Presido! Presido!”. It was for this same reason that, unknown to the party leadership; Chief Abiola led a team of supporters and relations as well as friends on a visit to congratulate General Abacha for a job well done.

It can now be recalled that during the ensuing struggle with Abacha to validate the June 12 election, and in order to prove that Chief Abiola was in full support of what he had done, General Abacha would play the tape of this visit repeatedly on Network News.

Four days before the June 12 election, (i.e. Wednesday), I flew in from Abuja to meet Chief M.K.O. Abiola to tell him that we had no money to pay polling agents as the promise made by government to grant the sum of ₦40 million (forty million naira) to each of the parties had deliberately not been fulfilled.

The government refused to release the money. Chief Abiola said he did not have money. I went to Universal Trust Bank to see Godson Esejele, later Executive Director (Finance), Federal Housing Authority, who was the Assistant General Manager of that bank. He told me that by 10:00 am the next day (Thursday) he would arrange ₦15 million (fifteen million naira) for us. The only condition attached was that if the promised ₦40 million (forty million naira) from the government got to the party, we should open an account with the bank with that amount.

I drove to Ikeja to see Chief Abiola and gave a rundown of the arrangement I was making. He thanked me heartily but added that if he had known, he would have told me to request for ₦20 million (twenty million naira) because of some of his commitments he was unable to meet at the time. The Federal Government was owing him heavily.

I must admit that Chief Abiola spent a great deal of his money. He was all out to win the election little realising that his best friend was going to be his worst enemy. He was a good candidate. There was no where we went to that he did not have something to show that he helped the people of that area. Although he was a Moslem, while building mosques for Moslem communities, he was also building churches for Christians.

He gave out scholarships to both Christians and Moslems; to Yoruba people, Igbos, and Hausa, without discrimination. He was a very good candidate.

I went back to the hotel and met Godson who said that if we wanted ₦20 million (twenty million naira), the money would not be ready by 10:00 am. We would have to wait till about 12:00 noon. By 11:30 am the next morning, Godson called me to say the money was ready. I went to the bank in Victoria Island and two bullion vans were ready with escort.

When I asked for a bond for the amount, the Managing Director dais, “we know you. When you get your cheque, you should open an account here”. I did not sign any document or undertaking that I was taking that money from the bank which illustrates what trust and credibility, or integrity can mean at critical moments.

I telephoned Chief M.K.O. Abiola that I was coming to the private wing of the local airport at Ikeja and that he should meet me there. I met him waiting with Kola and Habib bank manager from Apapa, and we realized that as it was already Thursday and election was just two days away, the “Hope 93” aircraft was insufficient for distributing money country-wide. We decided, therefore to charter an Okada aircraft for distributing money in the Northern states while “Hope 93” was to distribute the money in the Southern states for the payment of polling agents.

That evening, I went by road to Edo state and delivered the money for that State to Chief Odigie-Oyegun because I had to stay in Edo state for the election. I got to Benin City by 10 pm that day. When we eventually got the ₦40 million (forty million naira), we kept our promise and made sure that the ₦40 million (forty million naira) was used to open an account with UTB (Universal Trust Bank).

Air Borne But No Landing

Chief M.K.O Abiola, as indicated earlier, had said that if you want to go to Kano, going by air or by road does not make any difference as long as you get there. 

His interpretation of this was that going by air meant Abacha taking over from Shonekan and he Abiola, being sworn in the next day. Going by road was waiting till March, 1994, when Shonekan would use the National Assembly to hand over to him because he actually had won the presidential election. Unfortunately for Chief Abiola, he was air borne on his way to Kano but could not land.

There was, in fact, no landing, and Kano as the desired destination proved to be a fantasy.

It is a pity indeed, that Chief Abiola kept the leadership of the party away from his arrangement with General Abacha to takeover form Shonekan. If he had brought it to the notice of the leadership of the part, he would have been well advised.

The “Agreement” was phoney and hollow. It was an agreement which was inexplicable and in excusable in its folly and terrible in its consequences. In a similar but not identical set of circumstances, I had advised Chief Abiola against declaring himself the president of this country when arising from Abacha’s refusal to handover to him drove him to that extreme line of thought. 

I spoke to him on the telephone pointing out that the army was not there to back him up. He had no police support, and not even the immigration or customs would back him.

My Advice to M.K.O. Abiola

I advised against his intended line of action. In reply he merely said, “Mr. Chairman, you are a very good man. Anyway, we shall discuss that one later”, and he replaced the telephone.

As I did not want to be blamed later for not advising Chief Abiola correctly, I advertised my advice the following day in some of the daily newspapers.

It was clear to me that the course of action to which Chief M.K.O. Abiola was heading was not only going to be self-destructive but also ruinous. He would play into the hands of the military and offer himself as a sacrificial lamb by delivering himself to those who, for various and obvious reasons, very much wanted him out of the scene.

In addition to giving M.K.O. Abiola specific advice against his intended line of action, I also commented on those calling for a boycott of the election to select candidates to the constitutional conference which the Abacha regime was putting in place to address the various problems confronting the nation and putting out a new Constitution for Nigeria. I was convinced that the conference would achieve a lotfor this country, including setting the timeframe for the military’s exit from Nigerian politics.

Chief Abiola did not listen. The result of his action landed him in jail.

The Escape

While negotiations for the Interim Government were on, I was briefing Chief Abiola from time to time. One day, as we were going in for one of those meetingsat the villa, Chief Abiola told me that he had a message he wanted me to pass on to President Babangida and that he would send it by fax. I never received any fax message for onward transmission to the president because that was the day M.K.O. Abiola left Nigeria for the United Kingdom.

He did not want me to know that he was leaving the country. The following morning, I waited and waited all in vain for that fax message. I never received it till I was almost running late to attend a meeting at the villa. My other party men were waiting and we had to go. The next morning a BBC correspondent from London called me and asked if I was the chairman of SDP. On answering yes, he said, “your candidate is here”. I asked, “Which candidate?” and he answered. “Chief M.K.O. Abiola”. I was forced to ask him, “Where are you speaking from?” He replied, “This is BBC London. Do you want to hear his voice?”.

It was then I knew Chief Abiola had left the country.

Chief Abiola’s absence from the country at this critical time was disastrous to the party and to the party and to his cause. He was the symbol of theJune 12 election and most Nigerians were struggling for him. Escaping from the scene created a vacuum which made the struggle meaningless. It was the climax of the fear he had exhibited right from the time President Babangida nullified the June 12 election.

When Chief Abiola eventually returned, he visited me in Benin in my residence. One of the questions I asked him was, “Presido, I was the last person you spoke to on the day you left and you did not tell me that you were travelling?” Before the full glare of camera lights and press, he replied that “when two birds are on a tree, one does not tell the other that a stone is coming”. So he knew a stone was coming and we were two birds on a tree and he fled without telling me a stone was coming”. It seemed to me and to many Nigerians too, that the parable of birds on a tree was a very loaded and pregnant one. It shows the character of Chief M.K.O. Abiola whose cause many Nigerians were prepared to fight and die for. Today, the result of his action has been extremely unfortunate.

Access Bank - Ijesa Bank - that was snatched by political thieves

Access Bank was started by Ijesas in Lagos in 1988. As seen above, it was licensed to Mr. Abiodun Lawrence Omole, the owner of Trophy Larger beer in Ilesa, and his Ijesa partners. They used one of the partners, Chief Farodoye's business office address at the Western House in Lagos for registration.

Led by Chief Farodoye, it was a small, solid, and well-run bank, like most Ijesa's businesses, that uses the ethos - Omoluabi, in conjunction with the traditions of late Ijesa billionaires like Da Rocha, Ajanaku, SB Bakare, Lawrence Omole and so on.

Suddenly, the Acess Bank's core ownership became diluted by a series of schemes and mandates from CBN.

Tokunbo Aromolaran was the last managing director appointed by the original shareholding group, and at the time, the bank was already listed on the Nigerian Stock Exchange.

Using abracadabra, Aig Imokhuede (Sanusi's Kings College classmate) and Herbert Wigwe, were AGMs at GTBank, yet they formulated a scheme to secretly acquire large shares of the Access Bank without major shareholders knowing.

They borrowed the money from Intercontinental Bank, PLC (They never paid it back). Intercontinental Bank was the foremost bank in Nigeria and was owned by Yorubas, who pioneered Banking in Nigeria.

Upon securing controlling shares, they notified the authorities and took over the Access Bank overnight; thus, the Ijesa Bank was no longer. Once they took it over, it was like a pirate hijacking a ship in the high sea; they quickly changed policies and sidelined the original shareholders. They destroyed Chief Farodoye, who went into Exile in England and ended up working there as a security guard to make ends meet. Another partner, Abiola Ojo, survived the assassination attempt. Access Bank became a mafia bank - the untouchables!

Aig. Imokhuede became the managing director for a decade, and after he retired, Herbert took over. They erased all traces of Ijesas - all Ijesas were forced out from top management positions down to the security guards, all replaced - and it became a bank for the people from the East of River Niger in our land, Lagos (EKo).

In the 1990s and 2000s, I banked with Intercontinental Bank, PLC (IB), a reputable financial institution with banking, investment, and wealth management portfolios—an excellent bank with a solid reputation. My investment portfolio at IB earned higher yields (returns on investments) than my Wall Street portfolio in the USA.

Under Jonathan, banking rules changed. My IB advisor informed me that a small bank had been borrowing large sums of money from IB, and the bank had been unable to say no to this politically connected borrower(s). That IB reserve was getting lower than it should be and advised me to move my investment out of Nigeria because the banking landscape was changing and unpredictable.

I did what he suggested, and shortly after that, they changed the management; they removed 100% of the Yorubas that I had come to know during the years I transacted with IB.

Sanusi of CBN decided to perform a voodoo 'stress test' - on the banks without conducting any loan investigation on the IB books. Sanusi noted that IB reserve was low, and he reflexly declared it insolvent and decided to sell it. Guess who showed up to buy it? It was his friends from Access Bank (the bank that borrowed money from IB). He offered it to them at a meager N50 billion. Imagine offering one of Nigeria's largest banks with 350 branches across West Africa and England for this tiny amount. It was a steal, a giveaway, a daylight open robbery. Check the records; no other bank has been sold so cheaply in Nigeria.

Yoruba will say, Ile taa ba fii Ito mo, Irin lo maa wo. You cannot build something on nothing!

At the time, because Dr. Erastus Akingbola of Intercontinental Bank, PLC, a pioneering professional career banker, did not support PDP, these political thieves descended on him, used their political connections to snatch Intercontinental Bank PLC from him, and sent him into retirement. 

However, nature has a way of paying back; call it karma; check out this real-life list below.

(1). Emir Sanusi Lamido, was dethroned and banished from Kano Emirate. He was the CBN Governor who mastered the Access Bank and IB scheme deal and sealed it.

(2). Dr. Olusola Saraki. The Saraki family Dynasty in Kwara State has crumbled and is in total ruins. He lost large family properties along Glover Road in Ikoyi to the Federal Government. He is now a boy-boy to Nyesom Wike, the PDP strongman.

(3). The Late Herbert Wigwe traveled from California to Las Vegas to watch the Superbowl with his family. This story is not about the dead but about setting history records straight. May his soul rest in peace. Wigwe University is now in limbo.

(4). The ringleader, Aig. Imougkuede had an eye Glaucoma operation on their left eye and is scheduled for surgery in the other eye soon. He is partially blind and can hardly see.

(5). Mr Alabi, the interim managing director, imposed on us by Sanusi Lamido, to confuse us, is down with Stroke in Ilorin. He is in a vegetative state.

Today, Dr. Erastus Akingbola is a 78-year-old, healthy-looking man with a sound mind and spirit, happily living his life, keeping a low profile, and enjoying life with grace and blessings.

In Court, Dr. Akingbola has won his property taken by Access Bank at 999c Danmole Street, in Victoria Island, the IB PLC's former head office, and the Court has ordered Access Bank to vacate the premises for him immediately. The EFCC has also returned with apologies, multiple estates seized by them along Sinari Daranijo Street, also in Victoria Island.

Lastly, God is the only ultimate judge. Do good, and good things shall follow you in the days of your life - Holy Bible.

The information in this article is a compilation of direct accounts and data from staff from the original Access Bank and Intercontinental Bank, as well as my experience as a client when these political thieves struck.

From the IB staff, the only visible error Dr. Erastus Akingbola made was being apolitical and refusing to fund PDP-led Jonathan back then, and he paid the price. But God is favorable to him now.

Yoruba says: "bi iro ba lo logun odun, ododo aaba loojo."

Truth will always prevail, but it takes time for the truth to prevail.

Yoruba Historical Society (February 2024)

HOW THE USA IS DOING THE JOB HE CANNOT DO

WASHINGTON — Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated a network of six individuals connected to Nigeria-based terrorist group, Boko Haram.  All six were found guilty of establishing a Boko Haram cell in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to raise funds for and provide material assistance to Boko Haram insurgents in Nigeria.  OFAC’s action follows arrests, prosecutions, and designations in the UAE in September 2021, demonstrating the commitment of the Emirati government to using judicial measures and targeted financial sanctions to disrupt the flow of funds to these networks.

“With this action, the United States joins the UAE in targeting terrorist financing networks of mutual concern,” said Under Secretary of the Treasury Brian Nelson.  “Treasury continues to target financial facilitators of terrorist activity worldwide.  We welcome multilateral action on this Boko Haram network to ensure that it is not able to move any further funds through the international financial system.”

OFAC designated Abdurrahman Ado Musa, Salihu Yusuf Adamu, Bashir Ali Yusuf, Muhammed Ibrahim Isa, Ibrahim Ali Alhassan, and Surajo Abubakar Muhammad pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13224, as amended, which targets terrorists, leaders, and officials of terrorist groups, and those providing support to terrorists or acts of terrorism.  The U.S. Department of State designated Boko Haram as a Foreign Terrorist Organization and a Specially Designated Global Terrorist on November 14, 2013.

BOKO HARAM NETWORK IN THE UAE

The UAE Federal Court of Appeals in Abu Dhabi convicted Abdurrahman Ado Musa, Salihu Yusuf Adamu, Bashir Ali Yusuf, Muhammed Ibrahim Isa, Ibrahim Ali Alhassan, and Surajo Abubakar Muhammad for transferring $782,000 from Dubai to Boko Haram in Nigeria.  Salihu Yusuf Adamu and Surajo Abubakar Muhammad were sentenced to life imprisonment for violations of UAE anti-terrorism laws; Abdurrahman Ado Musa, Bashir Ali Yusuf, Muhammed Ibrahim Isa, and Ibrahim Ali Alhassan were sentenced to 10 years in prison, followed by deportation.  Today’s designations will prevent these individuals’ funds from being used further to support terrorism.

SANCTIONS IMPLICATIONS

As a result of today’s action, all property and interests in property of the individuals named above, and of any entities that are owned, directly or indirectly, 50 percent or more by them, individually, or with other blocked persons, that are in the United States or in the possession or control of U.S. persons, must be blocked and reported to OFAC.  Unless authorized by a general or specific license issued by OFAC or otherwise exempt, OFAC’s regulations generally prohibit all transactions by U.S. persons or within the United States (including transactions transiting the United States) that involve any property or interests in property of designated or otherwise blocked persons.

Furthermore, engaging in certain transactions with the individuals designated today entails risk of secondary sanctions pursuant to E.O. 13224, as amended.  Pursuant to this authority, OFAC can prohibit or impose strict conditions on the opening or maintaining in the United States of a correspondent account or a payable-through account of a foreign financial institution that knowingly conducted or facilitated any significant transaction on behalf of a Specially Designated Global Terrorist.

The power and integrity of OFAC sanctions derive not only from its ability to designate and add persons to the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN List), but also from its willingness to remove persons from the SDN List consistent with the law.  The ultimate goal of sanctions is not to punish but to bring about a positive change in behavior.  For information concerning the process for seeking removal from an OFAC list, including the SDN List, please refer to OFAC’s Frequently Asked Question 897 here.  For detailed information on the process to submit a request for removal from an OFAC sanctions list, please here.

Additional information regarding sanctions programs administered by OFAC can be found here

A PUNCH EDITORIAL

NIGERIA is stubbornly indulging in self-sabotage by refusing to let go of the four refineries owned by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited. What was once sold to Nigerians as “national pride” has become a bottomless pit—swallowing trillions, producing excuses, and delivering nothing close to commercially sustainable fuel.

With uncommon candour, the NNPC’s Group Chief Executive Officer, Bayo Ojulari, admitted publicly recently what Nigerians have known for decades: the refineries are running at a “monumental loss.”

During the Nigeria International Energy Summit in Abuja, Ojulari said the quiet part out loud: that efforts to revamp the refineries were simply futile.

“I want to say this very clearly… that we were running at a monumental loss to Nigeria. We were just wasting money. I can say that confidently now.” That is rare honesty, but honesty alone does not plug a N13.2 trillion hole.

That benumbing figure, equivalent to 22.7 per cent of the 2026 federal budget and nearly half of expected revenues, sits flush in NNPC’s own financial statements.

Between 2023 and 2024, about N13.2 trillion was injected into the Port Harcourt, Warri and Kaduna refineries, ostensibly for turnaround maintenance, operations, staffing, security and bank charges.

In 2024, the NNPC, under Mele Kyari, deceived the public into believing that the refineries in Port Harcourt and Warri had started working. Even the President, Bola Tinubu, joined in the ruse by issuing a signed statement congratulating the weakened behemoth on the milestone. It was grand trickery.

Despite not producing anything, the moribund refineries spend about N127–N137 billion annually on salaries and employee benefits for roughly 1,600–1,700 staff between 2020 and 2024. This is a high price to pay for failure.

Instead of becoming productive assets, the plants deepened their dependence on the NNPC balance sheet. Their combined obligations to NNPC ballooned from N4.52 trillion in 2023 to N8.67 trillion by the end of 2024. No receivables. No offsetting revenues. Just debt compounding debt. Allowing this to continue is patently irrational.

The Port Harcourt Refinery alone gulped over N2.2 trillion in one year, rising to N4.22 trillion in obligations. Warri and Kaduna followed the same ruinous pattern. Even when crude was supplied “every month,” utilisation hovered around 50–55 per cent, destroying rather than creating value. Nigeria was, in Ojulari’s words, “leaking away value.”

This demonstrates a glaring failure not only of economics but also of governance.

For over two decades, TAM has been the euphemism under which billions disappeared, yet no questions asked, no accounting and no reckoning.

From the abortive 1998 and 2000 exercises to the $1.5 billion Port Harcourt rehabilitation approved in 2021, the script never changed: award EPC contracts, pay contractors, inaugurate the plant with fanfare, then watch it collapse into silence weeks or months later.

Maintenance after TAM was neglected. Operators with world-class experience were never embedded. Corruption and mismanagement ruled the day.

Industry experts have long warned that these plants are simply too old to resurrect economically.

Aliko Dangote likened the exercise to forcing new parts into a 40-year-old car and expecting Formula One performance. With Nigeria dependent on fuel imports until it was rescued by the Dangote Refinery, the country paid a huge price.

Nigeria wasted N2.7 trillion on phoney petrol imports in 2011. For decades, it was plagued by petrol queues.

Former president Olusegun Obasanjo has repeatedly asked why the NNPC keeps pretending it can do what decades of evidence show it cannot.

Along with vandalised pipelines, unreliable crude supply, obsolete technology and skills gaps, the conclusion is that the refineries destroy value by design.

Worse still, refining locally has often cost more than importing the same products. The NNPC’s internal reviews showed that, in some cases, processing crude into petrol, diesel or kerosene delivered a net loss. This is the definition of a white elephant.

And yet, Nigeria keeps itself mired in this sordid rigmarole because past leaders lacked the courage to exit. The 2007 privatisation, reversed after former President Umaru Yar’Adua took office, now seems like a punishment for such untold folly.

Fears of political backlash, pressure from labour unions and the cynical cry of “selling to cronies” have paralysed decision-making ever since. The result is a national oil company acting as a charity for inefficiency.

Other countries have demonstrated that governments have no business in such business. The United States operates over 131 refineries as of January 2025 with a combined capacity of 18.2 million bpd, and none is owned by the government.

Canada privatised its oil assets in stages between 1991 and 2004, resulting in large private sector entities that guarantee energy security and a stable refining capacity of 2.5 million bpd.

Singapore, despite an oil output of just 20,000 bpd, has transformed into a major refining hub in South-East Asia, refining 1.5 million bpd from three refineries operated by oil majors.

Tinubu inherited this mess, but he does not have to perpetuate it. Indeed, his economic reforms, signposted by fuel subsidy removal, fiscal tightening, and market pricing, will amount to nothing if the refineries remain on life support. You cannot preach efficiency while funding failure.

Selling the refineries, outright, transparently, and competitively, is the only way out of this fiscal sinkhole.

Private operators, with capital, technology and discipline, may still salvage value or shut them down and redeploy assets rationally. Either outcome is better than the current haemorrhage.

Dangote spent $20 billion to deliver a greenfield 650,000 barrels-per-day refinery. Yet, the NNPC spent a similar amount over 20 years to “repair” its 445,000 bpd drainpipe facilities. This national folly must stop.

Nigeria now has proof that private capital can deliver local refining. The state cannot afford to cling to assets it cannot manage while trying to overcome current fiscal challenges, especially mounting debt amid CAPEX revenue shortfall.

Ojulari has prudently stopped the operations to reassess. But reassessment must not become another pause before the next wasteful reboot. The line of sight to recovery, which he admits does not exist, will not magically appear with another TAM.

The NNPC declared a record profit of N5.7 trillion on N60.5 trillion revenue for the 2025 financial year. This is a decent return, but with subsidiary debts standing at N30.3 trillion as of 2024, including those owned by the refineries, the company remains under severe financial strain that threatens its long-term viability.

Therefore, Tinubu must summon the political courage that eluded his predecessors. He must not listen to the repeated lies of vested interests that the refineries will work by committing more funds.

For far too long, criminals have used the NNPC, its refineries and other subsidiaries as tools to plunder state resources.

He must stop the bleeding and sell the refineries. He must also set the machinery in motion to privatise the NNPC itself in line with the provisions of the Petroleum Industry Act and raise funds to facilitate economic diversification and build critical infrastructure.

Saudi Aramco’s partial privatisation, even in small percentages, has raised billions of dollars for that country’s sovereign wealth fund. This is an example to follow rather than resorting to endless borrowing.

Beyond this, the Tinubu administration must hold those responsible for the gross mismanagement of the country’s most valuable asset to account.

QUESTION FOR NUHU RIBADU

Former Kaduna State governor, Nasir Ahmad El-Rufai, has asked the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA), headed by Nuhu Ribadu, to immediately clarify reports that the office imported a highly poisonous substance, thallium sulphate, from Poland.

El-Rufai raised the issue on Sunday in a post on X, where he disclosed that he had written formally to the National Security Adviser seeking explanations over the alleged transaction.

He said the information available to opposition political leaders suggested that the ONSA recently brought in about 10 kilograms of thallium sulphate from a foreign supplier.

“As part of my duty as a citizen, I wrote to the NSA to seek clarification on reports about the importation by his office of thallium sulphate, a very dangerous toxin,” El-Rufai said, adding that the substance was “odourless and colourless”, making its presence even more worrying.

In the letter, the former governor described thallium compounds as extremely hazardous and subject to strict international controls, arguing that the alleged importation raised serious questions around public safety and transparency.

He asked the security office to state the purpose for which the chemical was procured, the intended end-user, the company that supplied it, and whether the importation was authorised under any valid chemical or defence permit.

El-Rufai further requested details on the exact quantity and concentration reportedly acquired, as well as how the substance would be stored and secured.

He also sought to know whether relevant regulatory and public-health authorities, including the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control and the Nigeria Centre for Disease Control, were involved in assessing potential risks or developing safety and mitigation plans.

According to him, “public confidence in national institutions” requires that the matter be addressed promptly and transparently.

The Office of the National Security Adviser had not issued any official response as of press time.

AMERICA IS WELCOME TO BOMB NIGERIA.--- SENATOR NDUME

Senator Ali Ndume, who represents Borno South Senatorial District, has explained he would again support another US military airstrikes against insurgents operating in parts of North-East Nigeria.

Ndume made the remarks on Friday while speaking on Politics Today, a programme on Channels Television.

He said his call is being driven by the prolonged activities of Boko Haram insurgents in communities within his constituency, particularly around the Mandara Mountains.

According to the lawmaker, insurgents have maintained a presence in the mountainous areas for over a decade, forcing residents to flee their homes and farmlands.

He said sustained and consistent military offensives are necessary to eliminate the group and enable displaced persons to return home.

The lawmaker said residents of Gwoza and surrounding communities would be receptive to such support, stressing that security concerns have prevented him from visiting his village for years, even under escort.

Ndume maintained that his position reflects the desperation of communities that have endured prolonged insecurity and are seeking decisive action to end insurgency in the region.

Ndume said: “I called for it. In fact, I was thinking that they will start from my local government. Yes, because the Boko Haram, the issue of you know, have dominated for the past 15 years.

“They have dominated the Mandara Mountain up till now. And we had wanted, and have been calling that there must be consistent and sustained attack until they are all eliminated.

“That’s when our people that are still in the IDP camps, you know, under the mountain, can go back, because there are peoples who still live in the mountains and farm in the mountains, but they have to run away. Boko Haram chase them. There are some of them that are still captives.

“In fact, we want the… I’m speaking for my people, especially my own local government. If the 200 Americans that Nigerians are talking about now don’t have…they are not comfortable, please let them go to my local government and stay and operate from there, our people will be happy.

“I can move out of my house in Gwoza for they to come over my house for them to stay as long as we will have peace.

“You know what, for the past 16 years I cannot go to my village, especially this time around, no matter what, even under escort, you don’t risk going from now.”

HE IS THE MOST DANGEROUS MAN IN NIGERIA. THE FEAR OF HIM IS THE BEGINNING OF YOUR SANITY

Someone I Know Tapped the Phone of the National Security Adviser for me , and we listened to his conversation 

- Nasir El-Rufai, former Governor of KADUNA State

So during this interview with Arise Television the former Governor of Kaduna State Nasir El-Rufai El-rufai admitted that someone  tapped (literally hacked ) the phone of the National Security Adviser, NSA Nuhu Ribadu for him and he was able to listen to the NSA conversation.

According to Rufai ,why justifying the tapping, "The NSA’s call was tapped. They do that to our calls too, and we heard him saying they should arrest me."

The Interviewer Charles Aniagolu, shocked by the revelation briskly interjected that that was an illegal action. El-Rufai agreed with him , that what he did was  an  illegality but said it was justifiable because " the government also listen to our own  too. The Government thinks they are the only one who listen to calls, we have our way too. "

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo described Nasir El-Rufai as a talented but immature leader with a "pathological" penchant for disloyalty and reputation-savaging during his time as FCT Minister (2003–2007). Obasanjo confirmed rejecting pressure to make El-Rufai his 2007 successor, citing a need for "maturity" and alleging that El-Rufai lacked consistent loyalty to anyone but himself. 

Key details regarding Obasanjo's assessment of El-Rufai include:

Talent vs. Character: While acknowledging El-Rufai's high intelligence (referred to as "elephantine brain" in his book), Obasanjo criticized his character, stating he was a "pathological purveyor of untruths" and prone to betraying friends and colleagues.

"Small Man Syndrome": In his 2014 memoir, Obasanjo stated that El-Rufai is plagued by "small man syndrome," suggesting a need to "play himself up to give himself more 'height' than he has".

2007 Succession: Obasanjo confirmed that he rejected the proposal to make El-Rufai his successor, noting that even El-Rufai later admitted, upon reviewing his own performance years later, that Obasanjo was right about his need to mature.

Need for Supervision: Despite his criticisms, Obasanjo acknowledged El-Rufai's performance in his administration and believed he could be useful in public service, but only "under guidance and sufficient oversight".

These remarks highlight a complex relationship where Obasanjo recognized El-Rufai's competence as a technocrat but found him unfit for supreme leadership at the time due to character flaws.

THE MANDINKA PEOPLE OF GAMBIA

The Mandinka are a major ethnic group in Gambia. They are related to the first people who lived in the Sudanese Belt in the Stone and Iron Ages. The first people who lived on Earth were hunters who made and used knives, axes, scrapers, tools, and needles out of stone and iron.

After that, they made spears, harpoons, sticks, shields, blowguns, bows, and arrows, among other things.

Before the year 700, the black people who lived in the Sudanese Belt only lived in a small part of the area. They kept working in farmland and were able to have bigger and denser communities than people whose main job was raising cattle.

In the end, they settled in the forests of West Africa. Beginning around 700 BCE and going through the early Islamic contact period, trade over long distances became more and more important in shaping the economic, social, and political trends of western Sudan.

A lot of money was made in some parts of West Africa through trade, which helped build social classes and states. When the kingdom of Ghana was formed, the Mandinkas were part of the Soninke Clan, which was made up of people who spoke Mande. The people who lived in Mande were also called Manden, Malinke, or Mndinka, for short.

All of the former tributary states that made up the empire of Ghana got their freedom back after it fell in 1076. A small Mandinka kingdom didn’t start to form until 1235. A Mandinka king named Sundiata Keita ruled the country. He was known for building the strong Mali Empire’s foundations.

According to stories told by older people, the Mandinka first moved into Gambia when Sundiata was in charge in the 1300s. Mandinkas moved to other areas of the country in both peaceful and violent ways. Before the Mali Empire was formed, some Mandinka people went to the Senegambia area.

Early settlers went south and west to find better land for farming, food, and a place to live. Along with these people, some traders and hunters went to Senegambia, which had a lot of water. The people who moved there farmed and married into the local ethnic groups after they settled down.

#Africa #Gambia #BlackHistory #World

When Murtala Was Assassinated, I Was There, There Was Nothing Left for Me In The Military Govt– OBJ

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo has reflected on the assassination of General Murtala Ramat Mohammed, describing it as a turning point for Nigeria’s military leadership.

According to a report by Nigerian Tribune on Thursday, February 12, 2026, speaking in Abuja at the Murtala Muhammed International Lecture and Leadership Conference, Obasanjo said he was present when Murtala was killed during the February 1976 coup. He explained that the tragic event forced the military government to confront serious weaknesses in the country’s security system. According to him, the assassination revealed dangerous negligence and led to a complete reorganisation of Nigeria’s security structure.

Obasanjo noted that some of the coup plotters were people who had been close to Murtala, including trusted associates. This made the incident even more shocking and painful. He said the experience taught the leadership the importance of strong institutions and proper safeguards rather than relying only on personal loyalty.

He also recalled the period after the civil war, explaining that disagreements within the Federal Government nearly weakened the country’s efforts. He said the leadership realised Nigeria first needed to stabilise its political structure before moving forward effectively.

Obasanjo described Murtala as a disciplined and patriotic leader who lived a simple life. He said the late Head of State avoided luxury and focused on serving the nation.

Reflecting on leadership, Obasanjo stated that Murtala’s greatest achievement was leaving behind a successor who could continue his vision. He admitted that later leaders, including himself, had struggled to do the same.

In his words, "When Murtala was assassinated, I was there. There was nothing left for me in the military government. We had given our best

The Voice of the Great Migration: The Man Who Mapped a Path to Freedom

In the early 20th century, as the terror of Jim Crow lynching gripped the South, a single newspaper became the most powerful weapon against it and the most influential guide to a new life. Robert Sengstacke Abbott, a soft-spoken lawyer turned publisher, started The Chicago Defender in 1905 with 25 cents and a mission. He didn't just report the news; he weaponized journalism to physically redistribute the Black population of the United States and psychologically liberate a generation, building the most influential Black newspaper in American history.

Full Name: Robert Sengstacke Abbott

Key Achievement: Founded and built The Chicago Defender into a national institution.

Core Campaigns: The anti-lynching crusade and the orchestration of the Great Migration.

Era: Early to Mid-20th Century (1870–1940)

---

A Newspaper with a Battle Plan

From its first issue, The Defender broke journalistic conventions. It was not objective; it was an activist organ, written in a bold, sensational style that spoke directly to the pain and aspirations of its readers.

· Crusading Journalism: While white papers ignored or justified racial violence, the Defender put lynchings on the front page, naming victims and perpetrators. Its headlines screamed: "SOUTH IS DRENCHED IN BLOOD" or "500 BLACK PEOPLE MURDERED BY WHITE MOBS." It launched national anti-lynching fundraisers and exposed the horrors with a moral fury absent from the mainstream press.

· The Migration Blueprint: Abbott's most profound impact was turning the Defender into the primary catalyst for the Great Migration. He framed the North not just as a place, but as "The Promised Land." The paper ran blistering exposes of Southern oppression alongside glowing stories of high wages, good schools, and political freedom in Chicago and other Northern cities.

· Practical Instructions: The Defender didn't just inspire; it provided a practical guide. It published train schedules and job listings from Northern companies. It advised migrants on what to pack, how to act, and where to stay. Abbott even organized "migration clubs" to help families move together.

A National Network Built on Trust

The Defender's reach was nationwide, even though it was banned in many Southern towns.

· The Pullman Porter Network: Black Pullman porters, who worked the railways, became the paper's secret distribution agents. They would smuggle bundles of the Defender south in their luggage and drop them off at Black barbershops, churches, and cafes, creating a clandestine information network.

· The "Defender Wants to Know": Abbott encouraged readers to write in, and he published their first-person accounts of discrimination and violence under this heading. This created a powerful national conversation and made the paper a trusted, community-owned platform.

· Champion of Black Excellence: Beyond hard news, the Defender dedicated extensive space to Black society, sports, and arts. It covered Black baseball leagues, celebrated Black entrepreneurs, and reviewed plays and music, creating a positive, proud mirror for a community that was otherwise only depicted in caricature.

The Architect of a New Demography

Robert Abbott, a man who faced poverty and prejudice himself, died a millionaire and one of the most powerful Black men in America. His legacy is measured in demographic shifts and cultural awakening.

· The Numbers: Historians credit the Defender with persuading over 1.5 million Black Southerners to move North between 1915 and 1925, transforming cities like Chicago, Detroit, and New York and altering the nation's political and cultural landscape forever.

· A Lasting Institution: He built a media empire that remained under family control for decades. His nephew, John H. Sengstacke, took over and continued its mission, even playing a key role in persuading President Truman to desegregate the military.

· The Blueprint for Advocacy Journalism: The Defender proved that a free Black press was not a luxury but a necessity for survival and progress. It demonstrated that journalism could be a direct agent of social change, a model that would inspire the Black press throughout the Civil Rights Movement.

In summary, Robert S. Abbott was the great strategist of Black aspiration. With a printing press and relentless courage, he didn't just document history—he engineered it. He gave a people the information, the inspiration, and the practical instructions to vote with their feet for their own freedom, making The Chicago Defender the most important travel guide in American history.

#Africa #BlackHistoryMonth #African #World

US JUDGE WANTS TINUBU'S CRIMINAL RECORDS RELEASED IMMEDIATELY

Angry U.S. judge lambasts FBI, DEA for delaying release of Tinubu’s criminal records, issues final ultimatum

The judge ordered the FBI to provide sworn statements on why it has been missing deadlines to frustrate the release of Mr Tinubu’s records.

U.S. judge Beryl A. Howell lashed out at the FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration for employing delay tactics to frustrate the release of President Bola Tinubu’s records based on a 2022 Freedom of Information request by transparency campaigner Aaron Greenspan, who was assisted by investigative journalist David Hundeyin.

Ms Howell of the U.S. Court for the District of Columbia in Washington, D.C., on February 3, rebuked the FBI and DEA for holding up the release of Mr Tinubu’s records, expected to shed light on a narcotics-trafficking ordeal that made him surrender $460,000 to the U.S. government in the early 1990s. Mr Greenspan, CEO of Plainsite, a data transparency advocacy group, first filed the FOI in June 2022.

The sluggishness of the FBI and DEA to honour court submissions, with incessant postponements, has caused the case to linger for more than three years without any headway in sight, Ms Howell said in her opinion, while issuing fresh ultimatums that must not be missed, according to court filings seen by Peoples Gazette.

The FBI in 2023 announced plans to release 2500 pages of Mr Tinubu’s records in monthly batches of 500 pages. But the release was stalled after Mr Tinubu fiercely opposed it and sought a reprieve to protect his records, pending a Nigerian Supreme Court judgment that he was then praying to uphold his election victory. He claimed that he would be “adversely affected” if his FBI records were released prematurely.

Ms Beryl approved his request then, but even though Mr Tinubu’s presidential victory was upheld, the FBI and DEA continued to delay, begging for new dates to process and release the long-sought records anticipated to clarify the decades-long controversy about Mr Tinubu’s role in a cocaine trafficking scheme. The Nigerian president denies any wrongdoing.

The bureau, which ought to submit an updated report in May 2025, adjourned for several months until January 2026, when it requested a new date for February. The latest motion to extend the processing and submission date to February provoked the ire of Ms Howell.

“Defendant FBI has produced no records, despite initially anticipating completion of searches by August 1, 2025, Joint Status Report (May 1, 2025), later pushed to September 1, 2025, [51] Joint Status Report (June 30, 2025); and production to begin by December 1, 2025, [51] Joint Status Report (June 30, 2025), later pushed to January 23, 2026, [62] Joint Status Report (December 1, 2025), and pushed again, with minimal explanation, to February 13, 2025,” Ms Howell said.

“Similar to the current posture of the DEA in this case, the FBI has provided no reliable end date for the processing and production of responsive records,” the judge stressed.

Ms Beryl shot down the DEA’s argument to have released some documents while withholding other pages for over six months. The DEA claimed that the so-called files were “out for consult” with other agencies but failed to state when the documents could be available to Mr Greenspan.

“Defendant DEA has produced some documents; see [54] Joint Status Report (August 7, 2025), but has parroted the same message for the past six months and four joint status reports regarding twelve remaining pages not yet produced,” the judge said.

Consequently, she ordered the DEA to furnish Mr Greenspan with a Vaughn index detailing the reasons for redacting 50 pages and withholding 172 pages of Mr Tinubu’s records.

For the separate 12 records sent to unspecified agencies, Judge Howell ordered that a DEA agent must file sworn affidavits explaining, page by page, when each record was sent to the agencies for consultation, when the review is expected to be completed, and the steps taken so far to expedite the release of Mr Tinubu’s records.

Ms Howell ordered the FBI to provide sworn statements explaining why the bureau has been missing crucial deadlines to frustrate the release of Mr Tinubu’s records as requested by Mr Greenspan.

The judge further asked the FBI to turn over all non-exempt documents concerning Mr Tinubu, as the bureau promised to do in availing Mr Greenspan “its first interim response within two weeks of January 30, 2026.”

The FBI was further directed to provide a timetable detailing how the bureau intends to submit the second batch of 500 pages by March 13 and ensure that the last batch will be released by June 1, 2026.

“Submit to the court a detailed status report on how the FBI is fulfilling its representation that ‘the second interim response is anticipated for March 13, 2026,’ id., with production of segregable non-exempt information at the rate of 500 pages reviewed per month, and a plan to complete such processing and production by June 1, 2026,” court filings stated.

The judge asked both the FBI and DEA to file a joint status report on their progress “every 14 days” starting February 27, until all processing and production of responsive records is completed.”

In April 2025, the judge granted CIA’s motion to be left out of the case after successfully arguing that there was no evidence the agency had collected any intelligence on Mr Tinubu.

PEOPLE LIKE DONALD TRUMP RESPECT US. BUT NIGERIANS DO NOT.— REMI TINUBU

The First Lady of Nigeria, Senator Oluremi Tinubu, has said many Nigerian leaders enjoy deep respect and honour internationally but are often criticised, abused and undervalued by citizens at home, blaming the trend on hate-driven narratives and political manipulation.

]b]Mrs Tinubu made the remarks in a post on her Facebook page on Friday, days after United States President Donald Trump publicly described her as a “very respected woman” during the National Prayer Breakfast held in Washington, DC[/b].

The annual event, which was attended by members of the US Congress, religious leaders and international guests, saw Trump single out the Nigerian First Lady while addressing participants on faith, leadership and global religious freedom.

During his speech, Trump acknowledged Remi Tinubu’s presence and praised her role as both Nigeria’s First Lady and an ordained pastor in the Redeemed Christian Church of God, one of the country’s largest Pentecostal denominations.

“We’re honoured to be joined today by the First Lady of Nigeria, who also happens to serve as a Christian pastor at the largest church in Nigeria.

“A very respected woman. First Lady, please, where are you? Thank you very much. It’s a great honour. Very respected person, too,” Trump said.

Reacting to the recognition, the First Lady lamented what she described as a growing disconnect between international respect for Nigerian leaders and the treatment they receive from their own people.

]b]According to her, many Nigerians have been influenced by persistent negative narratives promoted by political interests, leading to hostility and intolerance towards leaders, even when such leaders are acknowledged abroad for their contributions and standing[/b].

In her post, she said, “Most of our leaders are highly respected and honoured abroad, yet many Nigerians fail to value what they have because of hatred and the narratives planted in their minds by political paymasters, which have also hardened their hearts.”

She further criticised what she described as a culture of public ridicule and online abuse directed at Nigerian leaders, warning that such attitudes undermine national unity and collective progress.

“They bully these leaders, speak ill of them, demean them, curse them, and even seize upon their mistakes to drag them across social media, ridiculing and mocking them publicly,” she added.

Mrs Tinubu stressed that Nigeria’s strength lies in unity, mutual respect and collective effort, urging citizens to support their leaders rather than tear them down.

“Nigeria is built on love, unity, and collective effort toward shared success. Let us come together to support our respected leaders and work hand in hand with them to make our country great,” she said.

Her comments come amid renewed international focus on Nigeria’s security situation, following claims by Trump and some US lawmakers that Christians in Nigeria face widespread violence.

In late 2025, the United States designated Nigeria as a “country of particular concern” over alleged attacks on Christians, a move that drew strong criticism from the Nigerian government.

The Federal Government rejected the designation, describing it as inaccurate and harmful to national cohesion, and maintained that Nigeria’s security challenges are driven by terrorism and criminality affecting citizens across religious and ethnic lines.