Opinion
Goodluck Jonathan is constitutionally qualified to run for President
By Chuef Mike Ozekhome
Introduction
Nigeria is a country of one major news item per day. The issue in the polity currently generating national ruckus, hoopla and bedlam is the presumed intention of Dr Goodluck Ebele Jonathan to run for the 2023 presidency. It does not matter that he has never confirmed to anyone, the rumour of his planned defection from his opposition PDP party under which he was once elected President, to the ruling APC party. They are prepared, as ever, to shave his hair in his absence.
I have carefully read the arguments of those who believe that Dr Goodluck Ebele Jonathan is disqualified from contesting the 2023 presidential election, because according to them, he had already done two terms and will thus be ineligible to contest for a third term. They cite the Fourth Alteration (No 16) Act, which was signed into an Act by President Muhammadu Buhari on the 11th of June, 2018. The section they are relying on is section 137(3) of the said Fourth Alteration to the 1999 Constitution, which provides that “a person who was sworn in to complete the term for which another person was elected as president shall not be elected to such office for more than a single term”.
THE ANTAGONISTS ARE DEAD WRONG IN THEIR LEGAL POSTULATIONS
The truth of the matter is that the antagonists of Jonathan running in 2022, in their strange line of argument, are mainly relying on the above section 137(3). They have probably not adverted their minds to sections 141 of the Electoral Act, 2010, as amended, and section 285(13) of the same Fourth Alteration to the 1999 Constitution, as amended, which they are relying on. More revealing is that these antagonists are probably not aware of an extant and subsisting Court of Appeal decision where Jonathan was frontallly confronted and challenged before the 2015 presidential election, on the same ground of being ineligible to contest the said 2015 election, having allegedly been elected for two previous terms of office. The section 137(3) being relied upon by the antagonists was signed into law in 2018, three years after Jonathan had left office. Can he be caught in its web retrospectively? We shall see that anon.
The case in question is CYRIACUS NJOKU V GOODLUCK EBELE JONATHAN (2015) LPELR-244496 (CA). In that case, the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, held that President Goodluck Jonathan had only taken the oath of office once and therefore upheld his eligibility to contest the then Nigeria’s presidential election slated for March 28, 2015.
The intermediate court held that the oath of office President Jonathan took in 2010 was merely to complete the “unexpired tenure” of late President Umar Yar’Adua, who died while in office as President.
The appeal had been brought before the court by one Cyriacus Njoku, who was challenging the ruling of the High Court of Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, which on March 1, 2013, had dismissed the suit he filed to stop President Jonathan from contesting the 2015 polls.
In a lead judgement delivered by Justice Abubakar Yahaya, the full panel of the court unanimously held that President Jonathan had only spent one term in office as President, going by the provisions of the 1999 Constitution.
President Jonathan had been empowered as acting President on February 9, 2010, following a motion for operation of the “doctrine of necessity” by the Senate, owing to the protracted stay of late President Umaru Yar’Adua in Saudi Arabia on medical grounds.
When President Yar’Adua eventually died on May 5, 2010, Jonathan was sworn in as president to serve the unexpired residue of office of Yar’Adua. Jonathan was later elected President in 2011 for the first time, on his own merit.
Mr. Njoku had contended that Jonathan had already sworn to the oath of office and allegiance twice and therefore, should be disqualified from contesting the 2015 election, as any victory he secured would amount to being sworn in thrice.
However, the court ruled that the oath that Jonathan took in 2010 was merely to complete the unexpired tenure of late Yar’Adua; adding that by virtue of Section 135 (2)(b) of the 1999 Constitution, Jonathan only took his first oath in May, 2011. The Court of Appeal further held that disqualification is through election, not oath taking.
The intermediate court’s judgement read in part:
“In this appeal, it is not controverted by the appellant that the first oath taken by the first defendant (Jonathan) was the oath he took as the Vice President and not as President… But he took the oath in May 2010 to complete unexpired tenure of late Umaru Musa Yar’Adua. Section 37(1)(b) disqualifies a person from contesting for president if he had been elected twice. Disqualification is through election and not oath taking. Election is a process of choosing a person to occupy a position by voting. When election is given its literal meaning, it connotes when a voting is employed to choose a person for political office. This did not take place when Jonathan stepped into the shoes of his Principal who went to the great beyond. To say these things were done is to import words not used by the constitution. Section 146(1) of the constitution cannot be deemed an election for a VP to step into the office of a President. Election involves conducting primaries by party, nomination, election and announcement of results. All these processes were not done. If a VP succeeds a President that dies, that cannot be challenged. It is a mode of stepping into the vacant office provided for by the constitution. When a President dies, the Vice President automatically becomes President as provided for by S130 (1)(2) of the 1999 constitution… It was not election that produced the first respondent in May 2010, the oath he took then was not an oath of elected President as provided for by Section 180 of the constitution. The process of election was followed in 2011. The oath of office taken in 2011 was the first oath taking by the first respondent as an elected President having fulfilled all the process of election.… Again, the succession of a Vice-President to the office of a President who died, in accordance with Section 146(1) of the 1999 Constitution, cannot be “deemed an election”, especially for the purpose of taking away a right that has been vested. As stated earlier, an election under the 1999 Constitution involves primaries, nominations, voting and declaration of results. That is the mode prescribed in electing a President, and once it is so prescribed, it must be followed, and no other method can be employed. All these processes can be challenged in a Court of law and if successful, the election would be annulled. But if a Vice-President succeeds a President who died, that cannot be challenged because it is a Constitutional provision, and the succession cannot be annulled. It is a mode of assumption to the office of the demised President, an ‘appointment’ by the Constitution, as it were, as no letter of appointment is necessary from anybody. The Vice-President automatically becomes the President, by virtue of his being the Vice-President. An example can be found in Section 130(1) and (2) of the 1999 Constitution.” Per ABUBAKAR DATTI YAHAYA, JCA (Pp 40 – 41 Paras E – D)
The Court of Appeal further upheld the decision of the lower court which had dismissed Mr. Njoku’s suit for lack of locus standi. It noted that “it is fundamental that where a party lacks locus, the court cannot assume jurisdiction….We agree with the lower court that the appellant has no locus to sue”.
On the question of the cause of action, the court held that the case of the appellant was “speculative and imaginary as none of the reliefs he sought accrued to him any benefit”.
Indeed, the Court of Appeal had awarded the sum of N50,000 each as cost to the defendant, President Jonathan.
RETROSPECTIVITY OF LEGISLATION
Aside Jonathan being completely cleansed of the virus of ineligibility to contest the 2023 presidential election by the Court of Appeal decision in Njoku’s case, as Naaman the leper was, after dipping himself in the River Jordan seven times, Jonathan is also aided by the golden canon of interpretation to the effect that an enactment does not operate retrospectively or retroactively to take away from citizens enured rights.
We may now ask the question: What is the effect of Buhari signing into law section 137(3) of the Fourth Alteration to the 1999 Constitution in 2018? The answer is found in section 2 of the Interpretation Act which provides that:
“1. An Act is passed when the President assents to the Bill for the Act, whether or not the Act then comes into force;
- Where no other provision is made as to the time when a particular enactment is to come into force, it shall, subject to the following subsection, came into force –
a. In the case of an enactment contained in an Act of the National Assembly, on the day when the Act is passed;
b.In any other case, on the day when the enactment is made”.
It is therefore clear that section 137(3) of the Fourth Alteration to the Constitution took effect from 11th June, 2018, when President Muhammadu Buhari assented to it. Section 137(3) is subject to section 318(4) of the 1999 Constitution which provides that, “the Interpretation Act shall apply for the purposes of interpreting (its) provisions”.
Section 137(3) is one piece of legislation that can be termed retrospective or retroactive legislation.
On retrospectivity of legislation, the apex court, coram Justice Kekere-Ekun, J.S.C, held in the case of SPDC V. ANARO & ORS (2015) LPELR-24750(SC) at (Pp. 64 paras. B), thus:
“There is a general presumption against retrospective legislation. It is presumed that the legislature does not intend injustice or absurdity. Courts therefore lean against giving certain statutes retrospective operation. Generally, statutes are construed as operating only in cases or on facts, which come into existence after the statutes were passed unless a retrospective effect is clearly intended. It was held inter alia, in: Ojokolobo Vs Alamu (1987) 3 NWLR (Pt.61) 377 @ 402 F-H that it is a fundamental rule of Nigerian law that no statute shall be construed to have a retrospective operation unless such a construction appears very clearly in the terms of the Act or Law; or arises by necessary and distinct implication. See also: Udoh Vs O.H.M.B. (1993) 7 NWLR (Pt.304) 39 @ 149 F – G; Adegbenro Vs Akintola (1963) All NLR 305 @ 308.”
Similarly, in ALEWA V. SOKOTO STATE INEC (2007) LPELR-8388(CA) (PP. 32 PARAS. A), the Court of Appeal, per Ariwoola JCA ( as he then was), held thus:
“It is however settled law that, unless the law makers expressly state otherwise, a statute operates prospectively but not retrospectively. It is a cardinal principle of English Law that no statute shall be construed to have retrospective operation unless such a construction appears very clearly in the terms of the Act, or arises by necessary and distinct implications. The position is the same in this Country. In Olaniyi vs. Aroyehun (1991) 5 NWLR (pt 194) 652, the Supreme Court held that:- “A construction like other statutes operates prospectively and not retrospectively, unless it is expressly provided to be otherwise. Such legislation affects only rights which came into existence after it has been passed.” See also; Chief C. Odumegwu Ojukwu vs. Chief Olusegun Obasanjo & Ors. (2004) 7 SCM 53 at 93, Afolabi & Ors. v. Governor of Oyo State (1985) 2 NWLR (pt 9) 734, Ojokolobo vs. Aremu (supra).”
Hear my Lord Kekere-Ekun JCA, (as he then was) in ALEWA V. SOKOTO STATE INEC (2007) LPELR-8388(CA) (PP. 21-22 PARAS. D):
“There is a presumption that the legislature does not intend what is unjust. Thus, although under our legal system, the Legislature is competent to make retrospective laws, the Courts generally lean against giving a statute retrospective effect unless the terms of the statute so state in clear and unequivocal language. In Afolabi v. Governor of Oyo State (1985) 2 NWLR (9) 734 at 752 E, Aniagolu, JSC stated thus, “The Courts have always leaned against giving statutes a retrospective effect and usually regard them as applying to facts or matters which came into existence after the statutes were passed, unless it is clearly shown that a retrospective effect was intended by the Legislature.” Underlining supplied. See alsoAdesanoye v. Adewole (supra) at 147 B-C & D-E; West v. Gwyne (1911) 2 CH 1; A.G. Federation v. A.N.P.P. (2003) 15 NWLR (844) 600 at 648 G -H; Sa’ad v. Nyame (2004) All FWLR (201)1678.”
His Lordship Muhammad, J.S.C, in EGUNJOBI V. FRN (2012) LPELR-15537(SC), (PP. 34-35 PARAS. F), held that:
“…It is trite law that the Courts frown at retrospective and retroactive legislations. Ojokolobo v. Alamu (1987) 3 NWLR (Pt.61) 377 at 34 406; Afolabi v. Governor of Oyo State (1985) 2 NWLR (Pt 9) 734. Although under Nigeria Law, there is a presumption against retrospectivity, where a retrospective operation is clearly spelt out, that legislation must not be declared incompetent; Adegbenro v. Akintola (1963) 2 SCNLR 216; Adeshina v. Lemonu (1965) 1 All NLR 233; The Swiss Air Transport Co. Ltd v. African Continental Bank Ltd (1971) 1 All NLR 37; Attorney General East Central State v. Ugwuh (1975) 5 SC 13…”
Indeed, section 4(9) of the Constitution denies the NASS “in relation to any criminal offence”, the power to “make any law which shall have retrospective effect”. Though this section specifically deals with criminal offences, judicial decisions clearly show that it operates with equal force to civil matters.
Thus, the court held in the case of the ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION V. ALL NIGERIAN PEOPLES PARTY (ANPP) & 2 ORS. (2003) 15 NWLR (Pt. 844) 600 @ pages 648-649, paras. E-B, that:
“A statute is deemed to be retrospective where it takes away any vested right acquired under existing laws or creates a new obligation or imposes a new duty or attaches a new disability in respect of transactions or considerations already past… Based on the presumption that a legislature does not intend what is unjust, the courts have always leaned against giving statutes a retrospective effect and usually regard them as applying to facts or matters which came into existence after the statutes were passed unless it is clearly shown that a retrospective effect was intended by the legislature. In the instant case the constitution came into being on 29th May, 1999 and all rights, liabilities and privileges as contemplated by the circumstance of the arose as of that day. Consequently, its provisions can only be read prospectively.”
Furthermore, the court held at page 649, paras. C-D; 661-662, paras. F-C; 665, paras. A-B as follows:
“One of the cardinal principles of interpretation of statutes is that no rule of construction is that a retrospective operation is not to be given to a statute so as to impair an existing right or obligation otherwise that as regards matters of procedure, unless that effect cannot be avoided without doing violence to the language of the enactment…”.
The court nailed it when it held at page 667, paras. C-D that:
“A constitution, like other statutes, operates prospectively and not retrospectively unless it is expressly provided to be otherwise. Such legislations affect only rights which came into existence after it has been passed.”
A cursory examination of the various provisions of the constitution and all the appellate court decisions cited above make it crystal clear that the purported disqualification of Dr Goodluck Ebele Jonathan is grossly misconceived by the antagonists, as the Constitution must be progressively and not retrogressively construed. More significantly, the Alteration Act itself does not make any express provision that the said inserted sub-section 137(3) would operate retrospectively. The principle of expressio unius est exclusio alterius (the express mention of one thing is the exclusion of others) applies here. See MADUMERE & ANOR V. OKWARA & ANOR (2013) LPELR-20752(SC).
CONCLUSION
It is clear that those deliberately misinterpreting the clear position of the law may be baying for Jonathan’s blood, possibly as a potential candidate who may subvert the chances of their preferred candidates. I do not view issues from such a narrow ad homine prism and blurred binoculars. It will be grossly unfair, unconstitutional, unconscionable and inequitable to deny Jonathan of the right to contest the 2023 presidential election when our extant laws and appellate court decisions permit him to. The question of whether Jonathan really needs to subject his glittering and internationally acclaimed reputation and credentials to the muddy waters of a fresh competition with persons, some of whom were his personal appointees as president, is another matter altogether. Only him, and not the present state of the laws in Nigeria, can answer that question and decide his own fate. But, as regards his eligibility to contest, Dr Goodluck Ebele Azikiwe Jonathan is pre-eminently constitutionally, morally and legally qualified to contest the 2023 presidential election.
By Professor Mike Ozekhome, SAN, CON, OFR, LL.D.
I have carefully read and listened to former Nigerian military president, General Ibrahim
Badamosi Babagida’s public remorse and regrets over the atrocious annulment of the June
12,1993 presidential elections. He did this 32 whopping years later. I want to very quickly say
that it takes a man with strong guts and balls and a man who has become repentant, born
again and has seen the face of God to publicly recant his earlier wrongful deeds and offer
public apology to the entire nation. This was no doubt meant to heal gapinng wounds and
balm wounded and bruised hearts.
The polls, the best, most transparent and credible elections, ever held in Nigeria till date,
were meant to end decades of military d The annulment threw Nigeria into turmoil and
widespread unreast, protests, maimings and killings. This forced Babagida to “step aside”;
the enthronenent of the Enest Shonekan’s Interim Government; and the arrest and detention
of Chief Moshood Abiola, the presumed winner who later died in Aso Villa in questionable
and suspicious circumstances. Of course, General Sani Abacha who was his second in
command later sacked Shonekan in a bloodless coup. For years, IBB prevaricated on the
annulment, claiming he did it in the best national interest. But on Thursday the 21st of
February, 2025,Babangida during the presentation of his memoirs, “A journey In Service”,
pointedly regretted in the public: “I regret June 12. I accept full responsibility for the
decisions taken and June 12 happened under my watch. Mistakes, missteps happened
in quick succession. That accident of history is most regrettable. The nation is entitled
to expect my expression of regret “. And wait for it:: he acknowledged for the first time that
Abiola won the elections fair and square, trouncing his major opponent, Alhaji Bashir Tofa.
I want to salute Babagida for having the courage and humility to own up like a man; that
everything that happened during the June 12 crisis took place under him as the head of state
and the president who was also the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal
Republic of Nigeria. I salute him for acknowledging that his government which actually
organised unarguably the freest, fairest and most credible elections in the electoral history
of Nigeria when it introduced option A4 from electoral books that were hithenlrto unknown
to Nigeria or to the world. But unfortunately, regrettably like he now admits, he again turned
around to annul the same elections in a way that was most bizarre, curious and unnatural.
To me, that he has come out to open up to doing something wrong and egregious to a
bleeding nation should be appreciated. I believe that Nigerians should forgive him because
to err is human and to forgive is divine ( Eph 4:32 ). I personally have now forgiven him
because I was also a victim of the June12 crisis. It threw up all manners of challenges to me
as a person, where in my very youthful age; in my thirties, I found myself marching on the
streets of Lagos every day- from Ikeja bus stop roundabout, to Ikorodu road; up to Tejuosho
market; from there to Ojuelegba, Surulere; to Mushin; to Shomolu and Igando, Alimosho.
Everyday, we were on the streets, protesting the mindless annulment. Some of us were killed
in process; some were lucky enough to escape abroad on self exile. But some of us- very few
indeed- refused to flee our dear country; we stayed back. We stared at the military eyeball to
eyeball. We challenge authority and spoke truth to power. We challenged impunity and
repression. I suffered several detentions across different detention centres. I virtually could
not find means of livelihood for my youthful family because I was profiled, my phones bugged
and no briefs were coming in. But I personally forgive him because it takes tons of guts to
make public confession of having erred and atone for same as he has now done.
It is confession that leads to penance and penance leads to restitution and then forgiveness.
If Babagida were to die today, I believe that he will see the face of God because he has prayed
God to forgive him; and he has prayed Nigerians to forgive him. Beyond that historic and
epochal mistake of the annulment of the June 12 election which constitutes his original sin,
let me place it on record that Babagida is one of the greatest presidents that Nigeria ever had
in terms of his ingenuity, rulership mantra; ideas for national resurgimento; ideas that
contributed greatly to nation-building. These were aside the IMF-induced loans and pills
which he introduced and which we again valiantly fought against successfully.
Babagida it was who gave birth to the Federal Capital Territory and laid the solid foundation for virtually everything you see there today. His government was peopled by intellectuals and
not by half illiterates and quacks. He recognized and used intellects. He was luminous and he built bridges of understanding, friendship and brotherhood across Nigeria. Nigerians,
please, accept IBB’s confession and forgive him his sin of annuling the June 12,1993
elections. Let the wounds heal; let the heart melt; and let the spirit of national triumphalism
prevail.
Festivals world over are the most popular forms of celebrations in human existence. Whether as religious, culture, sports, film, arts and other traditional practices, festivals are pivotal events that could involve millions of people in the case of the religion related across the globe annually or periodically. They are events that bring people together and are characterized with merriments, ceremonies, and a lot of other forms of fun and bonding.
Nigeria as a multi ethnic and diverse society with over 250 ethnic groups is enriched with various forms of festivals observed annually with those of religions most prominent with the celebrations by Muslims and Christians. Similarly, the traditional worshippers retain their own forms of festivals all depending on the tribes and the culture involved. Several among the religious and cultural festivals in Nigeria include Christmas the celebration of the birthday of Jesus Christ, the Easter that heralds lent and the resurrection of Jesus after death while Islam has Eid-el Kabir and Eid El-fitri which is breaking of Ramadan fasting. At the level of culture and tradition there other festivals that comes to mind that includes Argungu fishing festival in Kebbi state, the new yam festival predominantly among the Ibo speaking tribes, Durbar festival, Calabar Carnival, Osun festival, Ojude Oba festival, Igue festival among the Benin people of Edo state, Oro festival, Osun festival, Sango festival, Egungun festival all among the Yoruba people, New Yam festival, Eyo festival popular among the people of Lagos Island in Lagos state and so on.
Durbar Festival
The word Durbar is traced to Persian and is connected with the ceremony marking the installation of Queen Victoria as the Express of Colonial India in 1877 while the word have been pronounced and propounded as “darbar” with dar meaning door and bar meaning entry or audience in Hindi-Urdu. In Nigeria, Durbar is a treasured cultural horse riding and display festival majorly among the Hausa people of the northern Nigeria to mark the Islamic holidays of Eid-el- Fitri [end of Ramadan} and Eid-el-Adha [the feast of the lamb]. The over 400 years old practice is said to have been introduced by Sarki Muhammadu Rumfa of Kano in the late 14th century as military parade and display when horses were used in battles to defend and protect the Emirate and also the opportunity to pay homage and demonstrate loyalty to the emir. It is also part of demonstration to showcase the readiness of the palace troops for battles and to also celebrate important political events. Available information has it that the first major Durbar in the country took place on the 1st of January, 1900 as part of the celebration to mark the transition of the Royal Niger Company to an imperial Protectorate.
Also known as horse ride festival it is worthy of note that horses and to some extent camels played prominent roles in the growth and developments of the today prominent Nigeria cities like Kano, Katsina, Zaria, Sokoto and Bida. In the 14th century before the sojourn of Christopher Columbus, aside being used during conquest and in battlefields under the command of the Madawaki who leads cavalry of horsemen with their horses loaded with various weapons, horses were used mostly for commercial activities particularly the trans Sahara trade expansion with items like salt, gold and farm produces.
Ceremonies
The activities and ceremonies involves “Hawan sallah” in Hausa language {meaning Mount of Eid} which in essence connotes the mounting of horse during the Eid or sallah celebration. The ceremonies begin with prayers at Eid grounds followed with parade of the Emir and his entourage on horses followed with drummers and trumpeters with the movement ending at the Emir’s palace. The parade includes hundreds of beautifully decorated horses with nobles in their best clothes followed by musicians and magicians all in a long procession in distinctive turbans {Rawani} clearly indicating their nobility and social status through streets to pay homage to the Emir. Other special attractions particularly in Kano Durbar which is acclaimed to possess the biggest parade of colouful horses in the world, include the display by the “hyena man” who carries out street performance with trained animals like hyenas and baboons which create a lot of excitements and entertainment for the hundreds of crowd in attendance.
The procession of the strictly male event showcases participants dressed in flamboyant turbans and robes with modes indicating their royal linage. Kano Durbar for example is four day event that commences with Hawan sallah on the day of Eid followed by the day 2 and most popular for its entertainment and glamour Hawan Daushe for the special visitation of the Emir and his colourful entourage to his mother in her domain. The display of various entertainers including magicians, drummers, dancers, stunt men and masquerades attract and witness the attendance and spectators across the globe. The other two days are for Hawan Nassarawa and finally Hawan Doriya which are both continuous aspects for merriment during the festival.
The Emir’s return from his mother’s visitation on the day 2 {Hawan Daushe} is followed by The Jahi that sees the him and his entourage ride through various important historical quarters and families before returning to the palace. On arrival the Emir in a military manner takes position to receive salutes and traditional greetings from the cavalry of riders along with the various district heads, their families and entourage in order of hierarchy. This is followed by the demonstration of loyalty and gallantry by all the riders and spectators present. After the homage and performances, [The Jahi] the palace guards take positions and fire several gunshots to signal the closure and end of the day and most important aspect of the four day festival.
Durbar festival has become annual festival celebrated across cities Northern Muslim dominated cities of Nigeria like Kano, Katsina, Sokoto, Zaria and Bida and was extended to Ilorin in Kwara state during Eid el-fitri and Eid El-Adha. Generally speaking, the Durbar festival is not just the most population cultural heritage of the Hausa people of the northern Nigeria and major parts of Niger republic but it is festival that unite and bring the people together to celebrate their unique historical and cultural heritage.
Durbar festival recently has witnessed more activities like car racing and other fun fairs that attract sons and daughters of Hausa decent, visitors and tourist annually to places like Kano, Katsina and Zaria. The glamour, popularity and attractions of Durbar particularly the Kano Durbar festival over the years, led to the recognition of the festival as one of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity by the UNESCO in in December 17, 2024. This laudable and significant achievement in the nation’s cultural heritage exemplified the extent to which the festival has become popular to the people and the role it places towards unifying the people through their rich cultural heritage. During the presentation of the UNESCO certificate, by the Permanent Delegation of Nigeria to UNESCO to the Minister of Art, Culture, Tourism and Creative Economy Barr. Hannatu Musawa, opined that the great achievement does “not only celebrates the beauty and unity of the festival but also creates opportunities for the preservation and promotion of cultural heritage. The country’s representative at the UNESCO in addition stated that “Having the Kano Durbar on the UNESCO list is a huge milestone for Nigeria” while the Minister in her view remarked that “the recognitions bring both international prestige and tangible benefits to the local economy”.
In comparison, while Ujude Oba yet another similar festival of the Ijebu people of Ogun state in Western Nigeria, entails the participation of both male and female across various age groups as part of the big sallah [Eid-edha] celebration of the Muslim faithful. While both festivals identify or are associated with royalty, palace events and horse riding, durbar is strictly a male show and more of an horse riding festival while the practice is just an aspect of horse riding is just an aspect of Ojude Oba festival.
It is hope that the recent drive by the present administration leverages on the recent recognition of Durbar by the UNESCO to create more awareness through wider media coverage with a view of boosting general interest and tourist attractions which shall cascade or stimulate growth of the sector and also serve as source revenue to the governments across all levels.
Abdulkareem A. Ikharo.
Curator [NCMM].
Abuja.
By Wilberforce Edward
As Nigeria continues to grapple with various socio-economic challenges, the selfless contributions of individuals like Dr. Emmanuel N Musa serve as a beacon of hope. A renowned philanthropist, Dr. Musa has been making waves with his tireless efforts to empower communities, particularly in Adamawa State.
Dr. Musa’s philanthropic journey is a testament to his commitment to giving back to society. Through his foundation, Emnamu Foundation, he has been providing scholarships, job opportunities, and infrastructure development to communities in need. His impact is felt not only in Hong Local Government Area but also across Adamawa State, the North East region, and beyond.
One of Dr. Musa’s most notable achievements is his unwavering support for education. He has awarded numerous scholarships to deserving students, enabling them to pursue their academic dreams. Additionally, he has provided job opportunities for youth and the aged, helping to reduce unemployment and poverty in the region.
Dr. Musa’s philanthropy extends beyond education and economic empowerment. He has also been instrumental in promoting peace and stability in communities affected by insurgency. His foundation has worked tirelessly to provide relief materials, shelter, and medical care to displaced persons.
Despite his remarkable achievements, Dr. Musa remains humble and dedicated to his philanthropic work. His commitment to giving back to society is genuine and not driven by political ambitions. As he continues to make a positive impact on the lives of many, Dr. Musa’s legacy as a renowned philanthropist is cemented.
As the 2027 governorship election in Adamawa State approaches, there are whispers that Dr. Musa may be considering a run for office. While this remains speculative, one thing is certain – Dr. Musa’s dedication to public service and philanthropy has earned him a reputation as a leader who truly cares about the welfare of his people.
As we celebrate Dr. Emmanuel N Musa’s remarkable philanthropic efforts, we are reminded that there are still good people in the world who are committed to making a positive difference. His selfless contributions serve as an inspiration to us all, and we can only hope that his legacy will continue to inspire future generations.
Wilberforce Edward is a public affairs commentator. He writes from Abuja-FCT.
-
Crime1 year agoPolice nabs Killer of Varsity Lecturer in Niger
-
News1 year agoFCT-IRS tells socialite Aisha Achimugu not to forget to file her annual returns
-
Appointment1 year agoTinubu names El-Rufai, Tope Fasua, others in New appointments
-
Kogi1 year agoEchocho Challenges Tribunal Judgment ordering rerun in 94 polling units
-
Kogi1 year agoINEC cancells election in 67 polling units in Ogori-Magongo in Kogi
-
News1 year agoIPOB: Simon Ekpa gives reason for seperatists clamour for Biafra
-
Metro11 months ago‘Listing Simon Ekpa among wanted persons by Nigeria military is rascality, intimidation’
-
News1 year agoKingmakers of Igu/ Koton-Karfe dare Bello, urge him to reverse deposition of Ohimege-Igu