Farooq Kperogi : Why the North suddenly cares about northern lives - Newstrends
Connect with us

Opinion

Farooq Kperogi : Why the North suddenly cares about northern lives

Published

on

Farooq Kperogi : Why the North suddenly cares about northern lives

It should be made clear from the outset that I am overwrought with immense grief by the heartbreaking but unintentional killing of 126 innocent men, women, and children celebrating Maulud at Tudun Biri village in Kaduna State on December 3.

Nothing can compensate for this. No excuse can rationalize it. And the outrage that this issue has generated against the Tinubu government is richly justified.

But it’s oddly hypocritical that there are suddenly vocal elements from the North—particularly the Muslim North, which went into a dreamless slumber during Buhari’s reign of bloodshed—carrying on as if this cruel, indefensible, even if involuntary, killing of innocent Muslims in the name of fighting outlaws is unprecedented.

Well, on January 17, 2017, the Nigerian Air Force also “mistakenly” dropped two—yes, two— bombs on an IDP camp in Rann, Borno State, which killed 236 innocent men, women, and children, according to Human Right Watch Nigeria’s revised estimate as reported by the Voice of America on January 24, 2017. The Nigerian military said it mistook the poor refugees for Boko Haram terrorists.

There was pin-drop silence from the Muslim North—and from the same people who’re—or pretend to be— outraged by and bent out of shape about what happened at Tudun Biri. Those of us who ranted and raved in righteous rage about it because Muhammadu Buhari showed scant concern for the lives that were snuffed out by the military he was commander-in-chief of were hushed up, harassed, attacked, and defamed.

In a January 21, 2017, Daily Trust column titled, “Buhari’s Gambian Gambit As Borno Burns,” I wrote the following words that have now somehow materialized, except for the little fact that Tinubu isn’t a southern Christian:

“Imagine for a moment that Nigeria’s current president were a man called Goodluck Jonathan (or, for that matter, any southern Christian), and the military ‘mistakenly’ dropped a bomb on hapless internally displaced Boko Haram victims, killing scores of them and critically injuring many more. Imagine again that such a president didn’t deem it worth his while to visit the state where this grievous tragedy happened, but instead chose to go to another country to resolve the country’s political differences. What would we northern Muslims be saying by now?”

READ ALSO:

Several of my fellow northern Muslims attacked me for this. My traducers were particularly incensed that I inserted scare quotes around the word “mistakenly.” They thought it implied that I meant Buhari had deliberately ordered the murder of civilians in Rann. But I merely inserted quotation marks because I was acknowledging that the military owned up to the killing and called it a mistake.

When Mubi, Adamawa State’s second largest town, was overrun by Boko Haram terrorists in 2014 and then President Goodluck Jonathan decided to visit Burkina Faso to resolve the country’s political crisis, he was roundly condemned in the country, particularly in the North. I wrote a stinging column on this myself.

“Amid the heartrending humanitarian disaster that Boko Haram has wreaked on Mubi, the president chose to travel to Burkina Faso to ‘resolve’ the country’s political crisis. Which sane person goes to put out another person’s fire while his house is up in flames?” I wrote in a November 8, 2014, column titled, “State of Emergency Amid Worsening Boko Haram Insurgency.”

But when I wrote to condemn Buhari for ignoring Rann and, like Jonathan, choosing instead to visit the Gambia to resolve the country’s political crisis, I got rhetorically violent pushbacks from the very people who should be hurt by Buhari’s blithe indifference to the tragedy in Rann.

All that Buhari did after more than 200 civilians were killed by two Nigerian Air Force bombs was to delegate an aide to issue a familiarly stereotyped expression of “regret” through his Twitter handle. Neither he nor his deputy physically traveled to Borno State to condole with and comfort the people.

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s response to the Tudun Biri tragedy is comparatively better. Within a few days of the disaster, he delegated Vice President Kashim Shettima to visit the community and express his condolences.

“President Bola Ahmed Tinubu sent us to commensurate with the people of Kaduna over this tragic incident. The calibre of people that are here with me is a testimony [to] how deeply touched the president was by the incident,” Shettima said during the visit, as if to draw a contrast between this government’s response to a horrendous tragedy and the previous government’s response to a similar but more horrific involuntary mass massacre.

There’s always more that can be done, but that there was a presidential visit to the site of the tragedy—unlike in the past—is worthy of acknowledgement. I have advocated for this sort of empathetic leadership for years. I would be a hypocrite not to acknowledge it when I see it.

In condemning Buhari’s symbolic unconcern over the unintentional killing of IDPs in Rann, I wrote, “Now, a presidential national broadcast to mourn this tragedy and a personal visit by the president to give emotional strength to the bereaved won’t bring back the lost lives, but it would show respect for the dead and show that the president cares and takes responsibility for the fatal error of the people he is commander-in-chief of.”

READ ALSO:

There has been no presidential broadcast from Tinubu, but there was a presidential visit to bereaved families, yet the Tudun Biri tragedy has attracted more attention and anger in the North than the Rann one did. It’s obvious what’s responsible for the double standards: the ethno-regional identity of the president.

Had Buhari—or, for that matter, any northern Muslim—been president when the Tudun Biri Maulud merrymakers were involuntarily killed by the military, there would have been no expression of indignation from most of the people who are hyperventilating now.

Although Sheikh Ahmad Gumi was consistently critical of the Muhammadu Buhari government for eight years, which he undermined with his curious defense of bandits, he is increasingly coming across as merely using the Tudun Biri as an outlet to ventilate pent-up ethno-regional anxieties about a southern presidency.

That’s also true of former National Health Insurance Scheme DG/CEO Professor Usman Yusuf who became critical of the Buhari regime only after he was fired from his position. He is now furtively religionizing and regionalizing the Tudun Biri mass deaths.

”This is a religious procession,” Yusuf told Channels TV. “What would have happened if a religious Christian Procession in Plateau or Kaduna was bombed? Big Churches from the South specifically would have raised their voices all over Nigeria.”

This seems to me like an underhanded religious incitement because what the villagers were doing at the time of their unfortunate death was incidental to the fact of their death. They could very well have been at the marketplace selling goods.

Yusuf knows that the most effective way to rouse the raw passions of northerners, whether they are Muslims or Christians, is to make appeals to religion. Except that Yusuf’s attempt at religious manipulation is undermined by the reality that both the president and the vice president—and, to complicate things further, the two ministers of defense— are Muslims.

Why would they be interested in killing fellow Muslims? This same logic undermines Gumi’s claim that the Tudun Biri killing was “deliberate.”

Finally, Bashir Ahmad, former special assistant on digital communications to Muhammadu Buhari who saw no evil during Buhari’s reign suddenly went into an amnesic, conspiratorial frenzy over the Tudun Biri tragedy on Twitter.

“Haba! You can’t kill 126 innocent souls — a hundred and twenty-six civilians, and just call it a mistake. I can’t even remember a time when the troops killed such a number of terrorists anywhere in this country at once. @HQNigerianArmy, Nigerians are waiting to hear from you how this ‘mistake’ will be corrected and what measures you’d put in place to prevent a recurrence,” he wrote.

Thankfully, people shut him up by reminding him of Rann where 236 Muslims in IDP camps were mistakenly bombed to a cinder when Buhari was president and Buhari didn’t deem it worth his while to visit the survivors.

When your sense of rage and outrage is activated or suppressed by the primordial identity of the person in power, you have no conscience.

Farooq Kperogi : Why the North suddenly cares about northern lives

Farooq Kperogi is a renowned Nigerian newspaper columnist and United States-based Professor of Journalism. 

Loading

Opinion

UI, UCH and the Question of Inclusive Leadership

Published

on

UI, UCH and the Question of Inclusive Leadership
Saudi-based Nigerian Islamic scholar, Mallam Ibrahim Agunbiade

UI, UCH and the Question of Inclusive Leadership

By Mallam Ibrahim Agunbiade
agunbiadeib@gmail.com

July 23, 2026

The appointment of Professor Peter Olamakinde Olapegba as the 14th substantive Vice-Chancellor of the University of Ibadan (UI), effective November 1, 2026, is deserving of congratulations. I wish him a successful tenure as he takes on the responsibility of leading Nigeria’s premier university.

The reported competitive process through which he emerged—following the assessment of eight candidates and the shortlisting of five for the final stage—is commendable, provided it was conducted transparently and strictly on merit.

However, this development also raises an important question that deserves honest and constructive discussion: When will a qualified Muslim have the opportunity to emerge as Vice-Chancellor of the University of Ibadan?

This question is not directed at Professor Olapegba or his Christian faith. If he emerged as the best candidate through a fair and transparent process, then he deserves the support of all Nigerians. My concern is whether qualified Nigerians of different faiths enjoy equal opportunities to compete for the highest leadership positions in our national institutions.

The same question applies to the University College Hospital (UCH), Ibadan, where a change in leadership is expected in the coming months. It is therefore time for stakeholders to begin constructive conversations about the appointment of the next Chief Medical Director (CMD).

READ ALSO:

I believe that qualified and competent Muslim professionals should be encouraged and given a fair opportunity to compete for the position. If the best candidate happens to be a Muslim, there should be no hesitation in appointing that individual. Equally, if the best candidate is a Christian or belongs to another faith, the same principle of merit should apply.

This is not a call for religious quotas or preferential treatment. Rather, it is a call for a level playing field.

A Muslim should not be appointed simply because he is a Muslim, just as a Christian should not be appointed simply because he is a Christian. Leadership must be based on competence, integrity, experience, and the capacity to deliver.

However, merit can only be meaningful when every qualified candidate has a genuine opportunity to compete without bias or discrimination.

The University of Ibadan and UCH are national institutions that belong to all Nigerians. Their leadership should therefore reflect the principles of fairness, inclusiveness, equal opportunity, and merit.

As Professor Olapegba prepares to assume office, I congratulate him once again and wish him a successful tenure. At the same time, I believe this is the right moment to ask whether our leadership selection processes truly provide equal opportunities for all qualified Nigerians.

As the succession process at UCH approaches, I urge stakeholders to ensure that no qualified candidate is excluded—consciously or unconsciously—because of religious identity. Let the process be transparent, competitive, and firmly anchored on merit.

I am not asking for a Muslim to be appointed simply because he is a Muslim. I am asking that no qualified Muslim should be denied the opportunity to lead simply because of his religious identity.

The same principle should apply to every Nigerian, regardless of faith or background.

Let merit prevail. Let competence prevail. Let fairness prevail.

 

UI, UCH and the Question of Inclusive Leadership

Loading

Continue Reading

Opinion

Case for replicating the Oyo kidnap-rescue template nationwide, By Farooq Kperogi

Published

on

Case for replicating the Oyo kidnap-rescue template nationwide, By Farooq Kperogi
Farooq Kperogi

Case for replicating the Oyo kidnap-rescue template nationwide, By Farooq Kperogi

Because human beings are prone to perceive nonexistent patterns, connections and intentional design even in random or unrelated events, a cognitive tendency called apophenia, and because Nigerians have an enduring and justified mistrust of government, I have seen many people question whether the abduction and rescue of pupils and teachers from three schools in the Yawota and Ahoro-Esinele communities of Oriire Local Government Area in Oyo State really happened.

The mistrust is legitimate, but I find the apophenic leap from mistrust to the conclusion that the entire episode was staged a little unsettling.

I am convinced by the available evidence that pupils and teachers were indeed abducted by despicably homicidal terrorists. I have seen no credible evidence that any government paid criminals to stage the spectacle of an abduction and rescue.

Contemporary reporting documented the May 15 attacks, identified abducted children and teachers, interviewed their relatives and recorded the killing of two teachers before the surviving captives regained their freedom.

Terrorist groups have been abducting and killing innocent students for more than a decade and have never needed prompting from politicians to do so. Attributing their heinous crimes to sponsorship by rival factions within the Nigerian political class unintentionally exculpates these scoundrels and converts murderers into mere instruments of political intrigue.

That said, there is no complete clarity about how the pupils and teachers regained their freedom. Government critics have alleged, without evidence, that a huge ransom was paid as a precondition for their release. As I will show later, I doubt this.

But the government’s version of how the pupils and teachers were rescued is not entirely coherent, either.

READ ALSO:

The Presidency initially described the rescue as the outcome of a successful joint military, police and intelligence operation. It said eight suspected kidnappers were arrested, other members of the group were killed and neither ransom nor a prisoner exchange was involved. The abductors had allegedly demanded the release of a detained terrorist leader, but the government said he remained in custody and was being prosecuted.

The Army’s subsequent account was less dramatic than the Presidency’s early language suggested. It did not say troops stormed the camp and physically extracted the hostages during a firefight. Instead, it said a month-long intelligence operation identified the group’s leaders, informants, logistical networks and hideouts. According to the Army, arrests disrupted the group and exerted pressure that “ultimately led the terrorist group to unconditionally release the pupils and teachers.”

In a July 10 interview with Tinubu-owned TVC News, former DSS operative Seyi Adetayo offered a more specific but as yet uncorroborated explanation of the operational modalities of the rescue. He claimed that government security operatives identified and detained some kidnappers’ mothers, wives, children and other associates, sent recordings of those arrests to the abductors and combined coercive pressure with intelligence operations. He also claimed that the terrorists were warned that harm to their captives would bring harm to their relatives.

Based on the available evidence, the most defensible interpretation of what happened is that this was an unusually collaborative, intelligence-driven and coercively negotiated release. It was probably not a conventional battlefield rescue. Nor does it appear to have been a ransom-propelled release.

This actually fills me with hope. It means the government may have found a potentially effective template for disrupting terrorist networks and rescuing their victims without exposing abductees to the indiscriminate violence of a frontal military assault.

But the part of the template worth replicating is its lawful core: interagency cooperation, careful intelligence gathering, the identification of terrorist networks, the disruption of their supply routes and the arrest of culpable collaborators.

There would be no greater evidence for the truth of the government’s account of the Oriire rescue than the successful replication of its methods in unresolved mass-abduction cases nationwide.

READ ALSO:

The February 3-4 terrorist assault on Woro and neighboring Nuku communities in Kaiama Local Government Area of Kwara State not only killed scores of people but also led to a mass abduction. UNICEF reported that around 176 women, including pregnant women, and children were kidnapped from Woro.

More than five months later, the victims have not been released, according to the latest public reports. The terrorists have released videos showing women and small children appealing desperately for intervention. They, too, need the collaborative intelligence-gathering energies that security agencies deployed in Oyo.

On May 15, suspected militants abducted 42 children from Mussa Primary and Junior Secondary School and surrounding homes in Askira-Uba Local Government Area of Borno State. Some of the abductees were extremely young. According to the latest available reporting, all 42 remain missing.

There was a separate school attack in Lassa town in the same local government area in Borno on June 29. Gunmen attacked Government Day Secondary School while students were taking examinations. Eight people were rescued, but 36 students and one staff member remain captive. The students comprised 25 girls and 11 boys.

On June 7, in Magamin Diddi village in Maradun Local Government Area of Zamfara State, bandits reportedly invited villagers to what was presented as a peace meeting and then abducted them. The police confirmed that 39 people were taken, although community estimates were as high as 50. The kidnappers reportedly demanded ₦125 million and released some captives to communicate the demand. There has been no authoritative public account of the remaining captives’ release.

Nor should the passage of time cause older victims to disappear from the national conscience. Eighty-nine of the Chibok schoolgirls abducted in 2014 remain officially unaccounted for. Their families have endured more than a decade of promises, occasional discoveries and prolonged uncertainty.

There are many more cases than I have the space to chronicle in this column. Security forces presumably have records of mass abductions, including many that never made the national news. Yet Nigeria has developed a disturbing ritual in which outrage follows an abduction, officials promise decisive action and public attention eventually moves elsewhere while families remain imprisoned in terrifyingly crippling uncertainty.

The true test of the Oyo operation is not the applause it generated after one dramatic success but the number of forgotten captives its methods can bring home. If its intelligence model worked as the government says it did, it should become a national operational doctrine rather than a self-contained public-relations trophy.

Replicating it in Woro, Mussa, Lassa, Magamin Diddi and other communities would simultaneously rescue imperiled citizens, restore public faith in the capacity of the government to perform its primary duty and begin to extirpate a kidnapping economy that has destroyed communal peace and individual peace of mind across Nigeria. Until that happens, Oyo remains an encouraging breakthrough, but not yet a proven national template.

 

 

Case for replicating the Oyo kidnap-rescue template nationwide, By Farooq Kperogi

Kperogi is a renowned columnist and United States-based professor of journalism 

Loading

Continue Reading

Opinion

Shettima’s final test, by Azu Ishiekwene

Published

on

Azu Ishiekwene
Azu Ishiekwene

Shettima’s final test, by Azu Ishiekwene

Shettima’s final test, by Azu Ishiekwene

•Ishiekwene is the Editor-In-Chief of LEADERSHIP and author of the book, Writing for Media and Monetising It. 

Loading

Continue Reading

Trending