Fayose-Obasanjo: Two eboras dragging same pair of trousers (2) - Newstrends
Connect with us

Opinion

Fayose-Obasanjo: Two eboras dragging same pair of trousers (2)

Published

on

Tunde Odesola
Tunde Odesola

Fayose-Obasanjo: Two eboras dragging same pair of trousers (2)

Tunde Odesola

(Published in The PUNCH, on Friday, November 28, 2025)

On June 26, 2012, when the Ekiti governorship election was two years and four months away, Ebora Fayose, with the coals of ambition burning in his heart, set forth at dawn by writing a letter from his country home at No. 1, Odo-Ode Street, Afao-Ekiti, Ekiti State, Nigeria. Fayose sent the seven-paragraph letter to Agbe L’Oba House, Quarry Road, Ibara, P.O.Box 2286, Abeokuta, Ogun State, Nigeria, the cave of the Balogun of Owu, Ebora Obasanjo, who keeps grudges and gunpowder warm.

Fayose’s letter read, “Dear Baba,

“There is no denying the fact that my relationship with you has gone sour as a result of my action and inaction, which have definitely caused you embarrassment in public, and this has marred our very good father-son relationship in the past.

“I take responsibility for my overreaction and disrespect to your person, which is most regretted. I am indeed sorry.

“I pray that God will give you the grace to let go of the past, knowing full well that I am human and therefore not infallible, especially considering the circumstances surrounding my removal from office.

“To further buttress my willingness to seek peace with you, I could recall that I had made several efforts to this effect by consulting your close allies in the persons of Aare Afe Babalola (SAN), Chief Omilani, and Pastor Oyedepo, among others.

“Lastly, kindly disregard all insinuations or political blackmail suggestive of my doing or saying anything contradicting my present disposition as contained in this letter.

“My reconciliation with your good self may not go down well with some of my political opponents, but you remain the father of all.

“My wife sends her greetings.”

With high regards.

Signed: Ayo Fayose.

In a four-paragraph letter, Obasanjo, on July 18, 2012, wrote to Fayose, saying, “Dear Ayo, I write to acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated June 26, 2012, pleading with me to forgive you, as you put it, for your action and inaction which have caused me embarrassment in public.

“As for the embarrassment and personal insult to me, forgiveness is divine, and I will not withhold forgiveness since I believe that God will not withhold forgiveness for my inadequacies.

READ ALSO:

“However, for me, the personal aspect can be handled by me, but the party aspect has to be handled by the local, state and national levels of the Party.

“I wish you all the best and God’s blessing.

Yours sincerely,

Signed: Olusegun Obasanjo.

The exchange of letters between Afao-Ekiti and Ibara-Abeokuta in 2012 signalled the official cessation of hostilities after the two-time Ekiti governor and the three-time Nigerian ruler had clashed during the 60th birthday anniversary of a former Osun Governor, Prince Olagunsoye Oyinlola, held in Okuku, in February 2011.

But some scars do not disappear even after they heal. A governor, who was scurried out of the Ekiti State Government House, Ado-Ekiti, in the booth of a car like a bag of garri Ijebu, would never forget the ordeal. Neither would an elder publicly insulted by a younger fellow. So, both Obasanjo and Fayose seethed in controlled animosity against each other. Years after his controversial removal from power in the early morning of December 15, 2006, over alleged corruption in a state government-owned poultry business, Fayose contested his removal from office, and the Supreme Court, in April 2015, declared his impeachment illegal.

Fayose, who walked into the dining room of Oyinlola, where political giants like former Head of State, General Ibrahim Babangida; then-Oyo State Governor, Chief Adebayo Alao-Akala, etc, were being fêted, snubbed Obasanjo while greeting other leaders. The birthday boy, Oyinlola, noticed the insult and quickly went to Fayose and asked, “Did you not see Baba Obasanjo?”

“Obasan-who? I don’t know anyone by that name,” Fayose said flatly. “I hope you’re not blind,” Oyinlola countered with jocular seriousness, and added firmly, “Ayo, go and greet Baba before you sit down.” Obasanjo heard the dialogue. And he fired a verbal shot: “I don’t know bastards, too.” If the bullet hit Fayose, he didn’t show it. He only fired back, “You’re a bastard, too!”

After the Okuku exchange came the two letters of apology and acceptance. Two years after the letter-inducing ceasefire, Fayose coasted home to a famous victory in the Ekiti governorship election of October 16, 2014, defeating the incumbent governor, Gentleman Kayode Fayemi, by a stretch. Thus, Fayose became the poster boy of the PDP in the South-West, while Obasanjo maintained his title as the party’s godfather and disciplinarian-in-chief.

READ ALSO:

As the 2015 general elections approached, Obasanjo turned into a thorn in the flesh of the President Goodluck Jonathan administration, publicly tearing his PDP membership card, and endorsing the late President Muhammadu Buhari as a better candidate for the 2015 presidential election.

In his controversial three-volume book, My Watch, which was presented to the public on December 9, 2014, at the Lagos Country Club, Ikeja, Lagos, Obasanjo describes Jonathan as clueless, weak and selfish, even as he reserves uncharitable words for former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, a former Governor of Delta State, Mr James Ibori; and a former Governor of Kwara, Bukola Saraki, among other PDP chiefs.

A national chieftain of the PDP, Buruji Kashamu (now deceased), who hailed from Ogun State like Obasanjo, went to an Abuja High Court, where he obtained an order to stop the book’s release, claiming it was fraught with libellous claims. As a result of his loyalty to the PDP and financial muscle, Kashamu emerged as the axehead of the pro-Jonathan group against Obasanjo within the Ogun PDP. The book’s public presentation became the subject of intense national political debate as fever-pitch fear gripped the polity over Obasanjo’s safety. The Jonathan government did not shut down the venue of the book launch as anticipated. I was an eyewitness in the audience.

So, when Kashamu died on August 8, 2020, Obasanjo sent a letter of condolence to the Ogun State Governor, Prince Dapo Abiodun. It read, “I received the sad news of the demise of Senator Esho Jinadu (Buruji Kashamu), a significant citizen of Ogun State. Please accept my condolences and those of my family on the irreparable loss.

“The life and history of the departed have lessons for those of us all on this side of the veil. Senator Esho Jinadu (Buruji Kashamu), in his lifetime, used the manoeuvre of law and politics to escape facing justice in Nigeria and outside Nigeria. But no legal, political, cultural, social or even medical manoeuvre could stop the cold hand of death when the Creator of all of us decides that the time is up.

“May Allah forgive his sin and accept his soul into Aljannah, and may God grant his family and friends fortitude to bear the irreparable loss.”

Signed: Olusegun Obasanjo.

Not a few Nigerians saw Obasanjo’s letter to Abiodun as insincere and sarcastic because of its tone. It is also not on public record that Obasanjo sent a letter of condolence to Kashamu’s family, fuelling the allegation that vindictiveness, and not grief, was the inspiration behind the condolence letter.

As PDP governor in Ekiti, Fayose queued up behind Jonathan, attacking Obasanjo for alleged anti-party activities, saying the former president behaved as though he owed Nigeria. Thus, the two frenemies left the path of peace again and pitched their camps at opposing ends. In an eternal tug-of-war, two eboras forcefully grabbed the same pair of trousers; each thrust his foot in one leg of the trousers, one leg in, one leg out, each struggling, each pushing, each tugging and staggering, whipping up dust in a battle of self-interest. Unmistakably, the battle line was drawn in blood red colour.

Jonathan lost his re-election bid and went back to the creek quietly. The PDP won’t forgive Obasanjo; he’s the architect of their misfortune. Fayose continued to lambast Obasanjo, calling him a corrupt, manipulative and egocentric leader. He demanded a refund of the money he donated on behalf of Ekiti State to the Olusegun Obasanjo Presidential Library in Abeokuta, saying PDP governors were arm-twisted by Obasanjo to donate state funds to the library, a claim Obasanjo had refuted.

During his first coming as governor, Fayose, fiercely loyal to Obasanjo, climbed a table inside the hallowed chamber of the Osun State House of Assembly venue of the South-West regional hearing on constitutional amendment, ordering out activists like the late Bamidele Aturu, Abiodun Aremu (deceased), and a host of others, who had stormed the sitting, protesting that the hearing was a ruse to guage the people’s feeling on a third term for Obasanjo. South-West PDP governors, deputy governors, senators, House of Reps members, ministers, speakers, etc, were present at the event. I was an eyewitness.

READ ALSO:

The above-painted scenario was the state of affairs between Obasanjo and Fayose until the latter turned 65, and he decided to call on Nigerians from all walks of life to celebrate with him. Speaking with me on the phone, Fayose said, “Excuse me, sir, I don’t want to discuss Obasanjo anymore because we are all going to become history one day. But we must be mindful of our legacy. What is wrong with turning 65 and reaching out to everyone to celebrate with you? He wasn’t the only person I invited. Is there a sin in that? I told Osita (Chidoka), who gave me his (Obasanjo) number. I called and informed him about my birthday; he said he wished to come, but that he was out of the country, and I sent him $20,000, only for him to come and start abusing me at my birthday party. I’m not contesting any election. What do I need him for? I do not regret everything I said.”

The Ebora Owu has kept mute over Fayose’s outburst. “A knife cuts the child’s finger, the child flings the knife away. Has the knife not achieved its goal?” Obasanjo’s silence seems to say.

Looking beyond the theatrics of the cat-and-mouse fight between the two leaders, an ominous cloud of bad leadership examples descends, nudging me back to the twin metaphors of accident and misfortune upon which this article is predicated. I repeat, many Nigerian leaders arrive in office by accident, and many are a misfortune in office. Nigeria’s democracy is the government of the few, by the few, for the few.

Many National Assembly members, including Osun-born Senator Ṣola Adeyeye, had come out to say that Obasanjo gave millions of naira to federal legislators to accommodate a third term in the constitution. Adeyeye, who said he didn’t collect the N70 million shared to each legislator, maintained that Obasanjo sought a third term in office.

Fayose jumping on the table and ordering policemen to chase out human rights activists during the constitution amendment hearing in Osogbo, the Osun State capital, showed he was an accomplice, ready to do anything to subvert the Constitution for the President’s interest. This is the misfortune of Nigerian democracy.

The latest outburst between Fayose and his former godfather wasn’t a clash of morality. No. It was a fight of ego, revenge, and self-righteousness. Both clothes are cut from the same cloth, both are dyed deep.

Probably wanting to finally bury the hatchet, Fayose thought 65 was the age to retire from war, but Obasanjo was not only the Balogun of Owu Kingdom, but he was also a war-tested Aloku Soja (Old Soldier), with an unforgetful brain, a tribute some say makes him unforgiving. Ara Owu ki i ranro, awi menu kuro ni t’Owu.

I think Obasanjo was utterly wrong to collect $20,000 from Fayose and board a plane from Rwanda to deliver a baggage of insults at Fayose’s birthday. Fayose going to Obasanjo’s house to invite him was a show of repentance, and OBJ’s acceptance to grace the occasion should have been an enduring lesson in forgiveness. But Obasanjo flunked the opportunity.

Like a foxy old soldier, Obasanjo had his revenge strategy pre-planned. His enumeration of Fayose’s sins on a sheet of paper and his choosing to be the last speaker at the event all evidenced his mission. Either to show purpose or charge himself up, Baba Iyabo, at 88 years of age, ran up the stage, waving Juju legend, Chief Commander Ebenezer Obey, to cut the music. And he began his sermon on the mountain.

Was Fayose’s outburst wrong? I don’t think so, because he didn’t make his response public. Obasanjo did. Who wouldn’t be annoyed? Obasanjo didn’t blast Fayose alone; he lambasted his wife, too, saying the couple lacked integrity – Enyi mejeji e ki i se Omoluabi. What did Ebora Obasanjo expect to get from Ebora Fayose? A bunch of roses? Fayose crowned him with a garland of thorns, instead.

Both Obasanjo and Fayose are leaders whose decisions have impacted the lives of the Nigerian masses, either positively or negatively. Both are community leaders. Both are family men with wives and children. One is in combat with his children in his nuclear family. The other is at war with his siblings in his extended family. Both are our leaders. At various times, they decided the fate we live today.

* Concluded.

Email: tundeodes2003@yahoo.com

Facebook: @Tunde Odesola

X: @Tunde_Odesola

 

Fayose-Obasanjo: Two eboras dragging same pair of trousers (2)

Opinion

How opposition Tinubu would treat President Tinubu, By Farooq Kperogi

Published

on

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

How opposition Tinubu would treat President Tinubu, By Farooq  Kperogi

You may resent Bola Ahmed Tinubu, but you can’t deny that he has earned his place in Nigerian political history as one of the, if not the, most consequential opposition figures in Nigeria’s Fourth Republic. He constructed a carefully planned political and rhetorical template to oppose central governments effectively and then converted the symbolic capital he gained into a path to the presidency.

By May 29, Tinubu will mark his third year as president. He is beset by the same constraints his predecessors faced and is reacting to opponents almost exactly as they did, perhaps with even more viciousness and guile.

But the opposition seems to be in the wilderness. It is flustered, incoherent, spineless, and in strategic disarray. It would do well to study how an opposition Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu would have confronted an increasingly tyrannical and devious President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

If Bola Ahmed Tinubu were in opposition today, watching a president preside over widening and deepening oceans of blood and rising insecurity, constrict the space for alternative parties, intensify economic hardship and offer only perfunctory condolence optics amid horrendous mass slaughters, he would launch a sustained, strategic, organized, merciless and unsparing regime of critical engagement using every available medium. We know this because we have a record of him doing precisely that.

My recollection of his key moves as an opposition politician aren’t intended to be exhaustive. They are merely representative.

In March 2013, for instance, in remarks widely reported at the time, Tinubu said that if President Goodluck Jonathan could not guarantee security, he should “honorably resign.” By November 2014, his tone had hardened. According to TheCable, Tinubu said that in any serious country Jonathan would have resigned over the scale of insecurity in the country.

In the same 2014, he accused Jonathan’s government of “failure, lack of capacity, vision and creativity” and of misleading Nigerians about the true state of security.

READ ALSO:

That is the vocabulary Tinubu reaches for when he is not in power. He did not treat insecurity as a complicated policy arena deserving of cautious language. He treated it as evidence of unfitness for office.

An aggregation of all his statements about the insecurity that pervaded the country when Jonathan was in government (which has become worse on his watch) amounted to this: insecurity equals loss of legitimacy. That was one of his most potent rhetorical blitzkriegs against Jonathan, which traveled beyond the shores of Nigeria.

The same pattern holds for economic distress. On January 11, 2012, in an article published by PM News, Tinubu attacked Jonathan’s removal of fuel subsidy, dubbing it the “Jonathan tax.” He said the policy breached the social contract between the rulers and the ruled, described it as a punitive imposition on the poor and, crucially, urged Nigerians to resist it.

He wrote that citizens had a duty to “peacefully demonstrate and record their opposition.” That line matters. It shows that Tinubu, in opposition, does not merely diagnose hardship. He authorizes not just rhetorical dissent but physical rebellion against it.

Following his exhortation, there were disabling, convulsive and fatal nationwide protests and strikes. Tinubu aligned himself with that mood. He did not urge patience. He gave moral and political cover to resistance. Some even said he funded the protests, called “Occupy Nigeria,” in which at least 12 people died. It ultimately forced Jonathan to reverse the withdrawal of subsidies, which Tinubu is now implementing with more soullessness than Jonathan ever did.

He also does not leave resistance unorganized. On February 6, 2013, opposition parties merged into what became the All Progressives Congress. Tinubu was one of the principal architects of that coalition. The merger’s stated aim was to end corruption, insecurity and economic stagnation. It was a calculated attempt to convert grievance into power. Tinubu did not wait for electoral cycles to do their work. He engineered an alternative.

When he believed the Jonathan administration was using institutions against the opposition, he said so without equivocation. In January 2014, during the Rivers State political crisis, Tinubu described the disruption of opposition activity as “a frontal assault against democracy” and even a “coup against democracy.” In November 2014, after the chaos at the National Assembly, he again held Jonathan responsible. He saw pattern, not accident, and he said it plainly.

READ ALSO:

He went further. In October 2014, when Jonathan sought legislative approval for a $1 billion loan to fight Boko Haram, Tinubu opposed it. He argued that the funds could be used for political purposes rather than security. In other words, he was willing to recast even security spending as partisan maneuvering. That instinct has not been erased by time.

Now bring this record forward.

On April 2, 2026, President Tinubu met victims of the Plateau killings at the airport rather than visiting affected communities, with the presidency citing time and logistical constraints. Strip away the explanations and look at it from the vantage point of opposition Tinubu. This is the sort of image he historically converts into a political weapon. He would not defend it. He would amplify it as proof of cold detachment and deadly incompetence.

In fact, the seemingly intractable and worsening sanguinary communal upheavals that are spreading all over the country and the rising mass abductions for ransom that seem to be unabating would have constituted more than sufficient grounds for opposition Tinubu to delegitimize the presidency of President Tinubu.

There is also the matter of political space. Tinubu’s own rise was made possible by the constellation of opposition forces. The 2013 merger was a deliberate construction of an alternative to an incumbent he portrayed as incompetent and anti-democratic. If he were outside power today and perceived any effort, real or imagined, to frustrate the emergence of rival parties, such as we are seeing with the ADC, he would not respond with restraint. His record from 2013 to 2015 shows a readiness to build countervailing structures and to accuse incumbents of undermining democracy.

In early 2013 when there were credible fears that INEC might block or frustrate the registration of the new opposition merger that became the APC, including the controversy over a rival party using the same acronym, Tinubu framed any attempt to deny registration as authoritarian sabotage of democracy by the president.

Tinubu’s stance as opposition was confrontational and absolutist. When he was outside power, he interpreted procedural or institutional resistance in maximalist terms as existential threats to democracy, not routine political or legal friction.

And he routinely blamed it on the sneaky wiles of the president, not the institutions that were responsible for the actions he railed against. Opposition Tinubu would have put the blame for INEC’s withdrawal of recognition of the David Mark-led leadership of the ADC squarely on President Tinubu’s desk and would have called it Tinubu’s fascist, cowardly, fear-inspired strangulation of a rival, oppositional political space.

What emerges from this is not a series of isolated reactions but a coherent oppositional method. Tinubu indicts insecurity as presidential failure, frames economic pain as betrayal, promotes and legitimizes physical public resistance, works to consolidate opposition power and heaps all blames for the misfortunes of the opposition on the president. He combined rhetoric with organization. He did not do half measures.

Tinubu in opposition would not recognize the defenses now offered on behalf of Tinubu in power. He would reject them, loudly and repeatedly, and he would mobilize against them.

Criticism of Bola Ahmed Tinubu on the grounds that his NADECO-era allies or Southwest loyalists no longer protest policies they had consistently condemned misses a basic truth about power. People rarely mobilize against themselves, their benefactors or the networks that sustain them. Expecting otherwise is naïve.

The more useful lesson is not to lament their silence but to study Tinubu’s own playbook when he stood outside power. He exemplified disciplined opposition, coalition building, strategic messaging and relentless pursuit of institutional leverage. Those outside the orbit of power should stop waiting for insiders to revolt and instead organize to displace them. Power is not donated; it is taken. Tinubu has proved that.

How opposition Tinubu would treat President Tinubu, By Farooq  Kperogi

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

Continue Reading

Opinion

Adelabu’s Power Lines as Laundry Lines

Published

on

Azu Ishiekwene
Azu Ishiekwene

Adelabu’s Power Lines as Laundry Lines

Azu Ishiekwene

In many parts of the country, the rains poured down earlier in the week, bringing much physical and psychological relief from the searing heat.

The absence of electricity from public supply channels made it worse. Average daytime temperatures throughout March ranged from 33 degrees to 38 degrees centigrade in Lagos and Abuja, respectively.

Nigeria’s public electricity grid must rank among the most intractable problems any developing country could face. There is hardly anything more constant than the announcement of grid collapse, which leaves businesses and homes seeking alternatives and incurring unplanned expenses while paying for electricity not supplied.

What Candidate Tinubu promised

During his 2023 campaign, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu said that if he didn’t fix the problem, he shouldn’t be voted in for a second term. He must be regretting that statement now. Since the beginning of his administration in May 2023, there have been multiple grid collapses, with the highest number recorded in 2024 at 12. Even when incidents were fewer, sporadic outages have continued. The failure, on face value, is attributed to a mix of technical, structural and administrative weaknesses in the system. But there is more to it in the sense in which it is said: “The more you see, the less you understand.”

So unreliable is the public electricity supply that the Presidential villa appropriated N10 billion in 2025, and an additional N7 billion in 2026 for the installation of a solar mini grid that will effectively disconnect Nigeria’s seat of power from the national grid, bedevilled by ageing transmission lines which collapse repeatedly from sabotage, poor maintenance, and frequency imbalances.

The joke is on us

Nigerians, ever ready to make a jest of their tragic maladies and long suffering, are beaten when it comes to power outages. They are shocked beyond humour. If the high-tension cables were not too high overhead, people in communities through which they run would not hesitate to hang their laundry on them – knowing from experience that the lines are just part of the landscape and are very likely to be without electricity.

READ ALSO:

I have seen a video of a masquerade performing on a streetlight pole. Of course, the crowd applauded its invincibility; yet, both the crowd and the masquerade knew better. The lines had not been electrified for months and were unlikely to be for the spell of the circus.

Hope was rekindled at the beginning of the Tinubu administration when news filtered through that the currently embattled former governor of Kaduna State, Nasir El-Rufai, had not only produced a blueprint, but was going to be given the assignment of sorting out Nigeria’s notorious electricity sector. I learnt reliably that, as part of his plan, El-Rufai was discussing a $10 billion investment agreement with the Saudis before he ran into rough weather.

The coming of Adebayo

That was how Adebayo Adelabu took the job – a job at which he has performed so disastrously, saying he failed would be an honour. But it’s not his fault – it’s the fault of the President who appointed him and the Senate that cleared him for a job that he was clearly incompetent to perform, either based on his record or based on any hope of redemption. He is brilliant, but the power sector is littered with the remains of brilliant people, among whom he is now a fossil.

His better years were when he worked as an auditor at PWC. He was also the Executive Director/CFO at First Bank, and later a deputy governor at the Central Bank. He may not have been directly responsible for the misfortunes of these institutions at the time, but he doesn’t exactly smell of roses.

In the normal course of things, his banking career should have been a yellow flag. Still, Nigeria being Nigeria, the quota system and political connections ensured that he defied gravity.

Then, in 2023, Tinubu offered him the position of Minister of Power, after his failed attempt to become governor of Oyo State on the platform of the Accord Party. That only worsened our misery. Adelabu will be best remembered for splitting electricity consumers into parallel payment bands that do not necessarily reflect improved services.

The thing is not that Adelabu failed at his job. It’s the lack of evidence that he tried. Mr Dan Kunle, an energy expert familiar with the history of that sector, told me that, “No one is saying a power minister should provide the resources to fix the sector from thin air. It’s for him to provide a solid framework that would create the right environment and attract sovereign intervention.”

Adelabu, like many of his predecessors, is running the power ministry in 2026 with the 1950 operational manual of the Electricity Corporation of Nigeria (ECN). Yet, even then, when the country had a population of about 50 million, the British knew that electricity was an economic good. To provide meaningful and sustainable service, they had to prioritise not just the key administrative centres but also areas that could pay. That was why, for example, coal was shipped from Enugu to the Ijora Power Station in Lagos.

No roadmap

Adelabu has no roadmap, or if he has one for a population four times what it was under ECN, it’s a roadmap to nowhere. The same old problems persist: gas shortages, moribund plants, infrastructure deficits, massive debts, and frequent grid collapses, limiting supply to about 4,000 MW despite a capacity of 13,000 MW.

READ ALSO:

While Adelabu may wring his hands alongside Nigerians when the lights trip off, the sector has been drowning under the yoke of N6 trillion in debt as of late 2025, fuelled by non-cost-reflective tariffs and unpaid bills to both generating and distribution companies. Some of the problems predate Adelabu, but his incompetence has worsened them.

Yet, he still has ambition. Not to redeem himself after his disastrous three years as minister, but to become the governor of Oyo State. Obviously, he believes the reward for poor performance is a higher office. He is so shameless, it means nothing to him that he holds the Olympic record for national grid collapse. It means nothing to him that Nigerian businesses are powered by Indian generators and their homes by Chinese solar panels.

Examples from Africa

Egypt, with a population of 110 million, has 100 percent universal electricity access, supported by a heavy reliance on gas (81 percent) and growing low-carbon sources like hydropower. This ensures a stable supply amid population pressures.

South Africa serves 85-90 percent of its 62 million residents but faces severe shortages. Frequent load shedding persists due to Eskom’s debt, ageing infrastructure, and maintenance issues, despite high per-capita generation.

Ghana reaches 88-89 percent coverage for 34 million people, with hydro and thermal power dominating. Urban areas enjoy near-99 percent access, while rural areas still have gaps and occasional outages.

Kenya hits 76 percent for 56 million, excelling in urban (97 percent) and geothermal power. Rural expansion lags, though targets aim for full access by 2030.

Compared to the countries above, only 57 percent of Nigerians are grid-connected, with outages occurring 85 percent of the time, and poor metering and corruption that sustain estimated billing and inefficiencies.

After watching Adelabu perform so poorly over the last two years on the national stage, I was hoping he would go away quietly, under the shadow of the darkness he has fostered. But since he insists that he won’t leave quietly – or appears determined to stay on – I’m considering a self-appointed mission to drag him to Oyo State to see how he will turn their night into day.

Adelabu’s Power Lines as Laundry Lines

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

Continue Reading

Opinion

Super Bowl: Can Africa Spring Up anew?

Published

on

Super Bowl: Can Africa Spring Up anew?

With a landmass of approximately 9.83 million km² and a population of 334–336 million as of 2025—making it the third-largest country in the world—the United States is massive. It is four times the size of Algeria, Africa’s largest country, and dwarfs Nigeria, the continent’s most populous nation.

 

​The United States is a titan among nations. Who knows—perhaps neologists will coin a new term if the U.S. eventually purchases or forcefully takes Greenland from Denmark, further surging its landmass and population. When this massive scale fuses with unparalleled infrastructure, world-class venues, and a vast market, the USA becomes an ideal host for international sporting events with strong returns on investment.

 

​Between 1904 and 2025, the USA hosted one FIFA World Cup (with another to be co-hosted in 2026 with Mexico and Canada), four Summer Olympics, four Winter Olympics, and one FIBA Basketball World Cup. Unlike soccer, which is still finding its footing in the United States—even with Major League Soccer (MLS) having existed for 30 years—American football is the undisputed number-one sport. The Super Bowl—born from Lamar Hunt’s “light-bulb moment”—is the crown jewel. The Super Bowl has become what sociologists call a secular ritual, binding the social fabric of Americans together.

 

​Beyond the Vince Lombardi Trophy, the Super Bowl has evolved into a global marketing masterpiece. From the famous 1984 Apple commercial introducing the Macintosh, which is studied in MBA classes worldwide, to the 1979 Mean Joe Greene Coca-Cola commercial that showed genteel human warmth winning over fearsomeness, the intentionality of brands going head-to-head with rivals has been a recurring feature of every Super Bowl.

 

​While the USA is always attractive for hosting events, the Super Bowl’s success pivots on intellection that results in ingenious marketing. For the recent Super Bowl LX on February 8, 2026, two brands mirrored David Ben-Gurion’s principle of “taking the fight to the enemy.” Pepsi and Anthropic’s Claude entered with an offensive strategy: Claude’s AI ad—“Ads are coming to AI. But not to Claude.”—was a calculated strike in the competitive AI market, while Pepsi’s polar bear blind test revived the sulphurous rivalry with Coca-Cola. Many companies use their ad slots to build brand identity and equity or announce arrival in the business world.

 

Where does Africa stand in this Super Bowl business and sports calculus? While developed nations are making groundbreaking launches with chutzpah and creativity from creative shops—all resulting in a participatory economy—Africa’s involvement is largely an on-the-field display of Négritude spirit and ravenous passion.

 

​For Africa, the Super Bowl has become a “badge of honor” through representation. Mohammed Elewonibi, a Nigerian raised in Canada, was the first player of African origin to win a Super Bowl (XXVI, 1992, with the Washington Redskins). Since then, nearly 41 players of Nigerian origin or heritage have won—the most of any African country—including six who tasted victory with the recent Seattle Seahawks: Uchenna Nwosu, Nick Emmanwori, Boye Mafe, Jaxon Smith-Njigba (of Nigerian and Sierra Leonean roots), Jalen Milroe, and Olu Oluwatimi.

 

​Yet, as impressive as African athletes are in making the continent proud, we have blatantly failed to translate that audience engagement into commercial windfalls like the Super Bowl on home soil. It is appalling that most of Africa’s sporting events—the Durban July Handicap, Senegalese wrestling (Laamb), or the Safari Rally—have not fully harnessed the intersection of sports and marketing. Even the Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON), despite its 3.45 billion cumulative viewers (far surpassing the Super Bowl’s ~125–127 million), lacks comparable marketing prestige. Why are there no global product launches during our matches? Why aren’t AI giants capitalizing on Africa’s tech startup boom?

 

​Africa is being fed celery when it deserves the whole salad. This asymmetry stems from structural economic factors, but the genie is out of the bottle—we must be forward-looking. To turn African sporting events into “goldmines,” we must reinvent the industry, much as Cirque du Soleil did for the circus. Facing declining audiences, rising costs, and fierce competition, it lost its grip on the circus business. Cirque, however, escaped the dying circus business by reinventing it.

 

​By viewing competition through a new lens, Africa can transform massive viewership into unparalleled economic advantage and value. Just as Cirque du Soleil created uncontested market space, African sports must adopt what W. Chan Kim and Renée Mauborgne called a “Blue Ocean Strategy”—creating uncontested market space and making competition irrelevant. Much as we can not compete toe to toe with advanced economies , we should not follow them like zombies.

 

​In their book Blue Ocean Strategy: How to Create Uncontested Market Space and Make the Competition Irrelevant, the authors highlight how companies in “red oceans” fight for shrinking profits in crowded, defined markets. African sports events currently sit in those crowded red oceans. To elevate them, we need disruptive leaders willing to venture into untapped markets, create new demand, and unlock unlimited growth opportunities.

 

​Joseph Pine and James Gilmore, in their book The Experience Economy, wrote about the need to transform commodities into experiences. As Africans, we have been able to move our sporting events from the commodity stage to the third stage—service delivery—but the experience stage is the North Star we should aspire to reach.

 

​Our cultures, as varied as they are, define us. Despite dilution by Western civilization, our culture stands uneroded, like the mountains that litter our landscape and serve as a canopy to preserve our common heritage. This means our forefathers took culture into the realm of experience—something we are still grappling with in our sporting spectacles today. For us to make headway, our cultures—already bubbling with experience—must mix seamlessly with our sporting spectacles.

 

​Now is the time to merge cultural events like the Eyo Festival, Argungu Festival, Gnaoua World Music Festival, Osun Osogbo Festival, Meskel Festival, and others with our sporting spectacles—that is the Blue Ocean Strategy. This can only be achieved through close collaboration between leaders in sports administration and marketing professionals selling experiences, and the time is now. As this is done, a line from David Diop’s poem Africa—“That is your Africa springing up anew”—would fill our lips.

​The experience stage is the nirvana!

 

Toluwalope Shodunke

Can be reached via tolushodunke@yahoo.com

 

Super Bowl: Can Africa Spring Up anew?

Continue Reading
HostArmada Affordable Cloud SSD Shared Hosting
HostArmada - Affordable Cloud SSD Web Hosting

Trending