Opinion
Rivers State emergency rule: A different view by Azu Ishiekwene
Rivers State emergency rule: A different view by Azu Ishiekwene
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s proclamation of emergency rule in Rivers State on Tuesday surprised me for reasons different from those for which he has been severely criticised.
The mildest criticism is that Tinubu’s failure to call the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, to order was responsible for the crisis.
The more severe criticisms range from accusations that the President has subverted constitutional rule to charges of potential destabilisation at the behest of Wike.
A common point of agreement is that a civilian president should never have to declare emergency rule. That is the ideal.
But Rivers State before Tuesday presented a dire and complicated situation that stretched idealism to its elastic limits.
Chaos in slow motion
It’s convenient, especially for those who promoted and profited from the crisis, to pretend otherwise. Still, after the 27 state lawmakers loyal to Wike issued an impeachment notice, the outcome, if Governor Siminalayi Fubara had been impeached, might have been far worse for the state than can be contemplated under emergency rule. The proclamation was an unsolicited stitch in time.
If oil pipelines were already being blown up and militants deploying as the impeachment notice reached Fubara, what would have happened if the process had carried through? Rivers State has been chaos in slow motion for nearly two years, the only thriving business in the state being the politics of those who support Fubara and those who are against Wike.
The Supreme Court’s judgement invalidated the budget passed by Fubara and nullified the local government election. It affirmed the position of the 27 lawmakers, making Fubara’s government a lame duck. Emergency rule saved the governor from gunpoint, created a pause for the people to get their lives back, and made room for Wike and Fubara to stop and reflect. It’s a messy situation, but the counterfactual could have been worse.
READ ALSO:
- How Wande Abimbola rejected IBB’s ING bait, and other stories (1)
- Soldiers arrest 16 suspected oil thieves in Port Harcourt
- Controversial singer Portable apologises to Saheed Osupa over copyright dispute
Between Wike and Fubara
Popular media has framed Fubara as the victim of a grasping, unforgiving godfather, which suits his comportment. But during this inconvenient pause, it might be helpful for the governor to reflect on what he might have done differently, something that pressure by those egging him on for their narrow, selfish reasons might not have given him the space to do
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s proclamation of emergency rule in Rivers State on Tuesday surprised me for reasons different from those for which he has been severely criticised.
The mildest criticism is that Tinubu’s failure to call the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, to order was responsible for the crisis. The more severe criticisms range from accusations that the president has subverted constitutional rule to charges of potential destabilisation at the behest of Wike.
A common point of agreement is that a civilian president should never have to declare emergency rule. That is the ideal. But Rivers State before Tuesday presented a dire and complicated situation that stretched idealism to its elastic limits.
Chaos In Slow Motion
It’s convenient, especially for those who promoted and profited from the crisis, to pretend otherwise. Still, after the 27 state lawmakers loyal to Wike issued an impeachment notice, the outcome, if Governor Siminalayi Fubara had been impeached, might have been far worse for the state than can be contemplated under emergency rule. The proclamation was an unsolicited stitch in time.
If oil pipelines were already being blown up and militants deploying, as the impeachment notice reached Fubara, what would have happened if the process had been carried through? Rivers State has been chaos in slow motion for nearly two years, the only thriving business in the state being the politics of those who support Fubara and those who are against Wike.
READ ALSO:
- Bandits strike again in Benue, gun down 2 soldiers, 3 others
- UK announces new passport application fees starting April 2025
- Court lifts order stopping Senate probe on Natasha Akpoti
The Supreme Court’s judgment invalidated the budget passed by Fubara and nullified the local government election. It affirmed the position of the 27 lawmakers, making Fubara’s government a lame duck. Emergency rule saved the governor from gunpoint, created a pause for the people to get their lives back, and made room for Wike and Fubara to stop and reflect. It’s a messy situation, but the counterfactual could have been worse.
Between Wike and Fubara
Popular media has framed Fubara as the victim of a grasping, unforgiving godfather, which suits his comportment. But during this inconvenient pause, it might be helpful for the governor to reflect on what he might have done differently, something that pressure by those egging him on for their narrow, selfish reasons might not have given him the space to do.
In the public imagination, control of the state’s “political structure” is at the heart of the dispute between Fubara and Wike. Whether that is so, whether it’s about who the “authentic” party leader is, or it is more than what the public knows, Fubara and Wike know. We can only guess. But they both know.
Open War
The open war started after Fubara’s swearing-in when the governor wanted to install his candidate as speaker in the House of Assembly but failed. What was the point of demolishing the State House of Assembly complex built with hundreds of millions of naira of taxpayers’ money in December 2023 simply on the suspicion that the lawmakers were planning to impeach him there? Why did the governor think it was right to convene four of 31 lawmakers in his office to present the appropriation bill and then go on to implement it?
And why, after the peace deal brokered in Abuja, was it difficult for him to be his own man, free himself as the hostage of opportunistic local politicians and self-appointed opinion leaders and implement the decisions reached, instead of caving into busybodies in the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) whose primary interest is to continue the unfinished war of the 2022 Convention by other means?
Atiku could not have forgotten that when his boss did it again in Ekiti State two years later, it was mainly to facilitate Obasanjo’s hijack of the state for his political convenience, after lawmakers claimed to have impeached the governor. Fayose had become a thorn in his side, and he vowed to remove him by all means, fair and foul… Atiku may argue that he had been estranged from the government then and could not bear vicarious liability. However, he remained a part of the government until the end and must endure its glory and shame.
READ ALSO:
- Mohbad’s brother, Adura, arrested by police in Lagos
- UN staff member killed in central Gaza blast, five others injured
- Air Peace slashes Nigeria-London fare by N600,000
Atiku No 2 .
The PDP leadership and their cousins in Labour have never forgiven Wike for supporting Tinubu’s election. They have been quite loud in condemning the state of emergency. That’s their job as opposition. However, if the PDP is letting its testosterone rush get into its head and impair memory, we may need to remind the party how we got here.
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has been quite vocal in condemning emergency rule in Rivers State. In his earnestness, he has forgotten that the government in which he was the Number Two man had a shambolic record of infidelity to constitutional rule. And that is saying it nicely.
One can argue that President Olusegun Obasanjo’s proclamation of emergency rule in Plateau State in 2004, though controversial, was inevitable because of the horrific deaths caused by the sectarian violence, which led to reprisals in other states. Yet, former Governor Joshua Dariye’s suspected links to the crisis made his suspension inevitable.
Bayelsa’s Playbook!
Atiku could not have forgotten that when his boss did it again in Ekiti State two years later, it was mainly to facilitate Obasanjo’s hijack of the state for his political convenience, after lawmakers claimed to have impeached the governor. Fayose had become a thorn in his side, and he vowed to remove him by all means, fair and foul.
Atiku may argue that he had been estranged from the government then and could not bear vicarious liability. However, he remained a part of the government until the end and must endure its glory and shame.
Or perhaps he would have preferred the impeachment of Fubara from Obasanjo’s Bayelsa playbook? In that case, instead of an emergency rule, Tinubu would have provided a haven where the majority 27 lawmakers would have met under heavy security protection to remove the governor, as Obasanjo did under slightly different circumstances, in the case of former Governor Diepreye Alamieyeseigha.
Amaechi’s Forgotten Diary
Former Rivers State Governor Rotimi Amaechi, a longstanding foe of Wike, also weighed in, condemning the “power grab’s illegality.” He has a right to intervene and speak his mind. However, since he called the proclamation “an affront” to the rule of law and a power grab, it might be helpful to remind him of a typical, but by no means isolated, example from his record as governor.
The underlying currents may be similar – local politics gone rogue – but the consequences or potential consequences are not. Constitutional lawyers can debate the legal triggers because of the lack of clarity in Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution, compared with the 1960 Constitution, a pre-Republican document that gave the prime minister more expansive powers.
In 2013, when the position of chief judge in Rivers State was vacant, Amaechi appointed and swore in the president of the Customary Court of Appeal, Justice Peter Agumagu, against decency and the provisions of law. He joined issues with the National Judicial Commission (NJC), which was at its wit’s end to restrain him and keep him on the path of common sense. The state judiciary reeled under Amaechi’s blatant affront for one year, which he now conveniently forgets.
Apples and Oranges
Parallels have been drawn between the state of emergency in Rivers State and the one in 1962 during the Western Region crisis, especially as the latter was believed to have led the country down the slippery slope that eventually ended in the removal of the Tafawa Balewa government and the Civil War.
The underlying currents may be similar – local politics gone rogue – but the consequences or potential consequences are not. Constitutional lawyers can debate the legal triggers because of the lack of clarity in Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution, compared with the 1960 Constitution, a pre-Republican document that gave the prime minister more expansive powers.
While the emergency rule in the Western Region was mainly an opportunistic intervention by the federal government to undermine the Obafemi Awolowo-led opposition, the emergency in Rivers State was an inevitable step to prevent a potential descent into chaos, where the governor was not an innocent bystander.
Water in the Coconut
Since 1999, two administrations – Muhammadu Buhari’s and Umaru Yar’Adua’s being the only exceptions – have proclaimed emergency rule. Apart from 2013, when President Goodluck Jonathan left the governors of the three affected states in place because they had no link to the crises in their states, complicity has affected the scope of the application of emergency rule.
When Obasanjo threatened an emergency in Lagos, Tinubu said it was unacceptable because he was doing his best as governor to tackle the sectarian clashes in a small part of the state then. In Rivers, the governor is a part of the problem.
Those opposed to the proclamation should say how to leave Fubara in place and extract the water of peace from the coconut of Rivers State without breaking the shell on the head of the people.
Rivers State emergency rule: A different view by Azu Ishiekwene
![]()
Opinion
Saudi Executions: Truth Behind Viral Kissing Claim
Saudi Executions: Truth Behind Viral Kissing Claim
A Muslim scholar, Mallam Ibrahim Agunbiade, has urged the public to exercise caution over viral claims that two Bangladeshi nationals executed in Saudi Arabia were a married couple killed for kissing inside the Grand Mosque in Makkah, saying available official information does not establish the allegation.
In an article dated October 22, 2026, Agunbiade, a member of Al-Rabwa Islamic Propagation in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, said the execution of the two Bangladeshis on October 14 had generated widespread controversy, particularly on social media, where claims about the circumstances of their deaths circulated without sufficient verification.
He said the Saudi Ministry of Interior announced that the individuals, identified as Nazrul Islam Abdul Basir and Siti Akhtar, also known as Sweety Akhtar, had been convicted of committing an indecent act inside a mosque in Makkah and sentenced to death under ta’zir, a category of punishment determined under the applicable Islamic legal framework.
According to Agunbiade, the Saudi authorities stated that the judgments had received the necessary judicial approval and that a royal order had authorised the executions.
However, he noted that the ministry’s announcement did not specify the precise act for which the two were convicted or state that they were executed for kissing on the forehead, as alleged in viral social media posts.
The scholar said the distinction was important because claims that the deceased were a married couple who had been punished for kissing inside the Grand Mosque had not been substantiated by the publicly available official statement.
Citing a report published by Bangladesh’s The Daily Star on October 20, Agunbiade said a confidential consular memorandum reportedly indicated that the two were not married but had worked as cleaners for the same company in Saudi Arabia.
He added that the memorandum reportedly stated that Nazrul was detained in August 2023 under Saudi Arabia’s cybercrime law, while Sweety was detained the following day over an allegation of adultery.
Agunbiade said the available information did not explain how the earlier allegations related to the offence subsequently cited in the Saudi government’s execution announcement.
READ ALSO:
- Shettima Blasts States Over Power Woes, Says Govs Must Stop Waiting for Abuja
- Fourth Gas Leak in Six Months: Over 100 Ogun Pupils Hospitalised, Schools Shut as Parents Panic
- Nigerian Journalist Sentenced to 4 Years Over Facebook Post Criticising Police
He further disclosed that Nazrul’s parents had told Bangladeshi media that their son was unmarried and that the family did not know the woman involved.
The Bangladeshi government has reportedly requested copies of the court judgments and further clarification from Saudi authorities, according to the account presented by the scholar.
He said the documents would be important in establishing the precise offences, the evidence considered by the courts and the circumstances surrounding the convictions.
Until the judgments and additional official explanations become available, Agunbiade advised the public against presenting the claims that the pair were newlyweds or were executed specifically for kissing inside the mosque as established facts.
Islamic teachings on the sanctity of mosques
Beyond the controversy surrounding the executions, Agunbiade emphasised that Islam attaches great importance to the sanctity of mosques and appropriate conduct in places of worship.
He cited Qur’an 72:18, which states: “And the mosques are for Allah, so do not invoke anyone along with Allah.”
According to him, the verse underscores the sacred purpose of mosques as places devoted to the worship of Allah.
He also referred to a narration in Sahih Muslim concerning the purposes of mosques, including the remembrance of Allah, prayer and the recitation of the Qur’an.
Agunbiade said Muslims should respect these sacred spaces and avoid behaviour that distracts worshippers or undermines their religious purpose.
However, he cautioned against using religious teachings to justify the circulation of unverified allegations or drawing conclusions about a criminal case without sufficient evidence.
Qur’an warns against spreading unverified information
The scholar said the controversy also highlighted the importance of verifying information before sharing it, particularly when reports involve criminal allegations, religious sensitivities and the lives of individuals who can no longer respond to claims made about them.
He cited Qur’an 49:6, which instructs believers to investigate information brought by an unreliable source before acting upon it.
The verse states: “O you who believe, if a rebellious person comes to you with information, investigate it.”
READ ALSO:
- Hyundai Unveils Mufasa, Grand Creta SUVs to Strengthen Nigeria Line-up (Updated)
- NAFDAC Busts Illegal Herbal Factory in Lagos, Arrests Manager Over Fake Registration Number
- NELFUND Warns Schools: Student Loans Are Voluntary, Not Compulsory
Agunbiade also cited a narration in the introduction to Sahih Muslim, commonly numbered Hadith 5, which warns that a person may be considered a liar if they narrate everything they hear.
He said the teachings were particularly relevant in an era when sensational claims could spread rapidly across social media platforms, often reaching large audiences before journalists or other responsible parties had established their authenticity.
According to him, journalists, religious commentators and members of the public have a duty to distinguish verified facts from allegations, speculation and unconfirmed accounts.
He warned that repeating a claim without checking its authenticity could mislead the public, damage reputations and inflame religious or social tensions.
Calls for clarification should not be confused with rejection of justice
Agunbiade also addressed questions surrounding the judicial proceedings that resulted in the executions, saying the reported request by the Bangladeshi government for copies of the judgments and further clarification deserved attention.
He cited Qur’an 16:90, which states that Allah commands justice and excellence, to underline the importance of fairness and accountability.
The scholar argued that seeking clarification about a criminal case should not automatically be interpreted as rejecting a court’s judgment.
Rather, he said, understanding the precise offence, the evidence presented and the circumstances of the proceedings was essential to an informed assessment of the case.
He also cautioned against drawing conclusions from the timing of the executions alongside international political developments, saying that the coincidence of events did not, by itself, establish a connection.
Any such suggestion, he maintained, would require credible supporting evidence.
Facts must be separated from speculation
Agunbiade concluded that the information presented in the Saudi Ministry of Interior’s announcement established that two Bangladeshi nationals had been executed after being convicted of an indecent act inside a mosque in Makkah.
However, he stressed that the announcement, as described in his article, did not substantiate the viral claim that the two were a married couple executed specifically for kissing on the forehead inside the Grand Mosque.
He called for responsible reporting and urged the public to avoid treating unverified social media narratives as confirmed accounts of the case.
The scholar said respect for the sanctity of mosques should go hand in hand with respect for truth, justice and responsible journalism.
As questions remain about the precise offence and the circumstances of the proceedings, the full court judgments and further official clarification from the relevant authorities would be necessary to establish a more complete account of the case.
The allegations circulating online should therefore be distinguished from the information confirmed in the publicly described official announcement, pending the release of further details.
Saudi Executions: Truth Behind Viral Kissing Claim
![]()
Opinion
OPINION: Who Still Needs the NYSC? — By Bola Bolawole
OPINION: Who Still Needs the NYSC? — By Bola Bolawole
The recent abduction of National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) members travelling from Ibadan, Oyo State, to orientation camps in the South-East and South-South has once again raised a difficult question: does Nigeria still need the NYSC in its present form?
The question is not new, but the latest incident has made it more urgent.
On October 1, two buses conveying NYSC members and other passengers from Ibadan to Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, and Bende, Abia State, were attacked by suspected armed men in Imo State. The police subsequently reported that 10 victims had been rescued, while efforts continued to establish the exact number of people still in captivity.
If the abducted young Nigerians travelled from Ibadan, some of them could be from Oyo and neighbouring South-West states, although victims may also have come from other parts of the country. The incident should therefore concern Nigerians collectively.
Governors whose citizens are affected should not leave the matter entirely to the Federal Government. Even where they do not directly control the police or military operations, they can support affected families, communicate with them and provide whatever assistance falls within their powers.
Questions over police handling
There are also serious questions about how information concerning the operation was handled.
The Imo State Commissioner of Police, CP Audu Bosso, disclosed that security operatives had located the kidnappers’ camp but were unable to immediately advance because intelligence indicated that the area had been mined with explosives. He also spoke about the use of drones and preparations for further operations.
That raises an important question about the disclosure of sensitive operational information while a rescue operation is still ongoing.
Security agencies must communicate with the public, but such communication should not inadvertently expose operational strategies, locations or vulnerabilities that could assist criminals.
The media, too, must exercise responsibility. The desire to break news or attract traffic should never override the safety of victims or security personnel.
Why was NYSC established?
The National Youth Service Corps was established by Decree No. 24 of May 22, 1973, following the Nigerian Civil War.
According to the NYSC, the scheme was created to promote national unity and develop common ties among Nigerian youths. Its broader purpose was to encourage young Nigerians to serve communities outside their immediate cultural and geographical environments.
The idea was understandable.
Nigeria had just emerged from a devastating civil war. The wounds were still fresh, distrust among different sections of the country was considerable, and there was an urgent need to rebuild bridges.
READ ALSO:
- Ondo High Chief Shot Dead During Colleague’s Burial, One Arrested
- ‘We Are Ignorant, We Don’t Read’ — NAFDAC DG Raises Food Safety Concerns
The NYSC was therefore conceived as an instrument of reconciliation, integration and national development.
But more than five decades later, we must ask whether the circumstances that gave birth to the scheme still exist in the same form — and whether the scheme is achieving its original objectives.
Fifty-three years later, what has changed?
The NYSC has undoubtedly produced benefits.
Millions of young Nigerians have lived and worked outside their home states, interacted with people from different ethnic and religious backgrounds and contributed to communities through their primary assignments and community development projects.
For many Nigerians, NYSC remains one of the few institutions where young people from different parts of the country experience Nigeria beyond their immediate environments.
But the challenges have also become enormous.
Over the years, corps members have died in road accidents while travelling to their places of primary assignment or during their service year. More recently, insecurity, terrorism, banditry and kidnapping have introduced an additional and frightening dimension to the risks confronting young Nigerians serving their country.
The latest abduction therefore forces us to ask:
For how long should young graduates be compelled to travel long distances and serve in places where their safety cannot be guaranteed?
And more importantly:
Is the present structure of the NYSC still the best way to promote national unity?
Has the NYSC achieved its central objective?
After more than five decades of the NYSC, Nigeria continues to struggle with ethnic suspicion, regional grievances and demands for greater autonomy or restructuring.
The emergence of groups such as MASSOB and IPOB in the South-East, alongside various self-determination and restructuring movements in other parts of the country, suggests that the challenge of national cohesion has not disappeared.
The South-West, too, has witnessed the emergence of different groups advocating varying forms of restructuring and self-determination.
These developments do not necessarily mean that the NYSC has failed. National integration is far more complicated than a single government programme.
But they should compel policymakers to examine whether the original model remains adequate for today’s Nigeria.
Reform rather than sentiment
The answer may not necessarily be to abolish the NYSC overnight.
There may be a strong case for fundamentally reforming it.
A modern national service programme could place greater emphasis on skills acquisition, technology, entrepreneurship, healthcare, education, disaster response and community development.
The compulsory nationwide posting system could also be reviewed, particularly where security conditions make deployment dangerous.
Nigeria should not continue doing something simply because it has been done for 53 years.
At the same time, we should not discard an institution simply because it has weaknesses. The real question should be: what works, what no longer works, and what should replace it?
Time to rethink government agencies
The NYSC debate should also be part of a broader conversation about the cost and effectiveness of government institutions.
Nigeria has numerous Ministries, Departments and Agencies whose functions sometimes overlap, while some institutions have become largely ineffective.
The Federal Government should therefore revisit recommendations on restructuring and rationalising government agencies, including the Oronsaye reforms.
The objective should not merely be cutting institutions for the sake of cutting them. It should be about creating a leaner, more efficient government that delivers better services to Nigerians.
Who still needs the NYSC?
That is ultimately the question.
The NYSC was born out of the circumstances of post-Civil War Nigeria. Its founders wanted young Nigerians to develop common bonds and a stronger sense of national identity. Those objectives remain desirable.
But the Nigeria of 2026 is not the Nigeria of 1973.
Our security challenges are different. Our population is different. Our economy is different. Our young people face different challenges. Technology has transformed communication and interaction.
The government must therefore have the courage to ask whether the NYSC should continue unchanged, be radically reformed, or eventually replaced with a more effective national service framework.
What we cannot continue to do is expose young Nigerians to avoidable danger simply because a policy was created more than half a century ago.
National unity is important. But so is the safety and dignity of the young Nigerians who are expected to serve the nation.
Bola Bolawole, a former Editor of PUNCH Newspapers, Chairman of its Editorial Board and Deputy Editor-in-Chief, writes columns for Nigerian newspapers.
Source note: The opinion is adapted for Newstrends.ng from Bola Bolawole’s October 7, 2026 article. The NYSC’s official account confirms that the scheme was established by Decree No. 24 of May 22, 1973, principally to promote national unity and common ties among Nigerian youths.
OPINION: Who Still Needs the NYSC? — By Bola Bolawole
![]()
Opinion
Nigeria — My Country of Destiny
Nigeria — My Country of Destiny
A speech delivered by Mrs Bolatito Ajibode, Convener, Independence Day Fiesta, at Landmark Events Centre, to mark Nigeria’s 66th Independence Anniversary
Nigeria is my country of destiny.
It is not a coincidence that I was born here. God had me in mind when He blessed this land.
It is not a coincidence that this prosperous land is populated by people of different cultures; hence, our tongues and tribes differ. We call it PRODIVA — Prosperity in Our Diversity.
The Lord finished the work of creation and should be praised for loading us with the benefits of arable soil, mineral-rich land, solid minerals, oil and gas, and a market of over 200 million people. Many are yearning for these endowments and have come to our land to explore and exploit them.
Our endowments are beckoning on us for exploration. The few who have taken up the challenge, like Dangote, are smiling to the bank by converting our huge deposits of limestone into cement and refining our crude oil into petroleum products. He has taken Nigeria to the global stage, and we are all proud of him as our brother.
We, however, need more Dangotes.
Last year, we had our maiden edition at Muri Okunola Park, where we challenged ourselves to do more by building a side hustle in addition to our 9-to-5 jobs.
We urged ourselves to:
- Start small from where we are and grow.
- Explore the vast resources of this country to create wealth.
I am happy to say that we have positive testimonies from those who have started their side hustles, making extra income and contributing to the total income of Nigeria.
READ ALSO:
- Ex-APC Women Leader Found Dead With Throat Slit in Bauchi
- Supreme Court Ruling: INEC Moves to Clarify Fate of 2027 Candidates
- Omokri Defends Tinubu Over Pension Record, Faults Linking President to 89-Year-Old’s Death
Having laid a solid foundation last year, our goal this year is to cement it and contribute, individually and collectively, to the per capita income of Nigeria.
The desired growth of Nigeria can only come as we add value to the wealth of the nation in our own little corners.
That is the only variable we can control because the other variable — population — is outside our control.
We are typically excited about our young population and proudly rejoice that Nigeria is projected to become one of the five most populous countries in the world by 2050.
The question we need to ask is: How do we house, feed and clothe this growing population?
Certainly, having a young population is good, but it can also become an easy path to poverty and insecurity if we are not deliberate about growing national wealth and baking a bigger national cake.
Yes, our business environment is tough and unstructured. It raises the entry barrier because many are not ready to weather the storm. Those who are able to stay and thrive in this tough business environment have overcome the challenges, and some of them are here with us today.
A deep appreciation to our keynote speaker, Mrs Chinwe Ezenwa, the Managing Director of Lee Look Bags, who has been in the business of Ankara and Aso-Oke fabric bags for four decades. We look forward to drinking from her fountain of knowledge this morning.
Also in our midst is our brother, Mr Ola Awakan, the Director-General of the Nigerian Tourism Development Authority, who has used literature and poetry to deliver compelling indigenous stories from the heart. He has come with his team all the way from Abuja to honour us.
During the panel session today, we will hear the success stories of our panelists and also interact with them during the networking session.
In line with the theme of the year, we would like us to consider:
- Low-hanging fruits in our business environment;
- Low-technology business ideas;
- Businesses that are authentic and unique to us;
- Commercialising our indigenous values and ideas in food, clothing, arts and drama.
We need to own and dominate this space!
Today, we have in this room great men and women who have taken these indigenous values and ideas to the global stage.
They will share their PRODIVA stories and inspire us.
I believe their insightful stories will also challenge the invited students from Yaba College of Technology, the University of Lagos and Lagos State University.
The idea is to catch them young. 😍
Please note: the Independence Day Fiesta is not about storytelling alone. We are also going to have fun.
We have about four performances, including spoken-word poetry, drama, drumming, music performances and Naija music with good lyrics.
We will also break out for lunch to enjoy various Naija cuisines.
It is my prayer that, at the end of the session, we will all have our takeaways and begin to water the seed of prosperity in our diversity.
Once again, thank you for coming. Please relax and have fun.
Nigeria — My Country of Destiny
![]()
-
metro3 days agoLami Dawa: CAN Takes 14-Year Jail Sentence to Appeal Court, Borno Govt Reacts
-
Politics1 day agoAPC Dumps Adeleke’s Campaign Structure, Unveils Separate 168-Member Council in Osun
-
metro2 days agoThree Dead, Five Rescued as Two-Storey Building Collapses in Osun
-
metro3 days agoAdeboye Fires Back at Journalists Over Viral Jonathan Protest Photo, Says It Was Prayer Walk
-
Sports1 day agoSuper Falcons Receive $100,000 Each as Tinubu Finally Fulfils WAFCON Pledge
-
metro1 day agoThree Homeless Men Shot Dead in Midnight Attack at Lagos Bus Stop
-
International2 days agoBadenoch Rejects Slave Trade Apology, Says African Kingdoms Also Profited From Slavery
-
metro3 days agoEdo Youths Chase Policemen, Vigilantes From Checkpoint Over Alleged Extortion
