By Mr Osita Okechukwu Recently, when the social media outlets ran amok with news of grumblings against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR, within the APC, especially from the flank of the defunct CPC motherhood of our polygamous household, some of us heaved a sigh of relief that it is not the often flogged ethno-religious identity politics. The sigh of relief was mainly because ethno-religious identity politics haunts political parties more, more difficult to resolve its stereotype than that of intra-party dissension, we rated that it is easier to reconcile rumblings and marginalisation within. We were wondering whether these members forgot our doctrine of progressivism? What is their attraction to defect to those who mangled our economy via corrupt privatization of State Owned Enterprises (SOE) and breached presidential rotational convention from the south to the north and vice versa. For progressivism is APC’s political philosophy, our benchmark, which seeks to advance human conditions or in our local parlance, dividends of democracy, good governance via social reforms, and curbing unregulated inequality. As the elders of the defunct CPC we took solace on the truism that we had long shed the toga of our motherhood and wholly integrated into APC family. From thence series of consultations commenced. On this score it is pertinent to remind those grumbling the standpoint of Prince Tony Momoh of blessed memory, then chairman of CPC when he was urged to call a meeting of our tendency immediately after Buhari’s victory. “Am from a polygamous Momoh family, please don’t germinate polygamous mindset in our great party; it took us genuine, concerted and prolonged time to build genuine friendship which watered down the divisive sentiments of such mindset.” Yes on the complaint over economic hardship in the land and marginalisation we resolved to adopt diplomatic advisory approach to Mr President; because we are not unaware that the history of liberal democracy vividly records that most presidents have low approval ratings in their mid term. Which most times is reversed before the next presidential elections. Our deduction was that it is always difficult for Presidents to increase the Bhutan’s favourite doctrinaire barometer - Gross National Happiness (GNH) - passion of man throughout history in the first two years. Especially under economy in life support, which Tinubu inherited. Albeit corrupt oil subsidy, unstable currency, debt burden and unfavorable trade deficits. Accordingly we are in league with those who demand from our leader increase Gross National Happiness (GNH); in order words the demand is in sync with the restoration of progressivism. Our thrill is that GNH is the credo and grundnorm of Chapter 2 of 1999 Constitution and that of our great party, APC. In pursuit of Gross National Happiness Chapter 2 of our Constitution - Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy states categorically that the primary purpose of government is the security and welfare of the people. This is the Social Contract between Nigerians and our government, therefore there is nothing untoward in the demand for dividends of democracy by the people. This is our change agenda we pledged during the political campaign. No wonder why mid-term elections or Approval Ratings (APR), rarely favour the incumbent president. United States mid term elections are witness to this assertion.Talk less when President Tinubu had embarked on bold and courageous economic reform programs, prominent of which is removal of subsidy, which in plain phrase turned out to be the restriction of patronage to middle class and the masses. This unintended outcome is contrary to the bogey bandied before fuel subsidy removal that it favours the rich more than the poor. Restriction of patronage is most of the time frowned at by many, despite the alleged savings and future benefits which will accrue from removal of fuel subsidy. Our consolation is the fact that all the manifestos of three major presidential candidates are in consensus bed with removal of subsidy. One will surely come back to this enduring and contending demand in this essay. In doing so to most importantly report how we are playing the role of solution provider for the good of not only the APC members, but the greatest number of Nigerians. It could be recalled that All Progressives Congress (APC) was a polygamous household of Action Congress of Nigeria(ACN), All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP), Democratic Peoples Party (DPP), Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) all defunct and faction of APGA and Civil Society Organisations (CSO). Events later showed that we were naive, on taking intra-party rumblings with pinch of salt, when differently we were serially invited to meeting after meeting with the hint of defection, first was first quarter of 2024, less than President Tinubu’s one year in office. The complaint range from marginalisation of CPC members in appointments to anti-people economic policies or restriction of patronage. Some of us shrugged it off immediately, not because we were unaware that there are criticisms and musings which centered primarily on President Tinubu administration’s economic reform policies and crass nepotism in the wider public domain; but we argued why don’t our members explore the in-house mechanisms to address the matter. In addition we reasoned that whilst we frown at marginalisation of all colours for the harm it does to democracy and national cohesion; however we said that it is too early in the day to complain. That truly we lacked the locus standi because we the CPC bloc leans on no moral high ground to complain as our leader President Muhammadu Buhari, GCFR, cannot be absolved of same crass nepotism. We added that we need to intensify our advisory strategy to Mr President who is a master strategist and veteran politician who knows the electoral harms way rumblings can engender. We cautioned that shouting publicly will expose us to ridicule as some will query us, what did you do when others were being marginalised, especially for those of us among the Buhari’s cabal. The cat was let out of the bag when one of us Malam Nasiru El-Rufai, former governor of Kaduna State openly declared for Social Democratic Party (SDP), citing consultation with Buhari before the announcement. Calls upon calls from all the nooks and crannies of our dear country dominated the air waves in our circle. This prompted Senator Tanko Almakura to summon meeting, where we took critical analysis of the situation and came to the inevitable conclusion that we are staying tall in APC and cannot demolish the house we laboured to built. On April 16, 2025, general meeting we reviewed all the scenarios and anchored our resolution on the premise that we are staying tall in APC and cannot demolish the APC house it took us 9 years to construct. We also pledged our allegiance to President Tinubu, stating that it is better we take the loud complaints and observations of Nigerians on the issue of poor Gross National Happiness to Mr President, because the kitchen table issues are not affecting only members of the CPC, but the entire country. And truly on the issue of nepotism, that even some Yorubas are shouting on top of their voices that they are being marginalized in preference to Lagos Boys. Hence GNH eluding them under the watch of the great Asiwaju, their own son. Included also in our communique is that we cannot honestly profess progressivism as our credo and grundnorm when Nigerians GNH is defined by multidimensional poverty, gross inequality and palpable insecurity. Which earnestly we agree to address with vigour in Mr President’s desk. On our solidarity to Mr President we went down memory lane and recalled that the historic merger of the APC that took nine good years (2004-2013), to be consummated. That it was off and on, until Tinubu and his team reassured Buhari that he will be the new party’s presidential flag bearer. The Tinubu team recounted that they acknowledge the 10-12 million vote bank Buhari recorded in successive elections, (2003, 2007 & 2011), especially from the northern regions, and provided the supplement they pledged from the South West. In fact, when the newly registered party attracted many prominent politicians among which are His Excellencies Atiku Abubakar, Rotimi Amechi, Rabiu Kwankwaso, Dr Bukola Saraki et al, from our sister opposition political party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) again anxiety and tension rose in our camp. It was at this point that Tinubu once again demonstrated his unalloyed commitment to Buhari, when he told him plainly that the presidential primary will go in your favour, just hold on your delegates while I supplement them with mine from Delta State to that of South West. That yes, Atiku and Kwankwaso are his political allies for over two decades, but he had told them that they don’t have your type of vote bank. He predicted that with 12 million vote bank plus additional votes from southern regions that victory is guaranteed. Tension was lowered a bit with this reassurance from Tinubu, but cynics were at play, with ethnic and stereotype cards. As God will have it as predicted Buhari won the December 2014 presidential primary at Lagos, and subsequent presidential election courtesy of Tinubu. In lieu of all these historical indicators majority of CPC leadership and members resolved on April 16, 2025 to stay tall at APC and declared our unalloyed solidarity and loyalty to Mr President. To actualise our communique we set up some committees among which is Contact and Mobilisation Committee. This singular committee was mandated to contact Mr President and inform of the outcry on the streets over hunger, multidimensional poverty and insecurity. That the outcry on the street is replica of the outcry of those CPC clan who are not comfortable with his crass nepotistic mode of appointments. The committee made up of our elders was also mandated to remind Mr President that we voluntarily came together as progressives to form this unique party, by name APC. That we adopted progressivism as APC’s political philosophy, whereby our benchmark is to advance dividends of democracy, human condition, reduce inequality and address kitchen table issues. More than any other member, that the mantle fell on Mr President to provide evidence of progressive change, fulfil the promise of life in abundance and oblige life to the change agenda which we pronounced across the length and breadth of our dear nation. Which marks us different from our sister opposition political party, the PDP, that sees the State as a threat to public good, not an instrument of advancement of public welfare. While the mobilisation committee will reach out to our members nationwide and we urged them to use their expertise to reconcile and call back those members like Elrufia, Malami, Nwajiuba et al, who are wandering into political wonderland, where members have lost faith in democracy. In sum, our main standpoint is staying tall in APC to enable us to return President Tinubu back to progressivism, a double barrel philosophy which will make his economic reform programs to benefit both the 1% and 99%, thereby increasing the Gross National Happiness (GNH) of Nigerians.

In recent weeks, discussions have swirled around the proposed concession of the Akanu Ibiam International Airport (AIIA), Enugu. These conversations reflect the emotional, cultural, and economic importance of the airport to the people of the South East region. For many, the Enugu Airport is beyond just a transit point, but an emotional symbol of regional identity, global access, and long-overdue inclusion in Nigeria’s international aviation landscape. Put another way, given the peculiar history, especially the post war history of Ndigbo, the airport can be likened to the status that Rangers International Football Club of Enugu holds in the hearts of the people of South Easterners. This is given the fact that the region was the last to get an international airport among the all the six geopolitical zones, despite the fact that they are business people and travellers, but also given the protracted struggles of many years that eventually birthed the designation of the airport as an international aviation facility by the Musa Yar’Adua Administration. Since then, it has witnessed the affirmation of this international status, award of the initial contract for the facility upgrade by the Federal Executive Council meeting presided by former President Goodluck Jonathan on October 19, 2010, legislative intervention by the Enugu State Caucus of the 6th National Assembly to augment funds for the airport upgrade from constituency funds (budgetary envelop) meant for the state, major work on the runway by the Muhammadu Buhari Administration, and of course several obstacles, some of which bothered on wilful sabotage. Therefore, given the significance of this infrastructure, it is only natural that questions have arisen around the current concessioning effort by the Federal Government: Is the airport being sold off? Are private interests taking over? What does this mean for the South East? Who is behind the project? Is the South East losing its only international airport? These are valid concerns - and they deserve clear, factual, and honest answers. Unequivocally speaking, the airport is not being sold. What is being proposed is a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) concession, a well-established global model that allows for private investment in public infrastructure while preserving public ownership and regulatory oversight. In this case, the concession allows a credible private partner to invest in, operate, and maintain the airport over a fixed term, while government agencies—federal and state—retain full supervisory authority. This is not privatization. It is a strategic investment arrangement. It is also natural for concerned persons to wonder, why the concessioning? The reality is that no single tier of government can single-handedly carry the financial and operational burden of sustaining, upgrading, and expanding critical infrastructure like an international airport. AIIA is a prime example. Despite its designation as one of Nigeria’s five international airports, Akanu Ibiam International Airport (AIIA) remains only partially completed and is not yet fully operational to international standards. Key infrastructure components are either incomplete or require significant upgrades. Operational efficiency is constrained, and the runway, arguably the most critical safety and performance asset recently experienced a shutdown due to emergency repairs, further underscoring the urgent need for substantial capital investment. Ndigbo, therefore, remain grateful to the President Bola Tinubu and the Hon. Minister of Aviation and Aerospace Development and the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) for their responsiveness and continued collaboration in addressing these challenges. The ongoing efforts by the federal authorities to prioritize AIIA within national aviation development plans serve as a strong foundation for the proposed concession - one that will unlock the airport’s full potential for the Southeast and the nation at large. The inclusion of the runway in the concession scope is actually the major factor behind the various longer term concession proposals being considered, but yet to be finalised. Agreed that globally, airport concessions typically range from 25 to 30 years, but this is for fully completed, operational airports. AIIA demands not only significant capital for full development, but also long-term runway maintenance and performance guarantees. Therefore, the proposed terms account for the scale of investment, the long asset recovery cycle, and the need to ensure consistent, high-quality service delivery over time. This is not an arbitrary number - it is based on global benchmarks and justified by the scale of the work required. Again, one of the most transformational components of the AIIA concession is the development of a dedicated cargo terminal, which will be built from scratch. This greenfield development is expected to open a new frontier for the South East, unlocking vast economic potential in export logistics, agro-processing, pharmaceutical shipments, e-commerce, and light manufacturing. This cargo terminal is a fresh, ground-up development that will bring the region into alignment with global air cargo standards. It will serve businesses across the five Southeast states and beyond - positioning AIIA as a hub for both passengers, and for regional trade and industrialization. Understandably, many have equally asked: Who exactly is behind the project? Who is the concessionaire and technical partner? The concessionaire is backed by Arise Integrated Industrial Platforms (Arise IIP) - a Pan-African infrastructure developer with a strong track record across the continent in logistics, transport, and industrial ecosystems. Arise IIP is not a speculative or anonymous group. Their performance and potential have been evaluated by relevant regulatory bodies, including the Federal Ministry of Aviation, FAAN, and the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC), all of whom conducted due diligence visits to their flagship projects. Their involvement brings with it technical credibility, financial capacity, and global best practices to ensure that the project is a deliverable, bankable, and accountable project. The other question is: what is Enugu’s role in all of this? Is Enugu a Spectator or strategic driver? As the host state and the promoter, Enugu State is certainly not a bystander. The Enugu State Government has been deeply involved in shaping this project from the onset. Under the leadership of Governor Peter Ndubuisi Mbah, the State is not only safeguarding regional interests, but aligning the concession with its broader Multimodal Transport Vision. This vision includes launching Enugu Air, a state-supported airline to boost regional connectivity; deploying a modern CNG bus fleet (200) to ease urban mobility, completed construction of multimodal transport terminals at Holy Ghost, Nsukka, Gariki and Abakpa, building logistics hubs, trailer parks, and vehicle assembly plants as well as initiating a regional rail development framework in collaboration with other Southeast states. Within this framework, the AIIA concession is not an isolated transaction. It is a strategic anchor in a much larger plan to position Enugu and the South East as a logistics and connectivity powerhouse for West Africa and even Africa. Consequently, while some concerns and healthy discourse are quite welcome, it is also imperative to separate fact from fear. This is not a backdoor sale. It is not a loss or the end of our regional pride, AIIA. It is, in fact, the beginning of a better, bolder era for Southeast aviation - one that ensures the airport finally works for our people, our businesses, and our future. It is about regional prosperity, job creation, trade enablement, and infrastructure transformation. AIIA belongs to the South East; and this concession is how to ensure it finally takes off - sustainably, professionally, and economically. Okolie, PhD, a Management Consultant, is a former State Director, National Orientation Agency

I read a news report where the Enugu State Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Barr. Ugochukwu Agballa, was saying that the party does not need Governor Peter Ndubuisi Mbah, claiming that he has misgoverned the state. Reading such a story made me understand that the rumors going around—that his dealer died—might be true, and his new dealer may have given him something that his head cannot carry. Personally, I don't like Governor Peter Ndubuisi Mbah, but Barr. Ugochukwu Agballa has no right whatsoever to attack his person, especially linking him to misgovernance. Imagine someone who is synonymous with failure and only dwells on propaganda and manipulation to thrive. Someone who failed as APGA's guber candidate and killed the party even when it was prospering; he entered Accord and killed it to the extent that even to get a complete 6-man executive at the state level till date has become a problem. He entered PDP, was given contracts that he messed up, before venturing into APC, where he relegated the party to a mere beer parlour discussion object. What Barr. Agballa doesn't know is that Governor Mbah is a threat to his position as APC chairman, and that except he isn't interested in joining, that can only make him remain as the party chairman. He has forgotten that his boss, Governor Uzodimma, is currently out of "ihe a na-eme na APC and Tinubu's circle," unlike before. Having failed to stop Tinubu's visit to Enugu, failed to foist an acting VC in UNN, and also failed to foist a gubernatorial candidate for APC in Anambra State, it is a clear sign of losing out and dwelling on past glory. This is the same man who, rather than build the party, goes around acting like a rejected masquerade looking for sympathy dancers. A man who cannot conduct even a simple ward congress without turning it into a royal rumble should be the last to speak about governance. If failure had a face, Barr. Agballa would be its official portrait. Agballa’s politics is like an expired drug—no longer useful but still capable of harming those who take it. Every political party he joins ends up in a coma; yet, he walks around with the arrogance of someone who just discovered politics. The only appointment he deserves is in a museum—under the section labeled “Exhibit of Political Misfortune.” Truth is, if not for his noisy outbursts, most Nigerians wouldn't even know APC has a chairman in Enugu State. His only achievement in APC is turning it into a retirement home for failed featherweight politicians and a debating society for bitter men. Instead of insulting Mbah, he should face his unpaid executive members and address why APC meetings now hold under mango trees. Once Governor Mbah declares interest to join APC, Barr. Ugochukwu Agballa's political career will be dead, and that's what he has seen and is working to dwell on. In fact, Governor Mbah doesn't even need to enter APC to retire Barr. Ugochukwu Agballa from politics; all he needs to do is just make a phone call to his master, President Ahmed Bola Tinubu, that he will deliver 45% votes to him come 2027, and Barr. Agballa will become a former chairman. Sebastine Chukwuebuka Okafor Bookastro writes from Enugu

By George Agbakahị, PhD Much has been said and written about the ongoing saga between the suspended Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan and the Senate President across print, electronic, and social media. The tumultuous and politically charged debate that followed her suspension for alleged misconduct and violations of the Senate Standing Orders 2023 (As Amended) led a faction of her constituents to initiate a recall attempt, culminating in Senator Natasha’s homecoming rally a couple of weeks ago. However, this gathering appeared to defy a state-imposed ban on political assemblies. Her speech at the rally, which included bold declarations and serious allegations, garnered nationwide attention and sparked discussions about the boundaries between lawful political expression and incitement. During her address, the Senator stated: “Should we be met with or infiltrated by violence, Nigerians should hold Governor Ahmed Usman Ododo, [his predecessor] Yahaya Bello, and Senate President Godswill Akpabio wholly responsible.” She continued with a three-part allegation: “On the 14th of March at 10:30 p.m.… Akpabio told Yahaya Bello to commence my recall, and he would fund it. The second thing he told him was to kill me—and to ensure that my killing should not occur in Abuja but in Kogi State. Lastly, he was to initiate actions that would make it impossible for me to secure the senatorial ticket in the next election.” The seriousness of these claims, and their timing, suggest a deliberate attempt to draw public focus, elevate political tensions, and influence public sentiment surrounding ongoing legal and political processes. While commenting on the three LNG projects approved by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan referenced Senate President Akpabio, questioning, “How can such resources gotten from the Niger Delta be moved to the North?” She further asserted that she was removed from her position as Chair of the Senate Committee on Local Content for allegedly “using that office to promote the North.” These remarks, invoking regional and religious identity, risk inflaming divisions within Nigeria’s delicate ethno-political balance. By presenting the projects and appointments through an identity-based lens, her rhetoric arguably amplifies historic grievances and may inadvertently revive tensions reminiscent of Nigeria’s civil war era. Legal and Theoretical Underpinnings. While the Nigerian Constitution upholds freedoms of expression and assembly, these rights may be lawfully restricted in circumstances where public safety is threatened. Under the Public Order Act (CAP 382), state governments are empowered to regulate gatherings that may incite unrest. Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s actions, particularly the public rally amidst legal and political tensions, thus attracted scrutiny and may be seen as breaching the boundaries set by law. From a legal positivist view, her actions reflect a breach of formally enacted laws, supporting calls for consequences irrespective of motive. A natural law perspective may emphasize justice and fairness but also requires that such principles not be weaponized for personal or political gains. Applying framing theory, the Senator’s presentation of herself as a victim of persecution reflects a strategic communication technique meant to shift public interpretation, mobilize sympathy, and reframe institutional actions as conspirators A Calculated Challenge to Institutional Credibility. Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s speech projected a narrative of political resistance and persecution. Her assertion that, “There’s a whole lot happening right now; a lot is politically motivated. And these people are using the institutions to silence me, and in silencing me, they are silencing you,” casts her as a political underdog, challenging the legitimacy of state institutions. The subsequent claim that she had won “one of four political battles,” following INEC’s suspension of a recall petition, further frames her struggle as a personal and symbolic fight against perceived oppression. Critics argue that such positioning, particularly when laced with accusations of assassination plots and political exclusion, represents a high-stakes political strategy. By invoking emotionally charged narratives, the Senator may be seeking to build political capital, shape public discourse, and pressure institutions while remaining shielded by democratic protections. Judicial Intervention and Media Restraint. Since the controversy began, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has received significant media attention and sympathy both at home and abroad. Renowned international outlets, including The Guardian, Associated Press, the BBC, and most recently the NewYork times, have reported extensively on the matter, highlighting its implications for gender inequality and democratic governance in Nigeria. Many critics, including women’s rights organizations, have denounced her suspension as a retaliatory move likely to stifle whistleblowing and discourage female participation in politics. The incident has amplified global concerns about institutional accountability, transparency, and the fragility of democratic values within Nigeria’s legislative framework. However, much as it is vital to champion women's rights and gender equity, the apparent lack of fortitude and fellowship from other female senators undermines the reliability of her claims. It's commonsensical that her female colleagues in the senate would have bolstered her if gender discrimination were the nucleus of her suspension. In her response, Justice Binta Fatima Nyako of the Federal High Court in Abuja, on Friday, April 4, 2025, issued a restraining order barring all parties involved in the suit filed by Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan against Senate President Godswill Akpabio and three others from granting media interviews or making public comments relating to the case. This directive was issued as a precautionary measure to preserve the integrity of the judicial process, prevent media-driven misrepresentation of facts, and ensure that the matter is resolved strictly through legal channels. Given the public nature of the accusations and the political stature of those involved, the court's decision serves as a necessary safeguard against prejudicial commentary that could compromise fair hearing or escalate political tensions. Conclusion. Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s April 1 speech presents a complex intersection of free expression, political defiance, and legal boundaries. Her strategic use of language and identity-based rhetorics and appeals illustrates the broader risks associated with politicizing institutions and regional sentiments. While she positions herself within the framework of conflict theory, where political actors are cast as either oppressors or victims, such framing when unchecked may erode public trust and deepen societal divisions. As the judiciary assumes control over the unfolding legal process, the Nigerian public must carefully distinguish between legitimate grievance and political theatrics, lest the nation's fragile democratic space become a battleground for unchecked rhetoric and escalating disorder. Dr. George Agbakahị, a chieftain of the All Progressives Congress, APC, and South East Leader, Tinubu Support Organization and Member, Directorate of Media and Publicity, PCC, writes from Abuja.