By Ken Ekwueme

On Tuesday, September 1, 2026, the world football governing body FIFA formally accepted the resignation of Nigeria Football Federation (NFF) President Ibrahim Musa Gusau and other principal officers of the federation.

For while this may have settled some dust arising from the mass resignations occasioned by executive meddlesomeness, it has opened another vista of challenge and test of character for those shaping football in Nigeria.

Nigerians strongly believe and agree that NFF and the entire football ecosystem need reforms, especially after missing out from two consecutive World Cup for men, and now the 2027 World Cup for women in Brazil. But they also warn that such reforms must conform with laid down rules in accordance with NFF statutes and in consonance with both CAF and FIFA legal frameworks. The reforms must be anchored on the due process of the laws governing football in Nigeria, Africa (CAF) and globally (FIFA). One of such cardinal norms is that neither CAF nor FIFA should appoint or cause to be appointed a Normalisation Committee until the exhaustion of the NFF statutory process. Both CAF and FIFA are also barred from recognising or negotiating with Nigerian government or any such external body on the way forward for the NFF in moments of crisis such as the recent mass resignations. The NFF statutes have clearly stated the legitimate procedures towards resolving any leadership succession or vacancy crisis.

It bears reaffirming that Nigeria football administration is not anchored on lawlessness. Articles 38 of the NFF statute in keeping with the independence of the NFF states very clearly the steps to be taken in moments of resignations such as we have now. Where such vacancies exist on account of resignations, the law states categorically that such resignation does not amount to dissolution of the NFF. This also does not in any way extend an invitation to the federal government to meddle into the matter by trying to conjure ways of determining how the NFF should be governed. The lines are not blurred. They are defined. The government of any country under FIFA governance code has no locus to assume administrative duty either vicariously or by any direct manipulative process. On this count, the Nigerian government must back off from any intrusion whatsoever.

The question is: Are there vacancies at the football house? The answer is a valid YES! How then should the vacancies be filled? The answer is found in the law, not in any person’s imagination or conjuration. Here, again, we look to what the rule book says. Article 38 of the NFF statute envisaged diverse scenarios and dimensions of vacancies. Article 38(7), for instance, states: “If more than 50 percent of the positions of the Executive Committee become vacant, the General Secretary shall convene an Extraordinary Congress within the prescribed period of time. In the meantime, the remaining members of the Council shall take care of the daily affairs of the NFF until new elections are held.”

But whether more than 50 percent or all of the whole Council resigned, the NFF statute which is the only legitimate legal framework for football administration in Nigeria duly recognises the place of Congress to ensure stability and seamless succession of leadership within the federation.

Since the resignation tsunami that shook the NFF, the National Sports Commission (NSC) has appointed an interim administrative body to oversee the affairs of the federation. Under the circumstance, there should be no rush to set up a Normalisation Committee when immediate and extant procedures for filling vacancies have not been fully exhausted. The NSC must avoid being teleguided by the federal government. It must at this time recognise the legitimate powers vested in the Congress to drive the process of succession. Any procedure outside the Congress runs contrary to the grains of the NFF statutes.

This is even made easy as Congress has not only welcomed the reforms, but has indicated its willingness to work with both CAF, FIFA, and NSC to ensure a seamless transition to stronger and efficient leadership for Nigeria football. What is paramount at the moment is that every reform roadmap, strategy and prescription must have institutional legitimacy. Constituting a Normalisation Committee is not the next chapter in this regard. The most compelling and critical step is to consider the role and place of Congress as enshrined in the NFF statute and equally as is the lawful practice under CAF and FIFA jurisdictions which includes Nigeria.

Yes, there is crisis in Nigeria football. But due process of the law must be followed in the course of resolving the crisis. FIFA and CAF, both of which have bought into the reforms agenda for Nigeria football, should ensure they guide the Nigeria football stakeholders to abide by the statutes and not bow to extraneous influence.

The Congress of the NFF consists of 108 delegates representing various key sectors of Nigeria football. Its composition includes 36 states football associations’ chairmen and secretaries and the Federal Capital Territory; representatives and board members from domestic leagues, including the Nigeria Premier Football League (NPFL), Nigeria National League (NNL), Nigeria Nationwide League One (NLO), and Nigeria Women Football League (NWFL). It also includes members of specialist bodies namely: delegates from the coaches’ association, referees’ association, and the players’ union. This broad-spectrum membership of Congress makes it a veritable stakeholders’ representative body.

It is therefore both absurd and inappropriate to bypass Congress or diminish its legitimate essence in the guise of resolving the crisis. Doing so amounts to a descent into illegality and conscious transgression. It does not enforce the independence of NFF; it impairs it.

Not following the due process of the law exposes Nigeria to sanction by CAF and FIFA, even when they both agree to the reforms. And who knows, resolving the leadership crisis through any illegal means may trigger a trove of litigations. Some aggrieved stakeholders who felt that illegality was introduced in the making of the next Council may drag Nigeria to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), in Switzerland. That is not the kind of optics that Nigeria football needs at this time.

To avoid such showdown that could further dim whatever is left of Nigeria’s international image, Nigerian authorities, CAF and FIFA, must listen to Congress. A word is enough for the wise!

ekwueme, Sports Aficionado, writes from Abuja.

By Tochukwu Jimo Obi

Nigeria’s political environment is gradually heating up as preparations for the 2027 general elections gather momentum. While political competition is an essential component of democracy, the recent spate of inflammatory and threatening statements by some political actors is deeply disturbing.

Of particular concern are the recent comments attributed to the Chairman of Kuje Area Council in the Federal Capital Territory, Samuel Danjuma Shekwolo. In a widely circulated video, the council chairman appeared to tell residents that they should support the All Progressives Congress or leave the area council. He linked his position to development projects attributed to the Federal Government and the FCT administration. Although Shekwolo subsequently denied that he intended to threaten or disenfranchise residents and argued that his comments had been taken out of context, the controversy itself should not be dismissed.

Even more disturbing are the recent comments attributed to Borno State Commissioner for Youth and Sports Development, Sainna Buba. Speaking at a political event in Maiduguri, Buba reportedly warned that those who refused to support the APC would be flogged and used language suggesting that opponents could have their fingers broken. Coming from a serving government official, such language is unacceptable in a democracy. Political persuasion is legitimate; threats of physical punishment are not. The comments have already attracted condemnation and calls for an investigation.

These incidents must also be viewed against the backdrop of the recent controversy involving Senator Francis Fadahunsi of Osun East. Fadahunsi was criticised over comments concerning members of the Accord Party ahead of the August 15 Osun governorship election. The remarks were interpreted by some as an incitement to violence, although the senator subsequently denied advocating physical violence, insisting that he meant his supporters should politically defeat the opposition through their votes. The Osun State Police Command subsequently invited him for questioning.

The pattern should concern every Nigerian, regardless of political affiliation. At a time when the National Peace Committee is making deliberate efforts to prevent violence and encourage issue based campaigns, some politicians and public officials appear determined to undermine that effort through reckless utterances. On August 18, presidential candidates and political parties signed the first National Peace Accord ahead of the 2027 elections, committing themselves to peaceful and issue based campaigns and rejecting violence, intimidation, hate speech and inflammatory rhetoric.

The National Peace Committee deserves commendation for its continuing intervention in Nigeria’s electoral process. Its stated objective is to promote peaceful, credible elections and ensure that citizens can participate freely in the democratic process. But peace accords cannot succeed merely because political leaders sign documents. They must be backed by responsible conduct and, where necessary, firm enforcement by state institutions.

This is where the security agencies must rise to the occasion. Threats against voters, political opponents or any group of citizens should not be treated as ordinary political rhetoric simply because they emanate from influential politicians or government officials. Every credible allegation should be investigated promptly, impartially and transparently. Where an investigation establishes criminal conduct, the appropriate legal consequences should follow. Selective enforcement will only deepen public suspicion and reinforce the perception that politically connected individuals are above the law.

Election is not a do or die affair. It is a contest in which candidates and parties seek the consent of the people. Nigerians have the constitutional and democratic right to support the APC, NDC, PDP, Labour Party, ADC or any other political platform of their choice. They equally have the right to reject every one of them. No politician owns a community, local government, state or constituency simply because he or she occupies public office. Government projects are funded with public resources and cannot legitimately be presented as a political debt that citizens must repay with their votes.

There is therefore a need for political leaders, particularly those holding public office, to understand the enormous influence of their words. The recent action of Edo State Governor Monday Okpebholo over the controversial remarks of his aide, Apostle Kassy Chukwu, provides an important example of how political leadership should respond when an appointee crosses the line. Chukwu had warned that singer David Adeleke, popularly known as Davido, should not return to Edo State, prompting the state government to distance itself from the statement and subsequent reports that the governor terminated his appointment.

Other governors, ministers, lawmakers and political leaders should take note. Nigeria cannot afford another electoral season in which careless words become catalysts for violence. The security agencies must investigate threatening statements without fear or favour, while political parties must discipline members who endanger the peace. The responsibility for a peaceful 2027 election belongs to everyone, but those entrusted with public office bear an even greater responsibility. Democracy thrives when citizens are persuaded, not threatened; when opponents are challenged with ideas, not intimidation; and when every voter is allowed to walk into the polling booth and freely choose who should govern them.

Tochukwu Jimo Obi, Obosi Anambra State.

By Idris Rufai

Big Brother Naija, popularly known as BBNaija, has become one of Nigeria’s most watched and discussed reality television programmes. Over the years, the show has attracted millions of viewers with its entertainment, competitions, relationships, parties and large cash prizes.

As a young Nigerian and a student of Mass Communication, I believe entertainment should not be separated completely from responsibility.

I first took time to watch BBNaija in 2020. When Olamilekan “Laycon” Agbeleshe emerged as the winner.At the time, I was curious about what attracted so many people to the programme. I initially expected a reality show that would combine entertainment with education, character development, talent discovery and positive contributions to society. However, after watching the programme on several occasions, I found myself asking what lasting values some aspects of the show were passing to viewers, particularly young people.

My concern is not that entertainment itself is wrong. People need entertainment, relaxation and programmes that allow them to escape from the pressures of everyday life. My concern is the type of entertainment being presented and the values that may be communicated through it.

One of the areas that raises concern for me is the manner in which some housemates present themselves during night and pool parties. Certain forms of dressing, dancing and other displays may be considered normal entertainment by some viewers, but others may see them as inconsistent with the moral and cultural standards expected in many Nigerian communities.

Nigeria is a country with diverse cultures, traditions and moral values. We are Africans, and our cultural heritage has historically placed importance on values such as dignity, respect, modesty and responsible behaviour. Therefore, while our media industry should evolve with changing times, it should also consider the cultural environment in which its programmes are being consumed.

The issue becomes even more important when we consider children and teenagers. Today, children can easily access smartphones, laptops and social media platforms from their homes. They do not necessarily need to sit in front of a television to encounter content from programmes such as BBNaija. Clips from reality shows can quickly circulate across social media platforms and reach children who may not even be old enough to understand the context surrounding what they are watching.

Young people are impressionable. What they repeatedly see can influence what they eventually consider normal, acceptable or desirable. This is why media regulatory bodies have a responsibility to consider the possible consequences of the content they put before the public.

Some viewers may argue that BBNaija is simply entertainment and that nobody is forced to watch it. That argument deserves consideration. Adults have the right to choose the programmes they watch. However, when a programme has such a large influence on popular culture, its producers should also recognise that its impact can extend beyond the individual viewer.

There is also the question of what happens after the show. The winner receives a substantial financial reward and other prizes, while contestants gain popularity and social media influence. But beyond the money, fame and entertainment, what positive legacy does the programme leave for society?

Could reality television in Nigeria do more to promote entrepreneurship, education, creativity, leadership, talent development, community service and responsible citizenship? Could contestants be challenged to develop businesses, solve community problems, promote Nigerian culture or participate in educational and social initiatives while still providing the entertainment audiences enjoy?

I believe it is possible.This is not a call for the complete cancellation of BBNaija or other reality television programmes. Rather, it is a call for responsible entertainment. The Nigerian entertainment industry is capable of producing programmes that are exciting and commercially successful while still promoting values that contribute positively to society.

Regulatory bodies also have an important role to play. They should continue to ensure that broadcast content complies with established broadcasting standards and protects vulnerable audiences, particularly children, also have a role in guiding children on what they watch and helping them understand the difference between entertainment and acceptable real life behaviour.

As we embrace modern entertainment, we should not allow the pursuit of ratings, popularity, money and fame to completely overshadow our cultural and moral responsibilities.

The theme “Show Yourself” therefore gives us an opportunity to ask a deeper question: What kind of self are we encouraging young Nigerians to show?

Are we showing creativity, intelligence, entrepreneurship, leadership, talent and cultural pride? Or are we increasingly celebrating behaviour simply because it attracts attention?

BBNaija has the platform and influence to do more. Its millions of viewers represent an enormous opportunity to entertain while also inspiring, educating and empowering young people.

We should not reject entertainment, but we should demand better entertainment.

We should not reject modern culture, but we should preserve the values that define us.

And above all, as we tell young people to “show yourself,” we must also ask them, and those who create the content they consume, what exactly are we showing the next generation?.