OPINION
Time for INEC Chairman, Mahmud Yakubu, to Resign
By Femi Aribisala
Having been caught in lies upon lies, Mahmood Yakubu should do the honourable thing for a change. It is not realistic to insist that President Buhari should fire him. That is unlikely to happen since he is working to protect the president’s interests. But there is one road still open to Yakubu. He should resign without further delay. He has done enough damage already.
The logic is simple. The 2019 presidential election in Nigeria cannot be, by all accounts, the worst election in the history of Nigeria without the corresponding chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) being, at the same time, the worst INEC chairman in the history of Nigeria.
INEC chairman, Mahmood Yakubu, presided over an atrocious and fraudulent election that is now being fiercely contested in the courts. He can no longer remain as INEC chairman.INEC is supposed to be an impartial umpire in elections in Nigeria. However, it is now obvious that Mahmood Yakubu’s INEC operated essentially as an arm of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). The evidence is overwhelming that Yakubu’s INEC massively rigged the election in favour of the government. If integrity and impartiality is to be restored to INEC, Yakubu must leave immediately. If the confidence of Nigerians is to be restored in INEC, then the country deserves a complete overhaul of the organisation.
INEC Shenanigans
INEC, under Mahmood Yakubu, has lost all credibility. It is now practically impossible to believe anything that comes from the organization. The election results it declared defied commonsense. The figures did not add up. The election was not even rigged intelligently. It was rigged on the presumption of impunity.
In many cases, no voters were accredited, nevertheless fictitious returns were made. In others, total votes cast far exceeded the registered voters. In Borno, for example, only 372,347 votes were cast. However, 919,786 votes were declared; an inflation of 547,439 votes. The printing of election materials was contracted to the company of a member of the APC, who was also one of the party’s senatorial candidates.
Before the election, the use of card readers was declared to be mandatory. It was affirmed that the vote would be declared null and void where the card reader was not used. Nevertheless, in most areas of the North, the card reader was not used. The votes were simply inflated and deflated at INEC’s discretion.
In areas of the opposition People Democratic Party (PDP)’s strength, elections were strategically cancelled and supplementary elections scheduled. This ultimately enabled INEC to declare losers as winner and to convert winners into losers; as it happened, for example, in Kano.
But what has proved to be the most indicting of INEC has been the question of the central server. Having somehow obtained the result posted on the INEC central server, Atiku has demonstrated that it is completely different from the result INEC declared publicly. On the INEC server, Atiku prevailed over Buhari by a plurality of 1.6 million votes, while INEC publicly declared that Buhari won the election by nearly four million votes.
Atiku Must Be Stopped
When the APC discovered, to its dismay, that Atiku had access to the INEC central server and had somehow obtained the real and authentic results of the 2019 presidential election, it went into panic mode. The party’s first knee-jerk response was to petition the police to arrest Atiku for hacking into the INEC server. But if Atiku did in fact hack into the server, what does that mean for the results he found there? The afterthought was to insist that Atiku posted fake results into the server.
However, APC kingpins realized there would be trouble ahead if Atiku went public with his findings. The man had to be stopped; otherwise the victory they were celebrating would be in jeopardy. Therefore, they opted for the anomaly whereby, although Buhari himself lost the presidential election of three previous occasions and took the matter to court every time, they became determined that Atiku must be dissuaded from taking the matter to court.
Emissaries, friends, some members of the National Peace Committee, some Northern elites and powers close to Atiku were sent to dissuade him from challenging the election at the Tribunal, fearful that Buhari’s pyrrhic victory would be scuttled if he did so. When that did not work, Lai Mohammed accused Atiku of treasonable felony and conspiracy against the federal government. So doing, it was felt that Atiku would be forced to plea bargain and part of the deal would be that his petition be cancelled.
It has now come to light that hundreds of fake Facebook pages were created to sell propaganda against Atiku. These were discovered and Facebook has already closed them. They were designed to sell the lie that Atiku is corrupt and that he is a wanted felon in the United States. But all that collapsed when Atiku visited the United States in 2018, demonstrating once and for all that the insinuations that he could not go there without being arrested were all lies.
The same APC pretending to be holier-than-thou has ended up electing Femi Gbajabiamila as the new speaker of the House of Representatives, in spite of the fact that it is on record that he was convicted for professional misconduct by the Supreme Court of Georgia, U.S.A. for defrauding a client. It has also elected Ovie Omo Agege as deputy Senate president, despite the fact that he was also convicted of a felony while practicing law in the United States.
Servers Don’t Exist
Against all their pleas and arm-twisting, the shoe finally dropped when Atiku filed his petition. He posted for all to see that the result on the INEC server shows he won the election; and he authenticated this by quoting the serial numbers unique to the INEC server.
On this issue, the word from INEC has turned out to be lies upon lies. INEC’s first gambit was to declare to an incredulous public that it has no central electronic servers. Only God knows how it expected to get away with this lie. INEC officials had spent the better part of the campaign season boasting that their central server would make rigging elections obsolete in Nigeria. That, they had set up servers in each of the 36 states of Nigeria and in Abuja.
So, how could INEC now say it does not have a server? Where are the data of the 80 million registered voters stored if not in an electronic server? How does the card reader authenticate a voter’s PVC card without an electronic server? INEC conveniently forgot that it admitted publicly that it used its servers to collate results in the previous Ekiti and Osun elections. So, how did these servers suddenly disappear?
Servers Were Not Used
It soon became apparent that the lie that there are no servers could not be sustained, so INEC tried another gambit. It then said an INEC central server actually exists, but it was not used for the election. It was only used for rehearsals and dummy runs.
So, how are we to explain the situation where INEC collected over N1 billion to upgrade the existing server against the 2019 elections, only to now shamelessly tell Nigerians that it only used it for experiments? What then was the point of the upgrade? Did rehearsals not already take place during the Ekiti and Osun elections.
Why did Mahmood Yakubu boast before the election that: “we are pioneering and deploying in 2019 general elections, a new platform for the electronic collation and transmission of results.”
Clearly, another better lie became necessary again. So INEC tried this one for size. It said it could not have engaged in electronic collation of results because the Electoral Act intended to validate the process was not signed into law by the president. But this is simply not going to wash because INEC does not need the president’s permission in order to engage in the electronic collation of results.
Section 160 of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution states categorically that: “in the case of the Independent National Electoral Commission, its powers to make its own rules or otherwise regulate its own procedure shall not be subject to the approval or control of the president”.
Servers Were Used
But now the matter has been taken out of INEC’s hands. INEC has turned on itself. No less than 20 officials deployed during the election as electoral officers have now come forward to say that they transmitted results electronically to a central server, using their smart card readers during the 2019 presidential election. In effect, the cat is now out of the bag. INEC and Mahmood Yakubu need to go back to their factory and manufacture other lies about the server.
The question now is how did INEC think it could get away with all these lies, with so many people involved? Why was it necessary for INEC to tell all these lies? It can only be because it was fraudulent with the election. It can only be because it is trying to hide the truth that the result it declared to Nigerians claiming Buhari won the election is a lie. The true result must be the one in its server, which it is trying to say does not exist.
Servers Out of Bounds
So, INEC had to change its line of defence yet again. Atiku wants the court to give him permission to inspect the INEC server. Even if the results posted there have been deleted, they can still be retrieved by forensic experts. What is INEC’s response to this? It does not want Atiku to see its non-existent server that has now resurrected from the dead. It does not want its server released to Atiku, in spite of saying it was not used to collate the result. If it was not used, why not confidently submit it for inspection, knowing nothing would be found there?
The long and short of this is that Mahmood Yakubu’s INEC can no longer be believed. By the earlier denial of not owning any servers, INEC is already guilty of evidence tampering, whether or not the servers contain the results as claimed by Atiku. Not wanting to release the server for inspection shows INEC has something to hide. It shows there is information in the server which it does not want to reveal to Atiku’s legal team and Nigerians.
What all this conveys is that Atiku actually won the election, but INEC manipulated the results against him.
Having been caught in lies upon lies, Mahmood Yakubu should do the honourable thing for a change. It is not realistic to insist that President Buhari should fire him. That is unlikely to happen since he is working to protect the president’s interests. But there is one road still open to Yakubu. He should resign without further delay. He has done enough damage already.
With regard to the presidency, this is no longer a question of nullifying the election. The only option left is to declare Atiku Abubakar as the elected president of Nigeria outrightly.
OPINION
Oyo School Abductions: Time for Concrete Action Against Terrorism
By Tochukwu Jimo Obi
The recent kidnapping of students and teachers in Oriire Local Government Area of Oyo State has once again exposed the frightening state of insecurity confronting Nigeria. Condemnations have continued to trail Friday’s bandits’ attack on three schools in the area, where an unspecified number of students and teachers were abducted, while two persons were reportedly killed.
The tragedy has left families devastated and communities gripped by fear, as another painful chapter is added to the growing list of violent attacks across the country.The attack, which occurred on May 16, saw armed bandits storm the community and abduct staff, students, and pupils from three schools; Community Grammar School, Baptist Nursery and Primary School, and L.
A. Primary School. Eyewitness accounts revealed that the attackers operated for hours without resistance, moving freely through the area while terrified residents watched helplessly. The incident has raised serious concerns about the safety of schools and the preparedness of security agencies to respond swiftly to emergencies.Worst of all, one of the teachers kidnapped during the attack was reportedly beheaded by the terrorists, a horrifying development that has deepened public outrage. Such brutality underscores the dangerous evolution of criminal activities in Nigeria, where terrorists and bandits now operate with alarming boldness and cruelty. The gruesome killing has further strengthened calls for urgent and decisive action from government authorities at all levels.
This unfortunate incident of school attacks is happening yet again despite repeated assurances from security agencies that schools across the country are safe. Nigerians have continued to hear promises of improved intelligence gathering, stronger patrols, and enhanced protection for vulnerable communities, yet attacks persist with devastating consequences. The contradiction between official assurances and the reality on the ground has weakened public confidence in the nation’s security architecture.
Another disturbing trend is that insecurity is rapidly spreading into the South-West region, an area once considered relatively safer compared to other parts of the country. Reports of Lakurawa terrorists and other armed groups establishing footholds in parts of the region have heightened fears that criminal networks are expanding their operations unchecked. The Oyo school kidnapping has therefore become more than a local tragedy; it is a warning sign that no region in Nigeria can afford to feel immune from terrorism and banditry.
Every now and then, government officials continue to assure citizens that security agencies are on top of the situation, yet many innocent people are still being killed and abducted with little or no arrests made afterward. More troubling is the fact that these attacks reportedly lasted for over two hours without any intervention from security operatives. This glaring security failure leaves Nigerians asking difficult but necessary questions about the nation’s emergency response capabilities.
How could terrorists, moving in large numbers on motorbikes, invade communities, abduct many people, and still escape without being tracked, stopped, or pursued effectively? What then are the military aircraft and advanced security equipment acquired with public funds meant for if they cannot be quickly deployed during emergencies? These are questions that citizens deserve answers to, especially as insecurity continues to consume lives and livelihoods across the country.
The Oyo incident has once again strengthened arguments for the establishment of state police across Nigeria. It is now obvious and evidently clear that the country’s centralized security structure requires urgent decentralization, similar to what operates in many secure nations around the world. State policing, if properly regulated and managed, could improve intelligence gathering, rapid response, and community-based security operations, particularly in rural areas that are often neglected under the current system.
It is no longer enough for leaders to merely condemn these attacks without taking concrete and sustained actions to secure the nation. President Bola Tinubu, as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, must urgently engage all stakeholders in the security sector, including international partners where necessary, to ensure that these terrorists are decisively defeated.
Government must also ensure that budgeted funds meant for security agencies, especially for the purchase of military hardware and equipment, are fully released and properly utilized. Beyond military action, authorities must intensify efforts to prevent the recruitment of vulnerable youths into criminal and terrorist groups. Nigerians are tired of mourning innocent victims. These killings must stop.
Tochukwu Jimo Obi, a concerned Nigerian writes from Obosi Anambra state.
OPINION
Museveni’s Seventh Term and Africa’s Gerontocracy Debate
By Fortune Abang
Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni, 81, sworn in for a seventh term after nearly four decades in power, has once again intensified debate over gerontocracy and political succession in Africa.
Museveni, who first assumed office in 1986, has now extended his rule into a fifth decade, making him one of the world’s longest-serving heads of state.
His latest mandate, expected to run until 2031, follows the January 2026 election in which he secured about 71.65 per cent of the vote, according to official results, defeating opposition leader Robert Kyagulanyi, popularly known as Bobi Wine.
His continued stay in power has been enabled by key constitutional changes over time, including the removal of presidential term limits in 2005 and the abolition of the presidential age ceiling in 2017, reforms that effectively removed legal restrictions on tenure.
Across Africa, analysts say Uganda reflects a broader governance pattern in which long-serving leaders consolidate authority over extended periods.
Comparable examples often cited include Cameroon’s Paul Biya, in power since 1982, and Congo-Brazzaville’s Denis Sassou Nguesso, who first assumed office in 1979, both of whom have also presided over decades of uninterrupted or repeatedly renewed rule.
While Museveni’s supporters argue that his leadership has provided continuity and relative stability in a region frequently affected by conflict, critics say prolonged incumbency has gradually narrowed political competition and weakened institutional independence.
Uganda has maintained a degree of internal stability and played active roles in regional diplomacy and security operations in East and Central Africa.
Supporters point to these outcomes as evidence that long-term leadership can deliver policy continuity and state cohesion.
However, opposition voices and analysts argue that stability has come at a democratic cost, pointing to declining electoral competitiveness, constrained civic space and increasing centralisation of power around the executive.
The debate intensified after the removal of presidential term limits in 2005, followed by the scrapping of the age ceiling in 2017, which together removed two major constitutional barriers to leadership rotation.
These changes have been widely cited by governance analysts as pivotal in reshaping Uganda’s democratic structure.
In the January 2026 election, Museveni again defeated Bobi Wine, who garnered roughly 24.7 per cent of the vote, amid allegations from the opposition of irregularities and political repression during the electoral process.
Supporters of Museveni argue that his long rule has enabled economic transformation, infrastructure development and strengthened Uganda’s role in regional diplomacy.
Some regional leaders, including Burundi’s President Évariste Ndayishimiye, have previously described him as a stabilising figure in East Africa, crediting Uganda with supporting peace processes and regional cooperation.
Yet, critics argue that prolonged rule risks institutional stagnation, where governance structures become overly dependent on individual leadership rather than strong, independent institutions.
Analysts warn that this can weaken succession systems and limit democratic renewal.
A foreign policy analyst, speaking anonymously, said prolonged leadership can normalise “institutional dependence on individuals rather than systems,” arguing that such conditions undermine long-term democratic consolidation.
“No nation can sustainably develop when power remains concentrated in the same hands for decades while institutions fail to mature independently,” he said.
Beyond Uganda, Africa continues to record some of the world’s longest-serving leaders, reinforcing concerns about generational turnover in governance.
In several of these systems, electoral competition remains limited and constitutional reforms have often coincided with extended presidential tenure.
Foreign affairs commentator Collins Nweke argues that the central issue is not age itself, but accountability and leadership renewal, noting that political systems weaken when succession is delayed or constrained.
Other analysts emphasise the importance of civic awareness and institutional safeguards, particularly term limits, which they describe as critical tools for preventing excessive concentration of power.
A diplomat, also speaking on condition of anonymity, called for stronger electoral transparency mechanisms, including credible voter registration systems, independent election management bodies, and robust domestic and international observation frameworks.
An academic, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said stronger civic awareness could help societies resist unconstitutional tenure elongation.
“When citizens are politically informed and organised, sit-tight ambitions lose legitimacy and public support,” he said.
Museveni’s seventh term therefore reflects a wider continental tension between political continuity and democratic renewal, raising questions about whether African democracies are evolving toward stronger institutions or settling into prolonged cycles of personalised rule.
For supporters, his leadership represents stability in a volatile region.
For critics, it signals the entrenchment of gerontocracy and weakening democratic competition.
Between these positions lies a structural challenge that extends beyond Uganda; whether institutions in African states are strong enough to outlast individuals and guarantee orderly political succession. (NAN)
OPINION
Driving Africa’s Fair Energy Transition through Technology and Innovation
By Bart Nnaji
Africa’s energy journey is often portrayed as a stark choice between climate responsibility and development. In reality, the continent faces a more nuanced challenge: finding a fair, gradual energy transition that matches its unique needs and ambitions.
Technology and innovation can drive this change, helping secure affordable and sustainable energy for all.In the coming decades, Africa’s population is expected to soar to nearly 2.5 billion. Cities will grow. Industries will expand. Digital connections will multiply. The demand for energy will increase significantly.
Right now, expecting Africa to abandon fossil fuels overnight is neither realistic nor fair. In the near future, fossil fuels remain crucial for base power that is reliable, and affordable. In particular, natural gas is key transition fuel that will remain the base power solution for the next decade. Africa must not embrace renewable energy primarily when they have abundance of fossil fuel for their industrialization as other emerging and emerged nations have done. A just energy transition recognises these realities and seeks ways to build cleaner, more resilient systems over time.Technology as the Enabler of Africa’s Energy Future
Exciting new technologies are already reshaping Africa’s energy landscape:
Decentralised solutions, like mini-grids, off-grid solar, and batteries, bring electricity to places traditional grids can’t reach. By 2030, these distributed renewables could provide most new connections in underserved communities.
Smart grids and AI-driven management can reduce waste. They help utilities serve people better.
Modern batteries ensure that solar and wind energy can be delivered steadily, even when the sun isn’t shining or the wind isn’t blowing.
Decentralised approaches are essential to Africa’s path toward universal energy access. While technology is not a fix-all solution, it is a crucial enabler of efficiency, resilience, and affordability, shaping Africa’s energy future.
African entrepreneurs are leading much of this change. They’re developing solutions that meet local needs, such as pay-as-you-go solar, community-run mini-grids, and mobile payment platforms. These innovations don’t just bring power; they create jobs, build skills, and reap economic benefits for the continent.
But innovation alone isn’t enough. Investment is critical. According to the International Energy Agency, Africa needs about $90 billion annually to achieve a successful energy transition, but current funding falls short. Governments can help by setting clear, supportive policies that attract investment and make projects more affordable. Organisations like the African Development Bank say grid investment must rise dramatically, and clean energy spending should double by 2030 to keep up with growing demand.
From Energy Access to Economic and Human Impact
Reliable energy is more than just a technical necessity – it’s what fuels industrial growth. Picture the continent’s factories buzzing with activity, transport networks connecting people and goods, and data centres powering a vibrant digital economy.
Expanding decentralised solutions brings light to places that have been left in the dark for too long. It’s about giving children a place to study at night, helping clinics store vaccines safely, and empowering entrepreneurs to launch new businesses.
Of course, none of this works in isolation. Supportive policies, strong regulations, and partnerships between governments and private companies are essential. When African countries harmonise their rules and work together, they can create bigger markets. This draws even more investment and innovation.
Ultimately, Africa’s energy transition must be shaped by Africans themselves. The path forward is about collaboration, pragmatism, and investing in homegrown solutions. Africa’s mobile phone revolution showed the world how quickly the continent can leapfrog old systems. The same can happen with energy; by embracing flexible, tech-driven models that serve today’s and tomorrow’s needs.
Now is the time to come together to act boldly and invest in Africa’s energy future. By uniting efforts, we can turn potential into progress, ensuring resilient, inclusive, and sustainable energy for generations to come. Let’s power Africa’s future, together.
Prof. Bart O. Nnaji FAS, FA Eng. CON, NNOM – Founder/Chairman, Geometric Power Limited and former Nigerian Minister of Power


