
Politics
Aburi was not a single’s tennis match between Gowon and Ojukwu – Professor ABC Nwosu
Former Minister of Health and eminent statesman, PROFESSOR A. B. C. NWOSU, in this interview responded to some of the issues raised by General Yakubu Gowon in his recent interview, on his roles in the Nigeria – Biafra War. He is of the view that there are critical issues that the former Head of State did not address, warning that “Nigeria will continue to be an unstable state until we restructure.”
You must have read General Yakubu Gowon’s interview; as a person close to Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu and final year undergraduate who was politically active, how did you feel at the time?
I felt sad. Very sad because I had expected that Gowon would reveal at least some of the things which have bothered me and Ndigbo from 1966 till now. Gowon’s interview was not only sad for me because of his self-serving half-truth but for the major things not said. I don’t think that Gowon believes that total deviation from the Aburi agreement was the cause of the civil war but everybody, and I mean everybody who was a “Biafran” at the time, doubted that it was. That’s why ‘On Aburi We Stand’ was the war cry from the East. If Aburi had been implemented there would have been no Nigeria – Biafra War. I thank the respected Journalist, Chuks Iloegbunam, for his masterful response to General Gowon published in the Vanguard.
For example, when General Gowon said that he didn’t call his Secretary to Government to the Aburi meeting whilst Ojukwu did, I said to myself that General Gowon has lost it because Aburi was not a single’s tennis match between him and his so-called friend, Ojukwu.
Why is Aburi critical for Nigeria?
Aburi was critical because every other discussion on what had happened namely, the January 15 coup, May 29 pogrom and the July 29 counter coup had failed to resolve the matter as the various delegations had feared for their lives and would not attend further meetings. Chief Obafemi Awolowo’s meeting with Ojukwu on May 5th and 6th, 1967 did not succeed in bringing the Eastern delegation to the meeting. As Gowon correctly said, the East could not attend any meeting in Nigeria because they feared for their lives. As Gowon also said, a British war plane as well as a Naval war ship were considered but rejected by the East because of the involvement of Britain in the conflict. So the acceptable venue was General Ankrah and his offer of Aburi in Ghana. It was not a meeting between Gowon and Ojukwu, that’s why I insist it was not a single’s tennis match between the two of them. It was a meeting between General Gowon, who came with the federal cabinet secretariat; General Hassan Usman Katsina and the Secretary to the Northern Government; Governor David Ejoor, who came with the Secretary of the Midwest Government; Governor Adeyinka Adebayo, who came with the Secretary of the Western Nigerian government and Governor Odumegwu Ojukwu, who came with Eastern Nigerian government. So, it was a full-fledged Nigerian meeting to avert a war and not a meeting between Gowon and Ojukwu.
One of the key unanimous decisions at Aburi was that the conflict would not be settled through a war. Therefore to say that we fought to live together is not true since all of them had agreed that fighting was not necessary and would not be used to settle the matter. In any case, the matter of dividing Nigeria into 12 states was neither tabled nor discussed at Aburi. What was discussed was devolution of powers from the centre to the federating units including coercive agencies of State like Police, Army etc. What was discussed with unanimity was in making appointments to “Super Permanent Secretaries”, Inspector General of Power, etc. This greatly irked the super permanent secretaries at the time, who submitted an anti-Aburu agreement memo.
What was required in order to keep good faith was a follow-up meeting by all those present at the original meeting where the original agreement was reached. The other members cannot implement their version of the agreement without consulting and getting the concurrence of the Eastern government that wore the shoes that were pinching them on all sides – refugees and rehabilitation, burial of so many dead bodies and fleeing citizens, etc. So, it was wrong to have implemented the civil servant-mutilated Aburi Agreement. If one checks the sequence of events leading to the Nigeria – Biafra war, the creation of 12 states on 5th May 1967, which was not part of Aburi, was done to take the wind off the sails of the urge for the creation of Biafra. This was clearly bad faith shown by the federal government. Unfortunately, this was the impetus that accelerated the declaration of Biafra on 30th May, 1967 because people of the East feared that the federal government could declare a state of emergency and invade the East. Biafra was not declared before the creation of the 12 states, which was not in the spirit of the Aburi agreement.

One of the major agreements of the Aburi was the repatriation of soldiers to their states of origin. The West continued to whine over this until the Nigeria – Biafra war, where they joined the fight against Biafra.
But Aburi will continue to hunt Nigeria in the form of RESTRUCTURING of the Nigerian polity along the intentions of the founding fathers of the republic, where there are no senior or junior Nigerians, and where the federating units are coordinate government, not this nonsense of sub-national government. Sub-national government implies that Tafawa Balewa was senior to Sir Ahmadu Bello, Chief Obafemi Awolowo and Chief Dr. Michael Okpara. To me that is arrant nonsense, and all these people using the term Sub-national government don’t know what a federation is.
You told me that you are worried about Gowon’s silence over January 15 coup in 1966 and the counter coup of July 1966, what are your worries?
I am worried about the January 15th coup because I know it was fully investigated by the special branch of the police under late Inspector General of Police MD Yusuf and the report up till now is not public, even though some people have managed to lay their hands on it. The report was said to have been submitted to the Chief of Army Staff under General Ironsi (which would be General Gowon) but Gowon has said nothing about it so far. I would have liked to know how many people were investigated; the statement that they made and in particular, whether it was an Igbo coup. I know for certain that the report indicated that Emmanuel Arinze Ifeajuna and Demola Ademoyiga were the central figures of the coup and that Chukwuma Kaduna Nzeogu was involved towards the later part of their planning. There are rumors that others were involved but Nigerians would like to see what the report was like. It was also sad that General Gowon kept total silence on the counter coup of July 29 and how he became Supreme Commander.
That interview by Gowon was also totally silent on the pogrom and killing of civilians in the North and West of Nigeria. Easterners, especially Ndigbo, would wonder why he was silent because these were the bases of fears of insecurity by Easterners, especially Ndigbo, about their lives and property in their own country without being protected by their own government. Knowing the reason why people get killed and their properties seized when they venture out of their states of origin, is critical for stability in Nigeria.
Gowon stated that he gave specific instructions on the rules of engagement for the Nigerian Army for the war…(cuts in)
Really, and were these rules enforced? I never read of the tribunal and trials of those behind the Asaba Massacre for example. Meanwhile, “Asaba still mourns” and have erected a memorial to give their sons respectable rest. The other day Ogbomosho people wanted National Honours for their son and hero, Brigadier Benjamin Adekunle. I wonder whether it was the same Brigadier Adekunle, the Black Scorpion, who ordered that anything moving should be shot, even the dogs, but I leave that for now. And the West still feels that Colonel Emma Nwaobosi should be publicly hanged for killing Governor Akintola and his wife whilst idolizing Chief Awolowo. It perplexes me. ,
Finally, on war crimes, I am still to come to terms with the fact that starvation of new born children, their mothers and toddlers could be a legitimate instrument of war. Is that part of the UN Convention? And yet nobody talks about these things, just wishing that those who lost their loved ones should just hide in the corner and shut their mouths. And Gowon kept quiet on this in the interview.
It is obvious, from what you said, that you expected more from Gowon’s interview…
Yes. As I would have expected from Ojukwu, if he ever gave an interview in the later part of his life. In three months it will be 55 years since the war ended and Nigerians are living together but the same problems that were to be solved by Aburi are still very much with us. We keep having conferences upon conferences on how to live in a more stable united country. We even had under Obasanjo a Truth and Reconciliation Commission under the renowned jurist, Chukwudifu Oputa with also renowned Bishop Matthew Hassan Kukah as Secretary, but nobody was ready to talk. Nobody also had any regrets. Governor Usman Farouk, Governor of Northwest State when Nigeria was a 12 state structure and member of the investigative panel of MD Yusuf Panel for the January 15 coup, wrote his book titled, “There were Victors and There were Vanquished”. Some of us have copies. Nobody is still ready to talk and say exactly what happened. Even when these national conferences agree on issues like State Police, Devolution of Powers, Less funds for the Federal Government, more percentage on Derivation Principle, they don’t get implemented either by a president who throws the report into the trash bin nor by a president, who is supposed to be an apostle of true federalism and fiscal federalism. The consoling issue is that we shall all go the way of all mortals whether we like it or not. And Nigeria will continue to be an unstable state until we RESTRUCTURE.
Politics
Stakeholders demand sanctions against A’Court’s Justice Lifu, as Mark warns FG on political manipulation
Following the Court of Appeal’s decision to reverse the deregistration of the African Democratic Congress and four other parties on Monday, ADC National Chairman Senator David Mark stated the judiciary is on trial and warned the Federal Government against political manipulation.
Stakeholders also called for sanctions against Justice Peter Lifu for flouting a superior court order, as the ADC assures supporters they will remain on the ballot.
Political parties and stakeholders affected by the Federal High Court’s controversial deregistration order welcomed the Court of Appeal’s decision to stay the execution of the judgment.
The Court of Appeal in Abuja had on Tuesday ordered a stay of execution of the judgment that directed the Independent National Electoral Commission to deregister the ADC, Action Peoples Party, Action Alliance, Accord Party and Zenith Labour Party, while delivering a stinging rebuke to Justice Lifu for flouting a May 22 appellate court order restraining him from delivering the ruling.
In a unanimous decision on Tuesday, a three-member panel led by Justice A. B. Mohammed condemned Justice Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja for flouting a May 22 order that directed him to suspend proceedings before him, describing his conduct as the gravest form of judicial misconduct.
“The decision of the lower court to proceed with the judgment despite the express order of this court is a brazen violation of the hierarchy of the court and the 1999 Constitution,” the panel held.

The appellate court went further, invoking a Supreme Court precedent to characterise Justice Lifu’s conduct in the harshest terms.
“The decision of the lower court to proceed with the judgment despite the express order of this court is the highest form of judicial impertinence,” the panel declared, adding that the Supreme Court had previously held that a judge who acted in such a manner “is unfit for the bench as it amounts to judicial rascality.”
The court said it had a duty to assert its supervisory authority over lower courts and protect the integrity of the judicial hierarchy.
“Courts are enjoined to protect their integrity. This court has supervisory authority over the trial court. This court has the duty to invoke its powers in ensuring that its orders are obeyed. The application for stay of execution is hereby granted. The enforcement of the judgment is stayed,” the panel ruled.
The Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Lifu, had on Monday ordered INEC to deregister the ADC, Accord Party, Action Alliance, Action Peoples Party and Zenith Labour Party, ruling that the five parties failed to meet the constitutional performance thresholds under Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution, specifically, requirements related to securing at least 25 per cent of votes in certain states or winning seats in the 2023 general elections.
Earlier in Tuesday’s proceedings, INEC told the appellate court it was stunned by Justice Lifu’s decision to deliver the judgment, disclosing that the commission only learned of the ruling through media reports rather than any official notification.
INEC’s lead counsel, Mr Haliru Mohammed, told the panel that the commission had been aware of the appellate court’s May 22 order restraining the lower court from delivering the judgment, which had originally been reserved for June 5.
“We were not aware of any notice from the court regarding the delivery of the judgment. We only saw it as breaking news in the media. We therefore do not oppose the application of the appellant to stay the execution of the judgment,” Mohammed submitted.
The commission also aligned itself with the notice of appeal filed by the affected political parties.
Counsel to the ADC, Mr Shuaibu Aruwa, SAN, told the court that Justice Lifu communicated the judgment’s delivery to the party via WhatsApp, a disclosure that drew visible reactions from the bench.
Aruwa described the lower court’s conduct as an invitation to anarchy and urged the appellate court to invoke its disciplinary jurisdiction under Section 6 of the 1999 Constitution to sanction the judge.
“The action of the trial judge calls for swift and extraordinary measures from this court. We have come to the stage where this court should press the reset button.
“We urge this court to take disciplinary steps by immediately suspending that judgment. This court has the power to protect its own integrity. We pray this court suspends the judgment immediately without further delay,” he added.
APC reacts
Reacting to the appellate court’s decision, the ADC’s National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, said the ruling offered a measure of hope for the judiciary’s credibility, though he was careful not to celebrate unreservedly.
“It indicates that the judiciary may still redeem itself. We are cautiously delighted but we insist that it shouldn’t have happened in the first place,” Abdullahi said in a telephone interview.
He called on the National Judicial Council to take urgent steps to rid the bench of judges whose conduct brought the institution into disrepute.
“We, therefore, hope that the judicial council will take urgent steps to purge the bench of judges who bring the judicial institution to disrepute,” he said.
The National Leader of the Action Peoples Party, Ikenga Ugochinyere, was more emphatic in his welcome of the ruling, describing it as a vindication of the party’s position from the outset and calling on the NJC to weed out what he termed controversial judges.
“There was no need to panic in the first place, and, so, this ruling is a vindication of our position from the get-go,” Ugochinyere said.
“We call on the NJC to weed out controversial justices who say one thing in the morning and another in the evening. These are the bad eggs giving the judiciary a bad name,” he added.
Ugochinyere raised broader concerns about public confidence in the justice system, warning that judicial inconsistency was eroding citizens’ respect for court pronouncements.
“Court pronouncements are supposed to be respected by citizens, particularly because they come from institutions established by law. But when people begin to hide behind technicalities, it raises concerns about the integrity of those institutions.
“How do we expect citizens to obey court judgments when many people no longer see justice as blind, but rather as something influenced by individuals and personal interests? That is the challenge before us,” the APP leader added.
He also noted that the controversy surrounding Justice Lifu’s ruling had sparked frustration across the country, with some of the anger directed at the presidency.
“This situation has generated a lot of reactions across the country. Many people are directing their frustrations at the President. Perhaps there is a need for greater clarity so that Nigerians understand exactly what is happening,” Ugochinyere said.
He nevertheless described Tuesday’s outcome as a victory for democracy and the rule of law.
“What happened today (Tuesday) is a victory, not just for democracy, but for the rule of law. We are happy because the courts have once again demonstrated their relevance in our democratic process,” he said.
Other parties speak
The Acting National Chairman of the Coalition of United Political Parties, Peter Ameh, took a philosophical approach in welcoming the ruling, invoking the words of the philosopher Edmund Burke to frame the significance of the appellate court’s intervention.
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing,” Ameh said.
He warned that what he described as hostile executive rascality and brazen judicial overreach must not be allowed to stand.
Also, the ADC presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar said in a statement posted on his X handle that the ruling was a positive development, noting with particular significance that INEC itself had initiated the application for the stay .
“I welcome the Court of Appeal’s decision to stay the execution of the Federal High Court judgment seeking the deregistration of our great party, the ADC, and four other political parties. It is particularly significant that INEC itself initiated the application for the stay,” he wrote.
Atiku, Mark protest
The former Vice President, Atiku Abubakar also criticised what he described as judicial contradictions in the ongoing legal dispute, warning that such developments had placed the judiciary under intense public scrutiny.
“The disturbing spectacle of judicial contradictions and politically charged rulings playing out in our courts has placed the judiciary under intense public scrutiny. As ADC National Chairman, Sen. David Mark, rightly observed, the judiciary itself is now on trial,” Atiku said.
He warned against any attempt to weaponise the courts against Nigeria’s democratic institutions.
“Any attempt to undermine Nigeria’s hard-won democracy through judicial manipulation is a grave danger to the Republic. If our democracy suffers further injury, history will demand accountability from those entrusted with dispensing justice,” he said.
Following the judgment given by Justice Lifu, the National Judicial Council has been urged to investigate Justice Peter Lifu over his decision to deliver judgment in a case that was already before the Court of Appeal.
The civil society organisation, Tap Initiative for FOR Citizens’ Development, on Tuesday in a statement called on the leadership of the judiciary to immediately investigate Justice Lifu over the judgment.
The call follows concerns over the alleged disregard for the hierarchy of courts and implications such actions could have on the judiciary and Nigeria’s democracy as the country moves closer to the 2027 general elections.
Justice Lifu had on Monday ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission to deregister five political parties over their alleged breach of Section 225(A) of the Constitution.
However, the judgment was reportedly delivered despite an order staying proceedings issued by the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal on May 22.
The decision has since attracted criticism from several quarters, with critics accusing the judge of undermining democratic principles.
In a statement signed by its Executive Director, Mbasekei Martin Obono, the group urged the NJC to, among other things, “Determine whether the decision was delivered in disregard of pending appellate proceedings and a subsisting order of stay;
“Examine possible breaches of the judicial code of conduct; Take appropriate disciplinary action if misconduct is established; and
Reaffirm the authority of appellate courts and the supremacy of due process within the judiciary”.
The group recalled that the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, had consistently emphasised the need for accountability, discipline and ethical conduct within the judiciary.
It disclosed that it had formally petitioned the CJN, in her capacity as Chairman of the NJC, seeking an investigation and possible disciplinary action against Justice Lifu.
According to the group, the petition presents an opportunity to reinforce the principles of accountability and demonstrate that judicial independence is not incompatible with responsibility.
“Tap Initiative expresses grave concern that at the time the said judgement was delivered, there were subsisting appellate proceedings before the Court of Appeal in respect of the same subject matter in Appeal No. CA/ABJ/CV/569/2026. Furthermore, the Court of Appeal had issued an Enrolment Order expressly granting a stay of proceedings in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/2025, being the very proceedings in which the Federal High Court subsequently proceeded to deliver judgment.
“This development raises profound constitutional and procedural concerns, as it appears that a valid order of stay and active appellate proceedings were in force at the material time. If established, this situation would constitute a serious affront to the doctrine of judicial hierarchy and the supervisory jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal within Nigeria’s constitutional order.
“Tap Initiative emphasizes that the integrity of Nigeria’s justice system depends fundamentally on strict adherence to judicial hierarchy, procedural discipline, and respect for appellate authority. Any deviation from these principles risks creating conflicting judicial outcomes, eroding legal certainty, and undermining public confidence in the courts”, he said.
The group stressed that the judiciary remains the last hope of the common citizen, arguing that its legitimacy is sustained not only by constitutional authority but also by unwavering public confidence in its fairness, discipline and respect for the rule of law.
It therefore called on the NJC to treat the matter with the urgency and seriousness it deserves in the interest of justice, democracy and national stability.
Meanwhile, the National Chairman of the African Democratic Congress, Senator David Mark, on Tuesday declared that the Nigerian judiciary, rather than the opposition party, is the institution facing scrutiny over the controversy surrounding the deregistration of the ADC and four other political parties.
Speaking at the ADC Strategic Communications Retreat in Abuja, the former Senate President accused the judiciary of actions capable of undermining public confidence in the nation’s democratic process, while questioning the conduct of Justice Peter Lifu in matters relating to the party.
According to Mark, the outcome of the controversy will test the credibility of the judiciary and the ability of the National Judicial Council to address concerns arising from the case.
“The ADC is not on trial. Rather, it is the judiciary that is on trial and the nation is waiting to see how the National Judicial Council is going to handle this precarious situation,” he said.
The ADC chairman expressed concern over what he described as unprecedented judicial actions, alleging that Justice Lifu ignored an order of the Court of Appeal directing a stay of proceedings in the matter.
He said it was difficult to comprehend how a judge could be involved in actions that appeared to contradict existing court directives.
Mark further alleged that the judge issued conflicting decisions regarding the status of the party within a short period.
“It is strange that a judge can order the Independent National Electoral Commission to pronounce a party dead and in less than 24 hours put the same party on trial,” he said.
The remarks come amid growing political tension over recent legal challenges affecting opposition parties ahead of preparations for the next electoral cycle.
Despite the legal setback, Mark urged party members not to lose confidence in the ADC, insisting that the party would emerge stronger from the dispute.
“Like I have said previously, our members should not worry about the shenanigans of the ruling party. We will go through all these turbulence because we are up to the task. By the time we are through all these, ADC will come out stronger,” he stated.
The former Senate President also accused the ruling All Progressives Congress APC of attempting to weaken opposition forces through distractions, claiming that the governing party was struggling to defend its record in office.
He alleged that the President Bola Tinubu-led government is diverting attention from its challenges by targeting opposition platforms.
Addressing party communicators at the retreat, Mark charged them to craft messages capable of expanding the ADC’s appeal across political divides, including among members of the ruling party.
He challenged the communications team to develop persuasive narratives that would attract more Nigerians to the ADC project. (PUNCH)
Politics
Ex-Gov Ugwuanyi reaffirms support for APC’s Ikeje Asogwa, disowns PDP candidate
Former Governor of Enugu State, Rt. Hon. Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi, has dismissed as false and misleading reports circulating on social media alleging that he is supporting the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) candidate, Barr. Nestor Ezeme, in the forthcoming Enugu North Senatorial District bye-election.
In a statement personally signed by him, Ugwuanyi described the claim as fake news orchestrated by political mischief makers seeking to gain undue advantage ahead of the poll scheduled for Saturday, June 20, 2026.
The former governor, who is now a member of the All Progressives Congress (APC), stated that he has no reason to support a candidate from another political party, stressing that his loyalty remains with the APC and all its candidates.
“As a committed member of the APC, I have no business supporting the candidate of another party. My support is firmly and unequivocally for all APC candidates, from the President down to the Councillor,” Ugwuanyi stated.
He specifically reaffirmed his support for the APC candidate in the Enugu North Senatorial bye-election, Chief Ikeje Asogwa, noting that his position on the contest has never been in doubt.
“I stand by Chief Ikeje Asogwa and my party, the APC. Any claim to the contrary is fake news and should be dismissed and disregarded by the public,” he said.

Ugwuanyi further alleged that the rumours were being spread by individuals bent on deceiving the electorate through name-dropping and misinformation.
“These false reports are the handiwork of mischief makers who have resorted to propaganda and deception in pursuit of electoral gains. The people should not be misled,” he added.
The former governor therefore urged members of the public and supporters across the Enugu North Senatorial District to disregard the reports and remain focused on the issues ahead of the election.
Politics
Kenneth Okonkwo dumps Atiku over appointment of VP candidate from South-South

Nollywood actor and politician Kenneth Okonkwo has withdrawn his support for former Vice President Atiku Abubakar following the announcement of former Transport Minister, Rotimi Amaechi, as his vice presidential running mate.
Okonkwo made his position known in a statement issued on his X (formerly Twitter) account on Monday, shortly after reports emerged that Atiku had selected Amaechi as his running mate for the 2027 presidential election.
The former Labour Party chieftain said he could not, in good conscience, campaign for any presidential ticket that excludes the South-East from both the presidential and vice-presidential positions.
“If it is confirmed that he has chosen a candidate from the South-South, I wish him well. I am not favourably disposed to campaigning for any presidential ticket that does not have a person of South-East origin as President or Vice in 2027,” Okonkwo stated.
His remarks effectively distance him from Atiku’s campaign and signal a major crack within the opposition coalition ahead of the 2027 general election.
Okonkwo argued that the South-East has remained politically disadvantaged since the return of democracy in 1999, noting that the region has neither produced a President nor a Vice President during the period.

“This Geo-Political Zone has neither produced a President or Vice President since 1999. To deny the South-East the opportunity to produce the President or Vice President in ADC in 2027 will amount to perpetuating the marginalisation,” he said.
The lawyer and political activist expressed disappointment over reports that the vice-presidential slot may have been ceded to the South-South despite the sacrifices made by leaders from the South-East in building and sustaining the coalition.
“I heard from the social media that ADC has picked its vice presidential candidate from the South-South. If this is true, it is unfortunate, as this will continue the crude marginalisation of the South-East,” he said.
Okonkwo recalled that the ADC was founded by former National Chairman, Chief Ralphs Nwosu, an indigene of the South-East, and argued that the party’s coalition arrangement was never intended to sideline the region.
“The ADC was founded by Ralphs Nwosu from the South-East in 2005. He made the sacrifice to give up the party in 2025 for the coalition to usher in a better Nigeria. He couldn’t have made that sacrifice to marginalise his own people,” he stated.
According to him, the South-East had already relinquished key positions within the coalition and deserved consideration for the vice-presidential slot.
“I did not join the coalition to assist in the further marginalisation of my own people. I am of the opinion that if we made a sacrifice to give up the National Chairman and the President, it will amount to unpardonable injustice to deny us the Vice President in 2027,” he said.
Okonkwo further disclosed that his only request to Atiku was to demonstrate his commitment to the political inclusion of the South-East by choosing a running mate from the region.
“The only favour I asked Atiku Abubakar, who openly declared that he is the pathway to the presidency of the South-East, is to show it by choosing someone from the South-East to be his Vice,” he stated.
He maintained that his political involvement has always been driven by the desire to build a Nigeria where no region, ethnic group or individual is marginalised.
“I joined politics to fight for a better Nigeria where no region, Geo-Political Zone, or person will be marginalised,” he added.
His declaration is expected to fuel fresh debate over zoning, equity and power-sharing within the opposition coalition as preparations intensify for the 2027 presidential election.
-
Politics2 days agoCourt orders INEC to deregister ADC, Accord, three others
-
News2 days agoPopular Businessman dies in captivity despite ₦5 million ransom payment
-
News2 days agoTroops rescue Widow of late Major General Rabe Abubakar
-
News3 days agoOver 50 Bandit Attacks Recorded in a Week as FG Spends N57.78bn on Security
-
News3 days agoInsecurity: Ministers, Senators, Governors may become targets — Buratai warns
-
Kenneth Okonkwo
Kenneth OkonkwoPolitics2 days agoKenneth Okonkwo dumps Atiku over appointment of VP candidate from South-South
-
Politics16 hours agoStakeholders demand sanctions against A’Court’s Justice Lifu, as Mark warns FG on political manipulation
-
News4 hours agoLondon court acquits Alison-Madueke of all corruption charges





