Opinion

BEFORE WE CREATE ANIOMA: THE SOUTH-EAST DESERVES JUSTICE FIRST

Published

5 months ago

October 28, 2025

By Christopher Isiguzo

Nigeria has never been short of conversations about state creation. Every few years, new agitations rise from one corner of the country or another, demanding recognition, representation, and a sense of belonging. It’s a familiar song in our national orchestra , sometimes loud, sometimes muted, but always persistent.

Today, the melody has returned, this time from the Delta North Senatorial District of Delta State, the proud home of the Anioma people where calls for the creation of Anioma State have once again gathered momentum.

On the surface, the argument sounds compelling. The Anioma people, spread across nine local government areas:-Ika North East, Ika South, Aniocha North, Aniocha South, Oshimili North, Oshimili South, Ukwuani, Ndokwa East, and Ndokwa West share deep linguistic, cultural, and historical ties with the Igbo people of the South-East. They see themselves as part of that great heritage, separated only by a colonial boundary line and a political designation that placed them within the South-South geopolitical zone.

To them, the demand for Anioma State is not just political; it is cultural. It is about identity, belonging, and the yearning to reclaim a heritage that time and politics have blurred.

But noble as that aspiration may sound, it raises a question that Nigeria cannot afford to ignore; a question of fairness, balance, and national conscience:

At what cost will Anioma State be created, and at whose expense will justice be deferred yet again?

Nigeria’s geopolitical equation, as it stands today, is far from balanced. The North-West has seven states:- Kano, Kaduna, Katsina, Kebbi, Jigawa, Sokoto, and Zamfara.
The North-East, North-Central, South-West, and South-South zones each have six states.
But the South-East, with its proud and historic people, has only five: Abia, Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu, and Imo.

This single gap, just one missing state might appear trivial on the surface. But in the politics of representation, in the arithmetic of appointments, in the mathematics of resource allocation, and in the perception of inclusion, it makes all the difference.

The South-East’s shortfall means fewer senators, fewer representatives, fewer ministers, fewer local governments, and by extension, less voice in the national conversation. It means structural underrepresentation in every national decision-making process that depends on federal spread.

For years, the South-East has lived with this burden, a silent inequality that successive governments have acknowledged but never corrected. Every constitutional review committee, from 1999 to date, has admitted that the South-East deserves a sixth state. Yet, every effort to achieve it has ended in political foot-dragging and bureaucratic half-measures.

So, when talk of creating Anioma State resurfaces, not from the South-East but from the South-South, it becomes not just a matter of geography, it becomes a matter of justice.

Let’s not lose sight of the fact that if Anioma State is created from Delta, it will remain in the South-South zone. There is no provision in the Constitution that allows a new state to jump geopolitical boundaries or realign zones based on ethnic identity.

Therefore, even if the Anioma people are culturally Igbo, politically and administratively they will continue to belong to the South-South. That means the South-South, already with six states, will gain a seventh, while the South-East will remain with five.

This is where emotion must give way to reason. How can we justify increasing the number of states in an already balanced region while another continues to suffer structural underrepresentation?

What becomes of our constant talk about equity, justice, and fair play?
How do we explain to the millions of South-Easterners, men and women who have felt politically shortchanged since 1999, that once again, the call for fairness will bypass them in favor of political convenience?

If Nigeria truly desires national balance, the next state to be created must emerge from the South-East. Anything else is a betrayal of equity.

This isn’t the first time Nigeria has been confronted with this dilemma.

In 1967, when General Yakubu Gowon created the first twelve states, it was to end the fear of domination and bring governance closer to the people. In 1976, General Murtala Mohammed expanded the federation to nineteen states, largely to ensure regional balance. By 1987 and 1991, when Babangida created Akwa Ibom, Katsina, and later, new states including Delta and Anambra, the guiding principle was even representation across geopolitical lines.

The framers of these decisions understood something we seem to have forgotten; that no country can thrive when sections of its people feel structurally excluded.

That is why, despite our differences, Nigeria’s six geopolitical zones were designed to maintain relative equilibrium.
Tampering with that balance — by giving the South-South a seventh state while the South-East remains at five is to undo decades of delicate federal engineering.

The agitation for Anioma is not inherently wrong. It is born out of pride, culture, and the legitimate desire for identity. But it must also submit to the higher principle of national fairness.

If Anioma becomes a state today, the South-East’s cry for inclusion will become even harder to answer. The imbalance will grow deeper, the sense of alienation stronger, and the wound of injustice wider.

It will send a dangerous message, that in Nigeria, the louder you shout or the stronger your political connections, the more likely your demand will be met, no matter what it costs the rest of the country.

That is not justice; that is politics without conscience.

Some advocates of Anioma statehood argue that it would symbolically “return” the Igbo-speaking people of Delta North to their ethnic roots.
But that argument is built on emotional sentiment, not structural sense.

A new Anioma State would not expand the political strength of the Igbo nation. Instead, it would further split it, creating yet another state outside the South-East geopolitical bloc. The result would be even less cohesion in representation and more dilution of the collective Igbo voice.

In other words, while Anioma may celebrate cultural victory, the South-East will continue to suffer political defeat.

The truth is stark: Anioma State would not strengthen Igbo identity; it would weaken it.

Nigeria cannot continue to pretend that all zones are equal when one remains structurally smaller.
How do we preach unity when fairness is negotiable?
How do we build patriotism when entire regions feel permanently shortchanged by design?

Every nation thrives on the perception of justice. People must see that the system recognizes their existence, their worth, their contribution. For the South-East, that recognition has been delayed for too long.

The answer to that injustice is not another state in the South-South. It is a sixth state in the South-East.

Before we create new states elsewhere, let us fix what is broken. Before we add to the strong, let us strengthen the weak.

That is the only path to true federal balance.

When issues like this are discussed, it’s easy to drown in the technicalities — numbers, maps, boundaries. But at the heart of it are people: ordinary Nigerians who feel invisible in their own country.

Ask a young person in Abia or Ebonyi how it feels to watch other regions enjoy more federal attention, more roads, more projects, more appointments. Ask them how it feels to see six or seven governors meet in other zones to discuss shared progress, while theirs stops at five.

This isn’t just politics — it’s human dignity. Representation matters. Presence matters. Equality matters.

The South-East has given Nigeria its best minds, its strongest entrepreneurs, its most resilient patriots. Yet, in the architecture of statehood, it remains incomplete.

Creating Anioma State now would be like building a new wing on a mansion while one corner of the foundation is still cracking.

Nigeria is at a fragile point. Trust in government is thin, and national unity is often stretched. Every decision we make now must heal, not harm; must unite, not divide.

Creating Anioma State as tempting as it may seem, politically would tilt the federation further off balance. It would embolden other zones to demand new states before existing inequities are corrected. The North-West might seek an eighth. The South-West could push for seven. Where would it end?

Equity is not about satisfying everyone at once; it’s about establishing justice first, then expansion later.

Let us be guided by conscience, not convenience.
Before we add to the South-South, let us complete the South-East.
Before we reward new agitations, let us resolve old ones.

The Anioma cause is not without merit, but it must wait its turn. Justice delayed for the South-East cannot be denied again under the guise of cultural inclusion.

Nigeria’s greatness will not come from the number of its states, but from the fairness of its structure.

Until every region stands on equal ground, no region truly stands tall.

Justice is not a favor; it is a right. And fairness is not a privilege to be granted, it is a principle to be upheld.

Before we create Anioma, let us ask ourselves one question:
Will this decision bring Nigeria closer to balance, or will it deepen the cracks of inequality that already threaten her foundation?

The answer is clear.

Anioma can wait.
But justice for the South-East cannot.

Christopher Isiguzo
ikechristy2004@gmail.com

Opinion

Trailblazing Leadership: Professor Audi’s 5-Year Journey of Excellence As NSCDC Boss

Published

3 weeks ago

February 27, 2026

Daily Mirror

By Gambo Jagindi

Nigeria’s security landscape has been indelibly marked by the tenure of Professor Ahmed Abubakar Audi as Commander General of the Nigerian Security and Civil Defense Corps (NSCDC). As he completes his five-year term, stakeholders are lauding his unwavering commitment to excellence and visionary leadership that has transformed the corps into a world-class security agency.

Born on September 30, 1967, in Laminga, Nasarawa State, Professor Audi’s rise to the top is a testament to his unrelenting pursuit of excellence. With a PhD in Public Administration, a Master’s in Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, and a Bachelor’s degree in Physical and Health Education, he joined the NSCDC in 1996 as a volunteer and steadily climbed the ranks, earning several professional merit awards, including the Distinguished Merit Award for Excellence in Administration and Security Operations. He is a member of the National Institute (mni) and a Fellow of the Institute of Security and Forensic Studies, Nigeria.

Under Professor Ahmed Abubakar Audi’s stewardship, the NSCDC has achieved remarkable milestones, including notable apprehensions and improved security measures, while significantly boosting staff morale and inspiring a new generation of security personnel, cementing his reputation as a visionary leader in the security sector, and leaving an indelible mark on Nigeria’s security landscape .

Audi’s five-year tenure has been marked by a steady commitment to fairness and inclusivity. By ensuring federal character in appointments and promotions, he has addressed longstanding disparities and boosted staff morale. The payment of backlog promotions and arrears has put smiles on the faces of deserving officers, reflecting positively on the corps’ leadership. This emphasis on equity has created a more motivated workforce, positioning the NSCDC for continued success under Professor Audi’s leadership, which stakeholders are urging to be extended

Marking the completion of his five-year tenure, the NSCDC boss recently commissioned five strategic projects to boost the corps’ operational capacity, showcasing his visionary leadership. The projects include a Standard Mini Fire Fighting Station, a VIP Protection Unit Office Complex, the Hydrocarbon and Maritime Security Command and Control Centre, and a 24-Unit Staff Quarters. As Professor Audi concludes his first term, stakeholders are calling on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to extend his service, citing his dedication, patriotism, and excellence. With his continued service, Nigeria’s security architecture stands to gain significantly, and his leadership would remain a driving force for progress and stability. The nation would benefit from his expertise and experience, making a strong case for his tenure extension

Also as Nigeria hurtles towards the 2027 election, the need for seasoned security leadership has never been more pressing. Professor Ahmed Abubakar Audi, the outgoing Commander General of the Nigerian Security and Civil Defense Corps (NSCDC), is uniquely positioned to provide the steady hand required to ensure a peaceful and secure electoral process. With his proven track record of collaboration with sister security agencies, Professor Audi is well-equipped to lead the charge in protecting critical national assets and providing the desired security cover for the election.

Some Nigerians are advocating for the extension of Professor Ahmed Abubakar Audi’s tenure as NSCDC head, citing his proven expertise and strong relationships with other security agencies. Retaining him for at least two more years, they argue, would ensure a secure environment for the 2027 election, with critical infrastructure protected, election-related violence prevented, and law and order maintained. This, they believe, would bolster Nigerians’ confidence in the electoral process, making a strong case for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to consider retaining Professor Audi’s services, given his wealth of experience and demonstrated patriotism.

Jagindi is a digital media publisher who writes from Abuja via jagindi2016@gmail.com

Opinion

Benjamin Kalu: Demonstrating Emotional Intelligence In Turbulent Times

Published

1 month ago

February 19, 2026

Daily Mirror

By Philip Agbese

Nigeria’s democracy has gotten to a point where the resilience of our noble institutions is constantly tested by the intensity of agreement and disagreement in parliamentary Chambers. It is precisely in such moments we see ideas collide, voices of opposition rise, and passions sometimes threaten to overwhelm procedure that shows leadership should be seen beyond just title.

The recent deliberations surrounding the amended Electoral Act 2026 has further revealed Rt. Hon. Benjamin Kalu, who is the Deputy Speaker, to be an outstanding leader in the Nigerian House of Representatives. His conduct has undoubtedly express emotional intelligence, institutional fidelity, and democratic maturity. Kalu’s capacity to read the room without being ruled by it, and to act decisively without becoming dismissive, has in truth become a far more demanding attribute that is worthy of emulation. It was this quality that defined Benjamin Kalu’s leadership during one of the most contentious legislative exercises in the House.

However, the atmosphere recently felt inside the chamber during the clause-by-clause consideration of the Electoral Act amendment was electric in the sense that tempers frayed, tensions flared, and opposition lawmakers staged protests over the removal of the “real-time” transmission clause. It is well understood that the phrase itself; “real-time transmission,” had over time, assumed a symbolic weight which goes beyond its technical meaning. Within the House and in the imagination of the public, it has become a shorthand for electoral credibility, transparency, and the collective yearning by Nigerians for a system they could trust. At this point, it was, in essence, what Nigerians wanted.

Yet, while many lawmakers were understandably engrossed on the symbolic power of real-time transmission, an essential question which was barely asked by anyone amidst the echoes of protest is: what will happen when the imperfect realities of technology, and human systems occur during electoral exercise?

The debatable controversy surrounding real-time transmission reveals a deep philosophical divide that exist in governance. On one side, we have those who viewed the provision as non-negotiable electoral reform, while on the other side were lawmakers who support the electronic transmission in principle and also advocate for a safeguard-manual collation in the event of technological failure. The later was not a rejection of progress but an acknowledgment of contingency.

It is a general knowledge that in a country like Nigeria, server fluctuations, network instability, technological imperfections are not just hypothetical but lived experience. Therefore, the insistence on a single, inflexible method of conduct is a big democratic risk. It was this inconvenience that Hon. Kalu perceived the necessity of the right intervention, even as the opposition chants reverberated through the chamber.

Presiding over proceedings like this is a task that requires more than just the mastery of House rules, one that demands the sensitivity of managing human behaviour under stress. This was the confrontation before the deputy speaker: how would he uphold the rules of the House, protect minority voices, and ensure that dissent was heard, while also preventing the legislature from being held hostage by procedural brinkmanship.

As protests erupted over the removal of the real-time transmission clause, Hon. Kalu didn’t allow frustration to harden into rigidity, he chose a more demanding route. He gave room to the opposition lawmakers to vent their grievances. At the same time, he showed an affirmation of institutional integrity as he remained anchored to the rules governing legislative debate, insisting that the House must proceed, clause by clause, regardless of the volume of objections. His refusal to personalise the conflict along political line was an applaudable move that distinguished the deputy speaker’s conduct as a hallmark of emotional intelligence.

Hon. Kalu’s intervention showed a precise confrontation about idealism and realism. While opposition voices kept hitting on the removal of an absolute real-time clause as betrayal of public trust, the Deputy Speaker stood firm on the realty that rigidity can itself undermine credibility, because he believes that an electoral process that collapses because of issues with server or disruption in network does not serve democracy; but imperils it. His decision to steer the House retaining electronic transmission while permitting manual collation in the event of technological failure, has created a trustworthy legal framework.

It is important to understand that this outcome wasn’t from a place of partisan manoeuvring or one that pits the government against opposition. It is one that cut across party lines, standing as broad agreement on the desirability of electronic transmission. At this point, the law was only left to acknowledge the possibility of technological imperfections. In this sense, the Deputy Speaker’s role was not to advance a party agenda but to reconcile competing anxieties within the same democratic family.

Surprisingly, throughout the proceedings, the Deputy Speaker remained conspicuously focused even amidst the turbulence created by opposition’s protests. His demeanour at that moment conveyed a quiet message that the House would not be distracted from its duty. Hon. Kalu listened, he ruled, and he moved the process forward. He also ensured that that the amended Electoral Act 2026 was eventual passed.

At the end of the session, the law emerged not as the imposition of a dominant faction but as the product of legislative process that has undergone exhaustive and contentious sessions. Through the result of achieving a balanced outcome, the Deputy Speaker demonstrated that emotional intelligence is not opposed to rationality; it enhances it. This dual recognition has proven that the institution itself speaks louder than any individual voice, and this is the essence of responsible lawmaking by intelligent lawmakers.

It is also worthy of note that the true beneficiary of the Deputy Speaker’s display of high intellect is not a party or faction, but the Nigerian democratic project itself. His effort to prevent the House from descending into procedural chaos, has protected the credibility of the legislature, most especially at a time when public trust has become so fragile and precious at the same time.

Moreover, only few leaders who, like Hon. Kalu, can acknowledge the need of agreements in building institutions towards solutions that would create enduring services. He understood that the authority of the chair derives not from force but from fairness. Kalu has always interpret and enforce rules within the house without appearing partisan; and he has been guiding debates without dictating outcomes.

Kalu’s conduct during the passage of the amended Electoral Act embodies the essence of leadership, one that defines it to be much of temperament as it is about intellect. This exemplary action calls for more presence of intellectual leaders like Kalu in Nigeria’s democratic journey, because history would be a good judge of the amended Electoral Act 2026 on its practical outcomes in future elections. However, regardless of how those outcomes would unfold, the process by which the law was passed will always stand as a guide for future leaders.

This is a feat that should indeed be celebrated by all Nigerians rather than being condemned. Without doubt, the Deputy Speaker has demonstrated that emotional intelligence is not an abstract concept but a lived practice that strengthens democracy itself when exercised with integrity.

Agbese, Deputy Spokesperson of the House of Representatives, writes from Apa-Agila.

Opinion

No More Pipeline Vandalism in The Niger Delta, But…

Published

2 months ago

January 21, 2026

Daily Mirror

APPRAISING MILITARY RESOLVE AND THE PATH TO SUSTAINABLE OIL SECURITY

By Aaron Mike Odeh

On a recent media assessment visit by the Director, Defence Media Operations, Major General Michael E Onoja on the 20 January 2026, the General Officer Commanding (GOC), 6 Division of the Nigerian Army and Commander Land Component Operation DELTA SAFE, Major General Emmanuel Emeka, stated that there will be “no more pipeline vandalism in the Niger Delta” indicating a strong affirmation of military resolve and institutional confidence in the ongoing operations within Nigeria’s most economically strategic region.
Far from being a casual statement, the pronouncement reflects the operational posture, command clarity, and renewed determination of the Nigerian Armed Forces (AFN) under the leadership of General Olufemi Oluyede. It signals a clear message: the era of unchecked sabotage of national economic assets is being decisively confronted.

CONTEXTUALISING THE GOC’S DECLARATION
Statements of this magnitude from a serving GOC carry both symbolic and operational weight. They are rooted in firsthand command experience, intelligence assessments, and measurable gains on the ground. In this regard, Major General Emmanuel Emeka’s assertion should be understood as a projection of confidence derived from sustained military engagement, improved coordination with sister security agencies, and enhanced operational discipline within the 6 Division’s area of responsibility.
The Niger Delta has long posed complex security challenges due to its difficult terrain, extensive pipeline networks, and the activities of organised criminal syndicates. Against this backdrop, the GOC’s declaration underscores a belief that the Nigerian Armed Forces has reached a level of operational advantage sufficient to deter, disrupt, and dismantle pipeline vandalism networks.
OPERATIONAL GAINS AND MILITARY PROFESSIONALISM
Under Major General Emmanuel Emeka’s command, the 6 Division has intensified patrols, improved intelligence-led operations, and sustained pressure on illegal refining camps and crude oil theft routes. These efforts align with the Federal Government’s strategic objective of securing oil infrastructure as a matter of national economic security.
The GOC’s statement therefore reflects not mere optimism, but a professional assessment of the division’s growing capacity to dominate the operational environment. It also reinforces the Nigerian Armed Forces constitutional role as a stabilising force, committed to safeguarding national assets in support of economic recovery and investor confidence.

THE “BUT”: BEYOND KINETIC SUCCESS
While commending the resolve and achievements of the 6 Division, it is equally important to situate the declaration within a broader national framework. The “but” in the statement should not be interpreted as doubt or contradiction; rather, it represents an acknowledgment of the multifaceted nature of pipeline security in the Niger Delta.
Pipeline vandalism has historically been sustained not only by criminal intent, but also by socioeconomic pressures, environmental degradation, and the absence of alternative livelihoods in some host communities. Military success, while indispensable, achieves greater durability when complemented by effective civil governance, economic inclusion, and community trust-building.

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AS A FORCE MULTIPLIER
One of the strengths of recent military operations in the Niger Delta has been improved civil-military relations. The success of the Armed Forces is closely tied to cooperation from local communities, traditional institutions, and credible stakeholders.
Sustainable pipeline security is most effective when host communities become partners in protection rather than passive observers. The GOC’s declaration implicitly places responsibility on all stakeholders—government agencies, oil companies, community leaders, and youths—to consolidate the gains made by the Armed Forces.

INSTITUTIONAL SYNERGY AND NATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
The efforts of the 6 Division do not exist in isolation. They form part of a wider national security ecosystem involving regulatory agencies, intelligence services, law enforcement bodies, and policy institutions. The GOC’s confidence should therefore inspire complementary actions across these sectors.
Oil companies must uphold environmental standards and transparent community engagement. Regulatory bodies must enforce accountability. Development agencies must deliver visible dividends of peace. These non-military actions reinforce the security umbrella provided by the Nigerian Armed Forces.

LEADERSHIP AND STRATEGIC MESSAGING
Major General Emmanuel Emeka’s statement also serves as strategic communication—boosting troop morale, reassuring investors, and reinforcing public confidence in the Armed Forces of Nigeria. Such leadership messaging is essential in shaping national narratives around security, discipline, and state authority.
By articulating a firm stance against pipeline vandalism, the GOC is not only commanding troops, but shaping expectations and setting benchmarks for operational success.

CONCLUSION
The declaration that there will be “no more pipeline vandalism in the Niger Delta” should be seen as a reflection of strengthened military capacity, improved leadership focus, and renewed institutional confidence under Major General Emmanuel Emeka, GOC 6 Division of the Armed Forces.
The Nigerian Armed Forces has demonstrated readiness to secure critical national assets. The task ahead is to consolidate these gains through sustained operations, inter-agency synergy, and socio-economic interventions that address underlying vulnerabilities.
In this context, the GOC’s statement stands as both an assurance and a call to collective national responsibility—one that deserves commendation, support, and strategic follow-through.

Aaron Mike Odeh, a Public Affairs Analyst Media Consultant and Community Development Advocator wrote from Post Army Housing Estate Kurudu Abuja