Connect with us

Opinion

Centenary Honours Awards: What The People Say

Published

12 years ago

on

The Federal Government had, as part of the Centenary celebrations honoured some eminent Nigerians who have distinquished themselves in the service of the nation.
Expectedly, controversy has trailed the honours list with some people rejecting, especially the Ogonis, protesting the non-inclusion of late actvist, Ken Saro-Wiwa in the list.
Our Chief Correspondent Calista Ezeaku and photographer Dele Obinna sought the views of Port Harcourt residents on the issue.
Excerpts:

Mr Gboh Ebenezer Fege, Businessman
Truly, what I will say about the recipients list is that there are people who have contributed to the development of this nation, particularly Niger Delta, whose names were not included on the list. For instance, a person like Late Ken Saro-Wiwa, who we know his contributions towards the development of the Niger Delta and Nigeria at large. His name was not on that list. And if you refuse to include such person, how do you think people will believe that what you are doing is fair?  Some people on that list have not as much contribution to the development of the Niger Delta as Ken Saro-Wiwa did. So, for us, particularly the Ogoni people, we are not happy about that. The list is not people-orientated. I think the committee that compiled that list should have sought opinion of members of the public before coming up with the list.

Wele Promise Toochukwu, Public Servant.
Actually, the centenary award is a very good one for the country. I was opportuned to go through the list on a newspaper. I saw the names of those who rejected the award, the likes of the Kutis, Prof Wole Soyinka and Gani Fawehinmi’s families. They said until corruption is entirely wiped out from the country, until the federal government through NNPC accounts for the $20 billion from petroleum proceeds that is missing, until that is given a wider and explanatory view to convince the Nigerian public, they will not accept the award on behalf of their patriarchs.
Actually, I think the award is worth it, especially now that the country has come of age despite our challenges.
However, I think that there are some persons that should have been included on that list. These are human right activities, those who fought for the unity of this country, especially from this our own side, the Niger Delta. The likes of Ken Saro-Wiwa should have been included on the list. I think Saro-Wiwa as freedom fighter and a struggler for the people of the Niger Delta especially his tribe of Ogoni should have merited that  award. The likes of Tam-David West, Prof Nimi Briggs should have been on the list. Prof Briggs impacted greatly to us in the University. He brought sanity into the institution. And for Tam-David West’s quest for integrity, he should have been awarded.

Mr Jeffrey Ifeanyi, Businessman.
Majority of Nigerians don’t even know about the centenary celebration. The awareness is not there. The entire programme for the celebration, including the award is not really publicised, it is not really in the hands of the masses. So, for me, there is no criteria to begin to judge the award recipients, selection procedure. I don’t think I have what it takes to begin to criticise the list.  A committee was set up for the award which came up with the list. We all know what happens in Nigeria, but the committee should be given the benefit of doubt that they did their job. The award can’t be given to every Nigeria.
You see, the problem with our system is that we tend to bring politics into so many things.
There are things we should be doing and allow the process to run it self. There is no point saying you didn’t give the award to this man or you gave to this man. As I said earlier, a committee was assigned to do the job, they had  screened and presented the 100  distinquished personalities. So we should give them that benefit of doubt. Whether they came out plainly or they played some politics in the selection procedure, let us not go into that because these are the things that could create other problems. The country already has a lot of problems facing it – Boko Haram and others.
My emphasis is that this centenary thing is a Nigerian programme and every Nigerian across the country should have the feeling of the celebration. All Nigerians ought to be involved in the celebration either by wearing a centenary tee-shirt, dressing in Nigerian flag colours or anything. The atmosphere all over Nigeria should depict the celebration.
For the award recipients, they should see it as a call to serve. The award should ginger them to make more contribution toward the developing of the country.

Chief Jude Nwoka, Lecturer.
To some, the list is okay. We are celebrating 100years of amalgamation but the integrities of that celebration is what we need to ask. Have we done well within this number of years? Let us look at some major dates in the history of the country. In 1950, we discovered oil, 1960 we had independence, 1970 they said Malaysia came and took palm oil seedlings from Nigeria. Look at those indices, how have we fared?
By now it is expected that we would have had a lot of mechanism to fight corruption because our major problem in this country is corruption. And I am saying that the best way to fight corruption is to deal with corrupt people face to face. You know Nigeria has the best developmental plans. We have good brains, the human capital is there but the problem has always been implementation.
If our leaders will judiciously use our money to do things that are tangible and last over time, people will enjoy it. But this idea of a winner takes all has kept the country the way it is.
So that we are 100years today and people still survive after the amalgamation, we should celebrate, but the real issue is, how have we fared in that 100years?
Now talking about the award recipients, for people like Zik and other, yes they merit the award because of their fight for amalgamation. But after the amalgamation what have we been able to do? Have we left an, enduring legacy for the democracy. Often we are told that youths are the future hopes. Where are the young ones? The old ones want to remain power.
And what are the legacies they are leaving?
What I am saying in essence is that giving an award is not the issue. The people you want to give the award, what is their contribution. What are their sacrifices for the nation? Our past leaders like Zik, Awolowo, Tafawa Balewa never had sky scrapper. They never had 100miilion stories in Kano, 10 billion stories in London. They were simple men with simple character. The same thing with people like Ken Saro-Wiwa. They made sacrifices for the people. How many of such leaders do we have today?

Mr Iheanyi Ezinwo, Publisher.
I think it was a thoughtful thing for the federal government to decide to celebrate 100 years of amalgamation of Nigeria. I think we have come a long way.
And coming to the award, ordinarily the centenary could have been celebrated without the award, but I want to see it as one of the highlights. One of the items that the organisers want use to add colour to the centenary celebration. So to that extent I want to say that it is in order. And don’t forget that 100years is not a joke. Except in some rare cases, many of us who are here today might not be there when Nigeria will be celebrating another 100years years anniversary. So it is an occasion that is worth marking in as many significant ways as possible.
Now coming to the list, I want to believe that the list was compiled by a committee. And members of this committee are Nigerians eminently seen to be qualified to do the job. I want to believe that they were given a guideline for the job I want to also believe that those who commissioned them were satisfied with the job they did. That was why they decided to go ahead with the 100 names.
That is not to say that there might not have been same other people whose names should have been included.
But don’t forget, maybe they were given a target that it should not be more than 100 people.
Now, coming to the controversy, because of the polaristic nature of Nigeria, especially the misguided religious and tribal sentiment that has become so prominent during this administration of president Goodluck Jonathan, the controversies are not unexpected. There are some people who are just there to crticise the  policies of this administration. Remember when there were plans to declare a state of emergency in three states some people opposed it but at the end of the day, Nigerians saw reasons with the government. Ogoni people are saying that somebody like Ken Saro-Wiwa should have been included among awardees. Then the family of Gani Faweni is rejecting the honour because they say that it is impossible for them to stand on the same podium to receive the same award with somebody they alleged contributed to the early demise of their father. So the controversies are expected. There is no how you compile the name that there will be no controversy.
There is no how that list can accommodate everybody who has contributed significantly to the development of this nation.
On the question of whether some names on the list ought not to have been there, it depends on the criteria used in selecting the people. If I’m the one drawing the criteria, I can say somebody like Abacha shouldn’t have been included because his administration brought untold hardship to us in this country, not to talk about the massive looting. As a matter of fact, if I were to draft the criteria, all the past military heads of state should not be included.  So I want to appeal to Nigerians to give this present administration the benefit of doubt because I want to believe that the president means well.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Opinion

Time and Season Can Tell

Published

5 days ago

on

February 16, 2026

By

Quote:”In matters of the heart, seasons expose what emotions try to hide.”
There is a silent crisis unfolding in modern relationships—one that many people endure quietly but rarely articulate. It is the experience of emotional attachment without clarity. Unlike betrayal, which announces itself loudly, or conflict, which forces confrontation, this crisis creeps in softly. It begins with warmth, grows through shared vulnerability, and then dissolves into silence. In my observation, some of the deepest emotional wounds are not inflicted by harsh words or dramatic endings. They are caused by something far subtler: the gradual withdrawal of affection without explanation. Silence in relationships is often mistaken for neutrality, but it is not neutral. Silence communicates—only it does so in a language of confusion. When someone slowly retreats without offering clarity, they leave the other person suspended between hope and reality.
There is no clear goodbye, no decisive closure—only distance. The unanswered messages. The reduced enthusiasm. The subtle shift in tone. Emotional ambiguity can be more painful than open rejection because it denies finality while sustaining expectation. It leaves the heart in limbo. In today’s world of instant communication and digital closeness, emotional intensity is frequently mistaken for love. When someone gives us attention, listens attentively, checks in consistently, and offers companionship during vulnerable moments, it is natural to assume that something meaningful is forming. After all, connection feels like commitment. But attention is not always intention. Closeness is not always clarity. In emotionally complicated relationships, there is often an imbalance that goes unnoticed at first. One person invests deeply—emotionally, mentally, even spiritually—while the other remains cautiously detached.
The connection may feel mutual, but the level of commitment is not. And when investment is unequal, pain eventually follows. One of the most dangerous consequences of such relationships is how subtly we lose ourselves in them. It does not happen overnight. It begins with small shifts. We check our phones more often. We rearrange our schedules. We replay conversations in our minds. Gradually, our emotional world begins to orbit around one person. Friends grow distant. Personal goals lose urgency. Self-worth becomes tied—quietly but firmly—to someone else’s presence and validation. When that person withdraws, the collapse feels catastrophic. Yet the devastation is not solely because love has ended. It is because identity has been shaken. We are not grieving only the person; we are grieving the version of ourselves that depended on them.
Silence, I have come to believe, can function as a form of power. When one person controls communication through distance—responding selectively, appearing and disappearing unpredictably—they unintentionally gain emotional dominance. The other person is left waiting, interpreting, hoping. They analyze every word, every delay, every change in tone. This imbalance may not always be intentional. Sometimes it arises from emotional immaturity or fear of confrontation. Yet its impact is undeniable. It reveals an uncomfortable truth: emotional availability is not guaranteed simply because connection exists. Chemistry does not equal commitment. Attraction does not equal accountability. With time, I began to understand that not every relationship is meant to last. Some people enter our lives not as permanent partners, but as temporary teachers.
 They are not there to complete us, but to confront us—with our vulnerabilities, insecurities, and unmet needs. At first, this realization felt discouraging. It seemed to reduce love to a series of lessons. But eventually, it felt liberating. Emotional loss stopped looking like failure and started looking like revelation. Each experience—especially the painful ones—exposed areas where I needed growth. Where I needed stronger boundaries. Where I needed deeper self-awareness. Boundaries, I have learned, are not barriers against love; they are protections for it. Love without boundaries is not love—it is emotional exposure. Connection without clarity is not intimacy—it is uncertainty. Affection without commitment is not partnership—it is illusion. Healthy love requires mutual understanding, transparency, and intentionality. It demands that both individuals stand on equal emotional ground. Where one speaks, the other listens.
 Where one invests, the other reciprocates. Where one withdraws, the other communicates. Time, more than emotion, reveals truth. In the beginning, feelings are loud. They rush, they excite, they overwhelm. But time tests what emotions promise. It exposes inconsistency. It clarifies intention. It separates temporary attraction from sustainable partnership. Seasons, too, teach us something essential about relationships. No season lasts forever. Some bring growth. Others bring pruning. Some relationships stay long enough to build a foundation; others stay just long enough to teach resilience. Neither is wasted. When we accept that relationships operate in seasons, we release the need to force permanence. We stop chasing clarity from those unwilling to give it. We stop romanticizing inconsistency. We stop equating intensity with depth.
Instead, we begin to value emotional safety over emotional excitement. We learn that peace is more sustaining than passion without direction. We recognize that self-worth must never depend on someone else’s attention.In matters of the heart, time and season always tell.They reveal who is consistent and who is convenient. They expose what is genuine and what is temporary. They show whether a connection is rooted in intention—or merely in circumstance. And perhaps the greatest wisdom is this: not every silence deserves to be decoded. Some silences are answers. When we understand that, we stop fearing endings. We begin trusting timing. We stop clinging to uncertainty and start choosing clarity.Because in the end, the heart may feel quickly—but time always tells the truth.
By: Isiocha Kate
Continue Reading

Opinion

Why Adaeze Deserves A Second Chance 

Published

5 days ago

on

February 16, 2026

By

Quote:”If performance is the standard, then continuity in Rivers’ health sector is not a favour — it is a necessity.”
When the executive council was dissolved and political permutations began to dominate conversations across Rivers State, one sector stood out in the public debate,  Health.  In a state where access to quality healthcare remains both a social necessity and political responsibility, performance has become the most persuasive argument. And in those conversations, the name of Adaeze Chidinma Oreh consistently resurfaces. Her tenure as Commissioner for Health was marked not by ceremonial appearances but by visible system reforms that ordinary residents could measure in improved service delivery. From the outset, she placed primary healthcare at the centre of the state’s health strategy, reinforcing the idea that sustainable reform begins at the grassroots.  Primary Health Centres across several local government areas witnessed structural upgrades, improved staffing coordination, and better supply chain management for essential medicines.
Under her supervision, Rivers State deepened participation in the Basic Healthcare Provision Fund, ensuring that federal health allocations translated into tangible services at community level. Health insurance enrolment expanded significantly during her time in office, broadening access to affordable care for civil servants, informal sector workers, and vulnerable populations.  Public opinion often cites this expansion as one of the most impactful interventions of her administration. HIV service delivery also experienced notable scaling. More facilities were equipped to provide testing and treatment services, reducing travel burdens for patients and strengthening continuity of care. Her administration strengthened disease surveillance mechanisms, an important safeguard in a post-pandemic era where preparedness is as critical as response.Beyond expansion of services, she demonstrated regulatory firmness. Illegal and unlicensed medical facilities were shut down, sending a strong message that patient safety would not be compromised.
This crackdown on quackery earned her both commendation and resistance, but public health advocates widely supported the stance as long overdue. Emergency medical response systems received renewed attention. Ambulance coordination and referral systems were reviewed and strengthened, improving response time in critical cases. Maternal and child health programmes gained renewed emphasis. Immunisation campaigns were intensified, and advocacy for respectful maternal care became more pronounced within state facilities. Health workers frequently described her leadership style as consultative. Stakeholder meetings were not mere formalities; they were platforms for problem-solving and accountability. She engaged development partners strategically, aligning donor support with state priorities rather than allowing fragmented programme implementation.International partnerships brought in technical assistance, equipment upgrades, and training opportunities for healthcare personnel.
Transparency also became a visible feature of her administration. When misinformation circulated — particularly around admissions into health training institutions — she addressed the public directly, clarifying facts and protecting citizens from fraud. Within professional circles, she was regarded as technically sound, able to interpret data and translate policy into operational strategy. Her public briefings were often data-driven, reflecting measurable indicators rather than abstract promises. The Primary Healthcare Leadership Challenge saw Rivers State earn recognition during her tenure, reinforcing claims of structured reform. Community outreach was not neglected. Rural communities reported increased supervision visits and closer monitoring of local health facilities. Civil society organisations in Rivers State frequently acknowledged improved responsiveness from the Ministry of Health during her administration.
She maintained visible engagement with frontline workers, visiting facilities and interacting directly with staff and patients. Her approach to governance balanced policy reform with human engagement — a combination many observers believe strengthened trust in the health system. Under her watch, health insurance awareness campaigns improved public understanding of pre-paid healthcare models. She supported integration of technology into health administration, enhancing data reporting and accountability systems. Persons living with HIV/AIDS, women in rural communities, and economically disadvantaged families became central to programme targeting. In public discourse, she was often described as performance-driven rather than politically flamboyant. Awards and recognitions followed, but more importantly, measurable system improvements formed the basis of those honours. Healthcare professionals credited her with restoring a sense of direction to policy implementation.
Her tenure reflected continuity in reform rather than abrupt, cosmetic changes. Critics of political reshuffles argue that the health sector, more than many others, benefits from sustained leadership to consolidate gains. Many residents believe that reform in healthcare requires consistency, institutional memory, and steady administrative hands. As conversations around reappointments intensify, health stakeholders continue to emphasise competence over political balancing. In markets, professional associations, and community meetings, her name surfaces in discussions about measurable impact. The argument is less about sentiment and more about outcomes — expanded insurance coverage, improved primary healthcare structures, firmer regulation, and strengthened partnerships. Rivers State’s health sector remains a work in progress, but public opinion suggests that her administration laid foundations that require continuity rather than disruption.
In a political climate where appointments are often influenced by calculations beyond performance, her tenure stands as a case study in technocratic leadership. If governance is ultimately about service delivery, then health remains one of its clearest tests. And if performance, regulatory courage, grassroots impact, insurance expansion, strengthened disease control systems, and improved public trust are the criteria, then let Adaeze Chidinma Oreh be the person.
By: King Onunwor
Continue Reading

Opinion

Empowering Youth  Through Agriculture 

Published

2 weeks ago

on

February 9, 2026

By

Quote:”While job seeking youths should  continuously acquire skills and explore opportunities within their immediate environment as well as in the global space through the use of digital platforms, government, corporate/ multinational organizations or the organised private sector should generate skills and provide the enabling environment for skills acquisition, through adequate funding and resettlement packages that will provide sustainable economic life for beneficiaries”.

The Governor of Rivers State, Sir Siminalayi Fubara, recently urged youths in the Rivers State to take advantage of the vast opportunities available to become employers of labour and contribute meaningfully to the growth and development of the State. Governor Fubara noted that global trends increasingly favour entrepreneurship and innovation, and said that youths in Rivers State must not be left behind in harnessing these opportunities. The Governor, represented by the Secretary to the State Government, Dr Benibo Anabraba, made this known while declaring open the 2026 Job Fair organised by the Rivers State Government in partnership with the Nigeria Employers’ Consultative Association (NECA) in Port Harcourt. The Governor acknowledged the responsibility of government to create jobs for its teeming youth population but noted that it is unrealistic to absorb all job seekers into the civil service.
“As a government, we recognise our duty to provide employment opportunities for our teeming youths. However, we also understand that not all youths can be accommodated within the civil service. This underscores the need to encourage entrepreneurship across diverse sectors and to partner with other stakeholders, including the youths themselves, so they can transition from being job seekers to employers of labour,” he said. It is necessary to State that Governor Fubara has not only stated the obvious but was committed to drive youth entrepreneurship towards their self-reliance and the economic development of the State  It is not news that developed economies of the world are skilled driven economies. The private sector also remains the highest employer of labour in private sector driven or capitalist economy though it is also the responsibility of government to create job opportunities for the teeming unemployed youth population in Nigeria which has  the highest youth unemployed population in the subSahara Africa.
The lack of job opportunities, caused partly by the Federal Government’s apathy to job creation, the lack of adequate supervision of job opportunities economic programmes, lack of employable skills by many youths in the country have conspired to heighten the attendant challenges of unemployment. The challenges which include, “Japa” syndrome (travelling abroad for greener pastures), that characterises the labour market and poses threat to the nation’s critical sector, especially the health and medical sector; astronomical increase in the crime rate and a loss of interest in education. While job seeking youths should  continuously acquire skills and explore opportunities within their immediate environment as well as in the global space through the use of digital platforms, government, corporate/ multinational organizations or the organised private sector should generate skills and provide the enabling environment for skills acquisition, through adequate funding and resettlement packages that will provide sustainable economic life for beneficiaries.
While commending the Rivers State Government led by the People First Governor, Sir Siminilayi Fubara for initiating “various training and capacity-building programmes in areas such as ICT and artificial intelligence, oil and gas, maritime, and the blue economy, among others”, it is note-worthy that the labour market is dynamic and shaped by industry-specific demands, technological advancements, management practices and other emerging factors. So another sector the Federal, State and Local Governments should encourage youths to explore and harness the abounding potentials, in my considered view, is Agriculture. Agriculture remains a veritable solution to hunger, inflation, and food Insecurity that ravages the country. No doubt, the Nigeria’s arable landmass is grossly under-utilised and under-exploited.
In recent times, Nigerians have voiced their concerns about the persistent challenges of hunger, inflation, and the general increase in prices of goods and commodities. These issues not only affect the livelihoods of individuals and families but also pose significant threats to food security and economic stability in the country.  The United Nations estimated that more than 25 million people in Nigeria could face food insecurity this year—a 47% increase from the 17 million people already at risk of going hungry, mainly due to ongoing insecurity, protracted conflicts, and rising food prices. An estimated two million children under five are likely to be pushed into acute malnutrition. (Reliefweb ,2023). In response, Nigeria declared a state of emergency on food insecurity, recognizing the urgent need to tackle food shortages, stabilize rising prices, and protect farmers facing violence from armed groups. However, without addressing the insecurity challenges, farmers will continue to struggle to feed their families and boost food production.
In addition, parts of northwest and northeast Nigeria have experienced changes in rainfall patterns making less water available for crop production. These climate change events have resulted in droughts and land degradations; presenting challenges for local communities and leading to significant impact on food security. In light of these daunting challenges, it is imperative to address the intricate interplay between insecurity and agricultural productivity.  Nigeria can work toward ensuring food security, reducing poverty, and fostering sustainable economic growth in its vital agricultural sector. In this article, I suggest solutions that could enhance agricultural production and ensure that every state scales its agricultural production to a level where it can cater to 60% of the population.
This is feasible and achievable if government at all levels are intentional driving the development of the agricultural sector which was the major economic mainstay of the Country before the crude oil was struck in commercial quantity and consequently became the nation’s monolithic revenue source. Government should revive the moribund Graduate Farmers Scheme and the Rivers State School-to-Land agricultural programmes to operate concurrently with other skills acquisition and development programmes. There should be a consideration for investment in mechanized farming and arable land allocation. State and local governments should play a pivotal role in promoting mechanized farming and providing arable land for farming in communities. Additionally, allocating arable land enables small holder farmers to expand their operations and contribute to food security at the grassroots level.
Nigeria can unlock the potential of its agricultural sector to address the pressing needs of its population and achieve sustainable development. Policymakers and stakeholders must heed Akande’s recommendations and take decisive action to ensure a food-secure future for all Nigerians.

By: Igbiki Benibo

Continue Reading

Trending