Opinion
Beware Of Fake Palm Oil
Palm oil, a product of palm fruits predominant in the eastern part of Nigeria serves both domestic and industrial uses. Domestically, every household in the country largely consumes palm oil as it is so significant in almost every cooking. It’s nutritious, medicinal and rich in vitamin A, etc.
It’s also a good antidote and antibiotic in the treatment of wounds, and a fine physiotherapy material in handling bone dislocation. When combined with some herbs, it provides wonderful solutions for some health challenges.
It has high viscosity and reacts to temperature. It mixes and colours foods properly and gives it background taste and quality; and does not wash easily in water without soap due to the viscosity. In spite of daily consumption, it has no side effect.
Palm oil is also a good industrial material. It is used in the production of soap, cosmetics, etc. The above stated values and characteristics of palm oil, just to mention a few, result only when it is in good or pure original state. A good quality palm oil is produced from mature and ripe palm fruits; unfortunately, a reasonable percentage of palm oil available in the country’s markets today is far from pure original palm oil. And this is ignorantly consumed by the public.
When the writer first stumbled on this fake product, he thought it was incidental as no right thinking person would toy with such significant and massively consumed product in the name of making money, but was stunned when his findings in many markets in some states revealed that the fake palm oil has been in circulation for a long time now.
This product is a bit difficult to differentiate from the original palm oil as it has almost the same colour but slightly different in taste and scent, and lacks all the values/characteristics of pure palm oil stated above. It does not mix properly in liquid foods either hot or cold as it is found floating and gives no palm oil flavor or quality even as it appears so oil-red concentrated.
On intense inquiry, the writer learned that the fake product is produced by mixing a pigment of oil-red material with a little quantity of palm oil to multiply. The quantity of palm oil in the mixture determines the grade of the product. Thus, you find ‘first original’ and ‘second original’, all circulating as pure original palm oil in the country’s markets. And that which started at a very obscure angle has now blossomed to an alarming rate and seriously threatens the palm oil market.
With this product in existence and the alarming rate of its circulation, it holds that almost every inhabitant of this country who uses palm oil might have ignorantly consumed it, especially during the period of acute palm oil scarcity. The extent of damages to health in consuming this fake product cannot be over-emphasised. Perhaps the advent of stubborn ailments, in recent time, that defy known diagnosis and treatments, creating poor health conditions leading to loss of lives and, conjectural, blamed on modern food condiments may not be far from the consumption of this fake product.
What is the cause of inadequate palm oil supply impelling the incidence of adulteration? Before the civil war, palm oil was the major revenue earner for the country’s economy. This prompted the massive production of palm fruits and location of the relative oil mill facilities mostly in the eastern part of the country. This provided enough quality palm oil for both local consumption and export. The issue of fake palm oil then was undreamt of.
But shortly after the civil war, quickly followed by the crude oil boom, the palm oil sector of the economy was inadvertently and sadly ignored by the federal authorities that paid premium attention to crude oil production as it overtook palm oil in revenue generation for the economy.
Consequently, the large scale production of palm oil slumped. As the federal authorities no longer showed any meaningful interest in palm fruit production, palm plantation owners and other relevant stakeholders reviewed their interests and abandoned the business to the mercy of few local palm oil subsistent producers who felt not opportuned for the easy and fast paying office jobs occasioned by the crude oil boom. The unfortunate effect of this is that a virile and vast window of job employment and wealth creation in the country was ignorantly closed, giving rise to the unfortunate and numerous vices, including palm oil adulteration today.
As it is now, government at all levels should, as a matter of great concern, investigate, identify, track and eliminate as quickly as possible, the continued existence and circulation of this fake palm oil in the nation’s markets. The general public should be officially alerted and sensitized on this product.
The federal, state and local governments should, as of necessity, review their policies on agriculture with a view to revamping the moribund palm fruit production by setting up and encouraging, as before, palm plantations where possible. Palm oil mills should also be located at strategic areas in the palm fruit zones of the respective local government areas in the country to ensure standard and quality palm oil production. The local palm oil producers should be mobilized and encouraged with financial assistance and modern equipment in palm oil production. This would go a long way in tackling palm oil adulteration and reopen the vast and potent window of job/wealth creation while also boosting the nation’s economy.
By: Ukutumoren Uktumoren PH
The events that unfolded in Abuja on Tuesday November 11, 2025 between the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Chief Nyesom Wike and a detachment of soldiers guarding a disputed property, led by Adams Yerima, a commissioned Naval Officer, may go down as one of the defining images of Nigeria’s democratic contradictions. It was not merely a quarrel over land. It was a confrontation between civil authority and the military legacy that still hovers over our national life.
Nyesom Wike, fiery and fearless as always, was seen on video exchanging words with a uniformed officer who refused to grant him passage to inspect a parcel of land alleged to have been illegally acquired. The minister’s voice rose, his temper flared, and the soldier, too, stood his ground, insisting on his own authority. Around them, aides, security men, and bystanders watched, stunned, as two embodiments of the Nigerian state clashed in the open.
The images spread fast, igniting debates across drawing rooms, beer parlours, and social media platforms. Some hailed Wike for standing up to military arrogance; others scolded him for perceived disrespect to the armed forces. Yet beneath the noise lies a deeper question about what sort of society we are building and whether power in Nigeria truly understands the limits of its own reach.
It is tragic that, more than two decades into civil rule, the relationship between the civilian arm of government and the military remains fragile and poorly understood. The presence of soldiers in a land dispute between private individuals and the city administration is, by all civic standards, an aberration. It recalls a dark era when might was right, and uniforms conferred immunity against accountability.
Wike’s anger, even if fiery, was rooted in a legitimate concern: that no individual, however connected or retired, should deploy the military to protect personal interests. That sentiment echoes the fundamental democratic creed that the law is supreme, not personalities. If his passion overshot decorum, it was perhaps a reflection of a nation weary of impunity.
On the other hand, the soldier in question is a symbol of another truth: that discipline, respect for order, and duty to hierarchy are ingrained in our armed forces. He may have been caught between conflicting instructions one from his superiors, another from a civilian minister exercising his lawful authority. The confusion points not to personal failure but to institutional dysfunction.
It is, therefore, simplistic to turn the incident into a morality play of good versus evil.
*********”**** What happened was an institutional embarrassment. Both men represented facets of the same failing system a polity still learning how to reconcile authority with civility, law with loyalty, and service with restraint.
In fairness, Wike has shown himself as a man of uncommon courage. Whether in Rivers State or at the FCTA, he does not shy away from confrontation. Yet courage without composure often feeds misunderstanding. A public officer must always be the cooler head, even when provoked, because the power of example outweighs the satisfaction of winning an argument.
Conversely, soldiers, too, must be reminded that their uniforms do not place them above civilian oversight. The military exists to defend the nation, not to enforce property claims or intimidate lawful authorities. Their participation in purely civil matters corrodes the image of the institution and erodes public trust.
One cannot overlook the irony: in a country where kidnappers roam highways and bandits sack villages, armed men are posted to guard contested land in the capital. It reflects misplaced priorities and distorted values. The Nigerian soldier, trained to defend sovereignty, should not be drawn into private or bureaucratic tussles.
Sycophancy remains the greatest ailment of our political culture. Many of those who now cheer one side or the other do so not out of conviction but out of convenience. Tomorrow they will switch allegiance. True patriotism lies not in defending personalities but in defending principles. A people enslaved by flattery cannot nurture a culture of justice.
The Nigerian elite must learn to submit to the same laws that govern the poor. When big men fence off public land and use connections to shield their interests, they mock the very constitution they swore to uphold. The FCT, as the mirror of national order, must not become a jungle where only the powerful can build.
The lesson for Wike himself is also clear: power is best exercised with calmness. The weight of his office demands more than bravery; it demands statesmanship. To lead is not merely to command, but to persuade — even those who resist your authority.
Equally, the lesson for the armed forces is that professionalism shines brightest in restraint. Obedience to illegal orders is not loyalty; it is complicity. The soldier who stands on the side of justice protects both his honour and the dignity of his uniform.
The Presidency, too, must see this episode as a wake-up call to clarify institutional boundaries. If soldiers can be drawn into civil enforcement without authorization, then our democracy remains at risk of subtle militarization. The constitution must speak louder than confusion.
The Nigerian public deserves better than spectacles of ego. We crave leaders who rise above emotion and officers who respect civilian supremacy. Our children must not inherit a nation where authority means shouting matches and intimidation in public glare.
Every democracy matures through such tests. What matters is whether we learn the right lessons. The British once had generals who defied parliament; the Americans once fought over states’ rights; Nigeria, too, must pass through her own growing pains but with humility, not hubris.
If the confrontation has stirred discomfort, then perhaps it has done the nation some good. It forces a conversation long overdue: Who truly owns the state — the citizen or the powerful? Can we build a Nigeria where institutions, not individuals, define our destiny?
As the dust settles, both the FCTA and the military hierarchy must conduct impartial investigations. The truth must be established — not to shame anyone, but to restore order. Where laws were broken, consequences must follow. Where misunderstandings occurred, apologies must be offered.
Let the rule of law triumph over the rule of impulse. Let civility triumph over confrontation. Let governance return to the path of dialogue and procedure.
Nigeria cannot continue to oscillate between civilian bravado and military arrogance. Both impulses spring from the same insecurity — the fear of losing control. True leadership lies in the ability to trust institutions to do their work without coercion.
Those who witnessed the clash saw a drama of two gladiators. One in starched khaki, one in well-cut suit. Both proud, both unyielding. But a nation cannot be built on stubbornness; it must be built on understanding. Power, when it meets power, should produce order, not chaos.
We must resist the temptation to glorify temper. Governance is not warfare; it is stewardship. The citizen watches, the world observes, and history records. How we handle moments like this will define our collective maturity.
The confrontation may have ended without violence, but it left deep questions in the national conscience. When men of authority quarrel in the open, institutions tremble. The people, once again, become spectators in a theatre of misplaced pride.
It is time for all who hold office — civilian or military — to remember that they serve under the same flag. That flag is neither khaki nor political colour; it is green-white-green, and it demands humility.
No victor, no vanquish only a lesson for a nation still learning to govern itself with dignity.
By; King Onunwor
