Opinion

Should Amnesty Programme End In 2015?

Published

13 years ago

February 4, 2013

The Special Adviser to President Goodluck Jonathan on Niger Delta, Kingsley Kuku, a few days ago disclosed that the Presidential Amnesty Programme started in 2008 to empower ex-militants from the Niger Delta region will end in 2015. Is it right or wrong for the programme to end at the stated period? Our correspondent, Calista Ezeaku and photographer, Dele Obinna went to town to seek answers to the question from the public.

Excerpts:

Mr Zephaniah Egbufor-Businessman

I feel the programme should even end earlier than 2015. My reason is that by now the people in charge of this programme and the government should be able to assess how far they have gone over the years. All the money they have spent on these boys, are they getting the desired result? They should be able to assess the impact of this programme and know whether they should be spending that money or not. I heard that some people including women were protesting their exclusion from the programme. There is no way everybody in the Niger Delta would be part of the programme. I think what government should do is to provide social amenities for the Niger Delta region. They should provide things that will have positive impact on the daily life of everybody. They should go to some key underdeveloped areas and improve the standard of living of those people.

Apart from that, they should look for a way of making sure that the boys that have taken part in this programme are ready to start making a living for themselves. It’s not just about spending the money, some of them when you give them that money they don’t do anything with it. They first take it like salary. It shouldn’t be that way. If you place them on monthly salary it means you are encouraging other people to want to be militants.

So they should be able to see how they cannot encourage people to be jobless. They should encourage people to make use of the brains and achieve something. They should help these boys to be self sufficient. Fine, the trainings have been okay but this time, they should be able to assess what positive impact the programme has made on the people. There should be a way of ensuring that these boys give back to the communities in the Niger Delta where they come from.

Mrs Perpetua Muruako – Applicant

I’m fully in support of the programme ending in 2015. Many of them were sent to different countries overseas to learn one thing or the other and when they came back they had nothing to offer. They just depend on the monthly allowance given them by the government. So they are supposed to use the knowledge they acquired over there, to help the society instead being liabilities to government. I agree, some of them that were sent abroad for studies or whatever are serious but some are not serious at all. They came back with nothing. So let’s see the result of the money spent so far before we start talking of adding more years.

However, I am of the opinion that in order to prevent the occurrence of agitation when this programme ends in 2015, government should really consider how to help the people of the Niger Delta. They should empower their youth, provide them with free education, good roads, good water and what have you.

Hon Chike Chinwo – Politician

Personally, I will say if government says they will end the programme in 2015, there should have been an adequate arrangement to that effect. Whether the programme should end in 2015 or not is not the issue. The question is, is the amnesty actually affecting the people for whom the amnesty is declared or are there people using it to sap the government? This is because often a time we have read through the media that some persons are either involving those people who are not militants or the freedom fighters as the case may be. Therefore we are calling on government to actually investigate properly if those people who are concerned are actually the people benefiting from the programme. If they are not, then there is need for the extension of the time. And if actually they are trying to stop it by 2015, they should make adequate preparations for them so that those insurgences would not rise up again. I heard some of the people who were sent out for training, on coming back were left alone. I heard some of them are crying. So I think if you actually trained persons, at the end of the training you have to equip them. You have to mobilise them or look out for jobs for them to do to sustain themselves. If you just abandon them without nothing, they will go back to the creeks .

If these boys are not empowered, they might start the agitation again in 2015. Government should also look into the reasons for the agitation in the first place and if they find out the problem, then the problem should be solved, the people should be compensated. Just like what is happening in Ogoni land now, the UNEP report recommended that the place should be cleaned up. But up till now, nothing has been done. And if the people come up again to demand for their rights, we will start talking.

So, government is not helping us. if they say they want to do something for the people, they should implement it to the letter so that at the end of the day we’ll have a relaxed mind. So the amnesty programme should be extended to a reasonable time when people must have been acquinted with it and gained from the programme.

Engr. Edward Worgu- Off shore Engineer

For me, if federal government said they had a package for the ex-militants and they want to end it all of a sudden, for me it is not carried. They should ensure that everything they have promised these guys is in place, because if you suddenly stop the amnesty programme, it will generate another problem.

Come to think of it, you are giving amnesty to most of these people that are not even graduates, and you see them being paid and given contracts, good! May be that is done to make peace and all that but what about the graduates? What about the graduate that finished school and he is not doing anything?.

He will also want to carry gun to enable him benefit from the monthly allowance. So things have to be generally spelt out for people to know or do the right thing. You cannot just say amnesty programme will end in 2015 when most of them have not been settled. Some of them are still roaming the streets. And if you must know, some of the things that had piped low for sometime, are now coming up again, so much incidents now happening here and there.

So, for me, amnesty programme should not end in 2015. The programme should carry on and then they should get a proper medium of managing these militants and the graduates. Another thing, I will tell you is that most people that wrote their names for the amnesty programme are not really the ex-militants. This needs to be checkmated. There is also need to deal with the root causes of all these problems. How did amnesty programme come about? Have the problems that led to agitation been tackled? Niger Delta needs to be overhauled. Amenities should be put in communities, people should be given jobs. If you come to Rivers State, most people are not working, jobless graduates everywhere. So things should be put in place. They (government) should go to all these companies in the state, know how many of the people working there, are Niger Delta people and follow it up. If you go to some companies they will say, “we need graduates”. It’s a lie. They train people on the job. It’s not always about the certificate thing. They should employ the people and train them on the job and all these crimes will be reduced.

So, for me, I know the amnesty programme will come to an end one day but before then, things have to be put in place. These boys need to be engaged. They say that an idle man is the devil’s workshop. When you are idle mind will want to acquaint yourself with something that will fetch you good money. So, they should be involved in one thing or the other.

You know, honestly this amnesty programme has been a success, though not hundred per cent. Some of the ex-militants have truly repented. It was like a crusade that helped people repent to become better citizens

Ikenna Obineche – Journalist

I don’t know if these boys have actually gotten what they need from the federal government vis-à-vis empowering them, providing jobs for them. So for me, the amesty programme should be extended beyond 2015. If they end the programme in 2015, most of these boys will be idle and they might be tempoted to take up arms. So, I’m not in support of the programme ending in 2015. I’m not saying the programme should last forever. But let it be a gradual process. Let it be extended till the next 10years. These boys, have been hurt. You know what they were fighting for. Their lands were taken, their farm lands were destroyed, their rivers were polluted and all that. So the boys really need to be balanced financially. There should be a psychological healing too.

Apart from empowering the boys, government also has to provide the rural communities in the Niger Delta with infrastructures that will make their lives more meaningful. They should actually develop these oil bearing communities. If you go to some of these places like Oloibiri, it is a mess. I mean, check out other oil producing countries, check out a place like Texas, USA which is like the heart of the oil producing industry. Check out how developed Texas is. there is no way you can compare other oil producing countries with the oil communities in the Niger Delta. So, serious attention should be paid to these communities and the people there-the youth, women, graduates and all that.

Opinion

Time and Season Can Tell

Published

3 hours ago

February 16, 2026

The Tide

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

Opinion

Why Adaeze Deserves A Second Chance

Published

3 hours ago

February 16, 2026

The Tide

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

Opinion

Empowering Youth Through Agriculture

Published

1 week ago

February 9, 2026

The Tide

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