The Obono-Obla

17/03/2026

The World at the Brink: From Statesmanship to Fragmentation

Okoi Obono Obla
March 17, 2026

The World at the Brink: From Statesmanship to Fragmentation-

Conflict broke out between Afghanistan and Pakistan in October 2025, escalating into a full-scale war on 21 February 2026. Pakistan launched airstrikes and cross-border operations, claiming to target terrorist hideouts, while Afghanistan accused Pakistan of striking civilian facilities. The humanitarian toll has been severe, with thousands displaced and hundreds killed.

On 16 March 2026, Pakistan attacked Afghanistan again, bombing a mental health rehabilitation home in Kabul. More than 400 people were killed in the strike. Pakistan maintained that the facility was harboring terrorists responsible for attacks on its territory, while Afghanistan condemned the attack as a massacre of civilians.

The world today is rife with conflicts, simmering and convulsing across regions, threatening to engulf the globe. Unlike the post–Second World War era, the present moment seems bereft of true statesmen capable of steering humanity toward peace and reconstruction. The war between Ukraine and Russia, ongoing since 2021, shows no sign of resolution.

The leaders who managed World War II and initiated normalization, reconstruction, and the creation of the post-war global order are remembered as the “Big Three” of the Allied powers, alongside other figures:
– Franklin D. Roosevelt (USA): Architect of the “Grand Alliance” and a key designer of the United Nations.
– Harry S. Truman (USA): Oversaw final victory, authorized the atomic bombings, and launched the Marshall Plan.
– Winston Churchill (UK): Galvanized British resistance and shaped wartime conferences.
– Clement Attlee (UK): Implemented post-war reforms and managed decolonization.
– Joseph Stalin (USSR): Directed Soviet victory on the Eastern Front and expanded Soviet influence.
– Charles de Gaulle (France): Restored France’s standing and re-established it as a major power.
– General Dwight D. Eisenhower (USA): Supreme Allied Commander in Europe and later NATO’s first commander.
– General Douglas MacArthur (USA): Oversaw Japan’s occupation and democratic transition.
– George C. Marshall (USA): Introduced the Marshall Plan, stabilizing Europe’s recovery.

In contrast, the present United States–Israel–Iran war is broadening. Iran has been striking countries hosting U.S. bases—Qatar, Bahrain, Jordan, the UAE, and Kuwait—as well as U.S.-allied Oman and Saudi Arabia. Meanwhile, Israel and Hezbollah remain locked in fierce confrontation.

It is clear that the world has descended into chaos, driven by the shift from multilateralism to unipolarism. This transformation has rendered the United Nations increasingly ineffective, a mere paper tiger. What is urgently needed is a return to multilateralism, cooperation, and respect for international legality, as far as possible, to prevent the collapse of global order.

Conclusion: The absence of visionary leadership today contrasts sharply with the post–World War II era, when statesmen forged institutions and frameworks that stabilized the world. Unless a renewed spirit of cooperation emerges, the current conflagrations risk spiraling into a global catastrophe.

24/12/2025

Reflections on the Life and Passing of Senator Peter Nwoboshi:

I am saddened to hear the news of the death of Senator Peter Nwoboshi a few days ago. I offer my heartfelt condolences and pray to Almighty God to grant his soul eternal rest and forgiveness. Senator Nwoboshi’s death is a stark reminder of the transience and fleeting nature of life. Indeed, he reportedly emphasized shortly before his passing the need for us, while alive, to rein in our excessive propensity to acquire material possessions out of covetousness and greed—especially when privileged to hold positions of public trust that could otherwise be used to change the trajectory of humanity for the better.

My path and that of Senator Nwoboshi crossed in an unpleasant and uneventful manner in 2019 when I was Chairman of the Special Presidential Investigation Panel for Recovery of Public Property. Acting on an intelligence report, the Panel investigated the massive estate and landed properties he had accumulated during his tenure as Chairman of the PDP in Delta State, Chairman of the Senate Committee on NDDC, Special Adviser to the Governor of Delta State, Commissioner of Agriculture and Special Duties, and Senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

The Panel was empowered to investigate public officials living beyond their legitimate earnings and in possession of assets they could not lawfully explain. Upon discreet investigation, the Panel was able to locate and identify with accuracy the properties and assets Senator Nwoboshi had acquired during his public service. Consequently, the Panel filed an action for interim forfeiture of these properties at the Federal High Court, Abuja.

The investigation revealed that Senator Nwoboshi failed to declare almost 80% of his assets and did not truthfully disclose them in his Code of Conduct Assets Declaration, which every public official is required to file within three months of assuming office and upon leaving office.

The case was assigned to Honourable Justice Taiwo Taiwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja Judicial Division. On July 2, 2019, Justice Taiwo ordered the interim forfeiture of the assets and placed a post-no-debit order on several bank accounts linked to Senator Nwoboshi. According to the ruling, 14 properties and 22 bank accounts were to be temporarily forfeited to the Federal Government.

Aside from sealing the properties, the Panel also directed four banks to block Senator Nwoboshi from operating the accounts pursuant to the Court’s order.

Some of the properties sealed by the Panel included: Summing Electrical Company located at Asagba along Asaba Airport Road, Asaba; PON Filling Station along Asaba Airport Road, Asaba; and a multi-billion-naira estate under construction at Maryam Babangida Road, Asaba. Others were Cartage Cinema at Okpana Road beside Rain Oil Petrol Station, Asaba; Newbridge Filling Station along Airport Road, Warri; and a house at No. 8 Monu Olanrewaju Crescent, GRA, Asaba. In Lagos, Guinea House at No. 27 Marina Road, Apapa, and a multi-billion-naira building at 41 Burma Road, Apapa, were sealed. In Abuja, House No. 25, 6932 Road, Adban Estate, Gwarimpa, and Plot 3011B Kuranakh Close, Maitama, were also sealed.

The court ordered that Senator Nwoboshi or any interested party should, within 30 days, show cause why the assets should not be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government. The case received extensive media coverage, including a report by Channels Television on July 15, 2019, and was adjourned to October 8, 2019, for further hearing.

On August 11, 2019, a terse announcement was made via radio, television, and print media by the Secretary to the Government of the Federation that I had been suspended as Chairman of the Panel. Following my departure, the Federal Government directed the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, in collaboration with the Solicitor General and Permanent Secretary of the Federal Ministry of Justice, to take over all the Panel’s cases. Later, rumours swirled that the Attorney General compromised the cases initiated by the Panel and returned all assets previously seized under interim forfeiture orders to their original owners.

Senator Peter Nwoboshi’s passing is a solemn reminder of the impermanence of life and the enduring importance of integrity in public service. May his soul rest in peace.

@ Okoi Obono-Obla

16/11/2025

Reforming Section 84 of the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act, 2004: Restoring Faith in Nigeria’s Rule of Law:

As I was rummaging through Facebook, searching for what might animate or captivate my interest early this Sunday morning, 17th November 2025, after suddenly waking from a deep slumber, I saw something that quickly reawakened and configured my deadened brain and excited me ceaselessly and endlessly. It concerns the move in the Nigerian Senate to amend—or progressively change—one of the most retrogressive and backward laws in Nigeria, which I have long considered to underscore the neocolonial state of many of our laws. These were created when Nigeria was a colonial state, shaped and influenced by the 19th‑century Victorian era in England, imported wholesale, and imposed on us even though they were out of tune with our historical and cultural realities.

Any law that fails to reflect or embody the social and cultural ethos and norms of a people is not law but something else. Law is organic and must always conform to prevailing conditions—political, social, economic, and historical—experienced by a given society or community.

The Senate is presently considering amending Section 84 of the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, which makes it mandatory for someone who is the beneficiary of a judgment involving money to apply for and obtain the consent of the Attorney‑General of a State or the Attorney‑General of the Federation where the judgment debtor is a government agency, parastatal, commission, or statutory body. How can we have such a retrogressive, backward, and anachronistic legislation in the corpus of statutes in our country—which is a constitutional democracy and proclaims equality of everyone before the law? Why should someone who has obtained a judgment after a hard battle in court be subjected to applying for and obtaining the consent of the Attorney‑General of the State or the Attorney‑General of the Federation before he can enforce such a judgment?

In reality, such applications for consent from hapless judgment creditors are usually refused or even ignored by the Attorney‑General of a State or the Attorney‑General of the Federation. As a result—frustratingly and depressingly—judgments against the State or its agencies are never enforced, and the judgment creditors find themselves in a state of limbo, left to lick their wounds. This is one of the reasons why most Nigerians do not believe in, or have confidence in, the ideals of the rule of law, or even go to court when their rights are infringed upon by government; they would rather resort to self‑help.

I recall vividly that on 18th May 2010, my clients obtained a judgment delivered by Honourable Justice Michael Edem (as he then was) of the High Court of Justice in Ugep, Yakurr Local Government Area. The court awarded #200, 010,000.00 (Two Hundred Million, and Ten Thousand Naira) against the Government of Cross River State for land acquired in the early 1970s without compensation. I was counsel in that matter. Yet, fifteen years later, the judgment remains unenforced. Of the eight plaintiffs, six have died, and the government’s conscience has not been stirred to pay the debt. Ironically, this same government preaches obedience to the law while being its greatest violator.

Another case I handled involved a Nigerian citizen victimized by the now‑disbanded SARS. Arrested in Calabar, he was taken to Lagos, subjected to torture, false imprisonment, and unlawful detention for nearly a year. The Federal High Court in Calabar awarded ₦20 million in damages and ordered the Police to return vehicles seized from his car mart. Yet, to this day, the judgment remains unenforced. Enforcement against the Police is as difficult as a camel passing through the eye of a needle, thanks to Section 84’s shield.

Gladly, the Senate, on Thursday, 13th November 2025, approved the second reading of a bill to amend the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act, aiming to remove the requirement for Attorney‑General consent before enforcing monetary judgments against government agencies. Senator Idiat Adebule, representing Lagos West, who led the debate, rightly described the law as “manifestly outdated and fundamentally disconnected from present realities.” The amendment also proposes digital service of process and streamlined enforcement mechanisms, aligning Nigeria’s legal framework with modern judicial and economic realities.

This legislative momentum is reinforced by the recent minority judgment of the Supreme Court of Nigeria in Inspector General of Police v. Eko Ejembi Eko, SAN (SC/CV/268/2021, delivered 24 January 2025). In that case, while the majority upheld Section 84’s consent requirement, the dissenting Justice declared it unconstitutional, holding that it violated Sections 1, 3, 6, and 287 of the 1999 Constitution. The minority opinion emphasized that a judgment that cannot be enforced is justice denied, and that shielding government agencies from accountability undermines the very foundation of the rule of law.

Conclusion:
Section 84 has long served as a shield for state impunity and a sword against citizens’ rights. Amending it will not only honour the memories of those who won judgments they never lived to see enforced; it will restore public faith in the courts, deter governmental lawlessness, and reaffirm that in a constitutional democracy, judgments are not suggestions—they are commands.

Obono-Obla

03/11/2025

A Nigerian constitutional lawyer, Chief Okoi Obono-Obla, has accused US President Donald Trump and sections of the American government of hypocrisy over

02/11/2025

TRAGEDY struck Ekori Community as a 26-year-old man, Samuel Samson Udo, was in allegedly gunned down by suspected cultists during father's wake-keep ceremony.

02/11/2025

The Dangers of America’s Destabilizing Diplomacy:

Because the United States of America has studied us and is aware that we crave and indulge in the hollowness of excessive religiosity, it is deploying its usual arsenal of dubious diplomacy, backed by arrogant militarism, to whip up a frenzy over a fallacious “Christian genocide” narrative—one lacking in rationality, logic, and facts—aimed at destabilizing Nigeria. Unfortunately, some ignorant individuals, especially within the opposition, are celebrating this as if the USA itself is any better.

The threat by the USA to violate Nigeria's territorial sovereignty and integrity under the pretext of protecting its Christian population is a gratuitous attempt to invade and wage war against a peaceful country that has never posed a threat to international peace and security. Nigeria should be left to deal with her internal problems—just as the USA, which has recently experienced mindless gun attacks on churches across its cities and states, has not prompted any foreign country to threaten it with attack.

America has consistently succeeded in destabilizing or sabotaging other countries that fall under its radar whenever they challenge its arrogance and bluff. The USA falsely claimed that Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, possessed weapons of mass destruction and used that as a pretext to actualize its long-standing dream of removing the Iraqi leader and installing a puppet regime. That move backfired, creating multiple problems and paving the way for the rise of radicalized militia groups such as ISIS.

The same strategy was used to destabilize Libya and remove Muammar Gaddafi, resulting in a civil war that has plagued the nation for more than twelve years with no end in sight. I will not forget the Serbian imbroglio, which nearly destabilized Central Europe. Similarly, the USA goaded Ukraine into clashing with Russia, and today Ukraine is left to lick its wounds alone.

America’s cowboy diplomacy, backed by excessive militarism, has recently seen it targeting Venezuela under the guise of waging a “narco-terrorism” war, while the real intent is to topple President Maduro’s regime. Even the Colombian president has come under Washington’s radar. Nor should we forget the tariffs imposed on Canada after it rebuffed America’s subtle quest to treat it as an extension of its territory.

Nigerians must open their eyes and discern that the USA is pushing them toward a breaking point. When the inferno erupts, we will be left abandoned to our own devices—just as history has shown in every other nation America has “helped.”

Conclusion:
True sovereignty demands vigilance and unity. Nigeria must refuse to be manipulated into self-destruction by foreign powers pursuing their own interests under the guise of diplomacy and human rights.

@ Okoi Obono-Obla

15/10/2025

Dr. Okoi Arikpo Egede SAN: A Forgotten National Hero Who Deserves Recognition:

U. Iwara

Dr. Okoi Arikpo Egede, SAN, became a Minister of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in 1951. He was appointed as the Minister of Lands and Surveys that same year, having been selected by the Eastern Nigeria House of Assembly to represent the region in the Central House of Representatives.

Under the Macpherson Constitution, the three regions—Northern, Western, and Eastern—were each allotted four seats in the Central House of Representatives, based in Lagos. Dr. Arikpo was a pioneering intellectual, being the first West African to earn a Doctor of Science degree in Anthropology.

In 1967, Dr. Arikpo was appointed Nigeria’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, a position he held until 1975. During the tragic Nigerian Civil War (1967–1970), the burden of articulating the country’s position to the international community fell on his capable shoulders. He took on the enormous task of explaining the complex nuances of the conflict, lobbying to prevent foreign recognition of Biafra and garnering diplomatic support for Nigeria. He carried out this sensitive and demanding assignment with exceptional brilliance, diligence, and professionalism, ensuring Nigeria's position was well understood and respected on the global stage.

Regrettably, despite his service, there is no street named after him in either the Federal Capital Territory (Abuja) or Lagos—unlike many of his contemporaries, including those who served in ministerial roles from the 1950s up to as recently as 2007.

When President Goodluck Jonathan honoured fifty Nigerians to commemorate the country’s 50th independence anniversary, Dr. Arikpo was conspicuously omitted. I was deeply shocked by this oversight and took it upon myself to write a letter to President Jonathan, urging him to correct this omission. Sadly, the letter was never acknowledged. I also wrote to President Muhammadu Buhari, proposing that the Federal Polytechnic, Ugep, be named in honour of Dr. Arikpo, but that letter too received no acknowledgment.

In my efforts to have a street named after him in Abuja, I personally funded the campaign, only to be unceremoniously suspended from office—a painful outcome for a patriotic cause.

When Donald Duke served as Governor of Cross River State, I wrote to him questioning why the Calabar International Airport was named after Margaret Ekpo, rather than Dr. Okoi Arikpo, who was the Secretary General of the Calabar-Ogoja-Rivers (COR) State movement. From 1953, Dr. Arikpo led the agitation for the creation of COR State out of the defunct Eastern Region—a struggle that eventually bore fruit in 1967 with the creation of the South Eastern and Rivers States. He also played a central role in the creation of Cross River State, which later led to the establishment of Akwa Ibom State in 1988.

To his credit, Donald Duke, a gracious and forward-thinking leader, acknowledged my letter. He agreed to name the old Mercantile Bank building on Calabar Road after Dr. Arikpo, which he did. Unfortunately, successive governments in Cross River State have allowed the building to fall into a state of extreme disrepair.

I therefore implore Governor Bassey Edet Otu to take urgent steps to restore the old Mercantile Bank building, which was originally constructed by Brigadier General Jacob Udoaka Esuene. The building is not only a historical monument but also a symbol of the manilla currency era, once used by the people of the Cross River Basin and parts of the South-Western Province of Cameroon.

Additionally, the Government of Cross River State should make a formal representation to the Federal Government to honour Dr. Okoi Arikpo Egede, SAN, appropriately. His contributions to Nigeria’s development and unity cannot be overstated and deserve proper national recognition.

Finally, I urge the people of Egbizum in Ikpakapit Town, Ugep Urban, Yakurr Local Government Area, to rally and mobilise support for the restoration of Dr. Arikpo’s country home, as featured in your thoughtful post. Community-driven efforts can complement governmental actions to preserve our shared history.

Conclusion:

Dr. Okoi Arikpo Egede SAN was a trailblazer, a patriot, and a diplomatic titan whose legacy has been unjustly neglected. From fighting for state creation, to representing Nigeria on the world stage during one of its darkest hours, his record is both rich and remarkable. It is high time Nigeria—and particularly Cross River State—take deliberate steps to immortalise his name, through infrastructure, institutional naming, and historical preservation. The younger generation deserves to know the giants on whose shoulders they stand.

Thank you once again for spotlighting this national icon.

@ Okoi Obono-Obla

13/10/2025

11/10/2025

Council of State: A Case of Constitutional Clarity, Not Controversy:

I find it quite amusing that some people are trying to make heavy weather of the non-attendance of the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory Administration, Nyesom Wike, at the meeting of the Council of State held on 8 October 2025, during which the decision to appoint the Chairman-designate of the Independent National Electoral Commission, Professor Josiah Ojo Amupitan, was taken.

The truth of the matter is that Nyesom Wike, in his capacity as Minister of the Federal Capital Territory Administration, is not a member of the Council of State.

The membership of the Council of State is clearly provided in Paragraph B of Part 1, Section 5 (a–g) of the Third Schedule to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), as follows:

- (a) The President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as Chairman
- (b) The Vice President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as Deputy Chairman
- (c) All former Presidents and Heads of State of the Federation
- (d) Former Chief Justices of Nigeria
- (e) The Senate President
- (f) The Speaker of the House of Representatives
- (g) All Governors of the States of the Federation
- (h) The Attorney General of the Federation

It is as clear as crystal from the above that Minister Wike, not being among the holders of the offices contemplated by Paragraph B of Part 1, Section 5 (a–g) of the Third Schedule to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (supra), has no business attending the meeting of the Council of State. In fact, it would have amounted to an infraction of the Constitution had he attended any such meeting.

Conclusion:
Rather than stir unnecessary controversy, it is important to understand and respect constitutional boundaries. The Minister’s absence was not only appropriate—it was constitutionally mandated.

@ Okoi Obono-Obla

07/10/2025

The Council of State and the Appointment of INEC Chairman: A Constitutional Reflection:

Today, the Council of State is meeting in Abuja, and I suspect that one of the issues to be discussed is the appointment of a replacement for the outgoing Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

The Council of State is one of the National Executive Bodies established under Section 153(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended). Specifically, Section 153(1)(n) provides for the establishment of the Council of State, while Section 153(1)(f) establishes the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as another executive body under the same constitutional framework.

Furthermore, Part I, Section 6 of the Third Schedule to the Constitution outlines both the composition and advisory responsibilities of the Council of State. According to this provision, the Council comprises:

- The President, who serves as Chairman
- The Vice President
- All former Presidents and former Heads of State of the Federation
- All former Chief Justices of Nigeria
- The President of the Senate
- The Speaker of the House of Representatives
- All State Governors
- The Attorney-General of the Federation
- The Chief Justice of Nigeria

In terms of its responsibilities, the Council of State is constitutionally empowered to advise the President on matters relating to:

- The national population census
- The prerogative of mercy
- The award of national honours
- The appointment of the Chairman and members of INEC, the National Judicial Council, and the National Population Commission
- Any other matter the President may refer to it

Given this constitutional mandate, it is reasonable to anticipate that the Council’s deliberations today may include the nomination or endorsement of a successor to the outgoing INEC Chairman, in line with its advisory role under the Constitution.

Therefore, given the constitutional framework, those who are clamouring for the appointment of a Chairman of INEC through a process different from what the Constitution has laid down miss the point entirely. Where a law has prescribed the procedure or method for doing a thing, any recourse to a different procedure or method is not only improper—it is illegal and unconstitutional. The supremacy of the Constitution must be upheld, and any deviation from its provisions undermines the rule of law and democratic governance.

@ Okoi Obono-Obla

05/10/2025

Electoral Reform and Constitutional Realities: A Critical Appraisal of the ADC Proposal:

I welcome the proposal made by the leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) during its parley with a delegation of the European Union on electoral reforms. The suggestion that the President should be stripped of his constitutional power to appoint the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and that this power be transferred to political parties with at least five members in the National Assembly, is noteworthy.

While I agree with the need to reform INEC and the mode of appointment of its leadership and members, the ADC ought to recognize that its proposal carries significant constitutional implications. These would require an amendment to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).

The procedure for amending the Nigerian Constitution is deliberately arduous, cumbersome, and difficult—as is typical of federal constitutions around the world. Such constitutions are often found in heterogeneous societies where the forces of fissiparous tendencies and the pulls of centripetal and centrifugal forces are constantly at play.

This process demands consensus-building among political parties and leadership at both the national and state levels. For the proposal to scale through the National Assembly, it would require a two-thirds majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, as well as approval from 24 State Houses of Assembly across the country.

The sections of the Constitution that would require amendment or alteration for the ADC’s proposal to succeed include Section 154(1), Paragraphs C and F of Section 6(iv), and Section 14(1)(2) of Part I of the Third Schedule. These provisions vest powers in the President and also empower the Council of State to advise the President on the appointment of members of INEC.

Presently, the ADC has only a few members in the National Assembly and lacks the political clout to forge consensus among other parties, including the APC, which holds nearly two-thirds majorities in both chambers of the National Assembly. Therefore, it seems to me that the ADC’s proposal—no matter how appealing or attractive it may sound—is hollow and amounts to grandstanding, intended to create the impression that it has alternative ideas to transform the country’s electoral system.

Even if the proposal were tabled today before the National Assembly, I doubt it would receive serious consideration, as the Assembly is currently engrossed in its own constitutional amendment proposals initiated by its members several months ago.

Conclusion
While the ADC’s proposal to reform the appointment process of INEC leadership reflects a commendable desire for electoral transparency and independence, it is constrained by the constitutional architecture of Nigeria’s federal system. Without the requisite political leverage and broad-based consensus, such a reform remains aspirational rather than actionable. True transformation of our electoral system demands not just bold ideas, but the political will and strategic coalition-building necessary to navigate the rigors of constitutional amendment.

@ Okoi Obono-Obla