All The NewsOpinionPerspectivePolitics

CCB vs Saraki: A Destiny Still Threatened

5 Mins read

By Abdulwahaab Oba

In the politics of Nigeria, it is apparent Kwara would have gone completely unheard of, given her place in the political geography of Nigeria but for a few men who have stood over the years and gave Kwara its sense of belonging and pride of place among others in the country. Due largely to the accident of history and location, Kwarans have always had to fight for every place they got in the land because Nigerians from the south-west would not easily accept  us as being a part of them even when we have a large population that share cultural traits and language with them.

The people from what is referred to as the core north, incidentally a platform for derogation when extended to others outside of the scope in reference, would equally not accept a Kwaran who may not be able to speak the Hausa language like them. And within the north-central zone where Kwara currently finds herself, the state is a minority, thus intensifying the need for real struggle to get anything meaningful from the central pot.

It is within this context that I want to intervene in the ongoing face-off between Senate President, Dr. Bukola Saraki and those who are apparently working round the clock to bring him down at all cost.  Saraki, I am sure, is able to defend himself within the legal and constitutional provisions of the land and so I will not dabble into what is before the court of law. What I seek to do here is to draw the attention of my fellow Kwarans to the implications of the battle the senate president is being made to fight currently, particularly as it affects our interest as sons and daughters of the land. But for the likes of Saraki, the way things are in this country, it would have been difficult to hear the name of our state. When I say the likes of Saraki, I am by no means belittling the contributions of other men and women in the state who have risen to positions of prominence in their professions and have therefore made us proud as Kwarans. I recognize the immense contributions of the great house of Sheikh Alimi , whose royal connection and educational achievements earned honour and dignity for our community. The Nda Salatys, the Belgores, the Sheikhs Kamaldeens, the Adam Al-Iloris and a host of others who have all contributed to bring dignity to our community.

On the political tuff, we cannot but remember our worthy ambassadors and voices at the national scene like the Sanni Okins, the Yahaya Madawakis, the Saadu Alanamus, the Buhari Eduns, the Sule Maintos, the Adebimpe Oniyeyes, the J. A. Olawoyins, the Awoniyis, the Abdulmalik Attahs , the Daniyans and a host of others too numerous to mention in this space. May Almighty God grant eternal rest. Yet, without evocation, no one can deny the giant contributions the Saraki political dynasty has made to the process of ‘announcing Kwara’ in Nigeria. Some might not have liked his face while he was alive, but no one would deny that any time the name of the late Dr. Olusola Saraki was mentioned, the next thing would be the name of Kwara and vice versa. His was a singular contribution that stamped the name of Kwara firmly on the political geography of Nigeria.

Like his father, the senate President has also sacrificed enormously to enthrone his current party in power. He willingly put aside his presidential ambition, to which he was and is entitled under the law, in order to ensure that his party had a good showing in the last general election. And now, the hounds are after him, seeking to tear him apart. And that is where my concept of a threatened destiny derives from. I am not referring to Bukola Saraki’s destiny, actually. Rather, I am making reference to the collective destiny of concerned Kwarans who can understand and see an attempt to silence a key figure that has given us voice in a comity of states where we are a minority and we have had to struggle to get anything at all. If they succeed in pulling Saraki down, God forbid, the implications are that we would have lost our voice and authority as a people in this nation.

It is our collective destiny that is being threatened. The people of Lagos understood this type of threat when their leader, Senator Bola Tinubu faced a similar attack in the days of former President Goodluck Jonathan. And because they understood that it was more of politics and power struggle to silence the man who is no doubt the voice of the state and paved the way for its conquest by political hawks, they mobilised and rose to rally round the then beleaguered Tinubu. At the last count, there were over 60 senior lawyers that accompanied the man to court. Though he was ducked but he remained unbruised. He received a heroic welcome in Lagos and other western states.

Despite Tinubu’s  labelling as the Lion of Bourdillon arising from his alleged stupendious wealth, by the Jonathan campaign organisation, majority of Lagosians stood by Jagaban and voted massively for APC. They realised early enough that you can not throw the “bad” guy to be devoured by the lion. I  expect nothing less from our people. Our legal luminaries,  the Alfas and pastors all should rise to rescue our son and voice. Our mothers and fathers must not sleep for their son and our destiny is threatened. Parents praying for the success and progress of their children should not wish others fall. Youths who want to grow and succeed should pray and support those who have grown and succeeded. Kwara can not be like Ondo without a national voice.

I  recollect, Osun state governor, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola mobilising a large crowd of supporters from his state, largely because he too understood the threat to the destiny of the Yoruba people by the then political trial of Asiwaju Tinubu. Ajumobi and Amosun did the same thing for their idol and benefactor. The entire Yoruba nation stood for Tinubu.

We cannot do less, in Kwara. We must first of all, rise up and pray. Prayer is one of the effective weapons we have as a people to handle situations like this. And next to prayer, we must mobilise ourselves through every legal and acceptable judicial means to protect this voice of our collective destiny from being silenced by another form of impunity. In the south, we are disadvantaged by reason of our location on the map of Nigeria. In the north we are disadvantaged by reason of our tongue even though we sit next to them and share the same faith. We cannot afford to go into another form of colonisation where we can not determine what we want but someone from outside will be handing over crumbs to us. No! Where are our legal luminaries? Where are our religious leaders? I can not name names here but I expect them to begin fervent prayers to the Almighty to turn this tide of the adversary back on them. That is the least we can do, for a man whose destiny is link to ours.

Do not forget; we castigated Alimi Razak, Muhammad Lawal, Babatunde Idiagbon and lost what would have been derivable from their heroism. Why should we always rejoice at the perceived downfall of others? Sheikh Alimi , Sheikh Nda Salaty, Sheikh Belgore, Sheikh Kamaldeen, Sheikh Adam Abdullahi must not rise from their sleep before we do the needful. Our people must remember “teni begi loju, igi aruwe”. 

Wahab Oba is the Chief Press Secretary to the Governor of Kwara State, Dr AbdulFatah Ahmed, he first published the piece in September, 2015 at the peak of the trial of Dr Abubakar Bukola Saraki by the CCT.

   

About author
Time Nigeria is a modern and general interest Magazine with its Headquarters in Abuja. The Magazine has a remarkable difference in editorial philosophy and goals, it adheres strictly to the ethics of Journalism by using the finest ethos of the profession to promote peace among citizens; identifying and harnessing the nation’s vast resources; celebrating achievements of government agencies, individuals, groups and corporate organizations and above all, repositioning Nigeria for the needed growth and development. Time Nigeria gives emphasis to places and issues that have not been given adequate attention by others. The Magazine is national in outlook and is currently being read and patronized both in print and on our vibrant and active online platform (www.timenigeria.com).
Articles
Related posts
All The NewsCover StoryNewsPolitics

Musa Tsoken Congratulates Kalu on Daily Times’ Lawmaker of the Year Award

1 Mins read
The National Coordinator of the Asiwaju Again Renewed Hope Support Initiative 2027 and National President of the APC Initiative for Good Governance…
Abuja FileDevelopmentEconomyEnergyFinanceInside LagosOpinionPerspective

The Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: Why Capital Still Fails to Become Infrastructure

6 Mins read
  By Chidi Nwafor  In October 2023, a Gulf sovereign wealth fund quietly closed a $2 billion allocation to global infrastructure, earmarked in part for emerging-market energy and transport assets. The announcement drew the usual applause: another sign, commentators said, that institutional capital was finally waking up to the infrastructure opportunity in the Global South. Eighteen months later, less than a tenth of that allocation had actually left the fund’s balance sheet. Not because the mandate had changed. Not because the fund had lost appetite. According to two people familiar with the portfolio, the constraint was simpler and more uncomfortable: there were not enough investable projects to put the money into. This is not a story about a reluctant investor. It is a story about capital that wants to move, cannot find enough places willing and able to receive it in a form it can underwrite, and quietly waits instead. Multiply that fund by the hundreds of pension schemes, sovereign wealth vehicles, commercial banks and infrastructure funds now carrying dedicated allocations for emerging-market infrastructure, and a pattern emerges that rarely makes it into a headline: the world is not short of capital for infrastructure. It has capital in historic abundance, sitting adjacent to a historic infrastructure gap, unable to cross the distance between the two. The Comfortable Explanation  The explanation on offer at every major infrastructure summit is a familiar one. Global infrastructure investment needs run into the tens of trillions of dollars over the coming decade; committed capital falls well short; therefore, the problem is one of insufficient funding, and the solution is more of it: more pledges, more blended-finance facilities, more climate funds, more multilateral capital increases. It is a comfortable explanation because it assigns responsibility clearly to governments who under-fund, institutions who under-commit, and it offers a clean remedy: raise more. It is also, on close inspection, not what the evidence shows. Pension funds globally hold trillions in assets under management with explicit infrastructure allocations that remain structurally underweight, not because trustees have rejected the asset class but because deal flow meeting their risk and governance thresholds has not materialised at the pace their mandates assume. Sovereign wealth funds report the same pattern. Commercial banks with dedicated project finance desks describe pipelines that look full at the term-sheet stage and thin dramatically by financial close. Development finance institutions, whose entire purpose is to absorb risk that commercial capital will not, routinely report that their binding constraint is not capital adequacy but the volume of bankable transactions their teams can originate and structure in a given year. None of this fits the scarcity narrative. All of it fits a different one. Availability Is Not Deployability  Capital availability and capital deployability are not the same condition, and the conflation of the two is doing real damage to how the world thinks about the infrastructure gap. Availability asks whether money exists somewhere with a mandate that could, in principle, be pointed at infrastructure. Deployability asks something much narrower and much harder: whether a specific project, at a specific moment, has been engineered, structured, documented and de-risked to the point where an investment committee can approve it without exception. The first condition is met, overwhelmingly, across nearly every category of capital that matters to infrastructure. The second is met by only a small fraction of the projects competing for it. The result is a market that looks, from the outside, like a financing gap, and functions, from the inside, like a conversion problem: an abundance of capital on one side, an abundance of infrastructure need on the other, and an underbuilt set of mechanisms in between capable of turning one into the other at any meaningful scale. Where the Conversion Breaks  The break does not happen at the ends of the process. It happens in the middle, in the unglamorous sequence of work that turns a plausible concept into an instrument a fiduciary can sign. A promising transmission project needs a feasibility study rigorous enough to survive institutional scrutiny rather than optimistic enough to attract early interest. It needs offtake arrangements that hold up under real counterparty and currency risk, not the counterparty risk assumed in a base case. It needs environmental and social documentation calibrated to the standards of the institutions being asked to fund it, not the standards of the jurisdiction hosting it. It needs a legal and commercial structure that allocates risk in ways a commercial lender, not only a development financier, will accept. It needs a sponsor capable of executing what has been proposed, not merely capable of proposing it. Each of these is ordinary project finance discipline. None of it is exotic, and in mature infrastructure markets it happens as a matter of course, absorbed into systems built over decades: specialist advisers, standard-form contracts, established procurement norms, deep pools of transaction expertise. What is missing in the markets where the infrastructure gap is largest is not the standard itself but the machinery that meets it. Projects arrive at investment committees with ambition intact and preparation incomplete, and that gap is treated, again and again, as an individual project’s failure rather than what it actually is: a structural absence in the systems responsible for producing investable transactions at scale. The Missing Middle  This is the Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: the institutional architecture that sits between capital that wants to move and infrastructure that needs building, and whose incompleteness explains far more of the global infrastructure gap than any shortfall in committed funds. It consists of project preparation facilities able to fund feasibility and structuring work before commercial viability has been proven. Transaction advisers capable of building deals that satisfy development mandates and commercial return thresholds at once, rather than treating the two as separate constituencies to be managed sequentially. Risk-sharing and guarantee instruments that convert political, regulatory and currency risk into something a commercial balance sheet can underwrite. Aggregation platforms that bundle smaller, individually sub-scale projects into portfolios large enough to justify institutional transaction costs. Standardised documentation that reduces the bespoke legal cost of every new deal. And coordination across ministries, regulators and financiers robust enough that a technically sound project does not die in bureaucratic sequencing after the money has already been found. None of these are new ideas in isolation. What is missing is their assembly into a coherent system, deliberately funded and institutionally accountable, rather than scattered across donor-funded pilots that end when the grant does. The African Dimension  Africa makes this dynamic unusually visible, and consequently offers an unusually clear opportunity to correct it. The continent’s infrastructure financing need, by any measure, is vast. Less understood is that the shortfall is disproportionately one of preparation rather than capital. Nigerian gas-to-power, off-grid solar and mini-grid developers have each demonstrated that individual projects can clear the bankability bar; what has not emerged is systemic pipeline scale, a steady stream of comparably prepared projects large enough to absorb the capital already circling the sector. The pattern repeats, with local variation, from grid infrastructure in East Africa to transport corridors in West Africa. Interested capital is rarely the scarce input. Investment-ready projects are. The Global Comparison  Mature markets solved this problem gradually and mostly invisibly, through decades of institution-building that predates the current infrastructure conversation: specialist project finance units inside banks, standardised PPP frameworks, established regulatory playbooks, deep benches of transaction lawyers and engineers who move between deals rather than between one-off assignments. Emerging and frontier markets are not being asked to meet a lower standard. They are being asked to meet the same standard without having built the same machinery, and then being told, when deals fail to close, that the problem is insufficient funding….
Abuja FileAll The NewsCover StoryEducationEntrepreneurshipFeaturesNews

2026/2027 Admission Begins @ AAT University: Where Modern Facilities, Academic Excellence and Global Citizenship Meet

7 Mins read
Why Abdulrasaq Abubakar Toyin University is emerging as a compelling destination for the next generation of Nigerian undergraduates By Abdulrahman Aliagan For…
Stay on the loop!

Subscribe to our latest news.

Leave a Reply

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com