Lessons from the Catholic Bishops’ Visit to Tinubu, by Boniface Ihiasota 

The recent visit of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu at the Presidential Villa was more than a ceremonial engagement. It became one of the clearest illustrations yet of the widening gap between official optimism and the daily realities confronting millions of Nigerians. The discussions that followed—and the public reactions they generated—have once again underscored the indispensable role of religious institutions in shaping national conversations on governance, accountability and social justice.

Led by the President of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria, Archbishop Matthew Man-Oso Ndagoso, the bishops used the opportunity to raise concerns over insecurity, economic hardship, unemployment and the general welfare of Nigerians. They also urged President Tinubu to formally invite Pope Leo XIV to Nigeria, arguing that such a visit would strengthen peace, unity and national reconciliation.

President Tinubu, on his part, defended his administration’s reforms, insisting that the difficult decisions taken since assuming office were necessary to rescue the economy from years of structural distortions. He maintained that security architecture was being repositioned and that prosperity would eventually follow the current sacrifices.

Ordinarily, such exchanges between government and faith leaders are healthy in every democracy. However, the conversation assumed greater significance after Cardinal John Onaiyekan publicly disclosed that the President disagreed with many of the bishops’ assessments. According to the Cardinal, the bishops told Tinubu that “the economy is not helping our poor people,” while the President maintained that the economy was improving. The revelation immediately triggered widespread debate across political and religious circles because it exposed two sharply contrasting narratives about the state of the nation.

Yet, facts remain stubborn. Nigeria continues to face severe economic challenges. Inflation has remained elevated over the past two years, food prices have climbed dramatically, and millions of households continue to struggle with declining purchasing power. The World Bank has repeatedly warned that while reforms such as fuel subsidy removal and exchange-rate liberalisation may improve long-term fiscal sustainability, they also impose painful short-term costs on vulnerable citizens unless accompanied by robust social protection measures.

This explains why the bishops’ intervention resonated beyond the Catholic faithful. Religious leaders occupy a unique position in Nigerian society. They interact daily with ordinary citizens who seek assistance through churches, mosques and community organisations. Consequently, their assessment of public suffering often reflects grassroots realities that official statistics may not immediately capture.

The reactions also revealed an important democratic principle. Criticism of government should not automatically be interpreted as political opposition. Throughout Nigeria’s democratic history, both Christian and Muslim leaders have consistently spoken against corruption, insecurity, injustice and poverty irrespective of which party occupies Aso Rock. Their constitutional freedom to speak truth to power remains essential to democratic accountability.

At the same time, government officials equally have the responsibility to explain policies and defend their decisions. Democracy thrives not when everyone agrees but when disagreements are managed through dialogue rather than hostility. The exchange between Tinubu and the bishops should therefore be viewed as evidence that democratic engagement remains alive, provided both sides continue to listen respectfully.

The larger lesson is that perception matters almost as much as policy. Economic indicators may improve on paper, but if ordinary Nigerians cannot afford food, healthcare, education or transportation, public confidence will remain elusive. Governments ultimately earn legitimacy not through optimistic speeches but through measurable improvements in people’s quality of life.

As Nigeria journeys toward the 2027 elections, the meeting between the Catholic bishops and President Tinubu should remind both leaders and citizens that governance is not merely about defending statistics or winning arguments. It is about restoring hope. That hope will be strengthened only when policy outcomes begin to match the lived experiences of the millions whose voices the bishops sought to amplify.

Tinubu Takes the Bull by the Horns on Insecurity, by Alabidun Shuaib AbdulRahman

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s approval of a major restructuring of the Nigerian Army marks one of the most consequential security decisions taken by any administration since Nigeria’s return to democratic rule in 1999. On July 23, 2026, the Federal Government approved the expansion of the Army from eight to twelve divisions and authorised the recruitment of 28,000 additional personnel. The announcement immediately generated optimism among millions of Nigerians who have endured years of terrorism, banditry, kidnapping, communal violence and oil theft.

The significance of the decision lies not merely in its scale, but in what it represents politically and strategically. Tinubu has chosen to confront Nigeria’s insecurity through institutional restructuring rather than rhetorical promises. That is the essence of taking the bull by the horns. Nigeria’s security crisis is not a single conflict; it is a web of interconnected threats operating simultaneously across different regions of the country.

In the North-East, Boko Haram and the Islamic State West Africa Province, ISWAP continue to challenge state authority despite years of military operations. The insurgency, which began in 2009, has claimed tens of thousands of lives and displaced millions. According to the United Nations, more than 2 million people remain displaced across the North-East due to the conflict. In the North-West, armed bandit groups continue to terrorise communities in Zamfara, Katsina, Kaduna, Sokoto and in North Central’s Niger and Kwara states. Kidnapping for ransom has become a lucrative criminal enterprise. The South-East continues to experience separatist-related violence and attacks on security formations, while oil theft and pipeline vandalism in the Niger Delta continue to deprive the country of substantial revenue.

These overlapping crises have stretched military resources to their limits. For years, it has been argued that Nigeria’s military structure no longer reflects the country’s demographic realities or operational demands. Nigeria is now estimated to have a population of more than 240 million people, making it the most populous country in Africa. Yet much of its military architecture was designed for a smaller population and a less complex security environment. The threats have evolved, and the military must evolve with them.

Viewed from that perspective, the expansion from eight to twelve divisions is far more than an administrative adjustment. It is a deliberate attempt to decentralise military operations, reduce response time, improve logistics and bring operational command closer to emerging flashpoints. The restructuring is expected to establish additional divisional headquarters in Makurdi, Ilorin, Jalingo and Benin City, thereby giving the Army a broader national footprint and improving command efficiency across the six geopolitical zones.

Equally important is the approval of 28,000 new personnel. Manpower shortages have long been one of the Nigerian military’s most significant institutional weaknesses. Soldiers deployed in conflict zones often spend extended periods on the frontline with limited opportunities for rotation, a situation that affects morale, mental health and operational effectiveness. The recruitment initiative, first publicly disclosed by the Chief of Army Staff, Lieutenant General Waidi Shaibu, is intended to address that longstanding deficiency.

The economic implications are also significant. Nigeria continues to face a serious unemployment challenge, particularly among young people. The National Bureau of Statistics has repeatedly identified youth unemployment and underemployment as major socio-economic concerns. Recruiting 28,000 Nigerians into military service creates direct employment opportunities while also providing structured training, discipline and a pathway to stable income. In regions where criminal groups exploit poverty and joblessness to recruit young men, employment itself becomes a security strategy.

No nation has achieved sustainable prosperity without first securing lives and property. Investors do not commit capital where highways are unsafe. Manufacturers avoid areas threatened by violence. Farmers abandon fertile land when armed groups occupy forests and rural communities. Schools cannot function effectively where children fear abduction. Security is therefore not simply another government programme; it is the foundation upon which every other development objective rests.

Tinubu appears to understand this connection between security and economic growth. Since assuming office on May 29, 2023, his administration has increased defence allocations, approved the procurement of military hardware, strengthened intelligence coordination and encouraged domestic defence production through institutions such as the Defence Industries Corporation of Nigeria. The latest Army restructuring should therefore be seen as part of a broader effort to improve operational readiness and national security capacity.

Nevertheless, it would be intellectually dishonest to suggest that military expansion alone will solve Nigeria’s insecurity. It will not. The country’s security crisis is as much a governance problem as it is a military one. Poverty, unemployment, porous borders, weak intelligence gathering, corruption, illegal mining, proliferation of small arms, farmer-herder conflicts and inadequate policing all contribute to the prevailing instability.

A larger Army without stronger intelligence capabilities risks becoming a larger force reacting to attacks after they have occurred. Likewise, more soldiers cannot substitute for effective policing. Military forces are designed primarily for warfare, whereas internal security is traditionally the responsibility of the police.

This is where Nigeria faces a deeper institutional challenge. The United Nations recommends a ratio of one police officer to about 450 citizens. With a population exceeding 240 million, Nigeria would require well over 500,000 effective police personnel to meet that benchmark. Although the Nigeria Police Force has roughly 370,000 personnel on paper, the number available for frontline policing is considerably lower due to administrative deployments, VIP protection duties and other non-operational assignments. This shortfall explains why the military has increasingly been drawn into internal security operations that would ordinarily be handled by conventional policing institutions.

Financial sustainability is another critical issue. Recruiting 28,000 personnel is only the beginning. Training, accommodation, healthcare, salaries, pensions, weapons, vehicles, communication systems and continuous professional development require enormous and recurring expenditure. Establishing four additional divisions will also demand substantial investment in barracks, operational bases, logistics hubs and support infrastructure.

The Federal Government must therefore ensure that this reform is adequately funded beyond the initial announcement. Nothing undermines military morale more quickly than ambitious reforms that are not matched by consistent budgetary support.

Technology must also remain central to the new security architecture. Modern warfare is increasingly driven by drones, satellite surveillance, electronic intelligence, cyber capabilities, artificial intelligence-assisted analysis and precision operations rather than sheer troop numbers alone. Nigeria has already acquired various unmanned aerial platforms for counter-insurgency operations, but the effectiveness of the expanded Army will depend heavily on how well it integrates technology into intelligence gathering and battlefield decision-making.

Inter-agency cooperation is equally indispensable. Experience from operations in the North-East and other theatres has repeatedly shown that terrorism, kidnapping and organised crime cannot be defeated by a single institution acting in isolation. Intelligence sharing among the Army, Air Force, Navy, Department of State Services, Police, Civil Defence and other security agencies remains essential for operational success.

Public confidence is another factor that cannot be ignored. Citizens are often the first source of actionable intelligence. Communities will only volunteer credible information when they trust security agencies to respond professionally, respect human rights and protect informants from reprisals. Winning hearts and minds remains as important as winning military engagements.

Leadership often requires difficult choices. Expanding the Army at a time of competing fiscal pressures is neither politically convenient nor financially cheap. Yet insecurity has imposed even greater costs on Nigeria through lost investments, declining agricultural production, disrupted education, humanitarian crises and thousands of preventable deaths. In economic terms, the cost of inaction may well exceed the cost of reform.

Nigerians are therefore justified in demanding measurable results. Citizens will not judge this policy by the number of new divisions announced or personnel recruited. They will judge it by safer highways, peaceful farming communities in Benue and Plateau, secure schools across the federation, declining kidnapping incidents in the South-West, reduced oil theft in the Niger Delta and a restoration of public confidence in state authority. Those are the metrics that ultimately matter.

President Tinubu has undoubtedly taken a decisive step by approving one of the most significant military restructurings in recent Nigerian history. The move reflects strategic thinking and political courage. However, the journey from policy approval to tangible security outcomes is long and demanding.

Taking the bull by the horns is only the beginning. The greater challenge is maintaining the grip until the bull is completely subdued.

Nigeria now watches with cautious optimism. If this military expansion is properly implemented, professionally managed and complemented by governance reforms, intelligence-driven operations, police modernisation, border control and economic inclusion, history may indeed remember July 23, 2026, as a turning point in the country’s fight against insecurity.

The battle is far from over, but for perhaps the first time in many years, the nation can reasonably argue that its Commander-in-Chief is attempting not merely to react to insecurity, but to fundamentally redesign the architecture for defeating it.

Alabidun is a media practitioner and can be reached via alabidungoldenson@gmail.com

Nigeria’s New Tax Reforms: A Bold Gamble on the Nation’s Future, by Boniface Ihiasota 

For decades, Nigeria has struggled with a paradox. Despite being Africa’s largest economy by population and one of its leading oil producers, government revenue has remained among the lowest on the continent relative to the size of the economy. The country’s tax-to-GDP ratio has hovered around 10 percent, significantly below the African average of about 16 percent and far behind nations such as South Africa, where the ratio exceeds 24 percent. This persistent shortfall has left successive governments heavily dependent on borrowing and volatile oil revenues to finance national development.

Against this backdrop, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration embarked on the most ambitious overhaul of Nigeria’s tax system since the country’s return to democratic rule in 1999. On June 26, 2025, the President signed into law four landmark tax legislations: the Nigeria Tax Act, the Nigeria Tax Administration Act, the Nigeria Revenue Service (Establishment) Act, and the Joint Revenue Board (Establishment) Act. While some provisions took immediate effect, the comprehensive tax regime commenced on January 1, 2026.

The reforms seek to simplify Nigeria’s previously fragmented tax framework by consolidating numerous federal tax laws into a unified legal structure. Beyond simplification, the objective is to improve tax compliance, eliminate multiple taxation, modernise revenue collection through digital technology, and create a friendlier environment for businesses and investors.

Perhaps the most significant feature of the reforms is their emphasis on fairness. Small businesses and low-income earners receive broader protections, while the burden shifts towards higher-income individuals and larger corporations with greater capacity to contribute. The reforms also expand exemptions for vulnerable taxpayers and encourage voluntary compliance instead of relying solely on punitive enforcement. It was argued that a broader tax base, rather than higher tax rates, is the sustainable path to increasing government revenue.

Equally transformative is the digitalisation agenda embedded in the new tax regime. Electronic registration, digital filing, automated payment systems and integrated taxpayer databases are expected to reduce leakages, improve transparency and make tax administration more efficient. These innovations align Nigeria with global best practices and could significantly reduce the cost of tax compliance for businesses.

Yet, no reform of this magnitude is without controversy. Critics have questioned whether Nigeria’s institutions possess the administrative capacity to implement the changes effectively. Others fear that weak coordination between federal and sub-national tax authorities could create confusion during the transition. There are also concerns that businesses, particularly medium-sized enterprises, may struggle to adapt to new compliance requirements without adequate public education and technical support.

From the perspective of Nigerians in the diaspora, however, the reforms represent more than changes to tax legislation. They are a test of governance. Citizens abroad routinely compare Nigeria with countries where tax compliance is high because taxpayers can clearly see the dividends of their contributions through reliable infrastructure, quality healthcare, efficient public transportation and functional educational systems. They understand that taxation succeeds not merely because governments demand payment, but because citizens trust that public funds will be managed responsibly.

This is where Nigeria’s greatest challenge lies. Increasing tax revenue without significantly improving public service delivery risks weakening public confidence rather than strengthening it. Tax reform must therefore be accompanied by greater fiscal transparency, stronger accountability mechanisms and prudent management of public resources.

Nigeria cannot borrow indefinitely to finance development. Nor can it continue relying almost exclusively on crude oil revenues in an increasingly uncertain global energy market. Sustainable economic growth requires a robust domestic revenue base, and taxation remains one of the most dependable instruments for achieving that objective.

The success of Nigeria’s new tax reforms will ultimately not be measured by the trillions of naira collected annually, but by whether those revenues translate into better roads, stable electricity, quality schools, accessible healthcare and greater economic opportunities. If the reforms achieve that objective, they will stand as one of the most consequential fiscal transformations in Nigeria’s modern history. If not, they will become yet another well-intentioned policy that failed to bridge the enduring gap between government promises and the everyday realities of the Nigerian people.