Special Report
We fought for Nigeria’s democracy — Men who hijacked aircraft in 1993
Men who hijacked aircraft on June 12, 1993 have spoken up about the struggles and how they were abandoned by the government.
Speaking in Yoruba, one of the men, Adebayo Ekunsumi, in an interview said he and his colleague collaborated because they needed M.K.O Abiola to be installed as president, which led to hijacking a plane.
Benneth Daisi said that before the hijacking of the plane, the election was already held and was judged credible by Nigerians before it was annulled. He added that because of the annulment of the election, the entire nation was thrown into chaos which led them to fight for the stability of democracy in Nigeria.
The men said they spent 10 years of their lives in prison in Niger, yet the government abandoned them and they are struggling without any provisions made for them.
Hear the hijack story:
On Monday, October 25, 1993, in the heat of June 12 annulment agitations, four Nigerian youngsters, Richard Ajibola Ogunderu, Kabir Adenuga, Benneth Oluwadaisi and Kenny Razak-Lawal, did the unthinkable! They hijacked an Abuja-bound aircraft, the Nigerian Airways airbus A310, and diverted it to Niger Republic.
How did you conceive the idea, considering the fact that the four of you that carried out the operations were very young then?
The conception was not really by me. It was by Jerry Yusuf, now late. He was a business man, known internationally. I just finished my secondary school then, and was about 19 years old. We met in a hotel in Surulere. He called me and we had a meeting with some other guys. He said he read a report where somebody used a toygun to hijack an aircraft, and that we could do same here. But what actually touched me was the objective: that we wanted to reclaim the stolen mandate, freely given to Chief M.K.O Abiola, by the Nigerian people. I didn’t join for any pecuniary gain. I just felt since the people had, through the polls, given this man the mandate to govern, there was the need to put on such pressure on the military junta at that time, bent on truncating the process, to respect the people’s wishes. But it was Jerry Yusuf who conceived the idea of the hijack.
Tell us more about the meeting
Like I said we met in a hotel. He met me in a hotel I was living then. I had just finished my secondary school and my daddy was the manager of the hotel, so he just gave me a room in the hotel. My plan was to go to Jos where my mummy was, and my interest was to study Aeronautical Engineering. I had the plan to move out of the country, through my mum, to Canada, to study that course. So one night, around 11.30 pm, Jerry Yusuf was coming into the hotel, and he was hitting the gate and I was the only one available to open the gate for him. So when I opened the gate for him, he was now going in, and I called him back and said, ‘my man, come here, men’. He looked at me very strangely, and I said ‘give me money’. He said he wouldn’t give me. I now asked him why he was coming to knock the hotel gate at the dead of the night. I told him he actually woke me up from sleep. He now laughed and promised to see me later. I suspect that must have made an impression on him. So he called me later, because one of his boys had earlier spoken with me. He had about three of them, from Mushin and Iju Ishaga, then. He now asked me whether I had interest in carrying out an hijack. He said a lady recommended me to him, because we also had some ladies living in that hotel, then. I now asked him what he wanted to use that to achieve. He said the June election results had been cancelled, and his organization, the Movement for the Advancement of Democracy (MAD), needed to do something to get democracy back. I looked at the objective and concluded that I just had to take that step of supporting the cause. I said to myself that if I declined this, and move on to Canada, as planned, Nigeria might be at war before I would be back. I just believed somebody just had to go and demand that the democratic rights of the people be respected.
But within a short space of time, you had earned Yusuf’s confidence. How did you do that?
You know I told you he called me and said he knew his people had revealed their secret to me, that they were planning to hijack a plane. He now said since I had known, I should join them. I now laughed. He smiled back and told me that he had been told I was a very strong poison. He now told me he wanted me to be involved and that he loved my composure and the way I talked, and my action. He said he believed my involvement would give teeth to the plan, and I agreed.
Who now did the recruitment of others?
It was Yusuf. I was the last to join. You know it was from my hotel that we planned all this. And let me shock you, even after we had planned all this, I noticed we were even experiencing some paucity of funds. And it was a prominent pro-democracy doctor that gave us N10,000. So money wasn’t the motivation for us, but the need to reclaim the stolen mandate.
Was it you guys or the organization he gave the money to?
The organization.
But was he aware of what he was funding then?
I can’t say he didn’t know. He knew the objective, but he never wanted to get involved directly. He knew the objective. The only thing was that he believed that if Abacha took over power from Ernest Shonekan, he would hand over to Abiola. But MAD did not share such belief with him. I also didn’t believe in that. You know the thirst of the average military man for power.
So it took you how many days, weeks, months or even years to map out your strategies?
It was actually impromptu. What Jerry told me was that he wanted the operation to take place before Abiola arrived from his overseas trip. Then Abiola was in America, that was why Yusuf had to ask the doctor for money. The hijack actually was to raise an alarm on why Nigeria needed democracy, and why the mandate given to Abiola must be respected.
Can you give us graphic details of how the operation was carried out? For instance, where did you board the plane?
We boarded the plane in Lagos, enroute Abuja, October 25, 1993. It was a domestic flight. The mission was to hijack and take it to another country. And the desire was to get to Frankfurt, Germany, and if we could not get there, we could go to Kotoko Ghana, to declare the message of the organization to the world.
When exactly did you announce your mission, while in the air?
It was 16 minutes to land in Abuja that we struck. According to the plan, I was supposed to take the pamphlet which contained our mission statement to the pilot. It was in a brown envelope. And while doing this, the second guy was supposed to come in with a pistol.
So he was actually holding a pistol?
No, it’s a toy pistol, but there was no way you could know. So the plan was to put the pilot at gun point, to force him to listen to my command.
At what point did the pilot know that this was a hijack?
He knew immediately, when he was held at gun point. I had to come in from my own corridor, the economy class into the cockpit and tear-gassed him. And immediately I did that, he knew this was an attack, so he had to obey us.
What did you tell the pilot, when you first got there?
I first gave him a paper containing our mission statement, why we were doing the hijack. And I even told him to give it to the air hostesses to read to the passengers. The main discussion between me and the pilot was where do we land the plane? He told me there was fuel scarcity and he would like to refuel.
And what now happened?
We told him what we wanted was where we could give publicity to our action. We told him we were going to Germany, where we could have a good press coverage that would support our democratic cause for Nigeria. But that couldn’t be because of the fuel scarcity then. So I just had to use my own initiative that whatever it was, we had places in Africa. So we looked for an African nation that could accept our idea, fortunately the pilot was in agreement with me. So he now moved towards the Sahara, towards the desert..
So you told him all these before he agreed to land in Niger Republic?
Yes, because you have to let him know so that he wouldn’t been thinking that you were hijacking to kill. For instance, when the BBC journalist asked me in the aircraft, ‘what is your cause, tell the world?’ And I told the world we were fighting for democracy. And we told them no going back, that we were going for democracy, and that anybody that would not align with that position would die.
After knowing your plans, what was the mood like in the aircraft? Did the pilot now communicate this to the passengers?
Yes, he did, through the air hostesses.
Was he the only one in the cockpit? What about the co-pilot?
He wasn’t the only one. The co-pilot was there too. We had already held the two to ransom. They were already under our control. What remained at that point was the mind of the passengers, and we gave the parcel to the pilot and asked him to give to the air hostesses, so that they could communicate what was happening to the passengers, and they did that.
And what was the atmosphere like, immediately that was communicated?
Immediately the passengers heard that, they were afraid, because it was strange. Leaving Lagos for Abuja, and suddenly finding yourself a victim of hijack. It was at this point in time that I came out to threaten them more with petrol, because we actually went with petrol.
But how were you able to bring in all those items on board, without them being detected?
They were in a bag. We were able to beat the checkers.
So when you now threatened, what happened?
We brought out the petrol, we wet everywhere, they were scared. We brought out a lighter, and threatened them that we were going to set the aircraft ablaze. We also decided to search the passengers as a way of securing the operations, and we found some pistols. We now seized them.
So what eventually happened?
We landed in Niger Republic, after our discussions with the Gabonese authorities had failed. You know we contacted some African countries before arriving at the choice of Niger Republic, when it was obvious that the fuel that we had could not take us to Germany. We even tried Ghana, but they refused, saying the Nigerian Airways was owing them some landing fees, otherwise they would have allowed us. Luckily for us we did it in a Francophone country, because the pilot communicated with Niger Republic and they promised they were going to give us fuel.
But did they know that they were about harbouring an hijacked plane?
Yes they knew. It was already in the news. The news was everywhere. The international community was already in the know. A flight expected to be conducted in 50 minutes suddenly taking four hours would definitely arouse suspicion.
So the whole thing lasted for how many hours?
Three days.
What was the mood like during that period in the aircraft?
There were negotiations. It was during that period that the Aviation Minister of Niger Republic spoke to us through the aircraft intercom.
And what was he saying?
He said he was ready to give us what we wanted, that is fuel to go to Germany, and all that, and we told him our interest was to talk to the press.
But how were you communicating, since he must be speaking in French?
He was speaking in English. None of us understood French. There were already press men at the airport, but they didn’t allow them to get to where the plane was. The BBC correspondent now called me and asked me what we were fighting for, and the main reason for the hijack. I told him that we wanted to actualize the mandate given by the Nigerian people to M.K.O Abiola. That it was just a political adventure of some curious youths, that needed to protect their political interest.
Were you ever contacted by the Nigerian government?
Nigeria sent 24 delegates to come and talk to us, but none of them entered the aircraft to talk to us. They were in the hotel, asking us to come. Why we held it for that long was to get the attention of the international community.
What now went wrong?
At the dying minute, Abacha threatened. You know the mission was supposed to go for 78 hours, after which we threatened that we would set the aircraft ablaze.
Were you actually serious about burning down the plane?
Yes, we were serious about it, but not the passengers. That was why I first released some, and used the remaining to negotiate.
You were talking about Abacha’s threat?
Yes he threatened that he was coming to storm us with truckloads of soldiers from Nigeria. But the French government warned that it’s not British territory. Fortunately for us, the French government did not agree with Abacha, but they felt they had to do something. So they decided to capture us, by storming. You know the passengers must have told them that we had just a toy gun.
How were they able to achieve that ?
I learnt somebody among us demanded for water, since that was the third day. Everybody had been taking coffee and snacks, in the past three days. So they brought their best strikers (soldiers), and pretended they were bringing food. Somebody came to tell me that they brought food for us, and my instinct told me that must be a trap. And, I was quite right. When I got down there, I saw an ambulance, and was wondering why they brought food in an ambulance. I called the steward of the plane to come and carry the food from these stewards. I was about going back when I heard gun shots behind me. I ran back into the aircraft, but they followed me inside. We were arrested from there. They took me to the hospital because I had some gunshot wound, and others were taken to the police station. And when my leg was okay, and the day Abacha took over from Shonekan (November 17, 1993), they brought Jerry Yusuf to Niger Republic. We were remanded, and were later released around 2001.
So what have you been doing?
I’ve been trying to engage with the youths through an organization I run, African Youth Organisation. I use it to educate the youths about democracy and the need to be politically active.
Any regrets?
(..laughs) I don’t have any regrets taking that action. The only regrets I would have had would have been if I had died, without seeing this democracy that we clamoured for.
Special Report
Federal Roads: Umahi Closing the Gap as Tinubu Addresses Years of Neglect in South-East
By PETRUS OBI
The Federal Government’s renewed intervention in major infrastructure projects across the South-East is beginning to give fresh meaning to the argument that the region is witnessing a stronger federal presence under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
At the centre of the renewed push is the Minister of Works, Senator Dave Umahi, whose aggressive supervision of federal road projects has placed the region’s long-standing infrastructure deficit firmly on the national agenda.
The latest demonstration of that commitment is the ongoing reconstruction of the 65-kilometre Afikpo-Uturu-Okigwe Federal Road, linking communities and major highways across Ebonyi, Abia and Imo states.
During an inspection of the project in Okigwe, Umahi disclosed that the Federal Government had commenced preparatory works to remove a mountain more than 60 metres high that has for years constituted a major danger to motorists and contributed to fatal accidents along the route.
“This mountain, by the command of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, must collapse for the people of South-East,” the minister declared, underscoring the administration’s determination to confront difficult infrastructure challenges rather than continue to allow them to hinder economic activity and endanger lives.
The mountain section represents one of the most technically demanding portions of the project. According to the contractor, Hi-Tech Construction, three excavators are being deployed to intensify excavation and reshape the terrain to create a safer and more efficient road alignment. 
For a region where poor road infrastructure has historically been blamed for restricting trade, increasing transportation costs and slowing economic development, the significance of the project goes beyond the road itself.
The Afikpo-Uturu-Okigwe corridor is an important arterial route connecting communities and adjoining federal highways. When completed, it is expected to improve movement between Ebonyi, Abia and Imo, open up markets and strengthen regional integration.
More than 20 kilometres of the 65-kilometre project have already been completed, according to the Minister of Works, with the remaining sections progressing under the Federal Government’s tax-credit arrangement involving Dangote Industries Limited as sponsor and Hi-Tech Construction as contractor.
The project is also notable for the use of concrete pavement, which Umahi described as superior to what is obtainable on some other major federal highway projects.
But the Afikpo-Uturu-Okigwe road is only one component of a wider federal infrastructure push across the South-East.
Other major projects highlighted by the Presidency include the Enugu-Onitsha, Enugu-Port Harcourt, Enugu-Abakaliki, Abakaliki Trans-Sahara and Onitsha-Owerri roads.
Taken together, the projects suggest an attempt to address some of the region’s most persistent infrastructure bottlenecks while integrating its commercial centres more effectively with the national economy.
For Umahi, the issue is not merely the number of projects being undertaken, but their practical impact on the lives and economic fortunes of the people.
The minister has consistently argued that the Federal Government’s interventions in the South-East should be judged through tangible infrastructure delivery rather than political sentiments.
That argument is particularly significant in a region that has, for years, complained of inadequate federal infrastructure investment and what many residents perceive as neglect.
The ongoing projects therefore offer the Tinubu administration an opportunity to change that narrative through visible delivery on the ground.
The mountain at Okigwe provides perhaps the clearest symbol of the challenge.
For decades, the obstacle stood as a physical barrier to smoother transportation, while accidents and difficult road conditions imposed additional costs on motorists and communities.
Its planned removal is consequently more than an engineering exercise. It represents an attempt to physically dismantle one of the obstacles that have impeded movement, commerce and connectivity in the region.
Beyond road construction, improved connectivity could have wider economic consequences. Better roads can reduce travel time, improve the movement of agricultural produce and manufactured goods, strengthen access to schools and health facilities, and encourage investment along previously difficult corridors.
This is why the intervention is being viewed as part of a broader effort to close the infrastructure gap in the South-East.
The Senior Special Assistant to the President on Community Engagement, South-East, Barrister Chioma Nweze, reinforced this position, saying the projects would strengthen connectivity, open up communities and markets and stimulate commercial activities across the region.
The scale of the ongoing interventions provides the Tinubu administration with a strong opportunity to demonstrate that federal presence in the South-East can be defined not by political rhetoric but by roads, bridges, connectivity and economic infrastructure.
And with Umahi taking a hands-on approach to monitoring projects, the Federal Government appears determined to make infrastructure delivery one of the most visible signs of its engagement with the region.
If the Afikpo-Uturu-Okigwe road is completed as planned, including the removal of the 60-metre mountain, it could become one of the most striking examples of how a difficult infrastructure challenge can be transformed into an economic opportunity.
For the South-East, where infrastructure deficit has long featured prominently in conversations about federal neglect, the emerging picture is one of a region increasingly being brought into the centre of the Federal Government’s infrastructure agenda.
By Emma Igwe
In Ebonyi South, a scenario is playing out, following the loss of Igariwey Idu in securing the APC ticket for Edda/Afikpo North federal constituency, and the likely disposition of his followers to work against APC candidates. These anti-party activities and internal political realignments are now intersecting with broader dynamics in Ebonyi North and Ebonyi South senatorial districts, where the All Progressives Congress (APC) may face unexpected setbacks due to deep-rooted local interests, personal influence networks, and intra-party divisions.
In Ebonyi North, the political landscape is particularly complex, driven largely by a long-standing kindred dichotomy between the two dominant subgroups, Unwueru and Igbojima.
This internal division continues to influence voting behaviour across Izzi, Abakaliki, and Ebonyi local government areas, often outweighing party ideology or candidate competence. At the same time, the ripple effects of political dissatisfaction in Ebonyi South—especially from aggrieved APC stakeholders like Igariwey Idu—are beginning to shape cross-district alignments and quiet opposition strategies that could weaken APC’s overall electoral strength.
The APC candidate in Ebonyi North, Senator Onyekachi Peter Nwebonyi, who serves as Deputy Chief Whip and hails from the Unwueru subunit of Izzi, is widely acknowledged for his legislative performance and constituency projects across various communities in the district. However, his political strength is being challenged by deep-seated intra-ethnic sentiments, with his kindred of origin becoming a major political liability in the current contest. Some local political actors within Izzi are reportedly not fully aligned with his candidacy, further weakening his grassroots consolidation.
On the other hand, Chief Chikaodili Ojemba of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), who hails from the Igbojima axis—the same broader bloc as Governor Francis Ogbonna Nwifuru—appears to be gaining significant traction. Despite running under APGA, Ojemba is perceived by many as enjoying tacit support from influential political structures within the state. His alignment with both Governor Nwifuru and President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, at least in political posture, has further strengthened his acceptability across party lines.
Ojemba’s appeal is also reinforced by his position as chairman of the Quarry Dealers Association of Ebonyi State, as well as his philanthropic engagements, including recent scholarship awards to indigent students within the senatorial district. These activities have enhanced his visibility and grassroots goodwill, particularly among younger voters and economically disadvantaged communities.
While Senator Nwebonyi maintains a strong record of attracting federal projects and development initiatives across the district, the contest is increasingly being shaped less by performance and more by identity politics. The election is gradually evolving into a struggle for kindred supremacy rather than a comparison of competence or legislative effectiveness.
Demographically, the Igbojima bloc holds a population advantage and also benefits from the perceived influence of the incumbent governor, which may translate into significant electoral gains for Ojemba. He is also expected to perform strongly in Izzi areas, where local sentiments and political alignments are currently fluid.
In urban centres such as Abakaliki and parts of Ebonyi local government area, APGA may also enjoy considerable support due to the presence and influence of non-indigenous populations, particularly Anambra indigenes who have established strong socio-economic networks in these areas.
In a parallel development, Toochukwu Ogalagu, the APGA House of Representatives candidate for Ohaukwu/Ebonyi Federal Constituency, is also expected to command strong followership in urban centres such as Ezzangbo, Effium, and Alioma. However, he may face stronger resistance in Mgbo-speaking areas, where the incumbent representative retains influence. The simultaneous conduct of both senatorial and House of Repre
BY Emma Igwe
“Those who live ahead of their time should always expect criticism.”
— Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe
Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe reportedly made this statement on two notable occasions.
The first was during the campaign for Nigeria’s independence, when Southern members of the then National Assembly advocated for self-rule while many Northern members opposed the move. When Dr. Azikiwe was interviewed at Heathrow Airport in the United Kingdom, he responded with those words.
The second was during the Nigeria–Biafra War. After advocating dialogue between Nigeria and Biafra, Radio Biafra reportedly labelled him a saboteur. Once again, he repeated the same statement. Supporters argue that history later vindicated his position.
A Religious Reflection
If Jesus Christ, revered by Christians as the Saviour of the world, was persecuted and crucified despite His innocence, then public criticism and unfounded allegations against public figures should not come as a surprise.
It is painful for anyone to be associated with a crime in which they had no involvement.
Sen. David Umahi: A Record of Public Service
Supporters of Sen. David Umahi point to a number of achievements during his political career, including:
- Becoming the first Deputy Governor in Ebonyi State to openly oppose the imposition of candidates within the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), eventually emerging as Governor.
- Introducing the use of concrete pavement technology for road construction in Ebonyi State.
- Prioritising infrastructure development over patronage politics and the distribution of public resources.
When Sen. Umahi defected from the PDP to the All Progressives Congress (APC), he faced widespread criticism, particularly in the South-East. Today, many of those who opposed his decision have also joined the APC.
His supporters also argue that his performance as Minister of Works and his strong defence of President Bola Tinubu’s policies have attracted political opposition and criticism from rivals.
The Main Issue: The Death of Ms. Mary Habila
It is not disputed that Ms. Mary Habila died at Sen. David Umahi’s country home. However, the central issue should be determined by facts rather than assumptions.
The mere fact that a person dies at another person’s residence does not, by itself, establish that the owner or occupant is responsible for the death.
Liability can only be established through credible and verifiable evidence.
Among the issues that require proper investigation are:
- Whether there is evidence linking any individual to the cause of the death.
- Whether those present cooperated fully with law enforcement authorities.
- Whether medical assistance was sought promptly and the incident duly reported.
- The findings of forensic experts, medical examiners, and other investigators.
The cause and circumstances surrounding Ms. Mary Habila’s death are matters that should be determined through lawful investigation.
The Legal Position
Both criminal and civil liability must be established through credible evidence demonstrating that an unlawful act caused the death.
Sen. David Umahi has consistently denied any wrongdoing and has stated that he has cooperated with the relevant authorities throughout the investigation.
Ultimately, the circumstances surrounding the incident should be determined by witness testimony, forensic evidence, medical reports, and other admissible evidence—not by speculation based solely on the location where the death occurred.
It is a fundamental principle of justice that every person is presumed innocent until proven guilty by a court of competent jurisdiction. Accordingly, any conclusion regarding legal responsibility must rest on established facts and the applicable law, rather than suspicion or conjecture.
The occurrence of a death at Sen. Umahi’s residence, standing alone, is insufficient to establish legal liability without clear and convincing evidence linking him to the cause of the death.
By Okey Nwanguma
Nearly five years after five Nigerian engineers disappeared while carrying out their professional duties in Ebonyi State, the country still has no credible answers. Their families remain trapped between hope and despair, while the justice system appears unable—or unwilling—to establish the truth.
This is no longer merely the story of five missing professionals. It has become a defining test of Nigeria’s commitment to human rights, the rule of law, and public accountability.
On 3 November 2021, Engr. Nelson Onyemeh, Engr. Ernest Edeani, Engr. Ikechukwu Ejiofor, Engr. Samuel Aneke, and Engr. Stanley Nwazulum left Enugu for Ebonyi State to supervise the construction of the Abakaliki Ring Road under a contract funded by the African Development Bank (AfDB). They never returned.
Okey Nwanguma
The engineers were employees of NELAN Consulting Limited, an independent engineering consultancy appointed through an international competitive bidding process to supervise the project in accordance with AfDB standards. Their role was not ceremonial. Independent supervision is central to ensuring that public infrastructure projects meet contractual specifications, maintain quality standards, and protect public resources from abuse.
Their disappearance would have been shocking under any circumstances. But the allegations that preceded it make the case especially disturbing.
According to the families, disagreements had arisen between NELAN and the Ebonyi State Government over project supervision, certification of completed work, and control of payments. They allege that the engineers refused to compromise their professional obligations by certifying work outside the procedures required under the AfDB-financed contract.
These allegations have been denied, and no court has established that they are connected to the disappearance. Yet they provide a context that any serious investigation cannot afford to ignore.
The rule of law demands neither blind acceptance of accusations nor premature dismissal of them. It demands an impartial investigation guided solely by evidence.
Instead, the public has been presented with a series of troubling contradictions.
The engineers disappeared without trace. Government officials reportedly attributed the incident to communal violence. Later, public statements suggested they had been killed based on alleged confessions, even while investigations were reportedly still ongoing. Yet no bodies have been conclusively identified.
Perhaps the most disturbing aspect is the reported DNA evidence. According to the families, skeletal remains presented as belonging to the missing engineers were subjected to independent DNA analysis, which reportedly excluded them as belonging to the victims. One set of remains was reportedly identified as female.
If accurate, such findings raise fundamental questions. What became of the original investigation? Why were contradictory forensic findings not fully explained? What happened to the search for the missing engineers?
These are not political questions. They are questions of justice.
Equally troubling are reports that prosecutions proceeded while the fate of the victims remained uncertain and that the proceedings have since become stalled. Justice delayed is often justice denied—not only for defendants but also for victims and their families.
The wives of the missing engineers have refused to allow the case to disappear into official silence. Their petitions to the President, the National Assembly, the National Human Rights Commission, security agencies, and professional bodies reflect not merely personal grief but an insistence that the Nigerian state fulfil its constitutional obligations.
Their central demand is simple: tell us the truth.
The Constitution guarantees the right to life. International human rights law imposes on governments a positive obligation to conduct prompt, effective, impartial and transparent investigations whenever people disappear under suspicious circumstances. Families also have a right to know the truth about what happened to their loved ones.
These obligations do not expire with time.
Nor should they depend on the political status of those whose actions may come under scrutiny.
It is equally important to emphasize that allegations against any individual, including former Ebonyi State Governor and current Minister of Works, Senator David Umahi, remain allegations unless established through credible evidence and due process. Justice demands accountability, but it also demands fairness. The objective is not to convict people in newspaper headlines or on social media, but to establish the truth through lawful investigation.
Precisely because allegations and counter-allegations have persisted for years without resolution, there is now a compelling case for an independent federal-level review of the investigation. Such a review should involve investigators with no prior involvement in the matter, modern forensic expertise, and transparent public reporting.
Nigeria cannot afford unresolved disappearances involving professionals carrying out public duties on major infrastructure projects. If engineers, auditors, consultants, journalists, lawyers, or civil servants cannot discharge their professional responsibilities without fear, public accountability itself becomes endangered.
This case is therefore about far more than five missing engineers.
It is about whether public institutions inspire confidence or suspicion.
It is about whether forensic evidence is pursued wherever it leads.
It is about whether political influence can overshadow justice.
Above all, it is about whether every Nigerian life carries equal value before the law.
The families have waited for nearly five years. That is far too long.
Justice demands answers.
The rule of law demands accountability.
Nigeria demands the truth.
The attention of Enugu State Government has been drawn to a salacious report in the social media, credited to one Igboayaka O.Igboayaka, purportedly of Ohaneze Youth council, wherein he made an obvious, clearly laughable attempt to drag the name and office of Executive Governor of Enugu State, His Excellency, Dr. Peter Ndubuisi Mbah, into odious travails of disgraced former Minister of Science and Technology, Uche NNAJI.
It was obviously a convenient, last ditch effort to deflect attention and liability by dragging the name of the Governor into the mess Uche NNAJI had single-handedly inflicted on himself!
Pray, up until this moment, at what point in this matter did the name of Dr Mbah, feature in all these, whether as complainant or witness?
When did red herring become an acceptable defence against certificate forgery?
On all available records, the Federal Republic of Nigeria is the complainant in the criminal complaint against Uche Nnaji, definitely NOT Peter Mbah!
It is, therefore , absurd and disingenuous to think that accusing a perceived adversary of involvement in one’s unsavoury situation, in itself, would mitigate assured fate, tilt public opinion or hamstring legitimate law enforcement.
It is germain to state categorically here, that Governor Peter Mbah has filed no complaints against Uche NNAJI anywhere, civil or criminal.
Is being a sitting Governor sufficient to make one accountable for all criminal liabilities of any or all his opponents?
It would have been better for cheap hirelings like Igboayaka to explore available legal and/or judicial means under the law, to assist Mr NNAJI prove his innocence swiftly, rather than spending precious time and effort seeking to drag in someone that has nothing whatsoever, to do with his situation.
And threatening a statutory institution like ICPC, to dissuade it from performing it’s lawful duty, because a politically exposed person is involved, would set a dangerous precedent: availing criminal immunity to all manner of fugitives, who ordinarily deserve to be in jail.
It is unhelpful, indeed unnecessary here, going into the merits or demerits of the case against suspect, Uche Nnaji, but it would have made better sense to channel his endeavours to mounting a credible legal defence for self, than procuring charlatans and social media goons, to seek to use blackmail and intimidation to help him escape justice.
The best a well-advised accused person can ask for, is an expeditious, free and fair trial, not immunity !
Uche NNAJI should be anxious and ready for his impending day in court,so he can have the chance to prove his innocence, once and for all…
His Excellency,Governor Peter Mbah, is focused on governance, and has neither interest in, nor time for frivolities.
Signed:
Onyekwere Nwobodo
Special Adviser on Media, to the Executive Governor.
July 8,2026.
-
Politics4 days agoAwkunanaw Clan gives ‘Ofo’ to their son, Sir Chinyeaka Ohaa, the NDC 2027 Enugu state Guber candidate
-
Politics5 days agoHon. Chief Kevin Tobias Chukwu: Bringing Enterprise, Experience and Grassroots Leadership to Ezza South/Ikwo
-
News4 days agoPlane crash kills eight at US Air Force site in Alaska
-
News4 days agoUN security council holds second poll to select next secretary-general
-
News4 days agoAFRAA admits Enugu Air, Strengthens National Domestic Aviation Growth
-
News5 days agoFG Says It Won’t Publish Details of $5bn First Abu Dhabi Bank Loan
-
Foreign4 days agoUK: 11 Drug Couriers Convicted Over £13.8m Cannabis Smuggling Plot Through Birmingham Airport
-
Crime4 days agoAnambra Police Arrest Four Over Alleged Murder of 56-Year-Old Man in Awkuzu