DSS: Free Andrew Emelieze the champion of Federal Workers struggle welfare now. Femi Aborisade

*Femi Aborisade Demands Release of Comrade Andrew Emelieze, Co-ordinator of Federal Workers Forum* My client, Comrade Andrew Emelieze who has been championing the struggle for the welfare of workers employed by the Federal Government has been detained again today 3/7/25 by the State Security Service (SSS) in Ibadan. It should be recalled that the Comrade was detained on 30/6/25 and released the following day on 1/7/25. Today, he was invited by the same DSS and detained for no stated reason. According to the report of Mr. Yusuff Akinola, the lawyer from Abope Chambers who went to secure his bail on 1/7/25 and who also accompanied him today to the SSS office, no specific allegation of any offence was made against Comrade Andrew Emelieze. Indeed, according to Andrew Emelieze, his interrogation on 30/6/25 through 1/7/25 revolved round only facts relating to the formation of the Federal Workers Forum. Today, 3/7/25, after he honoured the invitation of the SSS, he was asked to wait for a Senior Officer who never showed up to interrogate him. I call on the SSS to release my client, Comrade Andrew Emelieze. If he has committed any offence known to law, he should be charged to court. Below are the verbatim reports of Yusuff Akinola Esq on 1/7/25 and 3/7/25, which show nothing but sheer harassment of a law-abiding citizen in person of Comrade Andrew Emelieze. *REPORT OF VISIT TO THE OFFICE OF THE STATE SECURITY SERVICE (SSS)OYO STATE COMMAND,ON THE ARREST, DETENTION AND RELEASE ON BAIL OF COMRADE ANDREW EMELIEZE FROM 30TH June through 1ST JULY 2025*. Around 11 a.m of 1/7/2021, I got to the premises of the Oyo State Command of the SSS located at Aleshinloye, Ibadan, Oyo State. I was initially prevented from entering the premises by the officers at the entrance gate on the ground that no lawyer can see anyone in their custody until the Investigation Officer has directly and formally invited the counsel. Later, when I stated we might make a public statement that our client had been denied access to a lawyer of his choice, I was eventually allowed to enter their main building at about 11:15 a.m. The officers at the counter directed me to wait at the visitors' room on the ground floor, that the Investigation Officer would come out to invite me to the Interrogation Room. After 40 minutes, the same officer informed me that they were attending to Comrade Andrew Emelieze and that I would be allowed to see him at a later time. Around 2 p.m, an officer who they all addressed as 'DLS' invited me to his OFFICE where I identified him to be their lawyer. The SSS lawyer ordered the Investigation Officer to bring Comrade Andrew to his office. Upon the production of Comrade Andrew in their lawyer's office, I asked for the reason for his arrest and detention. Neither the lawyer nor the Investigation Officer could state the particular reason for the arrest and detention. Rather, the lawyer showed me the statement written by Comrade Andrew and he asked Comrade Andrew if he was tortured and whether the statement was made voluntarily. Comrade Andrew responded that he was never tortured and his statement was made voluntarily. Comrade Andrew Emelieze's statement was his responses to the questions put to him about the historical facts on the formation of the Federal Workers Forum led by the Comrade which had planned a protest in Abuja for 1/7/25. Thereafter, we were led to the 'ADS' office where I orally applied for Comrade Andrew's bail. I was informed that it was not their practice to take oral application for bail. They requested that the bail should be applied with our office letterhead within 1 hour because their officers were preparing to head out of their premises. By 2:56 pm, I submitted, at the counter, the handwritten application for bail with Abope Chambers' letterhead. We were given a bail bond to fill around 3 pm but we had to wait till 6pm before Comrade Andrew could be released, because none of the officers present could tell us the offence Comrade Andrew had allegedly committed. Meanwhile, we needed to state the alleged offence on the bail bond. Around 6 p.m., the Investigation Officer came back and informed us that the alleged offences were *'Incitement and Public Disturbance'* . Comrade Andrew was finally released around 6 p. m. and we left their premises by 6:15 p.m. Yusuff Akinola, Esq. *REPORT OF VISIT TO THE SSS OFFICE TODAY 3/7/25 AND DETENTION OF COMRADE ANDREW EMELIEZE* Sequel to the invitation of Comrade Andrew Emelieze by the SSS, on the ground that there was a document we were yet to sign to perfect his earlier bail granted on 1/7/2025, Comrade Andrew and I went to the SSS Command this evening and entered their premises around 5:17 p.m. Upon entering their main building, we were informed by one of the officers that an unidentified senior officer wanted to ask him a few questions. Hence, Comrade Andrew was directed to wait at the Waiting Room. The officer then advised that I could leave so that they wouldn't waste my time. I informed him that we were invited only to come and "perfect the bail" earlier granted and I informed him that I wouldn't leave my client behind . He therefore stated that I could stay with Comrade Andrew at the Waiting Room till the time the said senior officer would return back to office. After 40 minutes, I informed the officer at the counter that we would like to leave as it and come back tomorrow since Comrade Andrew was already on bail and he needed to take his medication. The officer said I might leave but Comrade Andrew had to wait for the senior officer who was not available. I reminded the officer again that Comrade Andrew was on bail and there was no reason to detain him again since he had not jumped bail and I further asked if he had been detained again. The officer didn't respond to my question. After 2 hours of waiting, around the 7:18 p.m., I had to leave the SSS Command when it became obvious that their intention was to keep Comrade Andrew in their custody. Upon reaching home around 9 p.m. because of the heavy rain fall and traffic , I saw two missed calls on my phone from the officer that invited us. I called him back and he informed me that the senior officer had returned but they found out I had left. I asked if they had released Comrade Andrew, he said I should come back to their office this night for the release of Comrade Andrew. I asked if he meant I had to apply for his bail again and the officer said yes. I informed him I would return to their office tomorrow, 4/7/25. Yusuff Akinola, Esq.

Lamido was wrong on Afenifere's involvements in the June 12 struggle. Afenifere supported Abiola and was active in the formation of SDP via PSP which fused with Shehu Musa Yar'Adua's PDM. Before June 12 - Babalola

*Sule Lamido; The Soldier of Fortune's Horse.* By Olusegun R. Babalola My attention has been brought recently to the comments made by the former Jigawa State Governor, on Arise Television (17, June 2025) and the Guardian newspaper (25, June 2025), where he unfairly de-marketed audaciously made false comments on Afenifere, one of the most powerful welfarist groups in Africa and one of the greatest voices against bad governance in the world. On President Bola Tinubu, he made two things clear, which Afenifere have consistently emphasized, based on the principle of social democracy and welfarism, since Tinubu's presidency. According to him, Tinubu cashed in on the June 12 pro-democracy movement during the annulment crisis, acted more as a “soldier of fortune” than a genuine advocate for the people’s mandate." Secondly, he lamented that Nigeria is currently plagued by economic hardship, insecurity, and declining public morale, and he also warned that politics has taken precedence over governance halfway into Tinubu’s term. Particularly on Afenifere, Lamido surprisingly stated that "Afenifere believed that for any Yoruba to rise to the national level, it must be through them. I think that is also Tinubu’s crime—for making it to the presidency outside Afenifere.” Secondly, he noted that Afenifere “hopped into the arena after June 12 to use the victory, instead of the victor, to ride on the emotions of the Yorubas and regain political relevance after their siddon-look posture.” Lamido is looking at the surface as all sophists do, and not on both the surface and below the surface, as morally committed thinkers (political scientists and philosophers) do. Firstly, Afenifere is guided by the principle of justice, fairness, social democracy and welfarism. It's not that "Afenifere believed that for any Yoruba to rise to the national level, it must be through them" but that Afenifere believes that the principle of governance everywhere should be based on justice, fairness, social democracy and welfarism, and life abundant for all. This has been the unrivaled principle since Action Group days. This has always been Afenifere's measure of all politicians. If Tinubu switches from his neo-liberal policies to welfarist policies, and also adopts Afenifere's ideas of economic and political restructuring, Afenifere would commend him. It's no personal but a matter of principled ideology, which may be hard for Lamido to understand. Secondly, Afenifere did not join and lead the pro-democracy movement "to ride on the emotions of the Yorubas and regain political relevance after their siddon-look posture," but again based on the same principle of justice, fairness, social democracy and welfarism to seek for fairness and justice. If it was someone else from another region that was treated unfairly, Afenifere would have stood up for him. Thirdly, Lamido was wrong on Afenifere's involvements in the June 12 struggle. Afenifere supported Abiola and was active in the formation of SDP via PSP which fused with Shehu Musa Yar'Adua's PDM. Before June 12, both Afenifere and Abiola made it known to all that Abiola made up with Obafemi Awolowo (Afenifere leader) before the latter died. This was the case even though Afenifere was highly sceptical of the manipulations of Ibrahim Babangida's transition program and was more interested in the "National Question." Olusegun Obasanjo too, was sceptical about it and he wrote one his most advanced political treatises called _Constitution for National Integration and Development_ on the same transition program. It wasn't only Afenifere that was sceptical. It was also such scepticism that led to Bola Ige's "siddon look" cliche. And it was also the concern for the "National Question" that made Afenifere settle for Abiola and not Bashir Othman Tofa of the NRC. And hasn't the subsequent events of that transition program justified Afenifere's scepticism? Though Lamido claimed that he is not playing regional politics; that he is concerned with the "truth" especially for younger generation, for what he called "national rebirth;" and that his comments are not part of a North-West conspiracy against the current administration; Lamido is invariably assisting the same “soldier of fortune” to succeed whilst destroying genuine basis for an enduring trans-regional opposition. As such, he is guilty of the same critique that he placed on President Tinubu - that "politics has taken precedence over governance." Interestingly, Lamido has done this before. He was one of the many who abandoned the June 12 struggle and signed up with Sani Abacha's grip to power towards silencing oppositional groups. Abacha made him the Chairman of Nigeria Agricultural and Cooperative Bank in 1994, and after being inducted to Abacha's patronage system (apologies to Prof. Richard Joseph), he thereafter told the whole world that he didn't join politics to serve Abiola. That is the truth necessary for our national rebirth. Who is more honorable, the unrepentant prebendalist who dumped a cheated winner he once supported or a cautious skeptic who fought for justice and fairness? Lamido also noted that "It’s left for Nigerians to evaluate what is happening under President Tinubu’s watch to determine his democratic credentials." In my view, my evaluation is that Tinubu's administration has not only perfected the craft of dividing oppositional forces into factions as he did to Labour Party and other vital oppositional organizations for perpetual rule, but has also perfected dividing the oppositional minds, as seen in Lamido's comments. And this is really very disconcerting and telling. There would be no accountability from Tinubu's administration nor would the opposition be able to wrestle power from him or even win him, as long as oppositional minds and organizations are divided. National rebirth is impossible with divided minds and organizations, and without a clear sense of reasoned principles to end these artificial divisions. Invariably, if and only if Lamido is truly concerned about "national rebirth," one could say he is shooting himself in the feet. Sad. He has become, once again, the horse for the “soldier of fortune.” Olusegun Babalola is a member of Afenifere and was the Osun State Coordinator for LP Presidential Campaign Council. He is General Secretary of LP in Osun State has a blog - obalufonics.com