Where Is Chinweizu? Revisiting Nigeria’s Discursive Space
Almost everyone who has the sensibility for debates and discourses, and who is also old enough, will be familiar with the name of Chinweizu. He was the eponymous literary figure that was at the centre of the literary debate around the nature and content of African literature in the 1970s. The debate did not only swirl around him, he was the point-person for instigating the question of what it means, or does not mean, to do “African literature.” This was a debate that came on the heel of Africa’s political independence, and the end to official colonialism. Independence brought just more than the euphoria of being free at last from the horrors of colonization. It raised several other crucial issues having to do with what it means to be Africans in thoughts and in deeds. And this discourse resonated in African literature, African history and African philosophy. The African historians took on the gauntlet of challenging the colonial historiographical discourse on blackness and the colonized. The study of oral literature therefore became the arrowhead of the anticolonial and anti-imperialist intellectual reactions and discourse against the colonial intellectual and epistemological hegemony.
In African literature and African philosophy, the discourse was even more virulent. And this is because it went to the very heart of those disciplines themselves and how they can be done. The question of “what is African literature?” was not a mere academic one, like what is economics? Any answer to the nature and meaning of African literature necessarily carries an ideological burden of denoting what makes anything “African.” While we may have a very tough time in speaking about “African mathematics,” except in terms of the provenance of mathematical axioms, rather than their universal applicability, the same does not apply to literature grounded on contextual subject matters and motifs. Yet, African literature was almost submerged in a spurious universalism that wanted to subsume Africa’s literary representations under Euro-American imperatives. Language therefore became the subject matter for a discursive battle, and the nomenclature of what to call the space of those literary representations became the first level of the battle to reclaim Africans’ capacity to tell their own stories according to the demand of their contexts and experiences. And Chinweizu was at the forefront of this ideological act of redefinition and reclamation.
When I asked where Chinweizu is, I am obviously not asking for a temporal location of existence. Born in 1943, Chinweizu is 78 years old now. Indeed, all those involved in the early discourses are quite old now, and some are long dead. The indefatigable Wole Soyinka himself, with whom Chinweizu had the engaging and defining debate, is 86 years old. And speaks to a lot of dynamics and questions. The major question for me is simple: what has happened to fundamental discourses on ideological issues relating to who and what we are as Africans, and as Nigerians? Have we become too consumed by our postcolonial condition that we have allowed our collective predicaments to consume us? Has Chinweizu himself been consumed by postcoloniality? Or has old age taken its toil on a brilliant mind? How come we have arrived at a stage in our national existence that we now respond only to our quotidian conditions—banditry, kidnapping, Boko Haram, etc ? We have lost sight of those fundamental discursive matters that ought to serve as the foundation for organizing ourselves as a nation. Matters of national identity, national belonging, national consciousness, and so on have fallen out of the discursive spaces.
READ ALSO: Aregbesola Urges Escapees To Return To Imo Correctional Centre
I grew up intellectually in the 70s and 80s feeding on these debates and discourses about decolonization and the urgent need to liberate the African continent. Iconic intellectual names like Ngugi wa Thiong’o, Nnamdi Azikiwe, Amilcar Cabral, Franz Fanon, Obafemi Awolowo, Nelson Mandela, Wole Soyinka, Chinua Achebe, Billy Dudley, Claude Ake, etc. loomed large in our political theory syllabus on decolonization. Ngugi is still the leading voice on the imperative of decolonizing the African mind of all the dangerous remnants of imperialism and colonialism. I remember that Ngugi’s decision to “abandon” the English language as the vehicle for his fictional and non-fictional works appeared extreme then, but that is not to lose focus of his militant intellectualism against the numbing effects of colonization on the psyche of the Africans. Part of our question then, which is still relevant for now, is how theoretically and practically independence and liberation are two different conceptual animals?
And then our theoretical confusion was taken over by the giants in the literary and philosophical intellectual space and turned into a discursive fireball. The Makerere Conference of African Writers of the English Expression was the first in the long series of discursive altercation that had significant implications on the future of the continent. From Ngugi to Obi Wali, Eskiah Mphalele to Chinua Achebe, the African writers present at the conference were confronted with the instrumentality of the English language in the determination of the literary representations of Africa and her future. And then this later snowballed into a one-to-one “battle” among the giants. The most memorable for us back then in graduate school was that between Wole Soyinka and Ali Mazrui.
In 1986, Mazrui released his highly successful but also highly criticized television series, The Africans: A Triple Heritage. And it jumpstarted a real intellectual furor around the idea of what it means to be an African. The thesis behind the television series is simple: Africa cannot lay claim any longer to a pure indigeneity that is uncontaminated by the Christian and Islamic influences arising from Arab and European colonialism. And that is what, for Mazrui, constitutes Africa’s triple heritage; what we can say defines who is an Africa or “Africanness.” Two different types of critique considered Mazrui’s series to be anti-Western and anti-African. Soyinka saw Mazrui’s thesis of a triple heritage as nothing but a “triple trope of trickery.” And what is more, for Soyinka, Mazrui has no locus standi for pontificating on what Africanity or Africanness is since he is merely “an acculturated Arab.” But then, Mazrui considers himself a bona fide African. What or who then is an African?
This discourse on identity opened up several significant vistas on how Africa could be located within the global scheme of things that colonization facilitated and which crucially undermined Africa’s capacity for self-definition and self-innovation. The lesson from the Mazrui-Soyinka debate is how Africa can define itself outside of the orbit of Euro-American influence. However, by the time the next big debate occurred in the 1980s, mostly outlined by the Chinweizu-Soyinka discourse on the decolonization of African literature, the discursive space was responding to the question of what ought to be a writer’s responsibility to his or her social milieu. When Wole Soyinka won the Nobel Prize for Literature, there was an outcry as to why someone as dense and elitist as Soyinka would win such an award, and someone as simple and didactic as Chinua Achebe would be passed over. By the time Chinweizu and his intellectual collaborators wrote Towards the Decolonization of African Literature (1980), Chinweizu had taken up the issue at a deeper level of literary responsibility. A poem, for instance, for Chinweizu, must not only be, it must also mean something. But when it is filled with archaism and clear obfuscation, then it leads the reader into what he and his collaborators called “a wilderness of insipidity” that does nothing to edify the society.
Writers have a deep responsibility to their society. And this is all the more so given the postcolonial predicament that has superimposed itself on the Nigerian society. Soyinka himself speaks about the social anomie that threatens to swallow us all. But an even greater challenge now is not only the enormity of the social anomie, or the absence of intellectuals and scholars. Rather, it is the palpable absence of the space of discourse on the fundamentals of postcolonial representations of our lives and existence in Nigeria. In the age of social media and the creeping irreverence that it has inspired, then there is a grave concern about achieving a discursive mentorship, the type my generation was blessed with, through a relentless framing of fundamental questions and issues in the public sphere.
READ ALSO: Building And Reinforcing Your Team: Leadership
This is the responsibility of scholars and intellectuals. But where are they? Where are the big issues to be framed and discoursed? What could we now consider the enduring impact of the multifarious discourses on the Nigerian condition on national rebirth and value orientation? How do we deploy value reflection on the fundamentals of our collective existence into our collective consciousness? This is the great advantage deriving from the energetic restlessness of multiple discursive spaces churning out ideas and ideals on how Nigeria could overcome not only its social anomie but also its development deficits. I have always been interested in Nollywood as a significant tool for cultural change and reflection, the question is whether we can transform it into a discursive rather than just an entertainment space.
Ideas matter. Argumentations also matter. And both in a postcolonial context where the critics as well as the intellectuals have nearly been silenced by their collective predicament.
Prof. Tunji Olaopa is a
retired Federal Permanent Secretary
& Directing Staff, National Institute
For Policy and Strategic Studies
(NIPSS), Kuru, Jos
Read more authentic news on our social media platforms
By Toyin Falola
“I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.” – Galileo Galilei
Religion remains a much-debated issue, especially in Africa. It is one of the determining factors of our identity. It determines who we are, our beliefs, actions and reactions, and even our thought processes. Africans had their own culture and traditional religion until the advent of western civilization, which brought with it the ‘gift’ of Abrahamic religions—,Christianity and Islam—and judged African traditional religious practices as evil, pagan practice and witchcraft. The missionaries did a thorough job of making people believe that their religion was superior and righteous. Africans accepted these imported religions, and their traditional beliefs began to fade. Christianity and Islam are now the new order, and people are extremely devoted to these newly found Gods.
The Toyin Falola Interviews recently played host to music composer and songwriter, Beautiful Nubia. The question of Beautiful Nubia’s stance on religion pops up during the interview. He is known to promote African spirituality but has also defended foreign religions as advantageous. In response, he talks about his ancestral line: his paternal family were Olu Orogbo devotees (the Yoruba god of letters), and his maternal family were Ifa priests and Esu devotees. He said, “religion has always fascinated me like it gets people’s minds.” He opines that spirituality ties into what gets people so much into religion. Although he no longer practices religion, he affirms that these religions have positively influenced people to do good and show kindness to their fellow human beings.
He states, “Any organized religion has a set of dogma or doctrines they use to guide you to put you in there. You are there; it is like a strait jacket to keep you on the straight and narrow. Why I said religion is a good thing is because the purpose of this is to ensure that you stay on the straight and narrow, that you do good things.” We can agree that religion has contributed to the rise of morals to a certain extent, as the fear of God keeps many people from doing evil. It has curbed wickedness and negative traits inherent in humans and made many people see the world in a new light. Religion has spread the message of doing good and becoming a better human being.
The issue, however, is not the practice of these religions but the ability of leaders to sway people easily. Although imported religions have helped to stop the extremities of African religious practices, it has only accentuated people’s gullibility. Beautiful Nubia further states, “What is wrong with religion is that it gives certain people the power to use their followers. It is not the religion itself; it is the human beings who run these religious organizations who use their power to extract money from them and push them in the wrong direction.” Owning a church is one of the easiest and quickest ways to get rich, particularly in Nigeria. All that is needed to succeed in this business is to be a good actor, have nice clothes (suits, particularly), can win people over with words and give yourself an extraordinary title such as Rabbi.
It is common knowledge that the major reason why people attend church and Jumat services religiously are that they seek solutions to their problems. As much bad governance is enough to seek God’s intervention for various human issues ranging from terminal illnesses, protection, promotion, unhappiness, barrenness, unemployment, and marital problems, to poverty, which is an average African’s motivation to seek God’s face, also cause people to become staunch believers. To get swift, miraculous answers to these problems, many people fall prey to the traps of “men of God”, who only look to fill their pockets and bellies. This explains why a “pastor” would shut down his church after winning a 100 million Naira bet.
Pastors and Muslim clerics are considered mini gods who can do no wrong. The Bible verse, “touch not my anointed and do my prophet no harm,” is an ever-ready response by Christians in defense of their highly revered pastors who would not think twice before taking advantage of their desperation to get their problems solved. They forget that a “man of God” is first a man. Religion has rendered humans gullible to the extent that they excuse things their religious leaders do that are not even in tune with what is written in the Holy books. How do you explain a pastor who sleeps with a woman looking for the fruit of the womb and says his sperm is the anointing that will cause her to have her child? What do we say to a pastor who instructs his congregation to bring a greater percentage of their salaries to him so that God can answer their prayers? Should the man who claims to be an alfa but has exploited so many people in the name of being a ‘wonder healer’ be left alone? Churches and mosques nowadays see the desperation of people and feed off it. Many people come to church for prosperity and get ripped off the little they have, all in the name of miracles, signs and wonders. You could be in a church service and then suddenly hear the pastor say, “I see seven stars. I need seven people who will give the Lord Seven Hundred Thousand to come out now at the count of seven. One, Two…Seven!” You will be amazed at the number of people who will run to the altar to give the ‘Lord’ that amount of money in this present economy. Unsurprisingly, some borrow money to give to their pastors to receive blessings, then struggle to pay back the borrowed money. Monkey dey work, Baboon dey chop.
These men of God add false doctrines to their fraudulent, shady activities. Beautiful Nubia quotes his mother, a Christian singer, as saying, ” any church where they are a lot of people there, you know there are telling them lies there.” He made an example of a Muslim cleric who tells his followers that every other person is evil, an infidel and a pastor who tells his congregation that their Jesus is not a Jesus of poverty, that He died for them to be wealthy. It is now rare to find churches that preach about the kingdom of God and how to live a life that pleases God. Churches today entice and then mislead people.
Sometimes, people realize all these things are wrong but lack the courage to question these atrocities. According to Beautiful Nubia, “…as a child, you are fully indoctrinated, and as an adult, you are scared to question these beliefs.” Asking a pastor why he preaches only prosperity and how to get rich as a Christian would be considered as seeking the wrath of God because the pastor can call down fire to consume his ‘enemy’. Questioning an Imam on why he sleeps with young girls will only attract curses from the Quran on such a person, followed by “who are you to question God’s prophet? The ways and dealings of God are mysterious”. Really, who dares question these men of God? The fear that has been unconsciously programmed into your mind from a very young age holds your voice and makes you look away from the evils of these religious leaders.
This is not to say that there are no genuine men of God, but there is a plague of greedy religious leaders who, because of their power over their members, influence them to bend to their will while satisfying their greed and lust. “We should not focus too much on religion being our enemy. We need to focus more on ourselves, fix ourselves, and we can use traditional wisdom to do that”, says Nubia. The way we question and demand accountability from the government should be the same way we question our religious leaders. Not every “God says” is true. The Bible in 1 John 4:1 says, “Beloved , believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.” Many religious leaders are gods of their bellies and are only out to exploit people to put food in their fat stomachs and live expensive lifestyles with their poor congregation’s money. Child of God, shine ya eye!
This is Part 1 of the report on the interview with Beautiful on March 19, 2023. The extensive interview, which has received millions of views across different platforms, talks about the role of music in society. For the transcripts, see:
Death At Dawn, Rebirth At Dusk
By Toyin Falola
Twilight-zone, Afterlife, What-Mays, and Whatnots;
Questions that transcend mortal thoughts.
Uncertainties plucked by the hands of certainty
pondering life beyond the galaxy.
Philosophies, religions, and sciences;
Ancient lenses to dissect and ponder.
Beliefs, opinions, and standpoints in their multiplicities;
Scalpels that open the heart of certain death
Blazing free the skins of uncertainty.
Science, a nobility I revere,
But it stammers answering to the afterlife.
For science is knowledge and knowledge from experience
But the dead neither speak, nor take records.
Their journeys, ordeals, triumphs or woes?
No one bears witness.
But as dead, we must all be witnesses;
witnesses that testify not.
So, for now, we survive the knowledge of death.
On my Agbàlàgbà head lies my Ọ́kpụ́ Ágwụ́
With eagle feathers, rare and honorable
Adorning it for three scores, a decade, and some more days.
I had flipped my Kente given by the Gaa
And danced to crescendos from Gàngàn drums
I have been celebrated and celebrating
For the miracles, I have worked with pen, paper, keyboard, and brain
I have taken the tales we tell in my village square beyond the Atlantic
Changed the songs that disdain us into appraisals
I have called my brothers not to point to our fathers’ house with their left hands
I have honed Africa and beyond
To answer the calls of the people’s need
I have reached the thinkable and done the unthinkable
So, I danced and keep dancing.
Suddenly, I felt a touch on my host?
Electrifying my hand, leg, brain, and my whole
Telling me that my jur from the Dinka people awaits me.
That my hourglass tells of crossing the bar.
I thought I knew what it was like,
But my grasping convictions of approaching jur were perceptions
Just surviving the death of the knowledge of death
So, arms wide open ready to abound
What was there to fear?
No catacomb of secrets
No palm oil-drenched white garments
I have taken many to my gourmet
To feast and to see.
What was there not to fear?
With medicine men and women,
Syringes, lights, water, ECG, Oximeters, voices, and touches
Hovering around me like a sacred etutu
Making conversations with me and beyond
I was thrown into a pool of reminiscence
one leg and a part of me were already in the boat
It beckoned but I heard another.
A loud voice like my mother’s.
Who takes a journey without locking his home?
Who takes the jur with unpatched palm fronds on his hut?
While the thunder rages up the sky?
The walls are broken and Balogun journeys?
So, I left the sea to clear the cobwebs and light up the night lamb.
The past few weeks have opened new lights of understanding to me. I now see the world from different hills and have helped to reach new resolutions. I know I have written about “transitioning to nothingness,” but my emphasis was on the “nothingness” with lesser attention on “transitioning.” I think we need to continue to ask questions. Philosophies, religion, sociology, psychology, science, and other ramifications are mere perceptions and we are uncertain. The transitioning occurs when death becomes an angel to hug not a beast to fear. We do not know what it entails but one must always endeavor to go with clean hands.
My recovery from an illness may have offered me a fresh opportunity to shout some more, point to societal needs, and settle unfinished businesses. No, not those caused by my personal undoing, but rather those of the people who would be left unguided, and for matters untold about life, society, and individuals. I can say I have passed through the lessons of tantra transfiguration, to use an elegant phrase that I recently came across, to move from secular to sacred activism. No one survives death because of its finality, but when it seems that you did, it is a renewed quest, offering a new purpose.
Professors On INEC’s Will (3)
By Tony Afejuku
The debate has progressed well so far. Our professors, whose strokes have centred on their fellow professor’s manned INEC have tried as best as they could not to confine their impressions solely to the prism of subjectivity. Even when their impressions seem to be subjective, they still make allowance for contrary views, for opposing views. This obviously gives clarity, objectivity and logic to the subject at hand. Is the will of INEC of a professor minder and mincer of words’ control the will of the people or of the masses? On whose side are the Professors who are as concerned as almost everybody is with what is going – or with what has gone on – primarily about our Presidential 2023 elections? Our Professors who are debating the subject constitute the courageous and prophetic Nigerian voices of our day. Their authentic and responsible thoughts are not restricted to the local or regional. They are also not confined to electoral duties and responsibilities expected of the umpire and the will that belongs elsewhere. The truth about the quality of leadership about our country and elsewhere is also told in the debate of the literati.
Professor (Mrs.) Razinatu Mohamed in her submission, in her salvo-cum-explosion actually, drew attention to Vice President Yemi Osinbajo’s explosive explosion in the presidency. If Professor Osinbajo had provided the right vice-presidential leadership there would not have been the need for him to explode as he did as per a viral video Professor Razinatu Mohamed referred her fellow debaters to. “What has he been doing in the eight years of their administration? Irritated my foot; he is complicit.” Not done, Professor Razinatu drew attention to the kind of leaders that Nigeria and Africa need: “Leaders that understand the rudiments of modern socio-economic development and systems; Leaders that understand the crux of requirements for economic growth. Leaders that could demonstrate to the rest of the world that just as the world needs Africa, African countries need the world in a symbiotic relationship and partnership context where assistance becomes a dual role…..”
Razinata’s concern is clear. Nothing in Nigeria will climb out of its hollow hole. In fact, the will of the people will remain hollow so long as a hollow mincer and minder is in charge of its electoral affairs.
Professor Da Sylva perhaps responds better to Professor Razinatu Mohamed’s algebraic stroke. “Unfortunately, Nigeria’s democracy is trapped in its primordial self-made ethnic and religious sentiments and so, standards, merit, competence and pedigrees are measured by their curious divides of religion and ethnic inclinations. Until we all come to realize that heavens help those who help themselves, Nigeria ain’t going no-where – meeen!”
But below is Professor Da Sylva’s sledge hammer response to Professor Razinatu Mohamed’s Osinbajo hammer blow:
“Prof Osinbajo’s office demands he does what he did. Besides, it shows maturity and spirit of sportsmanship on his part. Every loser in a game “healthily” contested, is naturally expected to do the same. The only difference which again shows Osinbajo’s magnanimity is that in this context, the contest under reference was neither healthy nor just. The umpire seemed compromised and merely worked to a prepared answer. Yet the gentleman did the needful. I guess, brothers and sisters, that we should put all that behind us, and work for our common good, and the wellbeing of the country, provided the mythical Aso cabal will let the President-elect be, and let the masses be, and as such, they should not create any cause for us to think otherwise, lest they provoke our sense of patriotism to take appropriate action! I guess that those were the reading or feelings of the dirty-minded Aso Villa cabal. People that kill with sword never wish that any folk should pass a sword over their heads, a wise saying goes in Yoruba. The human principalities simply suspected that should they allow PMB to give the VP the intended latitude, they might not be able to control him. I remember on his return from London, he commended the efforts of his VP while he was away. He said he would still continue acting while he would still have some more rest at home. The following day everything changed, PMB decided to take charge as the President. I suspected some back door politics was playing out. My co-debaters, quite naturally, you’ll agree with me that, it is not over-ambition or sheer opportunism as you might insinuate for any deputy in an office to aspire to the next higher office, in a legitimate manner, there is nothing really unusual about it, and it would amount to killing a mosquito with a sledge hammer, should Oshinbajo be crucified for that, if at all. And as for his wishing Buhari’s non-recovery, I think that, again, like my Sister R, is a little unkind and not fair to the gentleman who I know to be a servant of God. He knows as much as I do, by our true Christian orientation and Biblical injunctions that, should he ever wish Buhari’s death or wish him any form of misfortune in those trying periods of the President, God Almighty who we serve would deal mercilessly and ruthlessly with him. That is what Psalm 41:1-13 is all about. So rule that out, because it is not, and could never be in his character. I can vouch for him. Rather, I saw him in those times that he acted for his principal, as someone zealous and appreciative of the trust his principal invested in him, and as such he tried to do his very best to merit the trust and the opportunity! I know and I am also sure that this is what an IBK, or a Razinat, would have done too had they found themselves in a similar situation! It does not amount to wishing one’s principal any evil, not at all. Not everyone can be like Chief Obafemi Awolowo who resigned his position under Gowon when the regime became financially reckless shortly after the civil war. Awolowo also gave very profound argumentation to justify convincingly his actions. He also turned down some other appointments including the “49 Wise Men of the Constitution Drafting Committee.” Oshinbajo couldn’t have resigned, normally, and naturally his principal, PMB should have supported him as a capable successor, but again, the President’s ethnic and religious bigotry took the better part of the President. Besides, PMB’s mind was long poisoned against his VP, a clean job by the Aso Villa cabal. IBK, Lady R, until the faceless cabal is permanently silenced the wheel of Nigeria might continue to go round in a circle, and to nowhere in particular”.
And Professor IBK takes the floor: “Prof. DAO, yours is a powerfully convincing submission, at least in a large measure. Now I am willing to hold a slightly different opinion about Osinbajo. Yet, I cannot fathom why he chose to run against Tinubu, days or weeks after the latter had begun his campaign in the party primaries. There’s much we don’t know about why OSBJ decided to run against BAT. Nothing is wrong with that politically but a little problematic from an Ethical or, at least Moral, point of view. Osinbajo did a poor job of it and came out a distant 4th in the primaries. I think he didn’t read the situation correctly and was probably misled by some cabal of sorts. Either way Osinbajo made a politically fatal error in this regard. Perhaps he must have sensed, or was told, that BAT was not the anointed candidate, or that BAT would be crippled by some ill-health or a medical condition. I remember the party’s screening committee publicly recommending that only younger contestants would be recommended to the NWC or such. Clearly there was an attempt to sideline BAT. Whatever the explanation, Osinbajo make the error in his campaign of promising to be more Buhari than Buhari. A man despised by whole sections of the northern population, a man whose reputation for laziness and incompetence was on the ascendant. Anyway, all is now history and Osinbajo has not given a good account of himself in this particular case. Prof DAO, I think your concept of the Trickster should account for Osinbajo’s situation here. FULL DISCLOSURE: a very close family member of mine was drafted to head Osinbajo’s campaign effort in Kano. We discussed extensively about Osinbajo’s pledge to carry on with Buhari’s policies. There was bewilderment and shock within the members. A week later half of the membership resigned on account of Osinbajo’s increasing identification with Buhari’s policies. Many mistakenly thought that Osinbajo was Buhari’s anointed one! I could go on…”
Interestingly interesting and intriguingly intriguing, dear, dearly dear readers: this debate.
To be terminated by the columnist-terminator and terminator-columnist next week after Professor Olu Obafemi’s summation of the debate he presided over.
Afejuku can be reached via 08055213059.
NEW TIMES CULTURE
BREAKING: Abacha’s Ex-chief Of Staff Oladipo Diya Dies
Breaking: Appeal Court Retains Adeleke As Osun Governor
Why GOFAMINT General Overseer Demoted His Deputy
BREAKING: UK Suspends Work, Study, Family Visas For Nigerians Over Ukraine War
BREAKING: First Nigerian Female Vice Chancellor Alele-Williams Is Dead
Opinion3 days ago
With Us, Not For US
Opinion4 days ago
The 2023 Elections And The Newness Of Nigeria
Opinion2 days ago
Latest News4 days ago
BREAKING:Confusion As INEC Rejects Irregular Votes In Abia, Enugu Governorship Election Results
Latest News3 days ago
BREAKING: Ekweremadu, Wife Found Guilty Of Organ-trafficking In UK