Okonkwo Christopher NNAKA ESQ.

28/06/2026

JOINING THE AWARD AND KULI KULI CONVERSATION: DID WE MISS THE BIGGER PICTURE?

By Okonkwo Nnaka Christopher esq.

Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." — Marcus Aurelius

To me, this is perhaps the missing condiment in the ongoing akara and kuli-kuli conversation. Many Nigerians the world over have viewed the assertions from their own perspective, mostly focusing on economic hardship. Meanwhile, many others view through the lens of entrepreneurship. Nonetheless, both perspectives deserve consideration and commendation, but my fear is that we may have overlooked an even bigger picture that stares us straight in the face. The picture that makes the conversation whole.

Sometimes, you join a public discourse because you saw a neglected perspective and decided to explore same. In other words, public conversations most often than not face a common weakness: the participant become more preoccupied with the literal usage of words or ideas without opening our minds to the broader principles that power them. To me, the same thing is faced in the ongoing conversations surrounding the First Lady, Senator Oluremi Tinubu's remark on akara and kuli-kuli. That common weakness has taken the minds of the majority of the people away from really seeing the substance of the discussion or of those remarks. Like sages have continually said, "it's all about perspective".

Succintly put, and this is my personal opinion, I think many Nigerians misunderstood the First Lady; the message was not really that we should all become akara or kuli-kuli sellers. Rather, and honestly speaking, I strongly believe the underlying message she tried to pass to Nigerians, especially the women folks living below the poverty threshold, was about the transformative power of entrepreneurship, the dignity of honest labour, and the strong ability of small businesses to become stepping stones out of poverty. To me the message is clear and what we have to do is also very clear.

Or did we suddenly forget that history is replete with examples of individuals and families that began their journeys to prosperity and greatness with what many would consider as insignificant businesses. The McDonald's story is still within public domain. Across Nigeria, countless parents trained their children through school by selling akara, roasted corn, kuli-kuli, vegetables, or other everyday products. There is honour in honest work, regardless of its scale.

However, many of the commentators that have joined the conversation so far have overlooked and neglected an even more important dimension of the conversation: the value chain. They have subsumed or subdued the importance of the value chain to the ongoing discussion. Funny enough many of them are entrepreneurs themselves but forgot so soon and so suddenly how they started. Who says Kuli kuli and Akara's value chain can not be exploited or have we suddenly given up? Let me share this biblical allusion, just check out the parable of the talent in the Book of Matthew. That was one of the last teachings of Christ before his crucifixion. My take is that, when you judiciously make use of the resources within your reach more would be added. So, to many Nigerians, selling akara and kuli-kuli may appear ignominious. Yet, beneath their apparent simplicity lies an inherent economic value that many have failed to appreciate. The true wealth is not merely in the products themselves, but in the value chain, innovation, branding, and entrepreneurial possibilities they represent.

Furthering on the above, let us take groundnuts as a good example. Everyone should know groundnuts are not limited to kuli-kuli production. There are many bye products. They can be made into peanut butter, groundnut oil, roasted snacks, flour, confectionery ingredients, livestock feed, and several other products that is capable of sustainable wealth creation. And above all, every stage of its processing creates an avenue for employment, innovation and technological advancement, branding, packaging, and wealth creation.

The above is also true of beans. The Akara we so much downplay is not the only expression of its economic value; there are many of them and Akara is just one of such expressions. As a Nigerian, at what point in your life did you realise that beans can also become moi-moi, bean flour, properly packaged snacks, and various other food products that serve different markets both locally and internationally.

In today's world, entrepreneurship has become a global feature and is no longer confined to a roadside stall or under the umbrella point of sales. The internet and social media have changed the rules of business. The world is now a global village where someone in London can purchase kuli from a producer in Kano. To say the truth, a well-packaged local product like kuli kuli can be marketed across Nigeria and even exported to customers globally. What you began as a local modest enterprise has the potentials of evolving into a recognised prestigious brand but it must pass through quality, consistency, innovation, and effective digital marketing.

In all of these, the government is never absolved of its responsibility. In fact, is chided for not providing proper atmosphere to catalyse all of this, especially the proper exploitation of the value chain. To this end, Government must continue to make enabling environments available to the common masses through sound economic policies, infrastructure/superstructure, security, access to finance, and support for small and medium-sized enterprises or businesses. You cannot remove this fact and expect a thriving economy.

However, I will reiterate on one point. In all of our yearnings it is pertinent we do not despise humble beginnings. Many successful businesses we see today all began with one product, one customer, and one determined entrepreneur who is not ready to relent. Perhaps the take home from this debate is not really about akara or kuli-kuli, in themselves. Rather, it should be about recognising opportunities where others see limitations, adding value instead of merely selling raw produce, and leveraging technology to transform small ideas into sustainable enterprises that is capable of global patronage.

Finally, the question that should be uppermost in our minds, therefore, should not be whether akara or kuli-kuli are "small" businesses. It should be whether we, as Nigerians experiencing economic downturn are well prepared to see the possibilities hidden within small beginnings. It should continually reoccur in our minds that many profound businesses were at one point nothing more than a simple idea, vigorously pursued with courage, discipline, vision and resilience or determination.

15/06/2026

14/04/2026

BRIDGING THE DIVIDE: INCLUSIVITY AS NIGERIA'S POLITICAL IMPERATIVE.

By Okonkwo Nnaka Christopher Esq.

INTRODUCTION

A COUNTRY FRACTURED ON THE LINES OF IDENTITY.

Today, Nigeria does not merely stand at a political crossroads, but on the precipice of moralism. There is a fracture within the polity: ethnic, regional, religious, and economic and it's deepened into fault lines that has become a threat to national cohesion.

The narratives are clear-cut; from the North/South dichotomy to the more persistent marginalisation narratives in the Southeastern part of the country, and the widening distrust between the citizens and the political elite, Nigeria’s political space has become increasingly exclusionary by the day.

With the look of things, the question is no longer whether Nigeria is divided. It is whether Nigeria can still be unified through intentional inclusivity.

THE NATURE OF NIGERIA'S POLITICAL DICHOTOMY

It has always been argued that Nigeria’s divisions are not accidental, rather, they are structural in nature.

These things manifest in:

• Ethnic Distrust: This is a lingering legacy of the civil war and a system of uneven power distribution.

• Political Exclusion: There is a perceived monopolisation of power by certain regions or blocs in Nigeria's political setting.

• Economic Disparity: There is an unequal and uneven development across board, this reinforces political resentment.

• Institutional Bias: Many accounts and allegations of selective justice and uneven federal presence are abound.

These divisions are not just political: they are psychological and penetrates the core of our commonality. In recent times, citizens increasingly define their national belonging through through the lens of ethnic and regional identity rather than shared citizenship.

INCLUSIVITY: BEYOND TOKEN REPRESENTATION.
Simply put, Inclusivity must not be reduced to political appointments or be seen as symbolic gestures. This is not about “balancing slots”, it is about structural fairness.

TRUE INCLUSIVITY requires the following to thrive:

1. EQUITABLE POLITICAL PARTICIPATION:
Every region must feel that it has a stake in governance: not as spectators, but as stakeholders in the main actions.

2. FAIR DISTRIBUTION OF NATIONAL RESOURCES:
Development must not be seen as selective patronage but as a constitutional obligation.

3. INSTITUTIONAL NEUTRALITY:
State institutions must operate without bias: either real or perceived.

4. RECOGNITION OF IDENTITY WITHIN UNITY:
Nigeria must embrace diversity without allowing it to become a basis for exclusion.

CONSTITUTIONAL IDEALS VS POLITICAL REALITY

In the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Inclusivity has already been envisioned. This can be seen through principles such as federal character. However, the implementation of same remains inconsistent. The challenge is not about the lack of legal framework but about the lack of political will. No political will.

INCLUSIVITY CANNOT thrive where:

• Merit is sacrificed for patronage
• Representation is manipulated for optics
• Justice is applied selectively

THE COST OF EXCLUSION

The political history of the world nay Africa and particularly Nigeria, has shown that exclusion breeds instability.

Marginalisation: whether real or perceived, creates the following:
• Political agitation
• Secessionist tendencies
• Loss of trust in national institutions
• Weakening of democratic legitimacy.

A divided Nigeria is not just faced by political instability; it is economically and socially vulnerable and susceptible to vices.

THE ROLE OF LEADERSHIP

Leadership must move from control to inclusion. This requires:
• Deliberate power-sharing strategies
• Inclusive policy formulation
• Transparent governance
• Listening to genuine dissent without criminalising same.

INCLUSIVITY IS NOT WEAKNESS.
It is the highest form of political strength that fosters a country's greatness.

THE ROLE OF CITIZENS

Inclusivity is not only a government responsibility. Citizens must:
• Reject divisive rhetorics
• Engage politically beyond ethnic loyalty
• Demand accountability across all regions
• Build bridges, not echo chambers

A PATH FORWARD

To bridge Nigeria’s divide, the following steps are critical:
• Recommitment to Federal Character Principles, not as tokenism, but as genuine inclusion.
• Decentralisation of Power
• Strengthening states and local governance.

The following are economic Inclusion Policies:
• Ensuring no region is left behind.
• National Dialogue is a key
• Creating platforms for honest conversations about grievances.

CONCLUSION

THE CHOICE BEFORE NIGERIA

To a larger extent, Nigeria’s fragile unity cannot be sustained by force or rhetoric alone. It must be built on fairness, equity and Equality absence of which that true desire will continue to elude us.

Inclusivity is not a political favour; it is a national necessity. The future of Nigeria depends not only on who holds power at the centre, but on how power is shared among the major stakeholders. A nation that includes all will endure. A nation that excludes will fracture.
The choice is ours to make.

13/04/2026

Hahahaha!

13/04/2026

The question have always arisen: should the INEC Chairman, Attorney-General, and Commissioners for Justice be elected instead of appointed?

At your first glance, electing these officials appears attractive on the face but a deeper thought will bring up something else. It suggests independence from the executive and direct accountability to the people. In a system where trust in institutions is fragile, this argument can be compelling.

But when you take a deeper reflection, a more complex reality unfolds.

Clearly, the primary duty of INEC is neutrality. It is not meant to be a political actor, in any way, but an impartial umpire. Subjecting such an office to elections risks dragging it into the very political contest it is meant to regulate because when the umpire descends into the arena, the game summarsaults. Campaigns require alliances, funding, and public positioning — all of which can compromise perceived neutrality.

Similarly, electing Attorneys-General and Commissioners for Justice may enhance independence from the executive, but it also transforms them into political actors. Legal judgment may then become entangled with electoral promises, partisan expectations, or donor influence as is had with politicians.

The issue, therefore, is not simply whether these offices should be elected or appointed. The real question is: how do we guarantee independence, competence, and public trust?

A flawed appointment process produces weak institutions. But politicising sensitive offices through elections may create even deeper problems.

The more sustainable solution lies in reforming the appointment system itself. Yes, ensuring transparency, multi-stakeholder involvement, legislative confirmation, and security of tenure. Institutions become credible not merely by how leaders emerge, but by the safeguards that protect them from undue influence.

In the end, democracy is not strengthened by multiplying elections, but by strengthening institutions that give Hope and lease of life to the people.

By Okonkwo Nnaka Christopher Esq.

15/02/2026

Listen to this...

15/02/2026

ELIGIBILITY, NATIONALITY AND CERTAINTY OF SPORTS: A SPORTS LAW ANALYSIS OF NIGERIA VERSUS DR. CONGO FIFA DISPUTE.

By OKONKWO NNAKA CHRISTOPHER ESQ.

ABSTRACT

The issue of Eligibility in International football rests at the very juncture of Nationality Law, Regulatory autonomy, and sporting finality. The ongoing dispute between the Nigeria National Football team and the DR Congo National Football team stirs fundamental jurisprudential questions:

1. The question arises that "Does a domestic citizenship law override international sporting regulation?"

2. The question arises that "What can we say is the evidentiary limit for overturning a completed football match?"

3. The question also arises that "How does the principle of sporting stability constrain appellate intervention by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)?"

All these are sacrosanct questions this article tends to examine and this will be carried out through the regulatory framework of FIFA, CAS jurisprudence, and comparative Nigerian constitutional law principles. Put on your keenness and flow with me on this.

INTRODUCTION

THE XTRAY OF AN ELIGIBILITY DISPUTE IN INTERNATIONAL FOOTBALL.

The issues of Eligibility disputes in football are not novel to International football. These typically arise when a particular Football Federation alleges that an opposing team fielded a player who lacked the legal capacity to represent that association at the time of the match.

In the current legal imbroglio between Nigeria–DR Congo controversy, the central question of the matter concerns dual nationality and whether certain Congolese players were legally eligible under both domestic nationality law and FIFA regulations.

In other words, the dispute therefore brings about three cardinal questions:

1. What determines eligibility in both domestic law or FIFA regulations?

2. What standard of proof applies in such maters and particularly to the instant matter?

3. Under what circumstances will CAS overturn a sporting result?

The answers to these questions contains enough materials for a successful countdown.

WHAT ARE THE EXISTING REGULATORY FRAMEWORK he FIFA

Under the FIFA Regulations Governing the Application of the Statutes, a player is eligible to represent a particular member association if:

• A player holds the nationality of that country.

• The nationality is permanent (not temporary or sporting-based).

• Any prior representation of another association has been formally resolved through a one-time switch approval.

In all of these FIFA basically focuses on:

• Documentary Nationality (passport recognition).

• Administrative approval of eligibility.

• Procedural compliance.

Ordinarily, FIFA does not carry out adjudication in political disputes concerning the internal dynamics of a country’s nationality regime or otherwise. Once nationality is conferred and recognized, FIFA presumes validity unless fraud is proven.

DOMESTIC NATIONALITY LAW VERSUS THE REALITY OF REGULATORY AUTONOMY

When we look at the whole scenario unfolding,
Nigeria’s strongest conceivable argument would clearly assert:

• Whether the Congolese law prohibits dual nationality,

• And whether a player retained foreign citizenship,

• Then the player’s Congolese nationality was legally defective.

However, the CAS jurisprudence has consistently and successively affirmed the regulatory autonomy of International Sports bodies. In reality, CAS does not function as a Constitutional Court of sovereign member states. This position only examines whether FIFA’s eligibility criteria were satisfied by member associations, and not whether domestic Nationality law was optimally interpreted. It is not within the purview of CAS jurisdiction to interprete National laws.

In the adjudication process this distinction is crucial and should be aptly captured.

For instance, if a player of the DR Congolese National team:

• Held a Congolese passport,

• Was recognized by state authorities,

• And obtained FIFA clearance where required,

Then eligibility under FIFA regulations is typically satisfied.

THE DOCTRINE OF STRICT LIABILITY IN ELIGIBILITY CASES UNDER FIFA

The first clear point here is that eligibility disputes operate under a strict liability regime.

In the instance that a player is objectively ineligible:

• The match result would be forfeited, it does not matter what the Intention is; it's utterly irrelevant.

• Administrative oversight offers no defense for the defaulting party.

Precedents that involve National teams are abound to demonstrate this principle. For example, in a situation where a suspended National team player was fielded, results were automatically reversed not minding any intended good faith.

Been that as it may, strict liability only applies where ineligibility is clearly established. Speculative or interpretative disputes rarely suffice.

THE BURDEN AND STANDARD OF PROOF IN ELIGIBILITY CASES.

Before CAS, the burden lies squarely on the protesting federation. It is trite law that he who asserts must prove.

The evidentiary standard in play; often described as “comfortable satisfaction”, is higher than a simple civil balance of probabilities.

In all, Nigeria would need to demonstrate:

• A clear regulatory breach at the time the match was played.

• Documentary proof of invalid nationality or absence of FIFA approval concerning a National team player.

• Full procedural compliance with protest timelines.

In many cases, without hard documentary evidence, appeals typically fail.

THE PRINCIPLE OF SPORTING STABILITY

Under CAS jurisprudence the emphasis is on the principle of sporting certainty.

Sporting competitions depend on finality. In practice overturning a completed playoff disrupts not only the immediate fixture but the integrity of the tournament structure as whole.

So, having the above in mind CAS rarely intervenes and does only when:

• The breach is objective,

• The violation is regulatory (not interpretative),

• And the evidence is compelling.

This judicial restraint reflects a broader philosophy: sport must not become a perpetually litigated competition.

COMPARATIVE INSIGHT: NIGERIAN ELECTORAL JURISPRUDENCE.

There is an instructive analogy within the the purview of Nigerian constitutional law.

In election petitions before the Supreme Court of Nigeria, disqualification of a candidate requires the following:

• A strict proof of constitutional breach.

• A Timely and procedural compliance.

• A Clear statutory violation.

Courts are reluctant to void electoral mandates on speculative grounds. Similarly, CAS avoids nullifying sporting outcomes absent undeniable regulatory breach.

In other words, both systems balance:

•Legality,

• Procedural discipline,

• Institutional stability.

THE LIKELY OUTCOME IN A CAS APPEAL

From a jurisprudential perspective, DR Congo’s position is stronger if:

• The players possessed valid passports.

• Any nationality switches were approved by FIFA.

• No suspensions existed.

• Protest timelines were met.

And on the side of the Nigerians', their case is strengthened only if:

• Fraud or material misrepresentation is proven.

• A player lacked FIFA approval at the time of the match.

• A procedural breach under FIFA statutes is demonstrated.

In the absence of such evidence, CAS would likely uphold the result in favor of DR Congo.

CONCLUSION: LAW, SOVEREIGNTY AND THE LIMITS OF PROTEST.

The Nigeria versus DR Congo eligibility imbroglio illustrates a fundamental tension in International Sports Law: the interface between sovereign nationality law and regulatory autonomy.

While national federations may pursue every legal avenue in defense of competitive interests, eligibility disputes succeed only where regulatory breach is clear and demonstrable without any form of ambiguity.

On the whole CAS jurisprudence favors:

• Documentary certainty,

• Regulatory compliance,

• And preservation of sporting finality.

In the absence of proven fraud or procedural violation, sporting results are rarely disturbed at all. The broader lesson is clear: in international football, eligibility is not a political argument: it is a regulatory question.

And regulatory questions are decided by evidence, not mere sentiment.




.

12/02/2026

This idea of dumping s**t on the intelligence of Nigerians is not funny at all.
What are those benefits the Nigerian Constitution, 1999 (As amended) make for Nigerians?