•Abductors demand N20m
•Muslim Board chief also snatched
Former Ondo State House of Assembly Speaker Victor Olabimtan was yesterday kidnapped in Kwali, near Gwagwalada, Abuja.
Olabimtan, an All Progressives Congress (APC) governorship aspirant, last Thursday, declared his intention to contest the October election.
He was speaker during the administration of the late Dr Olusegun Agagu and was recently commissioner representing Ondo, Ekiti and Edo states in the Federal Civil Service Commission.
The former speaker was said to be going for a meeting in Abuja when some gunmen in army fatigues abducted him at a check point

•Fourth round draw to be held today

Nigerian international Mikel  Obi was rested by manager Guus Hiddink in the FA Cup Third round win against English League One side Scunthorpe United yesterday at Stamford Bridge.
The Blues continued their resurgence under the Dutch caretaker manager with a comfortable 2-0 victory but Mikel who has been a mainstay for the former UEFA Champions League winners was given a deserved rest after featuring in all Hiddink’s three previous games.
The former Lyn Oslo midfielder watched from the bench as Spaniard Diego Costa escaped Scott Laird and impressively directed Branislva Ivanovic’s cross past Luke Daniels in goal for the visitors inside the first 13 minutes.
It did not turn out a whitewash as expected as the Blues waited until the second half to double their lead courtesy of substitute Ruben Loftus-Cheek who blasted a shot past the keeper after receiving a pass from Cesar Azpilicueta

Arsenal manager,  Arsene Wenger, had kind words to say about his young Nigerian forward, Alex Iwobi after the Gunners 3 – 1 triumph over Sunderland in the FA Cup on Saturday.
The teenager sparkled in his first start at the Emirates Stadium and was involved in the equalizer netted by Joel Campbell in the first half .
“I liked the timing of his passes. In the middle of the park that is a vital quality and that fact he plays forward and sees [things].
“As a young boy he is not afraid to come on and that is not easy, ” Wenger told reporters, according to arsenal.com.
If the Community Shield is thrown into the mix, Iwobi has been included in Arsenal’s 18 – man squad 14 times this season by the Frenchman.

.

LEBO Sikwane wanted to please her ancestors when she followed her calling to become a sangoma. But life turned ugly for her when she didn’t follow the correct procedure! The 38-year-old from Chiawelo in Soweto told Daily Sun her gobela disappeared with her car last week and she believed she was having bad luck because she didn’t listen to her ancestors. “Other sangomas have since told me my parents and ancestors were angry with me for not involving them when I chose a gobela. Normally the ancestors choose. “I made life difficult for myself by not letting my ancestors make the decision.” Lebo said she paid a heavy price as she was scammed by the sangoma from Protea Glen. “The sangoma asked if he could buy my broken-down car, which was standing in my yard for over two years. He said he would buy the car and give me half the money and keep the other half for thwasa services,” said Lebo. “But he disappeared with the car. I won’t trust sangomas again!” Lebo said she was still being tormented by her ancestors who wanted her to become a sangoma. She said although her Renault Clio was not working she loved it and was planning to fix it one day. Lebo’s uncle, Elias Masinyane (63) said Lebo disrespected her parents and ancestors. “She’ll have to start her sangoma training again so she can be healed,” he said, adding that the family would report the gobela to the Traditional Healers Council and open theft charges against him.

Alhaji Mohammed Abdulrahman was a member of the Northern Elders Forum which later transformed into the Arewa Consultative Forum under which he once served as Secretary of the group’s Politics Committee. Abdulrahman in this interview describes the embattled leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) as underrating the capability of the Igbo people who he says are a force to reckon with in the survival of the nation’s economy. He also speaks on the President Muhammadu Buhari administration warning that some of the President’s men are not comfortable with the change initiative of the All Progressives Congress government.
Nobody can restrict the Igbo to a geographical location
The leader of IPOB and Director of Radio Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, is not responsible enough or adequately equipped to discuss the Biafra issue. Under what context are they discussing Biafra? He is completely lost. We do not want a country where people just wake up, put on fine clothes and use an NGO to try to make money and begin to tell us about indigenous people. The Igbo are my people because I have children who are Igbo as I am married to an Igbo woman from Enugu.
The issue is that these people used Jonathan to steal Nigeria black and blue and they never expected that that government will lose the presidential election. They thought the stealing was going to continue. When they lost the election, it became a little confounding for them and the only way they wanted to protest was using the IPOB. It didn’t make sense to me. In Jonathan’s government, if you look at the list of appointments and those who called the shots, the Igbo people were more than any other set of people from other parts of the country. Almost everything in Nigeria then had the imprint of the Igbo.
So, how can they be talking about the Indigenous People of Biafra when they were in charge of Nigeria then?   What did not happen that time was changing Nigeria’s name to Biafra. What do they want, to enslave Nigerians? That is not how to go about it, not by violence. The Igbo people own houses all over the place. They are the main brain behind the Nigerian economy today. From the market women who sell ugu (vegetable) to the men who sell spare parts and vehicles. They own industries. So, what else do they want?   What is Biafra? Do they know how Ojukwu got the name? These people are just looking for ways to raise money.
I think they have been reading too many story books. Even Karl Max did not behave this way. The Igbo are responsible people. They are the brains behind the development of the African economy. They are all over the place, in all the nooks and cranny of Africa, from Gabon to Equatorial Guinea, The Igbo people are everywhere. Why should one young man, because he can wear suit and trousers start telling us about indigenous people. Does he know the United Nations more than the other Igbo people? We have the record of Igbo people who hold first positions in so many areas of life throughout the world, in Science and Engineering and so many other fields.
That is the real Igbo life and not the crudity of armed robbery. What does Biafra offer them. The Igbo already have the brain. The Igbo are the Israel of Africa. They are enterprising and virtually the best. The IPOB people are irresponsible, unlearned young men who do not have any work to do and trying to pull some other people into a death trap, in order to make money. The Igbo will not accept that. I am an Igbo parent because I have many children who are Igbo. Nnamdi should go and sit down and eat akpu because I believe he has not eaten enough of it.
At a time when people are talking about the internet computers and Information Technology and development in the world, you cannot compress Nigeria into a small place. The Igbo people have gone too far. If he is talking about IPOB, it means he wants to restrict the Igbo and other people have the right to react. What of the houses and other property owned by the Igbo all over the place? The Igbo are too intelligent to be restricted to one place. The world as they say has become one global village. The real Igbo are the business people. You do not have to have a university degree but the brain is what matters most. This Nnamdi Kanu’s brain is flawed.
The IPOB people are in the wrong market. From the production alone that can take place in Igbo land and exported to other countries, they can turn into an African Japan and Taiwan, all from Igbo land. Biafra should not be a boundary. Countries are no longer about boundaries. It is about the people. For the Igbo people, Nnamdi Kanu is a nuisance. We know what treason is and if he gets himself into the treason issue, he will be in for it and nothing will happen. Murtala was killed and nothing happened, Abiola was killed, nothing happened. Yar’Adua was killed and nothing happened. Abacha was killed and nothing happened.
All of them died and people who thought that Nigeria would come to an end must have known better now. Nothing of such happened. If Nnamdi Kanu is convicted for treasonable felony and he is killed according to the law, nothing is going to happen. It will not spark off a civil war. He is wasting his time. We should all be concerned with the Nigerian enterprise. The oil we depend on is virtually going into non-existence.   For the people who say they have oil, the oil is almost finished. The price of oil is heading towards $15 per barrel. Agriculture is going to be the mainstay of the economy. That is what everybody in the world wants. People want food to eat.
Why Buhari government may fail
The issue of Nigeria has changed. Of course, Buhari brought this bandwagon, the change initiative which he told God that he wants to implement and Nigerians decided to follow him. But Buhari should be very careful because some people do not want him to go into the implementation stage of the change mantra. Change has many stages. You cannot remain a good egg forever. You either hatch as a chicken or you get eaten as a good egg. So, Buhari’s change has to be implemented and he should note that there is a bloc within the National Assembly that wants to undo him and they can go to any length because they do not want Buhari to continue.
That is treachery. Members of the National Assembly were put there to represent the people but where it is discovered that they are not there to represent the interest of the people who elected them, then the relevant laws should be applied to deal with them. They should be dealt with when they begin to jeopardize national interest for selfish interests. We cannot afford to continue to use tax payers’ money to protect the lawmakers and they continue to behave like kings and queens. Buhari should face his job and come up with immediate results and he has to drop politics and go straight into what brought him into power.
The first thing the National Assembly did was that phoney election they held at the inception of this administration. They did that to show Buhari that he was not in charge and the second one is the recent issue over the purchase of vehicles for the National Assembly, at these times of austerity when they have all been given money to purchase vehicles. The National Assemble is trying to tell Buhari to his face that they are going to work against him. Some people are not comfortable with the change initiative and they will do everything possible to frustrate the President’s efforts.
What happened in Jonathan’s government was official banditry, from the Ministry of Finance to the Customs. All ministries and parastatals that provided money for government were all composed of bandits. We should have no time for that now because the people who put Buhari there have eyes to see and they have ears to hear. It should no longer be an administration of sirens and bodyguards. Nigeria has to work and he has to allow everybody participate to make Nigeria work. The privileged few who are there in government should not only be seen to be working but they should actually work.
We are fed up with rhetoric. Buhari has the goodwill and no other President had the goodwill as Buhari has and he should not squander it. There is limit to the patience that Nigerians have had over several years. There are groups under the President waiting for him to fail. It is like watching soldiers on a drill. If the commander notices anyone who is too weak to go on, he pushes him aside and Buhari should understand that. The promise of change has made Nigerians impatient because the goodwill given to Buhari is much and nobody should be allowed to squander it.
Buhari, too soft
Fuel and electric power are the twin issues that may bring this government down if the President fails to crush the activities of some people who do not desire the needed change. If Buhari cannot deal with issue of fuel distribution when the refineries produce and the marketers have become government on their own then Buhari does not have a government. If people generate electricity and power   and they decide to sell it the way they like and at the same time put service charges and start making free money, that is fraud and corruption.
It was when some people in the Jonathan government were looking for where to steal money that every service provider started talking about service charges. What service are they talking about? The electric power is never there and they charge you for that. If they want to increase electricity tariff, they should do so and stop talking about service charges.   It is stealing and corruption.
The privatization process was dubious and it is reversible. Government has to revisit the power privatization thing. Those are the people who want Buhari to fail, along with the fuel cartel. Buhari should look internally into his administration. There are people working with him who want to undo the President. If some people refuse to accept the change in certain sectors, they should be done with.
The distribution network of the NNPC should be checked and the President has to call the oil cartel to order because nobody has the right to hold Nigeria to ransom. We must get results within 12 calendar months and that is the change Nigerians want. We do not want a change where the President is said to be carrying out certain changes and nothing tangible happens at the end of the day. The issue of Dasuki should be handled swiftly and if he is supposed to end up in prison then let him be there.
If Saraki’s case will earn him a prison sentence then it should be done now so that we can move ahead. The rules of engagement must be followed. Those who looted our money should proceed straight to prison until they return such money. They must have invested the money they stole and they must have made some profit out of it. So, they should return the capital and take the profit. Buhari is too soft and it is the people around him who want to ground him, these are the people making him to be soft because they are more interested in seeing to the President’s downfall. Nigerians will continue giving him the goodwill if they see results.
We know it may be hard and difficult at the beginning but it should not be hard all through the period. Government has not started doing things to give Nigerians a hint that the situation will be better. Government is not dealing with the people are killing the system. They are likely to become the problem for government to perform. Buhari has just one year to prove that he can deliver because the people who want him to fail also have one year to execute their plot.

Kelechi Iheanacho   is celebrating his FA Cup goal during  Manchester City’s 3 – 0 triumph over Norwich City in the third round. Sergio Aguero was instrumental in the fifth goal Iheanacho scored in a City shirt in all competitions this season, setting him up just after the half – hour mark , as the visitors gave themselves a two – goal advantage.
“I am very pleased playing with him in the FA Cup. I am very happy and he is a professional. It was a great goal and a good pass from Sergio. I was about to control the ball but I said I should take it first time. I think nothing is enough in football, I will keep working hard and keep giving my best and working hard as a player, learning from the professionals in our team.
As a young player you need to work hard at every training and if you are given the chance to play you have to work hard and really show to the manager that you are deserve to be in, “ he added

ABEOKUTA—The Social Democratic Party, SDP, in Ogun State has broken its silence over the controversial N100 million allegedly collected  by its National Chairman, Chief Olu Falae from the former Chairman Board of Trustees of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP,, Chief Tony Anenih, saying, contrary to Falae’s claims of distributing the money to state chapters of the party, it did not get any money from him.
The money was allegedly linked with the $2.1 billion arms fund believed to have been mismanaged by former National Security Adviser, Sambo Dasuki.
Falae had admitted receiving N100 million from Anenih.
The party, which was under the control of former governor of the state, Chief Segun Osoba in a statement jointly signed by its Chairman, Olu Agemo and the Secretary, Clement Adeniyi yesterday in Abeokuta, declared that it was never notified of or involved in any negotiation to partner with the PDP or any other party for the purpose of winning the election or maintaining peace during the period as claimed by Falae.
According to the party, ”We were never informed by the National Secretariat of our party of the decision to adopt former President Goodluck Jonathan or any other candidate as the party’s presidential candidate.
“That, we were never informed of any donation of funds to the party by the PDP or any other party.
“That the SDP in Ogun State did not receive any financial or campaign logistics assistance from the national secretariat of our party or any of its principal officers.
“That in April 2015 we made our position clear on the sources of our campaign funding through advertisement in the Guardian, Vanguard, Punch and Tribune newspapers of Monday April 20, before the current revelation.
“We plead with our members and supporters who have received this untoward revelation with great shock to remain calm and await the convocation of a general meeting where these issues shall be thoroughly discussed and appropriate decisions taken,” the statement read.
.
“We assure you that the SDP in Ogun will continue to operate within ethical and moral norms as laid out in the principles of Progressive Welfarism established by our progenitor, Chief Obafemi Awolowo in the struggle to establish an egalitarian, peaceful and equitable nation”, the statement read.

But I must emphasize from the beginning that the fact that Nigeria is a multi-ethnic state is not unique to Nigeria or unique to Africa. It is not a negative phenomenon. Take a look at Europe:
The interesting thing about this is that Europe which we all think of as a white undifferentiated continent, turns out to be a variegated continent with each country being a rainbow of nationalities.
The next issue to confront is what is often characterized as the artificial creation of Nigeria. This is in reference to the 1915 amalgamation of Nigeria by Lord Lugard. Underlying this negative perception of the amalgamation is the mistaken belief that before the colonial intrusion, groups in Nigeria lived in splendid isolation. It is mistaken because to use Lagos as an example, long before the British colonization, you had the Nupe settling in Oshodi, the Epe settlling in Epetedo and the Ijesas settling in Ijesatedo.
As regards the issue of the artificiality of the Nigerian nation, the 2014 National Conference, in a Report adopted without dissent paid tribute to the efforts of the colonial authorities in clubbing together the disparate nationalities into what is now called Nigeria when the Conference said that it was “persuaded that when the administrations of the Northern and the Southern Protectorates of Nigeria were amalgamated in 1914, the framework of a potentially great nation was laid”, and called on all Nigerians “to ensure that the amalgamation achieves its full intendment of building a fully integrated nation”. This was a Report adopted by 460 representatives of the Nigerian people.
Again, the artificiality of Nigerian boundaries is not a Nigerian phenomenon. Apart from Islands such as New Zealand, Australia whose boundaries are natural, all boundaries in the world are artificial, being determined by wars, conquest and treaties. European boundaries have been determined by a series of conferences namely; the Peace of Westphalia, 1648, Congress of Vienna, 1815, Versailles Peace Conference, 1915, and the post-Second World War, not to mention the civil wars following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. The frontiers of the United States were formed as a result of wars between the British and the French authorities over the Canadian/United States border, and wars between the United States and Mexico to define the southern frontier.
The net effect of my submission is this: while admitting that Nigeria is a multi-ethnic state and that its boundaries are artificial, that should not pose existential threats to Nigeria. I am not saying that they could not because obviously, they can and have posed existential threats in Nigeria and in other places in the past. But it is like fire. It can cook, and it can burn.
This then leads me to ask a pertinent question: Should Nigeria have the free for all political system which we operate? During the First Republic, we had three major political parties: the NPC from the North, the NCNC from both the East and the West even though in public perception, it was regarded as an Eastern party and the Action Group was from the West. All the other parties were just ancillary parties. During the second Republic, the pattern was repeated. The NPN was basically a Northern party, the NPP was basically an Eastern party, and the UPN was basically a Western party. All the other parties were again ancillary parties.
The putative Third Republic was the only exception. The military regime decreed a two-party system. There was no Northern party, no Eastern party and no Western party. All of us had to find room in one party or the other rather than to keep setting up ethnic parties.
Each African state shaped its own response to multi-ethnic politics. But I have attempted some sort of classification into four groups. The first group is made up of those states who adopted a One-party system as a solution. Examples are:

• Angola (MPLA) 1975–1991
• Benin (People’s Revolutionary Party of Benin) 1975–1990
• Republic of Upper Volta Upper Volta (African Democratic Rally) 1960– 1966
• Burundi (Union for National Progress) 1966–1992
• Cameroon (Cameroon National Union) 1966–1985, (Cameroon People’s Democratic Movement) 1985–1990
• Cape Verde (African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde) 1975–1981, (African Party for the Independence of Cape Verde) 1981–1990
• Central African Republic (Movement for the Social Evolution of Black Africa) 1962–1980, (Central African Democratic Union) 1980-1981, (Central African Democratic Rally) 1987–1991
• Chad (Chadian Progressive Party) 1962–1973, (National Movement for the Cultural and Social Revolution) 1973–1975, (National Union for Independence and Revolution) 1984–1990
• Comoros (Comorian Union for Progress) 1982–1990
• Congo-Brazzaville (Congolese Party of Labour) 1969–1990
• Zaire (Popular Movement of the Revolution) 1970–1990
• Djibouti (People’s Rally for Progress) 1977–1992
• Equatorial Guinea (Worker’s National United Party) 1970–1979, (Democratic Party of Equatorial Guinea) 1987–1991
• Ethiopia (Workers’ Party of Ethiopia) 1984–1991
• Gabon (Gabonese Democratic Party) 1968–1990
• Ghana (Convention People’s Party) 1964–1966
• Guinea (Democratic Party of Guinea – African Democratic Rally) 1958–1984
• Guinea-Bissau (African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde) 1974–1991
• Ivory Coast (Democratic Party of Côte d’Ivoire – African Democratic Rally) 1960–1990
• Kenya (Kenya African National Union) 1982–1991
• Liberia (True Whig Party) 1878–1980
• Madagascar (National Front for the Defense of the Revolution) 1976–1989
• Malawi (Malawi Congress Party) 1964–1993
• Mali (Sudanese Union – African Democratic Rally) 1960–1968, (Democratic Union of the Malian People) 1976–1991
• Mauritania (Mauritanian People’s Party) 1961–1978
• Mozambique (FRELIMO) 1975–1990
• Niger (Nigerien Progressive Party – African Democratic Rally) 1960–1974, (National Movement for the Development of Society) 1989–1991
• Rwanda (Parmehutu) 1965–1973, (National Republican Movement for Democracy and Development) 1975-1991
• São Tomé and Príncipe (Movement for the Liberation of São Tomé and Príncipe/Social Democratic Party) 1975–1990
• Senegal (Socialist Party of Senegal) 1966–1974
• Seychelles (Seychelles People’s Progressive Front) 1977–1991
• Sierra Leone (All People’s Congress) 1978–1991
• Somalia (Somali Revolutionary Socialist Party) 1976–1991
• Sudan (Sudanese Socialist Union) 1971–1985, (National Congress Party) 1989–2005
• Tanzania (Chama Cha Mapinduzi) 1977–1992
• Tanganyika (Tanganyika African National Union) 1961–1977
• Zanzibar (Afro-Shirazi Party) 1964–1977
• Togo (Party of Togolese Unity) 1962–1963, (Rally of the Togolese People) 1969–1991
• Uganda (Uganda People’s Congress) 1969–1971
• Zambia (United National Independence Party) 1972–1990
• Some Middle Eastern and North African states;
• Algeria (National Liberation Front) 1962–1989
• Egypt (National Union) 1956–1958 and 1961–1962, (Arab Socialist Union) 1962–1976
• Libya (Arab Socialist Union) 1971–1977
• North Yemen (General People’s Congress) 1982–1988
• South Yemen (Yemeni Socialist Party) 1978–1990
• Tunisia (Neo Destour) 1963–1964, (Socialist Destourian Party) 1964–1981
• United Arab Republic (National Union) 1958–1961.

Theoretically, a one-party system did not recognize the rainbow variety of the state. But in actual fact, in the allocation of offices, both elective and appointive, it practiced affirmative action.
But by the 1990s, Africa enjoyed its democratic spring when hundreds of new political parties sprung up especially in those one-party states.
The second group can be classified into those states that run a fully functional open space system with an open multi-party system. Nigeria between 1954 and 1966, 1979-1984 will be an example of this. Between 1954 and 1966, there were three major parties in Nigeria, namely the Northern Peoples’ Congress,(representing the North), the National Council of Nigerian Citizens (with a national spread, but with the catchment area being in Eastern Nigeria) and the Action Group (representing the West). But there were also several mini parties. Between 1979 and 1984, there were the: –

• Greater Nigerian People’s Party (GNPP)
• National Party of Nigeria (NPN)
• Nigeria Advance Party (NAP)
• Nigerian People’s Party (NPP)
• People’s Redemption Party (PRP)
• Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN)
• Movement of the People Party (MPP),

Of which the GNPP, NPN, NPP and UPN were the major parties, while the others were marginal
The third group will be those who run an open space system with a restricted multiparty system. States which typified this system are states which originally ran a one party-system but on opening up the system, used their original position to maintain a dominance of a contrived system. Examples are the Movimento Popular de Libertação de Angola, the Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front, the Parti Démocratique Gabonais or the Rassemblement Démocratique du Peuple Camerounais)

Prof. A. Bolaji Akinyemi, CFR, delivered this lecture at the Maiden Edition of Engr. (Rev) Et Ikpong Ikpong Etteh (OFR) Annual Distinguished Lecture held, at the Oriental Hotel, Lekki, Lagos, on Wednesday, December 16, 2015

Nigerian pop star, Davido and his baby-mama, Sophie are presently involved in a feud over the custody of their child, Imade.
The story has taken various shapes, starting from the airport incident to the petition written against Davido by Sophie to Davido’s lengthy open letter.
The issue is on everyone’s lips and we sought out entertainers and stakeholders on who should take custody of the child.
Davido’s family took custody of the baby following allegation that Imade had been infected by marijuana which was said to have been passed to the seven month old baby through breast-feeding. Sophie is claiming that Davido’s family abducted the baby and planned taking her abroad but Immigration officials helped her stop the trip.
They shouldn’t have dragged this into public glare – Seun Omojola, actress and filmmaker
They shouldn’t have dragged that child into public glare. I believe whatever issue they are having should be sorted out in closed doors. The child will definitely grow up and read about it some day. It’s not good . You cannot take a child away from her mother. They both have the right to her custody. It shouldn’t be full custody for one person. It’s their child.
She made a mistake from the onset – Yetunde Bakare, actress and movie producer
According to reports, she left her child when she was just two months old. It doesn’t show any trait of her being a responsible mother. Davido should take the custody of the child because he has been catering for her from infant-hood. I know all these will not matter if her monthly allowance was not stopped. It will not have become a public discourse. It isn’t for the fact that she loves the child. It’s like Sophie Momodu has an ulterior motive. The child was taken away from her when she was two months old. If she had expressed her grouse then, she would have probably gotten justice. She made a mistake from the onset.
Joint custody will be the best for both sides – Annette Cookey, singer
I really don’t like to get into other people’s personal issues but I believe joint custody will be best for both sides, especially for the child. The child’s well-being should come first. The baby needs the dad, mum and an emotionally healthy environment to grow and of course to become great.
No one has the right to separate a mother from her child– Esther Ijewere Kalejaiye, Coordinator, Walk Against Rape
No one has the right to separate a mother from her child. If she has issues as alleged, then her family can step in and take care of the child, while she sorts herself. Above all, I believe both parties should manage the situation maturely and find a common ground because of the child. Sophie’s family should take the custody of the child. Davido can’t take the child away from her.
No child should be denied motherly love – Moji Olaiya, actress and movie producer
Our Constitution supports Sophie having the custody of the child because the child is under aged. But due to the hazards her company may have on the child, I think she has forfeited that right. However, under no circumstance should a child be denied motherly love, care and affection. Therefore, Sophie should have the child but should be supervised by a close relative, preferably her mother.
Davido will give his child more attention – Senator (comedian)
Sophie is not medically fit to have the child in her custody. Davido will give his child more attention. If Davido had not “abducted” the child from his baby-mama as purported by Sophie, Imade will be dead by now. And there won’t be need for this conversation. I think Sophie needs to learn how to manage her health before entrusting the welfare of a child to her.
Don’t deny Sophie access to her child – Awele Odita, actress and movie producer
I am of the opinion that Davido should not deny his baby-mama access to their child even if he has the child in his custody. No woman from the place I come from would leave her child for a man. The African custom frowns at that. She should
keep the child.
Let the court decide – Hannah Ogundare, actress
Davido’s story is more convincing, but let the court decide.
Davido should fight for the custody of the child —Imelda J
People that know me too well will agree with me that I don’t joke with any issue that has to do with women in the society. In fact, I am a feminist to a fault. But looking at the whole scenario, I am tempted to throw my weight behind Davido provided all the evidences he has tended are true. I am not saying this because I am an artiste, but simply because I am actually baffled by some of the revelations and exhibits provided by the Adelekes. The Momodus claimed that baby Imade was abducted about five months ago. Why didn’t Sophia raise the alarm or better still establish a case in the court against Davido then?
Why did she in the first place accept to collect money from the Adelekes’ overtime? Is it that she was enjoying the money and forgot that her child was not with her? Why would any reasonable woman succumb to pressure no matter the situation, and accept money in place of the happiness of her new born baby? If indeed she was forced to give away her child, why did she accept the N300,000 that was allocated to her? After pondering over these questions, I feel that Sophia over- stepped her boundaries. I have read a lot of comments and realized that most people, especially men were just insulting Davido because he is one brother they will never have. Yes, he is from a wealthy background. And he’s a successful musician. So, many people failed to realize that Davido is also human. He has feelings and has worked hard to earn his place in the music industry. Many Nigerian artistes know too well that it is not easy to get to where Davido is today. I want to advice those who have been raining insults on Davido to have a rethink.
I have personally witnessed a situation whereby men will impregnate a lady without taking responsibility. Some ladies have been disowned by their parents’ houses, as a result of giving birth out of wedlock. But in this case, Davido decided to act responsible regardless of his age. I think that action alone should have honoured the Momodus. They (Momodus) are asking for too much. But what is important here is the welfare of the poor child. I advice the Momodus and the Adelekes to resolve their differences amicably. Davido should please use the legal means to protect the life of that child. And to his fans out there. He was 21years as at then and could have been manipulated by his estranged lover. Remember everybody makes mistake. That you are a baby mama does not make your baby Daddy.
Davido should make his baby-mama happy—GT Da Guitarman
The beautiful thing is that Davido has already owned up to his responsibilities as the father of the child. He loves the child but also needs to accommodate the mother. It is not good enough to take away the mother from her child. Davido should do all in his power to make Sophie happy. The deed has been done and it can’t be changed. He needs to inculcate her into the family for the sake of the child.
Stop the ongoing media war —Adokiye
If both families have an existing squabble, they can resolve it through proper dialogue and in turn encourage Davido to legally marry his baby mama because by so doing, they will save themselves a lot of future problems which include addressing and treating the innocent child as illegitimate. It is also my opinion that both families should settle any existing squabble amicably and put a stop to the ongoing media war.
It’s a personal problem—Ego, singer
I don’t know the full story but personally, I don’t like talking about my colleagues. This is because I see that as their personal problems. I don’t like involving myself in their problems.
I won’t say anything—Faze, singer
I don’t like talking about people’s private lives. Moreover, they are my colleagues, so I won’t say anything as long as they are still my colleagues.
They should allow the mother to take custody—David Karnji, Infinity group artiste
My advice is that since the baby is still young, Davido’s family should allow the mother to take care of her baby. Actually, a child needs the mother more than the father and looking at the lifestyle of musicians, it’s best to allow the baby to grow before they fight over who takes custody of the baby. But if the mother is living a lifestyle that is not suitable for the growth of the child, it is better to allow the father the custody of the child.

Leader of Islamist sect group Boko Haram, Abubakar Shekau has dismissed the Army’s claim of massive gains in the fight to annihilate the terror group in Nigeria’s Northeast. He also mocked President Muhammadu Buhari calling him a liar.
In a 25-minute recording in Hausa and Arabic released via social media, Shekau said: “They (the military) lied that they have confiscated our arms, that we have been chased out of our territories, that we are in disarray.
“We are alive, I am alive, this is my voice, more audible than it was before. This is Shekau.”
Speaking further, the Boko Haram leader said: “Buhari is a liar and has deceived you. The army spokesman is also lying. He and his footsoldiers always run helter-skelter whenever we come face to face with them….
“Buhari, you once claimed that you will crush us in three months. How can you crush us?”
Although there was no indication of where or when the recording was done, reports suggest it must have have been in recent days.