By Blaise Udunze

Nigerians should gear up to start seeking accountability from those in power because the country is gradually entering one of the most dangerous phases in its economic history, not merely because inflation is high, unemployment is worsening, or public debt is rising, but because the institutions responsible for telling them the truth about the economy are either failing, compromised, silent or increasingly non-transparent.

At the centre of this deepening crisis are two disturbing realities. First is the National Bureau of Statistics’ failure to publish credible and updated labour force data for more than 14 months, despite unemployment being identified globally as Nigeria’s biggest economic threat. Second is the Budget Office of the Federation’s refusal or inability to publish statutory budget implementation reports for three consecutive quarters in violation of the Fiscal Responsibility Act.

Together, these failures represent something far more dangerous than administrative delay. They expose a governance culture increasingly defined by selective transparency, institutional opacity and economic manipulation. Nigeria is now dangerously close to governing itself without verifiable facts.

A nation cannot plan effectively when it cannot measure unemployment honestly. Neither can it fight corruption or fiscal leakages when it refuses to disclose how public funds are being spent. This is not merely an economic problem. It is a crisis of national credibility.

The irony is painful. While the World Economic Forum’s Global Risks Report identified unemployment and lack of economic opportunity as Nigeria’s leading economic threat for 2026, Nigeria itself has failed to publish official labour statistics capable of accurately measuring that threat since the second quarter of 2024.

That silence speaks volumes and could keep everyone wondering what the problem might be. At a period when millions of Nigerian youths are trapped between hopelessness, with an inflation rate currently 15.69 per cent, collapsing purchasing power and shrinking job opportunities, the absence of current labour data creates an economic blind spot of dangerous proportions. Policymakers are formulating reforms without clear visibility into labour realities.

Investors are assessing risks using outdated or disputed figures. With the apparent lack of clear direction, citizens are left with no choice but to wonder whether economic statistics are now instruments of propaganda rather than reflections of reality.

The controversy surrounding the infamous 4.3 per cent unemployment figure released by the NBS in 2024 only deepened this distrust. It is both laughable and amazing for millions of Nigerians struggling daily to survive. The claim that unemployment had magically crashed from over 33 per cent in 2020 to about 3.06 per cent rate for 2025 felt detached from reality, which is based on March 2026 reports. Factories were shutting down. Multinationals were exiting Nigeria. Manufacturing firms were downsizing. Informal labour was exploding. Youth migration was accelerating. Yet official statistics suggested Nigeria was suddenly approaching near-full employment.

The explanation lay in the controversial redesign of the unemployment methodology. Under the revised framework, anybody who worked even minimal hours weekly could be classified as employed. While the NBS argued that the changes aligned with international best practices, critics insisted that the methodology ignored Nigeria’s peculiar economic conditions, dominated by underemployment, survival jobs, disguised unemployment and casual labour.

The backlash was immediate and fierce. The Nigeria Labour Congress described the report as “fraudulent” and a “voodoo document”. Labour leaders warned that rebasing employment definitions merely to produce lower unemployment figures would destroy public trust in national statistics. Trade unions, manufacturers and employers’ associations openly rejected the figures.

The reality confronting businesses contradicted the official optimism. Textile factories were closing. Manufacturers were rationalising staff due to unbearable energy costs, foreign exchange instability and multiple taxation. Labour unions lamented rising casualisation as permanent jobs disappeared. The National Union of Chemical, Footwear, Rubber, Leather and Non-Metallic Products Employees revealed it had lost over 20,000 workers within one year because companies could no longer survive Nigeria’s harsh operating environment.

Yet official figures suggested unemployment was falling. This contradiction is dangerous because economic data is not supposed to comfort governments; it is supposed to guide policy.

When data becomes politically convenient rather than economically truthful, governance itself becomes distorted.

The problem is not merely methodological. It is institutional credibility. Why did the unemployment rate collapse statistically while poverty, inflation and hunger worsened visibly? Why has the NBS failed to publish updated labour force statistics for over 14 months if confidence in the methodology remains intact? Why are citizens increasingly suspicious of official numbers?

Unarguably, these questions matter because trust in national statistics is foundational to economic governance, but it appears that policymakers place less importance on this fact.

One thing that is missing is that they have yet to take into cognisance that countries cannot attract sustainable investments when investors doubt the credibility of official data. This is to say that international lenders, development institutions, and private investors depend on reliable statistics to evaluate risks, forecast growth and allocate resources. Once statistical integrity becomes questionable, economic credibility suffers.

Unfortunately, the non-transparency surrounding labour data is now being mirrored in Nigeria’s fiscal management architecture. The Budget Office of the Federation has failed to publish statutory budget implementation reports for three consecutive quarters despite explicit provisions of the Fiscal Responsibility Act requiring quarterly disclosure.

This failure is profound. Budget implementation reports are not ceremonial publications.  But they have failed to acknowledge that these are among the few mechanisms citizens possess to independently evaluate whether public funds are being used responsibly. The simple fact is that these reports reveal actual revenue generated, expenditures incurred, projects executed and budget performance levels. Without them, public finance enters dangerous darkness.

According to findings, reports for the third and fourth quarters of 2025 and the first quarter of 2026 remain unpublished. This marks the first time in 15 years that Nigeria’s Budget Office has failed to release quarterly budget performance reports.

More concerning is that this comes at a time when Nigeria is implementing one of the largest budgets in its history. The National Assembly recently approved a staggering N68.3 trillion 2026 budget, significantly higher than the original N58.4 trillion proposal. While government officials describe it as a “legacy budget” aimed at infrastructure development and capital investment, Nigerians still do not know how previous budgets were substantially implemented.

This creates a dangerous accountability vacuum. How can citizens assess whether previous allocations achieved measurable outcomes when implementation reports are hidden? How can lawmakers exercise oversight without timely disclosures? How can anti-corruption agencies track leakages effectively? How can development partners verify fiscal discipline?

The truth is simple because unpublished budgets create fertile grounds for corruption, waste and fiscal manipulation.

More troubling are recent revelations from the World Bank exposing structural leakages within Nigeria’s fiscal system. According to the institution, over N34.53 trillion was diverted through pre-distribution deductions between 2023 and 2025 before revenues reached the Federation Account.

That figure is staggering. The World Bank warned that approximately 41 per cent of government revenues never reached distributable pools because they were deducted as “first-line charges” by agencies operating outside conventional budgetary scrutiny.

Reports indicating that over $214 billion in public funds may have been lost, diverted, or trapped in non-transparent fiscal systems over the last decade capture the scale of Nigeria’s accountability crisis. More recently, it’s the shenanigans on the FAAC allocations of N800billion funds from States’ statutory shares meant to pay civil servants and improve on social amenities were channelled into private accounts linked to the Governor of Imo State, Hope Uzodinma, Chairman of the Progressive Governors Forum, to fund Tinubu’s 2027 re-election campaign.

With these intolerable developments, it becomes glaring that this is precisely why transparency without secrecy matters. The challenge is that when billions and trillions of funds move through non-transparent structures without rigorous disclosure, accountability collapses, whilst the citizens lose visibility over public finances and institutions responsible for oversight become weakened or compromised, which remains a litmus test for trust.

ActionAid Nigeria rightly described the development as “institutionalised revenue erosion” and warned that continued impenetrability undermines fiscal stability, public trust and development.

Truly and without an iota of doubt, its warning deserves more serious attention at this time. At a period when Nigerians are enduring painful economic reforms, rising transport costs, collapsing purchasing power, worsening insecurity and deepening hunger, every missing naira has human consequences. Every hidden expenditure weakens healthcare delivery, education, infrastructure and social protection.

One painful and unbearable approach is that instead of increasing transparency to reassure citizens, government institutions appear increasingly hard to understand, just to continue in their criminal and wasteful acts.

The consequences extend beyond economics into democratic legitimacy itself. Public trust erodes when citizens believe governments manipulate data, conceal budget performance and evade accountability. Eventually, institutions lose moral authority. Official figures become objects of suspicion rather than instruments of governance.

This is the larger danger confronting Nigeria today. Economic suffocation rarely begins with recession alone. It begins when institutions stop telling the truth.

It begins when governments prioritise narrative management over measurable realities. It deepens when citizens can no longer independently verify claims about unemployment, inflation, debt, revenue or budget performance.

Nigeria now risks entering that dangerous territory. Even more concerning is the growing culture of overlapping budgets, delayed implementation cycles and weak fiscal discipline. The government is reportedly still implementing components of previous budgets while simultaneously introducing new appropriations worth tens of trillions of naira.

This raises serious questions about planning efficiency, execution capacity and fiscal sustainability. If only about a quarter of approved capital expenditure is being effectively implemented, as recent reports suggest, then Nigeria’s challenge is not merely budget size but governance quality. Large budgets without transparency become monuments of waste.

The Fiscal Responsibility Commission, established to enforce compliance, has also appeared largely ineffective. Although the Fiscal Responsibility Act outlines numerous offences, enforcement remains weak while violations attract little or no consequences.

This culture of impunity emboldens institutional noncompliance. The implications for Nigeria’s economy are severe.

In every functional business atmosphere, foreign investors seek predictable and transparent environments. Credit rating agencies evaluate governance credibility alongside macroeconomic indicators. Development institutions increasingly emphasise fiscal accountability and data reliability, but this does not apply to Nigeria.

An economy governed through disputed statistics and unpublished fiscal reports cannot inspire long-term confidence. The Tinubu administration must take cognisance of the fact that credibility itself is now an economic asset.

Understandably, reforms may initially be painful, but the irresistible fact is that citizens tolerate sacrifice better when governance appears transparent, honest and accountable. What destroys confidence is the perception that institutions are concealing realities while citizens bear the burden of economic hardship.

Nigeria does not merely need economic reforms. It needs truth-based governance. The National Bureau of Statistics must urgently restore credibility by publishing updated labour force statistics transparently and consistently. Methodological frameworks should be openly explained, while stakeholder engagement must be strengthened to rebuild public confidence.

Similarly, the Budget Office must immediately release all outstanding budget implementation reports as required by law. Judging from the trend of events, it is a well-known fact that fiscal transparency cannot remain optional in a struggling economy already burdened by debt, inflation and widespread distrust.

Beyond publication, enforcement mechanisms must become stronger. Institutions that violate statutory disclosure obligations should face consequences. Accountability cannot survive where compliance is selective.

Nigeria’s future depends not only on how much revenue it generates or how large its budgets become, but on whether institutions remain credible enough to manage public trust.

Because no economy can thrive sustainably and more importantly, Nigeria cannot build its $1 trllion economy on invisible budgets, missing labour data, manufactured statistics and selective transparency. And no nation survives for long when truth itself becomes negotiable.

Blaise, a journalist and PR professional, writes from Lagos and can be reached via: [email protected]

By Michael Owhoko, PhD

Inevitable deaths are in the offing in 2027.  Those familiar with Nigeria’s electoral mythology, history and patterns know that the 2027 general elections will be a harbinger of death, powered by electoral violence. It will take a miracle to escape what will play out.  People will die. Nigerians will perish. Hospitals will be overwhelmed.  Nigerians must therefore brace up for the coming calamity, as the intensity and scale will make it a memorable year of regrettable carnage.  All six geopolitical areas of the country will be affected.

The event will further rub off on the country’s troubling global perception, and worsen its negative profile as the 5th most violent country in the world, and 4th in the Global Terrorism Index 2026, ranking as the 6^th deadliest and 7^th most dangerous country for civilians in the world.  Besides, the elections will threaten democratic norms, political stability, and erode faith in public institutions due to brazen manipulation of the electoral process.

The coming calamity will largely be fueled by electoral insecurity engendered by the desperation of political parties to outwit one another, particularly the ruling party, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the main opposition parties, including the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC).  While the APC will go all out and spare nothing to retain the incumbent government of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu for a second term in office, the ADC and the NDC will deploy every resource at their disposal to dislodge and replace the current APC Government, causing public uproar.

Though other political parties will also show strength and slug it out, the election will be fiercely contested by the APC, NDC and ADC.  The stakes are high, and driven by illogical greed and lust for power to control political authority and economic resources, even though the resources are poorly appropriated, and most times, thoughtlessly deployed to protect pride, fund vanity, and maintain empires, as against judicious application for improved living conditions for citizens.

The political parties are likely to deploy political thugs masked as party officials to the field to reinforce their internal strategic plans to achieve programmed goals.  By their planned political conduct and indifference, the political parties will, unwittingly, diminish the value of human lives during the general elections.  This is the picture of what the country will experience in next year’s general elections.

Before you ask me for proof, go and verify the antecedents of political parties and how their leaders ignited the political atmosphere to set the tone for violence and rigging through their utterances and body language, influenced by irrational desires to achieve electoral victory at all costs.  Except for former President Goodluck Jonathan, all presidential candidates since 1999 to date are guilty of stoking the polity through their predilection and declarations.

For example, prelude to the April 2007 Presidential election, the then President Olusegun Obasanjo had alluded that the election would be a “do-or-die affair”.  As simple as the statement was, it encouraged supporters of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) to go the extra mile to push for victory at all costs without thought of probable consequences.  Evidently, this resulted in violence and fatalities across the country.

Also, during the 2011 elections, when former and late President Muhammadu Buhari, then candidate of Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), lost to Goodluck Jonathan, his demeanour and post-election utterances, undeniably, provoked and encouraged election violence in parts of the country, particularly in the north-west.

According to Human Rights Watch, over 800 people were killed, and more than 65,000 persons were displaced in the 2011 general elections following widespread protests and riots by Buhari’s supporters in the northern states. The killings, which were worsened by sectarian colouration, occurred in Adamawa, Bauchi, Borno, Gombe, Jigawa, Kaduna, Kano, Katsina, Niger, Sokoto, Yobe, and Zamfara.

Without showing empathy for the high number of Nigerians killed, including innocent National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) members, Buhari further threatened that if the next elections scheduled for 2015 were rigged like the 2011 elections, “the dog and the baboon would all be soaked in blood”, implying that violence and death would be inevitable in the 2015 elections. Clearly, Buhari’s comment was an indication of political desperation, intended to use the threat of force and violence to effect the outcome of the political contest, as against allowing the impartial verdict of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

Luckily for Nigeria, former President Jonathan conceded defeat, preventing Buhari’s threat from coming to pass in 2015.  Jonathan’s action not only doused tension, but it also averted widespread killings and bloodshed that would have accompanied the announcement of the result in his favour, particularly in the northern part of the country.  Jonathan’s position was obviously dictated by his philosophy that his ambition and that of anybody was not worth the blood of any Nigerian, which he held as an article of faith throughout the period of the 2015 general elections, preferring a credible and peaceful election.

Also, the incumbent President, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, is not immune from utterances that have encouraged violence.  While addressing party members in London in 2023, Tinubu said political power was not served a la carte, but must be secured through intense efforts by “fighting for it, grabbing it, snatching it and running with it”.  Whatever that means, this remark was not only unhelpful, it encouraged rigging and violence, as well as opened a new vista of political desperation and redefinition of new premises for an unhealthy autochthonous political process.

A parallel can be drawn between Tinubu’s statement and an incident that occurred at a polling unit in the Lekki axis of Lagos during the 2023 general elections. After queuing for hours in the sun to cast votes, just when ballot papers were to be counted at the end of voting, some thugs emerged from nowhere, scared away voters, seized the ballot box and left with it, perhaps, to thumbprint fresh ballot papers.  Surely, there is a correlation between their actions and the political philosophy of “fighting for it, grab it, snatch it and run with it”.

In a similar vein, the Secretary of the Board of Trustees of the New Nigeria People’s Party (NNPP), Alhaji Buba Galadima, recently advised Nigerians to defend their votes in the coming 2027 elections with “bottles and jerry cans of kerosene”.  This is an obvious reference to violence and an invitation to anarchy.  Indeed, it is a precursor, as a worst-case scenario marked by an unhealthy electoral struggle will be thrown up in the 2027 general elections, where the value of human lives will be degraded.

The culture of killings in every election circle in Nigeria has become legendary.  Among all African countries, and indeed, the world over where elections are conducted, Nigeria is reputed for election manipulation and violence, attracting undue global spotlight. As elections draw closer, skepticism, uncertainty, fear, and apprehension permeate the atmosphere due to expected violence.

Though it is the responsibility of the government to protect and guarantee the safety of lives during elections, past assurances by the government to protect the lives of citizens did not translate to safety. When a few successes are discounted, you find that security agencies have proved to be incapable of handling high-level violence, like what happened in the 2011 elections, where over 800 people lost their lives.

From antecedents, politicians are careless about deaths and can sacrifice the blood of innocent Nigerians on the altar of electoral victory.   Their interests and activities are driven more by the value of votes, as evident during post-election litigations where they seek legal redress for electoral malpractice rather than justice for the dead.

Sadly, the coming deaths will dwarf all previous politically related killings in the country, necessitating the need to prioritise personal safety.  It is imperative to identify and avoid electoral black spots that are notorious for violence.  Political thugs are likely to trigger violence by creating an atmosphere of fear and intimidation at polling units aimed at electoral manipulations.

Citizens are therefore advised to devise safety nets that will shield and guarantee personal safety in the event of an obvious threat to life, even if it means avoiding polling booths.  Recalled that Nigerians who died during previous election cycles had since been forgotten, and the country moved on without them.  Therefore, citizens need to protect themselves to avoid being counted among the dead in the pending catastrophe in 2027.

Dr Mike Owhoko, Lagos-based public policy analyst, author, and journalist, can be reached at www.mikeowhoko.com and followed on X (formerly Twitter) @michaelowhoko.

By Blaise Udunze

When the word “xenophobic” is talked about, most affected African countries tend to focus on the pains being experienced by their citizens in South Africa. For a moment, it calls for Nigeria and the rest of the African continent to pause and ask, how did we get here?

The recent happenings across the streets of Johannesburg, Pretoria, and Durban, a painful pattern continues to unfold with frightening and fearful regularity, as Nigerian-owned businesses are looted, migrants hunted, families displaced, and African nationals reduced to targets of rage. If asked, the majority would chorus that the recurring images of xenophobic violence in South Africa are disturbing enough, and no doubt, yes, but the deeper tragedy is beyond the flames and bloodshed. It lies in the silent failures back home that forced many Nigerians into vulnerable exile in the first place.

The reality, as a matter of fact, is that to understand the suffering of Nigerians in South Africa, one must first confront the uncomfortable truth that xenophobia is not merely a South African problem. It is also a Nigerian governance problem exported abroad.

Nigeria, often celebrated as the “Giant of Africa,” has now become the “Mama Africa” who has failed to nurture her many children, with the fact that behind every Nigerian fleeing hardship for survival, known as the “japa” syndrome, in another African country is a story shaped by economic frustration, failed institutions, poor leadership, unemployment, and a financial system disconnected from the realities of ordinary citizens.

One apt way to confirm these inimical factors, the South African president, Cyril Ramaphosa, recently acknowledged this uncomfortable reality when he urged African leaders to address the domestic failures driving mass migration across the continent. Speaking amid renewed anti-foreigner tensions, Ramaphosa identified “misgovernance” as one of the factors forcing Africans to seek refuge in countries like South Africa. Of a truth, his comments may have generated debate, and some “patriotic Nigerians” may also want to prove him wrong, but they reflected a painful reality many African governments would rather avoid.

Nigeria, despite its vast human and natural resources, has increasingly become a country where millions no longer see a future at home. This is a critical irony and the height of it all because a nation blessed with oil wealth and entrepreneurial energy and one of the youngest populations in the world is yet burdened by systemic corruption, policy inconsistency, infrastructural collapse, and a leadership class that has often prioritised politics over productivity, especially with the imminence of an election.

It is so detestable and at the same time fearful that the result is a generation of young Nigerians trapped between hopelessness and migration.

One regrettable experience that has continued to haunt the country for decades is that successive governments have squandered opportunities that could have transformed Nigeria into an industrial and economic powerhouse. Public resources that should have been invested in power, roads, healthcare, manufacturing, education and enterprise development have either disappeared into private pockets or become trapped in wasteful bureaucratic structures.

Reports indicating that over $214 billion in public funds may have been lost, diverted, or trapped in opaque fiscal systems over the last decade capture the scale of Nigeria’s accountability crisis. Whether exact or conservative, such figures reveal a country losing resources or funds rapidly from severe bleeding that could have changed millions of lives.

Looking intently at these developments, one would know that the tragedy is not merely corruption itself but the opportunities corruption destroyed.

Come to think of this fact that with proper governance and strategic economic planning, Nigeria could have developed a thriving SME ecosystem capable of employing millions of citizens. Instead, unemployment and underemployment have become defining realities of national life. The World Economic Forum recently identified unemployment and lack of economic opportunity as Nigeria’s greatest economic threat, yet the country continues to struggle with coherent employment data and long-term economic direction.

This economic suffocation explains why migration has become less of a choice and more of a survival strategy for many Nigerians.

At the centre of this crisis is another troubling contradiction, which is that Nigeria’s banking sector appears increasingly profitable while the real economy continues to deteriorate.

Ordinarily, banks in developing economies are expected to function as engines of growth by financing productive sectors, supporting innovation, and empowering small businesses. Across the world, SMEs are recognised as the backbone of grassroots economic development, and the tangible result is that they create jobs, stimulate local production, and expand economic participation.

In Nigeria, SMEs account for over 70 per cent of registered businesses, contribute nearly half of the country’s GDP and generate between 84 and 90 per cent of employment. Yet, despite their enormous economic importance, SMEs receive barely between 0.5 per cent and one per cent of total commercial bank lending.

This is not just a policy failure; it is an economic tragedy. Rather than financing entrepreneurs and productive enterprises, Nigerian banks have increasingly found comfort in investing heavily in government treasury securities. In 2025 alone, major Nigerian banks reportedly generated N6.68 trillion from total investment securities and treasury bills, benefiting from high-yield government debt instruments instead of supporting businesses capable of creating jobs.

The banking sector’s recapitalisation exercise, which successfully raised N4.56 trillion, was celebrated as a regulatory achievement. But the critical question remains. The recapitalisation is for what purpose?

If stronger banks continue to avoid the productive economy while SMEs remain starved of affordable credit, recapitalisation merely strengthens financial institutions without strengthening national development.

Today, private sector credit in Nigeria remains significantly low compared to many African economies. High interest rates, excessive collateral demands, weak credit infrastructure and risk-averse banking practices have created an environment where small businesses struggle to survive, and these implications are devastating.

Every denied SME loan is a denied employment opportunity. Every failed business is another frustrated entrepreneur. Every frustrated entrepreneur is another Nigerian considering migration.

This is how economic dysfunction transforms into human displacement. In a situation like this, it is noteworthy to state that South Africa naturally becomes an attractive destination because of its relatively advanced infrastructure and larger economy. Today, this has informed Nigerians and other African countries alike to migrate there, not because they hate their country but because they are searching for dignity through work and enterprise.

Yet, in a cruel twist, many become targets of xenophobic violence. Foreign nationals are accused of “taking jobs,” dominating businesses, and contributing to crime. Shops are attacked. Businesses are burned. Lives are lost.

It is not a surprise anymore that the disturbing rhetoric surrounding xenophobia has become increasingly normalised and perceived as fighting against saboteurs. Another major concern is that social media posts celebrating violence against Nigerians reveal a frightening and fearful dehumanisation of fellow Africans. This has continued to be heralded unaddressed, as some extremist anti-migrant groups now openly mobilise hostility against foreign nationals under the guise of economic nationalism.

Yet, as opposition leader Julius Malema rightly asked during one of the recent xenophobic debates. “After attacking foreigners and shutting down their businesses, how many jobs have actually been created?” If you are smart enough to know, it is glaring that this is a question that cuts through the emotional manipulation surrounding xenophobia, which also reflects the fact that destroying a Nigerian-owned shop does not solve unemployment, nor does killing migrants create prosperity. Violence against fellow Africans does not fix structural inequality.

Malema’s argument was blunt but accurate in revealing that xenophobia is not an economic strategy. It must be perceived with the right perspective as the symptom of deeper failures, poverty, inequality, weak governance, and political frustration.

Historically, just like other colonised African countries, South Africa itself carries deep old wounds. The legacy of apartheid left enduring economic inequalities, spatial segregation, unemployment, and psychological scars, but this should not continue to shape social tensions today. What is of concern is that the same people, like other African countries, experienced, were expected to remain forward-looking and forge ahead rather than dwell in the past.

It is even more pathetic that decades after the fall of apartheid, millions of Black South Africans remain trapped in poverty and exclusion; perhaps they are not to be blamed for their failures as they claimed, but the foreigners who didn’t stop them from exerting their skills become the scapegoats.

That frustration often seeks an outlet, and immigrants become easy scapegoats. This, however, does not excuse the brutality.

The stories emerging from xenophobic attacks are horrifying and very dastardly and humiliating, as African migrants have reportedly been beaten, burned alive, stoned, and hunted in communities where they once sought refuge, as two Nigerian citizens were said to have been beaten and burnt to death. To say the least, the pain becomes even more ironic when viewed against history.

Because Nigeria played a major role in supporting South Africa’s anti-apartheid struggle, ranging from financial assistance to diplomatic pressure, scholarships, activism, and cultural solidarity, Nigerians stood firmly with Black South Africans during some of apartheid’s darkest years, which was enough to prevent such ugly events. Nigeria did so much to the point that Nigerian students contributed financially to anti-apartheid campaigns. Nigerian musicians used music to mobilise continental resistance. Successive governments invested enormous diplomatic and material resources into the liberation struggle.

The children and grandchildren of those who made such sacrifices are now among those facing hostility in South Africa today.

History makes the tragedy even heavier. Yet, Nigeria must also confront its own failures honestly. The truth is, if Nigeria had invested half the energy it spent supporting external liberation struggles into building a functional domestic economy, perhaps millions of Nigerians would not be fleeing abroad in search of economic survival today.

The painful reality is that many Nigerians abroad are not economic adventurers; they are economic exiles.

The ugliest side of it all is that they are exiled by unemployment, exiled by corruption, and exiled by policy failures. Again, they are exiled by a system that has repeatedly failed to convert national wealth into shared prosperity but into embezzlement that still finds its resting place in a foreign account.

This is why solving xenophobia requires more than diplomatic protests or emotional outrage, as exuded in the National Assembly by some members like Adams Oshiomhole and others. This calls for the political actors and those in the financial space to fix the conditions that force Nigerians into vulnerable migration in the first place.

One undeniable fact is that, as a country, Nigeria must fundamentally rethink governance and economic management as it takes into consideration the following solutions.

First, public accountability must become non-negotiable and should not be compromised anywhere. Corruption and resource mismanagement are critical and have robbed generations of opportunities, and these are the major traits fueling the exile. Infrastructure, industrial development, education, and healthcare must become genuine priorities rather than campaign slogans, as all these must become a reality, not a feeble promise.

Second, the banking sector must reconnect with the real economy. Financial institutions cannot continue generating enormous profits from government securities while productive sectors collapse. The government should hold a roundtable discussion with banks, which must be incentivised and, where necessary, compelled to increase lending to SMEs and productive industries capable of generating employment.

Third, there must be deliberate and conscious investment in skills, innovation, and entrepreneurship. Young Nigerians should not have to leave their homeland merely to survive because it is an aberration for a country that is enormously rich but still has some of its best hands eloping from the country.

Finally, African governments must reject the politics of division and scapegoating. This contradiction is at its height because Africa cannot claim to pursue continental unity while Africans are hunted in other African countries.

In all of the deliberation, the truth remains the same, in the sense that the story of Nigerians suffering xenophobic violence in South Africa is ultimately a story about failed systems on both sides, one on the side of economic failures pushing migrants out and the social failures turning migrants into enemies.

Until these structural realities are confronted with honesty and urgency, the cycle will continue. More young Nigerians will leave. More migrants will become vulnerable. More African societies will turn inward against each other.

But this trajectory is not irreversible. One gift that can’t be taken away from Nigerians is that Nigeria still possesses the talent, entrepreneurial energy, and human capital necessary to build a prosperous economy that gives its citizens reasons to stay rather than flee. The truth is that what has been lacking is not potential but responsible leadership and economic vision.

The true solution to xenophobia may therefore begin far away from the streets of Johannesburg or Durban. It may begin in Abuja, with governance that works, institutions that serve, banks that invest in people, and leadership that finally understands that national dignity is measured not by speeches but by whether citizens can build meaningful lives at home.

Until then, the “japa” flag will keep flying, as many Nigerians will remain exiled, not merely by borders, but by the failures of the country they still desperately want to believe in.

Blaise, a journalist and PR professional, writes from Lagos and can be reached via: [email protected]