Between Shelter and Safety: Rethinking Tenancy and Family Protection

When we think of housing, most of us see it as shelter. But a home is more than four walls and a roof — it shapes how families live, how safe children feel, and even how they grow up. Download pdf here

Between Shelter and Safety: Rethinking Tenancy and Family Protection

When we think of housing, most of us see it as shelter. But a home is more than four walls and a roof — it shapes how families live, how safe children feel, and even how they grow up.

Why Family Safety Matters in Housing

Families don’t just rent any house. Parents worry: Will my children be safe here? Is there enough privacy? A father may think about his daughters being protected from predators, or his sons avoiding negative influences. Even the comfort and privacy of a wife matter.

Self-contained apartments can offer security and privacy, but when houses are squeezed too close together, problems arise. Sadly, in today’s market, many landlords try to use every inch of land to build something. The result is cramped apartments — sometimes so small that only a young bachelor just starting life would tolerate them.

But what happens when those same tiny flats sit next to family homes? It can create tension. Teenagers living side by side with restless young men — exactly the kind of situation parents dread. In the end, families avoid such homes, and landlords are left with empty buildings.

The Dilemma Parents Face

To shield their children, many parents go for detached, fenced houses. This way, kids are mostly at home, in school, or at church. It sounds safe, but it comes with its own problem. When children realize they are being heavily restricted, curiosity kicks in.

I once heard a story from a commercial driver. A teenage girl, on her way to sit for JAMB, told him that her parents never let her out. Boldly, she asked him to pick her up after her exams. He admitted he was tempted, but stopped himself — remembering his younger sister was about her age.

That story shows how restriction alone can backfire. Sometimes, the very rules meant to keep kids safe make them more eager to explore risky behavior.

When Risks Become Real

A single reckless encounter — a one-night stand with a stranger — can change a young girl’s life. If she becomes pregnant, the identity of the father might never be known. Beyond shame and confusion, such situations leave lasting scars on families.

Finding Balance

So, what’s the best way to protect children while renting in today’s housing market? Restriction has its place, but it can’t be the only tool. Families need homes designed with safety and privacy in mind. Landlords, too, must think beyond profit. A poorly designed house may never attract responsible tenants, no matter how cheap the rent.

Housing should not just be about making money. It is also about building an environment where families — and especially children — can feel safe, grow well, and thrive.

 

Multichoice and Warranty in Nigeria

I bought a GOTV decoder. Two days later, the power adapter stopped working. I wasn’t worried—after all, there’s always a warranty. I knew I only needed to take the faulty equipment back to the office where I purchased it.

At the office, I queued for almost an hour and a half to be attended to. There weren’t enough staff handling complaints and subscription payments. When it was finally my turn, the lady at the counter said, “The warranty doesn’t cover this. You will have to pay N500 to get another one.”

“Why doesn’t the warranty cover the power cable—for a big international company like Multichoice?” I protested. I wanted to continue arguing but realized it would be unwise to make so much noise over N500. So, I told her, “I’ll pay, but only because I don’t want to waste energy over N500.” I paid, and someone from the store handed the adapter—unwrapped—to the staff, who then gave it to me.

The whole process felt unprofessional and lacking the corporate ambience one would expect. First, the device wasn’t packaged; it was handed to me bare, as if I were buying crawfish from Kugiya Market. Second, since I had paid for it, there should have been a receipt. I wanted to uphold the Nigerian standard of a gentleman transaction. Third, the adapter wasn’t tested to confirm that it worked. This made me suspect that the warranty might actually cover such items, but the staff were exploiting the loophole to make some extra cash.

Multichoice has long been known for quality and high standards—whether in the clarity of their visuals or the reliability of their hardware. However, recent events suggest a decline. The company has faced challenges in Nigeria, from customers migrating to cheaper competitors to public protests over sudden subscription hikes of up to 20%. Each time, many thought the company would fold, yet it managed to survive.

Survival may have come at a cost. The company redesigned its decoders, opting for lighter, smaller versions made of cheap plastics with less appeal. Worse still, manufacturing was outsourced to a Chinese company. While Chinese firms are bold in mass production, they often compromise on quality.

In Multichoice’s earlier days of prestige, their hardware rarely failed within the warranty period. Companies usually issue warranties confidently because they trust the durability of their products. So when a company excludes items like power adapters from warranty, it signals they are aware of potential quality issues and want to avoid constant replacements, repairs, or refunds.

This raises a key question: should giant international companies be allowed to sell products without warranty coverage? Governments are expected to protect their citizens from exploitation by enforcing strict warranty requirements.

Warranties benefit both companies and customers. They reassure customers about product durability, motivate manufacturers to improve quality, and build trust between brands and consumers. Without them, customers are left vulnerable, and companies risk eroding their reputation.

The Futility of Violence: Resolving Nigeria's Herder-Farmer Conflict

Video Showing a farmland in Plateau State

It has gone more than a decade and half since the deadly herders’ quest for grazing lands started in Nigeria. Thousands have died and many more are still dying on a daily basis, yet the government seems to have given up on the issue.

Herders have lived in Nigeria for as long as the Nigerian nation existed. They have lived mostly in the far north to the middle belt area of the country. Desert advancement, triggered by climate change, forced them to start seeking pasture in other parts of the country.

Nigeria has been run without a drive. There was always the absence of strategy and little or no concern to the repercussion of doing so. It is expected that the government should have predicted the eventual competition for land between herders and farmers, taking a decision to deal with it from the onset –population will always grow and force increase demand for agricultural land.  

The administration of late President Mohammadu Buhari, in its bid to create jobs in the agro sector, banned the imports of certain agricultural produce. Food prices soared as a result. This triggered a rush to subsistent and commercial agriculture, increasing the demand for arable land, thereby eating up huge expanses of land that would have been used for grazing. It is easy to see this in herders’ habit of moving cattle to settlement areas to graze. I have had the chance of asking a herder the question of why they still move cattle to settlement areas, despite the abundance of grass in the vast bushes. His answer was that there is hardly a place left uncultivated.   

This year, I decided to check things for myself. By mid-May, when farmers where fully convinced that the rains have finally come, they moved their ploughs across the fields. I realized that, every day, the herders come with their cattle and stand in the perimeter of the farms, not knowing where to take the cattle to. If there are patches of land in the centre that have not been cultivated, the farmers go to the extent of inviting other farmers to cultivate them. According to them, if any patch of land is left uncultivated, it lures cattle, culminating in sabotage of surrounding farms. But after crops have been planted, weeded and nourished, however, farmers leave the farms, allowing the crops to mature. At that time, herders move their cattle into the gutters separating the farms to find the badly needed pasture. In doing this, crop damages are expected.

Population will continue to grow and more land will be needed to grow enough food to feed the growing population. This will intensify competition for land between cattle herders and farmers. Thus, as far as the conflict is concerned, there is no end in sight. This leaves us with just one option: going back to the issue of RUGA, which ensures cattle stay in restricted areas, feeding on specially grown pasture with high nutritional content. This was what President Buhari’s administration tried to introduce but was met with stiff resistance by certain stakeholders.

Why did the modern ranching idea of President Buhari fail to gain acceptance? Buhari’s government intended creating herders’ settlements called RUGA. According to Scan News, RUGA would have contained “ranches, grass or feed farms, abattoirs, dairy, meat and skin/leather processing plants, housing, religious houses, schools, roads, power and water supplies and the complete range of infrastructure required to support and sustain an ultra-modern local government area.” The sheer size of the land would have been equivalent to 216 local government areas. Nigeria has a total of 774 local government areas. In Plateau State with 17 local government areas, for instance, it would have meant conceding about 35% of the land to Fulani herders. Plateau has a tribal population of about 40.

The late President and former Governor of Kaduna State, Ahmed El-Rufai, had said in the past that the Fulani people killing Nigerian farmers were foreigners from Mali, Chad and the Central African Republic. So, why give this kind of land to foreigners? This weird design is the reason why the intellectual demography kicked against the project. The uneducated hated RUGA because it was trying to give their land to murders. 

As said in the preceding parts of this article, Nigeria’s has been run with disregard to the principles of nation-building. Why should we allow illegal immigrants to come to our country, cause widespread killings and end up enjoying the resources of the country in a way their nations couldn’t provide them? This points to a possibility of fraud in the design of RUGA, demonstrating that the project was ill-motivated. There are schools of thought that believe that the actual reason why land is in desperate need by herders is due to an unexplained increase in the population of herders across the country. Perhaps, there wouldn’t have been any competition for land in the first place.  

The deadly conflict has pointed a fing
er on the dangerous repercussion of leaving borders free to everyone. Solving the herder issue requires, first and foremost, taking the profile of all herders across the country to ascertain their actual nationalities, with deportation following where it becomes necessary. 

Causes of Fatal Mining Accidents on the Plateau

Illustration of mine collapse

Plateau State, Nigeria, is endowed with a variety of mineral resources, notably tin and columbite. Historically, the exploitation of these minerals attracted both local and international interests, shaping the cosmopolitan character of Jos, the state capital.

However, from the late 1970s, mining activities declined significantly due to a collapse in the global prices of tin and columbite, which were then the principal commercial minerals of value. In recent years, global advancements in science and technology have renewed demand for these minerals, alongside others that were previously discarded due to limited industrial application. This resurgence has reactivated artisanal and small-scale mining across Plateau State, providing a critical source of livelihood for large numbers of unemployed youths.

In much of the state, particularly in the northern zones, mineral deposits remain widely dispersed. Women, who often lack the capacity to sink shafts, typically engage in surface-level mining along water channels, where mineral concentrates settle after rainfall. Artisanal miners, in contrast, commonly dig shafts that extend between 50 and 70 feet in depth to access richer deposits, relying on rudimentary tools such as shovels, diggers, and improvised pulley systems.

Despite the economic opportunities mining presents, it is accompanied by severe occupational hazards. Fatal accidents are recurrent, often involving individuals motivated by poverty to supplement their income. For instance, reports indicate that even professionals, such as a primary school head teacher in December 2024, have lost their lives in mining pits while attempting to earn additional income for their families. Similarly, women and children have also been victims, highlighting the vulnerability of economically disadvantaged groups.

Several factors contribute to mining-related fatalities on the Plateau:

1. Mine collapses. After reaching the mineral “floor,” miners typically dig horizontal tunnels that may extend up to one hundred feet. The intervening walls are expected to serve as pillars to prevent collapse. However, when these pillars are weakened by excessive excavation—whether by miners seeking additional ore or children scavenging nearby—the structural integrity of the mine is compromised, leading to collapses that often trap or kill those underground.
2. Water inundation. Abandoned mines frequently accumulate water under high pressure. When active tunnels breach these water-filled shafts, sudden flooding occurs, overwhelming miners with little or no chance of escape due to the depth of the shafts and the ensuing confusion. Survival in such cases is minimal, as visibility and mobility underground are severely restricted.
3. Mechanical failures. Accidents also result from equipment malfunctions, particularly the snapping of steel cables used to lower or raise buckets of ore. Buckets carrying heavy loads may fall back into the pit, crushing miners, while cable failures during descent frequently cause severe injuries or fatalities.

The recovery of victims varies depending on the cause of the accident. Where flooding is involved, bodies can often be retrieved after pumping out water. In contrast, collapses that bury victims make recovery exceedingly difficult without the use of excavators, which require significant financial resources. In such circumstances, families often resort to conducting funeral rites at the site without retrieving the body.

Despite the high incidence of accidents, artisanal mining persists as an economic necessity. Temporary halts in mining following fatalities are typically symbolic gestures of respect rather than reconsiderations of the risks involved. Mining, in many cases, has served as a pathway out of poverty. For instance, women have been reported to earn as much as ₦130,000 within two days, while daring young men occasionally secure windfalls amounting to millions of naira. Consequently, a common refrain among Plateau residents underscores the indispensability of mining: “What would have become of us if there were no minerals in Plateau State

Do Africans Know the Worth of their Minerals?

Precious Minerals. Image generated by a.i

The conversation often surfaces on how foreign powers are exploiting Africa's most valuable natural resources at little or next to nothing. The question thus arises as to whether African nations truly understand the worth of their earth resources. There are complex reasons why Africa's minerals are often under-priced. One fundamental reason is the lack of technology. When foreign companies come to Africa with technologies that Africans do not possess, the bargaining power tips in favour of the companies. An African leader desperate for funds to run his country may succumb to unfavourable deals despite knowing they unfairly favour the foreign company. Sometimes, proceeds are shared in a ratio of 6:3 in favour of the foreign company. Take the case of Orano SA, a French company that mines uranium in the Arlit region of northern Niger. Orano holds a 63.4% stake, while Sopamin, the Nigerien state-owned company, holds a mere 36.6% of Somair Mines. What's even more striking is that the lion's share is held by a company owned by a few individuals.

In some cases, a country's colonial history gives undue advantage to certain companies. France is a typical example of a colonial power that maintains a predatory relationship with its former colonies. Currently, Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger, all former French colonies, are fighting to correct unfair economic alliances with the European nation. The case of Nigeria is a nation blinded by oil revenues. Before the discovery of oil, Nigeria's economy was largely agro-based, relying on cash crops for revenue. The nation also depended on solid minerals for extra income. Following the discovery of oil, the Nigerian authorities failed to recognize that significant revenue can come from a combination of numerous smaller sources rather than a single giant source. The metallic mineral industry highlights the Nigerian government's contempt for non-oil industries. The authorities have failed to demonstrate a sincere willingness to reform the solid minerals industry for maximum benefit. One of the negative outcomes is the invasion of the industry by illegal miners, many of whom are foreigners who make large haulages daily.

The issue is complicated by the Exclusive Legislative List, under which earth resources fall in Nigerian law. This ensures that the prerogative to regulate activities in the industry remains in the hands of the Federal Government in Abuja. However, since the federal authorities are more concerned about oil revenues, the sector suffers. Despite the creation of an agency like NEITI (Nigerian Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative), solid minerals-producing states still suffer from a lack of funds that would be expected given the scale of mining activities in the states.

In December 2022, the Federal Government announced it had given N625 billion as derivation funds to the nine oil-producing states in Nigeria. This amounts to an average of approximately N70 billion per state per year. On the other hand, only Nasarawa State is fortunate enough to receive around N1 billion per month. In September 2024, Governor Caleb Mutfwang of Plateau State complained that the state only receives about N500 million as annual derivation revenue despite the billions generated from mining activities in the state.

Solid minerals-producing states are embittered by the unfair circumstances in which they find themselves. Some have developed mining policies that take advantage of loopholes in the Nigerian Mining Laws. The aim is to ensure they don't lose everything. These policies allow them to charge companies certain fees for registration, inspection, haulages, etc. When setting the charges, however, they are cautious to ensure that local companies are not discouraged. Total charges per annum in most states may not exceed N700,000 per annum, which is the same amount foreign companies pay. Upon hearing this, an alarmed foreign investor exclaimed, "That's just about three hundred pounds! Don't you value your minerals?" Thus, about £300 is what a Chinese company pays to a solid mineral-producing state to operate for one year, while earning hundreds of millions of pounds.

The Legacies of Late President Buhari

Late Former President of Nigeria, Muhammadu Buhari

It’s illogical when people say we shouldn’t speak ill of the dead. This notion doesn’t hold, because it’s not we who are speaking—rather, it’s the way the deceased lived their lives that speaks. We are merely the loudspeakers.

Some may view it from a religious perspective. Even so, the argument remains illogical since religion is founded on truth. If someone lived in defiance of God's teachings, they would still face judgment, regardless of public sentiment. So, what we say can stand even before God —as long as what we say is true.

The late President Muhammadu Buhari’s tenure as a military Head of State was short-lived, ending in a coup barely a year after he came into power. Yet, in that brief time, he managed to convince many Nigerians that he was the one who could truly confront Nigeria’s most feared enemy: corruption.

Before returning to power as a civilian president, Buhari consistently spoke of funds looted and stashed abroad by corrupt Nigerians—money he claimed could solve Nigeria’s infrastructural problems. He expressed a desire to recover these funds and use them for the common good. Nigerians began to see him as a messiah. When critics accused him of being a tribalist and religious chauvinist, many dismissed those warnings as baseless opposition from individuals benefiting from the country’s disarray.

Buhari contested the presidency three times without success. After his third failed attempt in 2011, his supporters unleashed violence in the northern part of the country, killing hundreds—mostly Christians—who were seen as obstacles to his ambition. This showed the level of devotion he commanded, almost elevating him to the status of a prophet. Earlier, he had ominously warned that if he lost, there would be “bloody dogs and bloody monkeys.” As the 2015 election approached, he repeated that threat. In contrast, then-incumbent President Goodluck Jonathan declared, “No ambition is worth the blood of any Nigerian.”

When the 2015 election results were announced, Buhari was declared the winner. President Jonathan conceded defeat—a rare and commendable act in Nigerian, and indeed African, politics, where incumbents rarely lose elections. Jonathan acted as a statesman to prevent a repeat of the 2011 violence.

Buhari’s early days in office seemed to fulfilled public expectations. But within two years, the trajectory began to change. His anti-corruption drive became confusing—a case of “the more you see, the less you understand.” His spokesperson often said the damage done to Nigeria was deep-rooted and would take time to fix. Eventually, however, Buhari’s government itself became brazenly corrupt.

A glaring example was during the COVID-19 lockdown, when the government claimed to have spent billions of naira on school feeding programs  —despite schools being closed. Nigerians asked, “Who were you feeding? Ghosts?” Not a single major conviction for corruption occurred. Instead, Buhari’s government released people previously jailed for corruption.

Under his leadership, inflation rose by 175%. By the end of his second term in 2023 Nigeria, once Africa’s largest economy, slipped to fourth place—behind South Africa, Egypt, and Algeria.

Security deteriorated further. What was termed the “farmer-herder conflict” masked widespread violence, where armed groups invaded villages, killing hundreds and seizing ancestral lands. There were no convictions. Banditry in the northwest worsened. Armed gangs on motorbikes would attack towns, kill residents, steal livestock and grains, or abduct people for ransom.

As the country's woes multiplied, Buhari lost the support of the very people who had once gone to great lengths to defend and idolize him.

On May 29, President Buhari handed over power to Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Nigeria’s newly elected president.

On Sunday, July 13th, 2025, former President Buhari died in a London hospital. Critics were baffled: How could he fail to build a decent hospital in Nigeria, only to die in a foreign one that still couldn’t save him? To many, this was final proof that Buhari had never truly meant well for Nigeria. Most shocking of all were the crowds in northern Nigeria that flooded the streets —not to mourn, but to thank God for his death