The cultural and ethnic melding of Northern Nigeria’s Hausa and the Fulani people is so deep, so labyrinthine, so time-honored, and so unexampled that a fictitious ethnic category called the “Hausa-Fulani” was invented by Nigeria’s southern press to describe the emergent ethnic alchemy it has produced.
Northern intellectuals resented the label at first. For example, the late Dr. Yusufu Bala Usman, the famously iconoclastic professor of history at the Ahmadu Bello University who was ethnically Fulani and who was the scion of the Katsina and Kano royal families, condemned the hyphenation of Hausa and Fulani as both ill-willed and ignorant.
But several Northern Nigerian elites of Hausa and Fulani filiation have now enthusiastically embraced it. President Muhammadu Buhari, for instance, told the Weekly Trust in 1999 that he loved the hyphenated Hausa-Fulani identity that the southern press invented because it encapsulates the complexity of his own identity. His father is Fulani while his mother is half Kanuri and half Hausa.
More than that, though, Buhari is culturally and linguistically Hausa. Like most people in Nigeria’s northwest who trace patrilineal bloodline to the Fulani (including most of the emirs), he doesn’t speak a lick of Fulfulde (as the language of the Fulani is called in Nigeria) and is completely divorced from the culture of the “unmingled” Fulani who now live mostly in Nigeria’s northeast and in the bushes elsewhere in the country.
Over the years, the northern political elite not only used the common Islamic heritage of the Hausa and the Fulani people as an instrument to construct and cement the notion of an undivided and indivisible Hausa-Fulani identity, they also encouraged other parts of the country to see them as one, undifferentiated people.
In time, the rest of the country came to regard the Hausa and the Fulani as indistinguishable. A popular quip among the Yoruba says, “Gambari pa Fulani ko lejo ninu,” which roughly translates as “If a Hausa person kills a Fulani person, there is no case,” implying that the Hausa and the Fulani are homogenous people whose internal strife are no more than evanescent, resolvable sibling squabble.
But the emergence and unabating intensification of kidnapping for ransom and other forms of rural and urban banditry in the Northwest where most of the villains are Fulani and most of the victims are Hausa are rupturing the centuries-old ethnic harmony between the Hausa and the Fulani that Nigerians had taken for granted.
In response to the rural and urban banditry by mostly Fulani brigands against Hausa people, Hausa people have formed vigilante groups called yan sakai or yan banga for self-defense, but Fulani people say the yan banga self-defense groups often indiscriminately murder innocent Fulani people who are not even remotely connected with abductions and murders.
This has provoked an endless cycle of recriminations and retaliatory violence between Hausa and Fulani people and is threatening the age-old, Islam-inspired ethnic fusion between them.
This has been going on for years under the radar of the national and international media until BBC’s BBC Africa Eye brought it to the forefront of global attention in its Jul 24, 2022, documentary titled “The Bandit Warlords of Zamfara.” The documentary showed that although the Hausa and the Fulani share a common culture, religion, heritage, and language, they are, for the most part, divided and rarely mix in rural areas. They fight over land, water, and food.
Self-confessed Fulani bandits told the BBC that Hausa people enjoy preferential treatments in government jobs, that Fulani people face discrimination in the formal sector in northern Nigeria, and that kidnapping, banditry, and indiscriminate mass murders were the only way they could call attention to their neglect.
Following the documentary, which so unsettled the Nigerian government that local TV stations that rebroadcast it were fined, there has been an open discussion, particularly in Arewa social media circles, of hitherto culturally taboo subjects such as whether Usman Dan Fodio whose jihad inaugurated the current Fulani ruling families in much of Muslim northern Nigeria was a Hausa-hating Fulani ethnic supremacist.
Islam had been centuries old and already deeply entrenched in Hausa land before Usman Dan Fodio’s nineteenth-century jihad, which many historians have called a “Fulani war.” The well-regarded seventeenth-century Songhai Muslim scholar by the name of Ahmad Baba, for instance, had recognized Hausa land as a bastion of Islam.
In a 1613 essay titled, “Al-kashf wa-l-bayān li-aṣnāfmajlūb al-Sūdān” (translated into English as “The Exposition and Explanation Concerning the Varieties of Transported Black Africans”), he wrote that “the people of Kano, some of Zakzak [Zaria], the people of Katsina, the people of Gobir, and all of the Songhay” lived under ideal Islamic rule and could never be enslaved by other Muslims.
About 200 years later, when Dan Fodio decided to “reform” the Islam he met in Hausa land, he repudiated the Islam that the Hausa people had practiced. In his 1806 treatise titled “Bayan Wujub Al-Hijra, Ala L-Ibad,” Dan Fodio rebutted Ahmad Baba’s thesis by asserting that what was true of Hausa land when Ahmad Baba wrote, “might not necessarily be true at all other times, since every scholar relates what he sees in his own days.” Dan Fodio’s son, Muhammad Bello, also wrote Infaq al-mansur in 1813, exactly 200 years after Ahmad Baba, and contested the notion that Hausa land was ruled by Islamic precepts.
Now, in everyday dialogic engagements on social media, in the marketplace, and in the streets, Hausa and Fulani people are openly talking about the jihad and its decidedly ethnic character. Hausa people are asking why all the emirs that emerged from the jihad, except for that of Bauchi, were Fulani. (Emirs in Borgu in Kwara and Niger states are not the product of the jihad and are not Fulani.)
These questions are especially important because the Fulani emirs who dislodged Hausa Muslim rulers have been doing exactly what the Hausa Muslim rulers were accused of by Fulani jihadists—keeping multiple wives and concubines, oppressing everyday folks called the talakawa, believing and partaking in fortunetelling, etc. Besides, in Islam, leadership isn’t hereditary, so Hausa people are asking why a supposedly Islamic jihad has entrenched Fulani ethnic monarchies to the exclusion of the native Hausa populations.
These debates aren’t new, of course. For example, in a June 30, 2000, article titled “The Fulani Factor in Nigerian Politics” published in the Weekly Trust, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi (who later became the emir of Kano on June 8, 2014, and was dethroned on March 9, 2020) caused a stir among not just other Nigerians but also among Hausa people when he said although the Fulani in northern Nigeria have lost their language and culture to the Hausa, they still cherish the irreproducible cultural and genetic distinctiveness that their ethnic identity imbues them with.
He isolated Nigerian leaders of putative Fulani line of descent—Ahmadu Bello, Shehu Shagari, Murtala Mohammed, and Muhammadu Buhari—whom he said even their “greatest enemies” respect because they supposedly embodied incomparable and uniquely Fulani values (even when they are/were not culturally Fulani).
He pointed out that the same could not be said of “other prominent non-Fulani contemporaries of these great men,” including military Head of State Ibrahim Babangida, who is Hausa, and Sani Abacha, who was Kanuri but born and raised in Kano. Sanusi then said the Fulani are “culturally programmed, generation after generation, to imbibe the best spirits of what makes good leadership, to a far greater extent than competing cultures.”
Garba Shehu, now a spokesperson for President Muhammadu Buhari, who is ethnically Hausa from Jigawa, was incensed. In a response titled “Sanusi’s Racist Rubbish” on July 7, 2000, Shehu wrote: “When I read Sanusi L. Sanusi’s article ‘The Fulani Factor in Nigerian Politics’…I came away with the feeling that the writer wanted to do one of two things: to either be ridiculous or to insult all of us who are not Fulani with some racist crap.”
Shehu invalidated Sanusi’s ethnic supremacist notion of a Fulani culture that makes Fulani people such good, just leaders by calling attention to the atrocities that were perpetuated against Hausa people by Fulani emirs—or what he called the “well-documented acts of brigandage” by the “Fulani oligarchy”— which instigated the emergence of the Northern Elements Progressives Union (NEPU).
“Where was he when the late Sa’adu Zungur, Aminu Kano, and company fought Fulani rulers who forced Hausa peasants to work the emirs’ farms, snatched wives, plundered what was kept in their trust, and appropriated/mismanaged farmlands and other resources belonging to their subjects?” Shehu wrote.
These sorts of emotive brickbats between everyday Hausa and Fulani people are escalating and becoming mainstream in the aftermath of the bloodstained conflict between Hausa farmers and Fulani herders. In fact, there are now calls, from both Hausa and Fulani interlocutors, for the reformation of the emirate system to strip emirship of its exclusivity to people of Fulani ancestry.
I think these are transitory, spur-of-the-moment tensile pushes and pulls that may soon abate, but it’s astonishing that it’s even happening.
The Girl Who Was Almost Married at 10 Is Taking Her Story to the United Nations
On September 4 this week…Sierra Leone’s First Lady is expected to stand before the United Nations General Assembly with a proposal aimed at protecting millions of girls from the same fate.
AT about 10 years old, Fatima Maada Bio already knew who she was expected to marry.
She was a child, but an adult decision had been made about the direction her life should take. Somehow, she escaped that future.
On September 4 this week, many, many years after that little girl could have been sent into a marriage she did not choose, Sierra Leone’s First Lady is expected to stand before the United Nations General Assembly with a proposal aimed at protecting millions of girls from the same fate.
She is expected to present a draft resolution seeking the proclamation of November 27 as an ‘International Day for the Elimination of Child, Early and Forced Marriage’. The proposal is new.
The date is not yet an official UN observance. It is a call for the international community to give the issue a permanent place on its calendar and, with it, sustained attention and action.
There is something deeply personal about that journey.
According to briefing material from the Office of the First Lady of Sierra Leone, she knew at around the age of 10 who she was expected to marry and narrowly escaped child marriage.
That experience did not become a footnote in her life. It became part of the reason she has spent years speaking about the rights and protection of women and girls.
The First Lady’s public advocacy has taken her from communities in Sierra Leone to some of the world’s most important international forums.
Her flagship ‘Hands Off Our Girls’ campaign has focused on ending rape, early marriage and violence against women and girls, while her work has also extended into girls’ education, women’s health and other issues affecting vulnerable communities.
However, her return to the United Nations this time carries a particularly personal weight.
She is taking a subject that could have defined her own childhood and asking the international community to give it greater and lasting attention.
It is not her first attempt to put child protection on the UN agenda.
In 2022, she spearheaded the effort that led the General Assembly to proclaim November 18 as the ‘World Day for the Prevention of and Healing from Child Sexual Exploitation, Abuse and Violence’.
“She is expected to present a draft resolution seeking the proclamation of November 27 as an ‘International Day for the Elimination of Child, Early and Forced Marriage’. The proposal is new.”
UNAIDS describes her as having championed the adoption of that first-ever World Day.
The United Nations has also continued to strengthen its attention to child, early and forced marriage.
In December 2024, the General Assembly adopted a resolution addressing the issue.
Sierra Leone has been moving on the national front too. The country enacted legislation in 2024 prohibiting marriage involving anyone under 18.
So when Fatima Maada Bio walks into the General Assembly this week, she will be carrying a story that has travelled through several stages: from the experience of a young girl, to a national campaign, to legislation, and now to another attempt to secure a place for the issue on the global calendar.
The numbers behind the issue are sobering.
The United Nations and other international organisations have consistently described child marriage as a major barrier to girls’ education, health, economic opportunity and personal autonomy.
Behind every statistic, though, there is a girl whose childhood is being shortened.
There is a school she may leave, friends she may lose, choices she may never get to make, and a future that may be decided for her before she is old enough to understand what that future means. That is why the personal history of the woman making this proposal is important.
Fatima Maada Bio knows what it means for adults to imagine a future for a girl before she has had the opportunity to imagine one for herself. She also knows what it means to get away.
That gives her advocacy a particular human quality. The issue is something she encountered as a child and has carried into her public life as an adult.
The fight has also taken her beyond child marriage. Last week, OncoDaily named her among its 100 Influential Women in Oncology for 2026, recognising her work in women’s health and cancer prevention.
The publication highlighted her partnership with the Merck Foundation, which has supported specialist medical training in Sierra Leone, including scholarships that contributed to the development of the country’s cancer-care workforce.
It also noted her advocacy for breast cancer awareness and early detection and her participation in discussions around the WHO Global Breast Cancer Initiative.
It is another part of a public role that has increasingly stretched beyond the traditional image of a First Lady.
Then there is child protection, and women’s health.
There is girls’ education, and the wider question of how countries protect women and children who often have the least power over decisions affecting their lives.
The international recognition in oncology is significant for another reason.
It shows that her advocacy is being noticed in fields far removed from the political spotlight in which First Ladies are usually seen.
Nonetheless, the child-marriage campaign remains different. It brings her public work unusually close to her own childhood.
Sierra Leone, as a country, has its own reason to pay attention to what happens in New York this week.
The country has already taken the important step of outlawing marriage involving children under 18.
The First Lady has been one of the most visible voices pushing the protection of girls into the national conversation.
Her campaign has also received international recognition, including her appointment by UNAIDS as a champion for the empowerment and engagement of adolescent girls and young women.
Now she is taking the conversation back to the United Nations. The proposed international day would not, by itself, end child marriage.
A date on the UN calendar cannot keep a girl in school, or protect her from an abusive household or change the circumstances that make families vulnerable to marrying off their daughters.
Those things require laws, enforcement, education, economic opportunity, social protection and changes in attitudes that can take generations.But international days can keep issues alive.
They create opportunities for governments, schools, civil society organisations, communities and international agencies to return to a problem every year, measure progress and remind themselves of what remains unfinished. That is the opportunity behind November 27.
This may also be the reason why the story of the little girl who nearly became a child bride is worth remembering when Fatima Maada Bio enters the General Assembly. She is no longer that girl.
She got education and became a journalist, an actress, an advocate, a mother, and Sierra Leone’s First Lady. She also became the President of the Organisation of African First Ladies for Development.
She is now asking the world to give millions of girls something she was fortunate enough to have: the chance to grow up and become all of that and even more before someone else decides what their lives should become.
That is what, on behalf of Sierra Leone and the world, she is carrying into the United Nations on September 4.
Not a speech or a title. She is carrying a powerful story the General Assembly should listen and act on.
• Ahmed Sahid Nasralla is the Ex-Officio and Immediate Past President of the Sierra Leone Association of Journalists (SLAJ), and the Chairman of the Federation of African Journalists (FAJ) Working Group on Climate Change.
Is Dangote Refinery Playing the Giraffe by Leaving Domestic Oil Supply to Marketers?
Is Nigeria gradually returning to a situation where imported petrol is competing with locally refined PMS, even as Dangote Refinery has the capacity to supply a substantial portion of domestic demand?
WHEN I was younger, bedtime storytelling was one of my favourite pastimes in my family. After the evening meal, my mother would usually gather us together for this special treat. Of all the fables she told us, one that has remained indelibly etched in my memory to this day was Why the Giraffe Eats from Tall Trees. The story portrayed the giraffe as a humble and considerate animal. Because of its long neck, it could reach the leaves and branches of tall trees, leaving the grasses and shorter vegetation for sheep and goats whose shorter necks could not reach the higher branches.
So, what is the point?
Could the Dangote Petroleum Refinery be playing the giraffe in Nigeria’s downstream petroleum market—leaving marketers to supply the domestic market with imported Premium Motor Spirit (PMS), while it increasingly exports its refined products to other countries? Recent developments in the petroleum industry appear to lend some credence to this question. The management of Dangote Petroleum Refinery recently attributed its increased export volumes to rising imports of petrol into Nigeria.
The refinery said the decision to focus more on exports should not be interpreted as a lack of commitment to the Nigerian market. “Rather, exports are a prudent operational response to the realities of a market where imported products continue to compete with locally refined fuel despite the availability of sufficient domestic refining capacity,” the refinery said.
Figures from the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) appear to support the changing supply pattern. According to the regulator’s recent report, Dangote Refinery’s supply of PMS to the domestic market fell by 21 per cent to 25.8 million litres per day in July, from 32.5 million litres per day in June.
The monthly factsheet showed that the refinery produced about 25.9 million litres of PMS per day in July and exported 3.4 million litres per day.
The July domestic supply figure was reportedly the lowest recorded by the refinery in 2026. At the same time, petrol imports rose by nine per cent to 19.7 million litres per day, from 18.1 million litres per day in June. These figures raise an important question: Is Nigeria gradually returning to a situation where imported petrol is competing with locally refined PMS, even as Dangote Refinery has the capacity to supply a substantial portion of domestic demand? Dangote Refinery has expressed concern about the continued issuance of import licences for petroleum products. It maintains that it has demonstrated sufficient capacity to meet, and even exceed, Nigeria’s domestic PMS requirements.
The refinery said that although it remains committed to Nigeria’s energy security and uninterrupted fuel availability, the continued inflow of imported PMS has created uncertainty around domestic demand forecasting and inventory management.
According to the refinery, it has consistently maintained sufficient inventories and reserved product volumes to guarantee steady supplies to the Nigerian market since commencing operations.
That commitment, it said, has involved substantial investment in storage facilities, logistics and working capital to protect consumers from supply disruptions and market volatility.
Why Dangote Says It Is Exporting More
The refinery’s major concern appears to be the lack of transparency over the volume of imported petrol expected to enter the country. Without reliable information on future import volumes, it argues, it becomes increasingly difficult to plan production and manage inventories efficiently.
Maintaining large stocks of petrol that may not be absorbed by the domestic market also comes with significant storage and financing costs.
“As a responsible energy provider, we have always endeavoured to keep adequate reserves to satisfy local demand at all times,” the refinery said. However, where significant quantities of imported PMS continue to enter the market through licences issued by the regulator, and there is limited visibility on future import volumes, the refinery says it becomes commercially unsustainable to hold excess inventory indefinitely.
Its argument is straightforward: when locally refined products cannot be absorbed by the domestic market because of competing imports, the surplus must be moved elsewhere. Hence, the increased exports.
The refinery insists that this does not mean Nigeria’s domestic market cannot be supplied. Rather, it says the exports are a response to market uncertainty created by competing imports.
It also warned that if supply shortages eventually occur because of market distortions caused by excessive importation and the resulting difficulty in forecasting domestic demand, such shortages should not automatically be blamed on Dangote Refinery.
The company maintains that it remains ready and capable of meeting and exceeding Nigeria’s petroleum product requirements.
Dangote’s Transparency Concern Is Genuine—Expert
Oil and gas expert Dr Ayodele Oni believes Dangote Refinery’s concern over transparency is legitimate. According to him, Section 317 of the Petroleum Industry Act contemplates the issuance of import licences where there is a demonstrable shortfall. But, he argued, a shortfall determination that is not published cannot easily be scrutinised. “NMDPRA should publish, ex ante, the aggregate volume of import authorisations it has approved for each quarter and the shortfall assessment behind them. That is a modest reform and it costs the regulator nothing,” he said. However, Oni cautioned against simply shutting out imports. He pointed to the performance of the country’s government-owned refineries, noting that NNPC’s three refineries produced nothing in July.
“A single plant supplying nearly the entire national market, with imports switched off, is a structural risk, not an achievement,” he argued.
He added that the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act exists to address such situations, stressing that regulatory policy should not be based on the assumption that a single refinery will never experience an unplanned outage.
According to him, the solution is structural: a transparent shortfall methodology, published quarterly import quotas, and the development of genuine second and third domestic refineries. “Everything else is noise,” he said.
” The government cannot simultaneously encourage domestic refining, allow substantial imports without clearly communicating the basis for them, and expect refiners to maintain costly inventories indefinitely.”
Imports or Domestic Refining?
Another industry analyst and former Managing Director of 11PLC, formerly Mobil, Otunba Adetunji Oyebanji, believes Dangote Refinery is within its rights to export. He argued that the government must retain the flexibility to import petroleum products whenever there is a potential shortfall. “This is an internationally traded product,” he said, pointing out that even countries with substantial refining capacity, including the United States, continue to import petroleum products. His argument is that economics, rather than sentiment, ultimately determines where petroleum products are bought and sold. “We heard that Dangote exported to America. Don’t they have refineries?” he asked rhetorically. For him, pricing remains a major determinant. And therein lies the real issue. The giraffe in my mother’s story was not merely tall; it was considerate. It reached the leaves that other animals could not reach and left the lower vegetation for them. But Nigeria’s petroleum market is not a fable. Dangote Refinery is a commercial enterprise, not a charitable institution. It must make economically rational decisions, just as marketers and importers do.
The bigger question, therefore, is not whether Dangote Refinery should export. It is whether Nigeria’s petroleum regulatory framework is creating the right conditions for locally refined products to compete fairly, while ensuring that consumers are protected and the country is not exposed to the risks of relying too heavily on a single refinery.
If Dangote has the capacity to meet domestic demand but finds it more commercially sensible to export because imported PMS is competing with its products at home, then the problem may be bigger than Dangote. It may point to a regulatory and market-structure problem that requires urgent attention. The government cannot simultaneously encourage domestic refining, allow substantial imports without clearly communicating the basis for them, and expect refiners to maintain costly inventories indefinitely.
There must be transparency. There must also be competition. And, most importantly, Nigeria needs more functioning refineries capable of supplying the domestic market.
Perhaps, then, the lesson from the giraffe is not that Dangote should leave the “grass” to the marketers. It is that the rules of the forest must be clear enough for every animal to know where it stands.
The Lagos State Government has declared Thursday, August 20, 2026, a work-free day for public servants, political appointees and others to mark this year’s Ìṣẹ̀ṣe Day celebration.
The announcement was made by the Special Adviser to the Governor on Tourism, Arts and Culture, Idris Aregbe, in a statement on Wednesday. He described Ìṣẹ̀ṣe as “not a relic” but “a living expression of our traditions and a celebration of Yoruba spirituality as an important part of Nigeria’s cultural and religious landscape.”
Authorities expect the event to draw more than three million residents and traditional worshippers in what is billed as one of the largest gatherings of its kind. Celebrations will feature prayers, rituals, processions, drumming and cultural displays dedicated to the Òrìṣà, coordinated by the Association of African Traditional Religion Nigeria and Overseas.
Ìṣẹ̀ṣe Day has been observed as a work-free day in Lagos since 2023, following a request by the Lagos State Council of Obas and Chiefs. Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu has maintained the practice annually as part of the administration’s commitment to indigenous values and religious inclusiveness under the THEMES+ Agenda.
Normal government activities are expected to resume on Friday, August 21. Residents have been urged to celebrate peacefully and respectfully.
Business3 days ago
Business3 days ago
Business3 days ago
Business17 hours ago
Business2 days ago
News3 days ago
Business2 days ago
News16 hours ago