Benue Strategic Partnership Tv

GOVERNOR ALIA, LEAD OR STEP ASIDE

A government that cannot keep its courts working, its schools open, its hospitals functioning, and its institutions stable is a government facing a profound crisis of leadership. That is the reality confronting Benue today.

The Ministry of Justice is on strike. Benue State University is on strike. State polytechnics are on strike. Colleges of Education are on strike. Health workers are preparing for an indefinite strike. Reports also suggest the Benue State House of Assembly may suspend sittings. These are not isolated disruptions—they are unmistakable signs of institutional breakdown.

This is no longer a difficult season. It is a test of governance, and the government is failing it.

Governor Hyacinth Alia was elected to govern, not to preside over paralysis. Leadership is measured not by political speeches or partisan victories, but by the ability to keep government working when citizens need it most.

While political battles continue to command attention, the collapse of essential public institutions demands even greater urgency. Politics cannot become the priority while governance is left unattended.

Every day of inaction carries a human cost. Students lose their future one academic session at a time. Patients face an uncertain healthcare system. Citizens seeking justice meet locked offices instead of functioning courts. Businesses operate in an atmosphere of instability. Public confidence is evaporating.
The Governor must immediately convene all critical stakeholders, negotiate in good faith with organised labour, resolve the issues fuelling these strikes, and present a credible roadmap for restoring government to full operation. Delay is no longer defensible.

If the Governor is unable to be physically present to discharge the responsibilities of his office for any extended period, constitutional governance must prevail. The Constitution provides a lawful mechanism for continuity through the Deputy Governor. Executive authority should be transmitted where necessary. Benue cannot afford a vacuum at the centre of government.

The people did not elect a spectator. They elected a leader.

History is unforgiving of governments that mistake silence for strategy and absence for leadership. It remembers whether leaders confronted crises or abandoned them.

Governor Alia faces a defining choice: restore leadership to the centre of government by giving the crisis in Benue the urgency it deserves or invoke the constitutional process that ensures the affairs of the state continue without interruption.

Benue is bleeding. Leadership must answer or yield to the Constitution. The time is now.

NB: Praise singers are free to continue praising you but remember they are the worst gossipers and critics behind close doors

YOU CAN'T SHINE A FLOODLIGHT ON YESTERDAY WHILE KEEPING TODAY'S BOOKS UNDER LOCK AND KEY

Transparency Begins with the Government in Power, Not Only the One Out of Power

The recent media report titled “N139.8 Billion Financial Gap Exposed in Benue as Alia Receives Probe Report, Vows Fiscal Reforms” has generated significant public interest and renewed debate about accountability in governance. While transparency and prudent management of public resources are essential pillars of democratic administration, it is equally important that public discussions surrounding investigative findings remain grounded in facts, due process, and established legal standards.

At the heart of the current controversy is the assertion that a Commission of Inquiry identified an unexplained financial balance of approximately ₦139.8 billion. However, it is necessary to distinguish between a financial observation contained in an investigative report and a legally established finding of fraud, theft, or misappropriation. Financial discrepancies highlighted during administrative reviews often represent preliminary findings that require further forensic examination, reconciliation of records, independent auditing, and, where necessary, judicial determination before definitive conclusions can be drawn.

Nigeria's political history offers several examples of highly publicized investigative reports that generated substantial public attention but ultimately failed to produce legal outcomes consistent with the initial allegations. Across various states, transition-period probes have frequently become subjects of political controversy, with competing narratives emerging between outgoing and incoming administrations. In many instances, allegations announced through administrative panels were later challenged, modified, or rendered inconclusive through legal processes and independent reviews.

This reality underscores an important principle: commissions of inquiry are not courts of law. Their reports serve as advisory instruments intended to assist governments in identifying areas requiring further investigation or corrective action. While such commissions perform an important public function, their findings remain recommendations unless subjected to the scrutiny of due process, including independent audits, fair hearing procedures, and judicial evaluation where criminal or civil liability is alleged.

The figures presented in the Benue report also warrant careful professional interpretation. Reports indicating total revenue inflows of approximately ₦826.5 billion and expenditures of ₦683.4 billion do not automatically establish the existence of missing funds. Public finance management involves a complex framework of obligations and accounting classifications, including debt servicing commitments, outstanding contractual liabilities, statutory deductions, restricted-purpose funds, grants, investments, cash reserves, and balances carried forward between fiscal periods. Without a comprehensive forensic reconciliation of accounts, it would be premature to conclude that any difference between aggregate revenues and expenditures constitutes evidence of financial misconduct. Sound accounting practice requires a thorough examination of all supporting documentation before such conclusions can be responsibly reached.

Equally important is the broader context within which public finances were managed during the period under review. Between 2015 and 2023, Benue State faced significant fiscal and humanitarian challenges, including persistent security threats, large-scale displacement of farming communities, increased social welfare obligations, infrastructure demands, salary commitments, and debt-related responsibilities. Any objective assessment of government finances during that period should take into account these realities and the extraordinary pressures they imposed on public expenditure.

Questions surrounding local government financing and loan transactions also deserve careful and independent verification. Financial operations involving local governments often involve multiple stakeholders, including financial institutions, statutory allocation mechanisms, and intergovernmental fiscal structures. Consequently, conclusions regarding documentation gaps or procedural irregularities should be based on complete records and professional audits rather than assumptions arising from incomplete information.

Beyond the issues raised by the report itself lies a broader question of governance and public trust. Transparency cannot be selective. A government genuinely committed to accountability must hold itself to the same standards it seeks to apply to previous administrations.

More importantly, credibility in the fight against corruption begins with self-scrutiny. A sitting government that has failed to satisfy the integrity, accountability, and transparency expectations of its own State House of Assembly should have no business presenting itself as the ultimate arbiter of the conduct of past administrations. Any administration that is unwilling or unable to subject its own financial activities, procurement processes, debt profile, revenue streams, and expenditure patterns to full public and legislative scrutiny weakens its moral authority to accuse its predecessors of corruption. Accountability cannot be demanded from others while being withheld from oneself.

The current administration has an opportunity to reinforce public confidence by institutionalizing proactive disclosure of key financial information, including monthly internally generated revenue (IGR), federal allocations, grants received, debt obligations, loans obtained, wage bill data, procurement records, and periodic expenditure reports. Such disclosures would demonstrate a commitment to transparency that extends beyond retrospective investigations.

Citizens have a legitimate right to understand not only how public resources were managed in the past but also how they are being managed today. Accountability is most credible when it is continuous rather than selective, and when current officeholders subject themselves to the same scrutiny they demand of their predecessors. Transparency must not become a political weapon deployed against former officeholders while current administrators operate behind a veil of limited disclosure.
For this reason, the publication of the full Commission of Inquiry report, together with supporting schedules, audit trails, reconciliations, and relevant documentary evidence, would contribute more meaningfully to public understanding than isolated headline figures. Open access to verifiable information enables citizens, professionals, civil society organizations, and independent experts to assess claims objectively and draw informed conclusions.

Ultimately, accountability should never be perceived as an instrument for political score-settling. Sustainable reforms emerge from impartial investigations, transparent procedures, evidence-based conclusions, and strict adherence to the rule of law. Public confidence is strengthened when governments demonstrate that their commitment to transparency is motivated by institutional integrity rather than partisan considerations.
A government that has not passed its own State House of Assembly's integrity and transparency test should be cautious about rushing to pronounce judgment on previous administrations. The standards applied to yesterday's leaders must first be met by today's leaders. The fight against corruption is most effective when it is principled, consistent, and non-selective.

Until all relevant audits, investigations, and legal processes have been completed, it is prudent to regard the Commission's findings as allegations and recommendations requiring further verification, rather than as definitive proof of wrongdoing.

The true measure of transparency is not how vigorously a government investigates yesterday's administration, but how openly it accounts for its own stewardship today. A government cannot credibly shine a floodlight on the past while keeping the books of the present under lock and key.

Those who seek to expose alleged misconduct in previous administrations must first demonstrate an unwavering commitment to openness, accountability, and transparency in their own tenure. Anything less risks turning the noble cause of accountability into an exercise in selective outrage and political convenience.

Signed,

Comr Akende Edmond Aondona

Public Affairs Analyst / Social Justice crusader

20th June, 2026

I, ROBERT TERKURA ANANDE ITYAV, A CATHOLIC OF THE MAKURDI DIOCESE, FROM MY OFFICE AS THE ORACLE OF BENUE : A RESPONSE TO ASORTAR JAMES,AN ASSISTANT TO REV. FR. HYACINTH IORMEM ALIA;
FR. HYACINTH ALIA
1. I DECREE THAT YOUR OFFICE AND FACULTY AS A PRIEST WILL BE WITHDRAWN IF GOD IS STILL ON THE THRONE!
2.THE SEEDS OF DISCORD AND VIOLENCE YOU HAVE PLANTED IN BENUE STATE YOU WILL REAP A MILLION FOLD.
3. EVERYTHING YOU HAVE DONE IN SECRET WILL BE TOLD IN THE MARKET PLACES.
4. THE GOVERNORSHIP STOOL YOU HAVE USURPED HAS BEEN RETRIEVED AND IS ON THE HEAD OF HIM WHOM YOU FEAR THE MOST.
5. YOU WOULD SOW IN JOY AND REAP IN BLOOD.
6. BENUE WILL REJECT YOU AND EVERYTHING YOU REPRESENT.
7.THE CHURCH THAT YOU HAVE MALIGNED AND SPOKEN AGAINST WILL RESPOND IN GOOD MEASURE.
8.FOR THIS THING YOU HAVE PERMITTED TO BE DONE ,EVEN WHAT YOU HAVE WILL HE TAKEN AWAY FROM YOU.

10.:NEVER AGAIN WILL ANYONE BEARING YOUR NAME OR CARRYING YOUR BLOOD AMOUNT TO ANYTHING IN BENUE STATE.

ASORTAR JAMES FOR INSULTING AND BRINGING TO PUBLIC RIDICULE THE OFFICE OF THE BISHOP OF MAKURDI DIOCESE.! YOU WILL REAP BOUNTIFULLY FROM THE POT OF DISGRACE AND RIDICULE THAT YOU HAVE SERVED. IT WILL BE MULTIPLIED A MILLION FOLD AND GIVEN TO YOU AND YOUR GENERATIONS TO THE FOURTH GENERATION. YOU WILL NEVER LACK A MAN TO BE PUBLICLY RIDICULED AND MALIGNED AS LONG AS THEY CARRY YOUR BLOOD. YOU WILL NEVER AMOUNT TO ANYTHING FOR TRYING TO RUBBISH THE NAME OF THE BISHOP AND THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
TODAY MARKS THE END OF AMYTHING IMPORTANT COMING FROM ANYTHING RELATED TO THE ASORTAR NAME.

THE LAND OF BENUE SHALL REJECT YOU AND YOUR PRINCIPAL!
THE ROADS OF BENUE SHALL REJECT YOU AND YOUR PRINCIPAL!
THE FORESTS OF BENUE SHALL REJECT YOU AND YOUR PRINCIPAL!
THE WATERS OF BENUE SHALL REJECT YPU AND YOUR PRINCIPAL!
YOUR ABILITY TO READON AND TALK CONSTRUCTIVELY IS WITHDRAWN GRON YOU AND YOUR PRINCIPAL!

MAY THE HEAVENS DO UNTO YOU AND YOUR PRINCIPAL EVERYTHING YOU HAVE INTENDED FOR THE CHURCH!

SHALOM!

BENUE COMRADES STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP FOR GOOD GOVERNANCE

ANY DISCIPLINARY MEASURE THAT PUNISHES THE PEOPLE MORE THAN THE INDIVIDUAL DEMANDS URGENT RECONSIDERATION

RESTORE THE PEOPLE'S MANDATES NOW!

The continued suspension, and subsequent extension of the suspension, of Hon. Aondona Dajoh and Hon. Saater Tiseer represents a direct setback to the democratic rights and developmental aspirations of the people they were elected to serve. This issue goes beyond personalities or politics; it concerns the collective voice of the constituents whose representation has been significantly diminished by the prolonged absence of their elected representatives from legislative duties.

Hon. Aondona Dajoh and the former Majority Leader, Hon. Saater Tiseer, have consistently distinguished themselves through visible constituency projects, grassroots engagement, and impactful human capital development initiatives. From community development interventions to empowerment programmes for youths, women, and vulnerable groups, their records reflect a commitment to service that has earned them recognition among their peers and the confidence of their constituents.
Their prolonged suspension threatens to stall ongoing development efforts, weaken advocacy for pressing community needs, and interrupt programmes that have brought hope and opportunities to many.

More importantly, it deprives the people of effective representation and undermines the democratic mandate freely bestowed upon them through the ballot.

While institutional discipline remains important, it should never overshadow the fundamental right of voters to have their voices represented. Any disciplinary measure that punishes the people more than the individuals concerned demands urgent reconsideration.
We believe the relevant authorities recognize that every additional day of their suspension weakens representation in their constituencies and translates into delayed development, diminished advocacy, and growing frustration among constituents who deserve to have their interests defended and advanced.

Democracy thrives when voters are placed far above their servants, not when they are sidelined because of their servants.

It is therefore imperative that the relevant authorities, legislative leadership, and stakeholders act in the interest of justice, fairness, and democratic accountability by rescinding the suspension and restoring the people's voices in the legislative chamber.

The people have waited long enough, and they are watching. Their mandates deserves respect. Their voices deserve to be heard. Their representatives deserve fair reconsideration.
For the record, justice delayed under the present administration is representation denied.

NOW THAT ALIA'S “MEN” HAVE STARTED TALKING

By Iorliam Shija

Politics has a cruel habit of turning friends into rivals and allies into witnesses.Throughout history, leaders have often discovered that the most dangerous criticism does not come from opponents who never supported them. It comes from former comrades who once sat at the table, fought the battles and shared the victories.

This week, Rt. Hon. Aondona Hyacinth Dajoh celebrated two milestones; one was his 50th birthday and and another was anniversary of his three years as the member representing Gbemacha State Constituency in the Benue State House of Assembly.

For many observers, however, it was not the celebration that attracted attention. It was what Dajoh said at Akpagher, Gboko Local Government, venue of the twin celebrations.

The former Speaker alleged that his removal from office was connected to his opposition to a proposal to relocate the Tor Tiv Palace from Gboko to Ihugh. He also made other allegations concerning events within the Alia administration.

Whether these claims are accepted or disputed is a matter for political debate. What cannot be disputed is the identity of the speaker.

Dajoh was not merely another APC lawmaker. His emergence as Speaker on June 5, 2023, was one of the earliest and most significant victories recorded by Governor Hyacinth Alia in the power struggle that followed his inauguration.

At the time, Alia was locked in a contest for political supremacy with forces loyal to Senator George Akume. The governor won important battles. He installed his preferred Speaker, secured his preferred Chief of Staff and SSG. The message was clear, a new political order had arrived.

Three years later, the picture is remarkably different. Paul Biam is no longer Chief of Staff, Prof. Joseph Alakali is no longer SSG and Aondona Dajoh is no longer Speaker. More significantly, Dajoh is no longer in APC.

Last month, he crossed over to PDP and arrived early enough to secure the opposition party's ticket for Gbemacha ahead of the next election cycle.That fact changes everything.

His comments should not be viewed merely as complaints from a former Speaker. They should be viewed as the political arguments of a man who has now positioned himself on the opposite side of the battlefield.

History suggests that leaders should pay close attention when former allies begin to find new political homes.

Julius Caesar spent years defeating enemies across Europe, yet the conspiracy that ultimately destroyed him emerged largely from within his own political circle. Richard Nixon survived repeated attacks from political opponents, but his presidency collapsed when trusted insiders began talking and allies withdrew their protection. Robert Mugabe outlasted generations of opposition politicians in Zimbabwe, only to discover that the greatest threat to his rule came from influential figures within the establishment he had built.

The lesson from these examples is not that Governor Alia faces the same fate. Rather, it is that leaders are often weakened not when enemies attack them, but when former allies stop defending them.

This is where the real lesson lies. In politics, removal is often easier than replacement.A leader may remove an ally from office, but he cannot always remove that ally from relevance.The former ally retains memories, relationships, supporters and in some cases, ambitions.

The moment such a person joins the opposition, every grievance acquires political value.Every disagreement becomes campaign material. Every private conversation becomes public discussion. Every former ally becomes a potential critic.

For Governor Alia, the concern should not simply be that Aondona Dajoh has spoken. Politicians criticize one another every day. The more important question is whether Dajoh represents an isolated voice or the beginning of a wider conversation among former associates who now feel excluded from the political project they once helped build.

If more former allies begin speaking from different political platforms, the challenge before the governor may gradually shift from defeating the opposition to explaining why so many former comrades have become opponents.

We hope to hear from Paul Biam soon.