Connect with us

News

Under Buhari, Tinubu: 500 Military Generals forced out despite rising insurgency

Published

on

Despite escalating insurgency across the country, no fewer than 500 senior military officers, including Major-Generals, Brigadier-Generals, Rear Admirals, and Air Vice Marshals, have been forced into early retirement following the changes of service chiefs under the Muhammadu Buhari and Bola Tinubu administrations.

The mass retirements, spanning the Army, Navy, and Air Force between 2015 and 2023, stemmed from the long-standing military tradition of disengaging senior officers who are either senior to or of the same course as newly appointed service chiefs.

The move, according to the military, is aimed at maintaining discipline, hierarchy, and operational efficiency within the services.

Data collated from media reports indicate that over 500 top officers have quit the services in the past eight years.

However, military insiders asserted that the affected Generals numbered approximately 900 or more. The PUNCH could not immediately confirm the figure as the military authorities could not be reached to authenticate the claim.

The first wave of retirements occurred shortly after former President Muhammadu Buhari appointed new service chiefs in July 2015. They include Lt.-Gen. Tukur Buratai as Chief of Army Staff, Air Marshal Sadique Abubakar as Chief of Air Staff, and Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas as Chief of Naval Staff.

Over 100 senior Army officers, mainly Major Generals and Brigadier Generals, were forced to retire, while the Navy lost over 20 senior officers, including Commodores and at least one Rear Admiral.

A second phase was recorded in 2021 after Buhari replaced all the service chiefs and appointed a new set-Air Marshal Isiaka Amao (Air Force), late Lt.-Gen. Ibrahim Attahiru (Army) and Vice Admiral Awwal Gambo (Navy).

That exercise saw about 123 generals exit the Army, while over 50 senior Air Force officers, and another 50 naval officers also left service.

The Army again witnessed another wave in May 2021 following the death of Gen. Attahiru, which led to the appointment of Gen. Farouk Yahaya, who was junior to several serving generals.

His emergence triggered the voluntary retirement of over 20 generals from Courses 35 and 36.

Under President Tinubu, the pattern has continued. Two weeks after he assumed office, the President, on June 19, 2023, appointed new service chiefs, prompting mass retirements across the services.

The appointment of late Lt.-Gen. Taoreed Lagbaja, Air Marshal Hasan Abubakar, and Vice Admiral Emmanuel Ogalla, as the heads of their respective services, led to the untimely retirement of 51 army generals, 49 top Air Force officers and 17 naval officers.

Last Friday, Tinubu executed a shake-up in the military leadership.  Gen Olufemi Oluyede replaced Gen Christopher Musa as CDS; Maj-Gen Waidi Shaibu becomes the COAS; Air Vice Marshal Sunday Aneke takes over as CAS, while Rear Admiral Idi Abbas assumes office as CNS. The Chief of Defence Intelligence, Maj-Gen Emmanuel Undiendeye, retains his position.

Under the latest development, about 60 top officers are expected to disengage from service should the military tradition continue.

Reacting to the situation, General Ishola Williams (retd.), faulted the arbitrary sacking of the service chiefs and the forced retirement of other top officers, describing this as a mirror of the military regime.

See also  Reps order IG to produce fake, PFIPC agency DG Adeyemi within 48 hours

“Once the government replaces the service chiefs, it means that the set of the former service chiefs will have to retire because they cannot serve under their juniors.

“And this has been happening all the time. And I don’t know why we cannot change this. It is very bad. They are copying the military regime. If you hold a job at that level, somebody should tell you that in three months, you are going to leave. But to just make an announcement and tell the person, ‘you are leaving now, is abnormal,” he said.

Williams suggested a system of appointment where the chief of defence staff would be the principal staff officer to the President, to whom other service chiefs would report, while other commanders would report to the service chiefs.

He argued that this would institute a natural order of succession within the army.

“When you are doing posting, you post the next senior officer. So, the chief of army staff and everybody know that this is supposed to be the next chief of army staff. Or you say, it’s going to be one of the senior commanders, who are also senior officers. But what they are doing now doesn’t speak well of the Armed Forces at all,” he added.

On his part, a retired Gen Aliyu Momoh commended the President’s decision to reshuffle the service chiefs, urging him to do more by removing the “cabals” in the military.

“I must commend the President; he has the right to hire and fire, but you have to go deeper. You will wonder why I’m commending the President. He has done a lot in the economy, fighting insecurity, and all of that. You see, that makes a country a great nation.

“But if you want to survive, if the country must survive, the President should go further to remove the cabals, the cartels that are in the military. It’s not those of them wearing uniforms. The cabals and the cartels controlling these things are not the forces. If you give these boys enough to fight, they will fight.

“So, it’s not just waking up and removing everybody, and thousands of people leave. No. You know that without security, there is no development. So, the President should go further to do more, to pull out all the cabals, whether politicians, ex-generals, and the rest, wherever.

“If he doesn’t do it, give Tinubu eight years, 10 years, he will still be doing the same thing we have been doing for the past, and there will be no solution,” he said.

The ex-general described the situation in the rank and file of the army as confusing, stating that the President could change the narrative and find a solution within five to six months.

“Look, there is confusion everywhere. People wore uniforms, they were doing their best, and now you removed them and you want to re-engage them, for what? Let’s change the narratives. And this solution can be found within six, seven, or eight months, not one year, if the right button is pressed.

See also  SSANU and NASU extend ultimatum on Strike

“But we are busy politicking, finding out where this new chief comes from, where this one is from. That is what we are doing as a nation. There is no coherence, no coordination. But of course, as I told you, the main problem is that there are cabals. Not only in the economy,” the ex-army officer stated.

Also speaking, Brigadier General Adewinbi (retd.) said the recurring wave of retirements each time new service chiefs are appointed was an established military tradition that could not easily be changed.

“There is nothing we can do about it. You can’t tell the President who to appoint; that is why he is the Commander-in-Chief. Many of us have been victims of this tradition,” he lamented.

Adewinbi suggested that the government should explore ways to continue benefiting from the experience of retired generals.

“What I think could be done is to ensure we utilise some of these generals. We can enlist them in our reserves so that their expertise and experience can still be put to good use.”

Retired Group Captain Sadique Shehu, who once served on the Committee for the Reform of the Armed Forces under Buhari, described the gale of military retirements as “unsustainable” and “structurally flawed.”

Shehu, a former spokesman for the Nigerian Air Force,  puts the figure of retired generals under Buhari at over 960 in 2022.

“Over 500 in the last eight years! They are more than that. I was in the Committee for the Reform of the Armed Forces under Buhari and personally tasked to count how many generals we had. As of 2022, the Armed Forces had had about 960 generals for a total strength of  235,000 personnel. That’s too much.

“The United States, with 1.3 million personnel, has about 900 generals. So, imagine — almost the same number of generals for a force that is barely a fifth of their size. If you divide our troops by the number of generals, a general would hardly have five soldiers under him,” he added.

Shehu attributed the bloated number of generals and the frequent mass retirements to poor manpower planning, political interference, and weak legislative oversight.

“It’s not a good practice, but the problem starts with producing too many generals. If we had fewer generals, even if the President skipped one or two courses to appoint a service chief, only a few officers would be affected. But now, when you pick a chief two courses down, you end up with 40, 50, or even 100 officers who must leave.

“You cannot leave the military to run itself. There’s too much political interference. If the Chief of Army Staff says he wants to promote 50 major-generals, the minister brings five from his village, and another minister brings five from his own. Nobody asks where these people will fit in,” he lamented.

See also  Ex-Kano governor Ibrahim Shekarau rejoins APC

He stressed that unless Nigeria drastically reduces the number of generals it produces, the cycle of forced retirements each time a new service chief is appointed would continue.

“The first solution is to tighten the number of generals we are producing. If we do that, even when the President exercises his power to appoint a service chief from a lower course, fewer officers will be affected.”

 

 

Shehu also urged the National Assembly to play a stronger oversight role by legislating clear conditions for the appointment and tenure of service chiefs.

“The National Assembly can pass a law defining how a President picks service chiefs — for instance, limiting tenure to two years or restricting choices to the topmost generals. They can modify the process without taking away presidential powers,” he explained.

He noted that many generals currently in service lack defined responsibilities due to rank inflation, describing the trend as “wasteful and counterproductive.”

“Some generals don’t even have real assignments now. Promotions are done without considering the economy or actual needs. That must change if we want professional and efficient armed forces.”

However, Major General Lasisi Abidoye (retd.) said the pyramid structure of the military naturally filtered out many officers through resignation, retirement, or death before reaching the senior cadre.

The retired officer explained that the Nigerian Army’s promotion process and rank structure made it unlikely for such a large number of Generals to be disengaged at once.

“During my time, I was RC 28, and when I got to the rank of Major General, only eight of us from my course made it. So, where will the other Generals suddenly come from?”

He noted that routine retirement remains a healthy and necessary process in the Armed Forces to ensure operational efficiency and career progression.

“That routine retirement is good for the military. When a Service Chief stays too long, all his juniors become stagnated and are forced to retire before him.

“Even the chief himself loses creativity after three years. No Service Chief should stay longer than two to three years; anything beyond that becomes counterproductive, like what we saw under former Lt. Gen. Buratai.”

Also, a former Director at the Defence Intelligence Agency, Major-General PJO Bojie (retd.), described the looming mass retirement of Generals following the appointment of new Service Chiefs as a “routine” exercise in the military.

Bojie said it was standard practice in the military for certain cadres of officers to be retired when new Service Chiefs took over.

However, Bojie insisted that the development was not unusual, saying it was “in line with military tradition.”

“The situation demands it, and it’s normal and routine,” Bojie added, dismissing concerns about the large number of Generals being retired.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Germany deports 137 Nigerians in five chartered flights

Published

on

Germany deported at least 137 Nigerian citizens in five documented chartered operations between February and June 2026, according to reports sighted by The PUNCH.

The documented arrivals comprised 27 Nigerians deported in February, 37 deported directly by Germany as part of a 50-person joint European Union operation in March, and 24, 23 and 26 Nigerians deported in April, May and June, respectively, according to figures contained in reports monitored by the DERS Team and Refugees4refugees.org.

The figures indicate an increase in the use of chartered flights to return Nigerians from Germany and other European countries, with several of the operations involving cooperation among European states.

On February 18, 2026, a batch of 27 Nigerians arrived at the Lagos Cargo Airport following a deportation operation from Germany.

According to Refugees4refugees.org, the flight was operated by World2fly and departed Stuttgart before arriving in Lagos shortly before 2 pm.

The report said the operation was primarily enforced by Germany, although one person, described as severely ill and mentally unfit, was transferred from Slovakia to join the 26 people deported from Germany.

It also identified Baden-Württemberg as a major participant in the operation and said Stuttgart had hosted both the December 2025 and February 2026 deportation operations to Nigeria.

The report further alleged that while some of those deported had serious health conditions, others had lived and worked in Germany for several years.

It cited the case of a single mother and her three children who were deported from the Sindelfingen district in Stuttgart despite reportedly having documentation relating to their residence status.

See also  Ex-Kano governor Ibrahim Shekarau rejoins APC

According to the report, the family subsequently returned to Germany after intervention by a volunteer and confirmation from local foreign authorities that the deportation had been made in error.

Furthermore, the February deportation also coincided with Nigeria’s participation in preparations for the Voluntary National Review of the Global Compact for Migration ahead of the 2026 International Migration Review Forum in New York.

The DERS Team said that Nigerian government agencies did not send representatives to receive the deportees at the airport, adding that the returning Nigerians were subsequently transported away from the airport without adequate assistance.

On March 10, another 50 people were deported to Nigeria in a joint EU operation hosted by Germany in cooperation with Spain, Austria and Belgium.

Germany accounted directly for 37 of the deportations, according to the figures provided.

The operation was described as the largest single deportation involving Nigerians in the three years referenced in the report.

A further 24 Nigerians, including women and a minor, were deported on April 9 on a chartered flight from Frankfurt organised through Frontex and German authorities, according to the supplied data.

In May 2026, another batch of 23 deportees was returned to Nigeria, while 26 Nigerians arrived in Lagos on June 17 following another routine chartered deportation flight.

Taken together, the five documented batches amounted to 137 Nigerians returned to the country between February and June 2026.

The figures highlight the continued use of organised charter flights in the enforcement of migration decisions involving Nigerians in Europe.

Migration rights advocates have, however, continued to argue that deportation policies should be accompanied by adequate safeguards for vulnerable people and proper procedures to prevent wrongful removal.

See also  Sex-for-marks: 60 randy lecturers axed in five years

While migration is as old as time itself, identified underlying factors driving irregular migration include conflict, exploitation, climate-related pressures and economic inequality.

Migration is the permanent or temporary movement of people from one place to another, changing their home. It can happen within a country or across borders, shaping populations, cultures, and job markets.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

Adeyemi demands media, lawyers’ presence before Reps probe on PFIPC scandal

Published

on

The House of Representatives Ad Hoc Committee investigating the controversy surrounding the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council is yet to decide where it will question the council’s self-appointed Director-General, Adeniyi Adeyemi, a source familiar with the committee’s proceedings has disclosed.

The development comes as Adeyemi insisted that his lawyers and journalists must be present before he submits to questioning by the House committee.

The committee, chaired by the lawmaker representing Kanke/Kanam/Pankshin Federal Constituency of Plateau State, Yusuf Gagdi, is probing how the PFIPC secured official office accommodation within the Federal Secretariat Complex in Abuja and received a budgetary allocation of more than N1.32bn in the 2026 Appropriation Act despite allegedly having no legal existence.

The investigation has attracted significant public attention following allegations that the council operated within government structures despite lacking legal recognition, raising concerns about possible lapses in public financial management and institutional oversight.

Adeyemi, who has been in police custody over the controversy surrounding the council, is expected to appear before the committee this week, following testimonies from several senior government officials.

However, as of Sunday, the venue for the much-anticipated session remained unsettled.

The source, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorised to discuss the committee’s proceedings with the media, confirmed the development in response to an inquiry by The PUNCH.

Asked whether the committee had chosen a venue for Adeyemi’s appearance, the source simply replied, “No decision yet.”

The development followed the committee’s hearings with key government officials, including the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Didi Walson-Jack; the Director-General of the Budget Office of the Federation, Tanimu Yakubu; the Director of Banking Services at the Central Bank of Nigeria, Hamisu Abdullahi; and representatives of the Inspector-General of Police.

The officials’ testimonies reportedly raised questions about how Adeyemi allegedly presented himself as the head of the PFIPC and secured recognition and access within government circles.

Adeyemi had, through his lawyers, indicated his willingness to appear before the committee publicly and respond to questions concerning the allegations.

However, Gagdi said the committee would determine the venue for the session at a later date.

Meanwhile, the Coalition of United Political Parties has rejected the findings of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission on the PFIPC controversy, describing the investigation as inadequate and calling for a broader and transparent inquiry.

In an interview with our correspondent, CUPP spokesperson, Agu Bryan, said the ICPC’s report, which reportedly cleared the Presidency of wrongdoing while indicting Adeniyi Adeyemi, failed to answer critical questions about how an allegedly non-existent government agency was able to operate at such a high level.

“The ICPC probe of the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council which exonerated the Presidency and indicted Adeniyi Adeyemi is nothing short of a charade,” Bryan said.

He argued that the report appeared to portray Adeyemi as having operated almost entirely alone, despite the scale of activities attributed to him.

See also  Certificate scandal: See who ordered ex-minister’s resignation

According to Bryan, such an operation could not have continued without assistance or enabling actions by officials within government institutions.

“As Nigerians, we know that someone could not have operated an alleged high-profile agency of such magnitude without enablers, either within the Presidency or across the government agencies involved,” he said.

Bryan called for a broader examination of the roles allegedly played by government institutions referenced in Adeyemi’s correspondence, including the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, the Central Bank of Nigeria and the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation.

He particularly cited the testimony of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Didi Walson-Jack, that her office failed to conduct due diligence on some of the documents associated with the controversial council.

The coalition also questioned how the PFIPC allegedly found its way into the national budget if, as reported by the ICPC, it had no legal foundation.

CUPP said the National Assembly and relevant government ministries owed Nigerians an explanation over how funds were appropriated to an organisation whose legal status had allegedly not been established.

“The National Assembly, particularly the House of Representatives, which appropriated funds to an agency that, according to the investigation, never existed as a creation of law, also owes Nigerians an explanation,” Bryan said.

He asked who within the Ministry of Budget and National Planning processed the budget line attributed to the PFIPC and what verification mechanisms were applied before public funds were appropriated.

CUPP also raised questions about the alleged recruitment of hundreds of staff and the extent to which Adeyemi was granted access to official government activities.

Bryan said the issues went beyond determining whether Adeyemi forged documents, arguing that investigators should establish how he allegedly gained access to government processes and institutions.

The controversy escalated after investigators reportedly established that a signature attributed to the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, was forged.

CUPP said the finding should prompt investigators to examine other official documents and correspondence allegedly used by Adeyemi.

“It is commendable that the House and the Police have established that the signature of the Chief of Staff to the President was allegedly forged. But that raises another critical question: how many other documents, official correspondences and signatures allegedly used by Adeyemi were also forged?” Bryan asked.

He said Nigerians deserved to know the full extent of the alleged deception and whether officials responsible for verifying the credentials of individuals dealing with public institutions failed in their duties.

The coalition further questioned how the PFIPC allegedly acquired sufficient official recognition to participate in government processes and appear in the national budget.

“How did a supposedly non-existent agency attain such a level of official recognition and attention that it found its way into the national budget?” he asked.

CUPP also called for Adeyemi to be given a fair opportunity to defend himself before the House committee, arguing that a transparent confrontation with the evidence could help determine whether other individuals or institutions were involved.

See also  Two-year refining milestone: Fuel import spending crashes 54% to $6.7bn

“Was Adeyemi given fair hearing thus far? Has he been given the privilege to appear before the Yusuf Gagdi-led Ad hoc Committee of the House of Representatives probing the matter to be interrogated and directly answer questions?” Bryan said.

He invoked the legal principle nemo judex in causa sua—that no person should be a judge in his own cause—in arguing that the investigation should be conducted independently and transparently.

Bryan said anything short of an open and impartial investigation would fail to satisfy public expectations.

He also criticised the ICPC’s handling of the matter and called for independent professional bodies to be considered if the Federal Government was genuinely interested in establishing the facts.

“If President Tinubu is determined to unravel the truth, independent organisations or bodies like the NBA, West African Bar Association or international or private investigators should be allowed to come in and take over the investigation,” Bryan said.

He accused federal security and anti-corruption agencies of lacking sufficient independence to investigate the controversy objectively, a claim the agencies have not accepted.

The House committee’s inquiry follows mounting concerns over how Adeyemi allegedly operated the PFIPC, secured government recognition and participated in official engagements despite questions over the organisation’s legal status.

The controversy has also drawn attention to the roles of several government institutions whose officials allegedly interacted with Adeyemi or processed documents connected to the council.

The committee is expected to hear directly from Adeyemi as it seeks to establish how the PFIPC was created, how it operated, who recognised it and whether public funds were allocated or expended in connection with its activities.

 

 

His appearance before the committee could therefore prove significant in determining whether the alleged scheme was the work of an individual or involved officials and institutions within government.

Adeyemi demands media

Adeyemi, through his lawyer, Ademola Oyedokun, had on Wednesday rejected the House committee’s decision to question him at an undisclosed location while he remains in police custody.

The committee subsequently attempted to question him on Thursday, but Adeyemi declined to respond to its questions, prompting the lawmakers to reschedule the interrogation for Monday.

However, a family source said Adeyemi had informed the committee that he would only submit to questioning if journalists and his legal representatives were allowed to be present.

“They eventually rescheduled to Monday and my brother told them that when they are coming, they should come with the media, otherwise he will not grant them audience.

“Initially, they agreed to come with the media, but later they said they would not be coming with any media. They said if he refuses to grant them audience, they will go ahead and conclude their investigation and it will be said that he was the one who failed to grant them audience,” the source said.

The development came a day after Adeyemi’s family raised concerns over an attempt by members of the House committee to question him in police custody without his lawyers present.

Adeyemi’s brother, Peter, alleged that the detained promoter declined to answer questions because his legal representatives were absent.

“The Reps committee came and wanted to interrogate him, but he refused. They are still there trying to make him talk without any of his lawyers being present. We are crying out loud so that the right thing would be done.

“He has stated that he wants to be quizzed the same way others who have accused him have spoken. It’s not that he is not willing to state his side of the story,” he said.

When contacted on whether the police were aware of the committee’s proposed visit and whether the lawmakers would be granted access to Adeyemi, the police spokesperson, Ani Ineidu, said visitors would be allowed provided they met the necessary requirements.

“Yes, if they have necessary documents. I’m not aware if they have relevant documents or authorisation, but if they fulfil the conditions, everybody who is under police custody has a right to visitors.

“So, in a case like this, if they have that right, they will be granted access,” Ineidu said.

In a statement issued on Wednesday, Oyedokun said his client welcomed the House investigation into the alleged establishment and operations of the PFIPC but opposed what he described as a closed-door interrogation.

“We have read that the committee intends to interview our client at an undisclosed date and place. We ask it, respectfully, to think again.

“Everyone else in this matter has been heard in public, and what has been said about our client was said in public. He should be allowed to answer in the same place it was said,” the lawyer stated.

The committee had on Tuesday announced that it would question Adeyemi at an undisclosed location while he remains in police custody.

The Chairman of the committee, Yusuf Gagdi, said the arrangement was necessary to avoid interfering with ongoing investigations by the Nigeria Police Force, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission.

Gagdi said the committee had invited Adeyemi but was informed by the police that he remained in custody pursuant to a court order.

He added that the National Assembly would not act in a manner that undermined the judiciary or violated the principle of separation of powers, stressing that lawmakers lacked the authority to override an existing court order directing Adeyemi’s detention.

 

 

The committee is investigating allegations surrounding the creation and operations of the PFIPC, including claims of impersonation, forgery, financial impropriety and the unlawful use of government facilities and official insignia.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

PHOTOS: Osun-Osogbo: Priestess defends 10-year-old Arugba, dismisses child abuse claims

Published

on

The Araba of Osogbo, Ifáyemí Elébuibón, has defended the tradition of selecting a young maiden as the Arugba of the Osun-Osogbo Festival, describing the role as a privilege rather than child abuse.

This is as a priestess and custodian of Osun Osogbo also defended the practice, saying the Arugba was selected through Ifa divination from the royal lineage.


Osun-Osogbo: Priestess

Elébuibón spoke in a video interview posted on Sunday by Yoruba cultural content creator, Wàá Ṣeré, amid discussions surrounding the age and responsibilities of the 10-year-old Arugba, Princess Alimot Osunbunmi.

Arugba is the young maiden chosen to carry the sacred calabash during the annual Osun-Osogbo Festival procession to the Osun Sacred Grove.

Alimot, a member of the royal family of the Ataoja of Osogbo, was selected through traditional Ifa divination in March 2025.

She carried the sacred calabash for the first time during this year’s procession to the Osun Sacred Grove on Friday, after she was unable to do so during the 2025 festival because of her young age.


10-year-old Arugba of the Osun-Osogbo Festival, Princess Alimot Osunbunmi carries the sacred calabash at Osun Osogbo festival…Photo Credit: Dewunmi Lagos

Explaining the role and its benefit, Elébuibón said the Arugba served as a spiritual intermediary between the Osun deity and the people.

He added that the responsibility was not determined by biological age.

“You see those people saying all that? They lack understanding. They don’t know. Whoever says the Arugba is too young—this one is ten years old, but some started at five!

See also  Certificate scandal: See who ordered ex-minister’s resignation

“The role the Arugba plays is a role of spiritual maturity, not about physical age. What the Arugba does for the town and the community is what the white man calls a ‘medium’—an intermediary between the Orisa and the people,” he said.

Elébuibón said the young maiden could communicate the wishes of the deity to the people because of the spiritual significance attached to the position.

“As young as she is, provided she remains pure and undefiled by any man, she can wake up one morning and say, ‘Mother Osun said this and that, do this, do that, don’t do this.’”

He added that the Arugba’s spiritual development was not necessarily tied to her physical age.

“Very soon, she will mature spiritually far beyond her biological age because the Orisa themselves nourish and care for them. Her role is not about age; what she does is not about age.”


FILE: Ifayemi Elebuibon

A female priestess and culture custodian, in another video posted by culture content creator Olamide Oseyifunmii, also defended the practice, saying the Arugba was selected through Ifa divination from the royal lineage.

According to her, the chosen maiden must be a virgin and is expected to observe certain taboos associated with the role.

“Whomever Ifa chooses becomes the Arugba. The Arugba must be a girl who remains untouched, pure, and a virgin. That is strictly what the Arugba must be,” she said.

She rejected the description of the practice as child abuse, saying the young girls selected for the role were traditionally protected and treated with care.

See also  Amnesty deal: Outrage mounts as Katsina moves to release 70 bandits

“Being selected as the Arugba carries taboos and honours; it is not what Westerners label as ‘child abuse’.”

The priestess said the Arugba was not expected to carry heavy loads apart from the sacred calabash during the annual procession.

She also explained the spiritual significance attached to the young maiden, saying devotees who bow before the Arugba were not worshipping the child but honouring the Osun deity believed to be represented through her.

“They were bowing to the divine spirit of Osun Ewuji inside her and upon her head,” she said.

The 2026 Osun-Osogbo Festival, which began on August 7, is being held at the Osun Sacred Grove in Osogbo, Osun State, and will run until August 19.

The annual festival, centred on the Osun deity, is one of Nigeria’s major traditional and cultural festivals and attracts worshippers, tourists and cultural enthusiasts from Nigeria and beyond.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Trending