Across cassava-producing communities, women sustain one of Nigeria’s most consumed staple foods through a layered system of labour, ownership, and machinery, where survival work continues daily under trees, makeshits shelters and within processing centres
The smell of fermented cassava hangs in the air long before the work comes into view, sharp, sour, and heavy in the morning heat.
In Gabaraku in Bida Local Government Area and Gwada in Shiroro Local Government Area of Niger State, among other areas, women are already at work beneath scattered trees, sitting on bare ground with buckets, knives, and piles of cassava tubers spread around them.
A few steps away stand government-supported processing centres established under the Federal Government/ International Fund for Agricultural Development, (IFAD)-backed Value Chain Development Programme (VCDP) in the state.
They are functional with platforms, water points, and structured processing spaces. But the most visible labour is happening outside the centres.
Under the trees, the work begins
Nigeria produces more cassava than any country in the world, yet much of it is still processed by hand.
Nigeria remains the world’s largest producer of cassava, with annual output running into tens of millions of metric tonnes.
A significant portion of this is processed into garri, a staple food eaten daily across homes. In practical terms, millions of Nigerians rely on garri every day, making it one of the most consistently consumed foods in the country.
Across cassava-producing communities, women dominate the processing stage from peeling and washing to frying and drying.
In many rural clusters, they make up the overwhelming majority of the workforce, sustaining a system where production depends more on physical effort than machinery.
It is this largely unseen labour that keeps garri available in markets and homes across the country.
Economy built in layers
What unfolds is not one system, but several working at once.
Some women own cassava and bring it for processing into garri for sale.
Others do not own anything. They survive through daily labour, peeling cassava, pressing sacks, or frying garri for small payments.
A third group standing slightly apart comprises machine owners who provide grating services for a fee.
Together, they form the hidden structure behind one of Nigeria’s most consumed staple foods.
Hauwawu Under The Tree
Under a tree in Gabaraku community, 22-year-old Hauwawu sits on the bare ground, peeling cassava with steady, practiced movements.
Beside her, her four-month-old baby lies on a small cloth spread over the dust.
Around her, other women continue working with knives scraping cassava in a rhythm that does not break.
At one point during the visit, the baby is lifted briefly and held for a few minutes.
There is no pause in the work.
Moments later, the child is returned to the cloth. Hauwawu adjusts it slightly, leans forward, and continues peeling cassava as the cluster around her carries on.
Her hands do not stop.
“I don’t have anything doing,” she stated quietly, adding: “So I come out every day to peel cassava to earn something for my children.”
Halima: Years Of The Same Work
Not far from her, Halima, 45, works through her own pile of cassava, her wrapper tied tightly around her as she peels.
Her hands move steadily, though slower than the younger women around her.
“I have been doing this work for years. It is not easy, but it is what we have,” she explained.
She paused briefly to stretch her fingers before returning to the pile:
“If I don’t come out, there is no money for the day.”
Around them, cassava peels gather on the ground as dust rises in the heat.
Amina: Eight Children To Feed
Amina, a mother of eight, sits on a low stool beside a growing heap of cassava, peeling quickly as the morning heat builds.
Her work is constant, driven less by routine and more by urgency.
“I have many children to take care of,” she explained without looking up.
“If I don’t come out to work, there will be nothing at home,” she further stated.
She adjusted her wrapper and continued: “This work is what keeps us going.”
The Crushing Machine And Its Owner
At the centre of the process, the sound changes.
A machine roars as cassava is fed into it in steady batches. The machine is owned by an individual operator who charges for each use.
Women arrive with basins of peeled cassava, waiting their turn as the machine runs continuously.
Wet cassava mash spills out in thick heaps, quickly gathered by waiting hands before the next batch follows.
Some women without cassava of their own remain near the machine, assisting by feeding cassava into the grinder or carrying the mash away.
They are paid small amounts for their effort.
In the whole process, the machine owner does not peel or fry.
as his income comes from every turn of the machine.
From Pressing To Fire: The Work Does Not Slow
After grating, the cassava mash is packed into sacks and tightly pressed to remove excess water.
The liquid drains out sometimes through channels provided at the processing centres, and in other cases directly onto the surrounding ground where drainage is limited.
The mash is then left to ferment briefly before further processing.
From here, it is sieved to remove fibres and lumps, breaking it into fine granules ready for frying.
Processing takes different directions at this stage depending on use.
Some batches are taken straight to the frying stage to produce garri commonly used for making eba, a staple swallow eaten in many homes.
Others are allowed to ferment longer, developing the sour taste preferred by those who soak garri in water for drinking.
Near the frying area, Kaka, 50, stands over a wide pan, turning garri over firewood.
Smoke circles her face as heat rises sharply from the stove.
“This work needs strength,” she noted without stopping, adding: “If you are tired and you stop, the garri will burn”
She adjusted her stance slightly and continued stirring.
“We have been doing it like this for a long time,” she added.
After frying, garri is spread out to dry.
Some women use elevated platforms provided within the processing centres.
Others spread theirs on sacks or bare ground under the sun, depending on where they work.
Children move in and out of the workspace. Some helping, others sitting quietly beside their mothers.
Not all women occupy the same position in this system.
Cassava owners carry the risk and eventual profit of production.
Labourers depend on daily earnings from peeling, frying, and processing while machine owners earn from service.
But across all three, income remains uncertain.
The Price Of The Day’s Work
Gogo sits beside a sack of finished garri, tying it carefully as others prepare theirs for sale.
Her work for the moment is done, but the uncertainty remains.
“The problem is selling,” she observed, adding: “You can work all day and still not get good money.”
She tightens the sack and looks toward the others.
“Sometimes buyers come and price it low. We don’t have a choice,” she stated.
Inside And Outside The Structure
Inside the processing centres, cooperative members work with training, shared facilities, and access to organised markets under the VCDP programme.
One beneficiary, Patience Jeremiah, says the training has improved her processing methods and helped her access better market opportunities.
But just beyond the centres, independent women continue differently.
They are not part of cooperatives.
“We want to be on our own,” one woman says.
They rely on daily labour, informal buyers, and flexible arrangements that allow them to earn as they work.
Both systems exist in the same communities — side by side, but not together.
The End Of The Day
As evening approaches, the rhythm begins to slow.
Sacks of garri are tied and lifted.
Firewood smoke fades into the air just as the smell of cassava lingers across both the processing centres and the open spaces under trees.
Each sack represents hours of labour, peeling, crushing, pressing, sieving, frying, and drying and carried out through multiple hands and multiple systems.
In Nigeria’s cassava economy, garri is not just produced, it is worked into existence daily.
And under trees and inside processing centres alike, the same labour begins again when morning returns.
The Nigeria Immigration Service has released an updated step-by-step guide for Nigerians living abroad to renew their passports through its Contactless Passport Application System.
The Service announced the update in a post on its official X handle on Tuesday, encouraging Nigerians in the diaspora to take advantage of the digital platform.
According to the Service, the application process involves the following steps:
1. Visit the official NIS Passport Application portal. 2. Select Continue from the pop-up window. 3. Click Apply for Renewal/Re-issue. 4. Create an account and verify your identity using your National Identification Number and date of birth. 5. Complete the application form and choose your preferred processing embassy or high commission. 6. Upload the required documents. 7. Pay the passport fee for your selected booklet. 8. Obtain your Application ID and Reference Number. 9. Select the Contactless option under the Application Status/Book Appointment section. 10. Review the contactless instructions and click “I Understand and Opt In.” 11. Download the NIS Mobile App. 12. Log in or create a profile on the app. 13. Select Passport Application Services. 14. Click Passport Biometrics Enrolment, enter your Application ID and Reference Number, and check your eligibility. 15. Capture your facial image and fingerprints. 16. Complete the liveness verification. 17. Pay the contactless service fee. 18. Submit your biometrics.
The Service, however, noted that not all applicants would qualify for the contactless process.
“If response is INELIGIBLE, then it means applicant should return to the landing page of the portal to book physical appointment at the Embassy/High Commission,” it stated.
For applicants who successfully complete the contactless biometric enrolment, the NIS said additional documents must be forwarded to the selected processing mission.
“Upon successful completion of biometrics via Contactless App, applicant should print-out the Application form, passport booklet payment, biometric payment, current Passport and enclose all in a self-addressed return envelope to the processing embassy selected during the application process,” the Service said.
It added that applicants would be able to monitor the progress of their applications after submission.
“Applicant may track successful application two weeks after submission via https://track.immigration.gov.ng or on the NIS Mobile App,” the Service added.
A former Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Babachir Lawal, has called for a judicial inquiry into the controversy surrounding the alleged fake Presidential Fiscal and Infrastructure Projects Council (PFIPC), arguing that the scandal points to deep institutional failures rather than a simple administrative error.
Speaking in an interview with ARISE NEWS on Monday, Lawal said the circumstances surrounding the alleged agency suggested the existence of a wider network that enabled it to function within government processes despite questions over its legal status.
He insisted that an administrative investigation alone would be insufficient. “I don’t think it should even be administrative alone; it should be a judicial inquiry”, the former SGF clearly stated.
Lawal questioned claims surrounding an alleged ₦27.5bn take-off grant reportedly linked to the agency, asking how such funds could have been approved and released if the organisation had no legal basis.
“Nigerians are talking about how N1.3bn was inserted into the budget. The man himself first said the quarrel came about because he refused to part with 48% of the 27-point-something billion Naira take-off grant. That money has been spent before this budget office was looking for the budget.
“Who gave him the money? It was not appropriated for; it’s not in any budget, that N27.5bn Naira for which he says somebody demanded 48%. Who gave him the money? How did the process of generating the request for the release come up? How did it go through?
“We are just talking about the tip of the iceberg here. Down there, before we got to here, N27.5bn had already been disbursed, according to him, as a take-off grant. How did that money get to him? It was not in the budget. So this is what should frighten us. If such money can go to a fictitious organisation, we only now begin to see it when we are quarrelling about how it got into the budget. How did that money get to them?”, Babachir queried.
The former SGF argued that the controversy only became public because of disagreements over the sharing of funds rather than because government oversight mechanisms functioned effectively.
He continued,… “So you see, that’s how we got to know this to start with. That is the reason why we got to know this on his side of the coin. It’s about the sharing of the N27.5bn. That’s why the thing came up. So it didn’t work. It should have worked before that money left the government coffers into the account of the agency.”
Lawal also alleged that the scandal reflected broader institutional weaknesses within the current administration, arguing that the Office of the SGF should have detected any irregularities before the matter progressed through official channels.
He maintained that the SGF’s office bears responsibility for identifying and flagging agencies without legal backing before their requests or budgets proceed through government.
He said, “It’s institutional compromise, because in this, I sense there’s quite a big racket going on somewhere along the line. If the agency was created by maybe one big man alone, and then he wants to go through the budget process, the budget office assigns the budget code according to the chart of accounts in GIFMIS. So, how did they manage to assign the budget code for this agency that does not exist? Who inserted it?
“Because first of all, the budget office issues a budget call circular to MDAs, and everybody starts to prepare his budget according to the budget line. They give you ceilings, and you prepare your budget and forward it to the budget office as an agency or ministry. Now, the Ministry of Budget and Planning would, in our time, call every MDA to come and defend its budget. Now, if you don’t exist, how did they recognise that you are a genuine entity? Who gave out the budget code and allowed their budget to pass?
“That’s what oversight is. The SGF should be able to know, because before it gets to the National Assembly, that budget goes through the SGF. Unless there’s a dereliction of duty by the SGF’s office, the responsibility to flag that this is a fake agency would have come from them.”
Lawal further criticised the National Assembly, accusing lawmakers of failing to thoroughly scrutinise budget proposals.
“It is a legislative oversight. This government—this National Assembly—has no interest in scrutinising the budget that comes before them. Most of the legislators just go in there to earn their salaries and collect allowances and go. They don’t scrutinise the budget line by line. We all know how this particular government works. There are some people that when they talk, nobody else has the authority to contravene.”
He also suggested that public attention should focus not only on the agency’s legal status but on the individuals who allegedly enabled its operations.
“Why are you interested in N27.5bn that had already been collected and spent? We are talking about an agency that we are claiming doesn’t exist. Maybe it exists, but it doesn’t have a legal framework for its existence. But it exists. And there are a lot of powerful people that make sure it exists in that form.
“Those are the people we need to expose. The Chief of Staff, in particular, is so powerful. The SGF is there, just reneging on his responsibilities. And nothing has happened now”, he concluded.
Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, ha threatened to initiate legal steps against Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi, and demand N10 billion in damages over allegations linking him to murder, bribery and other criminal activities.
The move was conveyed in a letter dated July 6, 2026, signed by Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Kemi Pinheiro, on behalf of Pinheiro LP, the Chief of Staff’s legal representatives.
The dispute stems from a press conference held by Adeyemi on June 25, during which he accused Gbajabiamila of seeking a share of the alleged take-off funds of the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC), receiving money through intermediaries, abusing his office and participating in efforts to conceal wrongdoing.Death & Tragedy
During the briefing, Adeyemi also referred to the Chief of Staff as “a murderer” and “an assassin”.
The Presidency has consistently maintained that the PFIPC is a fictitious organisation, despite its appearance in the 2026 Appropriation Act.
Gbajabiamila’s lawyers dismissed all the allegations as entirely false and defamatory, saying they were intended to damage his reputation.
The letter stated: “not only false but gravely defamatory,” adding that the allegations were “designed to portray our client as corrupt, dishonest, criminally culpable, morally bankrupt, administratively incompetent, a murderer and unfit to occupy public office.”
According to the legal team, Adeyemi is already standing trial before the Federal High Court in Abuja in Charge No. FHC/ABJ/CR/652/2026, FRN v. Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew & Ors, over allegations including forgery of an appointment letter bearing Gbajabiamila’s purported signature and the alleged counterfeiting of Presidential letter-headed papers to present himself as a government official.Nigeria Investment Guide
The lawyers further rejected Adeyemi’s claims that Gbajabiamila demanded 48 per cent of a purported N27.4 billion take-off grant for the council, amounting to about N12.5 billion, or that he received N400 million through proxies connected to appointments within the organisation.
Other allegations dismissed in the letter included claims that the Chief of Staff intimidated individuals and media organisations, manipulated budget processes, attempted to misuse security agencies and performed official duties while under the influence of intoxicating substances.Trending News Feed
Gbajabiamila also denied ever having any relationship with Adeyemi.
“You have never at any time met, interacted with, communicated with, or had any form of personal or official dealing whatsoever with him,” the lawyers wrote, adding that the decision to “fabricate and publish allegations against a person with whom you have had absolutely no relationship or interaction underscores the reckless, baseless and malicious nature of your publication.”
The legal team also criticised the timing of the allegations, noting that they were made after criminal proceedings had already been instituted against Adeyemi.
“It is even more disturbing to our client that you resorted to defaming him through your press statements after a criminal Charge had been filed against you,” the letter stated.
It added, “Trial by media remains unknown to Nigerian law and cannot be a substitute for due process.”Nigeria Investment Guide
Gbajabiamila’s lawyers demanded that Adeyemi immediately stop making further defamatory statements, remove all related videos, recordings and transcripts from every platform, issue a full retraction and apology in at least five national newspapers and across all social media platforms used to circulate the claims, and provide a written undertaking that he would refrain from making further allegations.
The letter warned that failure to comply would result in both criminal defamation proceedings under the laws of the Federal Capital Territory and a civil lawsuit seeking N10 billion in aggravated and exemplary damages. The damages, it said, would be donated to a charity chosen by Gbajabiamila. The legal action would also seek a perpetual injunction and a court order compelling the publication of an apology.
The controversy centres on the PFIPC, which was listed in the 2026 Appropriation Act under the title Presidential Economic Advisory Council/Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council and received more than N1.3 billion in budgetary allocations, including about N803 million for personnel, N200 million for overhead and N300 million for capital expenditure.
Adeyemi had argued during his June 25 press conference that an agency included in a budget signed by the President could not be regarded as non-existent.
However, the Presidency insists the council is fraudulent and has no legal existence.
Meanwhile, human rights lawyer Femi Falana has argued that the Presidency lacks the constitutional authority to clear anyone involved in the dispute and has called for an independent investigation into the allegations against both Gbajabiamila and Adeyemi.
Adeyemi is scheduled to appear before the Federal High Court on July 27, 2026.
