In a political system already full of elite corruption, the recent land grab scandal in Abuja, involving the Nyesom Wike, minister of the federal capital territory, still stands out. It has not only been done with impunity. Wike has also been unapologetically open and reckless in executing this crass, primitive accumulation of land. Wike, who is also a former governor of Rivers State, allocated vast plots of prime land in Abuja worth billions of naira to his children, young adults who have never earned a day’s wage. This blatant theft of public assets is not merely unethical; it is a textbook case of direct embezzlement, a form of corruption that dispenses with the common layers of obfuscation, accounting tricks and gimmicks typical of elite stealing in Nigeria.
A Crude and Reckless Form of Elite Theft
Unlike the more discreet and common forms of Nigerian corruption, which are usually kickbacks, inflated contracts, offshore laundering, or budget padding, Wike’s actions do not have that subtlety. This is not corruption with attempts to hide in bureaucratic fog, but an aristocrat carving out of pieces of the capital city for his bloodline, as if it were his personal estate. Most times, political corruption in Nigeria is sanitised with layers of legalese or funnelled through proxies and fronts. They may use fronts such as distant relatives or even trusted house helps to hold stolen assets. Here, Wike’s children are the named beneficiaries—signalling either staggering arrogance or foolishness.
This scandal of land grabbing is shocking not just for what it is, but for where it is: Abuja, which is the centre of elite political rivalry in Nigeria. Historically, politically exposed persons have avoided parking their ill-got wealth in easily traceable, onshore assets, for fear of political rivals gaining power and seizing it. Shell companies in Dubai, trusts in the British Virgin Islands, Panama and other tax havens have been the preferred channels, although some have opted to bury cash in underground wells and bunkers. Wike, by contrast, has chosen to bury huge stolen wealth in the most visible and politically sensitive ground possible. It raises a vital question: does he believe he’s untouchable and can hold on to the assets under threat of a rival regime gaining power? Or has he miscalculated the resilience of his political immunity? Perhaps he plans to quickly sell off the properties while his still in power. Whatever Wike’s rationalisation may be, the point of note is the rashness of his actions even by the political standards of the thieving politicians at the heart of the ruling class in Nigeria.
Tinubu’s Enabling Hand and the Deepening of Patrimonial Rule
Wike’s brazen behaviour is nourished and protected by the broader political architecture built by the ruling class and expanded under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. Tinubu is a veteran of patronage politics who uses a governance model deeply rooted in clientelism, where loyalty is exchanged for state resources. From the reappointment of tainted politicians to critical offices, to the disbursement of funds and assets to political loyalists and key allies under various bogus contracts and schemes, Tinubu’s regime has not only tolerated but rewarded blatant corruption.
Rather than sanction Wike or start an investigation, the Tinubu administration has maintained a calculated silence. This silence is endorsement. In effect, Tinubu’s presidency is redefining the boundaries of acceptable theft, normalising the open conversion of public resources into private dynastic legacies. Tinubu’s political calculus assumes that Wike is too valuable a political ally given his influence in the South-South, to be antagonised over mere “land issues.”
This deepening patrimonialism has broader implications. It further erodes institutional checks, showing clearly that, for the ruling class in Nigeria, public office is purely for self-enrichment. But on the flip side, it thus helps shed off illusions that working-class people could have that the capitalist system and its beneficiaries care about justice and fairness.
Repression and the Criminalisation of Whistleblowing
The brazenness of this scandal is not just in the act itself, but in how the system has responded. Rather than investigate the veracity of the claims, the Nigerian state swiftly moved against Hassan Shahru Mariga the land resources officer at the department of land administration of the Federal Capital Territory that was the alleged whistleblower who exposed Wike’s actions. The recent invocation of the Cybercrime Act (2024 amendment) to target activists, journalists, and whistleblowers is a chilling escalation in state repression. The Tinubu administration has weaponized this law to silence dissent, criminalise speech, and shut down transparency in the digital space.
Wike’s land grab is no longer just a corruption scandal, but a classic example of how those in power to protect themselves with resort to authoritarianism. The treatment of the whistleblower sends a clear message: theft is tolerable, exposure is not.
Building Mass Movements for Socialism in the Age of Neoliberal Looting
Faced with such systemic rot, it becomes urgent to ask: what alternatives remain? The capitalist political opposition is part of the same elite consensus. They are only in the game for their “turn”. The judiciary offers no hope of justice. Civil society is under siege. But movements like the Take It Back (TIB) campaign represent a flicker of hope. The organisation publicly opposed Mariga’s repressive treatment, mobilizing to prevent his dismissal following his unlawful detention.
Being as a nationwide socialist-oriented grassroots organisation, TIB is uniquely positioned to articulate a radical critique of the system, a critique not just of Wike or Tinubu, but of the neoliberal capitalist structure that has made this political system possible. And it can help foster an expansion of the resistance it represents by working with civic organisations and community associations in different states and local government areas.
The neocolonial capitalist governance model in Nigeria prioritises state power as a prize to enable looting. Decades of a neoliberal consensus around extraction, privatisation, deregulation, and state capture have made reinforced the nature of the political economy of underdevelopment in the country.
TIB’s perspectives for public ownership, workers democracy, and mass mobilisation for revolution from below offers an alternative vision: one in which resources are not converted into family fortunes, but are used to provide housing, education, and healthcare for the majority, by the people themselves. This scandal must be a rallying point, not just to expose Wike, but to galvanise a new generation of Nigerians to reject the entire edifice of capitalism, neocolonialism and elite corruption.
The key challenge for movements like TIB is to avoid marginalisation, deepen nationwide organising structures, and overcome state repression. But their potential lies in their clarity to recognise that corruption is not a Nigeria deviation from liberal capitalist politics, but at the core of the logic of the system’s political economy. We must overthrow that system to defeat its logic, and build a better society where the needs of the people are put first, where the working people themselves run society and where we have liberated Nigeria and the world as a whole from the shackles of capitalist exploitation. That revolutionary system is international socialism.
by Victor OSARENTIN
