Connect with us

News

Nigerians on medical death row: Muna, another victim of a failed system

Published

8 months ago

on

On 25 November 2012, my late pregnant sister, Ijeoma, was rushed by her husband to a hospital in Port Harcourt, Rivers State, but the doctors and nurses at the hospital callously and insensitively refused to attend to her without initial payment. They had demanded N20,000 (about €150 then) as precondition before they could attend to her. Her husband begged them to commence treatment and that he would go home to get money since the only money with him – N5,000 – had been spent on other procedures, including registration, as required by the hospital. He told them that the nature of the emergency made him even forget to put on his shoes. They vehemently refused the plea.

Everyone around noticed – especially women that had gone through child bearing – that death was knocking on my sister’s door. As her pain was increasing, people advised that she should be rushed to another hospital. Her husband drove her out in his car in search of a hospital. But unfortunately my sister did not make it. She painfully died in that pregnancy.

About 14 years after, the same system again has failed us. This time, it has consumed my young intelligent and promising nephew, Muna. His life was cruelly and mercilessly snuffed out by a corrupt failed system. It is so heartbreaking and disheartening because the closer we had thought we were in saving his life the more the failed structure had made it difficult and fastened his death. 

Munachimso shortly called Muna was diagnosed with leukemia and everything happened so fast. He went to hospitals in Imo, Rivers and finally in Abuja where he died.

When he was taken to the first hospital in Abuja, we had hope because they were able to stabilize him. After a short period, he was no longer depending on oxygen and started eating and playing with toys. All results carried out showed tremendous response and improvements, but the bills were rapidly increasing like thunder lightening. Within two weeks we had a deficit of more than 60 million naira and that was when the problem started. The hospital threatened to discharge Muna if we would not pay. We pleaded with them to be patient, continue his treatment and give us some time to pay the money. We went public seeking for financial help. Two days into this process Muna was forcefully discharged. He was taken to another hospital that had lesser equipment to save his life. There, his health situation again started to degenerate. 

With the help of the public, we the family members made arrangement to go back to this hospital where he was forcefully discharged. But it was not easy getting back. We made calls and chatted with some people in this regard for intervention so that Muna could be readmitted. We were still in this process and ready to agree on any term given by the management of the hospital so that he could be taken back when the worst news came. Muna was pronounced dead. It is devastating and my heart aches, for Muna’s death was preventable.

Who knows how many Nigerians have died like Muna? How many are currently on death row in various hospitals with death certificates already stamped, waiting to be issued? How long shall ordinary citizens continue to suffer and lament over government representatives’ low performances and uncaring attitude? With all Nigeria has got, why are the people in this state of despair? Who do we blame for Muna’s death? The hospital management that chased him away because of money or the government that failed to create a working healthcare system for all?

In all sincerity, while it is true that norms of medical ethics should at all times be observed, private hospitals are equally doing business too and must be sustained. They are not charity organizations. The problem is the government, its harsh policies and its lack of proper implementation. The Nigerian system in almost everything is only theoretically functional, but practically not existent because the system is corruptly structured. Nothing owned or operated by the government runs justly and smoothly, from schools to hospitals and courts etc. Muna’s death was avoidable but the system made sure that he did not survive. We are so deeply pained and so sad that we lost him. 

Hardly one finds government officials’ children in public schools. So, why should one be proud of a country where the minister of education cannot proudly send his/her own children to a public school preferring private schools or sending them abroad, or the minister of health cannot go to a public hospital for treatment when sick because of its poor standard? Why the deceit?

Why this high level of hypocrisy and compromise? Why do Nigerians condone such arrant nonsense? These are some of the reasons lecturers could go on strike for months and government officials care less to resolve the issue and why Nigerian government hospitals are substandard. Why should they care when their children are in well-equipped expensive schools/hospitals abroad? This is shameful and despicable. And we will all continue to lament until it becomes a law that no minister of education is allowed to send his/her children to a private school in Nigeria or to study abroad, and likewise no minister of health and his/her children are allowed to go abroad for medical treatment except in a few specified cases – including the children of every Nigerian president, lawmaker, and governor. This will revolutionize our schools and health sector to acceptable standards. Until then, Nigeria failed Muna and people like him. 

Yes, the 11-year-old boy was just a casualty of a failed system – a victim of the effect of corruption, nepotism, mismanagement and incompetence. Who will be the next victim? Does anyone know the nature, when and where? 

Good night Muna, and may your innocent soul rest in peace.

♦ Uzoma Ahamefule, a refined African traditionalist and a patriotic citizen writes from Vienna, Austria. WhatsApp: +436607369050; Email Contact Uzoma >>>>

Texas Guardian News
Latest posts by Texas Guardian News (see all)
Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Houston

Turnout, Trust, and Ground Game: What Decided Houston’s Runoff Elections

Published

4 days ago

on

December 14, 2025

By

Low-turnout runoff races for Houston City Council and Houston Community College trustee seats revealed how message discipline, local credibility, and voter mobilization determined clear winners—and decisive losers.

The final ballots are counted, and Houston’s runoff elections have delivered clear outcomes in two closely watched local races, underscoring a familiar truth of municipal politics: in low-turnout elections, organization and credibility matter more than name recognition alone.

In the race for Houston City Council At-Large Position 4, Alejandra Salinas secured a decisive victory, winning 25,710 votes (59.27%) over former council member Dwight A. Boykins, who garnered 17,669 votes (40.73%). The margin was not accidental. Salinas ran a campaign tightly aligned with voter anxiety over public safety and infrastructure—two issues that consistently dominate Houston’s civic conversations. Her emphasis on keeping violent criminals off city streets and expanding Houston’s water supply spoke directly to quality-of-life concerns that resonate across districts, especially in an at-large contest where candidates must appeal to the city as a whole.

Salinas’ win reflects the advantage of message clarity. In a runoff, voters are not looking to be introduced to candidates—they are choosing between candidates they are already familiar with. Salinas presented herself as forward-looking and solutions-oriented, while Boykins, despite his experience and political history, struggled to reframe his candidacy beyond familiarity. In runoffs, nostalgia rarely outperforms momentum.

The second race—for Houston Community College District II trustee—followed a similar pattern. Renee Jefferson Patterson won with 2,497 votes (56.63%), defeating Kathleen “Kathy” Lynch Gunter, who received 1,912 votes (43.37%). Though the raw numbers were smaller, the dynamics were just as telling.

Patterson’s victory was powered by deep local ties and a clear institutional vision. As an HCC alumna, she effectively positioned herself as both a product and a steward of the system. Her pledge to expand the North Forest Campus and direct resources to Acres Home connected policy goals to place-based advocacy. In trustee races, voters often respond less to ideology and more to proximity—those who understand the campus, the students, and the neighborhood. Patterson checked all three boxes.

By contrast, Gunter’s loss highlights the challenge of overcoming a candidate with genuine community roots in a runoff scenario. Without a sharply differentiated message or a strong geographic base, turnout dynamics tend to favor candidates with existing neighborhood networks and direct institutional relevance.

What ultimately decided both races was not a surprise, but execution. Runoffs reward campaigns that can re-mobilize supporters, simplify their message, and convert familiarity into trust. Salinas and Patterson did exactly that. Their opponents, though credible, were unable to expand or energize their coalitions in a compressed electoral window.

The lesson from Houston’s runoff elections is straightforward but unforgiving: winners win because they align message, identity, and ground game. Losers lose because, in low-turnout contests, anything less than that alignment is insufficient.

Texas Guardian News
Latest posts by Texas Guardian News (see all)
Continue Reading

Africa

Nigeria–Burkina Faso Rift: Military Power, Mistrust, and a Region Out of Balance

Published

4 days ago

on

December 14, 2025

By

The brief detention of a Nigerian Air Force C-130 Hercules aircraft and its crew in Burkina Faso may have ended quietly, but it exposed a deeper rift shaped by mistrust, insecurity, and uneven military power in West Africa. What was officially a technical emergency landing quickly became a diplomatic and security flashpoint, reflecting not hostility between equals, but anxiety between unequally matched states navigating very different political realities.

On December 8, 2025, the Nigerian Air Force transport aircraft made an unscheduled landing in Bobo-Dioulasso while en route to Portugal. Nigerian authorities described the stop as a precautionary response to a technical fault—standard procedure under international aviation and military safety protocols. Burkina Faso acknowledged the emergency landing but emphasized that the aircraft had violated its airspace, prompting the temporary detention of 11 Nigerian personnel while investigations and repairs were conducted. Within days, the crew and aircraft were released, underscoring a professional, if tense, resolution.

Yet the symbolism mattered. In a Sahel region gripped by coups, insurgencies, and fragile legitimacy, airspace is not merely technical—it is political. Burkina Faso’s reaction reflected a state on edge, hyper-vigilant about sovereignty amid persistent internal threats. Nigeria’s response, measured and restrained, reflected confidence rooted in capacity.

The military imbalance between the two countries is stark. Nigeria fields one of Africa’s most formidable armed forces, with a tri-service structure that includes a large, well-equipped air force, a dominant regional navy, and a sizable army capable of sustained operations. The Nigerian Air Force operates fighter jets such as the JF-17 and F-7Ni, as well as A-29 Super Tucanos for counterinsurgency operations, heavy transport aircraft like the C-130, and an extensive helicopter fleet. This force is designed not only for internal security but for regional power projection and multinational operations.

Burkina Faso’s military, by contrast, is compact and narrowly focused. Its air arm relies on a limited number of light attack aircraft, including Super Tucanos, and a small helicopter fleet primarily dedicated to internal counterinsurgency. There is no navy, no strategic airlift capacity comparable to Nigeria’s, and limited logistical depth. The Burkinabè military is stretched thin, fighting multiple insurgent groups while also managing the political consequences of repeated military takeovers.

This imbalance shapes behavior. Nigeria’s military posture is institutional, outward-looking, and anchored in regional frameworks such as ECOWAS. Burkina Faso’s posture is defensive, reactive, and inward-facing. Where Nigeria seeks stability through deterrence and cooperation, Burkina Faso seeks survival amid constant internal pressure. That difference explains why a technical landing could be perceived as a “serious security breach” rather than a routine aviation incident.

The incident also illuminates why Burkina Faso continues to struggle to regain political balance. Repeated coups have eroded civilian institutions, fractured command structures, and blurred the line between governance and militarization. The armed forces are not just security actors; they are political stakeholders. This creates a cycle where insecurity justifies military rule, and military rule deepens insecurity by weakening democratic legitimacy and regional trust.

Nigeria, despite its own security challenges, has managed to avoid this spiral. Civilian control of the military remains intact, democratic transitions—however imperfect—continue, and its armed forces operate within a clearer constitutional framework. This stability enhances Nigeria’s regional credibility and amplifies its military superiority beyond hardware alone.

The C-130 episode did not escalate into confrontation precisely because of this asymmetry. Burkina Faso could assert sovereignty, but not sustain defiance. Nigeria could have asserted its capability, but chose restraint. In the end, professionalism prevailed.

Still, the rift lingers. It is not about one aircraft or one landing, but about two countries moving in different strategic directions. Nigeria stands as a regional anchor with superior military power and institutional depth. Burkina Faso remains a state searching for equilibrium—politically fragile, militarily constrained, and acutely sensitive to every perceived threat from the skies above.

Texas Guardian News
Latest posts by Texas Guardian News (see all)
Continue Reading

News

Bizarre Epstein files reference to Trump, Putin, and oral sex with ‘Bubba’ draws scrutiny in Congress

Published

1 month ago

on

November 14, 2025

By

The latest tranche of emails from the estate of late convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein includes one that contains what appear to be references to President Donald Trump allegedly performing oral sex, raising questions the committee cannot answer until the Department of Justice turns over records it has withheld, says U.S. Rep. Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee.

Garcia insists the Trump White House is helping block them.

In a Friday afternoon interview with The Advocate, the out California lawmaker responded to a 2018 exchange, which was included in the emails released, between Jeffrey Epstein and his brother, Mark Epstein. In that message, Mark wrote that because Jeffrey Epstein had said he was with former Trump adviser Steve Bannon, he should “ask him if Putin has the photos of Trump blowing Bubba.”

“Bubba” is a nickname former President Bill Clinton has been known by; however, the email does not clarify who Mark Epstein meant, and the context remains unclear.

Texas Guardian News
Latest posts by Texas Guardian News (see all)
Continue Reading

Trending