Twisting Narratives and the Need for Accurate Information Dissemination

By Okoi Obono-Obla

A friend of mine called on Saturday 23 May 2026 and grumbled about how the President appointed someone from the South West as the Registrar of the Joint Admission and Matriculation Board (JAMB). He never mentioned whether the new Registrar was qualified or competent; his only grouse was the appointee’s place of origin. When he realized I wasn’t interested in the ethnic slant of his conversation, he veered off to another issue, still laced with sectional undertones.

This time, he alleged that the President had taken over the National Inland Waterways using the court. He further claimed that no country practicing federalism allows the federal government to own and control waterways. I was confused, given my familiarity with constitutionalism, because I knew the Constitution had not been amended to remove national waterways from federal jurisdiction.

My friend rambled on with incoherent points, but I inferred that his thought process was driven by personal grievances—likely resentment over not receiving an appointment—and he wanted to influence me to share his mindset. I told him I would research his claim.

Afterward, I searched online and found a story in This Day Newspaper (23 May 2026) titled “Supreme Court Voids Parts of NIWA Act, Restrains FG from Controlling Lands Adjoining Waterways in Lagos, Other States for Non-Navigational Purposes.” I discovered that my friend’s account was twisted. The Supreme Court had decided in a case filed by the Lagos State Government against the Federal Government, striking down provisions of the National Inland Waterways Act that gave the Federal Government authority over lands adjoining waterways. Importantly, this decision was not made by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu; the suit originated during President Buhari’s administration.

I sent my friend a WhatsApp message clarifying this:

“Good morning, Comrade, happy Sunday. Yesterday, you mentioned that the Federal Government had taken over the National Inland Waterways. However, upon researching, I discovered that the Federal Government was actually sued by the Lagos State Government on the grounds that it was meddling with lands adjoining waterways. The Supreme Court struck down certain provisions of the NIWA Act that had granted the Federal Government authority over lands adjoining waterways. This decision was not made by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu; rather, the suit was filed by the Lagos State Government during President Buhari’s administration.”

Since then, my friend has not responded, despite his earlier enthusiasm.

This experience revealed how even educated elites sometimes peddle falsehoods, twist facts, or weave narratives calculated to mislead the uninformed. Such distortions can fuel unnecessary tensions. The government must therefore strengthen its dissemination of accurate information, especially on legal and constitutional matters of national importance. Decisions like the Supreme Court’s ruling on the National Inland Waterways—touching on the delicate balance of powers between the Federal Government and the States—must be clearly communicated to prevent misrepresentation by detractors seeking cheap political points.

Conclusion:
False narratives thrive when official communication is weak. Governments must proactively clarify constitutional and judicial developments to safeguard national unity and prevent misinformation from sowing distrust.