```json { "headline": "The Great Nigerian Paradox: Billions for Ex-Leaders While Millions Face Starvation in the North", "subheadline": "A TIME investigation reveals how N38.2 billion in pensions for former presidents collides with a catastrophic hunger crisis, exposing deep fractures in Nigeria's priorities.", "narrative": "In a makeshift clinic in Maiduguri, Borno State, five-year-old Aisha’s ribs press sharply against her skin. She is one of 13 million children across Nigeria’s northeast projected to suffer from malnutrition this year, a statistic that represents the worst hunger crisis the nation has faced in nearly a decade. Just over 800 miles southwest, in the opulent Ikoyi district of Lagos, Nigeria’s commercial capital, the sprawling estate of a former head of state is maintained by a federal allocation that has consumed billions of naira over decades. These two realities—one of desperate scarcity, the other of entrenched privilege—are not parallel lines in Nigeria’s story; they are colliding forces, exposing what analysts describe as a profound crisis of national priority and moral imagination.\n\nAccording to the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP), funding cuts have crippled the humanitarian response in the northeast, putting thousands at immediate risk of catastrophic food shortages. In Borno State alone, about 15,000 people are in imminent danger. ‘The reduced funding we saw in 2025 has deepened hunger and malnutrition across the region,’ Sarah Longford, WFP’s deputy regional director for West and Central Africa, stated. This crisis is part of a wider West and Central African emergency where about 55 million people face severe food shortages, with over three-quarters in Nigeria, Chad, Cameroon, and Niger.\n\nSimultaneously, an investigation by Vanguard Nigeria reveals that by the end of this year, the Federal Government will have spent at least N38.188 billion (approximately $144.7 million) over 22 years on the upkeep of former presidents, vice presidents, and their families. From a modest N140 million in 2005, the annual allocation has ballooned, peaking at N3.185 billion in 2012 under President Goodluck Jonathan. Even in a year of severe hunger, the budget for former leaders remains robust. This juxtaposition forms the core of Nigeria’s current paradox: a state that can meticulously fund the comfort of its retired elite while its humanitarian agencies are forced to scale back nutrition programs for over 300,000 children due to funding gaps.\n\n**ECONOMIC DIMENSION: The Calculus of Misplaced Priority**\n\nThe economic narrative is one of distorted allocation with tangible consequences. The N38.2 billion spent on former leaders over 22 years is not merely a line item; it represents capital that could have transformed agricultural and social infrastructure in the crisis-prone north. Economists point to the opportunity cost. ‘For the cost of one year’s allocation to these pensions at their peak, you could fund the complete annual operational budget of a mid-sized agricultural development bank focused on the northeast,’ said Dr. Chidi Nwafor, a Lagos-based economic analyst. ‘We are investing in the past’s comfort at the direct expense of the future’s food security.’\n\nThe hunger crisis itself carries a staggering economic toll. Malnutrition stunts cognitive and physical development, crippling future productivity. The WFP warns that nearly 35 million people could face hunger when resources run low. The cost of treating severe acute malnutrition is exponentially higher than preventing it, yet prevention programs were among the first cut. Meanwhile, the pensions for ex-leaders are non-discretionary, protected by law and political precedent. This creates a fiscal rigidity where compassionate expenditure is variable, but politically sensitive entitlements are sacrosanct. The market reaction is one of quiet despair; foreign direct investment in agriculture remains hesitant, deterred by both insecurity and the state’s apparent inability to prioritize foundational human security over political patronage.\n\n**SOCIAL DIMENSION: A Nation Divided by Hunger and Heritage**\n\nThe social fissures are deepening along familiar yet dangerous lines: north versus south, poverty versus privilege, the governed versus the governing class. The hunger crisis is predominantly a northern phenomenon, exacerbated by the Boko Haram insurgency, climate change-induced desertification, and now, aid cuts. In rural communities in Adamawa and Yobe states, families are surviving on one meal a day. ‘We sold our last goat to buy maize, but it is finished,’ said Mallam Ibrahim, a resident of a camp for internally displaced persons in Maiduguri, speaking to Vanguard Nigeria. ‘The children cry all night from the pain in their stomachs.’\n\nThis suffering exists in a separate Nigeria from the one experienced by the political elite, whose retirement benefits include housing, staff, vehicles, and medical allowances. The social contract feels broken. ‘When people see convoys of new SUVs for a former leader’s family, and then their own child dies from hunger because a clinic had no supplies, it breeds a deep, generational resentment,’ noted Aisha Yesufu, a prominent social activist. The urban middle class, particularly in southern cities like Lagos and Port Harcourt, is increasingly vocal on social media, framing the issue as a moral scandal. However, this outrage often fails to translate into sustained pressure, highlighting a disconnect between online activism and the visceral struggle for survival in the northeast.\n\n**POLITICAL DIMENSION: Entitlement, Power, and Silent Complicity**\n\nPolitically, the system is engineered to protect its own. The ‘Former Presidents and Heads of State, Former Vice-Presidents and Chiefs of General Staff (Benefits and Other Facilities) Act’ is a legislative fortress. Any attempt to reform or reduce these benefits is seen as a direct attack on the political establishment, a club whose members may be rivals today but are united in protecting the perks of office for tomorrow. ‘It is a classic case of elite pact,’ explained Professor Innocent Chukwuma, a political scientist at the University of Lagos. ‘Today’s president knows he will be tomorrow’s pensioner. There is an unspoken agreement not to disturb the arrangement.’\n\nThis complicity extends across party lines. The budgetary allocations have persisted through administrations led by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the All Progressives Congress (APC). The current administration of President Bola Tinubu, while championing a rhetoric of economic renewal, has not signaled any review of these entitlements, even as it appeals for international aid to address the food crisis. Regionally, Nigeria’s predicament stands in stark contrast to nations like Ghana, where ex-presidential benefits are less extravagant and more transparent. Internationally, the optics are damaging. As Nigeria’s diplomats lobby for humanitarian aid, foreign donors privately question the country’s internal spending priorities, creating a credibility gap that undermines relief efforts.\n\n**CULTURAL DIMENSION: Respect, Royalty, and a Distorted Patriarchy**\n\nCulturally, the issue taps into deep-seated notions of respect for elders and former leaders, often framed in near-monarchical terms. In many Nigerian traditions, a former chief or ruler is maintained by the community for life. This cultural template has been transposed onto the modern presidency, creating an expectation of lifelong, state-funded comfort. To question it is often framed as disrespectful or ‘ungrateful,’ a powerful cultural silencing mechanism. ‘We treat our former leaders like traditional obas or emirs,’ said cultural historian Dr. Folake Shoga. ‘The state becomes the village, obligated to care for its retired patriarchs, regardless of their performance or the village’s current poverty.’\n\nThis cultural norm clashes with a more modern, performance-based social contract, especially among the youth. The #EndSARS protests of 2020 revealed a generation less invested in hierarchical respect and more demanding of accountability. The narrative around the hunger crisis and ex-leaders’ benefits is becoming a flashpoint in this cultural war. Religious leaders are also divided. While the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) offered condolences upon the death of a 90-year-old Plateau Imam, showcasing interfaith respect, it has been less vocal on the systemic inequities that allow hunger to flourish alongside lavish pensions. The media narrative, as seen in outlets like Vanguard Nigeria, is increasingly critical, framing the disparity not as tradition but as injustice.\n\n**TECHNOLOGICAL DIMENSION: Digital Eyes on a Physical Crisis**\n\nTechnology is amplifying the paradox and shaping the response. Satellite imagery and data analytics used by agencies like the WFP can pinpoint food insecurity hotspots with terrifying accuracy, yet this data cannot force budgetary reallocation. Conversely, blockchain and mobile payment platforms could theoretically ensure aid reaches beneficiaries directly, bypassing corrupt intermediaries, but they require funding and political will to implement at scale. The digital divide is stark: in Lagos, activists use social media to campaign and crowdfund for northern hunger relief, while in rural Borno, connectivity is poor and the primary need is caloric, not digital.\n\nSurveillance technology, ironically, is receiving investment where humanitarian tech is not. The Federal Government recently commissioned a solar-powered Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) monitoring centre for the Second Niger Bridge, a critical infrastructure project. While security is vital, the prioritization of surveillance tech over food security tech speaks volumes. ‘We can watch a bridge in high definition, but we cannot track and efficiently distribute food aid to starving villages,’ lamented Tope Ogundipe, a tech governance advocate. ‘Our technological priorities are mirroring our political ones: control over care.’\n\n**HUMAN IMPACT: The Faces of the Fracture**\n\nThe human stories are the devastating proof of the policy failure. In a clinic in Yobe State, Hauwa, a 28-year-old mother, watches helplessly as her twin toddlers are treated for severe acute malnutrition. The WFP-supported program here is at risk. ‘They said the help might stop,’ she whispered. ‘If it stops, my children will die.’ Her husband, a farmer, has seen his harvests fail for three consecutive years.\n\nContrast this with the life of a retired civil servant in Abuja, who served under a former president. ‘My own pension is always delayed, sometimes for months,’ he said, requesting anonymity. ‘But I read in the paper that the budget for his (the former president’s) house maintenance is billions. It makes the struggle of ordinary Nigerians feel like a joke to them.’ The benefits for former leaders often extend to their families, creating multi-generational state dependency. This creates two distinct citizen experiences: one of precarious survival, the other of guaranteed luxury, both funded from the same national treasury.\n\n**HISTORICAL CONTEXT: From Regional Disparity to National Catastrophe**\n\nThis is not Nigeria’s first hunger crisis, but analysts argue it is the most severe in the context of such visible elite entitlement. The 1970s saw drought and famine in the Sahel, prompting international response. The 1980s structural adjustment programs gutted agricultural subsidies, hurting rural poor. However, the current crisis merges the historical neglect of the north—dating back to colonial and post-colonial policies that favored southern cash crops—with a modern culture of grandiose political entitlement that solidified after the return to democracy in 1999.\n\nThe pension law for former leaders is itself a product of this era, an attempt to formalize benefits and prevent the kind of political vendettas seen in Nigeria’s past. However, it has morphed into an untouchable privilege. The peak allocation in 2012 coincided with the escalation of the Boko Haram insurgency, which directly precipitated the current displacement and hunger. Historically, Nigeria has managed crises through a mix of federal intervention and international aid, but never before has the contrast between internal spending on the powerful and external pleading for the powerless been so starkly documented and widely disseminated.\n\n**FUTURE IMPLICATIONS: Scenarios for a Nation at a Crossroads**\n\nThe trajectory of this paradox will define Nigeria’s stability for years to come.\n\n* **Short-term (3-6 months):** The most likely scenario is a continued, grim muddling through. International donors, shamed by the severity of the crisis, may provide stopgap funding, as seen with the WFP’s urgent appeals. This will prevent the very worst catastrophe but will not solve the underlying issue. Social unrest in the north may spike, met with increased security deployment rather than policy change. The pensions will remain untouched.\n* **Medium-term (1-2 years):** A tipping point may arrive. If hunger-related child mortality rises sharply and media coverage remains intense, public pressure could force a political conversation. This might not lead to the abolition of ex-leaders’ benefits but could result in a symbolic, one-time reduction or a voluntary forfeiture by a former leader—a gesture that would be politically powerful but economically minor. More likely, the government may attempt to boost agricultural intervention in the north, seeking to address the symptom (hunger) without treating the disease (distorted priorities).\n* **Long-term (5+ years):** The best-case scenario involves a constitutional or legislative review, tying the benefits of former officials to clear, transparent criteria and perhaps a percentage cap based on the national minimum wage or average pension. It would also involve a Marshall Plan for northern agriculture, funded in part by redirected savings. The worst-case scenario is a deepening of the current path: a permanently hungry, destabilized north acting as a drain on national resources, while a detached political elite continues to consume a disproportionate share, eventually leading to a fundamental rupture in the nation’s fabric.\n\nThe Nigerian paradox is a test of whether the state exists for the sustenance of its most vulnerable citizens or the comfort of its most powerful former servants. The answer, currently written in budget lines and empty bowls, will determine not just who eats today, but what kind of nation Nigeria becomes tomorrow.", "full_text": "In a makeshift clinic in Maiduguri, Borno State, five-year-old Aisha’s ribs press sharply against her skin. She is one of 13 million children across Nigeria’s northeast projected to suffer from malnutrition this year, a statistic that represents the worst hunger crisis the nation has faced in nearly a decade. Just over 800 miles southwest, in the opulent Ikoyi district of Lagos, Nigeria’s commercial capital, the sprawling estate of a former head of state is maintained by a federal allocation that has consumed billions of naira over decades. These two realities—one of desperate scarcity, the other of entrenched privilege—are not parallel lines in Nigeria’s story; they are colliding forces, exposing what analysts describe as a profound crisis of national priority and moral imagination.\n\nAccording to the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP), funding cuts have crippled the humanitarian response in the northeast, putting thousands at immediate risk of catastrophic food shortages. In Borno State alone, about 15,000 people are in imminent danger. ‘The reduced funding we saw in 2025 has deepened hunger and malnutrition across the region,’ Sarah Longford, WFP’s deputy regional director for West and Central Africa, stated. This crisis is part of a wider West and Central African emergency where about 55 million people face severe food shortages, with over three-quarters in Nigeria, Chad, Cameroon, and Niger.\n\nSimultaneously, an investigation by Vanguard Nigeria reveals that by the end of this year, the Federal Government will have spent at least N38.188 billion (approximately $144.7 million) over 22 years on the upkeep of former presidents, vice presidents, and their families. From a modest N140 million in 2005, the annual allocation has ballooned, peaking at N3.185 billion in 2012 under President Goodluck Jonathan. Even in a year of severe hunger, the budget for former leaders remains robust. This juxtaposition forms the core of Nigeria’s current paradox: a state that can meticulously fund the comfort of its retired elite while its humanitarian agencies are forced to scale back nutrition programs for over 300,000 children due to funding gaps.\n\n**ECONOMIC DIMENSION: The Calculus of Misplaced Priority**\n\nThe economic narrative is one of distorted allocation with tangible consequences. The N38.2 billion spent on former leaders over 22 years is not merely a line item; it represents capital that could have transformed agricultural and social infrastructure in the crisis-prone north. Economists point to the opportunity cost. ‘For the cost of one year’s allocation to these pensions at their peak, you could fund the complete annual operational budget of a mid-sized agricultural development bank focused on the northeast,’ said Dr. Chidi Nwafor, a Lagos-based economic analyst. ‘We are investing in the past’s comfort at the direct expense of the future’s food security.’\n\nThe hunger crisis itself carries a staggering economic toll. Malnutrition stunts cognitive and physical development, crippling future productivity. The WFP warns that nearly 35 million people could face hunger when resources run low. The cost of treating severe acute malnutrition is exponentially higher than preventing it, yet prevention programs were among the first cut. Meanwhile, the pensions for ex-leaders are non-discretionary, protected by law and political precedent. This creates a fiscal rigidity where compassionate expenditure is variable, but politically sensitive entitlements are sacrosanct. The market reaction is one of quiet despair; foreign direct investment in agriculture remains hesitant, deterred by both insecurity and the state’s apparent inability to prioritize foundational human security over political patronage.\n\n**SOCIAL DIMENSION: A Nation Divided by Hunger and Heritage**\n\nThe social fissures are deepening along familiar yet dangerous lines: north versus south, poverty versus privilege, the governed versus the governing class. The hunger crisis is predominantly a northern phenomenon, exacerbated by the Boko Haram insurgency, climate change-induced desertification, and now, aid cuts. In rural communities in Adamawa and Yobe states, families are surviving on one meal a day. ‘We sold our last goat to buy maize, but it is finished,’ said Mallam Ibrahim, a resident of a camp for internally displaced persons in Maiduguri, speaking to Vanguard Nigeria. ‘The children cry all night from the pain in their stomachs.’\n\nThis suffering exists in a separate Nigeria from the one experienced by the political elite, whose retirement benefits include housing, staff, vehicles, and medical allowances. The social contract feels broken. ‘When people see convoys of new SUVs for a former leader’s family, and then their own child dies from hunger because a clinic had no supplies, it breeds a deep, generational resentment,’ noted Aisha Yesufu, a prominent social activist. The urban middle class, particularly in southern cities like Lagos and Port Harcourt, is increasingly vocal on social media, framing the issue as a moral scandal. However, this outrage often fails to translate into sustained pressure, highlighting a disconnect between online activism and the visceral struggle for survival in the northeast.\n\n**POLITICAL DIMENSION: Entitlement, Power, and Silent Complicity**