Nigeria is facing a mental-health crisis that can no longer be dismissed as a marginal social problem or hidden behind the walls of psychiatric hospitals.

Across the country, Nigerians are battling depression, anxiety, trauma, substance abuse and other psychological challenges, while inadequate services, poverty, insecurity and social stigma make it increasingly difficult for many victims to receive help.
What is perhaps most disturbing is that the country appears to be responding to a growing crisis with a culture of silence.

Mental illness remains heavily stigmatized in many Nigerian communities. People experiencing psychological distress are sometimes labelled as spiritually possessed, weak, dangerous or simply unwilling to work hard. Some families hide affected relatives rather than seek medical assistance. In some cases, vulnerable people are subjected to degrading treatment, including confinement and physical restraints in unregulated environments.
This must stop.
Mental-health challenges are medical and social issues that require professional intervention, compassion and appropriate support. They should not be reduced to spiritual explanations or treated as matters that can simply be wished away.

The government must accept that the mental health of citizens is as important as their physical health. Yet mental-health services remain grossly inadequate when compared with the scale of the problem. Specialist facilities are limited, qualified professionals are insufficient, and many Nigerians—particularly those in rural and poor communities—have little or no access to affordable care.

This situation is unacceptable.
The Federal Government must urgently increase investment in mental healthcare and make it an integral part of the primary healthcare system. Nigerians should be able to obtain basic mental-health services at community health centres, just as they receive treatment for other common illnesses.
The states must equally shoulder their responsibilities. Mental-health programmes cannot be left exclusively to Abuja. State governments should establish and strengthen mental-health services, provide rehabilitation centres and ensure that existing facilities meet acceptable standards.

There is also an urgent need to expand the country’s mental-health workforce. Nigeria requires more psychiatrists, psychologists, psychiatric nurses, counsellors, social workers and other trained professionals. The government should provide incentives for specialists to work in underserved communities and invest substantially in training and retaining personnel.

But the crisis is not solely a healthcare problem. It is also a reflection of the harsh conditions under which millions of Nigerians live.

Unemployment, extreme financial pressure, insecurity, displacement, domestic violence, drug abuse and uncertainty about the future can all take a heavy psychological toll. A young graduate without employment, a parent unable to feed a family, a victim of kidnapping or violent conflict, and a child growing up in an abusive environment may carry psychological wounds that are invisible but profoundly damaging.
Government policies aimed at reducing poverty, creating jobs, improving security and strengthening social protection are therefore also mental-health interventions.

Particular attention must be paid to Nigerian youths. The country cannot continue to speak about its “future leaders” while ignoring the psychological pressures confronting them today. Schools, universities and workplaces should have accessible counselling and psychological-support systems. Young people must have safe channels through which they can discuss depression, anxiety, addiction, abuse and suicidal thoughts without fear of ridicule or discrimination.

The battle against substance abuse must also be intensified. Drug addiction should not be addressed through punishment alone. Prevention, early intervention, treatment, rehabilitation and reintegration must be part of a comprehensive national strategy.

The media and religious institutions also have important roles to play. Rather than reinforcing myths and stigma, they should promote accurate information and encourage people experiencing mental-health difficulties to seek professional help. Religious leaders, in particular, can complement medical intervention by offering emotional and social support without discouraging people from seeking appropriate treatment.

Nigeria should also strengthen regulation of facilities claiming to provide mental-health treatment. The government must investigate reports of abuse and ensure that vulnerable Nigerians are not subjected to torture, neglect or exploitation in the name of treatment.

The National Mental Health Act provides an important framework, but laws are meaningful only when properly implemented. Government must translate policy into funding, personnel, facilities, community programmes and effective oversight.

There is also a need for a national mental-health awareness campaign capable of reaching people in both urban and rural communities. Nigerians need to know that depression is not simply “being sad”, that addiction is not merely a character defect, and that seeking psychological help is not a sign of weakness.

Most importantly, Nigeria must learn to recognize the warning signs and intervene early.

A society that waits until a person becomes severely ill before offering help has already failed that person.
The Federal Government should therefore declare mental health a national priority and establish measurable targets for expanding access to care. State governments should follow suit. Primary healthcare centres should be equipped to provide basic mental-health services, while specialist hospitals should be adequately funded and staffed.
Civil society organisations, professional bodies, schools, employers and communities must also become active partners in the response.

Nigeria cannot build a productive economy with a psychologically distressed population. It cannot achieve meaningful development while families struggle silently with untreated mental illness. And it cannot claim to value human dignity while vulnerable citizens are neglected, abused or abandoned.

The time for silence is over.
Nigeria must confront its mental-health crisis with the same urgency it applies to other national emergencies. The government must fund the sector, expand services, protect vulnerable people and enforce standards. Society must reject stigma. Families must seek help early. And every Nigerian must understand that mental health is part of health.
The measure of a caring nation is not only how it treats the physically sick, but also how it responds to those whose wounds cannot be seen. Nigeria must wake up—and act before the silent crisis becomes an even greater national tragedy.

Nigeria cannot claim to be serious about industrialisation while deliberately—or through years of policy neglect—leaves one of its most commercially vibrant regions inadequately connected to the infrastructure needed to power its economy.

That is why the continuing concerns over the exclusion or inadequate integration of the South-East into Nigeria’s gas infrastructure planning deserve more than political statements. They demand urgent action from the Federal Government.

The recent concerns on this glaring neglect have been expressed by both Governors Chukwuma Soludo of Anambra State and Peter Mbah of Enugu State, who at different occasions noted the urgency of linking the zone to gas master plan.

According to Governor Soludo, “Anambra is sitting on one of the biggest gas reserves in Nigeria, if not in Africa – about 30 Trillion Cubic Feet, representing 15% of Nigeria’s total gas reserves – yet Anambra and the entire South-East were excluded from Nigeria’s Gas Master Plan.”

Soludo is not alone. Enugu State Governor, Peter Mbah, also queried the exclusion recently when he hosted the Senate Committee on SEDC, demanding a regional gas pipeline for the South-East.

The contradiction is glaring. The South-East is home to some of Nigeria’s most enterprising communities, major commercial centres and important manufacturing clusters. Aba, Onitsha, Nnewi, Enugu and Owerri have demonstrated remarkable economic resilience despite years of infrastructural deficiencies. Yet businesses across the region continue to battle crippling energy costs, relying heavily on diesel, petrol and other expensive sources of power.
This is unacceptable in a country that proudly describes natural gas as a critical pillar of its energy transition and industrial development.

The issue becomes even more troubling because the South-East is not a region without energy resources. Parts of the zone have significant oil and gas potential. What has been missing is the infrastructure, investment and policy attention required to convert those resources into affordable energy for industries and communities.

For the record, Imo State is the highest gas producing state in Nigeria. Anambra has 30 trillion cubic feet of gas, while Abia, Enugu, Ebonyi all have proven gas and oil reserves.
Yet, pipelines are built to carry gas from south east to Kano, Kaduna and Lagos.

This is where the Federal Government must answer some difficult questions.
Why should manufacturers in the South-East pay enormous sums to generate electricity with diesel when the country is seeking to expand the domestic utilisation of natural gas?
Why should gas-producing communities remain surrounded by energy poverty?
Why should investors be encouraged to establish industries in Nigeria while some of the country’s most productive industrial clusters are denied the energy infrastructure necessary to remain competitive?

And, most importantly, can Nigeria genuinely achieve balanced national development when strategic infrastructure continues to concentrate disproportionately in certain parts of the federation?

These questions cannot simply be dismissed as another South-East complaint about marginalisation.
They concern the economic survival of Nigerian businesses.

An inadequate gas network means higher production costs. Higher production costs mean more expensive Nigerian goods. More expensive goods make local manufacturers less competitive against imported products. The inevitable consequences are factory closures, job losses, capital flight and declining government revenue.
The damage therefore extends far beyond the South-East.

A thriving Nnewi, Aba or Onitsha industrial economy would create jobs for Nigerians from every part of the country. It would generate tax revenue, stimulate transportation and logistics, increase demand for financial services and strengthen domestic manufacturing. In other words, investing in the South-East is not charity to the region; it is investment in Nigeria.
The Federal Government must stop treating infrastructure development as a political reward system.

Gas pipelines should not be determined by political influence, ethnic calculations or which region has the loudest voice in Abuja. They should be determined by economic value, resource availability, industrial demand, national security and the long-term development interests of Nigeria.

There is also a serious question of fairness.
For decades, Nigerians have been told that the country’s natural resources belong to the entire federation. That principle should work in both directions. If resources extracted from one region belong to Nigeria, then the benefits of national infrastructure should also be distributed fairly across the federation.
The South-East cannot be expected to continue supplying entrepreneurial energy to Nigeria’s economy while its industries struggle for physical energy.
It is particularly disturbing when government officials repeatedly speak about transforming Nigeria into a gas-powered economy, attracting investments into gas processing and expanding domestic gas utilisation, while major industrial centres still face inadequate access to gas.

The Federal Government must therefore provide clarity on the actual status of the South-East under the current Gas Master Plan. If projects covering parts of the region have now been included, government should publish a clear roadmap showing the projects, timelines, financing arrangements and expected beneficiaries.

There must be no more ambiguity.
Words are no substitute for pipelines.
Announcements are no substitute for functioning infrastructure.
And political promises are no substitute for affordable energy.

The five South-East governors must equally accept their share of responsibility. They cannot merely issue statements whenever the question of regional marginalisation arises. They must develop a common energy and industrialisation blueprint and pursue it relentlessly.

The South-East Development Commission should also make regional energy infrastructure one of its highest priorities. The commission must work with the Federal Government, NNPC, private investors and international development partners to develop bankable projects that can connect the region’s industrial clusters to reliable gas supplies.

The region’s political representatives in the National Assembly must also speak with one voice.

This is not the time for partisan politics.
It is not the time for personal political ambitions.

It is not even the time for endless arguments over which political party deserves credit.

The issue is bigger than all of these.
It is about whether Nigeria is prepared to use its resources intelligently to build a productive economy.

Nigeria has spent too many decades exporting raw resources and importing finished products. The gas revolution provides an opportunity to change that narrative. But such a revolution will remain incomplete if large sections of the country are unable to access the energy required to manufacture, process and add value.

The South-East, with its established culture of enterprise, should be at the centre of this transformation—not at its margins.

Government must therefore act decisively to integrate the region into the country’s gas infrastructure network. Priority should be given to pipelines serving major industrial and commercial centres, gas processing facilities, gas-fired power generation and distribution networks capable of delivering gas at competitive prices.
At the same time, the Federal Government must ensure that communities hosting gas infrastructure receive tangible benefits. Host-community development, environmental protection and transparent compensation must form part of the process.

Nigeria should also guard against turning the Gas Master Plan into another document that looks impressive on paper but produces little on the ground.
The country has had enough of ambitious plans that die in government offices.

What Nigerians need now are projects that are financed, constructed, commissioned and maintained.

The message to Abuja should therefore be unequivocal: the South-East cannot be left behind in Nigeria’s gas revolution.
And the message to South-East leaders should be equally clear: stop waiting for political sympathy; demand development with a united voice and present government with credible, economically viable projects.

Nigeria’s natural gas wealth should not deepen regional divisions. Properly managed, it should help erase them.
The gas beneath Nigerian soil belongs to the Nigerian people. Its economic benefits must therefore reach Nigerian businesses and citizens regardless of their region, ethnicity or political affiliation.

The South-East has already demonstrated what its people can accomplish with limited infrastructure. Imagine what the region could achieve with reliable and affordable energy.
That is the opportunity Nigeria must not squander.

The time for explanations is over. The time for pipelines, power, factories and jobs has come.

The growing activities of scavengers across Nigerian cities have become a matter that deserves urgent attention from governments, security agencies, local authorities and community leaders. What began largely as an informal means of livelihood for people searching through discarded materials for items of economic value has, in some places, developed into an activity associated with environmental degradation, theft, vandalism and threats to public safety.

The recent case in question happened last weekend when Borno State Governor, Babagana Umara Zulum, said the state lost electricity distribution wires worth billions of naira to metal scavengers, including materials used for a power line project valued at over ₦3 billion.

Zulum said the loss was among the security and infrastructure concerns that forced his administration to ban scrap metal trading in the state.

The governor discloded this while in meeting with scrap metal dealers, whom he urged to submit proposals on how they could continue their businesses without threatening security or damaging public infrastructure.

There is nothing inherently wrong with scavenging as a means of earning a living. Many Nigerians depend on the collection and recycling of discarded metals, plastics, electrical components and other materials. Indeed, properly organised scavenging can contribute to waste management, recycling and environmental sustainability. The problem arises when the activity operates without adequate regulation and when individuals use scavenging as a cover for criminal activities.

Across many communities, there have been concerns about the removal of public infrastructure and private property, including electrical cables, water facilities, manhole covers, railway components, road furniture and other metal installations. The consequences can be severe. The vandalism of electricity infrastructure, for instance, can plunge communities into darkness, while the theft of public property imposes additional costs on governments and taxpayers.
Another disturbing aspect is the destruction of waste containers, indiscriminate dumping and the indiscriminate opening of refuse bags.

Where scavenging is conducted without proper environmental standards, recyclable materials may be recovered at the expense of public hygiene. The situation can also expose scavengers themselves, particularly children, to hazardous substances, sharp objects and other dangerous waste.

Government must therefore move beyond occasional raids and arrests. What is required is a comprehensive regulatory framework that distinguishes legitimate recycling activities from criminal acts. Scavengers and recycling operators should be registered, identifiable and properly monitored.

Scrap dealers should also be required to maintain records showing the sources of materials they purchase, particularly metals and other items that could have been stolen from public infrastructure.
Security agencies must pay particular attention to the markets and businesses where stolen infrastructure is allegedly bought and sold. It is not enough to arrest people found collecting scrap materials on the streets while ignoring those who finance, purchase and profit from stolen property. The demand side of the illegal scrap trade must be addressed if vandalism is to be effectively reduced.

At the same time, government should avoid treating every scavenger as a criminal. Many people involved in the trade are simply struggling to survive in an economy where employment opportunities are limited. A blanket crackdown could deprive thousands of legitimate workers of their livelihoods without addressing the underlying problem.

A better approach would be to organise the sector. Local and state governments, working with relevant federal agencies, can establish designated collection points and recycling centres where scavengers can take recyclable materials. Those who meet prescribed standards could be licensed and trained in safe waste handling. Such an arrangement would make it easier to identify genuine operators and expose those involved in criminal activities.

There is also a need for public education. Nigerians should be encouraged not to buy or sell materials suspected to have been stolen from public infrastructure. Communities should report suspicious activities, while scrap dealers should understand that purchasing stolen property can make them part of the criminal chain.

The authorities must also address the socio-economic conditions that drive vulnerable people into unsafe scavenging. Skills acquisition, vocational training, access to small-business financing and employment programmes can provide alternative livelihoods, especially for young people who depend on scavenging as their primary source of income.

The challenge before Nigeria is to strike the right balance between economic opportunity, environmental management and public security. Scavenging itself is not the enemy; the absence of effective regulation and the criminal exploitation of the trade are.

Government must act decisively to protect public infrastructure and the environment while creating a legal and organised pathway for legitimate recycling businesses. The objective should not be to drive scavengers underground, but to bring the sector into the formal economy, punish those involved in theft and vandalism, and protect law-abiding operators.

Nigeria cannot afford to continue replacing vandalised infrastructure while stolen materials are openly recycled for profit. The time has come for stronger regulation, better enforcement and greater accountability throughout the scrap and recycling chain. A properly regulated recycling sector can create jobs and protect the environment; an unchecked one can become a serious threat to public infrastructure and national development.