- by Deborah Longe
- February 25, 2026
TuneIn–ReadNewPosts–ListenAgain (Recent & Archived Programmes)–Word-of-the-Day–SendPrayerRequests–Winning Warrior Wives–JoinReadersClub–GetNotifications–Volunteer & Support–BuyBooks
The following is a transcription of On the Lord’s Side Podcast presented on GospelBellsRadio on February 25, 2026 by Olufemi Oguntokun. It may not fully match with the audio, but represents a near perfect transcription of the broadcast.
On Chief Razak Okoya’s Succession Comments and the Question of Polygamy
Good morning to you once again. It is Wednesday, the 25 of February 2026. The programme is On the Lord’s Side: Christian Perspectives on News and Current Events. My name is Olufemi Oguntokun. You can follow me on X at @OlufemiOG. You can follow Gospel Bells Radio on X at @GospelBellsRadio.
Many people in Nigeria engaged with a clip that circulated online. It concerned Chief Razak Okoya and comments he made regarding his children and the succession of his business empire.
They met when she was an undergraduate at the University of Lagos, and he is much older. Nevertheless, the relationship has lasted for so long. By my guess, and I may not be accurate about this, the relationship should have run into more than 25 years or thereabout. Of course, when this relationship started, it made the news. At that time, there were no blogs or social media to discuss the matter, but it was all over the soft-sell magazines of those days.
Not many people gave the couple a chance to survive for that long or to stay together for long, but they have. The reason for that is best known to them. From what you see from the outside, it looks like a good relationship. When the couple steps out for social functions, you see Mrs. Sade Okoya being the beautiful, doting wife, doting on the much older Chief Razak Okoya, her husband.
Chief Razak Okoya was married before he married the much younger Sade Okoya. He had children before he had children by Chief Mrs. Sade Okoya. So we are talking about a polygamous setting here.
What put them in the spotlight yesterday was a clip from a video in which Chief Razak Okoya said of his older children that they had failed. He said he would not want his current children to fail like the senior ones. The blogger who released this on X singled out that quote: “I don’t want my current children to fail like the senior ones.”
That was telling, for a man to say, “My senior children failed.” Of course, he was referring to the children he had before he married the much younger Mrs. Sade Okoya.
According to the blogger, Nigerian billionaire industrialist Razak Okoya revealed plans to hand over his business empire to his younger children, saying the decision is driven by his desire to secure their future and prevent past mistakes from repeating themselves.
Speaking about his succession strategy, the founder of Eleganza Group explained that he is intentionally grooming the younger generation to take over the reins of his business interests. According to him, the move is to ensure continuity and long-term stability.
He said, “I want to pass everything to my younger children because I don’t want them to fail like the senior ones,” hinting at lessons learned from earlier experiences. Okoya noted that experience is a crucial factor in leadership and emphasised the importance of focus, honesty, determination, and punctuality. He added that his children have been exposed to the inner workings of the business, including visits to the factory floor to help them understand operations first-hand.
The billionaire, who shares his younger children with his wife, Shade Okoya, said the plan is structured to ensure a smooth transition. He stressed that while others may inherit established systems, the children must understand the effort it takes to build and sustain a business.
You see how the media works. The man spoke about succession, leadership qualities, and business continuity, but the media singled out the part where he said, “I don’t want the younger ones to fail like the senior ones.” In this case, I will side with the media and say they identified the more important portion of what he said.
We are talking about a polygamous setting. We are talking about an 86-year-old man who is married to a 48-year-old woman. He was born on 12 January 1940. She was born on 25 April 1977. He is 86; she is 48.
Now he is talking about succession planning and saying he will pass his business interests to the children of his younger wife. The reason I am talking about this is because of a commentary I saw on X. The gentleman said that what we just listened to is that side of polygamy that many people do not want to talk about.
The chief is older than Mrs. Shade Okoya by 38 years. Now that he is 86 and she is 48, you must understand the dynamics. An 86-year-old man, ageing, married to a 48-year-old woman who is always by his side. From what we can see, she is always doting on him. But there is also something called dependence.
At that age, the 86-year-old must, in some major respect, have become dependent on the younger wife. And I began to think like a lawyer. If after the passing of this billionaire it comes to light that he willed all his business interests to the children of Mrs. Shade Okoya, the senior children could challenge such a will on grounds of undue influence.
They could argue that the younger wife exerted influence on him in his old age. That would be a plausible ground in law. A video like this could then be used to counter such an argument, to show that he was in control of his faculties and had full mental capacity when he made the statements.
But perhaps that is just speculation. Maybe he was simply speaking his mind. Nevertheless, the underlying point remains: this is that side of polygamy many people try to ignore.
I remember in my early days as a junior lawyer in Nigeria, I was invited to prepare the will of an elderly man who was infirm and married to a much younger woman. As I sat to take instructions, the younger wife was the one doing most of the talking. I insisted on hearing directly from the man to assess his mental capacity.
He had sound mental capacity, but as he gave instructions disinheriting his senior children and giving everything to the younger wife and her children, he wept profusely. I did not ask him why he was weeping, but I could guess.
When people become advanced in age, they naturally become dependent on those around them. In a polygamous setting, the man may become most dependent on the wife with him in his old age. That spouse knows the influence he or she wields.
From a Christian perspective, this reminds us of things done not in accordance with how God intended. It was not so from the beginning. When we attempt to make it so, we reap the whirlwind of that disobedience.
Yes, there are disputes even in monogamous marriages. Wealth brings its own dangers—greed and covetousness. When a man asked Jesus to divide an inheritance, He said, “Beware of covetousness,” for a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of the things he possesses.
I do not know the nuances of Chief Razak Okoya’s relationship. But anything done not as originally intended by God can never be healthy. It will end in pain, strife, tension, and discord.
I pray that he will organise his affairs properly and that his estate will not lead to evil or wickedness. And for us who observe these things, let us apply our hearts to wisdom and refuse to dabble in what was not so from the beginning.
On Allegations of Ransom Payment for the Abducted St. Mary’s Catholic School Girls
There are also troubling reports that money was delivered in cash via helicopter to Ali Ngulde, a Boko Haram commander in Gwoza, Borno State.
If true, this would be devastating. The allegation is that 40 million naira per head was demanded, amounting to around two billion naira in total. This report was carried by the French news agency AFP.
AFP says it can confirm that to acknowledge receipt of the money, Ali Ngulde travelled to Cameroon to communicate with Nigerian officials, after which 100 girls were released, followed by the remaining girls.
The Nigerian government initially denied paying any ransom but has failed to provide details of how the girls were released. AFP says it reached out to the National Security Adviser for comment, but there was no reply.
When the 230 girls were abducted from St. Mary’s Catholic School, there was national and international outcry. Eventually, the girls were released, but questions were asked. Was there a military confrontation? Was there an operation? How did the government know their location?
When Israel carried out the 1976 Raid on Entebbe, the operation was documented. Military interventions are usually explained after the fact. So how were these girls rescued?
If the government had intelligence on the terrorists’ location, why has the war not ended? That is why many suspected ransom was paid. No self-respecting government admits to paying ransom, but if AFP’s report is true, it raises grave concerns.
The only credible way for the government to deny this is to give a detailed account of how the girls were released. Silence is not an explanation.
If ransom was paid, and if any part of that money found its way back to officials who approved it, then our problem is deeper than terrorism. It becomes corruption. It becomes complicity.
If taxes paid by citizens are used to fund terrorists, how terrible the situation of those citizens. If those in government are profiting from war, then the reproach on the nation is great.
From a Christian perspective, where sin exists, reproach follows. The root of Nigeria’s problem remains corruption the greed for wealth.
The burden of proof is now on the government to explain how the girls were rescued. Until then, we are left with troubling questions.
Engaging the culture with the mind of Christ. Keep listening, and invite others. God bless you.