It is an intriguing data from Summer 2023 YCombinator class: of the  218 startups the US-based accelerator is backing, about 159 are broadly AI-anchored companies. The Information wrote: “This year, more than 60% of the group—or 134 startups—are building applications or tools around artificial intelligence, mostly related to large-language models, according to YC’s startup directory. In past YC groups, the percentage of startups bucketed under “AI” has trended below 20%. The huge increase demonstrates the recent fervor from founders and investors alike for this hyped-up industry.” Tekedia Capital Syndicate invested in one of these startups.

Then the shocker: of these 218 companies, only three are coming from Africa (Nigeria, Kenya/Rwanda and Congo/US/Canada)

Finding a native AI-company is challenging in Africa. To balance our portfolio for the next edition of Tekedia Capital investment cycle, as there is just no way we can present the startups to members without an AI company, we resorted to shopping at Silicon Valley, and co-invested with YCombinator.

But what is an AI company? But what is an AI company? In the simplest of terms, a company which applies the wonders of AI in any of the many things we do daily or in company operations, where AI becomes the catalyst to improve performance, reduce cost and accelerate innovation. Yes, you can have an AI application in your agro-business, retail business, ecommerce, etc. It is time for that transformation in Africa. If you are building a really good one, let me know

A man with his son embarked on a journey. They opted to use a horse as their means of transportation. They both mounted on the horse and were riding together when passersby saw them and started complaining and calling them names; accusing them of being wicked to have subjected the horse to such inhuman treatment. The Passersby told them; “How can you both be this wicked, How can two of you sit and ride a horse, Don’t you see that the horse is tired and might collapse, your actions are inhuman and wicked”. 

The man with his son paid attention to what the passersby were saying and decided that only one of them should mount the horse while the other person would trek along the horse. The man asked his son to ride on the horse while he walked alongside them so they wouldn’t be accused of treating the horse harshly. 

Immediately as the journey progressed, they met another set of passersby who severely complained and called the son a prodigal boy and asked him how he was able to comfortably ride on a horse whilst his old and fray-looking father was walking alongside them. The boy was called a series of names and then they decided since it’s like this; they both can’t ride on the horse without being accused of maltreating the horse, only the son cannot ride without people tagging the son as a prodigal, they decided that the father should instead ride on the horse while the son will walk along with them on foot. 

The dad mounted on the horse and the boy trekked alongside as they had decided but immediately the journey progressed they met another set of people who stopped them and asked the father how come he was such an irresponsible man to have mounted himself and ridden on the horse while his young son is walking along on a bare foot. They called the father names, and criticized him for doing that. 

At this point, the father and son decided that they should both walk along on foot with the horse. Since they have met stern criticisms riding the horse together and individually. 

As they were both walking along with the horse, they met another set of people laughing at them and calling them foolish. The people asked them how they had a horse and decided to walk along the horse when they could have ridden on the horse to make their journey smoother and faster.

At this point the father and son have exhausted all their options, having found out that whatever they do there must be people along the way who must murmur, complain or criticize their actions. 

There are many morals and lessons to this story but the most important  moral lesson I want you to pick out today from this  is “Do you”. Do  whatever you feel okay with, don’t be a people pleaser, and don’t pay attention to criticisms. If you do, you will get confused and remain on the spot because people must talk. 

Nigerians are registering their displeasure as the Presidential Election Tribunal delivers its judgment on petitions against the outcome of the February 25 presidential election.

They have cried blue murder, describing the rulings of the PEPT led by Justice Haruna Tsammani as a miscarriage of justice. Other members of the Court of Appeal are: Justice Stephen Adah of the Court of Appeal Asaba division, Justice Misitura Bolaji-Yusuf of the Court of Appeal also of Asaba Division, Justice Boloukuoromo Ugoh of Kano Division and Justice Abba Mohammed of Ibadan Court of Appeal.

The PEPT on Wednesday announced its judgments on suits filed by the Labour Party (LP), the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), and the APM challenging the election of President Bola Tinubu. 

The petitioners had alleged that Tinubu did not qualify to contest the presidential election owing to his record of forfeiture of $460,000 in proceeds of drug trafficking to the U.S. government. They also alleged that the vice president, Abubakar Shettima, received a double nomination. 

The petitioners also contended that Tinubu did not score 25% of votes in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Abuja, as required by law. 

Tinubu’s education also came into question. The petitioners had questioned his claim that he graduated from Chicago State University, without any record of primary and secondary education.

Nevertheless, the bone of contention has been the outcome of the election – which was largely believed to be fraudulent. Voters, political parties, and observers said that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) fraudulently swayed votes to favor Tinubu, thereby subverting the people’s will. 

Based on these and other issues, the petitioners; Peter Obi (LP) and Atiku Abubakar (PDP) had prayed to the tribunal to disqualify Tinubu, with each of them asking to be declared the winner. In the alternative, they asked the court to nullify the election and order a rerun.

However, delivering its judgment, the PEPT quashed most of the prayers. On the issue of INEC’s refusal to comply with the electoral law to transmit results from polling units to IREV in real-time, the court rules: On the substantial non-compliance with provisions of the electoral act as claimed by Peter Obi and the Labour Party, the court holds that INEC can’t be compelled to electronically transmit election results to its results viewing portal or IREV.

On the double nomination charge against Shettima, the court says “disqualification of a candidate on the basis of double nomination is a pre-election matter.” It added that the Vice President’s double nomination was not intentional.

On the forfeiture of $460,000 over an alleged drug case; the court says the case in a US district court in the state of Illinois was a civil matter and not a criminal one. It added that the LP failed to show evidence that Tinubu was arraigned, tried, fined, and sentenced for any criminal offense. The PEPT says Tinubu was not banned from entering the U.S., adding that the U.S. court’s judgment is an action against the property of the president and not an action against his person.

Ruling on the issues of corrupt practices that Obi and the LP alleged marred the election, which include: suppression of votes, inflation of votes, alteration of results, and overvoting, the court says:

“In Rivers and Benue states, during the collation, the petitioners alleged that INEC embarked on massive misrepresentations by uploading fictitious and incorrect votes and that if things had been done properly, they would have won the elections massively in those states. 

“Apart from the figures stated in those 2 states, the other allegations were nebulous. Apart from stating material particulars, other crimes must be pleaded and clearly set out. The proof must be beyond reasonable doubt. The petitioner must produce two sets of results, one genuine, and one false.”

The court also held that Obi’s argument that Tinubu did not score the mandatory 25% in the FCT is “irrelevant.” It says that “the FCT does not enjoy a special status and that Abuja is inhabited by Nigerians and that Abuja does not enjoy any special privilege.”

The PEPT also dismissed 10 out of the 13 witnesses of the Labour Party, saying they lacked probative value. It also held that the EU report on the outcome of the 2023 election was inadmissible.

These, among other judgments of the court centered on the cases of the APM and the LP, have so far been announced against the petitioners, upholding Tinubu’s presidency.

Nigerians cry blue murder

Following the rulings, Nigerians have been expressing their disappointment in the judicial system, saying among other things, that Nigerian courts are for sale.

“To you people thinking Peter Obi Lawyers didn’t file the case well, something is wrong in your head. Their opponents own the field. They own the ball. They own the referee,” Lola Okunri writes on X. “They own the VAR. Peter Obi lawyers cannot escape technicalities bla bla bla. If they do everything right, they will still bring out something. Does this look like sensible judgment to you? Celebrate your nonsense ke koshi danu.”

To you people thinking Peter Obi Lawyers didn’t file the case well, something is wrong in your head.

Their opponents own the field. They own the ball. They own the referee. They own the VAR. Peter Obi lawyers can not escape technicalities bla bla bla.

If they do everything…

— Lola Okunrin (@lollypeezle) September 6, 2023

“Someone who did all that to get into power, you think they’ll just fold hands and wait for some judgment to determine if they will cling on to power or not? The earlier you realize this country is a circus, the sooner you have your peace of mind,” another X user writes.

Someone who did all that to get into power, you think they’ll just fold hands and wait for some judgement to determine if they will cling on to power or not? The earlier you realize this country is a circus, the sooner you have your peace of mind.

— UMEH? (@UmehWrites) September 6, 2023

“These Judges did a better job defending Tinubu than the legal team of Tinubu himself,” Toluwani said.

These Judges did a better job defending Tinubu than the legal team of Tinubu himself

— Toluwani (LP) ????? (@T_akinpade) September 6, 2023

Opposition parties kept a lot of faith in INEC based on the utterances of its leadership and also the Osun & Ekiti experiences. They will learn a great lesson from this episode.

There should be concerted efforts to demand the resignation of INEC chairman. https://t.co/JsIV6dxE9G

— Olú?eun Onígbindé (@seunonigbinde) September 6, 2023