THEFRONTLINES

Over the last week and weekend, Nigerians were gripped with tension and anxiety as two gladiators, the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) and Dangote Refinery, engaged in a war of words over the pricing and who markets one product—Premium Motor Spirit, otherwise known as petrol by most Nigerians.

=As a prelude to all the drama, there was a crippling scarcity across the country. Long queues resurfaced, roads were overflowing, and some vehicle owners slept overnight at filling stations. The NNPCL response was that it owed marketers abroad. When that did not hold water, it blamed the scarcity on bad weather etc.

While the oil company was exposing its outright inefficiency, Dangote Refinery announced its readiness to begin production of diesel and aviation fuel from its brand-new facility and needed crude oil supply. But it met a brick wall and stiff resistance from the establishment.

It all began with the oil company refusing to sell crude oil as feedstock to enable the refinery to start production. Before now, Nigerians were regaled with all sorts of arm-twisting antics by NNPCL, NUPRC, and NMDPRA alleging that products from the brand-new refinery were inferior to those imported in an attempt to fully demarket and create a negative impression about the new refinery.

Nonetheless, the new refinery was starved of crude oil supply from the oil company, and when Dangote approached the oil majors, he was directed to the brokers. The brokers are middlemen who do nothing but link buyer and seller together and collect brokerage fees. Thus patronising the broker meant that Dangote was incurring additional costs of between $3 to $4 per barrel as margin for the broker and it would have increased his production costs too which will eventually be borne by the consumer.

Frustrated and desperate to secure crude oil supply, Dangote voiced out his frustrations and wondered why the NUPRC failed to enforce the necessary regulatory oversight as enshrined in the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) on obligation to local refineries. According to him “Our concern has always been NUPRC’s reluctance to enforce the domestic crude supply obligation, and ensuring that we receive our full crude requirement from the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC) and the International Oil Companies (IOCs).”

Not wanting to earn these additional costs and further delays, Dangote headed to the United States of America and Brazil from where he bought his first cargoes of crude oil to start test-running the refinery. Meanwhile,  the Chief Executive Officer of the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA), Farouk Ahmed alleged that the petroleum products from the Dangote refinery were substandard and that the imported variant was better.

It was at this point that Dangote opened up. He conducted stakeholders around the refinery facility showcasing world-class equipment. He explained that the refinery had achieved far better quality control feat and produced crystal clear products that met global standards and were better in comparison to the imported variants.

He also revealed that what was imported into the country by the other oil companies was dirty fuels that were substandard, corrosive and dangerous to automobiles. These dirty fuels were cheaper but were invoiced as top-grade fuels and the difference in their prices was skimmed by the oil cabal.

The President was forced to wade in and directed that crude oil be supplied to the new refinery. One would have thought that with this directive his problems were over, but what happened next was more drama.

With a date for the roll-out of PMS set for last Sunday, the oil company announced itself as the sole marketer of the PMS, completely shutting out other key players like IPMAN etc who will now be forced to buy from the oil company at its own price and profit margin higher and above the refinery prices.

It also barred the refinery from disclosing its product publicly. However, as soon as Dangote began the supply of diesel from his refinery, the price crashed from N1600 to N1300 in the first instance and N900 currently. The development, according to the Vice President of Dangote Industries Limited, Devakumar Edwin, caused oil marketers to report the refinery to the President that the plant’s low-priced diesel was counter-productive to oil marketers’ businesses.

He also revealed that oil marketers had continued to boycott Dangote diesel and aviation fuels after the refinery crashed the price of diesel. Last Sunday when Nigerians were told Dangote would begin the supply of petrol to the public, NNPCL said it was deploying about 300 trucks for loading but a check revealed less than 100 of the oil company trucks were seen at the facility for loading PMS thereby confirming Edwin’s earlier position of a gang up to boycott the refinery products.

Ridiculously, a few days before the new refinery opened its doors for the lifting of PMS, the NNPCL made itself a sole marketer. It claimed that because it is selling its product, crude oil, to Dangote Refinery, it reserves control over the right to first refusal to serve as the sole distributor of PMS from the new refinery, which was due to open its doors for the lifting of petrol from its facility.

In that position, it succeeded in fixing the new price of PMS and unilaterally jacking it up from N585 per litre to almost N1000. This unilateral action has drawn the flak of several legal luminaries including Femi Falana who questioned the oil company’s right to fix prices when it is not a regulator.

Now the question is: was all this drama necessary? Let us start from the issue of crude oil supply to the refinery. Who owns the crude oil, is it NNPCL, the federal government or the people? Oil assets do not belong to the oil company, at best, it is a holding company on behalf of the people and therefore has no controlling rights over it.

By the way, is NNPCL a regulator or a trading company? NNPCL is a private trading company on behalf of the federal government. Even the federal government does not own these assets, it holds these assets in trust for Nigerians. Therefore, for overriding public interest and the fact that supplying Dangote Crude oil will largely benefit the generality of Nigerians, neither the federal government, NNPCL nor any regulatory body needed to delay a second to satisfy that need.

If it has obligations, the oil company ought to have dedicated the 450,000 barrels used for a very dubious swap to the Dangote refinery for starters. After all, what have Nigerians benefitted from the crude oil swap in all these years? Is it not even more scandalous for the oil company to provoke our sensibilities by disclosing that it owes marketers $6bn? How? What did we get in addition or is it that the 450,000 barrels were not enough for local consumption?

The federal government must take full responsibility, as an oil producer, for abdicating its responsibilities in providing petroleum products for Nigerians from its three local refineries in the last 20 years. It is even more curious that the NNPCL which should be a competitor is now a marketer for a competitor.

It is a big shame that with three refineries capable of refining 450,000 barrels of crude oil per day, the federal government decided to abandon them and opted to create all types of schemes to fleece the people of its commonwealth consistently for over 20 years.

Dangote is a game changer and has effectively broken the jinx and weakened the cabal’s vice grip over Nigeria and Nigerians. He poses a great threat to the NNPCL’s existence and it is about time the NNPCL is either run efficiently or shown the way out for a more efficient entity to take its place.

What transpired these past few weeks were clear cases of bureaucracy and corruption. There are a lot of shady deals going on in the industry and those benefiting want the status quo to remain. The NNPCL should go public and be quoted on the stock exchange to make it more accountable and efficient.

Dangote must stay the course and remain on the side of the people, it is just a matter of time. While he is at it, he must explore and develop futuristic retail channels to forestall the shenanigans going on. Now that his refinery has gone full blast, he has to develop and take advantage of the West Coast corridor where he can deploy his retail business along the corridor to put a lie to NNPCL’s claim blaming smuggling rather than the lack of innovative marketing as the reason for subsidy removal.

Social agitators must learn to conduct their activities under the law, writes Bolaji Adebiyi

Joe Ajaero, president of the Nigerian Labour Congress, trended in the media for controversial reasons last week. He had always been in the news, sometimes for altruistic reasons and others for stepping out of bounds. This time, it was for his mistaken belief that he was above the law.

When law enforcement agencies invited the labour leader to answer criminal allegations related to harbouring a felon, Ajaero chose to ignore the lawful invitation and attempted to leave the country. However, he was apprehended at the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport in Abuja and taken in for questioning.

Unsurprisingly, Ajaero’s fellow labour leaders and allies in the civil society were swift to denounce his arrest as violating his fundamental human rights. To them, it was yet another example of the Bola Tinubu administration’s inclination to stifle dissent despite mounting opposition to its economic reforms.

However, as Bayo Onanuga, the presidential aide on Information and Strategy, pointed out, the crux of the matter was equality before the law. Ajaero had disregarded a lawful summons before. On 19 August 2024, the police invited him to appear for an investigation the following day. He responded that he was busy and would only appear on 29 August. The Police indulged him. He reported on the appointed date with fanfare and was subsequently interrogated and released on bail.

A day after the interrogation, he was asked to report on 5 September for further questioning. Regarding the continuous invitation as harassment, Ajaero ignored the summons and elected to attend an international conference held in Brighton, the United Kingdom. Only an irresponsible internal security organisation would have allowed him to leave the country during the pendency of the criminal investigation.

Coming on the heels of recent protests of the rising cost of living, it was easy for the labour leader to sell the harassment and insensitivity to dissent narratives. If he expected the security agencies to fall for this blackmail, he was mistaken, as they resisted his attempt to generalise his failure to stay within the law.

Ajaero’s condemnable behaviour is typical of Nigeria’s big men, who take advantage of their position to break the law and expect nothing to happen. The feeling of being above the law is worse among perennial civil society agitators, who equate civil disobedience with criminal contravention. They use the government’s trust deficit to cross the line to fight for the public good.

Ajaero’s brush with the law arose from a Police investigation of Andrew Wynne, a Briton accused of a treasonable felony. He was a tenant in the Labour House, a facility owned by the NLC. The Police accused the Briton of financing the August protests and also charged him with levying war against the state. These were weighty allegations that the labour leader ought to cooperate with the Police to investigate, no matter how frivolous he thought they were.

Under some circumstances, a landlord could be liable for a crime committed by his tenant, except if he shows he did not have intent or knowledge that his premises were being used for criminal or fraudulent purposes. For instance, this is the intent of Section 3 of the Advanced Fee Fraud Act 2011. In Peter Obi’s Anambra State, the law allows the government to demolish and acquire any facility used by kidnappers to harbour their victims. No court proceedings are required.

So, as the president of the NLC that owned the facility linked to the accused felon, Ajaero was required to prove to the Police that the organisation did not know about its tenant’s alleged criminal activities. Simple. Rather than do that, he resorted to red herring and rabble-rousing, which was bound to elicit a strong-arm response from the security agencies.

Besides, it appears customary for the labour leader to blur lines. Social agitators tend to go beyond the call of duty and dabble in politics. Ajaero has been particularly accused of mixing politics with labour activism. While labour cannot be expected to insulate itself from political participation because politicians make decisions that affect its members, its leaders should be cautious.

The NLC president needs to exercise circumspection. He is not only a vocal member of the Labour Party but also controversial within the organisation. His partisanship makes it challenging to see the merit of his case against the government’s policies. Indeed, he needs to be less combative and comport himself better.

On 2 November last year, he was embroiled in a political dispute in his home state of Imo. Ostensibly fighting for the interests of the state’s workers, the All Progressives Congress-led government, amid an election, read political meaning into his action and ruffled him. It took the intervention of Nuhu Ribadu, the national security adviser, to extricate Ajaero from that crisis.

His prevailing brushes with the law suggest that he learned nothing from that experience. Bubbling in controversy within his LP, his public utterances on public policy are bound to attract partisan responses, particularly from a government battling rising resentment of its economic reforms. Those who argue he is a victim of the government’s hatred for dissent misconceived the situation. Is Ajaero the only vocal labour leader in the polity?

At least there is Festus Osifo, president of the Trade Union Congress. He co-led the agitations for the new minimum wage and has been equally critical of the government’s reform policies. He supported the August protesters’ demands to alleviate their suffering. Why have the security agencies not gone for him? One Deji Adeyanju, a lawyer, also actively led the protests and has remained vocal against the reforms. It is not on record that he has been hounded.

The fact is that agitation for anything, including good governance, must be conducted within the law. Those who mouth the rule of law must clearly understand that it means rule under the law. No matter his cause’s justness, no one can operate outside the law. This is the lesson Comrade Joe Ajaero must learn.             

Adebiyi is the special assistant on Media to the Minister of Budget and Economic Planning, Senator Abubakar Bagudu

The highlights of last week were the long awaited American Presidential Debate, and the horrible flood incident that occurred in Maiduguri, Borno State. May God console those who lost their loved ones in the disaster, and ease the suffering of those who survived it.

Harris/Trump Debate

As I was watching the American Presidential Debate last week, that is, the debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump, I couldn’t but see the similarity between Trump’s abusive behaviour and utterances, and that of many Nigerian politicians who are self-centred and self-absorbed, and have absolutely nothing to offer the people, but prefer to spend the time running themselves down in the media space instead! 

Donald Trump, who behaved like a spoilt child that wasn’t getting their way, appeared to be more interested in self-praise and mudslinging, than detailing his campaign manifesto, that is, if he does have a manifesto! The fact-check showed that Donald Trump more or less lied his way through the 1 hour 45 minute debate, making at least 30 false claims – if we calculate the amount of time allocated to each Candidate to speak, it could have been almost a lie a minute! – from claiming to have rebuilt America’s military, to Haitian Immigrants in Springfield, Ohio eating people’s dogs, cats and pets, to some States allowing abortions after a baby is born! How can States be actively involved in permitting murder? Donald Trump doesn’t appear to know the difference between abortion and murder/infanticide; that abortion is the termination of a pregnancy, and that once a baby is born, the pregnancy is completed, and the killing of such a new born is a criminal offence called murder/infanticide! See the case of United States v Deegan (2010) No. 08-2299 Decided May 25, 2010 in which the Appellant was sentenced to 121 months imprisonment for killing her new born son. 

This isn’t to say that VP Harris didn’t make any misleading statements, for instance, about Project 2025. But, unlike Donald Trump, VP Harris didn’t lie her way through the debate, and was able to clearly articulate some of her manifesto.

All-in-all, after that debate, most right thinking people would have chosen VP Harris over Donald Trump. And, I’m not playing the gender card here, she earned it – she is a stable, better, stronger, safer and more reliable candidate than Donald Trump. 

US Politics and Democracy v Nigeria’s

But, the truth is that, even if Americans don’t choose VP Harris as the next and first female President of USA in its 248 year history, over the years, America has been able to build such strong institutions that four or eight years of a foolish Presidency by an inept, unstable or unsuitable individual cannot destroy – strong institutions, not strong men. America also has a decent accountability structure, part of which is the mechanism of free and fair elections that works, so that if there’s a general consensus that a President or other political office holder has performed less than par, they are voted out of office at the next opportunity. Their system of accountability is also one that encourages people to not only voluntarily resign when they feel they are not doing justice to the job, they can even decide not to run for election again if need be, like President Joe Biden, if they believe that they may no longer to be able to give their best to the country. Even within the political party structure, there is more internal democracy – after President Biden’s June debate with Trump, the Democrats had voiced their misgivings and there appeared to be a consensus that President Biden should not run for a second term. He heeded the voice of his party members, for the greater good. 

Unfortunately, Nigeria has not managed to evolve that kind of system in this Fourth Republic. There is corruption and little or no accountability, particularly for wrongdoing. Whether it is the Nigerian political parties which are a component of the foundation of our democracy, that all lack ideology and internal democracy, and are permanently at loggerheads amongst themselves, or it’s government, our institutions are as weak as possible. And, we all know that a house built on a shaky foundation like sand instead of rock, is bound to fall due to its unsteadiness caused by weakness of what it stands on. 

As far back as 2018, I had referred to Nigeria as being a Fragile State, and unless, going forward Government makes a bold and conscious decision to make nation building a priority, over and above parochial and all other interests, I fear that it would be near impossible for Nigeria to get out the fragile  condition she finds herself. 

The Maiduguri Flood Disaster

I cried when I saw a news clip of the Maiduguri flood disaster – the unnecessary hell that our brothers and sisters in Maiduguri are experiencing, as a result of what may be an unnecessary flood caused possibly by negligence, ineptitude or nonchalance, allegedly arising from not taking the necessary measures to secure the Alau Dam which then overflowed its banks as a result of heavy rainfall last Monday. Are the people of Maiduguri not already going through enough, with the persistent insecurity they have been experiencing for at least a decade as a result of the Boko Haram insurgency over there? Now this? I read an Al Jazeera news report stating that, warnings had been sounded months ago about the disaster that could occur. The question is, why were the necessary precautions not taken, so that this resultant disaster could maybe have been avoided or minimised? What happened to the funds that were provided for rehabilitation of the Dam? Irreplaceable lives have been lost, while property worth billions of Naira have also been lost, including state-of-the-art hospital medical equipment. It is time to hold those responsible for this tragedy accountable, for their acts or omissions. 

I also read a news report that the Federal Government has since come out to blame the Maiduguri flood on the overflow of the Ngadda River, and not the collapse of the Alau Dam. I fear that Nigerians may never know the truth about what caused the disaster, particularly if it may be related to government error.

Unfortunate incidents like the Maiduguri disaster occur because, over the years, Nigeria has gradually been caught in a vicious cycle of regression and failure caused by an interwoven web of corruption, lack of accountability and weak institutions. These three elements are the root cause of all the other evils that have now become part and parcel of Nigeria – poverty, insecurity, inadequate infrastructure etc.

Though it is shameful that 64 years post-independence, Nigeria is still using terms like ‘nation building’ which is usually reserved for a country that has just attained independence, since Nigeria started self-rule, particularly the last 14 years, successive government administrations have allowed the country to hit such a rock-bottom that it’s almost as if the Tinubu administration has to start rebuilding from scratch, unless of course President Tinubu prefers for his administration to remain immersed in Nigeria’s regressive story. And, in so doing, this administration must avoid following the wrong roads travelled by past administrations, if not, it’s best efforts will not yield any positive results. 

Like Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore, the very first item on President Tinubu’s administration agenda, should be to eschew corruption and reckless expenditure. See Section 15(5) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended in 2023)(the Constitution). Also see the case of Psychiatric Hospital Management Board v Ejitagha (200) LPELR-2930(SC) per Samson Odemwingie Uwaifo, JSC on government not exceeding or abusing its powers, acting reasonably and in good faith.

Last week, a news report concerning the son of the immediate past Director General of DSS, Mr Yusuf Bichi, allegedly stealing $2 million from his father’s safe and disappearing, made the rounds. If the story is true, the question is, what was Mr Bichi Senior doing with $2 million cash? What is the source of the funds? By virtue of Section 3 of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022 (MLA), any transaction in an amount exceeding $10,000 must be reported to the appropriate authorities with the source of funds made known, failing which such person may be guilty of the offence of money laundering contrary to Section 18 of the MLA and punishable upon conviction with imprisonment of 4-14 years or a fine or both (see Section 18(3) of the MLA). See the case of Kalu v FRN (2016) LPELR-40108(SC) per Sulaiman Galadima, JSC. So, while we are looking for Mr Bichi Junior, if the story has any iota of truth in it, it appears that Mr Bichi Senior also has a case to answer. 

The issue of former Governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello will continue to be a recurring decimal in the fight against corruption being selective, until the security agencies do the needful and arrest him. The security agencies failed to take advantage of the several opportunities they had to arrest Yahaya Bello in Abuja some months ago, to go and face money laundering charges filed against him to the tune of N80 billion. And today, it is alleged that he is hiding in State House, Lokoja, which is not inviolable, as it isn’t one of the exceptions mentioned in Section 1 of the Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges Act; but, instead, Yahaya Bello is the one dictating to the Judiciary and law enforcement agencies, the terms of how he should be handled, from under the rock he is hiding. It is shameful, and shows a lack of commitment on the part of law enforcement to upholding the rule of law – the optics are bad. 

Yet, it was easy for the security agencies to happily arrest the NLC President, Comrade Joe Ajaero, on what may be nothing more than spurious allegations of terrorism financing, and stop him from travelling to the UK for a Trade Union Conference last week. I call it spurious, because, if the DSS could really substantiate those allegations against Comrade Ajaero, he would definitely still be in detention by now! 

Conclusion 

If we are to start to rebuild Nigeria from scratch, the fight against corruption and crime cannot continue to be as selective as it has been under past administrations. If not, it will never be effective. We have to rebuild the country based on the right values, so we can get optimum results. Why should an individual who works in a company and is accused of Stealing N5 million contrary to Section 383(1) of the Criminal Code (CC) or Theft contrary to Section 286(1) of the Penal Code (PC) be sentenced to 3 or 5 years imprisonment (see Sections 390 & 287 of the CC & PC respectively), while a Politician can get off with a plea bargain arrangement and no jail time for stealing N20 billion from Government coffers? If all I have to do is return some of my stolen loot if I’m caught, there’s absolutely nothing stopping me from stealing as much as I like! In fact, the more the merrier, making extra provision for the funds that I may have to return in a plea bargain, if I’m caught stealing government funds. See the case of PML (Nig) Ltd v FRN (2017) LPELR-43480(SC) per Amina Adamu Augie, JSC on the position of the law on the concept of plea bargain. 

Considering the fact that corruption is responsible for almost ruining Nigeria I’m wondering whether Nigeria has come of age to use the somewhat lenient approach of plea bargain to punish corruption. Possibly, the plea bargain method can be used when corruption reduces from being the order of the day to a very bare minimum. For now, will justice not be better served and Nigeria saved, by offenders not just forfeiting their illicit funds, but serving serious jail time too? 

The multiplier effect of corruption are all its other relatives that we see – lack of accountability, nepotism, lack of infrastructure, mediocrity, regression, poverty, crime and insecurity, to mention but a few. 

The fact that it was easy to do an immediate fact check on everything thing that Donald Trump and VP Kamala Harris said during their debate, is instructive and cannot be over-emphasised. Unfortunately, in Nigeria, we run an opaque system based on minimum information and little or no statistics”. The Freedom of Information Act, is only there to decorate the statute books. Why is SERAP in trouble? Possibly for asking too many questions like Socrates, that Government doesn’t care to answer. The next question is, how do we rebuild properly without reliable statistics? We do not even have current population figures, let alone know how much fuel the country consumes per month! How do you plan and build accurately, without the requisite information to input as a basis? President Tinubu should make the organisation of a census a priority. Every country should hold a census, at least every 10 years. It’s been almost 20 years, since Nigeria had her last census (2006), and I’m sure the reasons for the delay in organising a census is not unconnected to the usual suspects, corruption and politics. 

In 2016, President Barrack Obama failed to cut his vacation at Martha’s Vineyard short when a flood occurred in Louisiana in 2016, and he was accused of dereliction of duty and lack of compassion. President Tinubu has been away on official assignments to the China-Africa Summit and the UK. Since he didn’t cut his trip short to visit Maiduguri, Nigerians hope that Borno State will be President Tinubu’s first port of call now that he’s back in the country. A hands-on approach coupled with compassion, which was sadly lacking during the eight year Buhari administration, would not only be welcome, it is the right way to go. 

 Joe Ajaero was arrested for failing to honour an invitation, writes TUNDE RAHMAN

By the time the Department of State Services released Nigeria Labour Congress President, Comrade Joe Ajaero, last Monday evening September 9, he had become contrite, remorseful and perhaps ashamed of his uninformed action. The labour leader was invited twice by the secret police and twice he failed to honour the invitation. As I learnt, during the second invitation, Ajaero even told the new DSS boss who telephoned him that he was travelling out of the country and could only honour the invitation on his return. What an insufferable arrogance! However, unbeknownst to him, at the behest of the police and Office of the National Security Adviser, which have been investigating him, the DSS had placed him on a ‘Watch list.’

For failing to honour the invitation, the SSS operatives promptly arrested him at the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, Abuja on Monday

morning as he arrived to

 board his flight to London. He was whisked to DSS office in Abuja where the police interrogated him for his alleged infractions, which remain yet unstated. It is instructive to state that the DSS, according to official sources, has nothing against Ajaero. However, the service arrested him so he

 can respond to the allegations levelled against him by the police. That interrogation was said to have been conducted within the DSS premises with his lawyer in attendance. 

When the interrogation was over and Ajaero was released on bail, the DSS took him home in a well-fortified security vehicle early enough on Monday night. He was then asked to break the news of his release to his associates by himself. Unknown to many, the NLC president himself delayed the announcement of his release till almost midnight that same Monday for reasons known to him. 

I have gone to this length to narrate Ajaero’s encounter with the DSS based on the information I garnered from sources close to the service in order to demonstrate that the NLC president was not picked up at the airport for no unjustifiable reason, as many may want us to believe and that he was not in any way manhandled by the service during the period of the arrest. 

On the contrary, he was reportedly treated with respect and decorum, and his rights fully respected. The DSS explained to him that not honouring the invitation extended to him was a grave error on his part, which he allegedly admitted and reportedly apologised.

With that background, it is evident that the United Kingdom Trade Union Congress, which intervened in the matter and attacked the present administration for alleged intolerance and violation of Ajaero’s fundamental human rights without justification, did not understand the issues involved and what actually transpired. The TUC-UK is one organisation lawyers would label a meddlesome interloper in this matter. And it was just fit and appropriate that the Presidency had given the association the response it rightly deserved.

For crying out loud, why would a labour leader deserving of that name or more precisely, why would an Ajaero who is the NLC president not honour a lawful invitation by a legal entity like the Nigeria Police?

It would appear Ajaero deliberately acted the way he did in order to further heat up the polity that has already become tense over the fuel situation or to befuddle the matter of his arrest in a bid to embarrass the government. 

I will return to the matter of Premium Motor Spirit shortly.

Just like Ajaero would want it to act, the NLC behaved in a way typical of the union. Without interrogating what actually happened, the Congress slammed the federal government with a midnight deadline to order Ajaero’s release, otherwise government should be ready for a showdown. 

Affiliate organisations of the Labour Union were placed on Red Alert, following an emergency meeting of the National Administrative Council of the NLC in Abuja in reaction to the arrest. They were directed to mobilise for a confrontation with the government if the NLC president was not released by midnight.

Why is labour so recalcitrant and inflexible, why does the union always resort to protest, in spite of the present government’s demonstration of good faith with them? Why is labour always dangling the strike option at the snap of their fingers? 

The other day and despite the then-ongoing negotiations with the government and Organised Private Sector, labour still called for a strike over the National Minimum Wage, disrupting business activities in some parts of the country, particularly aviation operations in Lagos and Abuja. In the end, after its ineffective industrial action, labour returned to the negotiation table with the government and OPS during which a new N70,000 National Minimum Wage was agreed upon. The two unions even got an icing on the cake, as President Bola Tinubu directed a three-yearly review of the NMW as opposed to the existing every five years review. 

The President Tinubu administration has shown good faith, trust in labour, and belief in what a harmonious relationship the government and labour unions can contribute to nation-building and a stable polity. It is high time labour reciprocated this appropriately.

On the matter of the fuel situation, I mean the recent increase in pump price of PMS, which Ajaero obviously wanted to load up with his arrest to create another confusion, there is also a need for some clarifications. In the wake of the hike in the pump price of petrol from N617 to N897 per litre, while calling for an immediate reversal of the increase, the NLC had claimed the hike was a breach of the agreement it reached with the government during the minimum wage negotiations where it came down from its demand of N250,000 to N70,000. In a statement signed by Comrade Ajaero, Labour claimed it had an understanding with the government that there would be no further increase based on which it agreed to the N70,000 NMW. However, those who attended the negotiations and witnessed as the negotiating parties reached an agreement said there was no such understanding. I believe Ajaero and the other labour leaders know the true position of things and are merely engaging in subterfuge. 

Truth is the recent hike was a difficult pill for government to swallow. President Bola Tinubu recently said in Beijing, China while addressing the Nigerian Community there that if there was a better option, the government would have taken it. The Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation Limited had long informed the government it was not covering its cost, arguing that with the unification of the multiple exchange rates that earlier existed, the company now required more money for the foreign exchange it would need for fuel importation. NNPCL argued that the matter was not helped by the high debt it owed suppliers. According to the corporation, in order to guarantee fuel availability, there is a need for an increase that would be close to the cost of making the products available. And because the PMS price in Nigeria is about the lowest within the sub-region, smuggling walked on all fours as the products is being smuggled across the border. 

We can argue that government needs to double up its efforts in checking smuggling, and that would be right. However, fuel availability must be guaranteed in the interim while efforts are being made to drive down the cost including warding off smuggling. 

Availability is expected to be further assured with Dangote Refinery now coming on stream. 

Indeed, the announcement on Friday that the federal government had finally reached an agreement with Dangote Refinery on the commercial terms for the supply of crude oil to the refinery and the off-take of its PMS is heart-warming. Following the agreement, the government announced that the distribution of petrol from the refinery would commence on Monday September 16 with an initial 25 million litres per day. Under the agreement, NNPCL will be the sole off-taker of petrol from Dangote Refinery while diesel from the facility will be sold directly to any interested marketer.

And as a buffer for the gradual reduction in the demand for PMS, the government is also speeding up efforts on the Compressed Natural Gas Initiative. Already, the government has commenced the distribution of CNG conversion kits and cylinders to transport unions in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, Kogi, Nasarawa and Niger States under a plan aimed at converting one million commercial vehicles free across the country in the next two years. As opposed to PMS that is around N897 or N900 per litre, CNG costs between N230 and N300 per kilogram.

In my view, the federal government must now begin the implementation of the NMW and get the Organised Private Sector to also toe the same line to stem labour’s seeming uneasiness. Arrears on the NMW must also be paid to win over the hearts of workers. This is also where the governors must immediately come in as well. The increasing revenue now going to them should come handy in implementing the new minimum wage. 

Rahman is a Senior Presidential Aide

Government must act within the law

The growing culture of impunity and scant regards for human rights in the country is worrying. Last Monday, it took the threat of a nationwide strike before security operatives freed the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) president, Joe Ajaero from its custody. He had been arrested at the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport Abuja while on his way to the United Kingdom for an official engagement. There were no clear reasons for the arrest. Barely some hours later, the Department of State Services (DSS) operatives raided the Abuja office of the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project’s (SERAP), a non-governmental organisation. Beyond the call to scrutinise the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited’s (NNPCL) books in face of alleged corruption and incompetence, there was no plausible reason for the invasion of SERAP office.

While we have no problem with security agencies doing their job, the federal government must understand that citizens have the right to freely express disaffection on their policies and programmes. It is a fundamental right. But in the last few months, security operatives have moved against many Nigerians – from labour leaders to civic organisations, and even journalists for raising contrary voices. This is ironically a throwback to the era of jackboots and dictatorship – a jungle of a sort where anything goes. But that is a reckless gamble. We are in a democracy. “This government has an obligation to support and protect civil society groups and human rights defenders,” said SERAP in a statement. “We are seriously concerned about the growing restrictions on civic space and the brutal crackdown on the human rights of Nigerians.”

The seeds of conflicts were sown early in the administration. President Bola Tinubu on assuming duty removed the subsidy on petrol and shortly after, floated the nation’s currency, the naira. Though hailed as necessary policies, there are evident problems of implementation, prompting astronomical rise in the cost of living. Today, millions of Nigerians can hardly afford a good meal a day. The removal of the subsidy, and the massive devaluation of the naira, punched deep holes in pockets and reduced people’s purchasing power, many of whom are jobless. Even worse, there were hardly concrete measures to cushion the impact of the haemorrhage. The N70,000 minimum wage approved by the government for workers is not yet operational.

Moreover, after billions of dollars had been poured into the refineries with the hope that they may help in moderating the choking cost of fuel, none is still currently working. Besides, there is slow progress in the promised compressed natural gas (CNG) initiative, seen as a cheaper alternative to petrol. But in the midst of the profound hardship, government at virtually all levels, is operating as usual, indulging in wasteful spending amid blatant corruption. It was thus a perfect opportunity for workers to resort to the only weapon it has to make government to listen. The two-day protest in late February paralysed and harmed many cities, including Abuja, but made the labour leader, Ajaero a marked man. Since then, he has been in a cat and mouse relationship with the government, a relationship worsened by the 10-day protest in August which made many in government jittery. Even though Labour was not the arrowhead, it threw its weight behind it.

The raids, the invitations of the labour leaders and the subsequent charges of terrorism against some of the protesters and others are evident of a government unwilling to tolerate dissent from any quarters. But it is a wrong-headed move. We cannot afford to militarise the environment. If anybody falls short of the law, he should be so treated. There must be a halt to what is becoming a gradual descent into dictatorship.

The Advocate

By Onikepo Braithwaite

Onikepo.braithwaite@thisdaylive.com

Lingering Fuel Crisis

Before I delve into the word for today, I cannot but express the displeasure of Nigerians on the matter of the lingering fuel crisis. It was rather nauseating watching the Minister of State of Petroleum, Mr Lokpobiri, after their meeting with the Vice President last week,  making incoherent excuses that don’t seem to add up, in a bid to assure Nigerians who are going through so much hell, that fuel would soon be available, while the CEO of NNPCL, Mr Mele Kyari looked on. Again, I hold President Tinubu to his November 2023 warning that non-performers would be sacked, so that they do not constitute themselves as clogs in the wheels of Nigeria’s progress. I repeat that, it appears that it is time for those running the oil sector to go home. Keeping them in their jobs, cannot be more important than the welfare of millions of Nigerians, who can no longer afford to feed because of the inflation caused by the increase in fuel price and the non-availability of the product. Let those who know how to drive, get into the the driver’s seat!

I have never worked in the oil industry, but does common sense not tell one that if NNPCL has allegedly run up a $6 billion debt with fuel suppliers and they are unwilling to extend any more credit to them and supply them fuel, it goes without saying that NNPCL should have been breaking down the door of Dangote Refinery (DR) to send crude oil there to be refined, in order to make fuel readily available to Nigerians, that is, if they had even the slightest bit of concern for the well-being of Nigerians. Instead, a foolish campaign of calumny was mounted against DR, raising false allegations about DR’s product! 

Oil is the main source of revenue for Nigeria, and therefore, it is bizarre that running of such a vital sector should be left in the hands of those, who by their actions, appear to be inept. There is no better time than now, for the Tinubu administration to decide that some things are too crucial to be used for paying back political debts, or to satisfy APC, or other reasons unrelated to capacity to perform on the job – such things must be put in the hands of those who have the expertise to operate them. Clearly, this is not the case with the Nigerian oil sector. 

And, this reminds me of the social contract that Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala discussed, at our recently concluded 2024 NBA-AGC. Not only must offices, particularly the crucial ones, be populated with only those who have the know-how, Government must be committed to fulfilling the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy contained in Chapter II of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended in 2023)(the Constitution) particularly Section 14(2)(b), the security and welfare of the people which is the primary purpose of Government. Section 16 of the Constitution, the economic objectives and achieving them, is synonymous with the welfare of the people. A hungry man, they say, is an angry man, not a happy one (see Section 16(1)(b) of the Constitution). And, Nigerians are rather unhappy. The fact that the pump price of fuel has increased, isn’t helping matters. 

Students are planning a protest against economic hardship on September 15, while the #EndBadGovernance Protesters have already given advance notice of their next outing on October 1, 2024. A month after the last protest, the most pertinent question to ask, is how gainfully Government has used the intervening period between the last protest which ended on August 10 and now, to alleviate the suffering of Nigerians, and address some of the legitimate concerns raised by the #EndBadGovernance Protesters. 

Court of Appeal’s Proposals for the Amendment of the Constitution and Electoral Act

1) Section 187 of the Constitution

Last Wednesday, I read an article in This Day Newspaper about some of the Court of Appeal’s proposals for the amendment of the Constitution and the Electoral Act 2022 (EA). Their first port of call is the amendment of Section 187(1) of the Constitution, so that as in the Bayelsa State case of PDP v David Lyon, Biobarakuma Degi-Eremienyo & Ors (2020) LPELR-49734(SC) per Ejembi Eko, JSC, the joint ticket of a Gubernatorial candidate or Governor-elect will not be vitiated as a result of the disqualification of the Deputy Gubernatorial candidate or Deputy Governor-elect by a court of competent jurisdiction. That Section 187 of the Constitution should also be amended to allow the Governor, Governor-elect or Gubernatorial candidate the luxury of nominating another Deputy, if there’s a disqualification of the extant one. Though the article was silent on the Presidential ticket, it wouldn’t be illogical to assume that such amendment could also apply to Section 142(1) of the Constitution, as it relates to the joint ticket of the President and Vice President.

I’m sure that we all recall that the Supreme Court upheld the judgement of the trial court sacking Mr Degi-Eremienyo, on account of his presentation/submission of forged/false documentation to INEC. People have asked me many times why the court was able to sack Mr Degi-Eremienyo then, based on the PDP’s allegation that he presented forged documentation and therefore, stood disqualified by virtue of Section 182(1)(j) of the Constitution; but that, following the 2023 elections, there was no disqualification of candidates based on allegations in rival parties’ election petitions that some candidates were not constitutionally qualified to run, because of the presentation of questionable documentation to INEC. But, the truth is that, in the  2023 petitions, had the courts disqualified anyone based on allegations of submitting false documentation brought by XYZ Party against ABC Party, and disqualified an ABC Candidate based on XYZ’s petition, such decision would have been perverse. This is because Section 31(5) of the Electoral Act 2010 which was the law in force at the time of Degi-Eremienyo’s case, was amended in the 2022 EA. Section 31(5) of the 2010 EA allowed  ‘Anyone’ to bring such allegations of questionable documentation before the Federal High Court, while Section 29(5) of the 2022 EA amended the aforementioned Section 31(5) to restrict ‘Anyone’ to only fellow ‘Aspirants’ who participated in the primaries of the same political party with the candidate being accused.

In short, by virtue of the new Section 29(5) of the EA, only an Aspirant for the same position in ABC Party can sue an ABC Candidate at the Federal High Court on the documents presented/submitted, not later than 14 days from the date of the occurrence of the event complained of, and not a Candidate from XYZ Party (see Section 285(9) of the Constitution). On the definition of Aspirant, see Ardo v Nyako 2014 10 N.W.L.R. Part 1416 Page 592 at 624-625 per John Inyang Okoro, JSC; Oli v INEC & Ors (2023) LPELR-60587(SC) per Helen Moronkeji Ogunwumiju, JSC.

While some welcome the amendment to Section 187 of the Constitution, citing the unfairness of what amounts to punishing the Governor who hasn’t committed any offence, for the sins of the Deputy (an antithesis to the principles of equity and justice), Section 36(8) of the Constitution provides inter alia that a person can only be found guilty of committing an offence known to law. What offence then, would the Governor be charged with committing, because the Deputy forged his own documentation, that he should be penalised?” It is for these reasons, that they believe that a Governor should be able to nominate a replacement Deputy. 

Others however, oppose the amendment on the ground that, if candidates and their political parties fail or neglect to do their due diligence on candidates/running mates before they are selected and presented formally to INEC with their documentation, then they shouldn’t be given a second bite at the cherry when such candidates are declared unfit by the courts. That, in fact, Section 29(8) of the EA prescribes a N10 million fine upon conviction, for the presentation of a candidate who doesn’t meet the Section 29 qualifications.

2) Section 246 of the Constitution 

The Court of Appeal also proposed that Section 246(3) of the Constitution be amended, so that not only appeals arising from the National and State Houses of Assembly terminate at the Court of Appeal, Gubernatorial election petitions and all pre-election matters should also terminate there. Back in the day, for example, by virtue of the Section 148(1)(a) & (b) of the 2002 Electoral Act, only the Presidential election petition appeal lay to the Supreme Court, while all other petitions terminated at the Court of Appeal, including that of the Gubernatorial election petitions. But, by virtue of Section 246 of the Constitution, the Gubernatorial election petitions now also lie to the Supreme Court. 

Reverting to the old system where only the Presidential election petition appeals lie to the Supreme Court, will definitely decongest the Apex Court’s overcrowded docket, and let the Justices  concentrate on more important appeals. Why should all pre-election matters get to the Supreme Court, when not all substantive election petitions get there? Presently, the case of X of ABC Party who submits a forged WAEC Certificate to INEC in his bid to run for Plateau State House of Assembly, can be fought as a pre-election matter from the Federal High Court all the way to the Supreme Court, but an election petition brought by Y of XYZ Party against X for the same House of Assembly seat terminates at the Court of Appeal! How so? 

However, this issue of expanding the subject-matter jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal is intertwined with the issue of the process of appointment of Judges and their elevation to the higher Benches. Nigerians have lost most of their confidence in the Judiciary, and with the Court of Appeal’s reputation for delivering conflicting, and sometimes perverse judgements, a case in view being that of the Plateau Lawmakers, they therefore, prefer to exhaust all levels of appeal, getting some comfort from the Apex Court. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, the testimony of former NBA President, Olumide Akpata, that Judges who were being considered for elevation to the Court of Appeal, were not conversant with the most basic legal principles like ‘Lis Pendens’; who can blame anyone for not wanting their fate to be determined by those who may not be well equipped to decide their cases? 

If the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal is to be expanded to be the final arbiter on Gubernatorial election petitions and all pre-election matters, then there must be a rejigging of the process of recruitment of judicial officers right from the beginning, be it Magistrate, Judge, Kadi or Customary Court Judge, so that only the brightest and the best are chosen. Apart from promotion tests and interviews, judicial officers must be grilled on their judgements which must contain all the elements of a good judgement, and not just because they are someone’s relative or protégé. These kind of measures, along with serious sanctions for corruption, will inspire confidence in Nigerians, and set a better stage for the expansionary proposals of the Court of Appeal. 

3) Section 285 of the Constitution 

As for the amendment of Section 285 which sets the timelines for the determination of pre-election matters and election petitions, the whole section must be reviewed holistically, vis-à-vis the holding of Primaries to the substantive elections and swearing in, if the object is that all litigation concerning elections must be completed before swearing in, unless of course the dates set for submitting forms to INEC, holding Primaries and elections are changed, so that all litigation will end timeously. But, this may not be practical because, based on the timelines set in Section 285, elections may have to be completed a year before, to be able to complete all litigation before swearing in. 

Or will a combination of reviewing the dates that Primaries and elections will hold, and necessary amendments of the EA, including Section 285 of the Constitution reducing all the time lines be more ideal? For example, Section 285(6) & (10) allow 180 days for pre-election matters and election petitions at first instance – this time frame can be reduced. Presently, for instance, in the case of the Gubernatorial election petition which goes through three stages – Tribunal, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court, the Tribunal will be concluded at least three months after swearing in, while the other two rounds of appeal will be completed early the following year – 349 days or so in total, approximately one year. Even a pre-election matter would probably be completed around the time of swearing in, if not after. 

Conclusion 

Definitely, it is time to clean up our somewhat messy electoral laws and process, and the time to do so is now, before the Primaries commence in 2026 and elections in 2027. The cycle of ignoring important matters till the last minute, then adopting a hurried fire brigade approach to tackle them, resulting in the making of vital mistakes and omissions which then become the centre for national debate after the fact, happens every election. This is the time for that debate, that will lead to concrete timeous action. 

Bola A. Akinterinwa 

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu (PBAT) has a publicly misunderstood mania of political governance (Tinubumania) based on ‘Emi l’Okan’ philosophy. ‘Emi l’Okan are Yoruba words meaning ‘it is my turn.’ PBAT never gave any particular meaning or methodological exegesis of it. However, ‘Emi l’Okan implies that fairness and justice should be allowed in Nigeria’s presidential successorship system. He explained that he had helped many others to clinch state power, that he had been tolerant, waiting for his turn, and therefore, there could not be any good reason to deny him his own turn. And true, he was not denied. He was elected and inaugurated on May 29, 2023

Emi l’Okan philosophy is predicated on surprise-giving, tolerance-driven and me-tooism style of governance. He believes that giving Nigerians surprises might make Nigerians enthusiastic and supportive. PBAT would not be bordered if his surprises are not well received. In other words, with or without the people’s support, Emi l’Okan as a policy philosophy should prevail. This is one interpretation of his many official actions so far.

For example, in his maiden presidential address to the Nigerian people on May 29, 2023, he said ‘fuel subsidy is gone,’ meaning that the policy of fuel subsidy had been thrown into the garbage of history.’ The policy decision was announced without expatiation. As a result, the announcement has generated much fury and divided the political class. Besides, the sufferings generated by the purported fuel subsidy removal prompted the perception of PBAT as a wicked person and his being given other bad names that may not be his. He undoubtedly and unnecessarily made haste by announcing the policy decision at his inauguration ceremony. 

Since the announcement, the policy has been killing Nigeria softly and prompting the wearing by many Nigerians of the toga of attitudinal irrationalities which have also been threatening Nigeria’s national unity, territorial integrity and raising troubling questions about his foreign policy of 4-Ds. Hence, there is the need to begin to make haste slowly. 

Tinubumania of ‘Emi l’Okan’

Tinubumania of ‘Emi lokan’ policy is manifested in various ways. First, it can be likened to the governance styles of the Southeast Asia countries. The Asian tiger economies are generally export-led, outperforming, and rapid development achieving. PBAT appears to like this development policy approach, especially in Hong Kong, South Korea, Taiwan and particularly in Singapore, which not only acceded into international sovereignty in 1965, but has also qualified to be described as a member of the First World. The Singaporean feat is said to be because of Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew who ignored the temporary sufferings of the people of Singapore to the advantage of the need to promote his economic policies of transformation and development. 

Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, alias LKY, served as the first Prime Minister of Singapore from 1959 to 1990. He was adjudged to be the founding father of the modern Singaporean State before he died in 2015 at the age of 91 years. His ideological stand was that ‘the ultimate test of the value of a political system was whether it helps that society to establish conditions which improve the standard of living for the majority of its people.’ More interestingly, his governance principles (maintaining a balance between nurturing excellence and encouraging the average to improve; promoting cooperation and competition between and among the people; payment for work and not for lying around; dictatorship because ‘the exuberance of democracy leads to undisciplined and disorderly conditions which are inimical to development’; etc.) appear to have considerably impacted on PBAT who wants a truly federal Nigeria, a vibrant economy and a strongly united Nigeria.  For instance, LKY disagreed with the western conception of democracy. He said, ‘with a few exceptions, democracy has not brought good government to developing countries,’ democracy had not worked in countries like China because of its large population. Consequently, LKY subscribed to the idea of state interferences in private lives, media, etc. From the action policies of PBAT so far, it is clear that he wants to be on record for transforming and waking up the sleeping or slumbering Nigeria to move away from the Third World to the First World like Singapore. But in doing so, he has been violating fundamental human rights and the constitutional right of the press to hold the government accountable.

Put differently, based on the foregoing, PBAT knows well the suffering implications of the policies of LKY to which I am arguing he appears to have subscribed. It is because PBAT knows the implications that he is asking Nigerians to be more tolerant. Nigerians, in response, do not quarrel with the plea for tolerance but are asking for how long? They are asking why it should be the governed that should be tolerant when the governing elite is publicly seen to be engaging in profligacy. And more notably, no one can rightly say that there has been fuel subsidy. The issue has been quite controversial. Some experts and even a former Minister of Petrol, Professor Tamuno David-West, have argued that the alleged policy of fuel subsidy is a fraud. What is even more fraudulent is that PBAT announced he has jettisoned the policy, and yet, people are still engaged in the controversy. Another deepening controversy on crude oil is that it is being mortgaged for external loans. Why is it that every financial policy in Nigeria is never devoid of allegations of fraud? There is the need to make haste slowly.

Second, at the level of Nigeria-South Africa relations, PBAT cares less about the official and officious attitudinal dispositions towards Nigeria. Nigerian leaders wrongly give impression that the relationship is warm, whereas it is not. At the recent re-inauguration of the South African president, Cyril Ramaphosa, it was apparent that PBAT was not seated in a more befitting place, even if he was on the second row. Nigeria’s president should not have been equated with traditional rulers in South Africa, who reportedly were seated in the front row.

Perhaps what was more disturbingly was not the place of the sitting, but the happiness of PBAT’s close collaborators that the PBAT delegation was well received. It was even defiantly argued that media reports claiming that the delegation was not snubbed. The truth as clearly shown in various videos supported the argument of snubbing of the Nigerian delegation. PBAT, from a physiognomic angle wanted to have a friendly handshake with the South African leader from the second row but the South African leader turned his head to the right and therefore refused to see whatever was to happen at his left side. This was a perfect diplomatic snubbing in the open.

On the other margins of the presidential inauguration, President Cyril Ramaphosa probably tried to make amendment by warmly receiving PBAT and his team, but in the pattern of close door. Giving a special or red carpet welcome in the secret and snubbing in the open only sends wrong diplomatic signals to observers. Observers are not unaware of the fact that something went wrong even if the handlers of PBAT are pretending or arguing to the contrary. If snubbing is denied, no one can deny another fact of a cold war underlying Nigeria-South Africa relations. Again, even if we want to admit that inter-governmental relations are fairly warm, the same cannot be rightly said of the people-to-people relations.

If you do not agree with this story of snubbing, the story about the perception of Nigeria not being a truly and major Frontline State during the anti-Apartheid struggle is another case in point. Besides, what about the most recent story of the 23-year old Miss Universe Nigeria, 2024, Chidimma Adetshina? Who has forgotten the fact that she was initially the 2024 Miss South Africa beauty pageant finalist as at July 2024, but was forced to withdraw, a development that compelled her to accept the kind invitation to compete in the Nigerian pageant. While her withdrawal paved the way for Mia Le Roux to become the first Miss South African winner, the same withdrawal stopped the chances of the already leading competitor in Nigeria.

However, the point is that Chidimma Adetshina was rejected, undoubtedly because of her Nigerian connectivity. The explanations given by Chidimma herself are very thought-provoking. As she put it, ‘I have lived there (South Africa) for 23 years and it’s heartbreaking to see that I wasn’t welcomed and accepted. There were certain things that happened behind the scenes that made me withdraw. It was heartbreaking that I had to withdraw close to the finale but a decision had to be made and it hit social media as well. But what I know is that I was born in South Africa and I am a South African. I am still proudly Nigerian as well.’

This self-explanation raises more questions than answers. If Chidimma is a South African by the principle of ius soli or place of birth, does it not mean that South African nationality is not conferred by place of birth and if it does, it cannot be enough? Besides, how can African leaders be preaching the gospel of continental integration and the sermons of one African people, on the one hand, and at the same time, be underscoring national protectionism and sovereignty, on the other hand? These are issues in Nigeria’s foreign policy attitude that are hardly reckoned with in the foreign policy strategic calculations of Nigeria under PBAT. There is the need to make haste slowly when dealing with South Africa and continental integration. Grosso modo, not making haste slowly can only begin to kill Nigeria the more in a subtle manner.

Making Haste and Killing Nigeria  

PBAT must learn to make haste slowly because whatever he is trying to do tooth and nail has a foundation already laid by his predecessors. In strengthening existing relationships, great caution must always be exercised to avoid tainting them. For example, PBAT reportedly went on a 3-day official visit to China before the China-Africa summit. The official visit was in furtherance of the cooperation agreements done under President Olusegun Obasanjo in 2005. More importantly, what President Obasanjo told the Chinese leader in Abuja in April 2006 was quite inspiring: ‘this twenty first century is the century for China to lead the world. And when you are leading the world, we want to be close behind you. When you are going to the moon, we don’t want to be left behind.’

As a matter of fact, Nigeria’s relationship with China became very noteworthy that the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs established a Nigeria-China Dialogue Series in 2013 in order to begin to document Chinese activities in Nigeria (vide Bola A. Akinterinwa and Ogaba D. Oche, eds., Nigeria-China Dialogue Series: Issues in Contemporary China-Africa Relations, No. 1: NIIA and CICIR. August 5-9, 2013). But how does the Government of Nigeria understand this relationship? Great, it can be rightly argued.

It is on record that Nigeria’s Foreign Minister, Ambassador Yusuf Tuggar, OON, first played host to a team of 18 scholars from the Schwarzman Scholars Programme at the Tsinghua University in Beijing on 2nd May, 2024 and seizing the opportunity to explain Nigeria’s diplomacy of the 4-Ds. Further still, the Foreign Minister, following PBAT’s return from his 3-day official visit and participation in the 2024 Summit of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation, held from 4th to 6th September, 2024, also seized the opportunity to explain the importance of Nigeria-China relations. He argued that Nigeria is not a child; that Nigeria knows what she is doing, and that China is not an exploiter. This is a good statement that completely ignores the non-implementation of some obligations agreed to in 2005 under President Olusegun Obasanjo. 

That Nigeria knows what she is doing is a moot question.

Another area of concern is the construction of gas pipelines. There is the gas pipeline project between Nigeria and Morocco which is currently generating heated controversy between the Niger Deltans and the Federal Government of Nigeria. The people of Niger Delta are complaining that they were not reckoned with in the making of the contract deal with Morocco. The people of Niger Delta want to know what their gains are from the project.

As good as the Nigeria-Morocco gas pipeline may be, it has the potential to be seriously and adversely endangered in light of the establishment of an Alliance of the States of Sahel (ASS) to which the Republic of Niger now belongs. The project necessarily passes through Niger and Nigeria-Niger bilateral ties are currently frosty, and therefore demanding making haste slowly in the quest for economic growth and development. 

There is also the Gulf of Guinea gas pipeline agreement which was done during PBAT’s 3-day State Visit (14th-16th August, 2024) to Equatorial Guinea. The agreement was done to ‘facilitate the development of gas resources, accelerate industrialization and enhance energy security.’ The pipeline will pass through the Gulf of Guinea, an object of global strategic calculations. One major rationale for the US interest in the Gulf is security, the need to contain international terrorism in the area. In fact, the pressure on Nigeria to accept the relocation of the US Africa Command from Stuttgart in Germany to Nigeria, is partly because of the Gulf. Global strategic calculations may therefore conflict with the local bilateral interests, hence the need to make haste slowly. For instance, in the joint statement of Nigeria’s Foreign Minister and his Equatorial Guinean counterpart, Simeon Oyono Esono Angue, on PBAT’s visit they noted in paragraph 6 that ‘the two Heads of State expressed their concerns over insecurity, instability and emerging crises across Africa. They reaffirmed the need to promote African-led solutions to African problems and committed to limiting foreign interference in the continent.’

In this regard, when is a problem typically African? Manifestations of terrorism in Africa are not necessarily African in design, in target, in containment strategy, etc. Consequently, how do Nigeria and Equatorial Guinea want to prevent foreign intervention when it comes to the global war on terror? This question is raised in light of the Malabo Declaration on Terrorism and Unconstitutional Changes of Government and the Abuja Process for Consolidating Regional Counter-Terrorism Approaches. In summary, should PBAT be seen as a democrat or as a dictator? Does the impression given above that the philosophies of Lee Kuan Yew might have impacted on PBAT also imply that he has become despotic in political governance? 

Media reports had it yesterday, 6th September, 2024, that Chief Ajuri Ngelale, PBAT’s spokesman and Special Presidential Envoy on Climate Action, and Chairman of the Presidential steering Committee on Project Evergreen, has resigned all his portfolios. What is relevant to our discussion here is the dimension brought to it by Jaafar Jafaar, a Nigerian investigative journalist. He reportedly noted on Saturday, 7th September, in his X handle that ‘Ajuri Ngelale is the first presidential spokesman whose television face and Oyibo accent – not PR or media expertise – earned him the plum job. Tinubu’s family brought him for cosmetic effect to smarten the president’s geriatric outlook and guttural voice. But soon afterwards, his inflated sense of importance and domineering attitude put him at odds with other powers around the president.’

If Chief Ngelale has a feel of self-importance and a domineering attitude, it should be expected. He cannot be a presidential spokesperson, whose responsibilities require full time attention on whatever is officially and officiously said about PBAT, and at the same time still be expected to operate fully as Special Presidential Envoy on Climate Action, and as Chairman of the Presidential steering Committee on Project Evergreen. This is a manifestation of a ‘Jack of all Trades’ policy that should not have been entertained.

Additionally, but more disturbingly, Jafaar Jafaar said his appointment was not based on PR (Public Relations) or media expertise but on his ‘television face and oyibo accent.’ A television face connotes a good look. ‘Oyibo,’ if I am not wrong, is a Yoruba word meant to connote the white man or whoever is behaving like a white man. By implication, his accent which is that of a white man is what was considered in appointing him ab initio. If the observation is true, it is most unfortunate if expertise had not been considered for purposes of political appointments. More unfortunate is the general arrogance of people in political positions who always arrogate to themselves the better-than-thou, the holier-than-thou attitudes. If PBAT is currently facing mounting criticisms of governance, can the appointment into very sensitive political offices of people on the basis of wrong physiognomic prognosis not be at the epicentre of PBAT’s many problems?

Without any whiff of doubt, there is nothing wrong in resigning because of one’s family concerns. The family must always take priority. So must one’s health. Commitment in the Civil and Public Service cannot but be largely defined by a settled home, a healthy family. In fact, there is no healthy nation without healthy families. However, if Chief Ngelale noted in his letter of resignation that he looks ‘forward to returning to full-time national service when time, healing, and fate permit.’ Additionally, ‘I respectfully ask for some privacy for my family and me during this time,’ he said. Privacy for the family is still pardonable but for the ex-spokesman, it is not because he is a public functionary. He cannot and should not expect that offices would be reserved for him until he is ready. His resignation letter clearly reflects how Nigerian politicians behave and why PBAT is currently challenged by crisis of governance and legitimacy at various levels. This should not be. It is against this background that ‘Emi l’Okan’ policy attitude should be further explained and understood.

Without doubt, ‘Emi l’Okan’ is an activist policy and quest for fairness and justice in the political governance system of Nigeria. It is an expression of self-claim, self-assertion, self-esteem and self-seeking agenda. More importantly, it is also a direct guiding and philosophical principle of PBAT’s governance of Nigeria. Most unfortunately, PBAT’s tenure as President is limited to four years. The chances of re-election in 2027 are still uncertain. This uncertainty probably explains why he is always in a haste to achieve his set development objectives, some of which are good and some of which are killing Nigeria softly. Emi l’Okan should not be ordinarily interpreted to imply ‘I am born to rule,’ but as an opportunistic turn to help develop Nigeria by drastically reducing the high level of institutional corruption, political chicanery and violent irrationalities. PBAT is on the trial scale and is battling for survival. Influence politics of the West, boko haramism, armed banditry, regional disintegration, deepening agitation for separate existence of many sub-nationalities in Nigeria, etc., are some of the challenges warranting that PBAT must begin to reflect on the need to make haste slowly in order to stop the unconscious killing of Nigeria softly. The dictatorial approach of Lee Kuan Yew might have been good for Singapore. However, Nigeria’s environmental conditionings are different. Nigeria is more sophisticated.

Tinubu’s administration navigates a rock and a hard place over rising petrol prices, writes Bolaji Adebiyi

It looks like the calm before the storm. Last Tuesday, the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation Limited announced an increase in the pump price of petrol from N568 to N855 per litre in all its outlets in Lagos. It will cost N897 from N617 in Abuja and more in other places. The major and independent marketers have since adjusted their pump prices to around N1000 and above depending on the distance from Lagos, the product’s central loading bay.  

Expectedly, reactions to the upward movement of the essential product’s price have been angry, but mercifully, they have remained at the level of grumbling. The usual agitators against price hikes, the organised labour and organised private sector, have ventilated their views, rejecting the upward adjustment. They said it would worsen the inflationary trend in the country and make nonsense of the N70,000 new minimum wage scheduled to take effect from May 2024. “A steep price hike would likely trigger widespread price increases, potentially reversing the recent easing in inflation as seen in July and leading to another surge in inflation rates,” said Chinyere Almona, director-general of the Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

The opposition Peoples Democratic Party also joined the fray, describing the increase as an anti-people act that would only increase the citizens’ mystery.  “The secretive and corrupt administration of the petroleum sector and persistent increase in fuel price under the Tinubu administration, without due regard to the wellbeing of the people, is akin to pushing Nigerians to the wall and daring them to do their worst,” its publicity secretary, Debo Ologunagba, said in a statement on Wednesday in which he added that skilful and transparent management of the petroleum sector would have kept the product’s price at N250 per litre.

It is easy to see how opportunistic and unrealistic the PDP’s claim is as it plays on the general sentiments against the price hike. Yet, during the 2023 electioneering, all the leading presidential candidates indicated their intention to remove the petrol subsidy, recognising its debilitating impact on the country’s economy. Without a doubt, the upward adjustment of fuel prices occasioned by the implementation of the subsidy removal policy in May 2023 had combined with the floating of the local currency to institute rising inflation, which stood at 34.2 per cent in June 2024.

However, inflation was not the only consequence of the twin macroeconomic reform policies. They also brought massive increases in government revenues, which rose to N9.1 trillion in the first half of 2024. The challenge is that this would not have translated to a concrete positive impact on the people’s living standards, as the rising cost of living, particularly food, forced many citizens to the streets last month. That being the case, why did the administration allow a further hike in the product’s price?

The fact of the matter was that shortly after President Bola Tinubu’s May 2023 announcement, forcing petrol prices to move from N197 to N480/N570/N617 per litre, the subsidy gradually returned with the floating of the naira in June of that year. With the landing cost inching towards N720 as the forex rate approached N638/$, the government could not toy with the idea of a further rise in the product’s price, hence its decision to ask the NNPCL to absorb the shortfall.

A few insiders cautioned that this interventionist policy was bound to fail, except the local currency’s value increased. With the naira/dollar rate hovering around N1600/$ and the price of crude hitting $84 per barrel, it was a matter of time before the landing cost of petrol would climb to N1200. Dispensing the product at N568/N617 meant a shortfall of N633/N583, which the national oil company had to bear. The policy’s unsustainability would soon become apparent.

Burdened by the rising shortfall, the national oil company asked the president for permission to increase its product’s price, meaning Nigerians would pay about N1300 – N1500 per litre. A hesitant president would not bulge until it became apparent that unless he did, the NNPCL would not only go down but also imperil the national economy. Faced with a $6 billion debt owed vendors, further product importation had become impossible, forcing nationwide scarcity and kilometre-long queues at filling stations.

At that point, the president met the NNPCL halfway, approving a phased bridging of the shortfall. This would enable the company to cut its losses by increasing its price to N855/N897 in the first instance, pending the coming onstream of alleviative measures such as the sale of crude in naira to the 650,000 barrels per day Dangote Refinery and others, who are expected to begin production in the last quarter of the year.  

The hope is that Dangote Refinery, which started producing petrol this week, will be able to improve product availability through its estimated 25,000 litres per day. There are other hopes. The proposed naira-denominated crude sale to locals will help preserve foreign reserves by 30-40 per cent, as a large portion of the $600 million spent monthly on fuel imports would be saved. It is estimated that this would translate to savings of $7.3 billion annually. The refinery will also help to reduce the army of unemployed persons with its estimated recruitment of 57,000 workers.

The promise of this initiative will be handy in the government’s efforts to convince an angry citizenry to bear with it in the coming weeks as the overall implications of the upward adjustment of petrol prices begin to manifest. It could not have been an easy choice for the president, who had to make a hard choice despite his concern for ordinary citizens. The petrol subsidy had drained national resources, increasing astronomically annually. It took N2 trillion in 2022, rising to N3.6 trillion in 2023. Despite its withdrawal from last year, it is estimated to gulp N5.4 trillion by the end of the year.

Meanwhile, many Nigerians know that most of the funds are lost to corruption, official inefficiencies, and massive smuggling across the border. Yet, these resources need to be freed to provide the critical infrastructure required to develop and grow the economy for the betterment of the country and its people. The challenge, as Chinyere Almona, director-general of the Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry, puts it, is that “Balancing the need for fiscal responsibility with the economic impact on citizens is a complex task for the government.”

So, it’s for President Tinubu, the choice between the devil and the deep blue sea. Which one has he chosen now?

Adebiyi is the media assistant to the Minister of Budget and Economic Planning, Senator Abubakar Bagudu

Age shouldn’t be a major consideration for sitting for examinations or entering tertiary institutions, writes Monday Philips Ekpe

The Minister of Education, Prof. Tahir Mamman, probably didn’t know what he was getting into when he directed the West African Examinations Council (WAEC) and National Examinations Council (NECO) not to register students who are less than 18 years old for the next round of secondary school exit examinations. Contrary to the overriding insinuations that he was introducing a strange criterion for sitting for the mandatory examinations and entry into tertiary institutions, the man was only attempting to resuscitate an extant, albeit largely overlooked or forgotten, law.

The bashing Prof. Mamman has received in his attempt to reposition a sector in dire need of innovations and real advancement is, perhaps, self-inflicted and avoidable. It appears that not much, if any at all, consultation was done before going public with the directive which has now been suspended till next year. Again, even the appropriateness of this shift, especially in terms time and readiness for implementation, is debatable and is already being challenged in informed and uninformed quarters. The education helmsman shouldn’t lose sight of the sensitivity of the position he occupies. That ministry didn’t particularly enjoy any remarkable glory and progress under his predecessor, Malam Adamu Adamu, accountant and the country’s longest holder of the portfolio.

Mamman must have learnt that there’s often a divide between the pursuit of issues that may have legal backing and soft variables like people’s comprehension, perceptions and feelings. It is, therefore, not surprising that there’re arguments against the minister’s move which, typical of the Nigerian public discourse, range from the logical to the silly and absurd. Making exceptions for exceptionally gifted children in setting age benchmarks in this discussion, for instance, can’t seriously be faulted. But going to the extent of casting aspersions on Mamman’s geographical background smacks of ignorance, arrogance, condescension and prejudice of the worst kinds. One commentator even went to the ridiculous extent of suggesting that education should be placed under the care of southerners who value it instead of northerners who do not. Yes, the contestation has gone that low, sadly. It mustn’t degenerate further, however.  

One truth about the 18-year age limit for being admitted for higher learning is that it does have benefits and justifications making it strong enough to adopt and perpetuate in many nations with respected and enduring educational systems. In the United States, most European countries and elsewhere, fresh intakes by universities are expected to have clocked 18 or 19 years. In those places, experiments were carried out which showed that the developmental psychology of children, adolescents, young adults and adults had a direct relationship with the ability to absorb what is taught and relate with external factors. In general terms, pupils and students within certain age brackets are expected to possess mental and emotional strengths that are utilised within the groups and identifiable by the larger society.

“All things being equal” is a common phrase in the social sciences, especially. The main basis for the expression is that most fields under this family of knowledge deal with human behaviour which can’t be classified along strict lines because of its diversity and unpredictability. Yet, for researches to be thorough and meaningful and then attain credibility and worth, conclusions must be reached. The closures that stand the test of time are the ones relied upon to advance the cause(s) of humanity. That doesn’t in any way make all conclusions sacrosanct, though. The very idea of change and the dynamism of the human experience demand a reasonable amount of flexibility in every area of development.

It makes sense to give credit to the framers of the nation’s educational direction in the 1980s which produced the 6-3-3-4 schooling format. The success or otherwise of the plan which has continued to be debated on various platforms is a different subject. With skill acquisition as a prime rationale for the scheme, it was designed with the ages of school goers in mind – age five to enter pre-primary school, age six to start a six-year primary school and then another six years to be split between junior and senior secondary schools. At 18 years, students were deemed ripe to pursue their education at the post-secondary level. In all, cognitive preparedness which was tied to age considerations was paramount. A minister of education in that era and an impactful and foremost Nigerian educationist, Prof. Babatunde Fafunwa, staunchly defended what Mamman is being crucified for by a section of the citizenry.

Many people campaigning to damn the age clause point to the sterling, astounding intellectual capacities of some kids – an undeniable fact of life. Michael Kearney holds the Guinness World Record of the world’s youngest university graduate. He was 10 years in 1994 when he achieved the feat. Before and after then, many others, Nigerians inclusive, have proved conservatives and biological age puritans wrong. The existence of those who break through kindergarten or teenage limitations and categorisations to hit phenomenal accomplishments is, therefore, not in doubt.

But there’s more to schooling than the knowledge of subjects and courses, hence the traditional awarding of degrees, diplomas and certificates after satisfying the dual conditions of character and learning. The philosophy behind the requirement of the two sides of the coin is grounded in the fact that the mastery of different disciplines is as vital as being able to get along in and contribute to any society.

Unless children are confirmed to be unusually brilliant, they really shouldn’t be rushed through the stages. And only established mechanisms should determine who these individuals are, not the whims and ambitions of parents. Educating a child goes beyond the walls of conventional schools, after all, something that ought to gain the attention of relevant stakeholders. Nigeria’s first female professor of psychiatry, Olayinka Omigbodun, put this truth succinctly: “Apart from academics, there are many other areas that help a child to develop and mature and to be more intelligent, like music. Learning how to play the piano not only helps overall maturity but also encourages discipline, and stimulates the brain, thereby encouraging brain health, which is so essential for the journey of life….

“Learning to sing and play the drums, learning to draw and paint, sports and games, reading story books, and not just academic books, all encourage brain health, help to develop academic, emotional, social intelligence which are all important and not just academic performance…. Studies reveal that there is a direct relationship in performance at university level and the number of story books that a child reads, particularly in early childhood.” A clear need to broaden our understanding and application of education.  

American clinical psychologist, Elaine Aaron, also once identified the elements required for optimal corporate functionality as “people who think carefully, feel deeply, notice the subtle details, and end up having the big picture.” Referring to this hypothesis, the Chancellor of Afe Babalola University, Ado Ekiti, and a prominent antagonist of the age restriction policy, Aare Afe Babalola, declared that “these four qualities are essential to nation-building. Age is not one of them, neither is it a requirement to obtain any of them. Maturity is not a function of age. Rather, it is a function of the mindset, emotional intelligence, and the ability to understand oneself and the world.

“Maturity is earned from training the mind, not from aging. Consequently, we have many adults who are all but mature in the way they think, act, or relate with others and the world they live in. Conversely, we have children who have defied all odds and achieved even the seemingly impossible.” The 94 years old SAN, super achiever and icon is well-positioned to render this principled, empirical counsel.

Dr Ekpe is a member of THISDAY Editorial Board

And it’s a wrap! The 2024 Nigerian Bar Association Annual General Conference (NBA-AGC) themed “Pressing Forward: A National Posture for Rebuilding Nigeria” ended last Thursday, with the inauguration of Afam Osigwe, SAN as the NBA President 2024-2026. We wish him an innovative and successful tenure. 

Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala’s Keynote Address

The Keynote Address delivered by Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala at the opening ceremony of the NBA-AGC, gave me renewed confidence that the subject-matter of many of my discourses are on point. The title of her Address was “A New Social Contract for Nigeria’s Future”. On June 13, 2023, I had written my own piece, “Social Contract: The A-Side Vs. The B-Side” and coined my own two-fold Social Contract between the Government and the Governed (the Citizens/People), and between the Citizens themselves. The first leg of my theory is that the main obligation of the Government to Nigerians is contained in Chapter II of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended in 2023)(the Constitution), that is, the achievement of the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy, while the second leg, is contained in Section 24 of the same Constitution, the duties of the citizen, that is, the responsibility of the people to the Government, and then, to themselves. I concluded that both parties had certainly breached the Social Contract, either by non-performance, or not performing in accordance with the terms of the contract. See the case of Pan Bisbilder (Nig) Ltd v First Bank (Nig) Ltd 2000 1 SC 71 per Emmanuel Olayinka Ayoola, JSC. Dr Okonjo-Iweala however, stated that Nigeria requires a new social contract to put the country on the right path to economic growth. 

1) Cross-Party, Cross-Society Agreement and Good Policy Consistency 

As Dr Okonjo-Iweala looked at the social contract on the Government’s side, she used Peru as part of her case study (as well as Singapore, South Korea and India). She said that when she visited Peru recently, she expected their economy to be as toxic as their political environment appeared to be, but, surprisingly, there seemed to be a “cross-party, cross-society agreement that certain things in the economy, the country, policy and society are sacrosanct and shall not be touched or changed when administrations change”; therefore, their economy was in decent shape. That is, they have good policy consistency, no-go areas that are perceived to advance the progress of their country, which they do not allow politics to affect – possibly a component of the social contract subscribed to by all Peruvian politicians irrespective of what party they belong to, so as not to disturb the economic development of their country.  

Nigeria neither has that cross-party, cross-society agreement, nor good policy consistency. On the contrary, we have bad policy consistency. We have a penchant for keeping bad policies, for example, a needlessly huge government structure complete with duplication and triplication of efforts and its accompanying astronomical cost of operation; extravagant, unnecessary government expenditure, using the excuse that that’s how it has always been done, and so the present Government is simply following laid down policy set by previous governments, instead of discarding such wasteful spending – like renovating government residential buildings for unjustifiable amounts, every four or eight years, depending on when the occupying official changes, and paying Legislators a severance package at the end of every legislative cycle, and then giving Legislators, including those who are returnees, sign-on benefits too, as if they are Freshers! As far as I’m concerned, such expenditure is needless and senseless, particularly in a country that is struggling financially. Dr Okonjo-Iweala stated that it is when economic and social policies are bad, that politics should intervene; but, when they are good, “why fix what is not broken”. Sadly, we mostly seem to do the opposite – we do not fix what is broken!

We also have a culture where, even if policies are good, the opposition discredits everything the government in power is doing or seeks to do. When the Jonathan administration sought to remove the fuel subsidy, the policy was opposed by majority of Nigerians, including many who are now part of this government’s administration. So, was it just a matter of opposing the fuel subsidy removal for opposing sake? While majority of Nigerians still oppose the removal of the fuel subsidy because of the hardship it has unleashed on them, why the change of heart for government officials who opposed it before, but, implemented the removal with ‘immediate effect and automatic alacrity’ (as Chief Eleyinmi of Village Headmaster used to say) upon assumption of office, and are now defending the policy? 

In fact, the three major 2023 Presidential Candidates had vowed to remove the fuel subsidy, if they won the election. For each of them to intend to remove the fuel subsidy, it means that this policy may not have been wrong; the problem could be the implementation policy. Maybe if the policy had been implemented during the Jonathan administration in 2012, when Nigeria’s economy was more buoyant than it is today and could take more shocks (pre-Covid-19 Pandemic), the situation wouldn’t be as dire as it is today. It appears that in a country where politicians put the country and people first, the opposition are more likely to support a good policy that would be beneficial for all. But, when the ethos is to discredit one another’s policies, even the good ones, in order to gain popularity, all that develops is a culture of self-centredness and vindictiveness of the political class, which is antithetical to nation building.

2) A Culture of Corruption and Self-Centredness

In Nigeria, Government officials have also been known to enter into contracts that are detrimental to Nigeria, so long as they derive personal benefits from same – another culture of self-centredness/selfishness and corruption. Aside from the fact that Lawyers who know nothing about international/commercial agreements are selected to work on contract documentation with foreigners (possibly as a result of corruption, nepotism and the like), Government via its officials, have been accused of entering into fraudulent agreements with foreign parties that Nigeria may not necessarily be able to perform, and then connive with the foreign contracting parties to benefit from penalty clauses arising from breach. During the Breakout Session with the Attorney-General of the Federation, one of the Commentators called upon his office to do a proper review of all foreign contracts.

The recent Ogun State v Zhongshan Ltd, Nigeria v P & ID and Air Nigeria/Ethiopian Airlines, may be examples. The Minister of Aviation, Festus Keyamo, SAN, apparently made a presentation to President Tinubu, stating that the deal he inherited from Hadi Sirika’s tenure regarding Nigeria’s transaction with Ethiopian Airlines, wouldn’t be beneficial to Nigeria! Again, in P & ID, which gas would Nigeria have supplied to P & ID to fulfil its contractual obligations, when we are still actively involved in gas flaring instead of harnessing same? From the beginning, the contract didn’t appear to be workable on Nigeria’s part. I don’t know whether the agreement between Governor Daniel’s Ogun State administration and Zhongshan was good or bad, and why the subsequent Amosun administration cancelled it, but surely, even if the agreement was detrimental to Ogun State, there should have been a thorough review of the agreement before terminating it, in order to avoid the ensuing unpleasant consequences that Nigeria is now experiencing. All this is evidence that successive Nigerian governments/sub-nationals appear to be nonchalant about Sections 14(2)(b) & 16 of the Constitution, which are concerned with the welfare of the people and achieving optimum economic objectives for the benefit of Nigerians. What seems more sacrosanct in Nigeria, are economic policies that benefit private pockets, not the country.

Ingredients for Nigeria’s New Social Contract

Dr Okonjo-Iweala admitted that Nigeria isn’t where it should be, “and that’s why we are still discussing nation-building more than 60 years after independence”. 60+ years ago, South Korea was in a worse situation than Nigeria; it’s now a First World country; Nigeria is still under-developed. Before Lee Kuan Yew (LKY), Singapore was a mess. Today, Singapore is prosperous in more ways than one; even its Singapore General Hospital, a Government, Public Hospital, is one of the best in the world. 

Dr Okonjo-Iweala believes that Nigeria needs a new social contract, as the basis for “the virtuous circles of reform, growth, peace, security and trust that have too long eluded us”. She is right. She advocated an agreement on policies and parameters which must be institutionalised by enacting them into law or inserting them into the Constitution, only to be changed by means of National Referendum. But, this cannot be achieved without the buy-in of Government and politicians, as it is mostly their failure in governance that has set Nigeria on a trajectory of failure. Dr Okonjo-Iweala said she  wouldn’t play the blame game, but, I must respectfully differ from her position because I believe that some things must be said; if not, Government will continue to take Nigerians for granted.  

Dr Okonjo-Iweala’s first ingredient for this new social contract she said, must be a shared understanding that security of life and property is a priority, without which there can be no economic or social development. Take agriculture for example, if the sector could even be half as productive as it was in the days before oil became Nigeria’s main source of revenue, it would not only create employment in the rural areas, there would be vertical integration and export opportunities, which would rake in good income for the country. However, because of insurgency, banditry and herdsmen wahala, people are no longer able to go to their farms, and agricultural output has dropped significantly. Dr Okonjo-Iweala stressed that the weaponisation of security for political purposes must stop – that politicians instigating violence to show that their opponents cannot govern, is unacceptable. She also mentioned that the understanding by all, that the security of our national assets is paramount, is crucial. As for me whether it’s corruption/government officials plundering our common wealth, or Nigerians engaging in crude oil theft, such criminal activities undermine Nigeria’s economic growth and financial well-being. 

Just as the administration of justice sector talks about the importance of the independence of the Judiciary for optimal efficiency, Dr Okonjo-Iweala emphasised the importance of the independence of the CBN. See Section 1(3) of the Central Bank of Nigeria Act 2007 (CBN Act). She denounced the use of CBN as a “fiscal agent, asking for printing of Naira beyond the agreed Way and Means limits”, and the use of other manipulative tactics through the CBN on the economy (see generally the functions of the CBN in the CBN Act); transparency in FAAC Allocations and full disclosure to citizens about how the funds are being utilised; sensible limits for public debt, and other measures to get Nigeria back on the right track. The right environment for domestic and foreign direct investment, is also needed for economic growth and a healthy balance sheet. 

Conclusion 

My take away from Dr Okonjo-Iweala’s Address firstly, is that it is still possible to steer Nigeria back on the path of prosperity and progress. If we want to press forward and build a better Nigeria, Section 14(2)(a), (b) & (c) of the Constitution which hitherto appears to be little more than a decoration in the Constitution, must be a very active part of the new social contract between Government and the people. While Government must take security more seriously as it is the bedrock of any progressive society, it must not only acknowledge, but bear in mind that sovereignty belongs to the people and they have a constitutional right to participate in their government, such involvement going beyond simply voting. The people cannot continue to be treated as dormant partners, who are only contacted during election season! Their needs must be prioritised. Government must also learn to be more truthful to the people. How many times has the resumption date of Nigeria’s refineries been shifted?

Secondly, Government and its officials must imbibe the patriotism, integrity, transparency, discipline, focus and determination of LKY – what I can do for my country for it to achieve its potential, not what my country can do for me. Once people are physically secure while going about their daily activities, and they get the feeling that Government is concerned about their welfare, introducing and implementing good policies, as opposed to indulging in lavish expenditure for themselves while the people are subjected to untold hardship, Nigerians will be more inclined to honour their part of the social contract by desisting from evil activities like oil theft, and stripping of infrastructure built for their benefit to sell for personal gain, for example, theft of clips from railway tracks, manhole covers and railings from bridges. It is poverty and unemployment that lead to disillusionment, crime and insecurity. When things are going well, who would want to die, let alone allow themselves to be brainwashed by ignorami to blow up themselves and others, in order to go and enjoy in Paradise?! It is the frustration from how bad things are, that makes people easy prey for such nonsense, believing that they have absolutely nothing to lose. If you look at the happier countries in the world, one may find that their suicide rate is low or zero. Suicide which was once rare in Nigeria, has become a common occurrence.

Thirdly, like the Peruvians, Nigerian politicians, across party lines, must subscribe to good governance; to the continuation of good policies irrespective of which administration introduced them, and the independence of institutions like the Judiciary. In short, Nigerians must agree that in this new social contract, all hands must be on deck to build a better country. But, once Government starts to renege on its part of the social contract, it usually has a catastrophic effect on the people and the country, as we are seeing in Nigeria today; the result of the breach of the social contract by successive governments.

Bola A. Akinterinwa 

One of Africa’s most critical problems is definitional in character. Non-African people think Africa’s problem is non-development. At a point in time, Africa was considered as underdeveloped. At another time, it is argued that Africa should not be insulted and that Africa is developing. Impression is given that, in the continuum of development, countries considered to be developed have already reached their crescendo of development. Perception of Africa as underdeveloped has been so critical that African leaders have had to acquiesce to it.

According to former US President, Donald Trump, Africa is a continent of pit holes. If you ask David Cameron about Africa, he can say Africa is fantastically corrupt and not just Nigeria. Those who were ignorant of Africa in the beginning considered their challenges in reaching the peoples of Africa, and therefore, called Africa the darkest continent and a discovery. They discovered Africa in the same mania of discovery of America. Put simply, Africa is dark and therefore needs sunlight. And most disturbingly, the developed countries has divided the whole world into three main types: First, Second, and Third World.

The first world is considered the developed countries in which the United States and Canada, UK, Germany, Japan, etc. belong. The second world is comprised essentially of the Eastern European and Asian countries, including Russia and China. Not much goodness is seen about Africa by the First and Second Worlds. The Third World is generally seen as a terra cognita for diseases and squalor, insecurity, and global setbacks. Even when diseases are carried from elsewhere to Africa by non-Africans, Africa is still held responsible for the carriage of the diseases. In this regard, has Africa any brighter future? Can there be any change of perception of Africa? Whatever is the case, we strongly observe that Africa’s future is bleak, not necessarily because of colonial impact and other external factors but essential because of Africa’s recidivist insecurity, France’s policy of Africa, and Nigeria’s uncertain future.

Africa: A Problem and a Desideratum

The world without Africa creates a void and can never be complete without Africa. A Welsh journalist and explorer, Henry Morton Stanley, claimed to have read more than 130 books on Africa before going to Africa on mission. He not only said Africa was a ‘dark,’ but also referred to Africa as the ‘darkest’ continent. In spite of this, Africa is still a desideratum for humanity. Africa is rich in various dimensions. For example, the Imouraren mine in Northern Niger is one of the world’s biggest uranium mines with an estimated 200,000 tonnes. The industrial powers need the uranium for production of nuclear energy. With this production output, Niger Republic remains one of the biggest uranium producers in the world. This is apart from Namibia’s 470,100 metric tons of uranium in recoverable resources as of 2021 which was the largest amount in Africa. South Africa, with its 320,900 recoverable resources remained the second main uranium producer in Africa.

In the same vein, the Democratic Republic of the Congo is on record to have exceptional natural resources like cobalt, copper, gold, coal and iron-ore deposits, in addition to being the world’s second-largest rainforest, and having offshore petroleum, and bauxite. The DRC accounts for 70% of global production and the world’s second-largest producer of copper. The DRC is also the leading producer of coltan. All these resources are from the so-called darkest continent and the resources are indispensable for the industrial growth and development of Europe.

In terms of human resources, Africa accounts for 18.3% of total world population in 2024 and is rated as number 2 among the regions of the world, with 1.22 billion people. Explained differently, Africa is the second-largest continent by geographic area, covering about 30 million square kilometres. It is also the second-most populous continent globally. Of the total population of Africa, black Africans account for 75% while the descendants of the Dutch, English, French and Germans account for 14%. They came to Africa as from the end of the 17th century.

What is noteworthy about the geo-political notion of Africa is best explained by international politics which has different typologies of Africa. First, the international community considers Africa as one of the regions of the world, and therefore divides it into five sub-regions: West, North, Central, East, and Southern. But for various reasons of force majeure, and particularly for continental political unity and economic integration, the 1991 Abuja Treaty Establishing the African Economic Community redefined Africa not as a region. In other words, it redefined the UN definition of sub-region as a region, and thus making Africa  a continent of five regions, with the possibility of carving out sub-regions out of each region or from two or three regions (see Articles 1(d) and 1(e) of the Treaty.

In this regard, while African leaders have been complying with the redefined concept of Africa of five regions, the international community does not appear to be complying with the African redefinition. Whereas, the ultimate objective of the African leaders’ redefinition is to fast track Africa’s growth and development through integration. The belief is that if integration is promoted through regionalisation, the future would be quite brighter for Africa. And true enough, the West Africa region is on record to be the most advanced in terms of regional integration in Africa. Why should African leaders be talking about an Africa of five regions and the international community has not been compelled to adopt Africa’s redefinition? Is it the world that must give name to Africa or what Africans say what their name is?

Secondly, there is the concept of Maghrebin Africa and Africa South of the Sahara. Maghrebin Africa refers to Arab Maghreb or Northwest Africa or the western part of the Arab world. The Arab Maghreb is a major issue not only for Africa, but also a foreign policy dilemma for Europe and America. The Arab Maghreb comprises Algeria, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia. Initially, Mauritania was geo-politically part of West Africa, when the country was part of the ECOWAS. Mauritania left the ECOWAS in December 2000 to join the Arab Maghreb. Morocco is on record to have sought membership of the European Union and also the membership of the ECOWAS. In other words, Morocco wants to be European, African, and Arab State simultaneously. The European Union and the ECOWAS are yet to respond favourably to Morocco’s request. 

The problem at the American level is different from organisational membership. The United States wants an Arab country to become a Permanent Member of the United Nations Security Council. The requirement for UNSC membership includes being a region of the world and the Arab world does not constitute a region of the world. The US therefore not only wants to take advantage of Egypt, being also considered as an African country, but also have one of the two seats reserved for Africa for Egypt. By implication, Nigeria and South Africa are to contest for the other seat. Besides, rather than have Nigeria and South Africa as Permanent Members, US strategic calculation is not only to have Egypt, but also Germany and Japan as permanent members. While the membership of Egypt is to serve the purposes of consolidating and strengthening US ties with the Arab world, especially because of Israel, the Germano-Japanese membership is to ensure more of their voluntary contributions to the maintenance of international peace and security. 

Thus, there is the Africa of multi-coloured people in Southern Africa, the Africa of the Arabs, and the African people south of the Sahara. The essence of the foregoing classification is to suggest that the consideration of a Permanent Seat for Africa has to be clearly defined in terms of the beneficiary. Egyptian candidature is apparently for the Arab world which is not a region by UN definitional criteria. Nigeria is the most eminently qualified to have a seat on merit for Africa south of the Sahara, having been contributing to UN peace support operations since 1960. South Africa only came into the picture in 1994. Even though Egypt and South Africa contribute more than Nigeria in terms of assessed and voluntary dues to the UN, Nigeria’s Africa policy makes her stand out above all others. African leaders, particularly Nigerian leaders, should not wake up one day to discover that final decisions on the matter had been taken to their detriment. This is one major concern that explains why Africa’s future may be bleak

Thirdly, Africa of 54 countries is now the equivalent of one developed country in global politics. France started this politics with the introduction of Franco-African summits during which the Francophone African countries collectively meet with France rotationally in France and Africa. While many observers see the development from a post-colonial angle, the European-Africa, India-Africa, China-Africa, Japan-Africa, summits are not driven by colonial considerations, but by non-belief in sovereign equality. Again most unfortunately, African leaders do not see this as a major problem. They are very happy to be summoned to Washington and have a handshake with the most powerful leader in global politics, etc.

And true enough, Africa is divided against itself in many ways while the world is united against it in terms of exploitation of Africa’s mineral resources. Several African countries still behave along colonial linguistic factors. The signing of the Alliance des États du Sahel (AES) is not simply about common defence against the ECOWAS military threats and ultimatum, but also common opposition to French language and civilisation. Besides, Egypt and Ethiopia are currently at logger heads over the building of dam on the River Nile. Ethiopia, a landlocked territory, wants to have access to the sea peacefully or forcefully. Egypt is vehemently opposed. The future of this cannot but be disorderly as a result of Ethiopia’s order and Egypt’s counter-order. What about the threats of the Jihad? What about Nigeria’s own future? Can Africa be in peace if Nigeria does not have peace?. If Nigeria is destabilised, what will happy to the ECOWAS region? In fact, how do we address France as a neighbour of Nigeria by geo-political propinquity? 

Insecurity and Franco-Nigerian Factor

 The Franco-Nigerian factor is quite complex in explaining why Africa’s future may be bleak. On the one hand, Africa is a major definiendum of the foreign policies of both France and Nigeria. While France maintains a privileged relationship with Francophone Africa, and especially with the immediate neighbours of Nigeria, Africa is the centrepiece of Nigeria’s foreign policy. Consequently, Africa is necessarily an instrument for rivalry. France does not want Nigeria to be able to influence the Francophone African countries against her and Nigeria’s foreign policy stand is not different: prevent France from influencing the Francophone neighbours from being used to her detriment. Even though the ASS countries have strained their relationships with France, it cannot be rightly suggested that the strained relationship is helpful to Nigeria’s foreign policy interest. The point of emphasis here is that Franco-Nigeria rivalry has a centrifugal character in intra-African relations. 

The policy of democratisation, which gave birth to the AU and ECOWASzero tolerance for unconstitutional changes of government in Africa, has its origin in France. At the sixteenth Franco-African summit, held on June 19-21, 1990, at the Brittany seaside resort of La Baule, there were 35 African countries represented by 22 Heads of State or Government, including King Hassan II of Morocco. President François Mitterrand of France told his audience that ‘France is determined to pursue its policy and therefore its aid to Africa,’ that the developed world should ‘renounce certain of their rights’ in order to have funds or a sort of guaranteed fund for developing nations, and that the ‘Western world must stop giving lessons to Africans ‘who have their own conscience and history.’ 

While France is telling the world that the people of Africa have their own conscience and history and therefore should not be dictated to, the same President Mitterrand made it clear to the assembly of Heads of State that there would no longer be development aid to any country that does not accept to democratise. In other words, democratisation became a conditionality for the grant of development assistance. President Mitterrand’s conditionality ignored the fact that the African people had conscience and history, and also knew how to define their own future. France presented and still presents herself as the spokesperson for Africa. And true enough, France, under President Mitterrand, had been calling for the establishment of a special international fund to assist under-developed countries.

Perhaps more interestingly, Mitterrand had it that ‘colonialism is not dead. It is no longer the colonialism of states, it is the colonialism of business.’ To what extent can the colonisation of states be separated from the colonisation of business? Who supports businesses or guarantees them? Who protects them? Are there no government businesses? Whatever is the case, President Mitterrand said the time of aiding and abetting dictatorial regimes was over, and that the new trend to follow is democracy. 

However, empirical studies have shown that France only complied with her own set rules when it is convenient. The cases of constitutional fraud in the Côte d’Ivoire of Alassane Ouattara and the Chad of Idris Déby Itno are good illustrations. President Ouattara manipulated the Ivoirian constitution to ensure a third term in power. In Chad, when Déby Itno president lost his live at the battle field, his son was installed by the military in contradiction of the Chadian constitution which requires the President of the National Assembly to succeed and organise elections within the following six months. France closed her eyes not to see this irregularity. In fact, the African Union of zero tolerance for unconstitutional change of government in Africa was mute and blind. The question cannot but be quo vadis Africa?

The coup d’état in Niger is a major issue in Franco-Nigerian relations. Nigeria has a policy of non-acceptance of exploitation and exportation of Africa’s mineral resources for the development of Europe but to the detriment of the interest of the host country of exploitation. As noted above, Niger Republic is one of the biggest producers of uranium which is being exploited by Orano, a French company, in the twin towns of Arlit and Akokan, 900 km northeast of Niamey.

As noted by Emmanuel Grégoire in his “Niger: A State Rich in Uranium (Hérodote, 2011/3, no 142), there is ‘insecurity resulting from the presence of AQIM in Mali’s territory, which was refuelled by western hostages in Niger… The renewed interest shown by the international community in Niger’s uranium deposits, and the revenues the country hopes to realise helps facilitate the task (underdevelopment). However, the economic situation is equally murky.  Due to the recent emergence of China, now Niger’s second largest trading partner behind the former colonial power, a repositioning of geopolitics is underway as French hegemony is challenged. The Areva group has for over forty years imported more than 120,000 metric tons of Nigerien uranimate to supply French nuclear power plants.’

In this regard, what has Niger Republic really gained from the French exploitation of its uranium resources? In a Press Release by TNH on 10 October 2007 (see reliefweb.int), ‘as the global demand for nuclear energy rises, analysts say the large amount of uranium in Niger is not a benefit to the country’s people but adds to the serious problems facing the region.’ In fact, the revenue from uranium is a major reason for the demands of an armed militia, Niger Movement for Justice that has been fighting Niger’s army, and asking for an equitable distribution of the revenues from uranium mining.’ In essence, Jeremy Keenan, a fellow at the University of Bristol, says ‘the fact that the uranium is there is more negative than positive at the moment. It’s a curse on the region and the people of the region. It is potentially a very volatile situation.’ Put differently, if it is generally argued that ‘the people of Niger have not benefited from the 100,000 tonnes of uranium extracted over the past 36 years and Niger is the world’s third to fifth-ranking producer of uranium, producing over 3,000 tonnes of uranium a year,’ what future has Niger Republic as a poor country? How do we explain 36 years of uranium mining by France and without gain to the people of Niger? Could this have been an exaggeration by anti-French people? Additionally, is the future of the exploitation of Niger’s uranium not a matter of replacement of French hegemony with either that of China or Russia, meaning that Nigeria’s foreign policy will still continue to be seriously challenged? Will the exploitation of the uranium resources stop with the declaration of the French as unwanted? Can Nigeria ever have peace in the absence of Muammar Gaddafi’s prediction that Nigeria would never know peace until the country is divided into Muslim North and Christian South? If Nigeria cannot have peace, can there be peace in Africa? And if there is no peace in Africa, is Africa’s future not bleak?

The appointment of the acting chief justice presents yet another chance to cleanse and reposition the judiciary, writes MONDAY PHILIPS EKPE

Like the 22 eminent jurists before her, Honourable Justice Kudirat Motonmori Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun was elevated to the position of Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) on Friday last week. Her earliest comments after the swearing-in ceremony included her pledge to instil discipline in the nation’s third arm of government, sanitise the processes of appointing judicial officers, and generally preside over a better judiciary. Her repeated appeal for the mutual understanding and participation of all the practitioners on the bench and at the bar in order to achieve those goals ended in a much-needed wish: “I believe that by the grace of God, at the end of my tenure, we should be able to have a judiciary that we will all be proud of.”

Shouting ‘Amen!’ to that prayer is certainly not a ritual. The greater motivation revolves around the very uniqueness of judicial institutions. Not being strangers to military adventurism in their country, Nigerians have witnessed several times the subjugation or outright rupturing of the executive and legislative arms of government in the event of coups. Even when the constitution was suspended, judges and magistrates were still mandated to dispense justice as defined and dictated by decrees.

The roles of benchers are accentuated in a democratic dispensation when freedoms are a given, when civil and human rights are intricately woven into the socio-political fabrics of society, and when representative and participatory governance is expected to flourish without limits. After 25 years of unbroken democratic practice, these noble characteristics ought to describe Nigeria. But, sadly and largely, they don’t. A chunk of the reasons why it can’t be defined in those terms rests with its judicial system and personnel that have failed on many grounds to rise to the occasion. While it would be unjust to heap all the blame for our failures of the judiciary, not holding it to account for rubbishing its own touted image as the “last hope of the common man” would be to deny a rooftop truth long acknowledged even by many members of its senior cadre.

The Nigerian judiciary has had to grapple with stubborn ailments that are yet to show signs of healing soon. Delays in the pursuit of justice, embarrassing and rampant unpredictability of judgments, inadequate modern amenities, credible allegations of corruption, poor funding, ever dwindling public respect, and other corrosive elements have conspired to keep the temples of justice on their knees – from the lowest rung throughout the federation to the apex court.

Unfortunately, the desperation of politicians to grab and cling onto power hasn’t helped. This tragedy has graduated from attempting to influence court rulings to actually infiltrating what is supposed to be the hallowed ranks of judges, thereby further undermining whatever is left of the integrity of the judiciary. The inauguration of 22 justices of the Court of Appeal and 15 judges of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court some months back dramatises this troubling situation. Not only that accusations of nepotistic favours trailed some of the appointments, the occasion itself and the celebrations that followed smelt like political carnivals, something antithetical to the globally recognised conservative profile of the judiciary.

Chidi Anselm Odinkalu, Senior Advocate of Nigeria, SAN, and law professor, put those excesses thus in his article, “Rule by Judges Is not Rule of Law”. According to the frontline advocate of the sanitisation of the Nigerian judiciary, “There was good reason for the politicians to make an obligation of their noisy presence at the swearing-in of the new judges. Section 14(2) of Nigeria’s constitution loudly proclaims that ‘sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria’ but under the colour of ‘rule of law’ and judicial independence, the judges have toppled the people and installed themselves as the ones who alone can elect politicians to positions of power and influence in Nigeria. Access to political office now, therefore, is a transaction that begins and rests with political access to judges. Having thus murdered the rule of law, what we now have is a rule by judges under which both political power and judicial office have become bereft of legitimacy. The victim is the public good.”

How punchy! The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has one standard response to political office seekers who lose to their opponents: “Go to court!”. Oftentimes, this gladdens those declared winners as they readily relish their unfettered, well-oiled access to the adjudicators. Courtesy of the laws that enable them to assume their posts and control the resources of state before the final determination of the cases, these beneficiaries happily exploit the unfair advantages to sabotage the general will. To date, very few rulings have been upturned to favour the petitioners. It’s difficult to exonerate the lordships in these circumstances.    

Bleak picture, no doubt, but I have a personal principle of looking for light, no matter how little. Luckily, reactions by some respected learned silks to the installation of 66 years old Kekere-Ekun provided just that. Wole Olanipekun, SAN: “We need to be sober and be reflective. Need to consider now as a profession where we were during the times of Adetokunbo Ademola, Teslim Elias, Uwais, and take back the legal profession to its old days of glory. Where did we misstep and how do we correct it?” Meaning, inevitable, remedial journey to the past!

Olisa Agbakoba, SAN: “The potential legacy of the new CJN is transformational and radical reform with the fundamental objective of case management driving how the courts work. It is very important that the reform needed is least infrastructure and appointment of judges. It is about a soft institution, which is about the way the court works. The court presently works on the 1844 model of the English court. The challenge for the new CJN is to turn this around.” The last major effort to transform the judiciary was initiated by the late CJN Dahiru Musdapher whose short-lived tenure resulted in the non-implementation of the report of the high-powered committee set up for the purpose. That document should be dusted up, reviewed and applied for efficiency and posterity.

Joseph Dauda, SAN: “The incoming CJN should push for the creation of constitutional courts at three tiers – trial, appellate and final – for the determination of political and other allied matters, thereby freeing the High Courts, Court of Appeal, and Supreme Courts to deal with regular cases that affect the livelihood of over 90 per cent of the populace that is presently neglected.” Clumsiness breeds inertia and institutional mediocrity. Eyes are on Madam CJN to bleed out the bad blood that threatens to choke the judiciary and let in oxygen.

Mike Ozekhome, SAN: “Ensure that judges know that they are being watched and they should be looked over their shoulders by their peers, not by members of the executive.… When this is being done by their peers themselves, then it will mean that it is the same judiciary that is reviewing itself…. There must be a mechanism whereby Courts of Appeal judgments must go one way if certain facts go the same way.” Internal censorship is required at this point to stem the decadence that is felt by most citizens. Doing so in a political environment dominated by the executive branch can be tasking but doable.

As the second woman to occupy the seat at the zenith of our judiciary, Kekere-Ekun must be aware of this momentous hour. Of course, wanting her to move every mountain she has met would be most unfair. But expecting her to shake the table and bring remarkable changes to a sector suffering from underachievement and occupational iniquities won’t be asking for too much.

Dr Ekpe is a member of THISDAY Editorial Board    

The appointment of the acting chief justice presents yet another chance to cleanse and reposition the judiciary, writes Monday Philips Ekpe

Like the 22 eminent jurists before her, Honourable Justice Kudirat Motonmori Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun was elevated to the position of Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) on Friday last week. Her earliest comments after the swearing-in ceremony included her pledge to instil discipline in the nation’s third arm of government, sanitise the processes of appointing judicial officers, and generally preside over a better judiciary. Her repeated appeal for the mutual understanding and participation of all the practitioners on the bench and at the bar in order to achieve those goals ended in a much-needed wish: “I believe that by the grace of God, at the end of my tenure, we should be able to have a judiciary that we will all be proud of.”

Shouting ‘Amen!’ to that prayer is certainly not a ritual. The greater motivation revolves around the very uniqueness of judicial institutions. Not being strangers to military adventurism in their country, Nigerians have witnessed several times the subjugation or outright rupturing of the executive and legislative arms of government in the event of coups. Even when the constitution was suspended, judges and magistrates were still mandated to dispense justice as defined and dictated by decrees.

The roles of benchers are accentuated in a democratic dispensation when freedoms are a given, when civil and human rights are intricately woven into the socio-political fabrics of society, and when representative and participatory governance is expected to flourish without limits. After 25 years of unbroken democratic practice, these noble characteristics ought to describe Nigeria. But, sadly and largely, they don’t. A chunk of the reasons why it can’t be defined in those terms rests with its judicial system and personnel that have failed on many grounds to rise to the occasion. While it would be unjust to heap all the blame for our failures of the judiciary, not holding it to account for rubbishing its own touted image as the “last hope of the common man” would be to deny a rooftop truth long acknowledged even by many members of its senior cadre.

The Nigerian judiciary has had to grapple with stubborn ailments that are yet to show signs of healing soon. Delays in the pursuit of justice, embarrassing and rampant unpredictability of judgments, inadequate modern amenities, credible allegations of corruption, poor funding, ever dwindling public respect, and other corrosive elements have conspired to keep the temples of justice on their knees – from the lowest rung throughout the federation to the apex court.

Unfortunately, the desperation of politicians to grab and cling onto power hasn’t helped. This tragedy has graduated from attempting to influence court rulings to actually infiltrating what is supposed to be the hallowed ranks of judges, thereby further undermining whatever is left of the integrity of the judiciary. The inauguration of 22 justices of the Court of Appeal and 15 judges of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court some months back dramatises this troubling situation. Not only that accusations of nepotistic favours trailed some of the appointments, the occasion itself and the celebrations that followed smelt like political carnivals, something antithetical to the globally recognised conservative profile of the judiciary.

Chidi Anselm Odinkalu, Senior Advocate of Nigeria, SAN, and law professor, put those excesses thus in his article, “Rule by Judges Is not Rule of Law”. According to the frontline advocate of the sanitisation of the Nigerian judiciary, “There was good reason for the politicians to make an obligation of their noisy presence at the swearing-in of the new judges. Section 14(2) of Nigeria’s constitution loudly proclaims that ‘sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria’ but under the colour of ‘rule of law’ and judicial independence, the judges have toppled the people and installed themselves as the ones who alone can elect politicians to positions of power and influence in Nigeria. Access to political office now, therefore, is a transaction that begins and rests with political access to judges. Having thus murdered the rule of law, what we now have is a rule by judges under which both political power and judicial office have become bereft of legitimacy. The victim is the public good.”

How punchy! The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has one standard response to political office seekers who lose to their opponents: “Go to court!”. Oftentimes, this gladdens those declared winners as they readily relish their unfettered, well-oiled access to the adjudicators. Courtesy of the laws that enable them to assume their posts and control the resources of state before the final determination of the cases, these beneficiaries happily exploit the unfair advantages to sabotage the general will. To date, very few rulings have been upturned to favour the petitioners. It’s difficult to exonerate the lordships in these circumstances.    

Bleak picture, no doubt, but I have a personal principle of looking for light, no matter how little. Luckily, reactions by some respected learned silks to the installation of 66 years old Kekere-Ekun provided just that. Wole Olanipekun, SAN: “We need to be sober and be reflective. Need to consider now as a profession where we were during the times of Adetokunbo Ademola, Teslim Elias, Uwais, and take back the legal profession to its old days of glory. Where did we misstep and how do we correct it?” Meaning, inevitable, remedial journey to the past!

Olisa Agbakoba, SAN: “The potential legacy of the new CJN is transformational and radical reform with the fundamental objective of case management driving how the courts work. It is very important that the reform needed is least infrastructure and appointment of judges. It is about a soft institution, which is about the way the court works. The court presently works on the 1844 model of the English court. The challenge for the new CJN is to turn this around.” The last major effort to transform the judiciary was initiated by the late CJN Dahiru Musdapher whose short-lived tenure resulted in the non-implementation of the report of the high-powered committee set up for the purpose. That document should be dusted up, reviewed and applied for efficiency and posterity.

Joseph Dauda, SAN: “The incoming CJN should push for the creation of constitutional courts at three tiers – trial, appellate and final – for the determination of political and other allied matters, thereby freeing the High Courts, Court of Appeal, and Supreme Courts to deal with regular cases that affect the livelihood of over 90 per cent of the populace that is presently neglected.” Clumsiness breeds inertia and institutional mediocrity. Eyes are on Madam CJN to bleed out the bad blood that threatens to choke the judiciary and let in oxygen.

Mike Ozekhome, SAN: “Ensure that judges know that they are being watched and they should be looked over their shoulders by their peers, not by members of the executive.… When this is being done by their peers themselves, then it will mean that it is the same judiciary that is reviewing itself…. There must be a mechanism whereby Courts of Appeal judgments must go one way if certain facts go the same way.” Internal censorship is required at this point to stem the decadence that is felt by most citizens. Doing so in a political environment dominated by the executive branch can be tasking but doable.

As the second woman to occupy the seat at the zenith of our judiciary, Kekere-Ekun must be aware of this momentous hour. Of course, wanting her to move every mountain she has met would be most unfair. But expecting her to shake the table and bring remarkable changes to a sector suffering from underachievement and occupational iniquities won’t be asking for too much.

Dr Ekpe is a member of THISDAY Editorial Board    

The Advocate

By Onikepo Braithwaite

Onikepo.braithwaite@thisdaylive.com

Congratulations to Her Lordship, Honourable Justice Kudirat Motonmori Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun, CFR, on her appointment as the Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria (ACJN) last Friday. ThisDay Lawyer wishes her an innovative, progressive and successful tenure. 

The Beginning of a New Era

Now that we are have come to the end of one era with the retirement of Chief Justice Olukayode Ariwoola last Thursday, and the beginning of a new era with ACJN Justice Kudirat Motonmori Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun, CFR, I believe that this is the right time to make a few comments about the Judiciary. However, as a Lawyer of almost 33 years standing, I will be measured in my remarks, as Rule 31(1) of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2023 (RPC) mandates all Lawyers to treat the court with respect, dignity and honour. So, I will simply try to outline a few areas, which if the ACJN works on, I believe will bring improvement, not only to the Judiciary, but to other parts of the administration of justice sector. 

It is stating the obvious, that the ACJN has a considerable amount of work to do to reform the Judiciary. According to The Hon. Sir Gerard Brennan, AC, KBE, QC, Chief Justice of Australia (1995-1998) in his Paper “The Role of a Judge” delivered on 13/10/96, he stated inter alia thus: “It is only when the community has confidence in the integrity and capacity of the Judiciary, that the community is governed by the rule of law…A bastion of impartiality is independence – independence not only from the Executive Government, but from other centres of power….”. I concur. Presently, the bitter truth is that, the Nigerian community has very little confidence in the integrity and capacity of the Judiciary; and Her Lordship, the ACJN must set out to correct this by bringing about the much needed improvements that the Judiciary requires – restoring the integrity, capacity, independence and other laudable qualities to Nigeria’s Judiciary; for the people to have better access to justice, and for public confidence in the courts as the last hope of the common man, to be rekindled.  

Instil Discipline into the Judiciary

Just as there are many good eggs in the Judiciary, there are also bad and corrupt eggs there too; the latter give the Judiciary a bad name, and it is time to rid the Judiciary of them, in order to restore the dignity of this once revered arm of government. 

Recall the 2020 case of Adams Oshiomhole, when he was suspended by his Ward 10 Etsako Local Government, a decision that was ratified at Local Government and Edo State APC levels. Proceedings were instituted against him at the Federal High Court (FHC) Abuja, which ordered his suspension as Chairman of the APC. Instead of going on appeal, they headed to Kano; and the next day, a FHC in Kano issued a counter-order preventing the suspension of Oshiomhole as Party Chairman – an abuse of court process. On appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the Abuja FHC. 

Again, in 2021, there was the case of former PDP Chairman, Prince Uche Secondus, in which a Rivers State High Court issued an order preventing him from parading himself as Party Chairman, having been suspended from the PDP at ward level. Similarly, instead of going on appeal, Prince Secondus’ supporters headed to Kebbi State High Court on a forum shopping spree, and despite the fact that there was an existing order in the matter which had been publicised to the whole of Nigeria, and additionally, the Kebbi Court lacked the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the matter, a counter-order restoring him to the position of Chairman, was issued by the Kebbi Court. Subsequently, even though the Kebbi Judge, Umar J., tried to backtrack by vacating her order, alleging that the court had been misled by Counsel, it was obvious, even to a child, that her later retraction was an afterthought, having been caught out. Aside from the fact that there was absolutely no nexus between Prince Secondus, his Ward and Kebbi State, the matter was already well known in the country since it concerned the leadership of the main opposition party, PDP;  and the public was well aware that the matter was already before a court of coordinate jurisdiction in Rivers State. Another abuse of court process. These are the kind of things that have almost become the norm today – conflicting judgements on the same matters from courts of coordinate jurisdiction.

To restore the dignity of the Judiciary, the ACJN must not allow the courts to continue to be used as a playground by/for Politicians and their Counsel. As a matter of urgency, the ACJN must instil discipline into the Judiciary. Judicial Officers who allow themselves to be purchased in forum shopping, those who are corrupt, those who hear matters that their courts lack the jurisdiction to entertain and engage in other forms of abuse of court process, should be sanctioned, even sacked, if need be. This is the only way to deter judicial officers, who break their judicial oath with gusto and aplomb. There should be a mechanism in place that when such erring Judges are proceeded against, there must be simultaneous disciplinary proceedings launched against erring Counsel at the LPDC. 

The importance of the judicial oath was underscored inter alia in Our Line Ltd v SCC (Nig) Ltd & Ors (2009) LPELR-2833 (SC) per Walter Samuel Nkanu Onnoghen, JSC (later CJN); that even if a judicial officer is appointed, they cannot resume sitting until the judicial oath is taken. The judicial oath demands honesty, faithfulness to the Constitution and the delivery of justice, over and above personal interest. In Akpan v State (1992) LPELR-381 (SC) per Adolphus Godwin Karibi-Whyte, JSC, the Supreme Court held inter alia that the court’s primary role, and in observance of the judicial oath, is to do justice between the parties before them. A situation in which many Nigerians believe that they cannot obtain justice in court, is unacceptable.

During the tenure of Hon. Justice Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad, GCON, abuse of court process was taken to the next level – it was the order of the day, and even though immediate past Chief Justice Ariwoola made statements that such unruly behaviour would not be tolerated, not only was it tolerated, some judicial officers who openly engaged in various forms of abuse of court process and failed to serve the community by delivering justice according to the law, were rewarded and elevated to higher positions around the same time that Justice Ariwoola made the statement threatening fire and brimstone against erring judicial officers! Unlike her predecessor, Nigerians expect the ACJN to walk the talk.

To build up the Judiciary, the ACJN must develop a better appointment process for Judges; a better assessment system, so that promotion of judicial officers will based on merit, and totally discourage the previous practice of  failure and bad behaviour being the stimulant for elevation instead. I recall that in 2021/2022, then NBA President, Olumide Akpata had stated that some Judges who were being considered to go to the Court of Appeal, didn’t know basic legal principles like ‘Lis Pendens’! Such people have no business being at the Magistrate Court, let alone being elevated to the penultimate Court of Appeal. 

Making the Supreme Court Supreme

The ACJN must gather stakeholders, to decide how appeals that go to the Supreme Court can be streamlined. By virtue of Section 233 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended in 2023)(the Constitution), practically everything can be appealed to the Supreme Court. I discussed this issue, in my piece of 4/6/24. The Supreme Court is a Policy Court, not a run-of-the-mill appeal court that hears appeals on how to share meat amongst chiefs according to native law and custom, or settling Landlord and Tenant issues. See the case of Petgas Resources Ltd v Louis N. Mbanefo SC.129/2018 Ruling delivered on 20/12/2021 per Helen Moronkeji Ogunwumiju, JSC. Streamlining appeals to the Supreme Court will not only reduce its excessive load, but give it the dignity and standing that such a final court demands.

The Court of Appeal has developed a reputation for delivering conflicting judgements and sometimes, even perverse judgements. See the 2023 election petition case of the Plateau State Lawmakers. While the Plateau State Governor was able to get justice on his election petition at the Supreme Court on the same facts, the Lawmakers who didn’t have a right of appeal beyond the Court of Appeal were denied justice. This type of circumstance underscores the importance of having an unimpeachable, transparent recruitment process for capable judicial officers at all levels, so that Nigerians will not feel that they cannot get justice until they reach the Apex Court. 

Chief Justice of Nigeria, Not Just the Supreme Court

In some of our previous writings, Olawale Fapohunda, SAN and my humble self had emphasised the fact that the CJN’s portfolio covers the whole of Nigeria, not just the Supreme Court, Abuja, and it therefore, entails spot visits to as many State Judiciaries and other Court Divisions around the country as possible. A few years ago, I went with a friend of mine to a Magistrate Court in Abuja, just to observe proceedings. To my utter dismay, I discovered the the court room was being shared by two Magistrates, using some kind of alternate arrangement. A good number of courts in different States are in deplorable condition – no ceilings, no roofs, no toilet facilities, even for the judicial officers. The ACJN can also request that all State CJs (CJ) send video recordings of all the courts in their jurisdiction, if it isn’t feasible to travel to all the different States. 

The ACJN must liaise with the CJs, to find a way around the State Judiciaries being starved of funds. The CJs have now become subservient to the Governors, not co-equal as they should be, as they must go cap in hand to their State Governors, begging for funding for capital expenditure and better conditions of service. Some Governors give their CJs as little as N5 million per month for capital expenditure, while some Judges including CJs, ride in 12/13 year old vehicles that break down every 100 metres! 

For one, the budget of the Judiciary, whether at the Federal or State level, should be a First Line Charge payable to the NJC for Federal Courts and Heads of Court for State High Courts, from the Consolidated Revenue Fund or Federation Account (see Part I Paragraph 1 NJC Paragraph 21(e) of the Third Schedule to the Constitution). Just as the LGCs were removed from the clutches of the Governors in order to allow them function, similarly, can’t the State Judiciary capital funding also not be extricated from them, so that the State Judiciaries do not continue to be at the mercy of the Governors who are more like Emperors, and accountable to no one? Not only is it demeaning for the CJs, making them seem subservient to the Governors, it impedes the independence of the Judiciary (see Section 162(9) of the Constitution). 

The argument on the other side is that funding the capital expenditure of State Judiciaries directly from the Federation Account goes against the spirit of true Federalism, but, already the Judges of Superior Courts of Record, including State High Courts, are already paid directly from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Federation (see Sections 81(3)(c) & 84(4) of the Constitution), so why can’t their capital expenditure be channelled directly through the NJC to the State Heads of Court?

Now that the salaries and remuneration of judicial officers of Superior Courts of Record have been increased, the ACJN must also prioritise salary increase and better working conditions for Magistrates and other members of the Lower Bench. They are a part of the Judiciary (see Section 6(5)(j-k) of the Constitution), but their conditions of service, are deplorable. Some Magistrates earn less than N200,000 monthly, while many of them are seen jumping on ‘okadas’ or waiting at bus stops  to take ‘danfo’ or the bus. 

Intersection between the Judiciary, Ministry of Justice, Police and Correctional Centre

The issue of Prison decongestion is also a pressing one within the administration of criminal justice sector, and demands that the ACJN in consonance with CJs, the Attorney-General of the Federation and State AGs, the Inspector General of Police and Controller General of Prisons, work together to achieve this goal. Paying one or two visits to the Correctional Centres, will give the Acting CJN a real feel of the overcrowding and terrible conditions there, and cooperation with the various agencies will bring on solutions to reduce the number of those awaiting trial, who are principally responsible for the overcrowding. 

Conclusion 

The ACJN is expected to hit the ground running. As someone who has been in the Supreme Court for over 10 years, she would also be aware that some in-house overhaul of the Supreme Court’s Registry, is long overdue. For one, the process of giving adjournment dates to litigants requires an urgent review. The wheels of justice in Nigeria move too slowly; technology must be embraced, as it is one of the means by which there can be a faster delivery of justice. Undoubtedly, the ACJN should expect to face opposition to reforms from enemies of progress within the Judiciary and other parts of the administration of justice sector, but this must not deter her. Lastly, it may be helpful for her Lordship, the ACJN to publish her vision and agenda for the Judiciary.

Monday Philips Ekpe writes that the nation’s public universities can actually avoid yet another academic disruption

Many news organisations reported few days ago a supposed decision of the National Executive Committee (NEC) of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) to declare a nationwide strike in the country’s public universities in three weeks’ time. The stand was claimed to have been taken during its latest meeting at the University of Ibadan. A formal communication to convey the plan to the federal ministries of education and labour was also said to be underway. In a less publicised response, however, the National President of ASUU, Prof. Emmanuel Osodeke, was quoted to have debunked the story of the impending industrial action, since there was no media event where the union actually made that move known in accordance with its tradition.

The veracity of that particular strike announcement may be in doubt but its likelihood shouldn’t be treated lightly. Most Nigerians are conversant with the truism that there’s no smoke without fire. So also are they with the disturbing record of the numerous gaps created in the academic calendars of public tertiary institutions largely as a result of the trade disputes between their owners and the academic and non-academic workforce. In two decades, ASUU alone has embarked on at least 16 national strikes, feats that have attracted to the ivory tower negative perceptions and commentaries. Many people have accepted the notion that Nigerian university lecturers are more comfortable with sending their students back home in order to secure enough space to operate outside the demands of their jobs and still be paid for work not done. That is, eating their cake and having it!

That viewpoint may not be wholly or easily discarded but it’s not all there is to the argument. Truth is, some ASUU leaders, activists and members have given themselves away as people with doubtful, less than exemplary interest in the overall wellness of education at the peak. There’re many stories of anti-social behaviours amongst them which validate this worrying image. But then, to casually dismiss the agitations of the dons would be simplistic, diversionary and defeatist. To ignore the insincerity, nonchalance, and outright irresponsibility of successive governments in the issues that have bedevilled our campuses for too long would even be more destructive. And for the direct and indirect stakeholders to play the ostrich would further worsen the chances of a country that has suffered too much neglect and squandered opportunities to take redemptive and pragmatic steps into a sterling future. We truly can’t afford to permanently label the academic staff of universities as mere strike mongers.

Their grievances are well known, even if debatable, many of which have since assumed protracted proportions. Insufficient funding. Inadequate, depreciating infrastructure including libraries, laboratories, classrooms, worker and student accommodation and other facilities that are central to healthy teaching and learning. Delay in the renegotiation of the 2009 agreement which has virtually stagnated staff remunerations. (Government’s unilateral award of 25 to 35 percent increase of salaries some months ago fell short of the principle of collective bargaining and added to the pent-up anger and distrust that characterise much of the relationship between the university workers and their employers). The failure of government to honour the disbursement of the 200billion naira annual revitalisation fund for five years beyond its first tranche in 2013.

Equally annoying to the teachers is the inability or unwillingness of the federal government to implement the recommendations of its own three interventionist committees set up in the course of the recurring crises in the sector. Not to mention the opaque implementation of the December 2023 presidential directive to remove federal universities from the Integrated Personnel and Payroll Information System (IPPIS) in response to a longstanding grouse of ASUU; the erosion of university autonomy, and what the body describes as proliferation of universities. And, of course, the non-payment of earned academic allowances and the outstanding salaries for three and half months accumulated during the 2022 eight-month strike.

Two months ago, in what appeared to be a conciliatory move, the Minister of Education, Prof. Tahir Mamman, met with the ASUU leadership to design ways of avoiding another interruption of academic activities. Both parties agreed to meet two weeks later to review their commitments. But, sadly, they still haven’t met, courtesy government’s foot-dragging, a situation that now gives credence to the news of the imminence of a potentially crippling down-tool. Can we beam the searchlight on the official handling of negotiations and agreement-keeping in matters relating to our universities? Not reassuring at the moment. Does the current administration have the capacity and conviction to do things differently? Sorry, no reasons at present to be hopeful.     

I did a piece here on July 21, 2022 titled, “Pick Your Fights, ASUU Members.” It reads: “I am not too sure if ASUU has properly articulated its positions to the satisfaction of the other critical stakeholders, especially students, parents, guardians and the rest publics but, at the heart of the agitations, in my view, is the fight to perpetuate and nourish the very soul of public universities in Nigeria. Even if some of the methods adopted by the lecturers are faulty, surely, the credibility and desirability of the mission are indisputable. Not too many people are aware that the bulk of the monies in contention is for the revitalisation of the various institutions, which means that individual lecturers will not gain directly from them. What concern can be more noble than that? But for the struggles embarked upon by the past generations of dons, a large percentage of the amenities in our institutions would not have been.

“One major motivation of lecturers in the pursuit of their cause today, in the face of daunting odds, is the need to keep with that tradition. No self-respecting trade union would let down its guards easily. A truth that should not be ignored is that majority of Nigerian families cannot shoulder university training, hence the push to keep the government in. Over time, ASUU has felt compelled to defend the right of Nigerian youths, particularly the less-privileged, to advanced learning. In prosecuting that goal, however, the union which proudly parades an enviable pedigree should urgently wake up to some pertinent present truths. The first is that times are changing faster than was anticipated even in the recent past. With that comes, inevitably, shifts in capacities, perceptions, values, dispositions and strategies.

“When that defining document was signed between the government and ASUU in 2009, the realities then were radically different from the ones now. The one revised under the last administration is also far from being implemented, unfortunately. The lesson here is that, time was when governments were a continuum. Not anymore. The pain of the university teachers is compounded by the fact that while official cries of shortage of funds and appeals for sacrifice fill the air, functionaries of state are yet to lead the way in that regard. Instead, reckless spending of public funds has continued unabated.

“For long, ASUU members have been bearing burdens that should not be theirs primarily. In societies that place premium on education, the legislature as representatives of the people, civil society, alumni associations, parents, students and the enlightened segment of the populace constantly mobilise themselves to protect the integrity of academic organisations.” More than two years after that humble submission, I have no better way of expressing the perennial predicaments that define much of Nigeria’s education at the tertiary level, unfortunately.

Symbolically and characteristically, there hasn’t been any official reaction to this real or rumoured threat from ASUU. But rather than government people warming up to paint the union black and further undermine its respect in the estimation of Nigerians, efforts should be invested in treating ASUU as their worthy partners.

Dr Ekpe is a member of THISDAY Editorial Board

Monday Philips Ekpe writes that the nation’s public universities can actually avoid yet another academic disruption

Many news organisations reported few days ago a supposed decision of the National Executive Committee (NEC) of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) to declare a nationwide strike in the country’s public universities in three weeks’ time. The stand was claimed to have been taken during its latest meeting at the University of Ibadan. A formal communication to convey the plan to the federal ministries of education and labour was also said to be underway. In a less publicised response, however, the National President of ASUU, Prof. Emmanuel Osodeke, was quoted to have debunked the story of the impending industrial action, since there was no media event where the union actually made that move known in accordance with its tradition.

The veracity of that particular strike announcement may be in doubt but its likelihood shouldn’t be treated lightly. Most Nigerians are conversant with the truism that there’s no smoke without fire. So also are they with the disturbing record of the numerous gaps created in the academic calendars of public tertiary institutions largely as a result of the trade disputes between their owners and the academic and non-academic workforce. In two decades, ASUU alone has embarked on at least 16 national strikes, feats that have attracted to the ivory tower negative perceptions and commentaries. Many people have accepted the notion that Nigerian university lecturers are more comfortable with sending their students back home in order to secure enough space to operate outside the demands of their jobs and still be paid for work not done. That is, eating their cake and having it!

That viewpoint may not be wholly or easily discarded but it’s not all there is to the argument. Truth is, some ASUU leaders, activists and members have given themselves away as people with doubtful, less than exemplary interest in the overall wellness of education at the peak. There’re many stories of anti-social behaviours amongst them which validate this worrying image. But then, to casually dismiss the agitations of the dons would be simplistic, diversionary and defeatist. To ignore the insincerity, nonchalance, and outright irresponsibility of successive governments in the issues that have bedevilled our campuses for too long would even be more destructive. And for the direct and indirect stakeholders to play the ostrich would further worsen the chances of a country that has suffered too much neglect and squandered opportunities to take redemptive and pragmatic steps into a sterling future. We truly can’t afford to permanently label the academic staff of universities as mere strike mongers.

Their grievances are well known, even if debatable, many of which have since assumed protracted proportions. Insufficient funding. Inadequate, depreciating infrastructure including libraries, laboratories, classrooms, worker and student accommodation and other facilities that are central to healthy teaching and learning. Delay in the renegotiation of the 2009 agreement which has virtually stagnated staff remunerations. (Government’s unilateral award of 25 to 35 percent increase of salaries some months ago fell short of the principle of collective bargaining and added to the pent-up anger and distrust that characterise much of the relationship between the university workers and their employers). The failure of government to honour the disbursement of the 200billion naira annual revitalisation fund for five years beyond its first tranche in 2013.

Equally annoying to the teachers is the inability or unwillingness of the federal government to implement the recommendations of its own three interventionist committees set up in the course of the recurring crises in the sector. Not to mention the opaque implementation of the December 2023 presidential directive to remove federal universities from the Integrated Personnel and Payroll Information System (IPPIS) in response to a longstanding grouse of ASUU; the erosion of university autonomy, and what the body describes as proliferation of universities. And, of course, the non-payment of earned academic allowances and the outstanding salaries for three and half months accumulated during the 2022 eight-month strike.

Two months ago, in what appeared to be a conciliatory move, the Minister of Education, Prof. Tahir Mamman, met with the ASUU leadership to design ways of avoiding another interruption of academic activities. Both parties agreed to meet two weeks later to review their commitments. But, sadly, they still haven’t met, courtesy government’s foot-dragging, a situation that now gives credence to the news of the imminence of a potentially crippling down-tool. Can we beam the searchlight on the official handling of negotiations and agreement-keeping in matters relating to our universities? Not reassuring at the moment. Does the current administration have the capacity and conviction to do things differently? Sorry, no reasons at present to be hopeful.      

I did a piece here on July 21, 2022 titled, “Pick Your Fights, ASUU Members.” It reads: “I am not too sure if ASUU has properly articulated its positions to the satisfaction of the other critical stakeholders, especially students, parents, guardians and the rest publics but, at the heart of the agitations, in my view, is the fight to perpetuate and nourish the very soul of public universities in Nigeria. Even if some of the methods adopted by the lecturers are faulty, surely, the credibility and desirability of the mission are indisputable. Not too many people are aware that the bulk of the monies in contention is for the revitalisation of the various institutions, which means that individual lecturers will not gain directly from them. What concern can be more noble than that? But for the struggles embarked upon by the past generations of dons, a large percentage of the amenities in our institutions would not have been.

“One major motivation of lecturers in the pursuit of their cause today, in the face of daunting odds, is the need to keep with that tradition. No self-respecting trade union would let down its guards easily. A truth that should not be ignored is that majority of Nigerian families cannot shoulder university training, hence the push to keep the government in. Over time, ASUU has felt compelled to defend the right of Nigerian youths, particularly the less-privileged, to advanced learning. In prosecuting that goal, however, the union which proudly parades an enviable pedigree should urgently wake up to some pertinent present truths. The first is that times are changing faster than was anticipated even in the recent past. With that comes, inevitably, shifts in capacities, perceptions, values, dispositions and strategies.

“When that defining document was signed between the government and ASUU in 2009, the realities then were radically different from the ones now. The one revised under the last administration is also far from being implemented, unfortunately. The lesson here is that, time was when governments were a continuum. Not anymore. The pain of the university teachers is compounded by the fact that while official cries of shortage of funds and appeals for sacrifice fill the air, functionaries of state are yet to lead the way in that regard. Instead, reckless spending of public funds has continued unabated.

“For long, ASUU members have been bearing burdens that should not be theirs primarily. In societies that place premium on education, the legislature as representatives of the people, civil society, alumni associations, parents, students and the enlightened segment of the populace constantly mobilise themselves to protect the integrity of academic organisations.” More than two years after that humble submission, I have no better way of expressing the perennial predicaments that define much of Nigeria’s education at the tertiary level, unfortunately.

Symbolically and characteristically, there hasn’t been any official reaction to this real or rumoured threat from ASUU. But rather than government people warming up to paint the union black and further undermine its respect in the estimation of Nigerians, efforts should be invested in treating ASUU as their worthy partners.

Dr Ekpe is a member of THISDAY Editorial Board

Honourable Justice Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun, JSC: Making the Women Proud

Presently, the only silver lining in the cloud for many of us in the administration of justice sector, particularly the women and following the #EndBadGovernance (#EBG) Protest, is the excitement of welcoming the Second Female Chief Justice of Nigeria, Honourable Justice Kudirat Motonmori Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun, JSC, CFR (the first Female to occupy that position, is Honourable Justice Aloma Mariam Mukhtar, GCON, July 2012 – November 2014), not just because history is being made again by a Female, but because #GoodGovernance needs to be injected into the Judiciary, it’s much battered reputation and confidence of the public in the Judiciary being the last hope of the common man, restored – and Justice Kekere-Ekun is  up to the task; she’s a Performer. 

Personally, I have only appeared before Her Lordship in one matter, when she was at the Court of Appeal, Port Harcourt Division, but, as Editor of this esteemed Publication, ThisDay Lawyer for almost eight years, we can testify to the fact that Justice Kekere-Ekun is hardworking, thorough and firm, as she appears to have delivered the highest number of lead judgements (sound judgements, I might add) that we have reported in the past eight years. 

Honourable Justice Kekere-Ekun who was elevated to the Supreme Court in 2013, has been recommended by the NJC to President Bola Tinubu, to be the next Chief Justice in accordance with Section 231(1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended in 2023)(the Constitution). The President, in turn, forwards her name to the Senate for confirmation. By virtue of Section 231(4) of the Constitution, as the position of CJN becomes vacant on August 22, 2024, the President is mandated to appoint the most senior JSC to perform the functions of the CJN until the substantive CJN is appointed – Justice Kekere-Ekun is the most senior. Considering the fact that it has been clear to everyone since 2022 that the position of CJN would become vacant on August 22, I see no reason for there to be any delay in completing the process of CJN appointment timeously, so that by August 22, 2024 as one CJN is retiring, the new one is being sworn in, instead of needlessly leaving the issue to fester for up to 90 days beyond the date of appointment of the acting CJN (see Section 231(5) of the Constitution). 

In October, 2023, the UK appointed the first Lady Chief Justice of England and Wales, Baroness Sue Carr, and come September 1, 2024, the new South African female Chief Justice, The Honourable Mandisa Maya, will assume the position. We also look forward to having our own Nigerian Female CJN!

#GoodGovernance vs Non-Performers

In the spirit of #GoodGovernance, one would have imagined that, by now, the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) would have rushed to pick two of the juiciest low hanging fruits, to show that it has heard the cry of Nigerians and one of their #EndBadGovernance prayers – to get rid of non-performers – swiftly replacing the bad leadership of NNPCL and those related to Sports, since it is not in the nature of most Nigerians to resign, even in the face of shame arising from non-performance/failure. 

Is it fair that, despite the fact that Nigerians are going through an extremely difficult time, they should also be queuing up for fuel incessantly? For the past two years, Nigeria has gone from one fuel crisis to the other; it was also during the era of the present leadership that bad dirty fuel was imported in early 2022 or so, and many vehicles were damaged as a result; is this not enough to show that those in charge of that fuel supply area, are incompetent? Ditto for those in charge of Nigeria’s oil production output, and ensuring that our Refineries are rehabilitated – they are equally as inept or corrupt, or both. 

As for Sports Sector, need I discuss Nigeria’s shameful outing at the 2024 Paris Olympics? Nigeria went with 88 athletes, no medal! Botswana took 11 athletes, and won two medals, one gold, one silver. With a N12 billion budget, Nigeria was unable to purchase one bicycle for the competition, so much so, that we shamelessly had to borrow a bicycle from Germany for the Nigerian contestant to ride for the cycling competition! If there’s a word worse than shame, disgrace and humiliating, that’s what would be used to describe Nigeria’s 2024 Olympics outing (similar to that of 2020). Yet, in both Oil and Sports sectors, Nigerians haven’t heard of any heads rolling.

It is time to hold President Tinubu to the warning he gave at the November 2023 Cabinet Retreat for Ministers. He said: “If you are performing, nothing to fear. If you miss the objective, we review. If you don’t perform, you leave us….Don’t  be a clog in the wheel of Nigeria’s progress”. I submit that those running the affairs of the two aforementioned sectors, that is, NNPCL etc and Sports, are ‘clogs in the wheel of Nigeria’s progress’. Not only have they missed the objective, they are non-performers. There is really no justification, for keeping them in their jobs. Nigerians are waiting for the President to keep to his word, and do the needful. Walking the talk, particularly at this time, will inspire confidence in Nigerians and show the people that the President has heard their cry. After all, the welfare of the people is of the utmost importance, more so than keeping non-performers in their jobs. Thankfully, at least, the price of food stuff seems have come down.

Is Patriotism Singing the National Anthem and Reciting the Pledge?

This brings me to the issue of patriotism, something that all Nigerians, including public/government officials, should embrace; it goes beyond Nigerians singing the National Anthem and reciting the Pledge. 

How patriotic are some of our so-called leaders and Government Officials themselves? Living lavish lifestyles instead of opting for salary and allowance cuts, seeing as the country is going through difficulty and Nigerians are living in penury. The Liberian President, Joseph Boakai, slashed his salary by 40%, in an effort to cut government expenditure. Last year, the Zambian President, Hakainde Hichilema ordered that luxury vehicles purchased for government officials be sold; he also rejected the proposal to buy vehicles worth $1.8 million for his entourage. That is patriotism, not singing national anthem. Look at Dubai 30 years ago, and look at Dubai today – the UAE is now considered to be one of the most developed countries in Western Asia. They used the same type of resources Nigeria has, to develop their Emirate. Look at South Korea 60 years ago – a rural agrarian economy with no mineral resources, a country that Nigeria was said to have rendered financial assistance to all those decades ago; today, it has transformed into a First World country. What about Singapore and LKY? Yet, Nigeria, over 60 years post-independence still remains an underdeveloped third world country, the poverty capital of the world. The difference between their leaders and ours, is that their leaders have ‘a love for country’ – patriotism, which they have shown, not by singing national anthem, but by developing their countries and giving their people a good standard of living; ours love themselves.

Though I haven’t read the now-aborted controversial Counter Subversion Bill 2024 (CSB) sponsored by the Speaker of the House of Representatives (HOR), Rt Hon. Tajudeen Abbas, I have seen the highlights; it allegedly purported to slap a N5 million fine or 5-10 years imprisonment or both, on anyone who refuses to sing the National Anthem or recite the Pledge! What a harebrained law, particularly in a democracy! Has Nigeria become a Military or Police State like North Korea, where the people gather round in public places to worship the State and their leader? Are such silly provisions, what is required at this critical point in time in Nigeria’s trajectory? 

Freedom of Expression and the Right to Remain Silent

How would that ludicrous provision about not singing the National Anthem, even be applied? If people attend functions and they don’t sing the National Anthem, will there be Anthem Police to check mouths and arrest those who fail to sing? I thought Section 39(1) of the Constitution guaranteed the right to freedom of expression, which would include the right to speak or not to speak. See the case of Aviomoh v C.O.P & Anor (2021) LPELR-55203 (SC) per Abdu Aboki, JSC. 

By virtue of Section 35(2) of the Constitution, even a person who is arrested or detained has a right to remain silent, let alone one who hasn’t committed any crime, but doesn’t want to sing or recite some lines. In Igagbele v State (2006) LPELR-1441(SC) per Walter Samuel Nkanu Onnoghen, JSC (later CJN), the Supreme Court held inter alia that “….the citizen’s right to remain silent, even when arraigned for a criminal offence, is an inviolable one”. One wonders what type of lawmakers Nigeria has, seeking to enact laws that do not meet the basic threshold of constitutionality. Even though Section 45 of the Constitution can restrict or derogate from some fundamental rights, including the right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, the right to remain silent is sacrosanct, and not one of the rights that can be derogated from. So, if I don’t feel like singing the National Anthem, no law can force me to. The Constitution allows me to keep my mouth shut!

This kind of unserious, self-serving ridiculous lawmaking, makes one wonder whether some members of the three arms of government, even understand their duties. Their most important assignment, is the security and welfare of the people (Section 14(2)(b) of the Constitution). For one, making Nigerians queue for fuel incessantly, shows a total lack of concern for the people’s welfare on the part of the Executive; and instead of the HOR to exercise its oversight functions to call NNPCL to order, it is instead, trying to enact useless draconian laws. 

#FightAgainstCorruption

Aside from the fact that Section 15(5) of the Constitution mandates the State to abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power, Government has another golden opportunity to show its commitment to #GoodGovernance, by ramping up its fight against corruption. Nigerians are asking whether Yahaya Bello, former Governor of Kogi State is above the law. Why has he not been arrested and arraigned, despite the humongous N80 billion charges that have been filed against him? Some say that the cowardly former Governor is hiding in Kogi State House. 

For the avoidance of doubt, the Constitution’s Section 308 immunity against suit and legal process clause, only extends to the persons of the incumbent President, Vice President, Governors and Deputy Governors – it does not extend to those who no longer occupy these positions. Furthermore, nothing in the said Section 308 makes their residences or official archives, inviolable. That inviolability of offices and residences, only applies to Diplomats. Section 1(1) of the Diplomatic Immunities and  Privileges Act 1962 provides inter alia for the immunity from suit and legal process, and the inviolability of residences and official archives of foreign envoys and foreign consular officers. Kogi State House certainly doesn’t belong to this category. See the case of African Reinsurance Corporation v J.D.P. Construction (Nig) Ltd (2007) LPELR-216(SC).

Conclusion 

The #EndBadGovernance Protesters have threatened to intentionally resume on October 1, 2024, which is Nigeria’s 64th Independence Day. Instead of relying on people that have some leverage on the public, like traditional and religious leaders to convince Protesters not to take to the streets again, Government should seize the opportunity during the intervening six weeks period between now and Independence Day, and show good faith by picking some of the available low hanging fruits like the ones I have outlined above and acting on them. Perhaps, if the people observe some genuine efforts by Government to display their patriotism by taking steps to deliver #GoodGovernance, then not only will there not be a need for another protest, Government will gain the confidence of the people. 

Bola A. Akinterinwa 

The #EndBadGovernance Protest is the newest version of the 20 October, 2020 #EndSARS Protest. Both are decentralised social movements with politico-economic and security objectives. While the #End SARS protest demanded an end to police brutality in Nigeria, by particularly insisting on the disbandment of the Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS), because of its notorious and brutal abuse of the people’s rights, the #EndBadGovernance protested for ten days, August 1-10, 2024 and demanded for the reversal of the policy of non-oil subsidy, better governance, and political restructuring among others. 

Like the 2020 protest, several people lost their lives under the pretext of hijacking of the peaceful protests by hoodlums in the 2024 protest. One major rationale for this is not far-fetched: Government was, and is always, aware of the likelihood of hijacking of peaceful protests, but always remained and still remains incapable of preventing the hoodlums from hijacking peaceful protests and looting. In other words, it is difficult to understand that Government knows there is a problem and yet it cannot strategise enough to contain the problem. This partly explains why some national and international observers consider that Government might actually be a major sponsor of the hoodlums.

And true enough, the government of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu (PBAT) warned against any protests even though the protesters have the right to protest. The warning was given in light of the likelihood of hijacking by the hoodlums and loss of innocent lives. If the government was intelligent enough to know that there would be hoodlums and that they would be violent, why was the Government unable to also evolve preventive strategies? Without gainsaying, several innocent lives were lost as predicted. Property was destroyed. The hoodlums infiltrated the peaceful protesters, operated freely, destroyed government and public property, and looted privately-owned shops and businesses. Several protesters lost their lives. And perhaps most disturbingly, #EndBadGovernance protests not only took place effectively but also generated a fresh controversy, that of the display and waving of Russian flags the definiendum of which is hereinafter explicated.

#EndBadGovernance and Diplomatic Aspects 

Unlike the #EndSARS protest which sought an end to police brutality, the #EndBadGovernance had a broader scope of objectives: ending bad governance which requires stoppage of institutional corruption, reversal of the oil non-subsidy, release of IPOB leader, Nnamdi Kanu, from detention. Political restructuring of the country, national security, stopping inflation and sufferings of people. Without doubt, all these demands have several international dimensions. For example, bad governance, because of its many implications, is not condoned internationally. Bad governance is when lives and property cannot be effectively protected. It is when fundamental human rights cannot be guaranteed. As a matter of fact, since the 1990 Franco-African summit held in La Baule, France, dictatorship has not only become a a conditionality for the grant of development aid to Africa, but also a definiens of good governance for which an unconstitutional change of government has become  non grata.

The request for the release of IPOB leader, Nnamdi Kanu, also has a diplomatic character. He has the nationality of Britain even he is an indigene of Nigeria. He was kidnapped in a terroristic manner, on a foreign soil, in Kenya, and flown to Nigeria. This made it the second time General Muhammadu Buhari would act as a leader and terrorist. The crating of Alhaji Umaru Dikko, Nigeria’s former Minister of Transport, at the Stanstead Airport in the United Kingdom in 1984, as diplomatic baggage was the first. Nnamdi Kalu is claiming the right of self-determination in order to carve out a Republic of Biafra out of the current Republic of Nigeria. Self-determination is a right and principle of international law. Even though he has jumped bail and is under court trial, the problem is that the Government of Nigeria, even before PBAT acceded to power in 2023, only respects court rulings and judgments selectively.

Again, the Government of Nigeria may be hostile to the idea of a Republic of Biafra, under the pretext of the constitutional provisions of non-divisibility of Nigeria and non-negotiability of national unity, the truth still remains that national unity cannot be coercively done. This is why people are asking for the release of Nnamdi Kanu. This is also why people, particularly the Patriots, are asking for a fresh non-manu militari national constitution. Even though international law prohibits intervention in the domestic affairs that fall under the jurisdictional competencies of other countries, the international community has much interest in Nigeria. The United Nations does not appreciate the dismantlement of any of its Member States. And more interestingly, the incarceration of Nnamdi Kanu as a major dynamic of insecurity in the south-eastern part of Nigeria is of international concern, especially that the Federal Government, with heavy military intervention, has not been able to stop the people’s agitation for self-determination.

There is also the question of corruption. It is a critical matter in global economic governance. An international convention was done on it in 2003 and Nigeria took an active part in the making of the convention. Although corruption is not peculiar to Nigeria, Nigeria’s type of corruption is most disturbing because it is officially not taken as a big deal. This is in spite of the many institutional mechanisms put in place to fight it. The more the institutional mechanisms, the more individual and institutional corruption is deepened. Imagine, for example, how it will be said that billions or millions of Naira, the Nigerian currency, have been swallowed by a snake. Imagine the story of the Chairman of the NAHCON (National Hajj Commission of Nigeria), Jalal Arabi, and the secretary to the Commission, Abdullahi Kontagora who have mismanaged the 2024 N90billion hajj subsidy. The two of them overpaid themselves fraudulently under the pretext of operational costs. Reports by The Punch have it that a total sum of SR314,098 has been recovered from Arabi.

As explained by the ripples.com which relied on the reports of The Punch newspapers, ‘the EFCC alleged that Arabi overpaid himself and others, with the chairman receiving SR50,000 instead of the approved SR15,929. Three commissioners received SR40,000 each instead of SR15,929, while the secretary received SR30.000 instead of SR,14,336. Directors/Chief of Staff received SR30,000 instead of SR2,550’ (vide Mayowa Oladeji’s “NAHCON chairman, secretary in EFCC custody over alleged N90bn hajj subsidy mismanagement,” www-ripplesnigeria.com, August 15, 2024). This case is one of the recent manifestations of what a former British Prime Minister, David Cameron, told Queen Elisabeth II about Nigeria on 11 May, 2016 in the context of an anti-corruption summit to be held in the UK. In the words of David Cameron, ‘this particular president (PMB) is actually not corrupt,’ but ‘Nigeria is fantastically corrupt’ or one of the two most corrupt countries of the world. Afghanistan is the other country.  And who says Nigeria is not the most fantastically corrupt in Africa, not to say in the world. This is one major dynamic of the #EndBadGovernance protest.

What about the controversy surrounding the salary of Senators? Do they earn N21million as monthly salary or not? The video interview of Mahdi Shehu is quite revealing: apart from the N17 million earlier disclosed by Senator Shehu Sani, Mahdi Shehu also said it is not simply N21m that is earned monthly by senators but also constituency project allowance of N500 million, which is paid directly into the accounts of the Senators and which is in conflict with the Procurement Act that requires due process: no public tender, no bidders, etc. Who determines what project to engage in is not known to the public. It is not even put as an underlined item of the budget. No project consultant. In the 2024 budget, N20 billion and 388m is provided for legislative aids. More disturbingly, N3 billion is earmarked for NASS car parks, and 4 billion for gymnasium, N15 billion for NASS hospital and only N2billion for the National Hospital in Abuja, etc. N15 billion was also allocated for NASS Library and only N983 million for the National Library. In the eyes of Mahdi Shehu, this is manifestation of an open fraud per excellence even if the Senators are making strenuous efforts to deny what is undeniable (vide News Central TV (@NewsCentralAfrica). The RAMC has not said much about this.

The issue of oil subsidy and its reversal, as well as national insecurity, also have international and diplomatic dimensions. So is economic inflation. On oil subsidy, its origin is traceable to the early 1970s when there was an oil price shock in 1973 and Nigeria was selling fuel to Nigerians below cost. This practice of subsidy was formalised in 1977 under the military regime of General Olusegun Obasanjo when the Price Control Act was put in place to regulate prices, including that of fuel. The problematic in this regard was, and still is, whether there has really been oil subsidy. From the perspective of a former Minister of Petroleum Resources and a renowned virologist, Professor Tamuno David-West, there was no oil subsidy. He made the computations of the landing cost of redefined oil to the distributing point of filling stations and convincingly submitted that there was nothing like oil subsidy. 

In an interview with The Guardian newspaper on importation of refined fuel and fuel subsidy, he said ‘there are two questions: should there be subsidy or should there be no subsidy? My answer is capital no! If you go through the racket, I will tell you why subsidy is nothing but fraud. It is not just one-man business; there are many interests involved in the fraud.’ And perhaps most disturbingly, Professor David-West revealed that ‘when former President Goodluck Jonathan set up the subsidy Investigation Panel and I (David-West) was invited, I got my facts ready, that there should not be any subsidy. The time I wanted to present my facts at the panel, Jonathan said they shouldn’t allow me. If you have four refineries refining your crude in Nigeria, why do you import? This interview is quite self-explanatory, but the truth is not wanted. Oil subsidy is therefore a mega-fraudulent purport. 

Display of Russian Flag: The Definiendum 

The display of Russian flags cannot be easily separated from the international perception of Nigeria as a country of bad governance where leaders say one thing and are acting contrarily. For instance, General Muhammadu Buhari similarly held the same view that fuel subsidy was a fraud when he was seeking election as President of Nigeria. In 2011 he admitted that fuel subsidy was a fraud. However research findings have shown that, on becoming an elected president of Nigeria, the story changed completely as it was General Buhari who reportedly was paying the subsidies. Six trillion naira was reportedly paid as subsidies in 2023, while subsidy payment is projected to be N5.4 trillion by the end of 2024. In fact, in terms of comparison, PMB is on record to have paid more subsidies than all other presidents since the time of General Obasanjo. If subsidy was fraudulent in 2011 and it suddenly became non-fraudulent as from 2015, how does the diplomatic community perceive Nigeria? A truly fantastically corrupt country!

First, on Monday, June 29, 2023, Mr Garba Shehu, the ex-spokesman to President Buhari, said several subsidies were removed by the Buhari administration. As he put it, ‘the massive electricity subsidy, the fraudulent fertiliser subsidy, Hajj/Christian pilgrim subsidies… the diesel subsidy, the aviation fuel subsidy, LPFO kerosene, cooking gas and the other subsidy policies we found in place, (we) put them firmly on the ground… For those with short memories, many of those subsidies were all in place when President Buhari was elected to office in 2015. All those in place were gone by May 2023, including the annual fertiliser subsidy that weighed 60-100 billion naira…’ (vide “Fact Check: Did Buhari’s administration remove diesel subsidy as Garba Shehu Garba claimed?” by Bunmi Aduloju, Fact Check, the cable.ng).

Second, there is controversy over who actually removed oil subsidy: PMB or PBAT? Based on simple logic, it is PBAT and not as wrongly pointed out by the Daily Trust that it was PMB. The then ‘Minister of Finance, Budget, and National Planning, Mrs Zainab Ahmed said the Federal Government has made provisions for the subsidy payment (N3trillion) until June 30, 2023. If PBAT was sworn in on May 29, 2023, and if payment of subsidies was scheduled to last until June 30, 2023. PBAT’s announcement of subsidy belonging to the past means he actually ended to the subsidies. But was there really any subsidies? This conflicting information cannot but be of important concerns to the global community. It also largely explains the protests against the PBAT who promised to continue from where PMB stopped. Where PMB stopped is part of the Russian saga that PBAT is finding it difficult to address.

The most significant aspect of the diplomatic dimensions of the #EndBadGovernance protest is the display of Russian flags during the protest. It has raised many questions on the intentions of the carriers: is it a call for Russian intervention? Is it a call for unconstitutional change of the PBAT’s government? More importantly, what is the message that the protesters wanted to communicate to the government and people of Nigeria? Answers to these questions cannot be well understood without explaining the definiens and the definiendos. Put differently, the display of Russian flags, a symbol of Russian sovereignty in another sovereign country that Nigeria is, needs to be well defined and articulated, by investigating the determinants, so as to be able to formulate how best to respond to the challenges posed beyond the legal dimensions.  

In this regard, at the epicentre of the definition is Russia and its national flag at display during the #EndBadGovernance protest against the government of PBAT. At the domestic level in Nigeria, the definiendum is undoubtedly a corruption-driven bad governance and total disregard for the rule of law, especially court rulings and judgments. For example, it is the Nigerians put in official positions to ensure national growth and development, peace and security, and more importantly, to evolve a Nigerian society that is completely free from political chicanery, religious bigotry, and ethnic chauvinism that are precisely milking Nigeria dry. When they loot, they do so very recklessly and their local communities celebrate them with traditional chieftaincy titles. The more the ill-gotten funds, the more the honour and societal recognitions. In fact, the acquiesced style is to embezzle public funds and then later arrange to set ablaze the office where the relevant documents are kept. Many cases of this type of corruption abound in Nigeria.

In Nigeria, when cases of fact-finding of embezzlement of public funds are to, or are being investigated, particularly in the National Assembly, accused persons always faint or slump in order to distract attention from the enquiry. And true enough, when the #EndBadGovernance protest was on, the case files of former Governor of Kano State, and the incumbent Chairman of the ruling party, All Progressives Congress, Abdullahi Umar Ganduje, were reportedly found missing in the law court. Recall that in 2018, there were video reports in which Umar Ganduje accepted bribes. He was condemned by the people of Nigeria and taken to court for prosecution. While the court case was still on and people are still waiting for the outcome of the investigations on the stolen files, media reports have it that PBAT has recommended the same Mr. Ganduje for ‘Ambassadorial Role Amid Corruption Trial.’ How will Umar Ganduje be perceived internationally and by other ambassadors of his category?

Secondly. And without jot of doubt, National Flag is an important symbol in international law and relations. Its importance can be gleaned from the perspective of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. In its Article 20, the Convention stipulates that a ‘diplomatic mission and its head shall have the right to use the flag and emblem of the sending State on the premises of the mission, including the residence of the Head of Mission, and on his means of transport.’ This provision should be understood in light of other articles that provide for the inviolability and protection of the person of a diplomatic agent and particularly, the Chief of the Mission.

For example, Article 22 (1) says ‘the premises of the mission shall be inviolable. The agencies of the receiving State may not enter them, except with the consent of the Head of the Mission. When the National Flag and the emblem of the country are openly and clearly displaced, the law enforcement agents in the receiving State cannot have any luxury of excuse of not knowing that the building is internationally protected, that it is exterritorial, and that it is a no go area unless without prior consent of the Head of the mission.

The same is true of the means of transportation of the Ambassador. The National Flag is normally flown in his or her car to indicate that an internationally protected person, and for that matter, the Principal Representative of another sovereign State, is inside the car. Law enforcement agents are not supposed to arrest them, violate them. Thus National Flags are an embodiment of political sovereignty. It is because of its importance that protesters often try to acquire the national flag of the country they are protesting against in order to burn it publicly just to send messages of protest and disregard.

Another aspect of the issue of National Flag is who can display it in his or her private car. Under normal circumstances, it is only official vehicles that can so do. Many people, in the case of the Republic of India for example, do not want to fly the National Flag of their country for fear of not allowing it to become dirty. In other words, their National Flag deserves utmost respect. Some others consider such display of the flag as an expression of patriotism. The controversy surrounding the National Flag was to the extent that, in 2003, the matter had to be referred to the court for interpretation and decision by Mr Navin Jindal. The Supreme Court of India ruled on 23rd January, 2004 that ‘the display of national flag by every citizen of India is a fundamental right.’ The court’s judgment encouraged Navin Jindal to set up a Flag Foundation of India in appreciation of the importance attached to the Indian National Flag. It is against this importance of any National Flag that the display of the Russia’s National Flag during protests against the Government of Nigeria should be explained and understood.

Put differently, does the display of Russian flag imply a message from the Government of Russia? Was there really any Russian backing for the protesters even though Russian embassy has denied any involvement in the saga? Russian presence in Nigeria’s immediate neighbourhood has the potential to threaten Nigeria’s national security because of the emerging anti-Nigeria sentiments currently developing in the Republic of Niger. And perhaps more significantly, it should be recalled that when the #EndSARS protesters were brutally attacked in 2020, the general opinion of Nigerians was that there was no good basis for any military or forceful attack on peaceful protesters carrying or waving Nigeria’s National Flag. By waving the National Flag, they were in solidarity with Nigeria’s sovereignty. So displaying the Russian flag is an issue that must not be simply taken as a legal matter by seeking a court trial of the carriers of the Russian flag. The issue is how best to deal with protesters who are not Nigerians.

As reported by thisDaylive.com on 7 August, the Directorate of State Services (DSS) had arrested seven Polish citizens in Kano. The reason given by the DSS was that ‘for the persons we have picked up from Kano because of where they were found during the protest and display of foreign flags in Kano… They were picked as a result of security enforcement because of where they were when the incident happened. It is not a targeted operation on behalf of my Director-General and DSS and Nigeria. Some of the carriers of the Russian flag reportedly include Polish citizens. As foreigners joining Nigerians to protest against the Government of Nigeria and seen to be vandalising public assets, they have been arrested and prepared to be tried in the law court. The Polish embassy has officially denied the involvement of any Polish citizen in the #EndBadGovernance protest. The arrested seven Polish citizens are students who simply were there to take pictures of protesters according to the embassy.

The postulations of the Embassy of Poland and the DSS raise more issues and questions than answers. First, the Polish Embassy has sought the protection of its citizens within the framework of Private International Law because the arrested citizens are said to be students and not diplomatic agents. The protection being sought by the Embassy is only necessary if the Polish citizens have been denied justice or could not have access to justice. At this stage that the embassy is seeking the release of those arrested is therefore not proper. As students in Kano State, were the Polish students on the pavements of the street during the protests? Were they really caught holding or displaying the Russian Flags? Why were the students at the protesting ground and not elsewhere? Are the Polish students the only foreign students in their university? If we consider that the Polish students arrived Nigeria on August 1, 2024, when the protest began and are said to be in Nigeria for few weeks, there can be elements of truth in the hypothesis that the students were simply taking photographs. However, that assumption may not hold as they may still be here at the time of the protest to protect certain interests. True, Poland does not appear to be in tune with Russia because of the Russo-Ukrainian war. The action of the DSS is therefore commendable so far. If there is nothing found incriminating, the students should have their peace. That Nigeria is said to be fantastically corrupt does not mean the country is a theatre for foreign spectators. 

BOLAJI AFOLABI argues for prompt overhauling of the sports sector

For sports aficionados, supporters, and many Nigerians, Friday, August 9 was an unusual day. For hours, various media platforms, and social media handles were abuzz with the hope and prayers that Nigeria’s Tobi Amusan who came third at the semi finals would make it on technical grounds for the finals of the 110 metres hurdles. The event was the recently concluded Paris 2024 Olympics. The apprehension of many Nigerians was hinged on the fact that the Ogun-born hurdler was Nigeria’s last realistic hope for medals at the games. This was not minding that Hannah Reuben would be on the mat following day for the women’s 76 kg freestyle wrestling. Hopes were subsequently dashed, as the speedy hurdler who posted 12:55 seconds did not make the final cut.

This unexpected, and unfortunate development snowballed into a cacophony of regrets, accusations and blame-games in the sporting community. From reports, Team Nigeria’s camp was thrown into a “mourning mode” just as the country’s fraternity of human kinetics in and around Paris, as well as here at home. Nigerians are hyper-passionate about sports. This needs not be overemphasized. Over the years, it has become the only unifying capital for a country that is divided along ethnic, tribal, and religious considerations. Through sports, such leanings and similar banal segmentations are usually shoved aside. With sports, nobody remembers language, creed, and location. With the ghost of the 2012 London Olympics, where Nigeria failed to win any medal staring the nation in Paris, the anger, complaints, and negative exertions of people was understandable.

I was privileged to attend the 2004 Olympics in Greece. Yes I did, courtesy of my selfless and inspirational principal in The Presidency at the time. A few days to the closing ceremony of the 2004 Olympics in Greece with no medal prospect, I engaged with Patrick Ekeji who was Nigeria’s *Chef de Mission* to the global tournament. After late dinner at the Holiday Inn “Nigeria House” in Athens. Ekeji, the foremost dual-lingual sports administrator who presently serves as Governor Hope Uzodinma’s Deputy Chief of Staff quipped: “We are condemned to win medals. We can’t leave here without any medal.” Happily, the “Nigerian House,” Olympics Stadium, Athletics Village, and other areas including Marousi, Omonoia and Kolonaki squares, restaurants, and pubs were besieged, and thrown into hours of jubilation when Team Nigeria won bronze medals at the men’s 4×100, and 4×400 relay events.

That Nigeria’s shambolic performance at the 2024 Paris Olympics games has elicited negative reactions and outright condemnation among many people is not surprising. Nigeria is a nation of about 200million people with over 250 ethnic groups, positioned as one of Africa’s largest economies, boasting about $3,62.81 billion gross domestic product, (GDP). Nigeria has produced some of the most brilliant and successful achievers in sports and other sectors over time. Failing to make the awards-list is unacceptable.

 Nigeria expended billions of naira, on a quadrennial event in which it featured 88 athletes who participated in 12 events and came back not even with *metals of participation.* Jamaica spent paltry $2,300 on each athlete and won one Gold, three Silver, two Bronze medals. Nigeria’s below par outing can only be inexplicable. Smaller African countries like Botswana, Cote d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, and Kenya performed better than Nigeria. These are countries which had hitherto looked up to Nigeria for inspiration. How about countries like St. Lucia and Uzbekistan, with populations below some of our states in Nigeria, excelling at the meet? 

Prior to the Olympics, many athletes posted impressive results which encouraged Nigerians to invest their trust and belief in them as potential medal winners. Tobi Amusan, Favour Ofili, Ese Brume, Kanyisola Ajayi, and few others posted very good times in their respective events at different meets and competitions at home and abroad this year. Blessing Oborodudu, and her female colleagues in wrestling showcased their readiness for the Olympics games. Not forgetting the Super Falcons who defeated arch-rivals South Africa to qualify for the female football event after 20 years.

Same for D’Tigress, the female basketball team which defeated every opposition all the way to the Olympic podium. With the convergence of these superlative performances and the desire to accomplish more, it was not out of place that people expressed hope and had expectations on Nigeria’s chances at the Olympics. At the end of the games, however, and contrary to predictions, Nigeria was not among Africa’s “Top 10” finishers. We “flourished and excelled” in the back-pages as one of the dismal performers in Africa and the world.

More worrisome was that some athletes of Nigerian descent competed for other countries. These included those who changed nationalities due to the arbitrary, nepotistic, and capricious attitudes of some Nigerian officials and managers. Watching helplessly as they won medals for their adopted nations triggered psychological discomfort, even emotional torture. Annette Echikunwoke won silver medal for USA in Hammer Throw after being frustrated and chased out of Nigeria by some overzealous officials at the Athletics Federation of Nigeria, (AFN). Same with Salwa Eid Naser (formerly Ebelechukwu Agbapuonwu) who also won silver medal in 400 metres, for little known Bahrain. She has been in the country since 2014 and naturalised. Watching others including Yemisi Ogunleye, Victoria Ohuruogu, Barthelemy Chinenze, Samu Omorodion and Michael Olise winning medals for Germany, Great Britain, France, and Spain in different sports evoked teary eyes, and mood swings.

From major stakeholders in the sports sector to politicians and ordinary citizens, it has been consistent and continued condemnation. Respected sports journalist, Dr. Mumini Alao believes that, “Nigerian sports is grossly underfunded which is a reflection of our poor economy. Unfortunately, even the little that is made available by government is often managed by selfish and corrupt sports administrators.” Enefiok Udo-Obong, two-time Olympics medalist in men’s relay believes that, “the failure of our athletes to win any medal is due to a combination of lack of preparation, bad luck, and incompetence of some of the handlers.” Chioma Ajunwa, Nigeria’s first-ever Olympics gold medalist won at Atlanta 1996 declared that, “it is a pity and painful that we keep saying the same thing after every edition of Olympics.” There are indeed reports that before the event, the Nigerian contingent had plethora of avoidable and resolvable issues.

Why have we abandoned weightlifting, boxing, and few other sports in which Nigeria had comparative advantage in the past? Can we learn from Uzbekistan which concentrated on boxing and delivered five gold medals; out of the eight won by the country? What happened to our swimming with the water bodies our country is blessed with? This is one sport with multiple medal prospects where our brother nation South Africa consistently excels. Why not us?

Going forward, given the numerous benefits of sports including youth empowerment, the promotion of national unity, curtailment of social vices, reduction of security challenges, and significant contributions to economic growth, the sector requires immediate and prompt overhauling. Every sub-sector of the nation’s sports superstructure needs people with new visions, fresh ideas, and creative approaches to leadership. Udo-Obong believes that, “people must be held accountable.The first thing is a sweeping change in the executive of sporting federations. A lot of board members have nothing to offer, only perhaps for title in which they are ready to pay their way for.”

Ajunwa counselled that, “Nigerian sports must put their house in order and stop recycling good for nothing administrators. Let them put in position those that really love and know sports, it’s powers, and what it can do for a nation rather than those that are there for pecuniary reasons.” Any circus approach, and motions without realistic movement must be jettisoned. The only way to get it right is to do the right thing in resourceful appointments into leadership, realizable planning, and improved funding. Can we juxtapose Sir Sebastian Coe’s achievements, who was a multi-decorated Olympian as President of Great Britain’s Olympic Committee with that of his Nigerian counterpart, septuagenarian Engineer Habu Gumel who has led the country to four Olympics?

There seem to be bright lights in the recent bleak experience that the sports administration can build upon towards having realisable and practicable vision. Through D’Tigress, Nigeria emerged as the first African basketball team, male or female to get to the Quarter finals at the Olympics. The team defeated Australia and Canada, the 3rd and 5th world ranked teams. Also, 32 year-old Rena Wakama was declared the “Best Coach” at the Olympics, just as Ezinne Kalu named in the Federation of International Basketball Association (FIBA) Women stars team; first in Africa. In long jump, Ese Brume and two others qualified for finals, first time by any African country. Despite not winning medals, some athletes ranked among the best in the world.

Perhaps, Minister John Enoh’s sustained admittance of taking responsibility for Nigeria’s failure, and promise to overhaul the sports sector may be the greatest positive. Away from the combative, arrogant, and know-it-all posturing of some of his predecessors, Enoh who may have been a victim of naivety and delegated legislation needs to be given benefit of the doubt in his determination to “right the wrongs” and put “round pegs in round holes.” Can he break the iron-cast grip of few “principalities, strongholds, and powers” that have held the nation’s sports down for years? Robert Nesta Marley and Jimmy Cliff, two iconic reggae superstars, in different songs, at different times, request to be watchful as we expect that “time will tell.”

 Afolabi is a development communications specialist, was with the Office of Public Affairs in The Presidency

THEFRONTLINES By Joseph Ushigiale

In the aftermath of the ten days of rage initiated by the #ENDBADGOVERNANCE group which spread across the country – although more pronounced in the northern part of the country than the south, the federal government decided to railroad its team to dialogue with critical stakeholders. The team embarked on a roadshow to state its case and seek greater understanding and patience to give the government time to stabilise.

And so last week, the Minister of Information, Mohammed Malagi and his delegation which included Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, Director General, National Orientation, Lanre Isa Oniru and Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media, Tunde Rahman were in ARISE, THISDAY MEDIA GROUP corporate headquarters, Lagos.

Chairman and Editor-in-Chief, ARISE, THISDAY Media Group, supported by Managing Director of THISDAY, Eniola Bello and the Ombudsman, Kayode Komolafe and ARISE NEWS staff, moderated the interactive session. He began the session with an opening remark, praising the minister and his team for the visit and reminding them people are watching the lifestyle of politicians and government officials which does not reflect the realities of the moment.

Responding to the opening remarks, Malagi took time to make a compelling case as to why Nigerians have to be patient with the administration arguing that it inherited a comatose economy riddled with debts and a system that was not sustainable.

He cited the cases of fuel subsidies and the existence of multiple exchange rate windows. He condemned the retention of the fuel subsidy regime describing it as wasteful and a drain on the economy arguing that fuel subsidies benefited a few privileged people and encouraged the smuggling of petroleum products to neighbouring countries.

On the existence of different foreign exchange windows, he said it was necessary to close and unify the three different windows into one to ascertain the true value of the naira and do away with arbitrage.

According to him, the decision to remove fuel subsidies was not canvassed by Tinubu alone but his political opponents including Peter Obi and Atiku Abubakar who all included subsidy removal in their manifestoes.

Malagi enumerated the administration’s quick wins which are being witnessed with the rollout of the students’ loan scheme, CNG projects, Construction of the Lagos – Calabar coastal highway, Lagos – Sokoto super highway, approval of a N70,000 per month minimum wage for the Nigerian worker etc.

He concluded his pitch by calling on Nigerians to sacrifice and support the administration as its efforts at delivering democracy dividends would begin to manifest soon.

Without a doubt, when you appraise President Tinubu’s policy thrust, you will come away with the impression of a well-intentioned president. He also comes along as a President with a listening ear and has empathy. There have been instances when Tinubu had to rescind decisions already taken as a result of public outcry.

Take the students loan scheme for instance, it would pass as a first by any administration. With this scheme, a window of opportunity opens for indigent Nigerian students to access quality and affordable university education. Now the scheme is offering a glimmer of hope for those students who would have dropped out of school for lack of finances.

Nigerians especially in the diaspora no longer have sleepless nights fretting over the procurement or renewal of international passports, thanks to the revolutionary policies that have liberalised the process. A lot is also being done in information and communication technology where the government has signed up with Google to deploy cutting-edge training for Nigerian content creators to monetise their skills.     

Now, where did it go wrong? President Tinubu swept into office after a highly competitive and divisive campaign and election that divided this country down ethnic and religious lines. The outcome of the highly contested presidential election ended in the Presidential election tribunal and the ruling is still a subject of debate to date.

This is why, in his inaugural speech, he called for unity and support from Nigerians. Yet, in their anguish, Nigerians were all united against fuel subsidy retention. So it was not just Obi and Atiku who canvassed for it, it was a national battle cry for subsidy to be removed and the opacity that has shrouded the conduct of oil business in Nigeria in secret and leaving filling stations gasping for products and people sleeping in filling stations be laid bare.

Nigerians needed a breath of fresh air, a new lease of life from Tinubu and for him to show that he understood the murky waters of shadowy oil deals. The conditions for the subsidy to be removed were simple: ensure you rehabilitate all or two of the local major refineries to stimulate local production, cut back on costly fuel import, conserve foreign exchange, and save the naira and jobs for Nigerians.

Had Tinubu charted this course, Nigerians would have heaved a great sigh of relief and saluted the President because that would have saved Nigeria from spending its scarce forex to import mostly poisonous fuel, reduced cost per litre if the 16 import levies paid on imported petroleum products are not inputted in the price of locally refined products. The ordinary Nigerian believes that petroleum products could be cheaper if refined locally and that dreams remain an illusion to this day.

Nigerians are angry. At the time of this report, the NNPCL has just announced that the inauguration of the Port Harcourt refinery which has been its poster boy in ‘renewing the hope’ of local refining has again been put off and dashed. This will be the sixth time the refinery’s inauguration has been postponed after payment of $1.5b for turnaround maintenance. It is now clear that the powers that be are hell-bent on making sure that none of the three national refineries work. Another bizarre saga is now playing out between NUPRC and Dangote Refinery over crude allocation for production. Do you see why Nigerians are angry? 

The minister also made a case about Nigeria’s petroleum products being the cheapest in the world and why they are being smuggled across borders. Is this not a very lame excuse and a crass display of a lack of creative thinking? For a fully privatised oil company, it beggars reasoning why the oil company did not see this apparent challenge as an opportunity.

If Nigeria’s petroleum products are much sought after in neighbouring countries, does it not automatically make it apparent that it presents a compelling reason for the oil company to recognise business opportunities on the West African coastline? Is there any reason or law restricting NNPCL from applying for retail licences in these countries to open filing stations and flood these countries with petroleum products? Can you imagine the humongous profits NNPCL would have been making if it decided to transform smuggling into a profitable commercial model?

Let’s examine the effect of merging the different forex windows. The former governor of the central bank, Godwin Emefiele under President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration spent billions of dollars to stabilise the naira. The naira was devalued several times and with the different windows in operation, arbitrage set in. Thus, there was a need for intervention to bring sanity to the financial sector to save the naira and the economy. Following the closure of the different Forex windows and the flotation of the naira, the currency became volatile and moved from $1 to N800 to $1 to N1600. The immediate outcome was runaway inflation from 23% to over 33% within seven months.

Every new President has his core support base and this base has great expectations of the new President. For Tinubu, the current hunger, pain and misery are not what they were expecting. Most Nigerians see the President now as lacking empathy and his policies as punitive.

After the protest, the Minister of Industry, Doris Anite estimated that the protest cost the economy N500billion daily while it lasted. So cumulatively, Nigeria lost N5 trillion to the protests simply because of fuel subsidy and naira flotation. Is this the price the President can pay for the two policies that have become the linchpin of his administration?

We were told to sacrifice and be patient for the administration to succeed. There has been no administration since independence in 1960 that has not urged the people to sacrifice. The irony is that, while Nigerians are sacrificing, politicians, technocrats and some privileged few with their families do otherwise. They live in opulence and openly exhibit and flaunt their extravagant and flamboyant lifestyles and the same people you ask to sacrifice are not blind and they see these things daily. Why won’t they be angry? Why not practice what you preach for once?

The Tinubu administration has three years ahead and it is still redeemable if it takes some steps back and does the needful. For instance, with inflation reducing by 2.2%, there seem to be silver lining in the horizon and the President must muster the political will to get local refining back on track. Nigerians are desirous of seeing their refineries produce products for their use rather than importing. The gains in refining locally are in quantum and the President does not need to be reminded of this. We need to create jobs, stabilise the naira and stimulate local production of goods and services from derivatives that will be accrue from the refineries.

While the current efforts at building infrastructure are salutary, the paucity of funds and the model of borrowing to finance infrastructure is digging us into a deeper debt hole. We had hoped the President would think out of the box and bring a new financing model to underpin his infrastructure financing. Regrettably, the President is reinventing the wheel and regurgitating the same old ways that took us nowhere but huge debts and corruption.

The current infrastructure development thrust is very limiting and myopic. The President can do better than this. He can still define his presidency by expanding the scope of the projects and embracing a creative and robust financing model that would inject foreign direct investment into the country.

The current Lagos – Calabar coastal highway and Lagos – Sokoto superhighway in addition to several other interventions on the railway should be relaunched. The President should launch a very ambitious project to build 10,000 km each of road and rail crisscrossing the country. Tinubu needs to float a $300 billion international infrastructure bond to inject foreign direct investment into the country.

 This will be followed up by an international tender for reputable investors to bid for sections of the project either the road or rail on a build operate and transfer Public Private Partnership model. To achieve this, he needs to put in the necessary legislation backed by sovereign guarantees to engender trust and transparency in international investors.

If 10,000 km of roads and rail each are divided along the six geo-political zones, any investors interested can bid for the section bring in his money, build, operate for an agreed number of years and transfer. In this way, the government will be relieved of the burden of borrowing, our economy will be reflated, and the projects will have multiplier effects on society.

In the absence of reliable legislation, no investor will be willing to bring in his money. In addition, the conduct of such an affair must not be opaque and shrouded in secrecy as was the case in the coastal highway. Once there is trust, investors will flood into the country with their money. It will be a great win for the administration because such a model will lay the basis for corporate governance, build institutions and stamp out corruption.

All tiers of government must deliver good governance if the streets are not to erupt again, writes BOLAJI ADEBIYI

Calm eventually returned early this week. There had been protests on the streets in some states last week. Faceless organisers mobilised angry youths to hit the streets, waving placards protesting the rising cost of living. It was supposed to be a peaceful march to call the government’s attention to the sufferings and pains that arose from President Bola Tinubu’s administration’s economic reforms.

However, the protests escalated, prompting President Tinubu to take swift action. He made two broadcasts within 24 hours, appealing for calm and promising to take further measures to alleviate the hardships caused by the reforms. This proactive response from the President played a crucial role in resolving the protests. While some protesters heeded his call, others remained steadfast in their demands, continuing their agitation until they dispersed on Tuesday.

Perhaps that breather was needed for the President to summon the nation’s elders to the Aso Rock Presidential Villa on Tuesday to discuss pressing matters affecting the country. The Council of State is a constitutional body comprising former heads of state, former chief justices of the federation, the President, the Vice-President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the 36 state governors, and the Federal Capital Territory minister.

Two ministers, Wale Edun, Finance and Coordinating Minister for the Economy, and Dele Alake, Solid Minerals Development, and the Chairman of Nigeria Governors’ Forum, Abdulrahman Abdulrazak, who is also the governor of Kwara State, briefed Nigerians after the well-attended meeting and said it was informed on the administration’s policies and attainments in the last 14 months and that the elders expressed their satisfaction and confidence in the ability of President Tinubu to turn the nation around the bend towards an inclusive economic development that will benefit Nigerians.

Mixed reactions have expectedly followed the council’s vote of confidence in the President. While some social and public policy critics were disappointed that the council did not acknowledge and appreciate the people’s suffering and dismissed the vote as irrelevant, other more positive commentators took it as a deserved commendation, given the administration’s efforts to revive and stabilise the economy in its short stay in office.  

Both sides of the divide have their points. Given the high cost of living, which occasioned the protests, it is reasonable to expect some critique of the implementation of the reform policies that precipitated the hardships that forced the people to take to the streets. That didn’t come from the Council, understandably so. These are former heads of state and chief justices who understand the intricacies of governance, which may create a lag between policy formulation and effective implementation that results in slow delivery of the intended outcome of government programmes.    

Contrary to critics’ view, the confidence vote is significant to the Tinubu administration. Given the bent of the protests in the North, where some protesters called for military take-over, and in the South, where the battle cry was #endbadgovernance#, the vote was reassuring for a government that perceived the agitation as an opposition move to oust it through the back door. With this somewhat revalidation of its mandate by the country’s highest constitutional advisory body, the government may have received the boost it needs to take on the opposition even as it mobilises public opinion to support its reform policies.

However, as critics said, no matter the evidence, the government needs to go beyond accusing the opposition of the protests. The high cost of living has hamstrung most Nigerians, who struggle to meet their basic needs. So, the opposition had fertile ground to exploit. What the government needs to do in the circumstances is to pull the rug off the opposition’s feet by removing the basis of the agitations.

In fairness, unlike in the past, the president and his ministers have been very conciliatory in their responses to the agitations. They acknowledge the pains and take time to explain them as the short-term discomfort of the reforms. For the umpteenth time, they rolled out the palliatives that had been put in place to alleviate the pain. More importantly, they have persistently pointed out the incremental gains of the reforms manifested by the positive rating of global rating agencies and the increasing investors’ confidence in the economy. However, the president and his team must go beyond this and recalibrate their delivery mechanism to ensure these positive developments directly impact the people. Certainly, the gains are useless if the people do not feel them in their lives.

One way for the Tinubu administration to move forward is to speed up the implementation of alleviative policies and programmes, particularly for the youth and the vulnerable. The Youth Investment Fund, the Graduate Support Scheme, the National Education Loan Fund, the Investment in Digital and Creative Enterprises, the Consumer Credit Initiative, the Mortgage Fund and the Conditional Grants to Nano Businesses must be ramped up and delivered at a higher speed.

The CNG/LNG initiative is an important component of palliative measures intended to cut the cost of transporting goods and services. It is reassuring that the president has inaugurated 30 CNG-powered buses as a symbolic gesture of the government’s commitment to this initiative. However, there is the need to multiply these quickly and flood the space with conversion kits and centres.

In the meantime, the government needs to abate the perennial petrol scarcity nationwide. What is the matter? For years, the country has witnessed a scarcity of this essential commodity. It was said that the problem was caused by subsidies, which made smuggling outside the country attractive. How come it remained scarce more than a year after the removal of subsidies? The government needs to interrogate this and deal decisively with the problem.

Finally, it is noteworthy that virtually all the 36 state governors attended the Council of State meeting on Tuesday. Abdulrazak, their chairman, briefed on the meeting outcome at the State House, Abuja. He said the governors and the president had an executive session after the council’s parley, where they had very frank discussions. Although he did not expatiate the content of the frank discussions, it is only hoped that it included the need for the governors to complement the federal government’s efforts to cushion the reforms’ negative effects.

Many Nigerians believe, quite correctly, that the governors’ gross underperformance is largely responsible for the widespread discontent among Nigerians. Despite huge funds accruing to the states from the subsidy removal savings, there is very little on the ground to justify the humongous resources flowing into their treasuries from the Federation Account since June last year.

For the calm that has returned to the country after the storm to endure, the government must double up its efforts to bring relief to the people. That can only be assured if all tiers of government act in concert to deliver good governance.

Adebiyi is the media aide to the Minister of Budget and Economic Planning, Senator Abubakar Bagudu

The Advocate

By Onikepo Braithwaite

Onikepo.braithwaite@thisdaylive.com

The #EndBadGovernanceinNigeria Protest (#EBG) should generate a good amount of food for thought, at least for any right thinking government. Of the utmost importance, is the fact that the people are starving, and palliatives can never be a substitute for sound economic policy. They are just a temporary measure, at best. Swift action is required. If a policy unleashes more suffering and hardship than good on the people, then there needs to be some rejigging, because ignoring the plight of the people is neglecting their welfare, and by virtue of Section 14(2)(b) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended in 2023)(the Constitution) the security and welfare of the people is the primary purpose of government. 

Fuel Subsidy

The Protesters’ first demand is the reintroduction of fuel subsidy, in order to reduce the astronomical cost of living. I have said before that an independent auditing body of repute should have been engaged, to audit the activities of NNPC, Ministry of Petroleum Resources and all other related agencies, to among other things, ascertain exactly how much fuel Nigeria has truly been importing, how much fuel we actually require per month, and how much has gone to subsidising scam and corruption. That way, the funds being diverted to subsidise scam, could have been stopped, and perhaps, the subsidy phased out in stages until we have a proper local refinery regime in place, instead of the cold turkey policy that was implemented by the Tinubu administration. 

The Dangote Refinery (DR) and any other functioning refinery, are low hanging fruits for putting such fuel regime in place; but, instead, our ears are filled with stories of sabotage against DR by Government Officials, instead of the FGN encouraging it to be up and running, so that Nigerians can benefit from it. 

Simply speaking, if we had been paying a subsidy on importation of 10 litres of fuel a month, but our actual requirement is 2 litres, then it would mean 8 litres is a scam! I recall about 10-12 years ago or so, when several companies were indicted for subsidy scam, some were accused of claiming from NNPC or PPMC (I can’t remember which body), for refunds on cargoes that were never even imported! 

Or could the Federal Government impose price control policies for essential goods and commodities, to ease the hardship on the people? – see Item 62(e) of the Exclusive Legislative List of the Constitution and the Price Control Act 1977 (PCA) (though fuel, and not most of our staple foods apart from flour, milk, sugar and salt are included in the Section 4 First Schedule to the PCA- this can be rectified). I’m sorry to say, but, a good number of Nigerian traders have a penchant for taking advantage of situations, to earn astronomical profits on the goods they sell. But, beyond palliatives, economic policies must be reviewed. Nigerians have no money to eat.

Ethnicity/Tribalism

Another low hanging fruit for thought following #EBG, is the worrisome issue of ethnicity/tribalism. Some argue that the North didn’t show this much enthusiasm for protest during the eight-year Buhari administration, not even during #EndSARS, because President Buhari is a Northerner. But, now that we have a Yoruba President, with #EBG they went on a rampage with gusto and aplomb. The fact that Russian flags were flown and paraded around Kano, coupled with treasonable calls for military intervention, is also a great support for the tribalism story of North against the Tinubu administration. These days, the habit of reducing everything including the most important matters to issues of ethnicity and tribalism, I find rather awkward, particularly at such a time as this, because poverty and hunger have no tribe or race – everyone suffers when they have no food to eat, even animals too, that’s why they are always on a hunt for prey to devour! I will discuss the issue of hunger further, below. 

However, the bitter truth is that, all over the world, there are many negative stereotypes/discriminations like racism, tribalism, gender and religious discrimination and so on, and that’s why, globally, there are all sorts of laws and international charters against discrimination – see Section 42 of the Constitution. And, while it isn’t too surprising  when the uneducated and uninformed display their ignorance, it is shocking when we realise that those who are expected to know better, are cut from the same cloth of lack of knowledge – they are shallow and sciolistic. Many also use these divisive stereotypes for their own personal gain, for instance, in politics and the workplace – take Republican Presidential Candidate, Donald Trump, for example – his fixation on race and his unintelligent comments, even about US Vice President and Democratic Presidential Candidate, Kamala Harris’ ethnicity and origins, more or less portray him as a racist; but, this will certainly earn him votes among bigot groups like the KKK and other White supremacists. 

In 2017 or so, I recall writing about what was at the time called ‘the Kaduna Declaration’ –  some mindless Northern Youth groups had given all Igbos in the North a three month ultimatum to leave all the Northern States, and at the same time, called on all Northerners in the South East to return home. Recently, a hateful online media handle operated allegedly by an unenlightened Yoruba group, Lagospedia, called for an ‘Igbos Must Go’ Protest, that the Igbos must leave Lagos. What nonsense! Like I said in 2017 and I repeat now, firstly, Sections 41(1) & 43 of the Constitution guarantee freedom of movement and the right of citizens to acquire immovable property in any part of Nigeria. I had stated unequivocally then, that the Kaduna Declaration was a threat to national security, and I reiterate that position today concerning the Lagospedia tweet. It goes beyond just being reckless; it is a criminal offence, which for one, falls within the purview of Sections 51(1)(b) & 62 of the Criminal Code Act 2004 (see Section 417 of the Penal Code) – that is, exciting hatred or contempt against any class of persons in such a way as to endanger public peace; this offence attracts 3 years imprisonment or fine or both, upon conviction.

In the Nigerian context today, tribalism/ethnicity is simply a distractionary tactic – instead of joining hands to peacefully demand good governance and accountability from all tiers of government, without which Nigeria can never progress, instead we waste precious time hating and fighting ourselves based on ethnic sentiments, and achieve nothing as a people. We have taken our eyes off the ball! 

Hunger

Back to the issue of hunger, another low hanging fruit for thought. While we cannot divorce the policies of the Federal Government from the pervasive hunger in the land, it is time to take note of some other facts, as hard or bitter as they may be. 

It has been repeated frequently, that the level of hunger in Northern Nigeria is higher than in the South, meaning that there appears to have been a deep-seated starvation up North over the years, not just today. The issue of insecurity/ Herdsmen/Farmers crisis which have plagued the Northern States more, has worsened matters, as people are not able to go to their farms anymore for fear of being killed, maimed or kidnapped. If the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) doesn’t tackle insecurity seriously, then this situation will persist, and the prices of food stuff may never become as low as they should, despite the fact that Nigeria is blessed with an abundance of arable land. Even in the South, there are areas where people cannot go to their farms.

State and Local Government: Joint Responsibility in Good Governance 

However, I don’t think it would be speaking out of turn to state that successive Northern leaders have failed the North mostly. In over 60 years since Independence, Nigeria has had more Northern Heads of State, ruling for long periods of time, and in the last 25 years of democracy, indigenous Governors of the Northern States. Could the anger in the North, therefore, be more deep-rooted than #EBG? A rebellion against their own leaders as well? 

Unfortunately, because of Nigeria’s culture of lack of accountability and failure being a stimulant for promotion, for instance, we have Governors like Abdullahi Ganduje and Bello Maitawalle who were not exactly paragons of good governance in their States, who have been rewarded with new positions; with Ganduje who is now facing charges filed by Kano State Government against him and some others for the diversion of N57.4 billion being made the Chairman of the ruling APC, and Maitawalle who couldn’t secure Zamfara State, strangely being appointed as Minister of State of Defence.

Section 14(2)(b) of the Constitution, doesn’t restrict the primary purpose of government to the Federal Government only. Section 5(2) of the Constitution more or less replicates the powers of the Federal Government for the Federation, in the State Government for the States, setting limitations to State Government power in Section 5(3) of the Constitution. Additionally, Section 7 of the Constitution also provides for democratically elected LGCs whose functions are clearly stated in the Fourth Schedule to the Constitution, including the provision of primary, adult and vocational education (see Section 18(3)(a) & (d) of the Constitution) and the provision and maintenance of health services in the area covered by the LGC. See the case of AG Lagos State v AGF & Ors (2003) LPELR-620(SC) per Samson Odemwingie Uwaifo, JSC where the Supreme Court held inter alia that the legislative power of the House of Assembly gives the States the exclusive function for the planning, layout and development of their respective areas. Also see the case of Knight Frank & Rutley (Nig) & Anor v AG Kano State (1998) LPELR-1694 (SC) per Muhammadu Lawal Uwais, JSC (later CJN) on the functions of the LGC. A good chunk of governance, lies in the hands of these two tiers of government.

I saw on the internet that UNICEF stated that, presently, Nigeria has up to 18.3 million out-of-school children, one of the highest, if not the highest number in the world. The FGN has nothing to do with primary school education. Education is not on the Exclusive Legislative List; Items 27 & 28 on the Concurrent Legislative List inter alia empower the FGN to deal with University, post-primary, technological and professional education. Primary school education is the preserve of the State and LGCs – see Item 30 on the Concurrent Legislative List & Section 7 Fourth Schedule to the Constitution Paragraph 2(a). Why have the State Governors and LGCs not been called out, for their failure to meet their own Section 18(3)(a) of the Constitution primary school free and compulsory educational objectives? For instance, the 2017/2018 academic session, the National Common Entrance Examination (that is, Primary to Junior Secondary school exam) cut-off mark was published for all the States. While Imo State had the highest cut-off mark of 66%, Sokoto was 7%, Zamfara, 12%, and Yobe, 20%. A cumulative failure of the Governments and LGCs in those Northern States vis-à-vis primary education; it didn’t have much to do with the Buhari FGN administration at the time. Even if there is a viable argument that insufficient funds are being budgeted by the FGN for education in Nigeria, the other side of the coin is that, if Imo State could have attained a 66% cut-off mark on that lean budget, the Northern States could also have done much better.

While the Federal and State Governments are meant to have properly equipped Teaching Hospitals, it appears that the LGCs are responsible for providing and maintaining health services in their areas (see Sections 17(3)(d) & 7 Fourth Schedule Paragraph 2(c) of the Constitution). All tiers of government have failed in this, but it is only the FGN that is held responsible for this dereliction. The Constitution puts food security in the hands of the three tiers of government, yet, the FGN is the only one being held responsible for the fact that even staple food stuff have been priced out of the reach of the common man. 

Conclusion 

Whether the #EBG has been successful or not, cannot be determined immediately, because while some of the demands may be able to be addressed immediately, many others require time. But, one thing the #EBG has certainly been successful at, is showing that Nigerians can no longer be taken for granted by Government. The Youths have started to demand accountability, and this is a good outcome, because without accountability in governance, Nigeria will continue to regress. Section 6(6)(c) of the Constitution ousts the jurisdiction of the courts to hold government accountable for not delivering good governance – see Chapter II of the Constitution) – this is an anomaly. The need for a free and fair transparent electoral process is imperative, in order to achieve better accountability in governance, by being able to easily vote out non-performers. 

Nevertheless, there are low hanging fruits for Government to pick, to satisfy some of the #EBG demands immediately – increase the tempo of the fight against corruption; stop reckless expenditure; buckle down on the fight against insecurity; do a cabinet reshuffle and drop non-performers; get rid of all those useless government agencies, cut the cost of governance; do a downward review of the remuneration of all political office holders; reduce the electricity tariff; release the #EndSARS Protesters who have no charges filed against them and prosecute those who have forthwith; create jobs and opportunities for the teeming Youths. In short, collate the demands of the #EBG, and address them.

Finally, now that the LGCs have gained their financial autonomy, the excuses for non-performance due to lack of funds should be considerably reduced. LGCs have an important role to play, and Nigerians hope that with this new independence, a better crop of people will be interested in manning the LGCs, instead of lackeys of the State Governors. During #EBG, many Governors didn’t show up to be counted, in spite of the fact that along with the LGCs, they are directly responsible for the people of their States. Along with the FGN, the State Governments and LGCs must also be held accountable to Nigerians, for their own failures in governance. Luckily, the LGC Chairmen are not covered by the Constitution’s Section 308 immunity clause, which means that if they are caught with their fingers in the till, they can face criminal prosecution immediately. 

Monday Philips Ekpe writes that demonstrations should be addressed and cannot truly be suppressed

Mahatma Gandhi, that iconic, dogged proponent of non-violent demonstration, once put his enduring philosophy of protests thus: “It’s the action, not the fruit of the action, that’s important. You have to do the right thing. It may not be in your power, may not be in your time, that there’ll be any fruit. But that doesn’t mean you stop doing the right thing. You may never know what results come from your action. But if you do nothing, there will be no result.” Protests as resilient, dependable seeds, in other words. As things stand, the organisers of the present protests in various parts of the country, scheduled to last till August 10, may have to take solace in the sage’s tested admonition, especially in the face of the apparently lost momentum. Now, the fire next time. Probably.

It’s not that they even have reasonable options, anyway. The seriousness with which the agitations began has not only waned considerably, other extraneous factors like the Russian flag have entered the fray and dampened any rationale for continuing. Perhaps to the joy of the government, at least. In this era of hashtags, #EndBadGovernance gave birth to many others of varying persuasions, perceptions and dimensions – all of which are virtually aimed at getting the attention of young Nigerians who by far constitute a chunk of internet/social media users. Understandably so.

The revolution in information and communication technology (ICT) has continued to power social mobilisation around the globe in contemporary times more than any other communication or media phenomenon. Twitter (now X), for instance, was so effective in galvanising the #EndSars rallies and street parades in 2020 that the then government of President Muhammadu Buhari sanctioned the operations of the medium. That period woke the nation’s teeming but underutilised youth population to its own latent energies. If the actions which had commenced peacefully hadn’t been infiltrated by thugs, those momentous days would certainly have produced substantial national course changes.

Nigeria’s latest protests have more than enough catalysts, both domestic and external, to snowball into what could keep everybody awake. Hunger, inflation levels not anticipated by most textbooks on economics and the whirlwind liberalisation of poverty in the land do not ordinarily require weeks-long notices for people dissatisfied with their conditions to react drastically. More recently, Kenya caught the eyes of the world as it was engulfed in the ruins that had started as the rightful demands by its citizens to hold the government of President William Ruto to account. Only some days ago, the riots in Bangladesh which culminated in the abrupt resignation and abscondment of its Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wazed were mostly invigorated by unemployed youths who were fed up with the discriminatory job placement quota system. In both cases and many others, the new media have become potent tools for sensitising and rallying people towards taking actions of all kinds.

Unlike some past instances, however, the reasons for attempting to unite Nigerians to “take back” their country, though pressing, haven’t succeeded in further validating the fame of social media platforms as mobilisers for common causes. They are serving, instead, as conveyors of the familiar fault-lines that have kept the populace divided for long. Sincerely, my major wish in the run-up to August 1 was for the exercises not to become violent. Thankfully, personalities like the Most Rev Dr Bulus Yohana, Catholic Bishop of Kotangora Diocese and Chairman of the Niger State Branch of Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), sought to douse the tension that preceded the demonstrations. According to him, “as a body, the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), Niger State chapter will not be part of the exercise but rather prefer to have peaceful dialogue and continue to pray for our nation. Peaceful protest with clear demands is good but such could be hijacked by miscreants and be perceived as security threat which can lead to arrests, shootings. And we cannot afford to lose any of our children….

“There is no time that violence has led to positive results, rather it has caused destructions, loss of lives, and setbacks… Let there be greater accountability, fairness in empowerment, job opportunities, employment into various Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs), Military and paramilitaries, sharing the commonwealth and then allowing justice to prevail at all times. An idle brain is the department of the devil. If you have nothing to do the devil will employ you for his work.” But the bit about the government rising to its duties sounds like a broken record. Rather than devise meaningful ways to make life more liveable for the Nigerian people, successive administrations have perfected devious methods to respond to their frustrations and anger, no matter how legitimate. And to break their ranks if they seem to forge any united front.

Are Nigerians now hopelessly helpless, condemned to a lifetime of Machiavellian manoeuvres by those who are supposed to lead them? Why is it so difficult for the citizens of a country that has practiced 25 years of uninterrupted democracy to truly demonstrate “voice of the people”, a core component of this system of government, even on issues that are fundamental to their very existence and general wellbeing?    

President Bola Tinubu’s reaction to the protests several days after they started began on a sober, compassionate note: “I speak to you today with a heavy heart and a sense of responsibility, aware of the turmoil and violent protests unleashed in some of our states…. I am especially pained by the loss of lives in Borno, Jigawa, Kano, Kaduna and other states, the destruction of public facilities in some states, and the wanton looting of supermarkets and shops, contrary to the promise of protest organisers that the protest would be peaceful across the country. The destruction of properties sets us back as a nation, as scarce resources will be used to restore them….

“As president of this country, I must ensure public order. In line with my constitutional oath to protect the lives and property of every citizen, our government will not stand idly by and allow a few with a clear political agenda to tear this nation apart…. Under the circumstances, I hereby enjoin protesters and the organisers to suspend any further protest and create room for dialogue, which I have always acceded to at the slightest opportunity. Nigeria requires all hands to be on deck and needs us all – regardless of age, party, tribe, religion or other divides, to work together in reshaping our destiny as a nation.

“To those who have taken undue advantage of this situation to threaten any section of this country, be warned. The law will catch up with you. There is no place for ethnic bigotry or such threats in the Nigeria we seek to build….” And he delved into self-appraising (not self-serving, hopefully) statements that would only be suitable for other occasions, not the ones precipitated by the prevailing unprecedented suffering, increasing loss of faith in the political class, and darker prospects.

Yes, true lovers of Nigeria should rejoice that the volume of mayhem earlier anticipated hasn’t materialised. But the current atmosphere in which the protests appear to be experiencing some inertia doesn’t call for triumphalism of any sort, either. Whatever the outcomes in relation to expectations, one point should be clear to any discerning mind: the seeming impregnability of the privileged clan won’t go on indefinitely without being challenged by the increasingly disillusioned mass of the people. Disappointed by the low turnout of protesters in Lagos, one of them declared, “Nigerians haven’t suffered enough. Perhaps, they’ll rise up when one cup of rice hits N10,000.” That’s deep.    

Dr Ekpe is a member of THISDAY Editorial Board

No one had to be Nostradamus, to see that the #Days of Rage aka #EndBadGovernance (EBG) Protest would turn violent, at least in some parts of Nigeria. And, indeed, in various States, violence and looting occurred on the very first day. EBG doesn’t seem to have taken off as well as #EndSARS did, even though, at the end of the day, not much was achieved from the #EndSARS Protest. In fact, it ended in monumental losses, with not much in terms of institutional reforms as far as the Police is concerned, (which was one of the main demands of the Protest), aside from a change in nomenclature of the offending Police Department from SARS to SWAT. 

#EndBadGovernance Protest: Looting, Carnage and Violence

On the first day of EBG, we saw live videos of people looting recklessly in Kano; and it was obvious that it was the people of Kano in action, not any Government sponsored thugs, at least not at the Rufaidah Building where there is a yoghurt shop located on the ground floor. Even teenagers and children were present at that particular scene of looting;  the about-to-be launched NCC Industrial Park, was also ransacked and looted, and we saw other young ones, making away with executive office chairs and other gadgets stolen from there. 

In Kaduna, 25 suspects who were arrested for their alleged involvement in damaging Government offices, happened to be members of Sheik El-Zakzaky’s Islamic Movement in Nigeria (IMN). A news report that I read, stated that an AK-47 rifle and ammunition were recovered from the suspects. 

In Bayelsa State, the Governor, Douye Diri, gave a press conference alleging that the opposition that lost the election in 2023, was responsible for violence in the State during the protest. The Governor openly accused former Bayelsa Governor and APC Gubernatorial Candidate in the 2023 election, Timipre Silva, Joshua Maciver and some others, of being behind the violence. 

In short, the narrative that was repeated by some like learned Senior Advocates, Femi Falana and Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, that the violence that had erupted during past protests like #EndSARS, was mainly because of the insertion of Government sponsååored thugs and agents into the mix to foment violence and disruption, didn’t quite seem to be the case, at least not in these three States and several others. It was the people themselves, that went on a rampage! As the saying goes, ‘a hungry man, is an angry man’. However, law enforcement agents must remember that while there cannot be use of force against peaceful protesters, in extreme and exceptional circumstances where force may be necessary, it must be proportionate. For instance, opening fire on unarmed protesters who may be disruptive or even throwing stones at the Police, is using disproportionate force. Such response, is unacceptable.

Some EBG Demands

My point? Like I said last week, these days, in Nigeria, a call to protest means different things to different people. For some, they genuinely use it as a means of airing their grievances, a right which is guaranteed by Sections 39(1) & 40 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended in 2023)(the Constitution), that is, the right to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly, peaceful being the operative word here (see Section 45 of the Constitution). See the case of IGP v ANPP 2007 18 N.W.L.R. Part 1066 Page 457. 

For those who were engaged in peaceful EBG protest, some of their demands are: 1) revert petrol pump price to N100/litre (so that transportation costs will be greatly reduced, prices of food stuff will once again become affordable and cost of living will decrease generally); 2) security; 3) combat hunger;  4) effective fight against corruption; 5) no more unjustifiable and unnecessary Government expenditure on things like ridiculously expensive renovations of government buildings, luxury vehicles, State-owned aircrafts, foreign trips with huge entourages etc, while Nigerians are asked to tighten their belts and sacrifice; 6) reduction in electricity tariff; 7) good governance, accountability and transparency; 8) reversal of the hike in fees for public tertiary institutions; 9) immediate release of #EndSARS Protesters still in detention; 10) closure of all IDP Camps and the resettlement of the IDPs; 11) children of all public office holders should attend public schools; 12) transition to a unicameral Legislature. The Protesters in Edo State, also demanded for a downward review of the remuneration of political office holders. Generally, the argument is that, if there are funds available for No. 5, then there must be funds available for the first leg of No. 1 and other things that benefit the people. 

The counter-argument by the pro-subsidy removal people, is that there really was no other option – the fuel subsidy had to go, if not Nigeria would sink. And that, in any event, the Buhari administration made no provision for the fuel subsidy beyond June 2023; that all the country was doing was borrowing left, right and centre to stay afloat. Majority of the people don’t understand all this, neither do they find it plausible, particularly if they do not seem to be enjoying any benefits from the gains and savings from the removal of the fuel subsidy, and instead, an unprecedented level of suffering has been unleashed on them. It is the responsibility of Government to communicate their side of the story to the people, in a language that they will understand. Additionally, Government must show good faith, by tightening its own belt along with Nigerians. When the people see Government and its officials spending lavishly while they are starving, naturally, it breeds resentment, suspicion and distrust.

Some Reasons Why Nigerian Protests Turn Ugly: Lack of Coherent Welfare Policy for the People

The worse the living conditions, the more likely that a protest will turn violent. At the time of the ‘Occupy Nigeria’ Protest of 2012 for example, living conditions were better. So, unfortunately, for some, with the present harsh living conditions, protest is an opportunity to pursue their sinister motives – to loot, settle political scores, destabilise the environment, for violence and other criminal activities. This time around, we even saw people hoisting the Russian flag and calling for military takeover (à la neighbouring Niger) – sounds like Treasonable Felony – see Section 41 of the Criminal Code Act 2004 (CC). See the case of Omisade & Ors v Queen (1964) LPELR-25119(SC) per Adetokunbo Adegboyega Ademola, JSC (later CJN). 

Part of the reason for this kind of bad behaviour during protest, is that Nigeria doesn’t have a proper welfare system, nor do we effectively impose sanctions for a lot of this undesirable behaviour (the standard of education in public schools is also low, the healthcare system is almost nonexistent, there’s a high rate of unemployment and poverty in the land). I watched some Protesters on television, on the first day. When they were asked why they were on the road in Ikeja, they stated that they are homeless and sleep under Ikeja bridge; they were trekking from there to the Ojota Protest location. 

It is highly unlikely that people who are protesting in London against climate change or the rising cost of living for example, will go on a rampage and start breaking into Sainsbury’s or Tesco Supermarkets to loot. UK has a proper welfare system; the unemployed receive benefits, there’s Public/Council housing, good public education and healthcare system in place. The less privileged may not be able to afford caviar and champagne, but, mostly, they are not starving. Usually, they have a roof over their head, food to eat, and their children get a good standard of education from the public schools, possibly comparable to that of the private schools, just without the frills and thrills. It is common for people in the UK not to further their education after Secondary School, and acquire skills instead; some training to be Bus or Train Drivers, because they will still live a decent life. The British Government has always made the welfare of its citizens a priority; if not, you will be voted out!

Examples of Bad Governance 

Good governance is simply meeting the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy, set out in Chapter II of the Constitution. Though we now have a Humanitarian Ministry, there doesn’t seem to be a coherent welfare policy in place for Nigerians, even though their security and welfare is the primary purpose of government (see Section 14(2)(b) in Chapter II of the Constitution). Isn’t it bizarre, that successive administrations have consistently failed to deliver on the most important mandate and essence of government? If Government takes this mandate as seriously as it should, possibly protests will become more civilised in Nigeria, or there would be no need for them. 

The Tinubu administration appointed a Humanitarian Minister who was allegedly caught diverting into personal accounts, funds meant for suffering Nigerians, the poorest of the poor; and to date, the Minister has faced no sanctions, nor has she been prosecuted. Maybe they believe that as time passes, Nigerians will forget about her alleged misdeeds. This particular Humanitarian role is crucial, it goes hand in hand with the welfare of the people, the second leg of the primary purpose of government. 

The Protesters are shouting from the rooftops, that they won’t stand for this kind of behaviour on the part of Government anymore – it is bad governance – to still keep in office, someone whose hand may have been caught in the cookie jar of the poor and needy, and to let them go scot free without any punishment. In fact, in some cases, such wrongdoers are promoted instead; maybe that’s what the suspended Humanitarian Minister may be hoping for. Tah! Even in our own administration of justice sector, in the last year, we have witnessed the elevation of several judicial officers to higher courts, soon after delivering perverse judgements. It was therefore, rather confusing, to hear the Chief Justice of Nigeria declaring that judicial officers who treated our jurisprudence with mockery would not be spared, around the time of their elevation to the higher Bench! 

The Federal Government distributed rice as palliatives for the people, to all the States in Nigeria. Undoubtedly, sound policies are preferable to palliatives, but if has to be palliatives, maybe they should be handed over to the Mike Adenuga, Dangote or BUA Foundations for instance, for onward distribution to the people instead, because we know the palliatives will definitely reach the suffering Nigerians they are meant for, instead of using government channels filled with cruel, greedy officials, who simply convert palliatives meant for the people to their own use and financial benefit. We saw this happen, during the Covid-19 pandemic. A former Lagos State House of Assembly member, who instead of distributing Government provided palliatives to her constituents, distributed them as party packs to guests at her birthday party. The former member, instead of facing criminal prosecution, has apparently been given a Federal appointment – a person who is unsympathetic and cannot be trusted, has been appointed into a position that requires a trustworthy person! This isn’t good governance culture, rewarding misconduct with higher office. It is one of the perfect ingredients, for bad governance. 

A few days ago, in Kogi State, where rice bagged by the Federal Government and clearly marked as ‘not for sale’, but to be distributed to the people to ease their hunger, were cornered into a warehouse by some government criminals who were attempting to re-bag the rice for sale! Aside from the fact by virtue of Section 15(5) of the Constitution, the State is mandated to abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power, some of the unholy activities of government officials amount to criminal conversion, theft, stealing contrary to Section 383 of the CC and other offences. But, as usual, none of the culprits will be exposed, and even if they are, they won’t be sanctioned – lack of accountability (see Demand No. 7). See AG Ondo State v AGF & Ors (2002) LPELR-623(SC). While we cannot expect the President to go and deliver and distribute the palliatives himself nationwide, Government will continue to earn itself a bad name, if it continues to use corrupt employees who intercept its messages of succour to the people, because it translates to doing nothing for the people when they receive nothing. See the case of Psychiatric Hospital Management Board v Ejitagha (2000) LPELR-2930(SC) per Samson Odemwingie Uwaifo, JSC. 

Governors 

The Tinubu administration, has increased the FAAC Allocations to the States. What do the Governors do with these funds? Why should the people be starving to this extent, if those funds are being applied properly? The Governors account to no one, for how they use or misuse these monies. It is time to start to question Governors who are the direct leaders of the people in their States and shed the light on them, instead of only calling out the President. 

Conclusion

In Nigeria, we like to copy and paste, and both Government and the people are guilty of it. But, not everything that works properly in the UK and Germany, works in Nigeria. Clearly, protests as they are now, do not seem to work as well here, even though it is within our constitutional rights to hold them. One way or the other, looting, violence and killing, have surely become part and parcel of our protests. Granted, successive governments have failed to play their part, so much so that, today, Nigerians have sunk to this deplorable level of hunger, and if the policies that have brought on this level of hardship are unleashing such disastrous consequences on Nigerians, it may be time to tweak them, or definitely find something to do, to permanently relieve Nigerians.

If protests in Nigeria have become a call to anarchy, and we all know that they will end in blood, tears and sorrow, then it behooves the Government not to let the situation in the country deteriorate to the point that Gari, our staple food, has become a luxury for many. In the case of EBG, the anger of the people and the threat of holding the protest alone, seemed have had some effect on Government. A few Governors came out to address their people, and so did the President on Sunday. Communication with the people should be done on a regular basis, and not because of a threat of or an actual protest; after all, by virtue of Section 14(2)(a) & (c) of the Constitution, sovereignty belongs to the people and they have a right to participate in their government. 

Finally, let us not forget that when infrastructure is destroyed and people are killed during protest, the country loses; but, more importantly, the common man who doesn’t have the luxury of alternatives that those who are more privileged can enjoy, suffers the impact of the mayhem caused by protests the most. 

Early signs show that the ongoing protests may not end well, writes BOLAJI ADEBIYI

It may be too early to review the protests that began yesterday despite spirited efforts by the federal government to persuade the faceless organisers to stand down. On Wednesday, George Akume, Secretary to the Government of the Federation, led four ministers, Abubakar Bagudu, Budget and Economic Planning; Wale Edun, Finance and Coordinating Minister for the Economy; Mohammed Idris, Minister of Information and National Orientation; and Dele Alake, Minister of Solid Minerals Development, to address the world press in Abuja on the efforts of the government to better the lives of the people.

They said that the federal government needed to make bold decisions if the macroeconomic stability needed for massive local and foreign investment inflow were to be achieved to turn the economy around and put it on the path of growth and development. Those decisions included the twin-economic policy reforms of petrol subsidy removal and the merger of the forex rates, which have occasioned high inflation and price spikes, resulting in the high cost of living that has generated resentment among the citizens.

But they insisted that the measures were correct and that the attendant short-term discomfort was anticipated, leading to the promulgation of several palliative programmes intended to ease the ongoing pains, which they explained were temporary. They reeled out the alleviation measures even as they contended that the economic reforms were bearing fruits judging from the reports of global rating agencies, foreign reserves balance and foreign direct investment inflow.

The success of that last-minute rally to persuade the protest organisers to stay off the streets as threatened yesterday could be measured by the outcome of the first day of what was supposed to be a mass action against the negative impact of the President Bola Tinubu administration’s economic reforms. In some places, the protests took place without a moment. According to media reports, most southern states were calm except Lagos, Oyo, and Rivers. Even those that had people on the streets were without any serious incidents.

But things were bad in Plateau, Kano, Kaduna, Katsina, Sokoto and Borno. At the last count, the unofficial body count was 16 in Borno, four in Kano, two in Kaduna and two in Plateau. Although skirmishes were in some parts of the Federal Capital Territory, no serious incident was recorded. The violence in these states confirmed the federal government’s apprehension about the protest. It had warned against the protest not because it wanted to curtail the citizens’ freedom of expression but because it had the premonition that criminal elements could manipulate the exercise of the right to carry out their nefarious activities. Now that it has happened exactly as the government predicted, was it worth it? Not really.

Notwithstanding the deaths, many businesses were closed yesterday as people stayed away from work for fear of violence. Billions of naira were shut in by people who complained about the adverse effects of the economic reforms of a government that came into office on the back of a renewed hope agenda. What were the complaints? The protesters interviewed complained about hardships arising from inflation due to high energy costs and the floating of the naira. “We are hungry, Tinubu; please, come and rescue us,” they cried. Their solution is to restore the subsidy and ensure food affordability.

Yet, a day before, the FG, through the SGF and the ministers, acknowledged the pains as temporary discomforts and reeled out palliative measures taken by the government to alleviate the suffering. Explanations were offered on why the economic reforms were imperative and why the gains made so far had to be consolidated so that a better future could be assured for Nigerians. So, was a protest leading to deaths, loss of man-hours, and huge resources necessary to draw attention to a problem that the government was already tackling?

Martin Luther King Jr, that fiery and legendary American civil rights leader, championed the concept of mass action to seek redress and gave four tests for genuine mass action. The agitators, he said, must demonstrate a grievance and that they do not intend to use the mass action to cause confusion or revenge; they must show that they have exhausted all methods of engaging the government, including negotiations and petitions; having found all those methods and doors to be closed, they must show that they do not intend to cause injustice to others, and they must show that they have a clear programme of salvaging the society without causing injustice to others.

Weighed against these tests, it is difficult to see how the ongoing protests fit. Yes, they have a genuine grievance as the high cost of living has become choking. However, shutting down the economy through the demonstrations was bound to hurt other citizens who ordinarily wanted to go about their businesses to survive the harsh conditions. For weeks, the government sought to engage the promoters in their grievances but failed because they were faceless. Meanwhile, whoever they are, they have not shown any workable alternative to the reforms.

As the second day of the protests kicks in today, how the organisers intend to achieve their demands on the streets without negotiating with the government remains to be seen. More important is the need to de-escalate the violence and tension instituted in a couple of states.

In the meantime, it is necessary to commend the federal government, some state governors and the security forces for the restraint shown so far. The President has continued to seek dialogue even when he insists that his economic reforms were correct and necessary for the revival and long-term growth of the economy. Some governors maintained the peace in their domain, holding meetings with stakeholders and appealing to them to stay the course. Some police chiefs addressed the protesters and provided security cover for them.       

It can only be hoped that reason will prevail in the coming days and the promoters of the protests will go to the table for a much more rewarding negotiation on their demands. Otherwise, if they escalate the mass action and things worsen, they might find that the Kenya example they often refer to may not pay them. As Wycliffe Khaemba, a Kenyan activist Methodist bishop, warned on Wednesday in an advisory to Nigerians, the protests were not an option because the ones in the central African country did not end well.

Adebiyi is the media assistant to the Minister of Budget and Economic Planning, Senator Abubakar Bagudu