• Bitcoin price consolidated between $94,000 and $100,000 for the last nine days.
• Ethereum price trades around $2,690 on Friday after rising almost 3% so far this week.
• Ripple price hovers around $2.55 after gaining nearly 7% this week.

Bitcoin (BTC) consolidated between $94,000 and $100,000 in the last nine days. Ethereum (ETH) and Ripple (XRP) prices stood relatively stronger and have gained nearly 3% and 7%, respectively, this week.

Bitcoin price consolidates between $94,000 and $100,000 range

Bitcoin price broke below the $100,000 support level on February 4 and has been consolidating between $94,000 and $100,000 ranges. At the time of writing on Friday, BTC hovers around $96,600.

If BTC breaks above the upper consolidating range of $100,000, it would extend the recovery to retest its January 31 high of $106,012.

However, the Relative Strength Index (RSI) on the daily chart reads 44 after being rejected from its neutral level of 50 last week, indicating bearish momentum. Moreover, the Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) showed a bearish crossover, hinting at further correction ahead.

BTC/USDT daily chart

However, if BTC breaks and closes below the lower consolidating range of $94,000, it could extend the decline to test its psychologically important level of $90,000.

Ethereum price shows mild signs of strength 

Ethereum price faced a rejection around its descending trendline on February 1 and declined 13.87%, closing below its $3,000 psychologically important level the next day. ETH continued its correction by nearly 9% in the previous week. However, ETH prices strengthened this week and recovered by almost 3%. At the time of writing on Friday, it hovers around $2,690.

If ETH continues to recover, it could extend the recovery to test the $3,000 level.

The RSI on the daily chart reads 38, bounced off from its oversold level of 30, indicating fewer signs of selling pressure. However, the RSI must trade above its neutral level of 50 to sustain the bullish momentum. Such a development would add a tailwind to the recovery rally.

ETH/USDT daily chart

However, If ETH continues its decline and closes below $2,359, it will extend the decline to test its next weekly support at $1,905.

Ripple bulls aiming for $2.72 mark

Ripple price broke below its ascending trendline (drawn by connecting multiple lows since early January) on February 2 and declined by 10.35%, closing below its daily support at $2.72. Last week, XRP faced rejection around the daily level of $2.72 and declined by 11.38% at Sunday’s close. However, XRP prices strengthened this week and recovered by almost 7%. At the time of writing on Friday, it hovers around $2.55.

If XRP continues to recover, it could extend the recovery to test its daily resistance level at $2.72.

The RSI on the daily chart reads 46, bounced off from its oversold level of 30, indicating mild bullish momentum. Like Ethereum, the RSI must trade above its neutral level of 50 for the bullish momentum to be sustained. Such a development would add a tailwind to the recovery rally.

XRP/USDT daily chart

On the other hand, XRP continues its pullback and closes below its daily support at $1.96. It could extend the decline to test its weekly support level at $1.40.

[fxstreet]

Cryptocurrency exchange platform Coinbase Global posted an earnings report on Thursday night which beat analysts’ expectations and showed a huge rise in revenues year on year, but the share price initially dropped overnight in pre-market trading and moved five per cent lower soon after opening on Friday.

The Nasdaq-listed company has seen its share price rise 50 per cent over the past six months, sitting at $298 (£236) at the close of play before announcing their latest financial update.

But it has been a typically wild ride over the last five years, as has been the case with many products or platforms associated with bitcoin and cryptocurrency: from a price of $328 in October 2021, Coinbase shares crashed to well below $40 at the start of 2023. Since the final months of that year though they have again been - generally, with more than a few wild swings - on the rise again and topped $330 by December 2024.

Much of that can be explained in part of the business model. Plunging prices of bitcoin and cryptoassets resulted in lower fees per transaction for Coinbase, while fewer transactions overall also impacted. In addition, there have long been regulatory concerns as well as litigation cases to contend with.

With more adoption of cryptocurrencies in the mainstream financial arena, plus growing public (and political) awareness, plus President Donald Trump declaring he wants America to be the world’s “crypto capital”, trading has once again been on the increase.

Coinbase’s earnings report showed an earnings per share (EPS) of $4.68 for the three months to 31 December, with analysts having been expecting a profit of $1.81 per share, according to Reuters.

Transaction revenue rose 172 per cent to $1.6bn, with total revenue up to $2.3bn, having been $953.8m a year earlier. Clearly this is huge growth on a year on year capacity, but as ever the question for the platform - and for businesses experiencing growth in general - is whether it is sustainable, and what comes next.

So what are analysts and experts saying about it now? The share price dropped more than four cent in pre-market trading, but by noon GMT - still more than two hours ahead of the US markets opening - it was back up to just 1.7 per cent lower than Thursday’s close. That day itself saw shares surge more than eight per cent higher, in anticipation of the results update, yet on Friday within five minutes after the markets opened, the price was down and moving between two and five per cent lower again. Volatility, indeed.

Analysts who cover the company are split on the target share price - usually a 12-month or end-of-year indicator of expectations, but frequently subject to change - but across the board at least 24 of 26 rate the stock as a strong buy, buy or hold, per Yahoo Finance’s latest data.

Citi maintain a buy rating on Global, citing a target price of $350, with Benzinga listing share price targets ranging from £328 (Barclays) to $420 (Needham).

The lowest on their list was analyst Kyle Voight at Keefe, Bruyette and Woods, who offers a “market perform” rating - in other words, an expectation that shares rise or fall in line with the wider market - and a price of $275.

Jefferies analyst Trevor Williams told Yahoo Finance that higher marketing spend would drive down profit margins and has a hold rating on the stock, while JP Morgan analyst Ken Worthington said the trading volumes surge “seen post election have largely remained intact, suggesting that this level of velocity, activity and revenue generation levels could be sustainable."

Dan Coatsworth, investment analyst at AJ Bell, told The Independent: “The buzz around how Donald Trump would become the first US president to embrace cryptocurrencies with open arms caused a frenzy among the public who were eager to grab a slice of Bitcoin. It created the perfect environment for Coinbase as a flood of people used the platform to buy and sell cryptos. This tailwind helped the business to beat earnings expectations for the first time in three quarters.

“What’s really impressive is the scale of the ‘beat’. The market had forecast $1.36 earnings per share and Coinbase achieved more than three times that amount at $4.68. It’s incredibly rare to see a company smash forecasts on that grand a scale.

“The big question for investors is whether that winning streak is now over. The stock market is forward looking and investors care about what’s coming next, not what’s just been reported. The fact Coinbase’s shares fell in pre-market trading is telling – it implies that the market sees the latest quarterly success as a firework that’s lit up the skies but quickly disappeared.

“The next quarter is forecast to generate $1.28 earnings per share, less than what was forecast for the quarter just gone. The crypto market is driven by pure speculation and when things go quiet on the news front regarding major buyers or sellers, or what might happen from a political or regulatory perspective, the volume of trading inevitably dies down.”

Naturally, Coinbase themselves are bullish on future prospects.

"We're really entering a golden age for crypto here. The opportunity in front of us is unprecedented to update the financial system and increase economic freedom around the world, the regulatory overhang is lifting," CEO Brian Armstrong said on a post-earnings call.

"President Trump is moving fast to fulfill his promise of making US the crypto capital of the planet. And the most pro-crypto Congress we've ever seen is now leading the charge on stablecoin and market structure legislation. Given the US's leadership here, the rest of the world is taking notice and will be under pressure to embrace crypto adoption," he added.

Coinbase want market additions from the presidential administration to revolve around token classification and stablecoins, while there’s an expectation they’ll also look to gain a bigger share of institutional investors’ business in crypto as time goes on.

TradingView note that retail investors have not returned to buying and selling cryptocurrency to the same levels as seen in 2021. That means there’s scope for more - but also probably shows more people are aware of the tax implications of bitcoin and beyond now, which was not perhaps the case earlier on.

International expansion is another potential case, but just as regulatory pressures may now decrease Stateside, they may still face big issues in other countries where governance is not as pro-crypto or where retail investors are more restricted in how they can trade.

Additionally, Coinbase has a low rate of return on equity (0.88 per cent), Benzinga shows, with their net margin (6.26 per cent) also below industry averages and meaning cost cutting may be on the agenda. All this, before considering potential competitors to the platform such as Robinhood, which itself reported record revenue this week.

Whatever way the Coinbase share price goes, it’s possible that cryptocurrency itself continues to be volatile, unpredictable and a source of argument between those who believe it to be a huge part of the future, and those who see it as having little or no intrinsic value.

[independent.co.uk]

“OPEC oil output declined in January …” – News Report, February 6, 2025. 

Later in the release, tucked in the middle was this statement which should be of interest to all Nigerians. “Specifically, the report [by Reuters] said Nigerian production slipped by 60,000 bpd, the survey found, reflecting lower exports, although domestic usage is increasing as the Dangote Refinery ramps up…This means the [Nigerian] government produced 1.42mbpd from 1.484 mbpd in December….Nigeria is still trying to meet its OPEC quota of 1.5 mbpd and is also making efforts to raise production to two mbpd.”

This report is alarming for several reasons. In October last year, when the country reached 1.7 mbpd, the Minister of State, in his characteristic way of reporting a flash in the pan as trend, was reported to have boasted that Nigeria would be producing 2 mbpd of crude by January 2025; and the figure on which the budget was based was realistic. Independent analysts cautioned the Federal Government against using 2 mbpd as basis of the budget.

Nigerian leaders and their economic advisers are eternally, if repeatedly, self-deceptive. Notwithstanding the additional request to raise the budget to N54 trillion, January crude production result is in; and, it has shredded the budget. A negative variance of almost 600,000 bpd means that the country must now produce 2.055 mbpd for the remaining eleven months to make up for the shortfall which January result has created. That also implies that there would have been a significant dollar revenue shortfall in the month under review.

 LIVING WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF BAD LEADERSHIP

“Wisdom in people consists of the anticipation of consequences” – Norman Cousins, 1915-1990, VBQ p 274. We have had mostly bad leaders since 1960. That should also tell us something about ourselves. At least, since 1992, when the first Nigerian Economic Summit Group, NESG, was convened by the late Chief Ernest Shonekan, 1936-2022, Head of Government under President Babangida, and later Head of the Interim National Government, HING, the likely consequences of our over-reliance on crude oil revenue had been revealed to us. Since then, every government had paid lip service to diversification of our economy. Good education had been identified as the foundation for success in an increasingly knowledge-based global economy.   Today, Nigeria cannot be counted among the top ten in any of the sectors which now define the global economy; certainly not in manufacturing, agriculture, computer and Artificial Intelligence or tourism.

“Nigeria’s GDP per capita shrinks to $835 – IMF” – Report, February 7, 2025. That news report in February would have been received as a deadly blow by the ruling elite in another nation. Not Nigeria. For once, nobody even tried to refute it. Because silence means consent, we have accepted that we have been steadily impoverished by our leaders to whom we still nevertheless pay our respects. A few days before the release of that damning report, Buhari was still telling an audience of people that he left Nigeria better than he found it. Amazing!!! The refusal to throw away the feeding bottle, which reliance on crude oil has become, has resulted in our rapidly worsening impoverishment. In 2025, the GDP per capita is now estimated to be $835; in 2024, it was $877. But, in 2014, it was $3, 220. There is an obvious question: Is there something wrong with us?

FUEL AND FOOLISHNESS

  Right now, the fuel supply and price situation is simply incomprehensible. Nobody can budget or plan their fuel expenditure because from January 1 this year, at least four different prices have been announced. At times, Dangote, the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation Limited, NNPCL, and independent marketers fix different prices on the same day. However, Nigeria is one country where the principles of economics are not allowed to work by forces which profit from undermining it at all costs.   At the moment, we have a distorted free market in which a dominant supplier seeks to cripple the others and end up with a quasi-monopoly.   

First, with our active support, the company received the promise of the Federal Government to have 650,000 barrels per day of crude allocated to its refinery. Second, the FG was arm-twisted to allow the company to pay in Naira for the crude. In exchange, Nigerians are supposed to enjoy regular supply of fuel at “reasonable” prices. Unknown to us, we were embarking on the sort of road, paved with good intentions, that lead to hell. Today confusion reigns; scarcity still occurs and we are paying prices far above what most of us thought imaginable for fuel produced locally; and sometimes more expensive than imported fuel. Certainly, something must be wrong.

 CRISIS OF CRUDE SUPPLY TO REFINERIES

  “NNPCL’s four refineries constitute the elephants in the room”. That was the verdict of a former Nigerian Managing Director of an international oil company, asked why the Nigeria fuel situation remains chaotic. For more than twenty years, the refineries gulped trillions of naira and billions of dollars with next to nothing to show for it. Yet they are collectively entitled to collect 445,000 barrels per day of fuel.  The FG bowed to the voice of the people and guaranteed Dangote, as well as other domestic refineries crude. At the last count, the commitment to local refineries is close to 700,000 bpd. With monthly production hovering around 1.5 mbpd, the significant shortfall in dollar revenue will reach crisis proportions any time soon. You can’t eat your cake and have it.

SIR HIGH CHIEF OLUFEMI DARAMOLA, KJW, MY SAVIOUR – 2

 NOTE: The first part of this story ended last week with my arrest in VANGUARD Office on a particular Monday by the DSS.

Below is the rest of the drama. The car conveying me to Awolowo Road, Ikoyi was sandwiched between two cars in front and two cars behind; and I sat in the back seat stuffed between two mean-looking and over-sized armed men. Forget escape. These guys were driving as if possessed by the devil. They probably were. Fast forward. I was at first given the honour of being placed in the Gani Fawehinmi room because the late human rights activist vacated the place two days before I became the new tenant. But, whereas Gani was only being harassed, my case was different.

My Front Page Analysis had hit the nail on the head too hard for comfort. It was assumed that I had insider information and the best thing was for me to be deleted. I was determined to go down fighting; but how and with what weapons? Almighty God provided everything needed. The fellow assigned to my room turned out to be a great fan of FRANKLY SPEAKING. He revealed the plans and offered to help me contact anyone who could help. VANGUARD had tried and government had lied to Uncle Sam and the Editor that I was no longer in their custody; that I was interrogated, warned and released – thereby preparing the ground for my assassination.

I was at first sceptical about the offer to help; I thought it might be a trick to find out who my associates were and to arrest them. Saturday was my day. So, like a drowning man who would grab at anything floating, I accepted the offer to help. He smuggled paper and biro into my room and I prepared to send a note. Then I asked myself: “Who can I rely on to receive the note and who would act on it before Saturday?” I had known Barrister Olufemi Daramola briefly, when he was the Secretary of the Lagos Island Branch of the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA, after they approached VANGUARD   to help publish an NBA Directory of Lawyers. I was assigned the responsibility of getting the Directory published and Chief Daramola was in charge for NBA, Lagos.

The Law Directory we published was so thorough it became a reference material for determining seniority at the Bar for years. It also helped to weed out several fake lawyers. That was all. Yet, when my life was hanging on a decision, it was to him I turned; and he saved my life from Abacha. When my life was hanging on a thread of hope, I had to choose one person on who to gamble it. Something about Chief Daramola’s frankness and boldness during our meetings, while working on the Law Directory told me that he was the best choice. It was divine inspiration; bearing in mind that a stone-throw from Daramola’s chambers, my half-brother, same mother, had his own law chambers.

But, he was gutless. Left to him, I would not be alive today. I wrote two notes, one inside the other and addressed the envelope to Barrister Daramola, 10, Simpson Street, Lagos Island. Why? I still don’t fully know. But, on Friday morning, the day before my planned end, a senior officer came to my room with my clothes freshly laundered, asked me to dress up, and go, but warned me not to grant any interview. It was then that I knew that a total stranger had saved my life while risking his own – Sir, High Chief Olufemi Daramola, KJW, of Ilawe-Ile, OMUO-EKITI. My Saviour!!! P.S. Why was the note not sent to VANGUARD? Because, I was told by my informant that they intended to arrest others in VANGUARD after the noise about my disappearance had died down. The late Alhaji Animasaun was next. So, VANGUARD was out of the question. Better to go down alone.

The crisis which followed the removal of Mudashiru Obasa from office as speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly appears to have drastically chilled. With a resolution of the Assembly supported by a majority of the members, Obasa was removed on January 13, 2025 while his then deputy, Mojisola Meranda was immediately elected and sworn-in to take his place.  Whether or not the legislators appropriately applied their powers to change their speaker is an unnecessary argument because Section 92 of the Nigerian Constitution1999 specifically empowers them to elect a speaker and a deputy speaker of a House of Assembly from among themselves.

Thus,the election or removal of such officers ought not to give room to violence.  Indeed, many analysts correctly made the point that the fate of Obasa was sealed as soon as the House resolved to remove him because the Constitution did not require the House to give reasons for the removal. Yet, Obasa had repeatedly claimed that he was not properly removed insisting that until the right thing was done, he remained speaker of the House. Perhaps Obasa was fighting a lost battle as he had no legal provision to back-up his claims. Interestingly, it was not only Obasa that lost out;a greater loser remains Nigeria’s bastardized democracy. In other democracies, it is not only the letters of the law that matter, the spirit of the law always matters too.

Nigeria, has since 1999 had a stunted growth partly because of rigid adherence to the letters of the law at the expense of the spirit of the law. It is not every aspect of governance that law covers; quite often, conventions are used to complement the law so that the real intentions of the drafters of the law are met. At the point of Obasa’s removal, the House was on recess to formally resume on February 18, 2025. If so, who convened the hurried meeting during the recess and what procedure did such a convener follow? This probably explains why Oluwagbenga Abiola, the vice Chairman of Agege LGA, where Obasa is from, argued that the Lagos State House of Assembly was “still on recess.”

Democracy presupposes the rule of law which makes it expedient for everything to be done according to law. As Bracton, the 13th Century British jurist and author once said, the King must be subject to law because it was the law that made him King. The average Nigerian politician inclusive of elected legislators need to know more of this and reduce their penchant for impunity and political rascality. Whether written or not, the legal power to do anything must never be experimented upon. A legislative Assembly where majority of members were agreed on the removal of Obasa didn’t need to be in a hurry or to heat-up the polity in carrying out its wish. Waiting for Obasa to be out of the country to act behind him portrays ample timidity; ordid the legislators have a hidden agenda?

It is a matter for regret that Lagos legislators allowed negative narratives to envelope their act. One can only hope that the rumour that two of them,Lanre Afinni and Sylvester Ogunkelu were reportedly held by security agencies for allegedly breaking into the speaker’s office in search of the Mace is incorrect. If so, the public ought to be told why two legislators were invited for questioning and why many of them stormed the office of the relevant agency to effect their release? Why should a simple vote for or against the removal of a speaker involve the arrest of two members? In a democracy where the majority carries the day on an issue, why were police invited to the House and who initiated the invitation?

The point to be made therefore is that the law empowering legislators to appoint their speaker among themselves did not envisage that violence or the use of police operatives would be part of such an internal selection process among people who claim to be ‘honourables.’ As Obasa was to later argue, when former speaker Jokotola Pelumi was removed he was in attendance and police operatives were not invited. The same according to Obasa was done when deputy speaker Adefunmilayo Tejuosho was removed. Although the law did not specify that speakers must necessarily be present at a session before they can be removed, did the law say it should be done in their absence? If the convention was extended to Obasa, he would have witnessed his unpopularity by the overwhelming vote against him. All the tension he created would not have arisen at all as he would have been humbled.

The allegation that Obasa was removed because of misappropriation of funds, high-handedness and lack of transparency in the management of the Assembly’s affairs constituted a major mistake made by the Lagos legislators. It would have been enough for the Assembly to merely pass a resolution supported by two-thirds of the members stating that they no longer wanted Obasa. They did not need to give other reasons, but having given reasons for their decision, natural justice demanded that they offered the accused a chance to defend himself especially as some of the allegations bothered on criminality.  As law-makers, they are deemed to know that they cannot be the prosecutor and the judge in any criminal case. They also ought to know that removal from office is not the punishment for misappropriation of public funds. It is therefore wrong for Lagos legislators to have made the public believe that Obasa committed grievous offences just to attract public support for his removal. 

Considering that criminal offences were raised against Obasa, it leaves a bitter taste to end the case with just his removal as speaker. Part of the irregularities Obasa was accused of included that he spent 80 million as allowances during the training of wives of 20 lawmakers in Dubai.Were the 20 legislators who submitted the credentials of their wives for the training not aware of the impropriety of the assignment? Many other allegations are flying about. For example, should the House not probe the alleged spending of N17 billion to construct a gate that leads to the Assembly complex and N200 million on a thanksgiving service?When will the allegation of N15.6billion allocated for office construction be investigated in view of the fact that the existing facilities are perfectly functioning?

Many state legislators in Nigeria behave like marketing agents pursuing anyone they are paid to pursue but that should not happen in politically sophisticated Lagos. Unfortunately, the Obasa episode is pushing some analysts to begin to think otherwise. How are we sure that the handling of N44billion allocated for vehicles which legislators should benefit from was not the real issue at stake?Otherwise, where were the current activists in the Assembly when Obasa reportedly kept the state governor waiting for over 4 hours just to present a budget to the Assembly?  Not only was the governor kept waiting for more hours than make sense, the leadership of the ruling party and all invited dignitaries were also allegedly kept waiting. And when ‘emperor’ Obasa eventually surfaced in the chambers, courtesies were reportedly not extended to anyone. Yet, no one at the time recognized the need to call the speaker to order. Instead, they overlooked a kind of monster that later intimidated them to a point of no return before scampering around for bogus allegations to secretly remove him. 

Obasa is not the only speaker to have been removed by legislators and his case is not different from what has happened elsewhere in Nigeria. In my records, those removed since1999 include Maduagwu(Anambra), Modu(Bornu), Ayuba(Plateau), Usman (Niger), Edoro and Okiye(Edo), Oluomo(Ogun), Orji (Abia), Isenah(Bayelsa), Shalla and Kamb (Kebbi), Falgore and Atta(Kano), Oloyelogun(Ondo), Nwanzunku(Ebonyi), Gbana and Kente(Taraba), Garba (Jigawa), Igbuya (Delta), Oloyelogun (Ondo),Ikyange (Benue), Ibrahim(Gombe), Muduru (Katsina),Emeziem (Imo),Oluwawole and Aribisogan (Ekiti). They were removed either for not getting enough goodies for their members or had legislators materially mobilized by the governor to remove their speaker. 

Lagos the centre of excellence ought to lead in strengthening democracy for which a free press is inevitable. But for 2 years now, activities of the State House Assembly have been sheltered in secrecy because the Assembly had placed a ban on media coverage of its activities. Unknown to the legislators and their other colleagues as well as even some judges who often disallow the media in their courts, it is against Section 22 of the Constitution to so act. Indeed, that section mandates the media to make all organs of government (no exception) accountable to the people. Accordingly, all eyes are now on the new Lagos speaker to redress the situation.

WHEN Muslims are in power, we are out of power. And when we are out of power, we are completely out of power” – Professor Is-haq Olanrewaju Oloyede, as quoted in a “Press Statement/Release at the World Press Conference organised by Concerned Yoruba Muslim Scholars in Nigeria in affiliation with the Supreme Council for Sharia  in Nigeria held at (the) Arisekola Mosque, Ibadan (on) Tuesday, 11th February, 2025.”

 When one had thought that Saturday Tribune editor, Lasisi Olagunju’s piece, “Are Yoruba Muslims truly marginalised?” had adequately answered all questions and doused the fire of the clamour for Northern Nigeria-fashion Sharia in the South-west, the dying embers were stoked again from unexpected quarters. Professor Is-haq Oloyede, Registrar of the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) and Secretary-General of the Nigeria Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs (NSCIA) joined the fray. Permit me to call you by your first name: Lasisi, my brother and professional colleague, started his piece this way: “Each time we hear or read outsiders say they are fighting for Yoruba Muslims, some of us (Yoruba Muslims) laugh. Who told them that we cannot fight for ourselves- if there is a war” Abi o! Why will serious-minded Yoruba Muslims even not laugh when we realise that those “outsiders” ostensibly and purportedly fighting for Yoruba Muslims look down on the same Yoruba Muslims and do not accept them as “true” Muslims?

 Do they think we are not aware that they call Yoruba Muslims “kafirs”, and treat them as second-class Muslims? Will a Yoruba Muslim ever become President of the Nigeria Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs (in existence since 1973)? That seat is reserved in perpetuity for whoever is the Sultan of Sokoto – whoever! And he must be Fulani! The best a Yoruba Muslim can become is Deputy President-General (South), which can go anywhere in the South. The Deputy President-General (North) is reserved in perpetuity for whoever is the Shehu of Borno. The NSCIA’s national secretariat, headquartered in Abuja, is headed by the Secretary-General. Its first Secretary-General was Ibrahim Dasuki, who later became the Sultan. The current Secretary-General is Oloyede. Before him was Dr. Lateef Oladimeji Adegbite. At the time he succeeded Adegbite in May 2013, Oloyede was the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Ilorin and Secretary of the Nigerian Inter-Religious Council (NAREC). 

 The meat of Lasisi’s piece is that Sharia had always been available to Yoruba Muslims. His exact words: “The present cries and announcements are very unnecessary. Sharia never left Yorubaland. Our fathers called it ‘seria’. It has evolved, adapted procedures in deft accommodation of its environment and social realities. Yoruba Muslim families who desire it still conduct their private affairs in accordance with Sharia without disturbing their neighbours” Lasisi is dead right. I remember my grandmother who raised me, a devout Muslim, always using the statement “Won da seria fun”; that is, the errant was punished according to extant (Sharia) laws. My dad and uncle were Muslims and they, too, always used the word “seria” to mean punishment. Those demanding for what we have always had, and which is still very much available, have other motives. They have a hidden agenda. To further corroborate Lasisi, my younger brother, a devout Muslim, had issues with his first son a few years ago. A family meeting was summoned, to which Muslim alfas versed in Islamic laws were invited. At the meeting, both father and son agreed to be judged by Sharia law. Each stated his case and the alfas used Sharia to counsel and to apportion blame. Those of us family members who were not Muslms only acted as observers.

 Let me quote Lasisi a little bit more: “A quiet Sharia panel has been sitting for decades at Oja’ba, Ibadan. There is another one in Osogbo. I suspect that other major Yoruba towns have them. They adjudicate on marriage and marital issues; they arbitrate disputes among Muslims. They do their thing without noise and drama and excesses. Every willing Muslim who goes there loves what the panels do and how they do it. The respective state governments are aware of their existence but they do not disturb them. At the compound and family levels, check out what we do with Muslim weddings, burials, administration of estates and inheritance matters, etc. Those who want more than this should be bold to say what exactly they want. They want hisbah, moral police on the streets of Ibadan, Abeokuta and Akure? They want a Yoruba Bello Buba Jangede who would be amputated for stealing a goat while big men who steal roads and bridges hold court? Anyone who wants the Kano, Zamfara kind of Sharia in 2025 Western Nigeria needs counselling”

 They need more than counselling! Like Lasisi said, Sharia operates among Yoruba Muslims already. My own father died a Muslim and we buried him according to Islamic rites. The alfas presided and those of us who were not Muslims tagged along. I just told you my kid brother settled issues with his first son before a Sharia panel that sat right here in Lagos. The son of my immediate younger brother married at the Asese axis of Ogun state last month according to Islamic injunctions (Nikkai). I had my purse filled with brand new notes ready for when they would ask for dowry and what-not, but that was not to be. When the Imam directing affairs asked for the dowry, my brother’s son started reciting the Quran. My kid brother leaned towards me and said it was accepted in Islam in lieu of cash as dowry for as long as the bride accepts it. No one stopped them! Religion is a personal affair between man and God. State intervention as we have it in Nigeria today is not only absolutely unnecessary, it is such interference that creates religious crises; and that is what those advocating for the Northern-Nigeria type of Sharia surreptitiously seek to foist on the South-west noted for its commendable age-long religious tolerance and harmony among the religious and non-religious groups in the region.

 Honestly, I thought Lasisi had adequately answered all questions raised by the South-west pro-Sharia army until I read the so-called “Southern Muslim Scholars/Masses”. They said with the support of their Muslim “Northern brothers”, they ensured that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu won the 2023 presidential election despite the Christians’ opposition to Muslim/Muslim ticket! So the Christians contributed nothing, abi? So only the Muslims made Tinubu president; and they must fill all available offices? Where is their sense of judgment, equity, and fairness?  After Muhammadu Buhari’s harrowing eight years when Fulani Muslims monopolised virtually all important government positions? It baffles me that any South-west Muslim can be insensitive to the way their faith is derided and ridiculed by their “brothers” from the North. Some “brothers”! Not only that, the Southern Muslim scholars were selective in the Tinubu appointments they flaunted to demonstrate that South-west Muslims were marginalised in the scheme of things.

 Again, I beseech you to read Lasisi as his piece had already punctured their puerile arguments with facts and figures. For anyone with an understanding of how Government functions, there is more to Harold Laski’s “Who gets what, when, how” than who occupies this or that office. What office did Isa Sumaila Funtua occupy in the Buhari administration when the CBN governor, Godwin Emefiele, was grovelling before him? What of Mamman Daura, the celebrated power behind Buhari’s throne? And what of Tunde Sabiu? Most times, those who determine things are not those in the offices that we see; who, often, are like Front Desk officers in a hotel reception room.

Oloyede posits that Muslims in the South-west have been under psychological torment because of the absence of Sharia courts. He was also quoted as saying that agitations for Sharia in the region should not be discountenanced for peace to reign. I sincerely hope he was misquoted or was quoted out of context. So, if the agitation for Sharia is not acceded to, there will be no peace, abi? The notion that only some people have the monopoly of violence should be discarded. We should not allow push to become shoving before we realise that! Oloyede, a professor of Islamic Studies, agrees with Lasisi that Sharia panels have been in existence in the South-west since time immemorial. His words: “Recently, people were talking about Sharia panels in the South-west and I was just smiling; I was smiling that I had never seen that level of ignorance being displayed. In Oyo state, somebody did a Ph. D. thesis on (Sharia panel) in 2007, which means it had been there before 2007…” So, if there are enduring Sharia panels in the South-west, why, then, is the latest hullabaloo about the same Sharia?

 I think the problem is that some Muslims want Government-established Sharia courts because they are tired of subjecting themselves to the same customary and high courts that Christians subject themselves to without raising an eyebrow. Let us note that by virtue of colonialism, the common laws of England, not Christian laws, operate in our court system; our courts are, therefore, not Christian courts as is being erroneously propagated. If they are, why do we have Muslims operating in them and dispensing justice? How many Christians operate on Sharia panels and in Sharia courts? Looked at closely, Muslims have an advantage that Christians do not even have. Any Muslim desiring Sharia law has the Sharia panels all over the place. They also have the liberty to move to where Sharia courts are available. Christians have no such privilege because there are no Ecclesiastical/Christian panels or courts operating anywhere in the country. Sharia is enshrined in our constitution whereas Christian laws are not. Do the Muslims think Christians are happy with this?

 Today, the Chief Justice of the Federation (Kudirat Kekere-Ekun) is a Muslim. The one before her (Olukayode Ariwoola) and the one before that one (Ibrahim Muhammed Tanko) were also Muslims. The only Christian (Walter Onnoghen, 2017 – 2019) was hurried out of office by Buhari. Not less than 12 of the 17 Nigerian indigenous CJN’s have been Muslims. Perhaps, there are more Muslims and non-Christian judges presiding at all levels of our court system –  customary, high court, court of appeal, and the supreme court – dispensing justice or its semblance to Christians. And since Independence (October 1st, 1960), Muslims have ruled this country more than Christians: 10 Muslims, approximately 39 years; against 6 Christians, approximately 26 years); and if Muslims anywhere have perpetually been marginalised like Oloyede posits in the opening quotation, whose fault? Don’t forget that Muslims also claim to hold the advantage of population over Christians.

 Says apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 6:1- 7: “Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? And if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? How much more things that pertain to this life? …I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? No, no one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because you go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? Why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?”

 Very strong admonitions! So, the situation of Christians under the prevailing circumstances is even more precarious than that of the Muslims. Christians are the ones more defrauded. They are the ones undergoing real psychological trauma. They are the ones keeping quiet just to give peace a chance. Perhaps the hour has come, and the time is now, when Christians should demand for Ecclesiastical courts to adjudicate cases between Christians and Christians!

Cameras equipped with AI technology and special bands to protect the neck are among the measures introduced by forest officials in Pune's Junnar area which witnessed nine deaths due to leopard attacks in the past one year.

With the availability of water, the hilly region on the northern end of Pune district, adjoining the Konkan, has ideal conditions for horticulture, but the plantations and orchards also provide a shelter to the big cat, officials said.

The Junnar forest range has witnessed 17 deaths due to leopard attack in the last five years, nine of them in 2024 alone.

With 17 people dying and 41 suffering injuries in five years, the district administration last year declared 233 villages across the tehsils of Junnar, Khed, Ambegaon and Shirur as "highly sensitive" and "potential leopard disaster-prone areas".

According to Dehradun-based Wildlife Institute of India, the Junnar forest division has 6 to 7 leopards every 100 sq km.

"The region, with a hilly terrain and a network of irrigation projects, has seen an increase in cultivation of crops like sugarcane, banana, grapes and pomegranate. These dense plantations provide an ideal cover for leopards to hide and move undetected," Deputy Conservator of Forests Amol Satpute told PTI.

The rising number of domestic animals provide them with easy prey, he noted.

"Human-wildlife conflict has been increasing in the division over the past 24 years due to these reasons. 2024 saw nine fatalities, the highest in 24 years. Local farmers and farm labourers demanded that something be done. We have introduced a slew of measures using the latest technology," said Satpute.

Smita Rajhans, the Assistant Conservator of Forests (Junnar range), said electric fences powered by solar energy are turning out to be useful in stopping leopards from entering orchards and plantations.

"A solar energy fencing with electric current is set up around the house. If the animal tries to cross the fence, it will receive a non-lethal shock and run away," she explained.

Such fences have been installed around 150 houses in the most "leopard-prone" areas, and additional 650 fences have been proposed to be installed, Rajhans said.

The forest department has also installed Artificial Intelligence (AI)-equipped cameras at vantage points, she said.

These cameras can detect leopards. The system triggers a siren which alerts forest officials. "The sound scares the leopard and it will run away," said Rajhans. Officials have also installed 'Animal Intrusion Detection and Repellant Systems' which can detect the presence of a leopard at night time.

"Besides, we have distributed specially designed neck belts to farm labourers in the region. Generally, leopards catch hold of a person by the neck, and the belt will provide protection in such a case," Rajhans said.

Also, there is the Special Leopard Protection Force (SLPF), on the lines of the Special Task Tiger Protection Force.

The Manikdoh Leopard Rescue Centre in Junnar, home to 44 leopards, provides temporary or long-term care to the big cats injured in attacks by villagers or trapped in conflict situations, but it is running short of space. "There are plans to expand the rescue centre so that around 125 leopards can be accommodated," said an official.

Dnyaneshwar Pawar, a forest guard, said leopards thrived during the COVID-19 as human activity dwindled.

"During this period, the population of the animal grew, leading to more human and leopard confrontation. Several measures have been taken at the ground level, such as creating awareness among locals, discouraging them from venturing out at night, and using nets around cattle farms. Since this is a sugarcane area, a lot of sugarcane cutters come from other regions. We provide them guidance on how to remain safe," he said.

Mayuri Bankar, a resident of Warulwadi, has been using the neck belt, provided by the forest department three months ago.

"I make sure to use it all the time while working in the fields. It has spikes on the exterior which can serve as a deterrent if the leopard grabs you by the neck," she said.

Nitin Bhujbal, a resident of Walanwadi in Narayangaon, installed a solar fence around his house two months ago. The area has large sugarcane fields which are frequently visited by leopards, he said.

"There have been two instances where a leopard attempted to sneak inside but retreated immediately after coming in contact with the electric current," he said, adding the system is completely safe and non-lethal.

[telegraphindia]

While the seismic market moves caused by DeepSeek were short-lived, the release of the Chinese startup’s high-performing and inexpensive large language model is likely to have long-term implications for technology, trade, and economic relations between the US and China.

Here are four predictions about these potentially dramatic impacts.

1. Artificial intelligence costs will continue to plummet

All innovations are fundamentally about doing more for less, or, in economic terms, being unit price deflationary. The AI revolution exemplifies this. Prior to DeepSeek’s release, costs of dominant AI models had already fallen by around 80 per cent on an annualized basis over the past two years. DeepSeek has simply accelerated this trend.

The 30x pricing difference between the token prices, or the cost of use, of DeepSeek and the market leader OpenAI reflect algorithmic improvements by the former and the latter’s more aggressive pricing strategy. This deflationary trend should continue as AI research progresses and more competition enters the field.

2. The AI economic pie will get bigger and be sliced differently

As AI becomes cheaper and more accessible, usage should expand significantly, following Jevons paradox, the idea that demand for a resource increases as technology makes it more efficient.

As foundational models become commoditized, value creation should shift toward applications, meaning more resources will be devoted to inference, or the deployment of AI to specific tasks, as opposed to training.

This, in turn, should increase demand for custom XPUs, chips designed to perform application-specific tasks more efficiently, as opposed to standardized GPUs which are particularly well suited for training.

Nvidia has indicated that this shift may already be starting. In May 2024, the AI leader said that demand related to inference was growing faster than for training, with the former now representing 40 per cent of total demand.

As AI applications widen, the opportunity to participate in AI research will likely no longer be limited to well-funded entities, opening doors for broader innovation across academia and many other areas. For example, DeepSeek’s R-1 model has already spawned thousands of new open-source models based on its architecture.

3. US chip export controls will deserve careful reassessment

DeepSeek’s breakthrough was achieved using far fewer and less advanced chips than its American counterparts, demonstrating how innovation can be born of constraint.

So even though US export controls may limit DeepSeek and its Chinese peers in the short term, these restrictions are unlikely to stop their progress. And these measures risk isolating US technologies from China’s market, possibly on a permanent basis.

Export controls also seem counterproductive for a US administration that places a high priority on addressing structural balance of payment issues with China. As one Chinese minister put it plainly, “If we want to buy from the US, but they … are restricting their exports … How can they cut their deficit?”

True, US politicians on both sides of the political aisle have been calling for more regulations on China in recent years, not fewer.

The decision to adjust chip export controls would thus signal a turning point in US-China economic relations and would not be taken lightly.

Nonetheless, the pros and cons of the current chip export restrictions have become more balanced and deserves a careful reassessment.

4. Interests of US and Chinese tech leaders may become more aligned

While DeepSeek’s breakthrough and open-source approach initially caused angst among US investors, many US tech leaders have welcomed the development.

Major cloud platforms like Microsoft, AWS, and Hugging Face have already integrated various models based on DeepSeek R-1, and many of these companies’ leaders have noted that the development of less expensive LLMs (large language models) should spur demand for their cloud services and thus enhance their revenue streams.

Looking further ahead, businesses stand to benefit massively from the potential productivity boost and cost savings from wider AI applications, regardless of their origins. This is especially true in the US, where wages are elevated compared to the rest of the world and STEM talent is persistently in short supply.

A useful historical parallel may be the frictions between the US and Japanese auto industries in the 1980s. Japanese auto makers eventually introduced their innovative “lean production” method to the US, significantly boosting productivity in the American auto industry.

The evolving AI landscape presents a tremendous opportunity for collaboration between the two global superpowers, especially as the industry pursues artificial general intelligence, a potentially world-changing mission. But the ongoing tensions between China and the US – on trade, technology and other issues – risks hampering progress by fracturing the technology landscape.

It is unclear whether this is the beginning of a new era of technological cooperation or a period of rising global competition, but either way, DeepSeek is a reminder of how rapidly things can, and likely will change, in the age of AI.

[cyprusmail]

Adobe this week released the first public version of an artificial intelligence tool that can generate video clips and revealed how much it will charge, but said it will not set pricing for major users such as studios until later this year.

The Firefly Video Model, as Adobe is calling the service, will compete against Sora, a model developed by ChatGPT creator OpenAI, and startup Runway, both of which currently offer video-generation services. Facebook owner Meta Platforms has also developed a video-generation AI model but has not given a timeline for when it will be released.

Adobe’s model differs from its rivals because it is geared toward generating clips that will fit into how film and television studios use Premiere Pro, its flagship video editing software.

To that end, many of the features that Adobe is emphasizing revolve around feeding existing shots into the video model and asking it to generate clips that fix or expand on shots that were taken on a real production set but that did not come out quite right.

Adobe said the service will generate five-second clips at 1080p resolution. While that is shorter than the clips of up to 20 seconds generated by OpenAI’s service, Adobe executives said the majority of individual clips in most productions are only three seconds.

Adobe said a user can generate 20 clips per month for $9.99 and 70 clips for $29.99. That compares with 50 videos for $20 per month with OpenAI’s plan at lower resolution and a $200 OpenAI plan that can handle longer, higher resolution videos.

Adobe is also working on a “Premium” pricing plan for studios and other high-volume video users and will release those pricing details later this year. Alexandru Costin, Adobe’s vice president of generative AI, said the company is working to generate 4K video and will remain focused on quality rather than longer clips.

“We actually think that great motion, great structure, great definition scheme, making the actual clip look like it was film, is more important than making a longer clip that’s unusable,” Costin told Reuters.

[Cyprus Mail]