The Federal Government of Nigeria has come out to disclose that 80 out of the girls rescued from armed conflict areas in the country are now in tertiary institutions of learning and undergoing their studies.

The Federal Government via its Ministry of Women Affairs also stated that the immediate past President, Muhammadu Buhari Ratified the Safe Schools Declaration (SSD) in December 2019, which is a global commitment to students, teachers and educational personnel as well as the validation of the Minimum Standard on Safe Schools in July 2021.

The Permanent Secretary, Federal Ministry of Women Affairs, Mrs. Monilola Udoh disclosed this during the meeting with UN Security Council Working Group on Children encountered in the course of Armed Conflict, led by UNICEF’s Christian Monduate, who came around with Daniel Ohlstein, Kaitlin Brush, Christian Monduate, Ariane Lignier, Nicolas Martin-AchardAndreg Sarushein, for a fact-finding on how Nigeria is protecting children caught up in situations of armed conflict or during military operations.

The UN Security Council Working Group led by UNICEF’s Christian Monduate, which came around with Daniel Ohlstein, Kaitlin Brush, Christian Monduate, Ariane Lignier, Nicolas Martin-AchardAndreg Sarushein.

She said: “It would be recalled that the Nigerian Government, through the Federal Ministry of Women Affairs, earlier on the 25th of March, 2017, fruitfully engaged with International Partners, precisely the Country Representatives of UN agencies, including the UNICEF, UNFPA, UNHCR, UN WOMEN, and the UN OCHA in support of the completion of the education of the ‘recused Special Girls’ (Chibok Girls).

“In collaboration with the Federal Ministry of Education and the Presidential Committee on Victims’ Support Fund, the Ministry succeeded in re-enrolling the rescued “Special Girls” and retaining them in School, including supporting them to tertiary education in the country.

“At present, eighty (80) of the “rescued Special Girls” are in various tertiary institutions undergoing their studies.”

According to Udoh: “The Federal Government of Nigeria in her efforts in ensuring the security of children in Nigeria, ratified the Safe Schools Declaration (SSD). The Child Right’s act has also been domesticated in 35 States of the Federation.

“The attacks on schools during armed conflict started globally in 2009. In Nigeria, the major attacks began 2014-2015 in the North-East as the result of the activities of terrorist groups, which left so many children out of school.

“Consequently, the former President Muhammadu Buhari Ratified the Safe Schools Declaration(SSD) in December, 2019, which is a global commitment to students, teachers and educational personnel as well as the validation of the Minimum Standard on Safe Schools in July, 2021, which signals the Federal Government’s commitment towards ensuring the general well-being of children.

“All these to ensure that our schools are Safe and in pursuant to section 15 of the Child Right’s Act, which gives the Child the right to free, compulsory and universal primary education. The Federal Government of Nigeria, through inter-agency collaboration has taken the following necessary actions:

“Developed Training Manuals on Safe School’s Declaration (SSD), which was launched for Security Agencies and Human Rights Organizations on the 14th of October, 2021. Hosted the 1st International Conference on the Safe Schools Declaration in Africa with the theme “Ensuring Safe Education for All, from commitment to practices”.

She listed some key interventions of the Ministry towards children who are survivors of terror and violent extremism, especially in the humanitarian emergency. Amongst them are:

“Some school children affected by crisis of terror and violent extremism in Borno, Adamawa and Yobe, were provided with a number of psycho-social support services ranging from medical treatment, school feeding, school bags, books and other educational materials, in collaboration with States Ministries of Women Affairs, the UNICEF, Street Child International, Save the Children among others, in order to support their rapid emotional recovery, school re-enrollment and retention.

“The Ministry has had fruitful partnership working with the North-East States’ Ministries of Women Affairs, Plan International; and the UNFPA to provide anti-Sexual and Gender-Based Violence (SGVB) trainings for learners and teachers in conflicts, insurgency and humanitarian emergency host communities; as well as provision of sanitary kits for girls in IDP Camp schools.”

She further added that the Ministry has sustained collaboration with Implementing Partners in supporting access to education and reducing the precarious incidences of Child & Forced Marriage (CFM) escalated by the insurgency and terrorists activities in the North-East, as well as via Nigeria for Women Project (NFWP), provide help low income women and mothers to come out of extreme poverty through access to soft and cooperative loans facilities, in order to strengthen families’ capacity for children development opportunities; thus enhancing the children’s resilience to incentives and antics used by terrorists and violent extremist groups.

•Details poor allocations to capital projects, worsening infrastructure deficit
•Seven ways to stem tide

As the controversy over the cost of governance in Nigeria rages, findings of a study show how states squander funds on overhead costs to the detriment of capital projects.

Case study is the 2019 fiscal year and study carried out by BudgIT. A statement on BudgIT website describes it as a civic organisation driven to make the Nigerian budget and public data more understandable and accessible across every literacy span. The statement adds: “BudgIT’s innovation within the public circle comes with a creative use of government data by either presenting these in simple tweets, interactive formats or infographic displays. Our primary goal is to use creative technology to intersect civic engagement and institutional reform”.

Findings of study:

Executive Summary

The cumulative actual expenditure for all 36 states grew by 2.73% from N5.12 trillion to N5.26 trillion between 2018 and 2019 fiscal years.

Actual recurrent expenditure and loan repayments grew by 4.75% from N3.17 trillion to N3.33 trillion within the period.

The rising nature of Nigeria’s sub-national government expenditure is expected to yield economic growth, but over the years, analysis of states’ fiscal data has shown that growth in public spending has not translated meaningfully into economic performance as there’s still a high rate of unemployment, decaying infrastructure, and worsening poverty rate.

State governments’ recurrent costs have increased significantly over the years with only a small portion of collected revenue and loans dedicated to meet capital expenditure; 36.73% or N1.93trillion of the N5.26trillion total expenditure in 2019 was dedicated to capital expenditure while 63.27% or N3.33trillion went to recurrent expenditure and loan repayments.

Year on year, between 2018 and 2019, actual expenditure on capital projects for all 36 states reduced by – 0.57%, from N1.94 trillion to N1.93 trillion.

This is a worrying sign as Moody’s Investors Service estimates that Nigeria’s infrastructure, which is significantly behind those of emerging market peers, needs an estimated $3trillion over the next 30 years to close the gap; this is the equivalent of spending N38 trillion per year for the next 30 years at today’s Naira-Dollar exchange rate.

Of course, not all the funding to close Nigeria’s infrastructure gap will come from the state government; the Federal Government and even the private sector have roles to play, but clearly, state governments need to do better.

They need to restructure their spending, increase spending on capital projects, comparatively reduce recurrent expenditure to a sustainable level, and ensure the effectiveness of all expenditures.

It is not to say that spending on recurrent expenditure is unimportant because workers’ salaries and retirees’ pensions need to be paid but over time bloated overhead components of many states’ recurrent expenditure crowd out much-needed spending on infrastructure.

In 2019, 11 states spent more on overhead costs than on capital expenditure, worsening the infrastructure deficit in those states.

Nigeria’s desired economic growth can be achieved if the recurrent expenditure component is optimised while the spending component going to capital infrastructure especially in the economic and social sectors is prioritised.

According to 2019 state fiscal data, only 11 states actually spent over 50% of their budgeted capital expenditure in the fiscal year. Further analysis also shows that 8 states could not meet their recurrent expenditure with their available revenues which include IGR and Gross FAAC, thereby building up their public debt.

Furthermore, 31 states gave more attention to their recurrent expenditure than capital expenditure. This spending pattern is not sustainable as this has opened gaps in providing quality healthcare services and educational systems, thus slowing down social development as well as growth in other key areas of the economy.

CAPITAL EXPENDITURE

Introduction

It is a no-brainer that the government’s capital expenditure, whether national or in this case, sub-national, plays a key role in how effective its economy functions. In simpler terms, the more the government spends on infrastructure, the better the performance output of its economy, thereby impacting economic growth.

Whereas, recurrent expenditure focuses on the running cost of government, such as payment of salaries, and pensions and overheads, capital expenditure on the other hand, deals with investing in infrastructure and assets that have short and long-term benefits in stimulating economic growth, as well as improving the lives and living conditions of the general public.

Inasmuch as capital expenditure is important for the economic growth of sub-national states, understanding the peculiarities of the state, as well as the realities and needs of the public will be important to assess the kind of infrastructure the state government should implement.

Nigerian state governments have a simple task: understanding that not all capital obligations are viable economically. This will go a long way to determine how useful state proposed capital investment will impact citizens’ living standards. This knowledge will prove whether states’ capital investments will augment economic growth, or be another needless “white elephant project”, a colossal waste of public funds.

Capital Expenditure Performance

There is a huge disparity between state governments’ budgeted capital expenditure amounts and the actual.

Although, it is a common point to note that budgeting of an amount does not automatically translate into disbursing of allocated funds, the salient reasons why state governments fail to meet their capital expenditure obligations is majorly attributable to a general inadequate lack of planning.

Sadly, these fundamental issues or gaps are not just limited to poor funding/revenue generation, but can also be linked to other underlying factors like inadequate budget planning process, a lack of informed knowledge of the current realities of the macroeconomic environment, and a huge politicisation of project implementation.

There is a huge disparity between state governments’ budgeted capital expenditure amounts and the actual performance of its capital expenditure in the 2019 fiscal year.

Out of the 36 states of the federation, only 11 states performed over the 50% average with Kaduna topping the list with 97.53%; followed by Rivers state with 74.53%; others are Lagos, 69.81%; Jigawa, 67.99%; Abia, 65%; Delta, 59.01%; Enugu, 57.28%, Anambra, 53.92%; Kwara, 52.31% and Gombe state with 50.41%.

It is also sad to see that 15 states have a capital budget performance less than 30%. A major reason is also the lack of budget realism across states in Nigeria. For example, Cross River had 2.78% performance due to its bloated projections of N1.04tn.

As seen also in the Federal Government, most states project high budget numbers only to meet the recurrent expenditure component due to its “compulsory” payments to staff and running of government, while strafing opportunities to expand capital projects.

Over the years, the sub-national governments’ actual capital expenditure spending has consistently fallen lower than their budget targets. This has particularly become a common trend, whereby state governments fail to meet their capital expenditure obligations, usually by a huge percentage.

Recurrent/Capital Performance Ratio: An expanding gulf

Based on the 2019 states’ financials, most states are prioritising recurrent expenditure over capital expenditure. At the end of the 2019 fiscal year, out of the total actual expenditure of N5.24tn of all the 36 states in 2019, N3.31tn was spent on recurrent bills. As such, states received a prominent percentage of 63.20% while capital expenditure only accounted for 36.80% or N1.93tn.

Recurrent/Capital Performance Ratio

An expanding gulf In Appendix 2, it is obvious that recurrent expenditure performance can be as high as 118.58% in Kogi, 114% in Kano, 105% in Lagos 104% in Edo and 101% in Gombe. 27 states have recurrent expenditure higher than 80% while capital expenditure showed that 20 states posting performance less than 40%.

Capital Expenditure: Reviewing Cost VS Value

Sub-national governments need to reevaluate their various approaches to funding and executing capital projects within their respective states.

State governments’ budgets are filled with a large number of unnecessary projects that have no developmental or economic impact or benefit, and can largely be viewed as an irresponsible waste of resources.

Some of these “administrative projects” have huge price tags attached to them, amounts which could be diverted elsewhere based on the needs and realities of the populace.

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to threaten our way of life in Nigeria, and around the world, with state and national governments forced to adapt to new realities.

Based on the Nigeria Centre for Disease Control’s numbers, some of the worst hit states include Lagos, Oyo, Kano, Rivers and Edo. As such, more attention has turned to bolstering the health infrastructure within the states, so as to cope with the effects of the pandemic.

N1.93tn

At the end of the 2019 fiscal year, out of the total actual expenditure of N5.24tn of all the 36 states in 2019, N3.31tn was spent on recurrent bills.

RECURRENT EXPENDITURE

Introduction

Based on the sub-national fiscal sustainability ranking in BudgIT’s 2020 State of States Report, about 8 states namely, Osun, Bauchi, Plateau, Gombe, Adamawa, Ekiti, Kogi and Oyo, could not adequately cover their recurrent expenditure obligations with their total revenue.

This is also coupled with the fact that most states are still struggling to pay the federal government’s newly approved minimum wage. With the high cost of overheads, bloated wage bill and the cost of servicing political appointees, nothing will be left for the provision of infrastructure such as construction of roads, provision of quality healthcare and education.

This has further led to indiscriminate borrowings from domestic and foreign sources for meeting recurrent obligations, this development, which is fiscally unsustainable, is also contrary to government’s pledge to deploy all borrowed funds to the development of critical infrastructure.

Sustainability of Over-bloated Recurrent Bill

State governments’ recurrent expenditure continues to increase astronomically over the years due to factors such as the expansion in the size of the state’s workforce and the cost of running the government among others.

This has reduced the public revenue available to implement projects that will have an impact on the social and economic well being of the people. The total recurrent expenditure for all the 36 states witnessed an increase of 4.75% or N139.9bn from N3.17tn recorded in 2018 to N3.33tn in 2019, with over 19 states responsible for this increase.

Kogi state was topping this list with over 78.9% increment from the 2018 figure of N57.07bn to N102.13bn in 2019.

Sustainability of Over-bloated Recurrent Bill

At the end of 2019, the financials showed that Lagos state reported a total recurrent expenditure and loan repayments of N555.65bn, the highest figure in the country.

The state’s personnel expenditure increased by 43.5% from what was witnessed in 2017. Lagos still maintains a sustainable threshold compared to other states in the region as a result of its huge Internally Generated Revenue (IGR). States such as Delta, Bayelsa, and Akwa Ibom are running high recurrent expenditure of N231bn, N137bn, and N130bn respectively despite their size and population compared with states like Edo, and Kebbi with higher populations, with far lesser recurrent expenditure.

Recurrent Expenditure Growths Profile

23 states increased their total actual recurrent expenditure and loan repayments between 2018 and 2019. The biggest increases were observed in Kogi, Cross River and Imo states with increases of 78.96%, 46.77% and 38.58% respectively.

A total of 13 states saw a cut in their total actual recurrent expenditure and loan repayments. The biggest drops were observed in Sokoto, Ondo and Osun states which had cuts of 28.03%, 27.75% and 22.39%.

Recurrent/Capital Ratio

A total of thirty-one states had higher recurrent/capital expenditure ratio indicating that recurrent expenditure (including loan repayments) in those states crowded out capital spending. Leading the pack in this category are Taraba, Benue and Oyo which spent 89%, 86% and 81% of their total expenditure on recurrent expenditure and loan repayments.

South-South States’ High Recurrent Bill & Other Trends

Based on the figures available from the states in their 2019 audited statement, it was observed that most states in the South-South region such as Delta, Bayelsa, Akwa-Ibom and Cross-River, are running high recurrent bills. An evidence of this is what these states spend on overhead cost. Delta state and Cross-River state spend 37.87% and 36.26% of their total recurrent on overhead.

Delta state also spent N33bn on miscellaneous under Overhead component of its Recurrent expenditure. This N33bn miscellaneous spending is more than actual Expenditure on Personnel in the same year by 21 non-oil producing states which ranged from N7bn to N31bn per state.

While recurrent expenditure per capita stood at N6,845 in Kano, it was as high as N59,220 in Bayelsa and N34,608 in Delta state. Delta state spending over N215bn on recurrent expenditure or Bayelsa spending more on recurrent expenditure than Kano State does not look good for fiscal sustainability considering the volatility of oil prices.

Further breakdown also revealed that states with a high proportion of their recurrent expenditure dedicated to overhead costs include Kwara, Zamfara, Kaduna, Anambra and Benue. 46.5% or N33.47bn of Kwara state’s total recurrent expenditure of N71.59bn was spent on overhead costs.

With consistent borrowing to service the budget deficit in order to balance revenue and the expenditure, the states are borrowing heavily to maintain government bureaucracy. This has dealt a blow on the capital component that has led to abandoned projects.

Also, no new projects are being implemented as a result of lack of funds which has in turn contributed immensely to the slowing down of the economic activities of states. It is evident that the huge cost of running the government has a higher chance of contributing to wasteful spending and embezzlement of public funds.

SEVEN RECOMMENDATIONS

Favouring Developmental Capital Projects over Administrative Capital Projects
State governments need to prioritise projects that will have a direct impact on the standard of living as well as aid economic development of the state. Capital expenditure should only be allocated appropriately and based Developmental capital expenditure projects should take precedence over administrative capital projects within the budget of sub-national governments.

Administrative capital projects are projects that in every sense do not affect the lives and livelihoods of citizens within a state. These projects have no direct impact on economic growth, and can only be seen as a waste of resources.

Development capital projects on the other hand are projects that have both economic growth and standard of living value to the state and its indigenes. Development capital projects stimulate economic activities within the state, and directly impact citizens’ lives.

State governments need to prioritise projects that will have a direct impact on the standard of living as well as aid economic development of the state. Capital expenditure should only be allocated appropriately and based on the needs of the state.

Understanding the Needs of the States

It would be wise for sub-national governments in Nigeria to shun being sub-national governments can solve the lapses in their execution of capital expenditure obligations within their various jurisdictions through a purposeful and informed budget formulation process that takes the people’s realities and needs into account.

This approach should be participatory where citizens will be involved in policy planning, policy development and budget implementation. This will bring government closer to the people, foster the spirit of cooperation, thereby enhancing community service and infrastructural development.

This will also enable the execution of only viable projects that will both impact citizens’ lives, communities and also stimulate economic activity.

Capital expenditure should only be appropriately allocated based on the needs of the state. Determination of capital expenditure allocation should constitute a long and stringent financial planning process, which should not only just cover the implementation of the capital project, but also monitoring, management and future maintenance of the project.

Elimination of ‘White Elephant’ Projects that Yield No Economic Benefits

It would be wise for sub-national governments in Nigeria to shun being wasteful in their spending towards capital projects and infrastructure that has no direct impact on the lives and livelihoods of its citizens as well as have an economic impact.

Therefore, resourceful spending has to be encouraged when implementing capital expenditures within the states. Priority should be given to sectors that yield the best value in stimulating economic growth and improving standards of living.

Productivity Concern for Recurrent Expenditure

Sub-national government spending on recurrent expenditure continues to be on an upward trajectory, and if not checked will reach a state of unsustainability which could spell disaster for the states. There have been several calls for state governments to restructure their labour force, putting into context the realities of the state, which include most importantly, its ability to generate enough revenue to keep its government afloat.

The high cost of states’ recurrent expenditure has raised several concerns if this matches the expected productivity level of the public sector.

The problem involved has been likened to the lack of a well-trained workforce including inadequate checks in the political and the budget formulation process. Expenditure on bogus overhead costs that do not serve useful economic and social objectives has further increased the size of recurrent expenditure with low productivity in the face of dwindling revenues.

The state governments need to allocate resources optimally for developmental goals and adequately finance public investment projects and also initiate public sector reform programmes that will increase demand for quality and responsive public services that will deliver result-oriented outputs. It is not enough for the state government to lament the current shortfalls in revenue target without dealing with the inefficiency in the usage of the available resources or block the unnecessary cost the government incurs that siphon public revenue.

Overhead costs optimisation should be implemented. This would help in reducing general and administrative costs for proper management of available resources.

Sub-national governments, as a matter of urgency, need to reduce recurrent expenditure to a sustainable level by cutting wasteful spending, eradicating corruption as well as blocking loopholes by eliminating ghost workers in its monthly payroll.

There should also be a reduction in the number of political officeholders serving in state cabinets. Each state government should also consider the merger of Ministries, Departments, and Agencies that perform duplicating functions to reduce the cost of governance. By doing these, state governments will be able to block leakages, reduce waste and be able to use saved funds for social development.

Rationalise Overhead Costs by Centralising Expenditure

It is not enough for the state government to lament the current shortfalls in revenue target without dealing with the inefficiency in the usage of the available resources or block the unnecessary cost the government incurs that siphon public revenue. Overhead costs optimisation should be implemented, this would help in reducing general and administrative costs for proper management of available resources.

Public Debt for Public Investment Increase Public Revenues

Incurring public debts domestically and externally to fund self-liquidating capital expenditure and carry out development projects will enhance economic activities that will increase economic growth. The government should initiate and implement appropriate policies that will ensure that these borrowings are put into appropriate use that will stimulate public investments and also ensure that borrowing is not diverted for personal aggrandizement.

Increase Public Revenues

State governments should, as a matter of urgency, search for new ways to generate more revenue and increase their capacity to generate proportionately what they are spending on recurrent expenditure. This can be done sustainably by each state tapping into the state’s natural resources.

States need to reduce their overreliance on federal allocation and grow their IGR. This requires a drive for investments in states and strengthening the capacity of the revenue-generating agencies. States should also try as much as possible to depend less on federal allocations and more on their IGR, proper usage of such revenue to create an impact on the economy is also paramount.

• Source: States’ 2019 Financial Statements, BudgIT Research

[Vanguard]

The office of National Security Adviser in Nigeria has acquired a string of curious myths. Think of a public office somehow above open discussion by citizens except in whispers and hushed speculations. Imagine a department of state that can interfere in the affairs of other departments without much qualms and cite ‘national security’ as the enabling source of authority. Contemplate a public office that incurs huge expenses and spends public money without much regard for the rules of open public accountability. Think again of a publicly funded office that can be used to conceal nefarious political spending and often monumental corruption in the assurance that few questions would be asked. To sustain the halo of inscrutability around the office of the NSA, all that is required is to couch a dubious spending as a matter of ‘national security’. Just stamp the enabling memo ‘confidential’. Place the paperwork in a folder with the bold inscription: ‘Top Secret”. End of the matter. No questions asked. No consequences for billions spent in invisible transactions.

An extension of this myth of national security as a fetish is what has come to be known as ‘Security Vote’ in all of our 36 states. To service the unquenchable thirst of this ubiquitous deity, all state governors yank off huge sums of state funds every month for free unaccounted spending in the name of ‘security vote’. With that latitude in place, a governor is free to ‘donate’ hundreds of millions of Naira in support of every conceivable cause. A recent survey puts the security vote per state at an average of N250 million every month. The richer states reportedly charge much more on the treasury of their states. For the 36 states, that comes to a princely sum with hardly any accountability requirements.

 Yet every state has detachments of official federal security agencies: Police, Department of State Security, Army, Air Force and Navy (where applicable), Civil Defence Corps, all with their respective budgeted federal funding. As with the federal level, once these curious state expenditures are dubbed ‘security votes’, no more questions are asked. Of course in some states, real internal security threats require state governments to augment the funding of official federal security agencies. States donate vehicles to aid police logistics. Others augment the duty allowances of security personnel in their states.

In the general lack of accountability requirements among state governors, abuses have become rampant. It has drawn the attention of the Nigerian Governors Forum which is said to be working on a peer accountability protocol to check the excesses of some of their members. In general, security in Nigeria has become a thriving industry, almost a deity above questioning, reproach and reprimand.

We must quickly admit that the specific operational mechanics of national security are universally protected from open discussion in barber shops. Similarly, in nearly every country, times and situations of grave national emergency and the pursuit of sensitive national interest, security personnel and agencies do get waivers from routine accountability requirements. Senior security officials  get permits in such situations to ‘play’ with cash to achieve specific objectives. For instance, at the early stages of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, CIA field operatives carried huge cash troves to facilitate ingress and egress of operational assets or to acquire vital intelligence.  They could pay off warlords and influential mullahs or buy over informants to ease the progression of advancing troops.

In Nigeria, a strange type of needless myth of secrecy surrounds everything ‘security’. The office of National Security Adviser is the bastion of this myth of secrecy. At different times and under different presidents, the office has served different functions sometimes at variance with constitutional stipulations. On the functions of the NSA and his office, the constitution is unambiguous. The NSA is just one of the gamut of presidential advisers albeit one entrusted with counselling the president on matters of national security. 

A consequence of the deification of the NSA’s office is the erroneous belief that only persons with a military, police or security background qualify to be appointed National Security Advisers. Thus we have had an unbroken string of retired military and police persons as NSAs. This of course is a gross misconception. The misconception underplays the deeply intellectual requirement of that office. In the best traditions of the presidential system, an NSA should possess a broader intellectual grasp of aspects of national security. He or she needs to have the capacity to connect all aspects of the security needs of the nation to the uniqueness of national history, economy, society and culture at any given time.

The ideal NSA must therefore be able to connect all aspects of the national reality to credible security threats to the government and people at any given moment in time. Poverty, hunger, environmental challenges, ethnocentrism, religious bigotry, etc are as much matters of national security as bandits, terrorists, separatist militias and cross border military manoeuvers by a hostile neighboring state.  Most importantly, the NSA must be able to relate the perceived security threats of the moment to the specific agenda of his president.

Because national security is dynamic, the ideal NSA must be able to maintain a synergy with existing defense and security establishments in order to deal with the immediate security challenges. It is because of this broad intellectual requirement of the office that the US from where we cloned our constitution has had a tradition of appointing either renowned intellectuals or intellectually inclined military or security persons as NSAs.

In the pure intellectual  tradition, America has had the likes of Henry Kissinger, Condoleeza Rice, Zbigniew Brezinski,  Susan Rice and Jake Sullivan as NSA. In the ranks of outstanding persons with military and security background, there have been the likes of Collin Powell, Michael Flynn and H .R Mcmaster in that capacity. Even those with a military background are required to show outstanding intellectual acuity in their understanding of the multi faceted nature of America’s complex national security burden.

Of course, we need to locate America’s choices of the intellectual type NSA to its historical, locational and geo strategic obligations. North America and specifically the US is the territorial equivalent of an aircraft carrier. Surrounded by three great oceans, nothing must threaten the security of people living on and defending the ‘carrier’ nation. All troubles must take place far away from the carrier platform and ‘homeland’. The theatres of trouble must be places far away. America can go far away to contain troubles, put out fires, project its power  and advance its national interests in order to maintain its global pre-eminence and secure the homeland. This has remained the basic pillar of America’s national security doctrine over the decades. It is essentially a foreign policy-driven notion of national security.

For this reason, the events of 9/11 were a rude shock to American national security thinking. As a consequence, the creation of a separate department of Homeland Security was a consequential alteration of US national security doctrine. It has meant a subtle division between domestic and external aspects of national security for the first time. The realization is that the “aircraft carrier” nation now also requires internal protection from its resident adversaries as well.

In Nigeria’s instance, however, national security has remained an essentially domestic preoccupation. There have been occasional external pressures in the past. Threats either from Apartheid South Africa, jihadist terrorists from the Sahel across the northern borders and border skirmishes from Cameroun have sporadically and periodically flared up. But these have remained largely external threats which have been the headache of the professional military. 

Within this essentially domestic orientation, Nigeria’s national security picture has been copiously dynamic. We have had the series of crises that produced the civil war, the upsurge of micro nationalist pressure, the rise of militant regional nationalism, sectarian violent eruptions (the Maitatsine uprising), rise of sectarian and jihadist terrorism (Boko Haram), intra communal violent eruptions (Zango-Khataf, Modakeke/Ife , Shagamu crises,  the rise of militant separatism (IPOB, Niger Delta militancy), herdsmen versus settled farmer clashes, urban cultism, banditry, transactional kidnapping, armed robbery etc. Different presidents have adopted different strategies to contain whichever of these threats confronted them.

President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua assumed office literally under a barrage of gunfire. Militancy in the Niger Delta was the most potent and urgent national security threat. The military was literally outgunned and overwhelmed. His NSA was under immense pressure to reassert the armed superiority of the state. State governors under severe threat had alternative ideas on how to secure their states. A number of them in the troubled Niger Delta applied for arms import waiver and licenses to import military grade weapons and munitions. One governor then got a license from the then NSA to bring in helicopter gunships and surveillance drones. Authority was quickly granted and stripped down equipment was flown in, assembled and handed to the military. Bombardments of militants camps followed, thus forcing the trouble makers to surrender and submit to the amnesty programme. Yar’Adua used the office of NSA was used to achieve a clear national security objective.

President Jonathan was ignorant on national security. He could literally not distinguish between a pistol and a rifle. So he got help from the late General Azazi, a fellow Niger Delta citizen as NSA. No one knows whether Azazi’s purely military approach would have worked since he died prematurely. Jonathan later changed his NSA as well as the meaning of national security. The definition of National security was broadened to include and prioritize the political security of the incumbent president. Thus, resources deployed towards political ends to advance the power hold of the incumbent president and party were legitimate national security spends.

Literally, all hell was let loose. A deluge of political money was unleashed. Politicians, journalists, hair dressers, unbranded facilitators, herbalists, aafas, marabouts and Pentecostal prayer warrior pastors were all drafted to the political bazaar to ensure Jonathan won in 2015. The office of the NSA became the cash office! Jonathan lost. The money disappeared.

When Mr. Buhari assumed office in 2015, one of his first ports of call as an anti-corruption trumpeter was the office of NSA. He shredded the veil and revealed that humongous amounts of public money had been funnelled and casually shared out for purposes of defeating him in the election. Multiple arrests were made and some paltry change recovered. Some weak cases were filed in court. Jonathan’s NSA, my friend Sambo Dasuki, was put away almost indefinitely for presiding over the money bazaar in the name of ‘national security’. Not much came out of that drama by way of convictions.

Buhari appointed his own NSA. A president who was a retired combat general with an NSA that was also a good retired intelligence officer raised hopes of better national security. But the face of national security had drastically altered. All manner of non-state actors had their signatures on the face of the nation . Herdsmen emerged as killers from nowhere to terrorise communities that had hitherto welcomed them and their cattle amicably. Kidnapping became a business. Shooting farmers became a sport. Bandits took over farmlands and extorted ransom and tributes. Separatist rascals took up arms against the state, claiming phantom sovereignty and territory. Faith became weaponized as places of worship became targets of terror attacks. As NSA, only Mr. Monguno knows what exactly he achieved in that office in eight years.

Therefore, of all the appointments so far announced by Mr. Tinubu to date, those of the NSA and the service chiefs are perhaps the most significant from point of view of national security. Death is everywhere in the land and fear of death and insecurity is now the greatest unifier of all Nigerians.

The choice of Mr. Ribadu as NSA is quite consequential. He was the founding Chairman of the now infamous EFCC. Even though he allowed the agency to periodically drift into political abuse, the consensus is that he left a positive mark. A section of the public thinks the security situation could improve under his watch. But that optimism can only be predicated on the hope that he can rescue the office of NSA from its serial infamy and accumulated fallacies and myths.

To succeed, Mr. Ribadu must jettison the illusion that the office of NSA is in any way superior to those of the other presidential advisers. His task area is only different. For Mr. Ribadu, the challenges are well defined but the solutions lie beyond familiar approaches. He, in collaboration with the service chiefs, must seek solutions from outside the traditional box of national security myths.

The situation is dire, urgent and could get worse. Since Mr. Tinubu was sworn in, over 500 Nigerians have died in the hands of bandits and sundry gunmen. Plateau state alone has recorded over 200 fatalities in the last less than 20 days. Those statistic could get more frightening unless something drastic is quickly done. Here are a few areas of darkness:

• Our defense and security effort must change its spatial orientation. Security agencies must retake all ungoverned spaces in the country. Bandits, terrorists, kidnappers and killer herdsmen all operate from and are based in forests, bushes, savannahs often beyond the reach of security forces. These spaces serve as fortresses for non-state actors while security agencies operate from urban inhabited spaces. Our ungoverned spaces have become an alternative republic from where assaults are mounted against the state and citizens.

• The new NSA needs to urgently research, probe and unravel the relationship between political interests and violent actors in different parts of the country. Which politicians arm the various gunmen? What percentage of the ‘unknown gunmen’ in the South East, for instance, are sponsored by political interests?  What percentage are separatist militia activists?

• When and why did herdsmen make the transition from innocent cattle herding to armed terrorism and criminality? What politicians invited and armed these herdsmen mostly from neighboring countries to advance their interests? Where did the guns come from?

• We need a deeper understanding of the interface between security agencies and criminal cartels operating in different parts of the country. There is a strong argument out there that as criminal violence has grown, so also has the security establishment become a series of business cartels and racketeering rings.

• Since kidnapping became an industry, how does it interface with other sectors of the economy? Most kidnap ransom payments are made through the banking system. How come the banks have not helped in providing leads to the kidnappers and other criminal networks?

• There have been reports of a close link between government agencies and criminal gangs involved in illicit economic activities. Illegal mining of solid minerals in northern states and oil theft in the Niger Delta stand out. In spite of this knowledge, there have been scant arrests, prosecutions, indictments or earth shattering disclosures.

Mr. Ribadu comes into office at a time of unusual challenges. The bulk of Mr. Buhari’s toxic legacy happens to be in the area of insecurity. Of course, Mr. Ribadu’s appointment comes with a mixture of cautious optimism and cynicism. He has a rather interesting mixed ancestry. He is a policeman. He has been an active partisan politician. He has had a handshake with Nigeria’s corruption high command. The man has experience in power and public office. He has a working knowledge of Nigeria’s crime and corruption industry. But he remains first and foremost a Nigerian policeman. The police knows us and we know them well. This mutual knowledge contains the prospects and problems of Mr. Ribadu as the new NSA.

In continuation of financial reforms introduced since the inauguration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has said it would sanction and blacklist bank directors with loans that remain non-performing for more than one year.

The CBN had earlier abolished the multiple exchange rate regime  In a circular it released last month, it said all segments of the forex market had been collapsed into the Investors and Exporters (I&E) window.

In the recent reforms, the apex bank also revised the Cash Reserve Ratio (CRR) of merchant banks to 10 per cent from 32.5 per cent.

CBN director, banking supervision,  Haruna Mustafa disclosed this in a letter to all Merchant banks dated July 14, 2023.

The CRR is the share of a bank’s total customer deposit that must be deposited with the central bank.

The new fresh cut reverses significantly, the increase in the CRR by the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) last September from 27.5 percent to 32.5 per cent to tame inflationary pressure.

Meanwhile, a new corporate governance guideline for commercial banks, financial holding Companies (FHCs), merchant banks, non-interest and payment service banks was released on Friday by the CBN.

“Any director whose credit facility or that of his/her related interests remains non-performing in the banking subsidiary of an FHC, for more than one year, shall cease to be on the Board of the Financial Holding Company (FHC) shall be blacklisted from sitting on the Board of such banking subsidiary or that of any other financial institution under the purview of the CBN,” the guidelines stated.

The CBN said no loan/advance and interest thereon to a director of an FHC by the banking subsidiary shall be written-off without its prior approval.

A subsidiary of the FHC, which renders services to the FHC may extend similar services to other entities within the Group that so desire, on the same terms and conditions, the guidelines stated.

It says all intra-group transactions shall be conducted at arm’s length and in compliance with the extant laws and regulations guiding the operations of the entities

The apex bank’s guideline also prescribed that all services between an FHC and its subsidiaries will be guided by Service Level Agreements (SLAs) and/or shared services arrangements in line with the CBN Guidelines for Shared Services Arrangements for Banks and Other Financial Institutions.

Under protection of shareholders right, the guidelines stated that except where prior approval of the CBN is granted, no individual, group of individuals, their proxies or corporate entities shall own controlling interest in more than one FHC.

It says except with the prior written approval of the CBN, no FHC or any of its director, shareholder or agent shall enter into an agreement which results in: a change in the control of the FHC, the transfer of shareholding of 5 per cent and above in the FHC; and/or an increase in shareholding to 5 per per cent or more in the FHC.

The CBN said its prior approval and no objection shall be sought and obtained, before any acquisition of shares of an FHC by an investor (including through the capital market), that would result in equity holding of five per cent (5%) and above.

In a circular signed by Chibuzo Efobi, CBN’s director, financial policy and regulation, the apex bank said the guidelines take effect August 1, 2023.

The circular said the new guidelines supersedes all previous codes, circulars, and related directive on corporate governance issued by the CBN.

“Banks and financial holding companies are invited to note the responsibilities imposed on their boards by these guidelines and especially on the executive compliance officers (where applicable)”, the circular stated.

The Financial Reporting Council (FRC) of Nigeria in 2019 issued the Nigerian Code of Corporate Governance (hereinafter referred to as “NCCG 2018”) as the single Corporate Governance Code for the country.

The NCCG 2018 replaced all sectoral codes in Nigeria including the extant Code of Corporate Governance for Banks and Discount Houses in Nigeria issued by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) in May 2014.

Following the pronouncement of the FRC, for sector regulators to issue sector-specific guidelines on corporate governance for institutions under their regulatory purview, the CBN said it has adapted the Principles and Recommended Practices of NCCG 2018 in developing this Guidelines for Commercial, Merchant, Non-Interest and Payment Service

Banks (hereinafter referred to as “bank(s)”), taking into account, the peculiarities of the sub-sectors.

“The CBN, pursuant to the provisions of Section 2(d) of the CBN Act 2007, and Sections 56(2) and 67(1) of the Banks and Other Financial Institutions Act (BOFIA 2020), hereby issues this regulation to be cited as the “Corporate Governance Guidelines for Commercial, Merchant, Non-Interest and Payment Service Banks in Nigeria”, the CBN said.

The guidelines stated that the government’s direct and indirect equity holding in a bank shall not be more than ten per cent (10%), which shall be divested to private investors within a maximum period of five years from the date of investment.”

[Leadership]

As I was saying to the previous administration, I hope President Bola Ahmed Tinubu will ensure that the law rules the civil service and then his anti-corruption crusade. In the last administration, I once asked: ‘How long can a public officer act in a position that the law provides a confirming body for?

The then Acting Chairman of the EFCC, Ibrahim Magu acted in office from November 2015 to July 2020. In 2017, the 8th session of the Senate rejected his nomination twice on the advice of the then Director-General of the State Security Service, Lawal Daura. Yet the President didn’t respect the Senate’s rejection.

He kept Magu in office until July 2020 when another allegation of corruption, which dogged his confirmation foundation ruined him following a Commission of Inquiry headed by a former president of Court of Appeal, Justice Ayo Salami. What was more curious, in February 2018, there was a court ruling that the Senate has powers to confirm the EFCC Chairman to remain in office.

Coincidentally, President Buhari who migrated into his sixth year in office at the end of May 2019 following an election got Magu to slip into his sixth year as EFCC Acting Chairman without confirmation by the Senate. Was that not another celebration of rampaging impunity?

Besides, at that same time, there were reports of so many permanent secretaries and executive secretaries of examination bodies who were being accused of corruption. Which led to my question then on this same page: ‘When will the Buhari administration begin to prosecute all these Permanent and Executive Secretaries and Examination Bodies’ Registrars being suspended and sacked for alleged corrupt practices? When will the Buhari administration deal with that enemy called impunity?

In March 2021, there was a report over disquiet in the offices of the Accountant General of the Federation and the Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC) because of illegal retention of the heads of both organisations in office four months after they reached the mandatory retirement age of 60 as stipulated in the public service rules.

Former Accountant General of the Federation (AGF), Ahmed Idris

Reports showed that both Ahmed Idris, the then Accountant General of the Federation and Boboye Oyeyemi, the then Corps Marshall of the FRSC, reached the mandatory retirement age in November 2020. Going by the extant rules they ought to have retired and handed over to the next ranking officer in their organisations pending either the appointment of their replacements or formalisation of the appointments of those that they handed over to.

Strangely, both officers remained in their offices enjoying all the perquisites, citing their appointments as tenured, which wasn’t true. And so for that reason, they stayed on in contravention of the public service rules, which do not support their claims.

The public service rules guiding employment of federal civil servants stipulate 60 years of age and 35 years in service (which ever comes first) as terminal points for all categories of employees.

In the particular case of Oyeyemi, who was first appointed into the office in 2014 by President Goodluck Jonathan, his reappointment contravenes both the public service rules as well as the act establishing the FRSC. The FRSC Act in Section 2(1) stipulates that all its commissioners, including the Corps Marshal can only serve for four years. While defending the illegal reappointment of the Accountant General, Labour and Employment Minister Chris Ngige curiously said President Buhari was acting in line with presidential powers granted under the 1999 Constitution.

He said Section 171 of the constitution empowers the president to appoint persons into some extra-ministerial offices of which the office of the Accountant General was one. In a similar vein, the spokesperson of the FRSC, Bisi Kazeem, said in response to media inquiries, Oyeyemi was serving at the pleasure of the president who by the provisions of the FRSC Act is empowered to make the appointment.

It was observed then that cases of such controversial appointments were not limited to the two organisations in the public service. The case of the service chiefs who were only replaced in February 2021 after serving beyond their retirement dates then came to mind. The tenures of the Comptroller General of Nigeria Immigration Service as well as that of the Inspector General of Police were similarly extended in manners that had not been seen in the public service of Nigeria.

That unpleasant development became rampant under the Buhari administration, spreading to include various agencies of government and even the academia. This act makes nonsense of the public service rules and regulation, which were enacted to maintain its professionalism and relevance in the scheme of governance.

Mmesoma Ejikeme

This untoward practice nurtured a culture of impunity in Buhari years. As the Mmesomas in the system are poised to benefit from this despicable culture of impunity, the new administration must uphold the provisions of the extant rules, which should be considered more than the conveniences of breaking and bending the rules. There should be a new Head of the Civil Service of the Federation who should work within confines of the presidential bureaucracy to ensure that the civil service is not violated again the way Buhari did.

Doubtless, the rape on the civil service through careless and illegal extensions of tenure has bred negative consequences, which have affected service morale, discipline and professionalism. Besides, it has bred corruption among officers who may want to do whatever is possible to remain in office or some others who, because of the fear that they may not be allowed to rise to the pinnacle of their careers because of sit-tight bosses.

According to newspaper comment then, ‘This development gives the impression that the administration, despite its avowed commitment to reforming the public service for efficient service delivery, is not living to its words.’This is a serious presidential malpractice that must be stopped forthwith as it is neither in the interest of the administration nor that of the country. A succession plan should be in place in all sectors so that replacing an officer is not a problem and in doing so extant rules must be followed.

Impunity on Abuja’s original inhabitants…

In January 2018, I wrote an article here on a ‘January 15, 2018 justice for Abuja’s original inhabitants who had then just secured victory on their quest for definition of (their) citizenship within this convoluted federation. Below is an excerpt from the article: https://guardian.ng/opinion/justice-at-last-for-abuja-indigenes/

‘After 42 years of complicated relationship with federal authorities that grabbed their land for the purpose of building a capital for the nation, Abuja original inhabitants last Monday (January 15, 2018) got some significant justice that will change their national profile for ever. It is puzzling most news media organs were unaware of the ruling on the status of the Abuja original inhabitants that has some jurisprudential significance.

This is the story even most judicial reporters either curiously missed or did not consider newsworthy: The Court of Appeal in Abuja on that Monday declared in a landmark judgment that indigenous inhabitants of Abuja are indeed entitled to a ministerial representation in the Federal Executive Council as provided by the combined provisions of Sections 147 (3), 299, 14 (3) and 42 of 1999 Constitution.

The Court also declared that persistent denial and refusal of past and current presidents to so appoint an indigene of FCT Abuja as a minister in the federal executive council (FEC) since May 1999 tantamount to a gross violation of the said constitutional right against discrimination. Accordingly, the Court directed the President to immediately make the said appointment. N100, 000 was awarded against the president and the Attorney General of the Federation as first and second respondents.

Expectedly, some FCT indigenes have expressed delight over Court of Appeal’s Jan. 15 judgment that entitled them to ministerial representation in the Executive Council of the Federation.The natives of Abuja said the decision would give them the opportunity to fully participate in governance in the nation’s capital their forefathers donated to the nation more than four decades ago.
While congratulating the original inhabitants, it is also important to implore President Muhammadu Buhari to implement the judicial decision without delay.

This is in the interest of peace and stability of the permanent capital of the federation. The (federal) capital was legally moved from Lagos to Abuja on Thursday 12 December, 1991 by the then General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida (IBB) military regime. The proclamation of Abuja as nation’s capital was done by the military regime of General Murtala Mohammed on 3rd December 1976…’

The battle for this judicial recognition and victory has been a long drawn one. The natives have been agitating for political recognition and other rights since creation of the capital in 1976. Even the 1999 constitution has long been identified as unfair to the citizens of Abuja who actually have no other state of the federation to claim. Section 299 of the Constitution provides the ambiguity successive governments have been exploiting to cheat the people.

They have political representation at the level of civil service up to the office of permanent secretary, National Population, among others, but specifically, representation at the cabinet level has been a huge challenge despite peaceful agitations. For instance, in October 2015, when the Buhari administration was concluding cabinet making, the Abuja indigenes protested for their right to nominate their own representatives too. But as usual, no one listened to them.

On March 26 this year, I paid a glowing tribute to the memory of the lawyer who actually spearheaded the struggle for justice for Abuja indigenes alone.
In the tribute titled, ‘Sleep Well, Musa Panya: Who Got Justice For Abuja Indigenes…I wrote:

This is a fitting tribute to a significant lawyer, an original inhabitant of Abuja who fought and conquered even Muhammadu President Buhari in Court and got justice for his people on human rights. He joined his ancestors at 54 last week after battling that evil deposit called sickle cell anemia. I am sure when Baba Musa Panya gets to his Creator, he will report Buhari to Him and his bitter complaint will be: My Father, my Father, what are you going to do to that man, our leader, Buhari who has since January 15, 2018 failed to abide by a Court of Appeal declarative judgment that the FCT should be regarded as a state and so an indigene of the Federal Capital Territory should be appointed as a member of the Executive Council of the Federation?

The case Musa Baba Panya Vs FG has been copiously cited in the current presidential election petitions at the Court of Appeal. But the point here is that Buhari, a great promoter of culture of impunity never respected the declarative judgment of the Court of Appeal that the same federal government never appealed.

President Buhari refused to appoint an indigene of the Federal Capital Territory into the Executive Council of the Federation. This is therefore a strategic reminder to President Tinubu who has pledged to allow the law rather than man to rule, to abide by the 2018 judgment that an Abuja original inhabitant should be part of the federal cabinet. That is one way of beginning to dismantle our growing culture of impunity in Africa’s most populous nation and hope of the black race, Nigeria.

The Lagos State Government has announced that Eko Bridge inwards the newly re-opened Apongbon Bridge will close for 24 hours on Sunday 16th July, 2023 for immediate remedial palliative works by the Lagos State Public Works in conjunction with Federal Ministry of Works and Housing.

The Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Transportation, Engr. Abdulhafiz Toriola made this statement known today, that the 24 hour closure will allow uninterrupted palliative adjustment of the bridge.

While confirming that the Lagos State Traffic Management Authority (LASTMA) Personnel have been deployed to control and manage traffic around C.M.S, Marina, Ijora, and other alternative routes on the Lagos Island and Mainland, he explained that the palliative work was necessary to complement the newly re-opened Apongbon Bridge.

The alternative routes made available during the period of repair are highlighted as follows;

1. For Motorists from Mainland/Surulere going to Lagos Island are advised to make use of Ijora-Olopa/Causeway to Carter Bridge (Idumota) to connect their desired destinations;

Or

b. Connect Costain to Iganmu through Ijora-Oloye via Ijora Causeway to Carter Bridge (Idumota), for their desired destinations.

2. For Motorists from Lagos Island going to Surulere/Mainland are advised to connect Carter Bridge (Idumota) through Iddo/Oyingbo to Herbert Macaulay for their desired destinations;

Or

Connect Carter Bridge(Idumota) through Ijora Olopa by LAWMA Headquarters to Eko Bridge inwards Costain/Alaka for their desired destinations.

3. Motorists can equally make use of the Third Mainland Bridge through Adekunle to connect Herbert Macaulay to link their desired destinations.

The Transport Permanent Secretary further urged road users to cooperate with the Traffic Managers during the palliative works to enhance seamless movement.

E-Signed;

Engr. Abdulhafiz Toriola

Permanent Secretary,

Lagos State Ministry of Transportation.

15th July, 2023.

The Federal Government has filed a two-count charge of illegal possession of firearms and ammunition against suspended Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor, Godwin Emefiele, before the Federal High Court in Lagos.

According to Channel Television report, FG accused Emefiele of possessing a single-barrel shotgun (JOJEFF MAGNUM 8371) without a licence.

The government maintained that the offence is contrary to Section 4 of the Firearms Act, Cap F28 Laws of the Federation 2004, and punishable under Section 27 (1b) of the same Act.

In the second count, the suspended CBN Governor was accused of having in his possession 123 rounds of live ammunition (Cartridges) without a licence, which is contrary to Section 8 of the Firearms Act Cap F28 Laws of the Federation 2004 and punishable under Section 27 (1)(b)(il) of the same Act.

The case is yet to be assigned to a judge, but there are indications that this will be done next week.

Emefiele has been in the custody of the DSS since June 10. The spokesman for the DSS, Dr. Peter Afunanya, had said it was for “investigative reasons”.

Afunanya, in a statement on Thursday, also disclosed that the agency had charged Emefiele to court following an Abuja High Court ruling.

Count one of the charges reads; That you, Godwin Emefiele, Male, of No. 8 Colorado Street Maitama Abuja, on or about the 15th of June 2023, at No. 3b Iru Close, Ikoyi, Eti Osa Local Government, Lagos State, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, had in your possession one (1) Single Barrel shotgun (JOJEFF MAGNUM 8371) without a licence. You thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 4 of the Firearms Act, Cap. F28 Laws of the Federation 2004, and punishable under Section 27 (1b) of the same Act.

Count two: That you, Godwin Emefiele, Male, of No. 8 Colorado Street Maitama Abuja, on or about June 15, 2023, at No. 3b Iru Close, Ikoyi, Eti Osa Local Government, Lagos State, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, had in your possession One Hundred and Twenty-Three (123) Rounds of live ammunition (Cartridges) without a licence You thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 8 of the Firearms Act Cap F28 Laws of the Federation 2004 and punishable under Section 27 (1)(b)(il) of the same Act.

Meanwhile, Another FCT High Court in Abuja voided the arrest and detention of Emefiele by the DSS on Friday.

Delivering judgement, Justice Bello Kawu held that the arrest, detention, and interrogation of Mister Emefiele are in violation of the subsisting judgement and orders of Justice M. A. Hassan.

Mr Emefiele, through his Counsel, Peter Abang, had asked the court to set aside and nullify the arrest and detention of the Applicant for being illegal and a nullity in view of the subsisting judgment by another court delivered on 29th December 2022.

Justice Kawu also made an order setting aside any warrant of arrest obtained or procured by the Respondents, especially the DSS for the arrest of Emefiele in connection with the allegations of terrorism financing, fraudulent practices, money laundering, threat to national security before any court.

The court further granted an injunction restraining the respondents, particularly the DSS from arresting, detaining, or interfering with Mr. Emefiele’s personal liberty and freedom of movement.

The court finally granted an order of injunction directing and mandating the Respondents, particularly the DSS to forthwith release Mr. Emefiele from any arrest or detention.

Justice Rabiu Gwandu of the National Industrial Court in Lagos has fixed September 30 for further hearing in a $4.2 million suit instituted against a multinational oil company, ExxonMobil Corporation and its parent body, Mobil Producing Nigeria Limited by its ex-staff, James Nwagbogwu Ebede, over alleged forceful retirement.

When the matter was mentioned for continuation of trial, counsel for ExxonMobil, Paul Usoro, SAN, was in court to cross examine the claimant who has given evidence and closed his case since last year.

But, Ituah Imhanze leading two other lawyers for Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited told the court that he filed an amended statement of defence against the consequential amendment statement of claim of the claimant.

However, claimant’s lawyer, Chucks Uguru told the court that he will not be opposing the amendment but urged the court to impose a cost of N750,0,000 on the Mobil Producing company, contending that the claimant filed his amended statement of claim since 18th of March,2022.

Uguru stated that the only reason the defendants have not filed their statement of defence was for the purpose of delaying the case which was filed about five years ago.

He told the court that the case had suffered series of adjournments at the instance of the defendants.

Uguru further told the court that the business of the day was for the claimant to be cross-examined by the defence counsels but this is another dilatory.

Consequently, he urged the court to grant them two hearing days if the case is to be adjourned after the application must have been heard.

In her ruling, the trial judge, Justice H Gwandu, after Mr. Imhanze granted the application for amended statement of defence, and ordered Mobil Producing Nigeria company to pay the cost of N500,000, which must be paid before the next adjourned date.

Thereafter, Justice Gwandu adjourned the matter till 30th and 31st of September 2023 for continuation of hearing.

In a statement of fact filed before the National Industrial Court on behalf of the claimant, stated that he worked with the company from December, 2001 to 2018 as an engineer and that because of his consistent excellent performance, he was at various times given important responsibilities.

He averred that in 2015 he was deployed to Dubai with the posting to last till December 2017 but that he was forcefully redeployed back to Nigeria and retired because he refused to carry out alleged dishonest actions that he was being compelled to do by the manager of ExxonMobil while on assignment in the United Arab Emirates and Iran.

According to him, on his return to Nigeria, further punitive actions were taken against him leading to his forceful retirement.

He alleged that the company attempted to compel him to employ unqualified engineer and that on several occasions, attempts were made to compel him to sign off uncompleted and poorly executed project as completed, among others.

The claimant alleged that upon return from Iraq, he provided the defendants details of the unethical and immoral acts he was being coerced to do for which he was being unjustly treated.

He said the defendants constituted a team and got further details from the claimant, and promised more documents upon the receipt of the claimant’s personal belongings shipped by the defendants for the claimant.

The claimant further alleged that when his shipment arrived Nigeria, he was shocked that the defendants were unwilling to either clear the shipment from the ports or handover the original Bill of Lading to the claimant such that the claimant can go and clear the container containing his personal belongings.

The claimant alleged that since 6th September 2017, the defendants have continued to hold on to the shipment containing his personal belongings and he believes it is in the defendants bid to subvert the course of justice.

Consequently, Mr. Ebede is claiming $4.2 million as general damages for the emotional stress he had suffered;

N114,992,096 being the equivalent of 32 months salary which the defendant ought to pay him for his forceful retirement and also demanding published public apology in two daily newspapers and two international newspapers.

However, the defendants in their preliminary objection urged the court to decline jurisdiction to entertain the suit on the ground that the ExxonMobil company is an entity incorporated under the laws of the United States of America, saying that the Nigerian court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter.

In her ruling, the presiding judge, Justice R. H. Gwandu, while adjourning for hearing held “I hold that this court has the jurisdiction to adjudicate on issues contained in the claimant’s suits both by subject matter and territory, the claimant having shown sufficient cause of action against the defendant.”