In a 2010 assessment report, the US-based group, Human Rights Watch (HRW), posited that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) was envisaged to tackle corrupt politicians and public sector fraud effectively, but has contrary to expectations, continued to “reward rather than punish corruption”.

Coming just seven years after the establishment of the anti-corruption agency, HRW’s early verdict seemed a clairvoyant perception that has deepened over the years. Although a product of a United Nations Convention, the enthusiasm at the time to nip corruption persuaded the state governors to overlook what was supposed to be an established path to building a strong and enduring institution.

As a strategic agency with a national jurisdiction, the decision to overlook the error may have been inspired by hope that the EFCC may evolve into an independent organization led and run by persons that shared a common desire to chart a firm path where public office holders will be held accountable without fear or favour.

It may have started fairly well under its pioneer chairman, Nuhu Ribadu. But sooner rather than later, it became clear that politicians with views out of sync with those of Aso Rock chief occupant became the prime targets of its operatives. The still-born attempt to engineer a third term for then President Olusegun Obasanjo through a constitutional amendment turned the EFCC into an enforcer against politicians, especially members of the National Assembly where the constitutional immunity for then Vice President Atiku Abubakar and state governors shielded them from the arm-twisting that was generously applied to beat dissenting politicians into line.

At the end of Obasanjo’s second term and the ouster of Ribadu under controversial circumstances, EFCC shed whatever remained of its toga of independence and became a full-fledged tool at the disposal of the tenant of Aso Rock. It became a theatre of hysteria and a potent tool of vendetta without pretence. What with the comical manner Chairman of Globacom, Mike Adenuga, was chased out of Nigeria to Ghana and later Europe; the gestapo-style bid to arrest former governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, not forgetting the invasion of the offices of Dangote Group in search of non-existent documents just to spite its President Aliko Dangote.

Yet, in the midst of all this and many more, nobody bothered to inquire into how the anti-graft agency was birthed. Was the infraction-burdened commission itself a child of Constitutional infraction? This is the matter before a seven-man panel of Supreme Court justices, led by Justice Uwani Abba-Aji. They are to adjudicate on a case first brought before the apex court by Kogi state through its Attorney-General. A good 15 other states have joined in the consolidated suit which seeks to determine whether the EFCC Bill followed due process of the law, in this case the Constitution, before it became an Act of Parliament. Hearing on the matter has been fixed for October 22.

The states that joined in the suit marked: SC/CV/178/2023, are Katsina, Sokoto, Jigawa, Ondo, Edo, Oyo, Ogun, Nasarawa, Kebbi, Enugu, Benue, Anambra, Plateau, Cross River and Niger. Their argument is that the enactment of the EFCC Act grossly undermined the powers and rights of the states as federating units within a Federation. The states have functional Houses of Assembly but the input of these State Assemblies was not sought in the course of the enactment of the EFCC Act as required by the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

This is a strong ground because it borders on Constitutional abuse.

The state governments are relying on the case of Dr. Joseph Nwobike Vs Federal Republic of Nigeria, wherein the Supreme Court held that it was a UN Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) that the National Assembly converted into the EFCC Establishment Act and that in enacting this law in 2004, the provisions of Section 12 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, were not followed.

The state governments argued that in transforming a convention into Nigerian law, the provision of Section 12 must be complied with. The 16 state governments assert that the provision of the Constitution demands that a majority of the states’ Houses of Assembly shall agree to bring the UN Convention into Nigeria before passing the EFCC Act or any other such law. They maintain that this critical requirement that underscores the sovereignty of Nigeria as a self-governing entity was never met neither was the constitutional procedure followed.

For the avoidance of doubt, section 12, subsection (2) of the Constitution states that “the National Assembly may make laws for the Federation or any part thereof with respect to matters not included in the Exclusive Legislative List for the purpose of implementing a treaty,” which in this case is the UNCAC, a treaty Nigeria ratified since 14 December 2004 from which the EFCC Act was enacted at the whim of the Executive and the National Assembly without the concordance and ratification from the state Assembles.

Subsection three(3) of section 12 states that “a bill of the National Assembly passed pursuant to the provisions of subsection (2) of the section shall not be presented to the President for assent, and shall not be enacted, unless it is ratified by a majority of all the Houses of Assembly in the Federation.”

The fact that 15 states have joined Kogi in challenging the legality of the process that birthed the EFCC across party and regional lines illustrates the common challenges states face when they hold contrary views with the occupant of Aso Rock. In the prayers brought before the Supreme Court, their major desire is not to be shielded from prosecution but for the process not to be activated at the whim and caprice of the party at the centre or the President at any point in time. The reality of imperial presidency is one of the major impediments to a functional federal structure. Despite being heads of sub-national governments, state governors still face the prospect of arbitrary persecution if they are not in the president’s good book.

The suit before the Supreme Court, if successful and should be, may open the door to the resolution of some contentious issues and proposed legislations that are emasculating the states and the citizens. One of such is the proposal for the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to take over the conduct of local government elections as well as the criteria for choosing its chairman and national commissioners. With every electoral cycle, the overbearing power and influence of the presidency in conducting credible elections become more apparent. The recent gubernatorial election in Edo State is sticking out like a sore thumb.

Above all, what the suit seeks to achieve is to establish that Nigeria is a true Federation hence its statutes including Acts of Parliament must respect the constitutional roles and relevance of the federating units, the states.

Dr (Mrs) Ochioma, political strategy consultant, writes from Benin City

Since 1999, as insecurity in Nigeria has surged dramatically, federal and state governments have been divided over whether to maintain the current central policing system or shift to a state/local policing model.

In February 2024, President Bola Tinubu and the governors of all 36 states agreed that implementing a state/local policing system could provide a more effective response to the severe insecurity that threatens lives and property across the nation.

It is distressing that news of Nigerians being killed by bandits and terrorists floods the media daily. These unnecessary and preventable deaths highlight the deep-rooted insecurity and the consequences of inadequate policing. Given that ensuring the safety of lives and property is a fundamental duty of the government, the ongoing loss of Nigerian lives at an exponential rate is both alarming and unacceptable. This is particularly true since our leaders have the ability to curb, if not halt, this tragic loss of life by restructuring the nation’s security system—an area where their leadership has thus far fallen short.

The sheer number of Nigerians who have lost their lives since the return to multiparty democracy in 1999 is not just shocking but overwhelming.

Here’s a snapshot:

As of September 30, 2024, Statista.com reports that 38,000 deaths in Nigeria have been caused by domestic terrorists, including the religious extremist group Boko Haram and bandits. For perspective, the death toll in Nigeria due to insecurity is about 3,000 less than the number of lives lost in the ongoing one-year-old Israeli-Palestinian war, which has resulted in approximately 41,000 deaths in Palestine and Gaza—the focal point of the Middle East conflict with religious dimensions.

While Israel and Palestine are engaged in an active war, leading to the tragic and high number of casualties, Nigeria is not technically in a conventional war. However, the country has been locked in an asymmetric conflict with non-state actors for nearly two and a half decades.

As a result, a significant number of Nigerians have lost their lives in this prolonged state of turmoil, especially in remote areas, notably in the northeastern, northwestern, and parts of the north-central regions, where conditions have been harsh and life precarious.

Given this situation, the need for effective policing in Nigeria cannot be overstated. The lack of such policing, among other issues, has created an environment where insecurity can thrive, leading to the widespread suffering of our people.

There is no doubt that policing is crucial for ensuring the safety and security of lives and properties. It is clear that the current police force is overwhelmed, possibly because the existing system is not well equipped to handle the increasingly complex criminal challenges facing the country.

Currently, Nigeria operates a centralized policing system. Under this system, while the state governor is designated as the chief security officer of their state, the actual control lies with the Inspector General of Police (IGP), who is based in Abuja,the Federal Capital Territory, FCT. As a result, the state police commissioner takes directives only from the IGP, not the state governor. This structure aligns with Section 214(1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, which mandates: “There shall be a police force for Nigeria, which shall be known as the Nigeria Police Force, and subject to provisions of this section no other police force shall be established for the Federation or part thereof.”

To alter this framework embedded in the nation’s laws, a constitutional amendment is required—a challenging endeavor due to the complex legislative process that involves federal lawmakers and requires the approval of a majority of state-level legislators. Nevertheless, despite the challenges, a deliberate change in Nigeria’s security structure is essential to effectively combat the insecurity plaguing the nation.

Effective policing is known to lower crime rates, build trust and confidence within communities, enhance public safety, and promote economic growth and development. Therefore, establishing a solid policing framework is essential for Nigeria. However, the limited funds available for training police personnel, resulting in a lack of capacity, pose a significant challenge to the Nigerian police force. These issues mirror those affecting nearly all sectors within the country’s public administration.

Some of the critical challenges that need to be addressed include insufficient resources, corruption and misconduct, strained relations between communities and the police, and emerging threats like terrorism and cybercrime—areas where the police, as currently structured, lack the institutional expertise to handle effectively, as these are relatively new challenges.

To tackle these issues, Nigeria has initiated several reforms, such as:

(a) Police reform programs

(b) Community policing initiatives

(c) Counter-terrorism strategies

(d) International partnerships and training

Despite these efforts, Nigerian citizens, particularly those in rural areas, continue to suffer under relentless attacks from religious and criminal elements since the return to multiparty democracy in 1999. This ongoing insecurity remains a significant challenge, despite the best efforts of the current government.

Given this context, many have argued that a state or local policing model might be more effective than the current centralized policing system in addressing the new wave of criminal activities that threaten defenseless Nigerians.

There has been resistance to the idea of state police, dating back to its initial proposal in 1999 under the administration of then-President Olusegun Obasanjo (OBJ, 1999-2007). According to historical records, OBJ faced impeachment threats from federal lawmakers who were influenced by those opposed to state police. Their concerns included the lack of funding to support such a system and the risk of misuse if governors had full control over the police in their states.

A recent incident illustrates the complexities of the current system. Following a court ruling ,IGP Kayode Egbetokun reportedly ordered the police to withdraw from local government elections in Rivers State. However, the elections proceeded under the direction of the state governor, Siminari Fubara, who relied on another court ruling authorizing the election, used vigilante groups to ensure the process was completed successfully. This event highlights the urgent need to reassess Nigeria’s current policing structure and judicial interference in our electoral system.

The conflict between the Rivers State governor and the IGP on election matters brings into focus broader questions about the role of the police in Nigeria’s electoral processes and the ongoing debate between adopting a local policing model versus maintaining the central policing system.

As a nation striving for optimal security for both lives and property, it is crucial that we urgently and impartially evaluate which approach is best suited to address the current insecurity challenges facing our country.

This is why the bill advocating for the establishment of state police, which is currently under legislative review in the House of Representatives, is a positive development. It should be pushed forward with renewed urgency to ensure its inclusion in the ongoing process to amend the 1999 Constitution.

While local/state policing has its advantages, such as fostering community engagement, quick response times, deeper understanding of local issues, adaptability, and cost-effectiveness, it also has drawbacks. These include limited resources and expertise, high susceptibility to political influence, inconsistent training standards, and challenges with coordination across different jurisdictions.

Conversely, central policing offers benefits like standardized training, access to specialized skills and resources, better coordination and communication, economies of scale, and the ability to conduct national-level intelligence gathering—critical for combating complex criminal activities. However, its disadvantages include a lack of close connection to local communities, bureaucratic hurdles, risks of centralized control and abuse, and limited awareness of local needs.

The strengths of central policing often align with the weaknesses of local/state policing, and vice versa, meaning the two approaches tend to balance each other out. The real challenge lies in choosing the approach that will serve the country’s needs most effectively. This is where a hybrid model—combining elements of both systems—could offer a more balanced and pragmatic solution, potentially transforming our approach to security if our lawmakers are willing to adopt it.

The recent Supreme Court decision mandating that funds designated for Local Government Areas (LGAs) be directly transferred to their accounts and managed by the elected grassroots representatives strengthens the argument for implementing state police.

This ruling overturns the previous arrangement in which state governments controlled LGA funds. Under the new system, LGAs would allocate resources for security, enabling them to hire and maintain local police forces as they see fit.

At the state level, funds previously directed toward supporting central police operations could instead be used to coordinate local police within LGAs. This would address concerns about funding shortages, one of the main reasons governors were initially hesitant to embrace local/state policing.

Currently, aside from the central police headquartered in Abuja, states operate informal policing mechanisms, such as vigilante groups under various names. With the adoption of decentralized policing through constitutional amendments, these systems could be formalized into an official police force with proper recognition, akin to the native police of earlier times. Alternatively, a hybrid model could be adopted, blending aspects of both central and local/state policing.

Many nations already use such hybrid models, combining local and central forces. Examples include decentralized policing with national standards, regional police forces with local branches, or community policing supported by centralized oversight. Countries like the United States (local police with federal backing), the United Kingdom (local forces with national coordination), Australia (state police forces supported by federal agencies), and Japan (community policing with national supervision) have all implemented these hybrid approaches.

In my view, these countries provide strong examples for Nigeria to consider, offering valuable lessons in effective policing.

To conclude, it is worth noting that Nigeria previously practiced local policing in the pre-independence era through native and district constabularies. This approach persisted until the 1914 amalgamation, which consolidated the local police structures of the two protectorates into a unified national framework.

Having experienced both local and central policing models, a balanced hybrid approach—blending elements of both—could enhance the effectiveness of policing in Nigeria. It is hoped that our lawmakers will seriously consider this hybrid option as a viable alternative to the current system.

A similar approach could be applied to deciding the most suitable system of governance for our country. This decision is currently in the final stages of refinement by our legislators, who recently conducted a retreat in Kano, Kano State, focused on constitutional review.

In my view, when it comes to the debate over whether to maintain or replace the current system of governance, it’s clear that instead of continuing with the imported parliamentary and presidential models that Nigeria has experimented with over the past 64 years of independence, we should adapt our democracy to align with the unique dynamics and cultural characteristics of our environment. This customization could lead to a more effective and well-functioning society. Our neiboring country Ghana operates a hybrid. Perhaps that is why religion orientation of president candidates and their running mates do not matter in the country of Ghana as it is a major issue in Nigeria. 

A crucial starting point to end insecurity in our country would be to transition our policing system from a centralized structure to a state/local model, which could help curb the widespread loss of lives caused by violent actors who have been terrorizing our communities with impunity.

Given this, any further delay in implementing the state/local policing system—an initiative that has been under consideration for 25 years since the return of multiparty democracy in 1999, and for which there is broad support across Nigeria as both the presidency and all the 36 governors reaching a concensus in February this year —would suggest that our political leaders, particularly the legislators, are neglecting their responsibility to protect lives and properties implying that they may be recklessly putting the lives of a critical mass of Nigerians at risk.

This is a path we hope they will avoid.

Magnus Onyibe, an entrepreneur, public policy analyst, author, democracy advocate, development strategist, alumnus of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, Massachusetts, USA, and a former commissioner in the Delta State government, sent this piece from Lagos, Nigeria.

The Anambra State House of Assembly passed two progressive legislations pursuant to its powers under the Constitution (Anambra State Economic Planning and Development Law, 2024; and Anambra State Local Government Administration Law, 2024), and I have signed them into law. This has generated commentaries and debates especially in relation to their consistency or inconsistency with the recent Supreme Court judgement and the mantra of “local government autonomy.” My media team, other members of my government as well as well meaning Nigerians have vigorously defended these progressive laws and that should suffice. At this moment in Nigeria, being a state governor is not a fanciful job, especially given the gamut of allegations and innuendoes levelled against governors vis-a-vis local government funds. In the circumstance, any comment by me would be construed as self defence. However, I have a citizen duty to clarify and contribute to the discourse—especially as one who has been extensively involved in the debate and search for a more perfect union.

At the outset, let me make an important disclosure. I am a federalist and a proponent of competitive federalism for a multi-ethnic, multi-religious, vast country as Nigeria. From my limited knowledge, I do not know any federation (except perhaps some variants in Brazil) where a uniform local government system is provided for in a federal constitution or where the local government is treated as a de-facto federating unit. I understand that the issue of appropriate local government system was vigorously debated by the framers of the 1999 Constitution and a compromise was to insert Sections 7 Constitution which, among others, empowers each State through its House of Assembly to make laws which provide “for the establishment, structure, composition, finance, and functions...” of the local governments. Pioneered by Lagos State about 2004 several states have various laws pursuant to these Constitutional powers. The composition or structure of local governments in Lagos or Ebonyi state is certainly different from Anambra.

Also, the debate as to whether local governments should be part of the federal constitution or left to each federating unit (state) to determine its own appropriate local government system is still an unsettled matter. The APC committee on restructuring Nigeria proposed scrapping the local government from the Constitution of Nigeria. As the former chairman of planning and strategy committee of Ohanaeze Ndigbo Worldwide, I know that the published position of Ndigbo in 2018 was that local governments be scrapped from the Constitution and let each state/region determine the type of local administration that suits it. Similar positions have been argued by Afenifere, PANDEF, Middle Belt Forum, etc. This is an issue for another day.

In the context of our evolving federalism, I see the recent Supreme Court judgment regarding the direct transfer of funds belonging to the local governments as an important contribution to our search for effective and transparent administration of resources at the local level. I see the judgment as an opportunity for public good. Given the Constitutional mandate for joint planning between the State and local government, I see the judgment as an opportunity for greater transparency and predictability regarding the sources and uses of funds, as well as greater coordination and collaboration between the State and local government. If there was any state where the State-Local Government Joint Accounts Committee did not manage the LG funds transparently, the Supreme court judgment is an opportunity and mandate to do it differently by further empowering the LG administration.

But there is more work to be done. We all need to think through how the funds transferred to the LGs should be appropriated, spent, or accounted for. Monies meant for the federal or state governments are not spent by the president or governors. The National Assembly and State Assemblies make appropriation laws on how and by whom the monies should be spent and provide oversight functions. What happens to the monies directly sent to the LGs? Who spends the monies, on what and how will they be accounted for?

This is where Section 7 of the Constitution comes handy, and the Anambra State House of Assembly has risen to the occasion. Happily, the Supreme Court did not nullify Section 7 of the Constitution. The new laws by Anambra House of Assembly are therefore consequential to give operational life to the Supreme Court judgment and not to undermine it. If the State House of Assembly abdicates this constitutional duty, the Local Government will then have no law on the use and management of its finance which the Constitution has given the State House of Assembly (and only the House of Assembly) the mandate to legislate on. Indeed, in many states the House of Assemblies retain the power to suspend or remove chairpersons of local governments.

By the way, isn’t the legislative authority exercised by the State Assemblies under Section 7 of the Constitution similar to the powers granted by the Constitution to the National Assembly over the Federal Capital Territory and its Area Councils? I understand that the Senate President had recently at one of the Plenary Sessions rhetorically asked if it was indeed possible to grant the kind of “autonomy” some people talk about without major amendments to the Constitution. Many Nigerians ask the same question. I also understand that the Senate recently resolved to begin the process of Constitutional amendment in this regard. This is a welcome development. But until that is done, our laws pursuant to the Constitution and designed to give operational effect to the Supreme Court judgment remain subsisting and valid.

A critical instrument for muddling through our evolving federation and delivering higher efficiency and effectiveness in development is through structured collaboration among the tiers of government. No tier of government enjoys absolute autonomy. For example, the FGN has exclusive right over solid minerals, but the States have exclusive right over the land. Only a collaborative framework will maximize benefits from natural resources. Currently, there is a collaborative funding for the security agencies. The States and LGs contribute tens of billions monthly and deducted directly from FAAC every month towards the funding of the armed forces which are exclusively under the FGN. At the state levels, each state is spending a fortune of its own revenues on logistics and operational costs for the federal security agencies. The FGN, States and LGs are jointly paying for the FGN initiative on metering, etc. The states understand the above “emergency measures” as part of the collaborative arrangements to make Nigeria work better. A federal agency, the Debt Management Office (DMO) must clear any state government seeking to borrow from domestic financial system, while the National Assembly must approve States’ external borrowing. The federal UBEC insists on counterpart funding by states before it can release federal funds for basic education and also supervises the utilization of the contributions by states. There is a dozen or more areas of oversight of federal agencies over State finances. The above illustrations are simply to make the point that no tier of government can function in absolute autarky without collaboration with others. Given the functions assigned to the LGs by the Constitution, it is impossible to see how they can perform them without active collaboration with State governments. Because the Constitution did not envisage "absolute autonomy" for the Local Governments, it gave the State House of Assembly powers to make laws for them and equally did not create a Local Government Judiciary distinct from the State Judiciary.

The two legislations passed by the progressive Anambra House of Assembly seek to achieve three objectives: consistency with the Constitution and judgment of the Supreme Court; enhanced transparency and productive collaboration; and promotion of sustainable finance, democracy, and development at the local government. The laws seek to codify the collaborative arrangements to promote transparency and accountability. We seek to avoid ad-hoc or arbitrary arrangements---- building to last! The good news is that the eminent jurists at the Supreme Court did not outlaw collaboration and cooperation among the LGs in funding joint or common services, nor did they nullify Section 7 of the Constitution. What the new laws simply require is that ALL the chairmen/mayors of the local governments, meeting under the aegis of the State Economic Planning Board (similar to the National Economic Council) decide what percentage of their revenues to contribute to a Joint Local Government Account to pay for common/pooled services such as: (a) payment of salaries, allowances, gratuities and pensions of workers and retirees under the Local Government Service Commission; (b) provision and maintenance of primary, adult and vocational education including all salaries, allowances, gratuities and pensions payable in that regard; (c) provision and maintenance of primary health services including all salaries, allowances, gratuities and pensions payable in that regard; (d) payment of allowances to traditional rulers and Presidents-General of the communities; (e) Subventions to the Local Government Service Commission; and even for community security.

What many people do not know is that the Constitution puts primary education and primary health care under the local governments. Many also do not know that primary school teachers are pooled under the UBEC—Universal Basic Education Commission. Workers in all the LGs are also pooled staff under the Local government service commission. Ditto for primary health workers. Absolute autonomy would mean that each LG would have its own primary education policy, employ its own teachers, and pay them whatever it can afford and whenever it can do so, etc. Now that Anambra has free education for primary and secondary education in all public schools, some LGs may decide that they cannot afford it. It might even get to a point where some LGs might ask “non-indigenes” who are workers in the LGs or teachers in primary schools to “go home” to their LGs of origin due to budgetary or other constraints.

Indeed, absolute autonomy of LGs would mean that institutions that pool resources and workers would be scrapped including the Local Government Service Commission, Local Government Pension Board, the Anambra State Universal Basic Education Board (ASUBEB), the Primary Health Care Agency, etc. Does it mean that the federal UBEC or Federal Ministry of Health would have to deal with each of the 774 LGs in respect of primary education or primary health care instead of coordinated through the State UBEC or state primary health care agency? This would be a recipe for humongous chaos, not only for the administration of local government and pensions, but more so in the primary education and primary health sectors. My administration inherited 4 years arrears of gratuity which we have been clearing systematically. How do you share the outstanding balance among the LGs or pay pensions to over 15,000 LG retirees who served the LGs as a pool without pooling of funds? Some years ago, some LGs rejected teachers posted to their LGs because it would jack up their wage bill.

Yes, our nascent federation is evolving but some of us as practitioners are determined to make it work for the people while we have the opportunity. I believe in building enduring institutions, especially ones founded upon due process, transparency, and rule of law. People remind me that many of the institutional reforms we established at the CBN still endure. Since assumption of office as Governor 30 months ago, we have devoted a lot of efforts in reforming and strengthening institutions, including the local government administration. Today, Anambra State under my watch is ranked number 1 among the 36 states on fiscal transparency by BudgIT, and among the top five states on financial sustainability. We inherited a local government system with four-year arrears (2018-2022) of gratuity to retired primary school teachers and other staff of local government. We have restructured their finances back to sustainability. Everyone who retired from the local government and State civil service since my tenure is paid gratuity/pension, and we are on course to clear the outstanding arrears soon. Three years’ arrears on counterpart funding for Universal Basic Education Commission (UBEC) has been cleared, resulting in billions of Naira recently invested in our primary schools. Some 326 primary health centres are being constructed or modernized in all the 326 wards in the state as well as employing hundreds of medical personnel to man the primary health centres. Most of the local government secretariats have been remodelled and equipped, and the LG system is once again alive. This is not to mention that 3,615 out of the 8,115 new teachers recruited under my administration are for primary schools and they are being paid. We do not want to go back! 

So, the laws are designed to protect our gains so far and strengthen the system for the future consistent with the Constitution and laws. I always remind myself that I am a bird of passage, and eventually, I will leave office. But we must build to last--- for the next generations. More specifically, the new laws are designed to protect our workers at the local level and protect our primary education and primary health care from chaos and collapse. Many teachers and pensioners wrote me to passionately plead that they do not want the agony of the 1990s--2003 when some primary school teachers in some LGs were paid and others owed salaries. I just read a report that the organized labour (particularly the Nigerian Union of Local Government Employees, NULGE; Nigerian Union of Teachers, NUT; and Nigerian Union of Pensioners) were urging the FGN not to transfer workers/teachers salaries to the local government in the name of “local government autonomy”. No law protects the workers against nonpayment of salaries or pensions by governments. In Anambra we want to ensure that we do not wake up and hear that some LGs paid salaries of primary school teachers and others did not or that some pensioners are paid and others not, or that some contribute towards UBEC counterpart-funding while others do not. The laws seek to create a framework to ensure that the basic functions mandated by the Constitution for the local governments are discharged as a matter of first-line charge or the irreducible minimum. With these laws, workers, and retirees from the local government system in Anambra (primary school teachers, primary health workers, workers in the local government system under the local government service commission) can sleep with their two eyes closed. The LGs and State government can also collaborate in the security of the communities, just as the States and FGN collaborate in funding even the federal security agencies.

It is equally important to understand that the Constitution mandated this collaboration between the States and Local Governments when in its section 7 (3), it provides that "it shall be duty of a local government council within the State to participate in economic planning and development of the area referred to in sub section 2 of this section and to this end, an economic planning board shall be established by a Law enacted by the House of Assembly of the State". This provision gave rise to the establishment of the Anambra State Economic Planning Board of which all the local government chairpersons are members and who, among other things, decide on the percentage to be contributed to the Local Government Joint Account. It is important to appreciate that this money is not handed over to the State but remains with the Local Governments under a joint pool for the discharge of certain services by the local governments which services are uniform/common among the local governments as stated earlier.

In sum, the laws ensure that the State can function in a cohesively planned, transparent and sustainable manner to maximize the security and welfare of the citizens. They constitute a very smart solution to a possible systemic threat.

Governors are often accused of seeking to “control” LG funds with insinuations that LG funds are mismanaged. Of course, in a society where public office is seen as “dinning table” and public trust is low, people judge others by their own standards: by what they would do if they were in the position. I often ask: control for what? While I cannot hold brief for every governor, I know that most states are struggling to ensure a solvent local government system. I wish I can be spared the headache, if not for the predictable collateral damage to the system if we abdicate from structured oversight and collective accountability. The challenge ahead can be daunting given the quantum rise in wage bills because of the new minimum wage, as well as consequential rise in future pension/gratuity payments. Without active collaboration and coordination between state and local governments, many LGs will end up in a huge financial mess, requiring bailouts by state governments or will FGN directly intervene in every case of insolvency among the 774 LGs?

In conclusion, the progressive legislations by the State Assembly are designed to unleash the creative powers of the LGs, encourage peer learning, optimal development outcomes in planning and execution among the LGs, as well as novel accountability and transparency. The laws are ingenious by creating multiple layers of collaborative oversight whereby the LGs agree on monies to set aside and managed collectively by them for common services or first-line charges, while the rest is appropriated by the Congress of Councillors in each LG. In an innovative sense, the legislative powers – including powers of appropriation and oversight now largely reside with the local government legislature—Congress of Councillors, which is empowered to make bye-laws, which are in the nature of regulations, for the Local Governments (as it is the House of Assembly that is empowered by the Constitution to enact laws to guide the Local Governments).

Since neither the Constitution nor the Supreme Court judgment prescribes the manner of appropriation, expenditure, and audit/accountability for local government funds, the House of Assembly and the Congress of Councillors fill in the blanks under the new laws pursuant to Section 7 of the Constitution. The evolution of our federalism is a work-in-progress, and the new Anambra laws constitute creative and progressive additions to institution-building. May the Federal Republic of Nigeria continue to win!

Agriculture and food security is a nucleic aspect of the President Tinubu administration’s policy design and rationale. The administration understands that food is an essential and integral component of existence; hence, its relentless, practised, and sustained efforts in this regard.

Food security is a principal element of national security. It is the primary responsibility of the government to protect lives and property -- and protecting the people against hunger is a basic extension of this sacred duty. The administration is not remiss, reclining, or relenting in its obligation of ensuring food security for the nation.

At compelling times such as now, it is important to keep citizens abreast of the government’s efforts in this respect.

Here are some of the interventions of the administration, through the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security – with outcomes. The list is, however, not exhaustive.

THE 150-DAY DUTY-FREE IMPORT WINDOW FOR FOOD COMMODITIES

-  Suspension of duties, tariffs, and taxes on the importation of certain food commodities through land and sea borders. These commodities include maize, husked brown rice, wheat, and cowpeas.

DRY SEASON FARMING AND CULTIVATION OF HECTARES OF WHEAT

- The dry season farming initiative was launched with the cultivation of 118,657 hectares of wheat across 15 states. This effort supported 107,429 farmers and resulted in 474,628 metric tonnes of wheat.

-  Release of 42,000 metric tonnes of assorted food commodities from the Strategic Food Reserve through NEMA and distribution of 58,500 metric tonnes of milled rice to all states and the FCT to stabilise prices.

DISTRIBUTION OF SEEDS, BAGS OF FERTILISERS, AND STRENGTHENING FARMLAND SECURITY

-  To combat food inflation, 60,000 metric tonnes of improved seeds, 887,255 metric tonnes of seedlings, and 501,726 litres of agrochemicals were distributed.

-   Strengthening of farmland security with additional resources for Agro-rangers and other security agencies.

-  Distribution of 2.15 million bags of fertilisers provided by the Central Bank of Nigeria.

EMPOWERMENT OF FARMERS

-   Over 2,770 farmers across 109 crop production clusters, strategically located in all senatorial districts of the country, have been empowered.

-  Each of these clusters has been provided with essential agricultural production inputs and supplies, including power tillers, knapsack sprayers, herbicides, organic fertilisers, and over 5,000 metric tonnes of maize seeds.

-  In support of their efforts, each of the 25 farmers within these clusters received inputs sufficient for one hectare of crop farmland. The power tillers are to be used and maintained collectively by the group, fostering cooperation and efficient resource utilisation.

LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION AND ANIMAL HEALTH

- Distribution of 14 million doses of vaccines for anthrax and foot-and-mouth diseases.

- Establishment of animal health centres, veterinary hospitals, and micro earth dams.

- Training of livestock farmers on biosecurity and antimicrobial resistance.

- Facilitation of 14.9 million animal vaccinations and distribution of 760 tonnes of poultry and ruminant feed.

CONTROL OF PESTS AND DISEASES

-    Launched initiatives to combat ginger blight, providing N1.6 billion in support of affected farmers and distributed pesticides and fungicides.

-  Nigeria is one of the world’s largest producers of ginger.

PROVISION OF FARM INPUTS

-   Distribution of farm inputs, including modern machinery, to over 100 farmers in Kano to empower smallholder farmers and boost food production.

-  Facilitating farm input access to farmers with 75 percent funding while the farmers provide 25 percent.

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND EXTENSION SERVICES

-  Development of 23 improved crop varieties and the enhancement of storage facilities.

-  Promotion of e-extension services and training of 120,000 extension agents and 20,755 farmers.

RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE, AGRICULTURAL LANDS, AND CLIMATE CHANGE MANAGEMENT

-  Construction of over 77.8 km of asphalt roads,130.9 km of earthen roads, and provision of 102 motorised and solar-powered boreholes to improve rural infrastructure.

-  This fundamentally improves access and conveyance of agricultural produce from the hinterland to the market.

-  Conducting soil analyses, constructing water harvesting structures, and training farmers on sustainable practices.

EMPOWERMEMENT OF YOUTH IN AGRICULTURE

-  Establishment of vocational training programmes and youth employment initiatives in agriculture.

AGRO-PROCESSING AND VALUE ADDITION

-  Support for Special Agro-Processing Zones (SAPZ) and agribusiness incubation centres to foster agro-processing and value addition.

- Completion of a large-scale integrated rice processing mill in Niger State.

-  Intensification of efforts to produce and process exportable commodities like soybean, sesame, ginger, and hibiscus with a focus on improving standardisation and quality assurance to enhance the competitiveness of our agricultural exports.

TRAINING AND PROVISION OF INPUTS FOR SMALLHOLDER POULTRY FARMERS

-  Under the National Poverty Reduction with Growth Strategy programme, 1,110 smallholder poultry farmers have been trained and empowered across the six geopolitical zones of the country.

-  This training and empowerment initiative was conducted simultaneously in all 36 states of the federation and the Federal Capital Territory.

-  Each beneficiary received day-old chicks, feed, and cash support to raise broiler chickens to market weight.

- The primary objective of this programme is to lift smallholder poultry farmers out of poverty. This is achieved by training them in modern broiler rearing technologies and stimulating their interest in broiler production as a sustainable enterprise.

OTHERS

- $500m from AfDB for farm access roads under the RARP.

- Continuation of the Livelihood Improvement Family Enterprise Scheme for Niger Delta States, which started during the previous administration. 35,000 persons have been trained and provided stipends since the beginning of this administration, and the programme is set to be renewed.

- ⁠Minister of Agriculture and Minister of Water Resources' standing committee on irrigation and dams has been reconvened and meets regularly based on the directive of the President.

 - Agricultural mechanisation equipment ordered from Belarus and other countries are expected to be delivered soon.

In July, prices of food items began to plummet – with the new harvest -- as reported by some news organisations. Also, according to data by the National Bureau of Statistics, on a month-on-month basis, the food inflation rate in July 2024 was 2.47 percent, which shows a 0.08 percent decrease compared to the rate recorded in June 2024.

It is important to acknowledge that with the rocketing in the price of petrol, the cost of transportation will leap upwards, and this will, in turn, impact the market prices of food items. But this is only a temporary situation that will abate with increased CNG penetration and the consummation of other government initiatives.

Fredrick Nwabufo is Senior Special Assistant to the President on Public Engagement

I have two important things on my mind this morning. The first is the condition of the roads in Uyo. After a one-week visit, I noticed that many roads in Uyo require urgent repairs, reconstruction and rehabilitation. Most of those roads were constructed by the Victor Attah administration and some by the military governments that preceded it. They are long overdue for a complete overhaul. During my stay, I also received messages from friends and those who read my column, asking me to find out why the state government is not working on the internal roads in Uyo. 

Moved by these messages and what I saw myself, I sent a message to the governor yesterday, asking if something is being done to fix the roads. Within one hour, Pastor Umo Eno responded: ‘’Thank you so much my brother. We have issued contracts for the repairs and rehabilitation of roads in Uyo and for the reconstruction of the Uyo Village Road. The rains have disturbed a lot, but we will follow up’’.

Good to know. I’m pleased that the Eno administration is following in the tradition of keeping our city roads in a good shape. The state has been blessed with a good network of roads for which we are well respected by the rest of the country. We cannot afford to drop the ball. Obong Attah gave us the ring roads; Akpabio expanded the city with dual carriageways linking Nung Udoe; Abak and Ikot Ekpene, in addition to remodeling the town. The expansion of the Airport Road by Gov. Udom Emmanuel has turned out to be a worthy investment. 

The expansion of Uyo Village Road into four lanes will further add to the beauty of the town. The large expanse of land on the side of the Uyo Village Road should be turned into a park! I recall that Obong Nsima Ekere had pledged in his election campaign in 2019 to build a high brow housing estate there. That's also an option Gov. Eno may consider.

But the government needs to do a lot more in the area of refuse disposal. There are still heaps of refuse at street corners in Uyo.

I understand from press reports that Gov. Eno met with the new 31 Local Government Chairmen and Chairwomen this morning and told them to buckle up for the tasks ahead. I don’t have the specific marching orders he gave to the LG chiefs, but here are my own agenda for them:

A). They should immediately submit a three-year development plan to the state government, through the office of the SSG, indicating their action plans on the development of their LGAs. Such action plans should contain specific plans on agriculture, infrastructure; primary education and other areas. For agriculture, the chairmen should agree to train young people in farming and allocate farmlands for them. Each LGA should be given targets on the quantity of food to produce each year. This should include livestock, poultry and fish farming.

B). For infrastructure, each LGA should submit to the state government, the total number and length of rural roads that they would construct.

C). The Local Govt chiefs should also submit proposals on how they will combat crime in their domains, working with the security chiefs in those areas.

D). In terms of personal conduct, the chiefs should live modestly. They should be compelled to live in their areas and should not move out unless with expressed permission from the governor. They should also sign up on how to conduct themselves appropriately. This is not the time for public officials to spend public funds buying expensive drinks at night clubs!

Again we are back to square one. While the celebration over July 11 Supreme Court judgment that granted financial autonomy to the 774 Local Government Areas across the country lasted, not a few had wondered if the Supreme Court was not putting the cart before the horse by embarking on a judicial misadventure over what was unarguably a political issue. And now, the National Assembly, which but for its hypocrisy has the power to confront the nation’s demon, is bellyaching about sections 13, 14 and 16 of Anambra LGA new bill which seek to compel the local governments to pay their federal allocation into an account to be established by the state government, a bill it claims runs afoul of the Supreme Court judgment.

Perhaps our National Assembly that that often treat Nigerian with less dignity than even the colonial masters, think Nigerians are suffering from collective amnesia since neither the said Supreme Court judgment nor the National Assembly has removed the constitutional power of the state Houses of Assembly to make laws for local government.

 One was however not surprised  that this was coming from Governor Chukwuma Soludo who, as CBN governor, called attention to the chicanery of our leaders with his “Nigeria is the only known federation in the world where the centre allocates funds to third tier of government it does not supervise”.

The truth is that military arbitrarily created local government as third tier of government like the 36 states also created without logic or rhyme are a fraud by those driven by command and control military mind-set. If the fervour was about rural development, we did not see that play out during Babangida’s regime when most of the badly executed or abandoned DFFRI projects were cornered by retired military officers.

And If it was to deepen democracy as Obasanjo wanted us to believe, very few will be persuaded that deepening democracy at grassroots level was by providing money, cars and logistics to feuding intra-party members to destroy their party or destabilise their state as he was reported to have done in Ekiti by ferrying a few members of state House of Assembly out of their states to Abuja to impeach their governors for opposing his third term bid has a familiar ring of fascism.

It was not a surprise most of the professors Obasanjo dragged to his LGA’s ‘third tier crusade’, parted way with him when they discovered they had been used. Both Professor Ben Nwabueze and Chief Rotimi Williams who helped Obasanjo to destroy whatever was left of our federalism in 1979 by ceding almost 70% of the items in the constitution to the exclusive list with nothing in residual list publicly regretted betraying the country before their passage to the great beyond.

The tragedy of our nation is that unlike the unambitious set of leaders we have had since 1999, Nigeria once had selfless and visionary leaders for whom the nation came first. Ex-president Jonathan acknowledged this during his 51st independence anniversary by “thanking our founding fathers  who brought  joy and hope to the hearts of our people  after six decades of colonial rule  by working together to  restore dignity and honour  to a multicultural and multilingual nation of diverse people with more than 250 distinct languages and ethnic groups”.

This they achieved in spite of the initial lack of consensus on the national question with Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe and his group canvassing for unitary system, Obafemi Awolowo and his Yoruba group insisting on federalism while Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa who believed “Nigerian unity is a British invention” and Ahmadu Bello who expressed grief over “the mistake of 1914” settled for confederacy.  But at the end, realizing their responsibility to those that look up to them for direction, these illustrious Nigerian pathfinders settled for a federal arrangement that allowed groups to develop at their own pace.

Unfortunately, nearly all northern governors have since 1999 been opposed to returning the country to a federal arrangement, a social system that promises ‘unity in diversity’, justice and fairness. The reasoning behind the northern governors short-sightedness is that the north because of its numerical advantage in the number of states and LGAs, not only collect more free monies from the federation account, but gives it a veto power over any form of constitutional amendment.

But for refusing to confront our demon, everyone is a loser. Nuhu Ribadu some two years back had challenged these northern leaders to show how billions of naira collected from the federation account since 1999 have impacted on the lives of the poor in the north. It is in this regard, one can also ask the Niger Delta’s self-serving leaders who many believe are behind oil bunkering, if lives of ordinary people of the Niger Delta are better today than in 1999 when they first embarked on economic sabotage of the country. And what has been the fate of ordinary people in the Southwest and Southeast where governors surreptitiously worked against restructuring of the country for fear of losing easy money coming from Abuja which they often deploy towards ‘building bridges over land?

Again, for the sake of our uninformed youths, we must go through history our leaders want to supplant with revisionism which celebrates criminals as heroes.

Between 1962 and 1963, the constitution bequeathed onto us by our founding fathers was breached by NPC/NCNC coalition partners of Prime Minister Balewa, President Nnamdi Azikiwe and Premiers Ahmadu Bello and Okpara, who jointly refused to recognise Dauda Soroye Adegbenro, the duly elected and Privy Council recognized Premier of Western Region. That paved the way for the incarceration of Obafemi Awolowo, the setting back of the giant strides made by the West and the installation of Ladoke Akintola as premier by the coalition partners without election. Anarchy was let loose on the west when those denied the right to determine their own fate decided to make sure those who sowed the wind reaped the whirlwind through ‘operation wet e’.

While the west was burning, the north buried its fangs on the neck of the east after the disputed 1962/63 census exercises and the massively rigged 1964 election. Zik as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces had approached the military for support but was reminded that operationally, the military reports to the prime minister. Zik while pretending to be going for medical check-up but in reality embarked on ship cruise to South America, after  handing power over to Dr Nwafor Orizu, the Senate President.

In January 1966, Igbo young military adventurers sympathetic to Zik, in breach of the military espirit de corps, selectively murdered  their friends, about eight northern senior military officers and their political leaders, two western senior military leaders and their premier while conveniently sparing their over 30 Igbo military officers and Igbo political leaders.

Aguiyi Ironsi after quashing the insurrection took over power with the help of the Senate President who according to Richard Akinjide, refused to swear in the next available minister in the absence of the prime minister as stipulated by the constitution.

Ironsi’s greatest undoing was the promulgation of Decree 34 which turned the country from a federal into a unitary state. That was quickly interpreted as an Igbo agenda having canvassed for a unitary system during the various constitutional debate from 1954 up to the 1957 London Constitutional Conference where NCNC leaders insisted Nigeria should be divided into a federation of 17 provinces which Awolowo claimed would amount to bringing unitary system through the back door.

In July 1966, another set of adventurers led by Murtala Mohammed, Danjuma, Babangida,  and others initiated their vengeance coup called Araba (secession) during which all Ibo military officers on sight were brutally murdered.

At the end the civil war that followed, successive northern military leaders created more states and LGAs for the north thus making northern leaders the 1950 Nigeria they could control a fait accompli.

The way forward is not through a third tier fraud or unviable states created without rhyme. The cheapest and tested option before us is to confront our demons by embracing a federation of six geo-political zones as canvassed by Nigerian stakeholders including leaders of ethnic nationalities, the true owners of Nigeria.

This is the answer to distributive injustice in the South-south, tribal war over control of political power and resources on the in the Northwest, Boko Haram insurgency in the Northeast and  the apparent ethnic cleansing in the North-central where majority of our compatriots live in IDP camps in their own country.

And as for our embattled President Tinubu who voluntarily offered himself a sacrificial lamb after 58 years of crisis of nation-building, he has a choice as to whether he wants to be remembered as a Nigerian statesman or like his predecessors including Buhari, the best statesman we never had.

“.... the problem in Africa is not so much that development failed as that it never really began.”

Claude Ake (2001)

#NES30 (30th Nigerian Economic Summit) holds from Monday 14th to Thursday 16th of October 2024 in Abuja. As a participant/ observer of the summits in the last three decades, I bear witness that Nigerian Economic Summit Group (NESG), a private sector platform conceived in 1993, incorporated in 1996 has kept faith with its vision to be “Africa’s leading private sector think-tank committed to the development of a modern globally competitive and inclusive Nigerian economy”. Credit goes to the foresight, thoughtfulness of the founding men and women, the resilience of the subsequent Board members of NESG. The story of NESG confirms that contrary to the received advise of America’s 44th President Barack Obama, Africa truly needs “strong” men and women to build sustainable institutions in overcoming legacy of under-development. NES30 is a tribute to late Chief Ernest Shonekan, Mr Pascal Dozie and late Alhaji Ahmadu Joda for their respective efforts in building NESG which has outperformed scores of similar government and private economic institutions, devoted to analyzing economic data and sharing perspectives on Nigerian economy. At least in consistent orthodoxy of market policy ideas, notwithstanding their controversial impact.

At 30, the critical question begging for answer is: to what extent NESG institution built on the “foundational principles” of “free market economy” and “private sector investment” has promoted growth and development ? The point cannot be overstated: Institutions with men and women are just the means. The end is “development” which scandalously and regrettably is still in huge deficit in Nigeria!

Happily there have been some policy introspections and self critical assessment within NESG itself. No thanks to the abysmal performance of the economy driven by the “philosophy” which NES II as far back as 1995, repeatedly canvassed to be “market oriented”. Asue Ighodalo, Chairman 27th Nigerian Economic Summit themed: “Securing our future: The fierce urgency of Now”, identified key current features of Nigerian economy, as “increasing unemployment, pervasive insecurity and dwindling investments in critical sectors,”. Last year, Deputy Chairman of the NESG, Amina Maina at the 29th Summit bemoaned a “once promising high growth nation ... now struggling with under-development”! Which means that Nigeria’s growth and Development numbers have not significantly improved in quantity and quality since NES1 in 1993. On the contrary. There is a slide to a new “underdevelopment”. Token progress defies sustainability. National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), says Nigeria’s headline inflation rate declined to 32.15% in August 2024, 1.25% points lower compared to the 33.40% recorded in July 2024. This is a far cry from the target of 21% Inflation Rate in 2024 budget proposal. Notwithstanding the new NBS’s inclusive methodology on unemployment rate calculus, the unemployment rate increased significantly in Q3 2023 at 5.0%, an increase of 0.8% from Q2 2023. Nigeria's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) reportedly grew by 2.98% (year-on-year) in real terms in the first quarter of 2024, higher than the 2.31% recorded in the first quarter of 2023, but lower than 11.52per cent between 2000 and 2004. Persistent Naira devaluation and spiral fuel price hikes have worsened wage income poverty despite commendable six nominal increases in National minimum wage since 1981 due to the struggles of organized labour.

Whence then the relevance of NESG and its addictive market (and only market!) policy recommendations at times of stag-inflation, with persistent slow growth, high unemployment, deepening inequality, mass poverty and rising prices? What difference will #NES30 make from the norm of what passes for three lost decades of development?

At the weekend in Nassarawa, Vice President, Kashim Shettima, representing President Bola Tinubu spoke the mind of many Nigerians. “Enough is Enough” of distressing statistics, “poor educational outcomes, high pupil-to-teacher ratios, and the large number of youth not in employment, education, or training...high fertility rates, alarming maternal and under-five mortality rates, and low life expectancy among vulnerable populations” he declared. Senator Kashim Shettima spoke at the launch of Nasarawa State’s Human Capital Development (HCD) Strategy Document. It is heart warming to read, for once, in recent times about “human capital development” . NESG at 30 must compliment the government to return “Development” to Nigeria’s economic discourse at the centre of which must be humans not as mere “numbers”. The fundamental objective of the state principle as espoused in 1999 constitution is the welfare and security of the citizens. I share the optimism of the Minister of Finance, Wale Edun, that recovery is underway within the context of the Renewed Hope agenda given the improved numbers on Non-oil revenue, reduced National debt burden, Ways and means and budget deficit among others. The numbers must however translate to decent secured jobs and quality of working and living conditions. That requires collaboration with a reformed private sector platform like NESG that accepts that elected governments have “business in business” in delivering on promises to the electorate.

Happily this year’s NESG theme focuses on “Collaborative Action for Growth, Competitiveness, and Stability”. Undoubtedly NESG has “achieved significant progress in the areas of research outputs, execution of programmes, seminars, conferences..”. But it must reinvent itself; Replace market orthodoxy of TINA (There Is no Alternative) with heterodoxy of views that there are many pathways to development. One-way path-of-no-return neoliberalism has underdeveloped Nigeria. It’s time to reform the existing Reform, terminate the unhelpful notion of market fundamentalism that pitches the state against the market in mutually destructive competition. Promote benign view of the state for it to make the market work. Stop idolizing the market that repeatedly fails which in turn puts the burden on the state through stimulus rescue. John Mcmillan rightly observes that “the problem in the developing countries is not that the markets are absent but that they are working badly’. Take petroleum downstream as example. For decades, market failed to deliver products not until productive collaboration with the state to build first legacy public refineries and now private refineries, innovate local for-crude-in-Naira, local crude-for-local refineries deals. A promised departure from the rot of the wholesale import in the names of market forces. First reinvent the market by getting domestic supply chain in place through refinery fixing (whether private or public). There was once a Nigeria of four National Development Plans (NDPs) with double digit growth rates sadly later traded for feverish debt-payment SAPs promoted by IMF/ World Bank for odious debt repayment by unaccountable military regimes. NESG has certainly come of age but the age of its market policy ideological dogma must give way to pragmatic mix bag of state and market policies that China has (with consistent Development plans) applied to secure second seat in the league of global economies , first position to take a multitude out of poverty. Nigeria should not “waste” this current crisis. Start with the “soft” notion of development. I agree with former Secretary-General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon that development is “ the pathway to the future we want for all”. Why should things get ‘tough’ for the already toughened populace before they will get better?. Amartya Sen, 1998 Nobel Prize Winner for Economics has long warned us against a development process as a war (and in his own words!), as a “fierce process”, the regular trade marks of which are “blood, sweat and tears”- “... a world in which wisdom demands toughness’ instead of reasoning together for collective good.

President Bola Tinubu, deeply moved by the inhuman treatment endured by the Super Eagles of Nigeria at a Libyan airport, warmly welcomes their safe return to Nigeria.

The harrowing experience of the national football team at the hands of their hosts and the Libyan authorities prompted the Nigerian Football Federation to withdraw the Super Eagles from the scheduled match on Tuesday. 

President Tinubu expects the Disciplinary Board of the Confederation of African Football (CAF) to conduct a thorough investigation and recommend appropriate action against those who wilfully violated the organisation’s Statutes and Regulations.

The President commends the proactive coordination between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Federal Ministry of Sports Development in addressing the unfortunate episode and ensuring the safe return of our players.

President Tinubu applauds the players for keeping their spirit alive despite the excruciating ordeal in Libya.

The Nigerian leader recognises football's unifying power in bringing nations and people together and views the treatment of our citizens as unsportsmanlike and inhumane, a stark contrast to the spirit of the game he deeply appreciates.

He fervently calls on all lovers of the round-leather game and administrators to unite and work collaboratively to prevent and overcome such incidents in the future.

Bayo Onanuga

Special Adviser to the President

(Information & Strategy)

October 14, 2024

Nigeria’s foreign capital inflows from BRICS nations have surged by 189% in the first half of 2024, amid the country’s ongoing efforts to secure a spot within the expanded BRICS coalition.

An analysis of data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) revealed that capital importation from BRICS countries rose from $438.72 million in the first six months of 2023 to $1.27 billion in the same period of 2024.

The BRICS group, initially comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, expanded on January 1, 2024, by officially welcoming five new members: Saudi Arabia, Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

Argentina was also invited but declined membership, making the total membership 10.

While Nigeria was not part of this wave of inclusion, the country remains steadfast in its efforts to join the group within the next two years, recognizing the potential benefits in trade and investment flows that BRICS membership could bring.

What the data says 

• The surge in BRICS capital inflows was primarily driven by South Africa and Saudi Arabia, which accounted for the largest increases in H1 2024.

• Inflows from South Africa skyrocketed from $228.09 million in H1 2023 to $838.32 million in H1 2024, marking a significant 267% rise.

• South Africa’s dominant position in capital flows suggests strong bilateral relations, especially in financial services, consumer goods, and telecommunications.

• Saudi Arabia, a newly inducted BRICS member, saw a remarkable jump in capital inflows, rising from a mere $0.03 million to $147.07 million during the same period.

• Similarly, China, a relatively smaller investor in the previous year, saw its capital importation into Nigeria leap from $0.25 million to $35.64 million over the same period.

• China’s growing investments can be attributed to its global Belt and Road Initiative, which seeks to enhance infrastructure and trade networks across Africa, with Nigeria being a key partner.

• Among the newly inducted BRICS members, the UAE also contributed to the rise, with inflows growing from $209.41 million in the first half of 2023 to $245.19 million in 2024.

• These inflows reflect the deepening economic ties between Nigeria and the Gulf states, particularly in energy, infrastructure, and trade.

50% of BRICS countries have zero foreign capital in Nigeria 

While there was a general increase in investments from BRICS member countries, half of the countries on the BRICS list did not record any foreign capital inflows into Nigeria in both H1 2023 and H1 2024.

These countries include Brazil, Russia, Iran, Egypt, and Ethiopia. Despite being members of the BRICS coalition, these nations have not made any capital investments in Nigeria during the period under review.

This lack of inflow could be attributed to a range of factors, including differing economic priorities, regional focus, or geopolitical considerations that may influence their investment strategies.

What you should know 

November last year, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Yusuf Tuggar, was reported to have said that Nigeria plans to become a member of the BRICS economic bloc in the next two years and join the G20 group of nations.

• The Minister said that Nigeria meets the qualification for joining organisations like the BRICS and G20, noting the size of her economy and her population is a suitable criterion.
• Last year, Nigeria’s Vice President, Kashim Shettima attended the BRICS summit in South Africa but didn’t push to become a member when the bloc admitted new members including two from Africa – Ethiopia and Egypt.
• In September this year, Tuggar, the Foreign Affairs Minister, reiterated the country’s interest in joining BRICS, an influential economic bloc comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa.

Tuggar explained that while Nigeria has not yet formally applied to join BRICS, the country would do so “at the right time.”

He noted that joining the bloc is indeed on the radar of the Bola Tinubu administration.

[Nairametrics]

The Federal Government has waded into the ordeal of the Super Eagles of Nigeria in Libya.

Naija News has reported that the Super Eagles flew to Libya on Sunday, October 13, in preparation for the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations qualifiers against the Mediterranean Knights at 8 p.m. on Tuesday, October 15.

After landing at the Al Abraq Airport in Libya, the Super Eagles were left stranded for over 13 hours without any assistance from the host Libyan Football Federation.

The captain of the national team, William Troost-Ekong had also taken to his Instagram story to lament over the ill-treatment and announced that the Super Eagles have resolved not to honour the game.

Also, a statement from the NFF has confirmed that the football body is making arrangements to fly the national team back to Nigeria, which means that there is little or no chance of honoring Tuesday’s fixture.

Alkasim Abdulkadir, the Media and Communications Special Assistant to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Yusuf Tuggar, disclosed that the Minister has been in contact with the Super Eagles.

He disclosed that the Libyan authorities were yet to authorize the Nigerian Mission in Libya to travel to Bayda City where the Super Eagles are located.

Abdulkadir wrote on X: “Update: @YusufTuggar is in touch with the Nigerian Mission in Libya through the CDA Amb Stephen Anthony Awuru who has also been in touch with the NFF and Libyan authorities since last night, but Libyan authorities were yet to authorize them to travel to Bayda City where the airport is located. 

“However, the CDA instructed the head of the Nigerian Community in Benghazi Mr Morris Eromosele who arrived there this morning with supplies and internet access. 

“The Minister continues to monitor the unfortunate event through the CDA and awaits a report for further action.”

[NaijaNews]