Vice-President Kashim Shettima has departed Abuja for the United States to attend the 79th session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA).

In a statement on Sunday, Stanley Nkwocha, senior special assistant to the president on media and communications, said Shettima’s trip to UNGA was at the behest of President Bola Tinubu.

The 79th UNGA with the theme, “Leaving no one behind: Acting together for the advancement of peace, sustainable development, and human dignity for present and future generations,” will be held between September 24 and 28.

“It would be recalled that President Tinubu had directed the Vice President to lead the Nigerian delegation to the high-level global forum while he focuses on addressing pressing domestic issues, including the recent devastating flood disaster,” the statement reads.

Nkwocha said during the session, Shettima will deliver Nigeria’s national statement, participate in key meetings on the sidelines of the event, and engage in bilateral discussions.

The president had said that only authorised government officials will attend this year’s UNGA.

Femi Gbajabiamila, chief of staff to the president, conveyed Tinubu’s directive during a one-day retreat organised by the State House management for heads of government agencies under its supervision.

Gbajabiamila said the decision to reduce the country’s delegation to the UNGA is part of the “administration’s commitment to ensure prudent management of resources and reduce the cost of governance”.

[TheCable]

The expansive headquarters of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in Jabi, Abuja, deserves to have a wing for circuses. The building is so imposing that the mere sight should frighten the crime-minded, but behind the façade lies a clay-footed anti-graft agency that enjoys playing to the gallery and displaying the absurd. Over the years, it has witnessed many spectacular acts of triviality but on the watch of Olukayode Olanipekun, unnecessary ego now drives its policies and operations.

Nowhere has this absurdity played out more than in its lousy handling of the case involving Yahaya Bello, the former governor of Kogi State. The timid handling of Bello, a wanted man who visited its headquarters in Jabi, Abuja, last Wednesday, was not only scandalous, it shows that the Commission now takes the sensibilities of Nigerians for granted.

The EFCC had, last April, declared Bello wanted after he failed to appear for arraignment on N80.2 billion money laundering charges. Instead of responding to the charges, the former governor who had boasted that he was ready to face any inquisition into his tenure in office, preferred to take the agency on a long ride. ‘The White Lion’ holed up for months, literally under the bed of his successor in office, Governor Ahmed Ododo somewhere in Lugard House, seat of the state government in Lokoja, from where he occasionally sneaks out of town and into his Abuja mansion.

The most spirited attempt to arrest him later that month in Abuja was thwarted by Governor Ododo who deployed his official vehicles and security details to Bello’s Abuja home to rescue him and drive him out of the city. Bello returned to his hide-out in Lokoja even though many say he has severally been sighted in the nation’s capital as well as his native Okene. Though the EFCC declared him wanted, placed him on the watch list, got all security agencies to mount a manhunt for him and placed him on INTERPOL red alert, the cat and mouse game has lasted all of six months.

So, when last Wednesday, September 18, 2024, Bello walked into the EFCC headquarters in Abuja, the public heaved a sigh of relief; at last the man whom many swear would lead the EFCC to the whereabouts of far more than the N80 billion that allegedly developed wings on his watch as governor, would be in custody. But rather than arrest and clamp him in detention for interrogation and onward arraignment, the EFCC Chairman simply waved him away.

Olanipekun

Why did the EFCC refuse to arrest a man who was publicly advertised as a felon running from the law; a man it has told every other agency to arrest on sight?

The agency said it rejected the method by which Bello reported to the commission. Upon realising that Bello came with the Kogi state governor, the EFCC Chairman directed that no official should attend to him. Olanipekun’s grouse is that Bello by-passed documentation formalities and instead of coming with his lawyer, ‘breached the EFCC protocol’ by coming for an invitation in a convoy of vehicles and with a sitting governor. And so it allowed Bello who spent three hours loitering within the EFCC premises to return to his luxurious car and drive off!

Are these enough reasons to ask a wanted felon to drive off? Agreed that the EFCC also did not invite the governor, was his mere presence within its premises enough to thwart a legitimate arrest of Bello?

Olanipekin’s action was absurd, to say the least, and he needs to explain that to Nigerians. Ironically, not long after Bello drove away, his agency shamelessly issued a statement to dispel media reports that the former governor was in its custody. It also reiterated that the man it had declared wanted for over half a year, and who was sighted in its premises earlier in the day “remains wanted with a subsisting warrant for his arrest”. Nothing can be more shamefully self-indicting.

The truth is that Olukayode Olanipekun who was in his office when Bello drove into the premises in an executive convoy, felt humiliated that the felon he had tried unsuccessfully to arrest in Abuja and Lokoja, surrendered to the EFCC on his own, and with cameras flashing. To make matters worse, Bello had primed the media to report his trip to the EFCC himself. It was too much of a humiliation for the EFCC chairman, and as his ego took over him, he bluntly refused to order Bello’s arrest or to see him. He holed up in his office upstairs while Bello chatted with his Chief of Staff and other sundry staff for all of three hours.

Rather than arrest him within the EFCC premises, Olanipekun was said to have told his aides that he preferred to humiliate Bello with a public arrest anytime, anywhere.

What arrogance!

Minutes after Bello’s departure, he mobilized over 30 operatives for his second attempt at arresting Bello, this time at the Kogi State Lodge in Asokoro later that night. After several gunshots and what could have ended in a bloodbath at the Governor’s Lodge, he failed again as common sense prevailed and the EFCC operatives were asked to withdraw.

Today, as Yahaya Bello still walks free, the cost of feeding Olanipekun’s fat ego can only be imagined. For the many who believe the Tinubu administration only pays lip service to the fight against corruption, last week’s incident is a good example.

The question is: does the EFCC Chairman still expect other security agencies to cooperate with his agency by arresting Bello wherever he is sighted?

Indeed, the EFCC Chairman has a lot to explain to Nigerians. Were all the spectacle necessary? Why was he prepared to put his operatives in harm’s way in a situation that was clearly avoidable? More importantly, when did his personal ego become part of the EFCC operational policy?

Sheddy Ozoene is the Editor-In-Chief of People&Politics.

It is that time of the year again for our ritual roadside assessment of the state of the nation from the perspective of the common folk. It is the last quarter of the year, that time of the year when nearly every Nigerian household takes stock of their fortunes in the year that is about to elapse. Above all, it is the first year and half of a new government. After one year of honeymoon, the new Tinubu government will soon run out of excuses on the promises it made to the electorate during the election campaigns early last year. It is time to ask again: “How Country?”

The “How country?” test is my ancient method of measuring the mood and state of the nation hardly ever fails. It is at once a casual greeting as well as reaching out to neighbours in normal Nigerian street parlance. It is just a simple greeting cast in the mould of a universal non- committal question: “How Country?” You throw it casually at people you encounter at the roadside, in barbers’ shops, in the drive way of the super market  as you walk in. You don’t expect any in- depth answers.

All you usually get is a reflex response. The respondents hardly have time to reflect on their answers. But it quite often gives you a quick snapshot of the way things are in the country on the go. It is a sort of everyman’s instant state of the union address on the go. No partisanship. No colourful choreographed answers. Just straight from the hips knee jerk instant response. The answers you get  reflect everything from the misery index, the state of security, the ease of finding work , paying your bills or just getting by on a daily basis. Most importantly, the answers are a measure of how ordinary people are faring and how they generally view the prospects of our commonwealth. 

 ‘How country?’ hovers between bad English and pidgin, dangling between serious enquiry and a casual perfunctory greeting.  You therefore mostly get answers in mostly hybrid lingo as well. In normal times, you get: “We dey!”. In times of political turmoil, you are likely to get: “Country bend small!”. In times of economic hardship, you are likely to get: ”We dey manage!” When economic hardship joins political confusion and uncertainty, you get: “God dey our side”.  

It has always worked for me in journalism as an illicit public opinion sampling technique. It is at once a way of expressing cordiality and fellow feeling, a reaffirmation of shared feelings as members of a national community of feelings. What irks me probably pains you. What pains me gnaws at your innermost feelings. Thrown at a troubled soul, the question suggests that perhaps there is someone out there who shares your pains or feels your hurt even without your telling them.

But in the end, “How country?” becomes a way of restating that we are partakers in a community of feelings, caring about each other in a common patrimony whose state of health resonates in our individual circumstances and can be measured in our spontaneous responses to casual greetings. Our private states come shinning through our spontaneous responses to simple greetings.

As compatriots, we share something intangible, a common concern for the state of the nation and the state of the state that presides over us all.  The state of things comes to us in the simple things of life that make life worth living. How easy is it to get to work? How adequate is the minimum wage to get us to and from work? How affordable is junior’s  school fees? Do we have enough to share a cup of garri or rice for the neighbour next door?

Deploying the ‘how country?’ informality, I usually use a crude sampling method to get a rough idea of the state of the nation or the feelings of ordinary citizens. This is something that neither my training in the humane letters, social sciences or media studies specifically taught me.

On a given day, I would throw the friendly greeting/question at a cross section of ordinary strangers irrespective of class, ethnicity, circumstance or countenance. By the end of the day, I am likely to have greeted a cross section of fellow countrymen and women ranging from my gate man, cook, steward, secretary, driver, managers, policemen at the checkpoint, labourers at a building site or my customer, the woman who roasts corn or unripe plantain (year in, year out) at the roadside on my way from work.

When I come home in the evening and in the quiet of my privacy, I would recall and rewind from the barometer of memory the findings of the day.  I get a rough idea of the way things are at least from the eyes and gut responses of ordinary people, uncoloured by partisanship, self interest and the arrogance of position. 

On the guiding question of “how country?”, the answer you get at any given times has kept changing with successive regimes. Most times, however, it is a function of what policies touch the people where it matters most. Let us take the contrast between a past administration and the present one for illustration.

Under an elected Obasanjo presidency, the introduction of the GSM cellphone revolution gripped the public imagination. The new technology suddenly put a lot of power in the hands of the masses. Ordinary people in the villages, in the farms, in the markets, simple artisans and the army of youth on campuses and street corners suddenly found themselves armed with this powerful tool of communication and infinite possibility. Nothing like it had happened previously. Added to it was a policy of financial inclusion through the  banking consolidation and the popularization of the stock market. Market women and simple traders in the markets were encouraged to measure their net worth not just in the quantum of cash under their mattresses or in their bank accounts.

More common people began to operate bank accounts and to invest in shares and the bond market. Telecommunications and banking expansion provided the two growth sectors under Mr. Obasanjo with infinite multiplier effects that sucked up a sizeable percentage of the unemployed. Apart from sporadic and isolated disturbances such as Odi, Shagamu and Zaki Biam which were decisively put down with a level of ferocity that offended the human rights community.

These incidents did not however graduate into nationwide insecurity. Nor did they douse the momentum of economic upliftment that swept the nation and put smiles on the faces of ordinary people. If you asked most of the people in the bus stop crowd then: ‘How Country?’, the resounding answer was most likely : ”We dey kampe!” or they simply showed you their new cell phone with pride and a smile. This was a reaffirmation of confidence in national stability and the abilities of the national leadership of the time and the possibility of hope in the horizon.

Fast forward to the period between 2015 and the end of the Buhari administration. The prospect of a Buhari return to power as an elected president brought mixed reactions. There was the resurrection of all sorts of populist myths in the popular imagination. The man was a disciplinarian, would punish corrupt people and erect honest people as role models. Buhari’s appeal was essentially retrospective.

When the hour came for the famed man of steel to unleash his magic, the nation met with a solid silence of an eerie silence. He was either perennially away on sick leave or touring the world.  In the face of grinding national headaches, he was aloof and indifferent. His officials literally too orders from themselves as minimal accountability took flight. The rich were free to multiply their wealth while the poor multiplied in numbers. The man divided the country. He embraced his kith and kin and left the rest of us to find our way. In the end, a nation that had looked forward to Buhari for some salvation could no longer wait for him to retire to Daura.

Barely five years into the return to the Buhari myth, Nigerians knew better. In a video clip that was then doing the viral rounds in the social media, the newly elected Buhari was heard bragging, fortuitously, that Nigerians would sooner than later know the difference his return to power would make. By the time Buhari was handing over power to Mr. Tinubu, most Nigerian had become speechless in consternation as hardship and mis-governance joined forces to create a nation that looked forward to change in whatever guise. By the end of the Buhari administration, the most popular response to “How country?” was solid indifference or stony silence.

Now a year and half into the Tinubu administration,  only very few can find the courage to ask anyone: “How country?” Practically all the indices of daily living have jumped through the roof. Gasoline, electricity, food prices, rents, school fees, cost of medicines, air fares, transport fares etc. The cost of everything has jumped through the roof. Taxes have piled upon levies; tariffs have been heaped on hidden charges all for services that are hardly ever rendered.

To worsen the matter, an overwhelming majority of ordinary Nigerians have delivered the unanimous verdict that the Tinubu government is not good hence a nationwide protest a month ago against bad government. An indifferent executive has joined forces with a most cavalier legislature to run riot with state resources with multiple budgets dedicated to spending on sundry items of luxury and waste ranging from mansions to luxury SUVs, jets and ,some say. even yachts and lavish unnecessary junkets with overloaded delegations.

In the present circumstances, it has become hard to even pose the casual question: “How country?” The answers are benumbing. They range from ‘which country?’ to a studied long sigh and silence of the cemetery.  When you throw “How country?” at common folk these days, you would be lucky to get a response. They just look at you, shake their heads and move on. At other times, you could get a loud sigh followed by a look that suggests that you are probably an alien or a retort question: “Which country?”

It all takes us back to Chinua Achebe’s last moment memoir: There Was Once a Country. The question meets yet a bigger question: When again shall we have a country?

The Dangote Petroleum Refinery was supposed to be the final solution to Nigeria’s energy needs. What went wrong? Why the brouhaha? Why the anti-climax? I have been observing developments from my balcony — beyond what I have been seeing in the papers, watching on TV, hearing on radio and reading on social media. I could see two major camps in the pandemonium — one painting the picture of a conspiracy to sabotage the refinery so that the “cabals” can continue to feed fat on the nation; the other casting Dangote as the monopolist who is scheming to control the downstream sector same way he sits like a goliath on top of the cement industry. I will now share my thoughts.

Ordinarily, the Dangote refinery should be a thing of joy, a national pride — something Mr Femi Otedola, Alhaji Aliko Dangote’s bosom friend, calls the “eighth wonder of the world”. According to the information on its site, the 650,000 barrels per day (bpd) plant is “Africa’s biggest oil refinery and the world’s biggest single-train facility”; its pipeline infrastructure “is the largest anywhere in the world, with 1,100 kilometres to handle 3 billion standard cubic foot of gas per day”; it has a 435mw power plant which “can meet the total power requirement of Ibadan DisCo”; and its refined products can meet all of Nigeria’s needs, with spare to export. What is there not to love about the refinery?

Well, the devil is always in the detail. Otherwise, why should there be controversy in place of carnival? Before I proceed, let me state that I am not here to join the bandwagon of protagonists and antagonists. I have been around long enough to know that things are not always the way they appear. Forgive me, therefore, if this article fails to add more spice to the drama. For me, the Dangote situation offers us yet another opportunity to rethink the story of this country as we keep racing aggressively in the wrong direction. Nigeria cannot develop this way. The brouhaha stems from the fact that our oil sector has been grossly mismanaged for decades. And it is very depressing.

Shorn of the drama, the three burning issues are: supply of crude oil, off-taking of products and retail pricing. The Dangote refinery wants to be given preference in the sale of crude oil produced in Nigeria, which the Organization of Oil Exporting Countries (OPEC) reported as 1.35m bpd in August 2024. After all, the refinery’s capacity is 650,000 bpd, so why should it have any problems sourcing crude locally? Dangote also wants fuel importers and marketers to be asked to patronise the refinery’s products. Again, this seems simple: why import what is available at home? Finally, at what price should the products from Dangote be dispensed at the pumps? These are the key issues.

Here we go. On crude availability, it is a very sad story. With my modest knowledge of the oil industry, I can say that NNPC Ltd’s share of Nigeria’s reported production of 1.35mbpd is not up to 650,000 bpd. When the national oil company was still publishing monthly reports years ago, there were months when its total share was about 150,000 bpd. Things have slightly improved. According to a recent report by The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), it has gone up to just over 200,000 bpd. I think the figure should be higher than that now, but for practical purposes, I still do not think NNPC is in a position to meet Dangote’s needs all by itself. Some form of reshuffling will have to be done.

Why is NNPC’s share so low? There are at least two reasons: (1) a sharp decline in onshore production as a result of decades of insecurity and low investment (2) our crude arrangements to pay for the importation of petrol and service foreign loans. We do not have all the information on these pledges, but at least we know that the loan arranged by Afrexim Bank costs us around 90,000 bpd in repayment. I believe this is taken from the federation’s share of oil production. Therefore, if what we are getting from our production is not significant enough — with a chunk already pledged to creditors and other commitments — where will NNPC get the 650,000 bpd that Dangote needs?

A quick option is for the oil majors to be compelled to sell to Dangote: section 109 of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) stipulates that local refineries be given priority for crude sale before exports. It is called domestic crude supply obligation (DCSO). This is feasible but slightly complicated. The majors have long-term commercial commitments abroad which they will have to breach, and this could have legal implications. But most importantly, when oil companies export their crude, they earn forex — some (no matter how little) of which they repatriate, thereby improving dollar inflow into the economy. In any case, NUPRC has clarified that DCSO works on a willing buyer, willing seller basis.

If the oil majors sell to Dangote in dollars, that would be fine for the naira — but it means Dangote will have to source FX to pay. Even if all that the refinery is buying for now is 400,000 bpd, that is a lot of money. At the current price of $72/barrel, that is roughly $28 million daily and about $864 million monthly. If we scale it to its 650,000 bpd capacity, that is $46.8 million daily and $1.4 billion monthly. That is quite an FX requirement. If they sell to Dangote in naira, where will they get the FX to finance their own obligations and run operations? Clearly, there is a trade-off for every option. I seriously doubt that the federal government will trade off FX inflow for the sake of the DCSO provision.

The federal government recently announced that NNPC would start supplying Dangote about 385,000 bpd from October 1. That is good news — if NNPC has up to that to give. To the question: why is Nigeria’s share of oil production so low? When militants started attacking oil pipelines in 2006, little did it occur to us that the consequences would ruin the economy someday. Most of Nigeria’s oil production used to be onshore under the joint venture (JV) partnerships with international oil companies. Nigeria owns 55-60 percent equity of the JV projects. This means we will fund a JV project to the tune of 55-60 percent and — in turn — get 55-60 percent share of oil production.

In 2001, we were getting 1.2m bpd from JV production alone. Today, we are getting 200,000 bpd overall. The sad story of Nigeria. From our share, NNPC used to set aside 445,000 barrels daily as “domestic crude” for its refineries and export the rest on behalf of the federation. We had plenty oil to play with. NNPC was remitting between $3 billion and $4 billion from exports every blessed month as oil prices soared frequently — at a point hitting the all-time high of $147/barrel. We could meet every FX demand without blinking. The nouveau riche were buying private jets like bottled water. The naira was stable for a long period, only suffering minor depreciations as a result of lower oil prices.

Unfortunately, insecurity crippled onshore production. To worsen matters, the Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB), introduced to the National Assembly in 2008 by President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, was busy gathering dust owing to unseriousness on the part of everybody, particularly the lawmakers. Unsure of what laws would govern their investments, the oil majors withheld their money. Years were wasted. The law was not passed until 2021, by which time the world had left us behind. Now, we are paying the price. Offshore production became more attractive to the oil majors because although it is more capital-expensive, the incentives were generous and they never had to worry about insecurity.

Nigeria is so upside down that when crude oil prices went past $100/barrel in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, we did not benefit much because we did not have enough oil to export. In the past, we were having huge windfalls. Under Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo and Yar’Adua, we built our excess crude account to over $22 billion from windfalls. But with insecurity and low investments in the upstream sector, our production had gone down. We were producing 2.2m bpd steadily in the 2000s but today we are struggling with around 1.3m. That is even better: in 2016, we went below 1m bpd. If this reversal of fortune does not make us sober, nothing else will.

The second issue is Dangote’s desire that fuel importers and marketers be directed to patronise the refinery. Fair enough. If they are getting a better deal from Dangote, why not? It should be a simple business decision. But from the pricing template released by the NNPC after the refinery sold its first petrol a week ago, it appears Dangote is priced higher than or similar to imported petrol. NNPC said it bought at N842.61/litre from Dangote and added all the levies, taking the pump price to N950.22/litre in Lagos — compared to the going price of N855, although NNPC used N1,637.59/$ as the FX rate as against the official average of N1,594. Still, the math was not “mathing” to me.

Dangote denied selling to NNPC at N842.61/litre but, noticeably, did not disclose the price. My sense is that since Dangote imported its crude at a higher cost, its petrol price will be high. More so, it is when a refinery achieves economies of scale that its pricing can become competitive. I hope when Dangote begins to buy crude in naira — as announced by the government last week — its FX exposure will reduce. It can then begin to price its products more competitively. By the way, I am not saying Dangote petrol will sell for N200/litre as some have been fantasising. I don’t know who came up with the theory that Dangote will produce “cheap petrol” because there is no “landing cost”.

And that takes us to the third issue: pricing. We have to manage our expectations. As I explained in a recent article, the biggest cost input is the price of crude oil, not shipping. Shipping costs are negligible. If crude prices are high, product prices will be high too. If crude prices fall to $50/barrel today, the prices of products will drop significantly, assuming the naira does not fall further. In the interim, even if Dangote buys oil in naira, it will still be at the prevailing international price. We need to be guided. That is why I see the Dangote vs NNPC media war as a distraction: things are more nuanced than they appear. When the dust settles, we will still have to address these burning issues.

DAMNED BORNO

As if the destruction brought by terrorism and insurgency are not enough, Borno state fell into the grip of another tragedy when the Alau dam collapsed and flooded Maiduguri, the capital city, claiming 30 lives and displacing 400,000 people, according to the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA). What an avoidable tragedy! The flood was building up for days or weeks before the disaster. This was a major failing of the meteorologists (or the authorities who should act on their reports — if there were any). I implore all good-spirited Nigerians to donate relief materials to help the displaced residents. Even a carton of noodles is massive under the circumstance. Compassion.

DOUBLE WHAMMY

This life. Ms Ruth Auta, a Nigerian nurse, relocated to the UK for better life but has now been sentenced to three years imprisonment for leaving her 10-week-old to die. Apparently, she left the baby at her accommodation unattended for over nine hours and by the time she returned, the boy was dead. Negligence is a grievous offence in the UK. She probably couldn’t afford a childminder (they are quite pricy) and there was maybe no friend or family member to watch over the child (very rare in a country like the UK). Whatever the case was, you cannot leave a 10-week-old baby by himself. But imagine a grieving mother also ending up in jail. This life can be very hard. Unfortunate.

LABOUR IN VAIN

The Labour Party is embroiled in a serious crisis that has exposed its underbelly. We are hearing allegations of fraud and mismanagement of funds in a party that was branded as the vehicle to rescue Nigeria from corruption and ineptitude in 2023. I am not surprised — I have been around long enough to know that Nigerians will aways be Nigerians. The problem is us, not institutions, not statutes. Until we change, Nigeria cannot change. If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do? I just feel bad for young Nigerians who invested their emotions in the party, believing it was going to be different from the others. We need a new mentality to build a new Nigeria. Fact.

NO COMMENT

According to BudgIT, the civic-tech non-profit organisation, the Cocoa Research Institute of Nigeria (CRIN) in Ibadan, Oyo, got N250 million for solar street lights in some areas of Lagos in the 2024 budget. The institute also budgeted to spend N100 million on motorcycles in Osun, N100 million on health centre construction in Ondo, and N200 million on classroom renovations in Rivers. Well, this is Nigeria. In 2020, the ministry of agriculture and rural development also built a worship place for farmers “to enhance productivity”. And you know what? We are only talking about federal budgets her

There is a shadowy group of powerful Nigerians once described as the “owners of Nigeria”. They can be counted on our fingertips – not  more than five of them. If you add their foot soldiers, then, they may be  up to 10 or a dozen. They decide who rules and who does not. They decide the direction the country goes and which it does not. They decide what is and what is not. The destiny of the country – and of its citizens – is in their firm grips. They are our own Napoleon Bonarparte; when they sneeze, everyone catches a cold. If you read  H. Rider Haggard’s “Ayesha: She, who must be obeyed” you will understand what they represent. Domineering, insatiable, they always want their wish to be our command (Does that title of a book sound familiar?).

These cabals are largely from the North: two are from Minna in Niger state while one is from Gusau, Zamfara state. They are all Fulani or minorities from the North who owe their meteoric rise in the military and the country’s political landscape to their allegiance to the Fulani and its cause. One is, well, from the South-west but whose ancestry remains a matter of conjectures and controversies. Let us assume, then, that he straddles the South-west and South-east. The preponderance in, and dominance of, the Fulani/North in this shadowy group is testimony to the vice-like grip that the Fulani ethnic group, negligible as its population is, has on the destiny of the country called Nigeria. Little wonder, then, that the loquacious ones among them have often boasted that Nigeria is their inheritance, bequeathed to them by their fore-fathers! Nothing can be farther from the truth – but that is the hallucination that informs their “Aryan race” mentality that cannot be divorced from Nigeria’s fundamental problems! Hence, the struggle by some other ethnic groups that make up the country to exit it.

Taking advantage of the disquiet in the country as a result of the unimaginable suffering ravaging the land, the “owners of Nigeria” met recently after which one of them read what appeared as the communique of their meeting. A news medium reported the meeting of the retired generals thus: “State of the Nation: Former military leaders, others meet in Minna behind closed doors. Three former  military rulers and some other generals yesterday met behind closed doors in Minna, Niger State, over what many considered as the state of the nation.The trio were former President Olusegun Obasanjo, former military president Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida, and former Head of State, General Abdulsalami Abubakar. Also at the meeting, which took place at the uphill residence of Babangida, was former National Security Adviser (NSA), General Aliyu Gusau. The trio were reported to have long been waiting for Obasanjo at the IBB mansion before he eventually arrived. Although details of the meeting were not known, it was speculated to be around the security situation in the country and the refusal of the PDP to sign a peace accord ahead of the Edo governorship election. It was gathered that the meeting lasted for about two hours, after which former President Obasanjo returned to Abuja. Obasanjo had arrived at the Bola Ahmed Tinubu Airport, Minna at about 4.30 .pm. in a GulfStream 5 aircraft believed to have been chartered and he departed in the same aircraft at about 6.30 p.m. He was received at the airport by some protocol officers from the Niger State Government House. The Niger State Government also provided the vehicles that took him to the uphill home of Babangida and back to the airport, while the same protocol officials saw him off at the Bola Ahmed Tinubu airport at about 7pm.” That was last week Tuesday.

The security situation was a mere alibi; a smokescreen. There is no “State of the nation” discussion these days that will not include the ongoing hardship in the land. Insecurity, yes: economic hardship, no less! Subterfuge and elements of surprise are time-honoured military tactics which cannot be lost on these old foxes as we shall soon see from another meeting addressed by one of the retired generals who had attended the first meeting. A news medium reported the event thus: “Abdulsalami: Hardship getting out of control in Nigeria. Former Head of State, General Abdulsalami Abubakar, has said the hardship in Nigeria is getting out of control and that the distribution of palliatives is not the way out but sustainable action to end the people’s suffering. The former Nigerian leader spoke at his residence in uphill Minna when he received the leadership of the Campaign for Democracy and Human Rights led by Comrade Abdullahi Mohammed Jabi. General Abdulsalami said “The hardship in the land is getting out of control. Everybody is crying about this hardship and it seems to get out of control. People cannot afford three square meals. The issue of transportation, the hike in fuel price, the hike in school fees for the children, and the lack of funds in everybody’s pocket make life difficult for everybody. I would like to inform you that in some of the proposals we have given to the government on another platform (he did not mention the platform), giving palliatives is not the answer to the high prices of food and other items in the country,” he added. While saying that “There is need for government to flood and saturate the communities with food, let them (Government) buy food and sell it at lesser prices to the people so that people will try to buy some of these food items, depending on their pocket/income,” he reiterated that palliatives are not sustainable. He said their forum (he did not name the forum) had made recommendations to the federal government on the way out of the economic hardship in the land. He said “We have passed these recommendations to the government; we hope they will implement them”. Speaking also on the #Endbadgovernance protest slated for the 1st of October, 2024, Gen. Abdulsalami said “For God’s sake, when you demonstrate, do it peacefully”.

So, you can see what we mean! There is no way the four generals would meet without the hardship in the land forming the kernel of discussion. But his Forum’s recommendation to the government to buy stuff and flood the market with them beggars the issue, just like the palliatives they had rightly said palliate nothing. We should be thinking of increasing our productive capacity now and shunning what we do not produce instead of encouraging mindless importation of stuff that piles more pressure on an already weakened Naira, impoverishes our local farmers and producers while helping to develop other nations’ economies.

The Forum referred to by Abdulsalami cannot be a new creation. In last week’s “Fear history”, we had quoted Obasanjo as referring to the same or similar shadowy group decades back. Saturday PUNCH newspaper report of August 20, 2016 with a screaming front page headline titled: “I and others brought Buhari to salvage Nigeria – Obasanjo”, ran the story thus: “Former President Olusegun Obasanjo has said that he and four other eminent Nigerians brought President Muhammadu Buhari to salvage Nigeria from its current challenges. He said they took the decision when they felt that the country stood at a crossroads. Obasanjo said, ‘Three or four of us from different parts of the country got together and said to ourselves: what do we do? We said, what is the problem with us and why are we still not growing? We got talking and knew we needed to do something. What do we need to deal with, for this Nigeria of ours to become what God has created it to be? A land flowing with milk and honey; that is the intention of God for creating Nigeria…’” We should end the story there!

So, you can see that there are a few Nigerians who have invested themselves with the power and privilege to decide here what Professor Harold Lasswell defined as the very essence of politics: Who gets what, when how! Is Abdulsalami’s verdict of last Thursday the considered opinion of the “owners” of Nigeria? I think so! Is it a vote of no confidence in the Tinubu administration? Yes, I think so! Is it a yellow card or a straight red? If it is a yellow card, then, President Tinubu still has the opportunity to make amends and keep his seat. If it is a straight red, then, it is a question of when and not whether; a question of how and not if! Except the Jagaban Borgu is able to meet force with force. Will Tinubu’s wily horse outsmart the generals’ smart foxes? Perhaps the Battle of Philippi will be sooner than expected. The valley of decision may be nearer than imagined. “Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision: for the day of the Lord is near in the valley of decision. The sun and the moon shall be darkened, and the stars shall withdraw their shining”(Joel 3: 14 – 15).

But should we pause and look closely, we will see that those now posing as the messiahs of Nigerians were the same people whose tenure brought untold ruination on Nigerians and dug the pit that we today find ourselves in! The man who introduced the Structural Adjustment Programme and handed us over to the IMF and the World Bank; who introduced the settlement syndrome, weakened the military to curtail military coups and frittered our Gulf War oil windfall! The one under whose watch MKO Abiola died in detention in controversial circumstances: Ask him how he got to own his own hilltop residence! And the one who entered office a pauper but left as one of Nigeria’s richest men; who spent the larger part of his second term in office fighting phantom wars against his deputy and whose third term fiasco littered the hallowed chambers of the National Assembly with bribe money! These are the men pretending to be our messiah today! When they had the opportunity to salvage the nation, they fiddled like King Nero. Now that someone else is trying – although clumsily – to clean their Augean stable, their highfalutin pontifications will not let us hear words, as they say. With saviours like these, no one needs a messiah!

I believe in God. My faith in His existence is trans-denominational. My pro-God stance predated my encounter with the ontological approach of St. Anselm or Thomas Aquinas’ cosmological argument, or even René Descartes’ logical approach to prove that there has to be a supreme being for everything else to make sense.

I make that declaration from the onset before the horde of hypocritical religionists start raining down invectives as they usually do whenever anyone questions their weaponisation of mass hypnosis to swindle congregations all over the world – particularly in Africa – under the canopy of God.

If you believe in God, then there is a possibility that you would also believe that He can intervene in the affairs of men. That intervention could be in the form of a miracle – an extraordinary occurrence that can’t be explained with natural or scientific laws. That is as positive as it gets. The other side of the coin is that “miracles” are now being commercially hawked by merchant pastors who use it as an opiate.

Nigeria’s National Agency for Food And Drug Administration And Control (NAFDAC) recently warned the public not to buy “miracle” products produced by a church headed by the popular Christian televangelist, Jeremiah Fufeyin.

NAFDAC said the products – which have names such as “Miracle Water” and “River Jordan Water” – claim to have “bogus” healing properties, such as the ability to cure women of infertility. The statement also said Mr Fufeyin’s Christ Mercyland Deliverance Ministry was selling these wares without NAFDAC approval as required by law.

NAFDAC began investigating the products after receiving complaints from members of the public, the agency’s statement said. It also said the products violate regulatory approval and that Mr Fufeyin’s church had “refused to co-operate with the investigation.”

Christ Mercyland Deliverance Ministry has countered NAFDAC’s statement arguing that it operates under Nigeria’s law, which guarantees freedom of religion without interference. The church, which has hundreds of thousands of YouTube subscribers and enjoys huge success across social media, denied all the allegations.

However, it is noted that some of the products are emblazoned with Mr Fufeyin’s name. According to the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), “Mr Fufeyin has long attracted followers from across the country, claiming to perform miracles and heal ailments. The preacher has said he is a billionaire, but has faced criticisms for his lavish lifestyle. In Nigeria, it is not uncommon for preachers like Mr Fufeyin to sell products claiming to treat ailments. For instance, the late televangelist TB Joshua sold ‘anointed water’, which was marketed as having healing powers.”

Fufeyin’s church is not alone in what has been described as the lucrative business of packaging miracles for sale. In these harsh economic times, many Nigerians are looking for an easy way out of their misery. Psychologically flagellated and hemmed in from all sides by problems of nuclear and extended families, many people resort to the transcendental. They forgo logic and hold on to whatever celestial straw is thrown their way.

Warehouse-type buildings that hitherto housed manufacturing concerns have now been bought over and converted to churches and miracle centres. The factories are dying but the churches and their offer of miracles are booming.

Yet we cannot tar every pastor with the brush of infamy because there are still veritable men of God doing God’s work in spirit and in truth. The problem is that the genuine ones are being totally overshadowed by the charlatans.

And it’s a dog-eat-dog affair out there. Sometime ago, one popular pastor, Bishop Prince Ufuoma (Prophetic Professor) of Elevation Christian International Church, reportedly confessed how he joined the white prophet cult, killed about seven persons, slept in the cemetery and performed fake miracles. He was also said to have claimed that all the popular pastors in Nigeria are part of the white prophet cult and they made him join them.

At the event, he was said to have displayed the charms he relied on in the past to swing “miracles”, warning his listeners that most of the claims of miracles in many modern churches are fake (https://www.nairaland.com/6961969/popular-pastor-confesses-how-he#109785921).

Truth be told, the movie star lifestyle of many modern pastors could put pressure on the fledgling ones among them to devise various means of catching up. With a desperate congregation hungry for miracles, the stage is set for mass deception.

I wasn’t surprised the other day when I received a video clip of a pastor magically conjuring credit alerts into the accounts of church members. You would think that I had been soaked in nitrous oxide, the laughing gas. I told myself that that was one miracle I could vend myself, especially since I had all the account details of tithe-paying church members!

Remarkably, it is not just a Christian thing. Muslim clerics have also wisened up to the immense possibilities available to “men of God” in the multi-billion naira industry. Some clerics specialise in sourcing marabouts for the high and mighty. Many of those spiritual intercessors are of middle eastern origin as if their God is more powerful that the one worshipped in Nigeria.

Our politicians who could be as vicious as they come when looting the treasury are mere potty in the hands of the marabouts. Karl Max must be beating his chest in self-congratulation because it was he who warned us that religion was the opium of the masses.

More than ever before, Nigerians are now calling for some kind of regulation of the religious sector in such a way as to protect citizens from religious Ponzi schemes. At the moment, virtually anyone who can acquire a suit of any description and memorise a few verses in the Bible can call himself a pastor and start a church. In the same vein, anyone who can tie an impressive turban and recite important verses in the Quran can claim to be a cleric.

Nigerians are now clamouring for some kind of control to protect the people. References have been made to Rwanda’s battle with the same problem and the positive results already yielded.

In Rwanda, the law requires that places of worship operate in an orderly and secure manner. It prohibits the use of loudspeakers and mandates that all preachers undergo theological training before establishing a church to ensure the safety and tranquility of worshippers.

Last month, Rwanda shut down 5,600 churches, including some 100 places of worship operating in caves, for not complying with the country’s safety and health regulations. The crackdown on places of worship is part of a broader effort to regulate religious practices. A 2018 law requires pastors to hold theological degrees from accredited institutions and mandates churches to adhere to strict building codes and hygiene standards.

Government intervention in the area of streamlining policies governing religious practices is bound to meet with stiff resistance from those “holy” men making iniquitous gain from the misery of their congregation. But the government has to stay the course. The Bible itself foresaw mercantile religiosity and warns: “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves (1 John 4:1).

If that verse was a meal, I’d gladly take the Jamaican reggae artist Max Romeo’s lamentation as dessert:

My father’s house of worship

Has become a den of thieves

Stealing in the name of the Lord…

In the annals of Nigeria’s democratic journey, the statement made by former President Olusegun Obasanjo on February 10, 2007, reverberates ominously. Declaring that the then-upcoming general election would be a “do or die” affair for his party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP),cast a shadow over the electoral process, suggesting that the stakes were so high that violence or undemocratic measures were acceptable.

Despite the violent and undemocratic nature of the declaration, it is surprising that more than 17 years down the line that Mr. Godwin Obaseki, Edo State Governor, made a similar pronouncement ahead of the gubernatorial elections scheduled to hold on September 21, 2024 in his state. It is shocking and deeply concerning that despite the lessons, Nigeria should have learned about the dangers of making   democracy look violent and intimidating, particularly as such incendiary language still finds its way into our political discourse. In defense of his statement, Obaseki explained that the upcoming election is critical for safeguarding the progress made under his administration and preventing elements opposed to Edo’s development from taking power. Yet, this reasoning is flawed and dangerous.

Elections, by nature, are the cornerstone of democracy. They are meant to provide the people with the opportunity to exercise their sovereignty through the ballot box, in an atmosphere of peace, fairness, and transparency. When a candidate or a sitting governor declares an election a “do or die” affair, it sends a dangerous message, that the rule of law, civility, and the will of the people are secondary to political victory at any cost. This rhetoric feeds into a narrative that normalizes electoral violence, coercion, and intimidation.

Without a doubt, the essence of democracy lies in choice, not compulsion. An election should represent the power of the people to decide who will govern them. It is not a battlefield where political gladiators fight to the death for control. Elections in Nigeria, and indeed anywhere in the world, should be about ideas, policies, and visions for the future, not a winner-takes-all contest that justifies using all means, even violent ones, to achieve victory. It is unarguably against the foregoing backdrop that for Nigeria’s president, Goodluck Jonathan, once expressed a commitment to maintaining peace and order in Nigeria, stating that he would not resort to violence or shed blood for his political ambitions. His commitment to peace, no doubt, reflects his dedication to stability and governance.

In fact, Governor Obaseki’s defense that the stakes in the Edo election are high does not justify treating it as a “do or die” affair. Yes, elections are often pivotal moments in a state’s development, and the outcomes can have significant consequences for governance and public welfare. However, democracy must always allow room for peaceful transitions, compromises, and most importantly, the expression of the people’s will. When a leader frames an election as existential, it creates unnecessary tension and opens the door to undemocratic practices.

Without sounding exaggerative in this context, Nigeria’s electoral history is littered with instances where elections turned violent, leading to loss of lives, destruction of property, and long-lasting political instability. The 2007 election, which Obasanjo described as “do or die,” was marred by widespread irregularities and violence. International observers condemned the election as deeply flawed, and the aftermath was a testament to the dangers of inflammatory rhetoric.

Election violence creates an environment of fear, where citizens are deterred from participating in the democratic process. It also emboldens undemocratic forces, from political thugs to corrupt officials, who believe that power can be seized through brute force rather than legitimate means. Worse still, the normalization of violence in elections leads to a cycle where political office becomes a prize to be won at all costs, and governance is reduced to patronage and self-interest rather than service to the people.

As political leaders, it is essential to recognize the weight of words. In a country with Nigeria’s diverse and complex socio-political landscape, leaders must be careful not to inflame passions that can spiral into violence. Instead, they should promote a culture of peace, tolerance, and respect for the democratic process. The language of “do or die” should have no place in the political lexicon of a country that has endured so much bloodshed in the name of democracy.

Governor Obaseki and other political leaders must recognize that their words have the power to shape public attitudes and behaviors. In the spirit of true democracy, they must focus on building trust in the electoral process by ensuring free, fair, and transparent elections. They must also accept that losing an election is not the end of the road, but part of the democratic process. A true leader is not defined by their ability to cling to power, but by their willingness to serve the will of the people, even when that will is expressed in opposition to their interests.

Governor Obaseki’s justification for his “do or die” rhetoric, that it is necessary to protect the gains made under his administration, fundamentally misunderstands the nature of democratic governance. Elections are not about safeguarding personal or political legacies but about allowing the electorate to freely choose who they believe will best serve their interests. While Obaseki may believe his administration has been beneficial for Edo State, the decision ultimately lies with the voters, not political incumbents.

Moreover, framing the election as a “do or die” moment creates the impression that losing would be catastrophic for the state. This inflates the stakes to an unhealthy level, where political actors may feel justified in resorting to violence or subverting the process. If the election is truly about the people, then they must be allowed to make their choice without intimidation, fear, or coercion.

Without a doubt, Nigeria’s democracy is still evolving, and each election presents an opportunity to strengthen its foundations. However, if elections are continually treated as a zero-sum game where the loser is banished from relevance and the winner takes all, the nation risks stagnation and regression.

Political leaders must commit to electoral reform that eliminates the incentives for violence and malpractice. This includes ensuring that the institutions are tasked with overseeing elections, such as the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), are independent, well-funded, and equipped to conduct free and fair elections. There must also be stringent penalties for those who incite violence or attempt to manipulate the electoral process.

Furthermore, civil society, religious leaders, and the media have a critical role to play in promoting a culture of non-violence and democratic integrity. By holding politicians accountable for their words and actions, they can help shift the narrative away from “do or die” politics to one of peaceful, constructive competition.

Elections are not wars. They are the lifeblood of democracy and should be conducted with dignity, respect, and a commitment to the greater good. When political leaders, like Governor Obaseki, echo the dangerous rhetoric of past elections, they not only jeopardize the immediate contest but also the long-term health of Nigeria’s democracy.

While Obaseki may believe that his defense of “do or die” rhetoric is warranted, democracy thrives on dialogue, consensus, and peaceful contestation, not on threats of existential destruction. It is time for Nigeria to turn the page on “do or die” politics and embrace a new chapter where elections are a celebration of democracy, not a cause for violence. The future of Nigeria depends on it.

Nigeria’s economic landscape has often been likened to a tightrope, where the government’s decisions, no matter how well-intentioned, seem to send mixed signals to the people. One moment, the government promises relief, and the next, it introduces new policies that increase hardship. A clear illustration of this paradox is the simultaneous increase in the minimum wage and fuel price, an action that feels like giving with the right hand and collecting with the left.

The push to increase the national minimum wage has long been a demand of labor unions, activists, and the struggling Nigerian workforce. For years, inflation, devaluation of the naira, and skyrocketing costs of living have rendered the wages of the average Nigerian almost meaningless. A significant wage increase was seen as a potential lifeline for workers barely managing to make ends meet. It was a symbol of hope, suggesting that the government was sensitive to the plight of workers and determined to ensure that people could live with dignity.

This long-overdue wage raise was hailed as a victory by many, with promises of a new era of economic empowerment. However, just as the celebrations began, a darker cloud loomed.

The announcement of an increase in fuel prices struck with the force of a sledgehammer, leaving many Nigerians reeling from the impact. Fuel prices, especially in a country where public transportation and businesses are largely dependent on petroleum, have a ripple effect on every aspect of the economy. From transportation costs to food prices and housing, the price hike in fuel immediately triggered an inflationary spiral. For many, the increased minimum wage was swallowed up by the rising cost of basic goods and services.

It is important to remember that in a developing country like Nigeria, the cost of fuel directly influences the daily expenses of millions of people. From the petty trader who needs to transport her goods, to the student who commutes to school, and the businessman running a generator to power his office, the rising cost of petrol sends shockwaves across all sectors of society. The knock-on effects are immediate and brutal.

While the government’s decision to raise the minimum wage might have come from a place of goodwill, the simultaneous fuel price hike makes it feel like a zero-sum game. For every extra naira that citizens may earn from a wage increase, a larger portion of that income is now being drained by the surge in fuel prices. It feels like the promise of prosperity is taken away as soon as it is given, leaving the average Nigerian in a state of frustration and confusion.

Given the foregoing situation, little wonder Comrade Joe Ajaero, the President of the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), while speaking at the 2024 National Minimum Wage Implementation Workshop for South Zone, on September 18, 2024, on Wednesday specifically said the hike in fuel price by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) has worsened the misery of Nigerians.

Without a doubt, this situation creates a cycle of poverty for the lower and middle classes, who are already facing challenges such as food inflation, high housing costs, and an unreliable electricity supply that forces many to rely on generators. Despite earning a slightly higher wage, their disposable income diminishes as essential goods become more expensive.

The heart of the matter, however, lies in Nigeria’s soaring inflation. The inflation rate, which has been in double digits for years, continues to skyrocket. According to the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), inflation recently hit record highs, severely eroding the purchasing power of the naira. For the average Nigerian worker, what matters more than an increase in wages is the value of their money. And in a climate of high inflation, even a wage hike offers little comfort. The reality is that without addressing inflation, any increment in wages amounts to little more than window dressing.

The reason for the foregoing situation cannot be farfetched as inflation is an invisible tax on the poor and middle class. As the prices of goods and services increase, people find that their money buys less. From basic foodstuffs like rice and beans to transportation and rent, everything is getting more expensive. The inflationary pressure is not only a function of fuel prices but is also exacerbated by other structural issues in the economy, such as poor infrastructure, a weak industrial base, and the over-reliance on imports.

The truth is, the hardship in the land has gone beyond simply ameliorating its impact by increasing workers’ salaries. To solve the economic challenges Nigeria faces, a more comprehensive approach is needed, one that tackles the root causes of inflation and not just the symptoms.

The government must prioritize strategies aimed at stabilizing the economy, improving food production, and reducing the cost of living. Tackling inflation should not be left solely to wage increases, which are reactive measures that do not address the structural problems causing price hikes. A well-coordinated set of policies that focus on economic growth, diversification, and productivity will be more effective in the long run.

It is crucial that the government finds a way to stem the tide of inflation if the country is to experience any real economic relief. Relying on wage increases to mitigate hardship is unsustainable because inflation will continue to outpace any such increases, leaving the populace in a perpetual state of struggle.

In fact, the government must prioritize measures that cut across monetary policy reforms, boosting domestic reforms, boosting domestic production, reducing the cost of doing business, strengthening economic diversification and carrying out tax and welfare reforms   to combat inflation.

At the heart of every economic decision is the human impact. The hardship many Nigerians are experiencing has gone beyond the breaking point. Increasing wages while simultaneously hiking fuel prices creates a painful paradox for workers. It is a glaring reminder that the current approach is unsustainable and insufficient to address the economic challenges at hand.

Given the foregoing unbearable situation, the government must act swiftly to ease the pressure on Nigerians. The focus must shift from merely increasing wages to creating an environment where workers can thrive without fear that their next salary will be consumed by inflation. This requires clear, bold, and decisive action on multiple fronts; not just on wages, but on the very structure of the Nigerian economy.

In fact, raising the minimum wage and hiking fuel prices at the same time creates a frustrating scenario for Nigerian workers, one where they receive with one hand and give back with the other. While the intention behind the wage increase is positive, it is drowned out by the harsher realities of inflation and rising costs.

To truly improve the lives of the Nigerian people, the government must go beyond surface-level adjustments like salary hikes. It must tackle inflation head-on, reduce the cost of living, and create an economic environment that fosters growth and stability. Only then will Nigerians see the tangible benefits of economic policies, and only then will the government be seen as giving with both hands, instead of taking back what it has given.

The Labour Party’s candidate in the Saturday’s governorship election in Edo State, Olumide Akpata has called on the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), to maintain a level-playing field for all candidates and parties in the ongoing election.

Akpata insisted that the electoral body cannot afford to confer undue advantage on any candidate or political party.

Akpata made the call on Saturday shortly after he cast his vote at exactly 10:30 am at his Ward 6 in Oredo local government area of Edo State, maintaining that INEC has no excuse not to deliver a free, fair and credible election.

He said, “I want to hope that this is experience of every voters, and that I am calling on INEC that level-playing field should remain, and nobody should be given any undue advantage, and all of our agents should be allowed into the Collation Centres.

“Nobody should be prevented, so that we can confirm that it (the election) was carried out in the manner as prescribed by the electoral guidelines and the Constitution.

Details later…

[Leadership]

African philanthropist and business leader, Tony Elumelu, will make Africa’s transformative economic growth, youth employment, and energy transition central to the discussions at this year’s United Nations General Assembly.

The 74th United Nations General Assembly will take place late in September in New York, United States of America.

Elumelu will call for urgent action in a series of engagements, including a roundtable discussion at the Clinton Global Initiative with former President of the United States, Bill Clinton, and at an event co-hosted by the World Food Programme and Tony Elumelu Foundation, led by WFP Executive Director, Cindy McCain.

He will bring his perspective both from extensive experience in building industry-leading businesses across the continent and the success of the Tony Elumelu Foundation’s catalytic programmes empowering young Africans. 

Elumelu is a realist, challenging Africa and Africans to solve their problems, bringing African solutions, and also recognising Africa’s responsibility to act.

As Chairman of United Bank for Africa Group and pan-African investment company, Heirs Holdings, as well as Founder of the Tony Elumelu Foundation, Elumelu is a leading driver of Africa’s transformation agenda, helping shape the continent’s narrative on the global stage. 

His thought leadership and advocacy challenge conventional views, offering innovative strategies for collaboration and growth. 

The success of his Foundation in promoting youth entrepreneurship as a pathway out of poverty has featured in case studies from Harvard, Chicago Business School, Stanford and Cambridge.

With over 60 percent of Africans lacking access to electricity and young people making up more than 60 percent of the continent’s 1.3 billion population, Africa faces challenges that impact the world. 

Africa, most recently with tragic floods in West Africa, is suffering climate driven environmental crises caused by global emissions, whilst its development is held back by huge infrastructure deficits.

In a recent statement, Elumelu emphasised: “I have often said that there is nowhere else in the world you can reap the kind of investments as in Africa. 

“However, I am acutely aware of the fundamental challenges our continent faces. 

“Addressing the issues of sustainable economic growth, youth unemployment, gender inequality, and Africa’s energy transition is critical not only for meeting the continent’s basic developmental needs, but also for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and unlocking the immense economic potential that Africa offers.”

An economist and visionary entrepreneur, Elumelu’s economic philosophy of Africapitalism serves as a blueprint for accelerating Africa’s economic transformation, advocating for the private sector to take the lead in delivering social and economic wealth, and shared prosperity for all.

Alongside Elumelu’s advocacy, the United Bank for Africa, which he chairs, will host a networking gala on the sidelines of UNGA, a platform to spotlight investment opportunities on the continent. 

The Gala will convene prominent leaders across four continents in commemoration of UBA Group’s 75th anniversary and the Group’s 40 years of operations in the United States.

[EagleOnline]