When the Israeli-Hamas war started one year ago, it didn’t look like it would last long. 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s promise to avenge the deaths of over 364 Israelis killed and dozens taken hostage by Hamas on October 7 at a music concert left little doubt it was going to be a bloody phase. But how long, ugly or bloody, it would take for Netanyahu to kill the last Hamas, which was his minimum condition for peace, was hard to tell.

Unfortunately, with over 42,000 killed in Gaza, including women, children, UN workers and journalists, over 1500 Israelis killed and the fate of 101 hostages unknown, the last Hamas is still at large. The war has spread to Lebanon, and Iran is enmeshed.

War coming?

The regional conflict the world had tried to prevent is upon us, and with less restraint and increasing provocation, talk about another world war that sounded farfetched only months ago now seems probable. 

The war may not yet be on Africa’s doorstep, but the continent has not been an onlooker. There have been widespread pro-Palestinian protests in South Africa, increasing domestic pressure on President Cyril Ramaphosa’s government. Art was weaponised in Cape Town flats, with some residents deploying murals and graffiti in Palestinian flag colours. 

South Africa’s case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has been perhaps one of the most audacious jurisprudential efforts to hold Israel to account. Since South Africa dragged Israel to the ICJ last December and obtained a ruling to stop Israel from potentially genocidal acts, Africa’s involvement in the war by other means has become more salient.

By deciding to drag Israel, South Africa risked bilateral relations of R876 billion in trade. Still, it counted it as a fair price not just to assuage domestic pressure but also as a matter of conviction for ties that run deep and to honour its own historical experience.

Beyond South Africa

Israel has managed to ignore the court and taken advantage of the U.S., blindsided by weak leadership and the November 4 presidential election, to ramp up attacks in the region. With no let-up in the Russia-Ukraine war and the supply chain problems it has created, the escalation in the Israel-Hamas war has forced African countries to brace up.

Egypt has been on edge because of the impact refugee spillover and possible military action could have on its fragile economy, never mind the potential influx of militant Palestinian jihadists. It has resisted suggestions for refugees to camp in Sinai. 

In August, Algerian President Abdelmajid Tebboune promised to send troops to Gaza. Yet, the president and Hamas leaders knew that was only a political statement – Cairo would never grant passage that could potentially bring the war home.

In Ghana, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and Kenya, the sentiment is pro-Israel, particularly in Kenya. Shortly after the outbreak of the war, President William Ruto tweeted that Kenya stood side by side with Israel and condemned the October 7 attack outright. 

One year later, Kenya’s position has not changed, which some have argued is partly informed by the robust economic ties with Tel Aviv, especially in agriculture and the security challenge that al-Shabaab poses to Kenya. 

The authorities believe whatever weakens Hamas weakens al-Shabaab, a terror group that staged more than 10 attacks last June/July alone in eastern Kenya, killing 30 security officers. In Israel’s pursuit of the last Hamas, Kenya feels obliged to take more than a passing interest because a defeated Hamas means less oxygen for its radical sympathisers elsewhere, including al-Shabaab.  

Giant asleep

Nigeria, the continent’s largest economy and its most populous, has offered a muted, somewhat confused response to the Israeli-Hamas war. The official line, worn for use after decades of lip service and repeated at this year’s UNGA, is a two-state solution. That’s also the official position of the African Union (AU). However, the precarious, almost 50-50 Muslim-Christian population leaves the Nigerian government walking on eggshells in Israeli-Palestinian matters. 

It is cautious not to offend the predominantly Muslim North and potentially spark deadly pro-Palestinian sectarian protests. It is also careful not to offend Christian sensibilities in the South, especially a growing evangelical population that considers itself a part of New Testament Israel. 

Over the years, Nigeria has cooled from a radical supporter of liberation struggles on the continent and elsewhere to a somewhat insular patron. It has been subdued by its internal problems of insecurity and economic hardship.

It’s not certain how the Nigerian government would respond to Israel’s current two-pronged war in pursuit of Hamas and Hezbollah, with Iran in the mix. But an escalation might, among other things, affect oil prices, Nigeria’s mainstay, and complicate the already fraught domestic petrol product market. 

Experts have said a repeat of the oil market chaos caused by the Middle East crisis of 1973-74 is unlikely. However, with a far larger population and a barely competitive economy, today’s Nigeria is far from the conditions that made it benefit from the Middle East chaos five decades ago. 

More migration headache

Yet, the price Africa is paying is beyond the reading of its vital economic signs. Of the thousands caught up in Lebanon, the new epicentre of the conflict, many are African migrant workers. Following the escalation of the conflict, the Kenyan government has asked approximately 26,000 nationals in Lebanon to get help if they need to evacuate. 

The governments of Ethiopia (another African country with a significant migrant population in Lebanon), Uganda, Nigeria and South Africa are watching closely in a phase that may worsen the already complicated global migration and humanitarian crisis.

What started as the hunt for the last Hamas a year ago has grown into the pursuit of the last Hezbollah, and now, it seems, to their last supporters as well. However, as I wrote in a previous article, history teaches that war against an idea is unwinnable. Israel’s existence is proof enough if Netanyahu and the remnant hardliners in his cabinet cared to learn.

Untested leverage

Unlike in the 1970s, when few African countries had diplomatic ties with Israel, the country’s footprint on the continent has grown to the point where 44 of 54 countries have recognised Israel’s statehood. 

It’s fair to argue that Netanyahu only listens to Netanyahu. Yet, for whatever it is worth, the continent does not have to wait to pay a much higher price for this war before closing ranks and leveraging its closer ties to pressure Israel to accept a ceasefire. Except, of course, if the closer relationship means nothing. 

The National Orientation Agency (NOA) has dismissed as untrue reports insinuating that the Agency must give permision to citizens before they can use the National Anthem.

The correct submissions of NOA's Director-General, Mallam Lanre Issa-Onilu, during an interview with Radio Kwara is that the Agency as the custodian of national symbols, will issue correct melodies of the National Anthem. He also advocated that those who produce national flags or use them for commercial advertisement purposes should obtain the correct versions from NOA.

As a matter of fact, all state offices of the Agency are currently undertaking programmes aimed at enlightening Nigerians on the lyrics of the reintroduced National Anthem.

For the avoidance of doubt, the new approvals given by the Federal Executive Council (FEC) prescribe that the first stanza of the National Anthem will be sung at all official government programmes, while the entire three stanzas will be used only at special events such as the Democracy Day, opening of parliament et cetera. The third stanza has been designated as national prayer.

In line with this mandate, NOA has released the correct and authentic lyrics of the National Anthem, reintroducing it as part of its initiative to promote the new National Anthem Act signed by the President.

The correct lyrics of the National Anthem are as follows:

Stanza 1
Nigeria, we hail thee
Our own dear native land
Though tribes and tongues may differ
In brotherhood, we stand
Nigerians all, are proud to serve
Our sovereign Motherland.

Stanza 2
Our flag shall be a symbol
That truth and justice reign
In peace or battle, honour’d,
And this we count as gain,
To hand on to our children
A banner without stain.

Stanza 3
O God of all creation
Grant this our one request.
Help us to build a nation
Where no man is oppressed
And so with peace and plenty
Nigeria may be blessed.

NOA therefore calls on all citizens to ignore such misleading reports and freely use the National Anthem, and simultaneously respect and honour the national symbols, which embody our nation’s aspirations and unity.

Paul Odenyi
Deputy Director Press
The National Orientation Agency
Date: Oct 9,2024
Lanre Issa-Onilu

I have seen the screenshot of the text messages that went between Senator Akpabio and the late Ufot Ebong in which Ebong, in his sick bed at Ibom Specialty Hospital, Uyo, acknowledged receipt of $35,000 from the Senate President. The money was meant to assist him seek medical care overseas, but, unfortunately, Ebong passed away before he could be flown abroad. Ebong had served in the Akpabio and Udom Emmanuel administrations. My condolences to the Ebong family and my commendations to the Senate President for his usual kindness. You may not like Akpabio for whatever reasons, but his generosity to his friends and kins is legendary. Ebong was his childhood friend. Around 1984, Ebong lived next door to my elder brother in Calabar, somewhere close to the airport, and that’s when I knew Ebong. During holidays (I was a student at UNN then), part of which I spent with my brother, I would go over to Ebong’s apartment where we spent hours playing scrabble. Akpabio, then a law student at UNICAL and an avid scrabble player, was always there. Ebong was jovial, witty and easy going. I reminded Ebong of those jolly days when I last spoke with him early this year and we laughed over it. I am saddened by his death.

I am also disturbed by the needless controversy surrounding Senator Akpabio’s $35,000 gift to Ebong. While some people claim that the money came too late, others blame Akpabio for releasing the screenshot of their chats in which Ebong thanked Akpabio for his help, for purpose of self-promotion. This controversy is not necessary. Akpabio is a giver and he also loves to be appreciated for it. It is his nature. I know of a few other instances in which the Senate President has extended help to our brothers and sisters in their dire times of need. It is in his character and for that, I commend him.

I am also aware that Gov. Umo Eno met with the PDP stakeholders from Essien Udim LGA yesterday (Wednesday, October 9) at Government House. The Essien Udim delegation was led by the 106-year-old Chief Afangide. Other PDP leaders from other LGAs were also present. The main thrust of the meeting was the Saturday council elections and the controversy that followed the victory of the APC candidate in that LGA. The governor, I understand, appealed to the PDP members from Essien Udim to get over their pain and accept the loss as part of the political process. He gave them assurances and hope that a loss of a local government was not capable of destabilizing the party and promised to make it up to them in several ways. ‘’We can live together and work with our new chairman in peace and harmony’’, he reportedly told the delegation.

The governor did well in meeting with the Essien Udim stakeholders who have been grieving over the loss. I still insist that it was very nice of the governor to allow the APC victory in Essien Udim. In Ika LGA from where Minister Ekperikpe Ekpo hails, APC also won one or two councilor seats.  

The position of the Senate President is of immense strategic and political significance, and we are blessed that one of us is on the seat. Irrespective of our political differences, Akwa Ibom people and the state government have a responsibility to rally around Senator Akpabio and give him the political and moral home-front support. The South West region of APC met over the weekend in Lagos and voted to unanimously support President Tinubu in the face of mounting criticisms over his economic policies. For the same reason, Akwa Ibom should come together and support their own.

At the same time, Senator Akpabio is expected to reciprocate the governor’s good nature and the warmth of the people and bring home democracy dividends. I have written about, and thanked Senator Akpabio, for the forthcoming South-South Development Commission which should be headquartered in Uyo. We need more. What can the Senate President do to actualize Ibom Deep Sea Port? What of all the dilapidated federal roads leading into the state? What of the request for a new army battalion to be sited in Oron which the governor presented to the military authorities in August? Can our Senate President help here?

On a personal level, much is also expected from the Senate President. He should settle his political differences with many APC leaders in the state. Gov. Umo Eno has shown that it is possible and beneficial to go beyond partisan differences and live in peace and mutual respect with one another. Similarly, I beseech Senator Akpabio to reach out to Umana Umana; Atuekong Etiebet; Nsima Ekere; Senator John Akpan Udoedehe; Group Captain Sam Enwang (rtd) and a host of others and make peace with them. It doesn’t speak well of him to have so many people – most of them Ibibio leaders – as foes. It doesn’t speak well of him to be receiving warmth and respect from the governor and the people of the state; and yet he doesn’t seem to be capable of extending such to others. Our Lord Jesus Christ preached against it. may this last quarter of the year bring us peace, joy and harmony.

The National Industrial Court of Nigeria (NICN) held its 2024/2025 Legal Year ceremony yesterday in Abuja. With a retired Justice of Supreme Court, Ejembi Eko as Chairman, I was the guest speaker. Below is a slightly abridged version of my presentation that speaks not only to labour justice and public interest but also the rule of law and the role of Judges in Nigeria.

===========================================================================================================================

I consider it an honour and a privilege to stand before this august gathering as you celebrate the 2024/2025 Legal Year. I expect many of you may be wondering what qualifies me to be here and why a journalist is presenting a paper on labour justice and public interest. Perhaps I should let you in on a secret. I got the invitation for this assignment when I met an energetic man playing ping pong (table tennis) sometime last year. Had I not been introduced to the gentleman before I watched him toss the ball upward with his left hand and strike it fiercely with his right, it would have been difficult for me to believe that he was the Honourable Justice Benedict Kanyip, President of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria (NICN). Even though we exchanged contacts that day, I decided not to dwell too much on the promise because I thought it was one of those spur-of-the-moment decisions people make while in a jolly mood. But early this year, the honourable justice followed up with a call to remind me that I would indeed be the speaker at the 2024/2025 Legal Year ceremony. I cannot thank Justice Kanyip enough for the honour.

Let me also appreciate other Judges of this court. My understanding of the contributions of the NICN to labour jurisprudence in our country has been enriched in recent days. To prepare my paper, I spent considerable time at the Court’s library. And, as it is with most libraries in Nigeria, the environment could be better. But I was fortunate to encounter two dedicated library staff who painstakingly provided me access to relevant materials, including ‘Digest of Labour Cases in Nigeria (1960 to 2012)’ and ‘Digest of Judgements of National Industrial Court (1978 – 2006)’ edited by Oluwole Kehinde with foreword (to both books) written by a former President of this Court, Justice Babatunde Adejumo. These materials, and a few others I browsed through, catalogue hundreds of cases decided by this court to advance the course of justice for workers in Nigeria.

I have been asked to speak on labour justice and public interest. There could not have been a better time to interrogate this topic in Nigeria as both labour and government were recently locked in negotiating an appropriate national minimum wage—the lowest amount of salary that employers of labour, whether in the private or public sector, should earn in the country. After much drama, it is gratifying that the two parties were able to reach a consensus on the issue, despite the fact that the agreed amount cannot even buy a bag of rice in the market.

The situation of workers in Nigeria is further complicated by the fact that those in the informal sector are practically excluded from any form of labour justice. Today, the only avenue for redress for most is to appear on radio programmes. That is how Ahmed Isah, an activist and on-air personality who anchors ‘Brekete Family’ on Human Rights Radio Abuja, has become not only the ‘Ordinary President’ for the vulnerable of our society but also their ‘Chief Justice.’ Such is the flagrant violation of workers’ rights by all levels of government and the private sector that even foreign owned entities operating in Nigeria have been emboldened to treat our people with disrespect. In a clear breach of extant labour laws, many of these companies resort to unwholesome practices that deny their Nigerians workers job security and appropriate benefits. Even where there are statutory compensation provisions for work-related diseases, injuries, disabilities, or death, they are mostly observed in the breach. In several cases, affected workers or their next of kin receive little or no compensation for death or permanent injuries, including when they occurred while carrying out assigned duties.

The concept of Labour justice and public interest are interwoven. Any initiative that engenders fair treatment in the workplace impacts positively on societal wellbeing. Indeed, the United Nations (UN) has on many occasions highlighted the importance of access to justice which essentially means the right to have one’s cause heard before an impartial arbiter. The international reference point for the concept of labour justice, as we are all aware, is the International Labour Organization (ILO) which, in several instruments, enshrines the right of workers to access justice without encumbrance. This includes access to courts and other formal dispute resolution mechanisms in pursuit of effective remedy.

The parameters in any given jurisdiction to measure labour justice include fair wages, which indicates that workers are to be compensated by their employers in a manner commensurate with their output; safe working conditions that guarantee protection from foreseeable danger and defence of their inalienable right to organize protests and negotiate collectively. There are of course several others, including not being discriminated against on the basis of religion, race, gender, age etc. If these parameters encompass the principles and practices that ensure fair treatment and protection of workers in their employment context, it goes without saying that the aim of labour justice is to address power imbalances between employers and workers, and to promote the dignity of labour.

Unfortunately, despite a plethora of legislation and the fact that Nigeria is a signatory to numerous conventions that should guarantee access to justice for workers, the reality is quite different. This can be glimpsed from the way key aspects of labour justice are resolved in our country. Not necessarily to the satisfaction of workers. These include freedom from discrimination, the ability to engage in collective bargaining, modalities for addressing unfair dismissal, among others. This then brings me to the issue of specialized labour court which the NICN represents in Nigeria.

The evolution of industrial courts can be traced to 1806 in France, 1869 in Germany and 1919 in the United Kingdom. But it was not until 1976 that authorities in our country signed on to the idea with the NICN. Established to address labour justice in all its ramifications, the court became functional in 1978. In the early years, the NICN faced several challenges that affected its effectiveness and efficiency. But even when operational, the court provided no reprieve for aggrieved workers for decades as its judgments were unenforceable due to the lack of laws and procedures required of a Superior Court of record.

The problem started with the Supreme Court decision in the case between the National Union of Electricity Employers (N.U.E.E.) and Bureau of Public Enterprises (BPE). The apex court held that, despite the provisions of Decree 47, the NICN had neither exclusive nor coordinate jurisdiction with state high courts. The fact that the court was powerless for about 28 years of its operation was acknowledged on 5^th May 2003 by the then NICN President, Justice Adejumo in a scathing remark. This was the way he put it: “The NICN remained practically moribund. The court sat only in Lagos for those years. It was clearly unknown and its decisions and pronouncements hardly respected.”

The constitutional amendment of 2011 assented to by President Goodluck Jonathan changed the narrative by altering sections 6 and 254 of the 1999 Constitution and including the NICN as a Superior Court of record with coordinate jurisdiction with High Courts. The amendment also expanded the jurisdiction of the court to handle human right cases emanating from the workplace. The court is also saddled with jurisdiction to resolve disputes between the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), Trade Union Congress (TUC) and government.

Before I continue with the issue of labour justice and public interest, let me make a general point about justice administration in Nigeria. It is important because the extent of justice available to workers in any given society is a function of the extent of rule of law available in that society. It is doubtful that citizens as workers can expect a higher degree of labour justice than what is available within the larger society. In her speech at the special session of the Supreme Court commemorating its new Legal Year and the induction of the latest set of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) on 30 September 2024, the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Honourable Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun emphasised that obedience to court orders will, under her watch, be “non-negotiable”. And that “No individual or institution, irrespective of their standing, will be permitted to treat the judgments of our courts with levity or disregard”.

This, indeed, is as it should be in a society governed by ‘rule of law’. But ‘rule of law’ is not the same as ‘rule of judges.’ According to worldjusticeproject.org, “The rule of law is a durable system of laws, institutions, norms and community commitment that delivers four universal principles: accountability, just law, open government, and accessible and impartial justice”. In contrast, ‘rule of judges’ denotes impunity towards the law by the very persons who ordinarily are invested with the functions and responsibilities of upholding ‘rule of law’. It is a situation in which a judge places himself/herself above the law or makes himself/herself the law rather than a servant of the law or shepherd of the ‘rule of law’. Regrettably, the loud and overpowering noise of the latter is becoming definitive of Nigeria’s judiciary in the perception of most people. Nothing gives better expression to that than the statement, “Go to Court” by conscious wrong-doers, often followed by “Go on appeal” by their hand-in-glove judges!

Aside the indiscipline of conflicting judgements, there is also the disgraceful issue of courts of coordinate jurisdiction nullifying one another since forum shopping has been institutionalised in Nigeria. In recent days, we have seen how the judiciary has been dragged into the power struggle between the godfather and his godson in Rivers State. If there is anything to take from what transpired before last Saturday’s local government election in the state, it is the willingness on the part of an alarmingly increasing number of judicial personnel to accept and play the role of hitmen for influential political actors as against serving the interest of the country and the public good. That should also be of serious concern to Justice Kekere-Ekun.

I still cannot fathom how any self-respecting Judge would grant an injunction, using subterfuge to restrain the police from performing their primary responsibility of restoring law and order during an election process. Unfortunately, it is such contrived court orders that the police are ever eager to obey most often against the public interest. (NOTE: After my presentation yesterday, Mr  Nnamonso Ekanem, SAN, said I was wrong on the case of Rivers State, and that the Federal High Court Judge did not restrain the police. He asked me to go and read the Certified True Copy of the judgement. Ekanem was immediately countered by another SAN, Jibrin Samuel Okutepa, who said the Judge indeed restrained the Police in what he described as an affront on the law. Okutepa (who later sent me the CTC of the 45-page judgement) was unsparing of the antics of some judicial officers in the country. Interestingly, shortly before I left the court, a respected retired Jurist whispered to me that my position is indeed unassailable. The Judge not only restrained the police from carrying out their constitutional responsibility, according to the eminent jurist, but he also prevented the Independent National Electoral Commission from providing a voters register that would have aided the conduct of a credible local government election in the state).

Meanwhile, at the rate some Judges are going; they will soon be granting injunctions to spouses who seek to restrain their partners from performing matrimonial duties in ‘The Other Room’. Now that prominent politicians are openly describing judgments emanating from our courts as ‘Kangaroo judgement’, it is incumbent on the National Judicial Commission (NJC) to step in and deal with blatant deviant behaviour among its members. But let’s come back to the issue of labour justice and public interest.

The NICN may have been envisioned as a specialized superior court of record with the aim of having its divisions everywhere in Nigeria, but this vision, in my view, is yet to be achieved.From its website, the NICN currently has twenty-eight (28) divisions outside the Abuja division. This means that eight states are left without any division of the NICN. Regrettably, that includes my state, Kwara, where the presence of the court is no more than a Registry located at 13A Offa Road, Ilorin. This lack of national spread not only raises the issue of awareness and accessibility but also limits the court’s ability to serve all segments of the population effectively.

There is another issue that relates to a crisis of mission, though not of its own making. In creating the NICN in the mid-seventies, the military government at the period envisioned sustainable rapid industrialization of Nigeria which they reasonably believed would make industrial disputes inevitable. For instance, between 1975 and 1985, Nigeria experienced significant industrial growth driven by the oil boom and government-led initiatives aimed at diversifying the economy. This period saw the establishment and expansion of various manufacturing companies across different sectors, including food and beverage, textiles, cement, pharmaceuticals, and more.Unfortunately, that sector is now almost comatose.

I began from the premise that the NICN has done quite a bit to advance labour jurisprudence in Nigeria based on my rudimentary research. But, as attested to by Justice Adejumo, the work of the Court is not known to most Nigerians. Even lawyers are not particularly conversant with it, according to some legal experts. In his book, ‘Rocheba’s Labour Law Manual (with International Conventions of Occupational Health and Safety)’, Enobong Etteh who has edited several Nigeria Labour Law Reports alluded to this. “A good number of the lawyers that appear before the court (NICN) do not appreciate the law and practice of the court. And consequently, they carry on as if what obtains in the regular courts necessarily obtains in the NICN,” Etteh wrote. “This is far from being so as the NICN is a specialised court permitted to regulate its procedures and proceedings as it thinks fit, and is not bound by any rules of evidence, although it may inform itself on any matter in such manner as it thinks just.” 

However, the biggest challenge to labour justice has come from the regular courts. Between 2010 and 2024, the NICN has had a number of its decisions overturned, particularly by the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. These reversals often stemmed from jurisdictional challenges, misinterpretation of labour laws, and procedural issues. I will highlight three of such notable cases and what they mean for labour justice in Nigeria. The first is the case between Skye Bank Plc (now Polaris Bank) and Victor Iwu. The NICN had ruled in favour of the claimant regarding wrongful termination of appointment. But the Supreme Court overturned the NICN decision and clarified that the Court of Appeal has the jurisdiction to hear all civil matters from the NICN, not just those related to fundamental rights.

Considering that there were already two conflicting judgements of the Court of Appeal regarding appealability of the NICN on the issue under reference, this ruling overturned the prevailing belief that decisions of the court were final except in cases involving human rights or criminal matters, thus opening the door for more NICN decisions to be appealed. There are implications for this decision. I know that this may not sound well to lawyers but I am of the view that the NICN should have both original jurisdiction and final say on some issues pertaining to workers. Especially those relating to compensation for injury or disease and wrongful dismissal. Allowing all cases instituted at the NICN to be subject to appeal may not bode well in a country like ours. While it is conceded that the right of appeal may encourage NICN judges to be careful about their decisions in cases before them, some unscrupulous employers could use the right of appeal as a punitive measure or a delay tactic.

The second case is that between Chevron Nigeria Ltd and Mr. Titus Oyegun. While the NICN ruled in favour of the employee in a wrongful termination claim, the Court of Appeal overturned the decision, arguing that the NICN overstepped its jurisdiction by addressing certain contractual matters that should have been handled by the High Court. I am of the opinion that the decision of the Court of Appeal upturning the decision of the NICN should be tested at the Supreme Court. I do not believe it is in the interest of labour justice to exclude contractual matters from the jurisdiction of the industrial court.

In the third case between Arik Air Ltd and Mr Gabriel Igbinigie, theNICN had ordered the reinstatement of the claimant and awarded compensation. The Court of Appeal overturned the decision on grounds that the NICN exceeded its jurisdiction by ordering reinstatement. This was based on the time hallowed labour principle that you cannot force a willing employee on an unwilling employer. I understand the point the appellate court is trying to make but I still do not believe the ruling will serve the end of labour justice. In such circumstances, I would prefer punitive damages and compensation for aggrieved workers as a deterrent to arbitrariness on the part of employers.

The next point I want to make may sound a little bit heavy but there is a perception among some stakeholders that the judges of the NICN tend to be biased, especially in favour of the government. That is understandable since the jurisdiction conferred on the NICN dictates that a good percentage of its cases will involve government as employers of labour. The challenge is that a labour court considered biased may be unhelpful to workers. I must, of course, state here that the allegation of being pro-government cannot be sustained by any credible evidence.

When the federal government secured an injunction restraining the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) from proceeding with its proposed nationwide strike last year, the Congress accused the court of a “continuous weaponisation of the instrument of Exparte injunction in favour of government.” According to the NLC President, Joe Ajaero, “that is against the interests of Nigerian workers.” However, it should be noted that in several instances, the government has also attacked the judgments of the court. I remember the former Governor of Kaduna State, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai saying that one of the biggest mistakes Nigeria made was to establish the NICN, citing instances when judgements were entered against the government in favour of workers. So, if neither the government nor the NLC appear comfortable with the NICN, then the court must be doing something right. However, while the perception of being pro-government may be baseless, it can undermine public confidence in the court’s impartiality and fairness.

Let me now come to the issue of jurisdiction. As the ILO has succinctly put it in their publication, ‘Overview of procedural for access to labour justice in judicial dispute resolution institutions’, access to labour justice should not only be viewed from the perspective of labour courts and the right to have a claim examined by an impartial judge. It should also encompass access to a fair procedural regulation which enables real conditions of equality before recuring to the judiciary. The emerging regime in labour justice globally is ensuring effective labour dispute prevention and resolution, in law and practice. That’s because the notion of access to labour justice, according to the ILO, “encompasses judicial and non-judicial mechanisms and institutions dealing with the prevention and resolution of individual and collective labour disputes.”

Here, I must commend the establishment of the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Centre of the NICN to resolve certain labour related disputes using the process of mediation and/or conciliation. Since an effective labour justice system accommodates other active players, the exclusive jurisdiction of the NICN as guaranteed by the Industrial Act and Constitution may be unhelpful. Exclusive jurisdiction doesn’t, in my view, enhance access to justice for workers. For instance, the history of the labour court in England shows how refusal by the major labour unions to appear before it ultimately led to the labour court ceding the majority of its powers to administrative tribunals.

Meanwhile, I find it disturbing that in conversations about labour justice in Nigeria, there is hardly any thought given to the informal sector. Yet, as of the first quarter of 2023, according to the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) ‘Nigeria Labour Force Survey’, 92.6 per cent of workers in Nigeria were in informal employment. If you exclude agriculture from this sector, going by the survey, we still have 89.4 per cent of our people in informal employment. How can we exclude such a huge percentage of workers from access to justice and social protection and imagine we can develop our society? Take farmers for example. Because of their vocation, they are both employers and employees who feed the nation. Their incapacitation by reason of insecurity and natural disaster has resulted in nationwide shortages of foodstuffs, high cost of food crops and hunger in the land, impacting all Nigerians. Yet, they are excluded from any form of labour justice or social protection.

What the foregoing suggests is that in Nigeria today, labour justice is designed more for the formal sector. We need to redress this anomaly by the instrumentality of law and policies. Can there be a law mandating that at least 75% of the labour justice standard applicable to the formal sector also be made applicable to the informal sector? With that, we can address issues like unwritten contract agreements regarding wages, hours of work, and other indices of labour justice enjoyed by the formal sector. At present, there is no such law. These are some of the issues that should concern the National Assembly whose members seem obsessed with where and how Mr Bobrisky was sleeping when serving his jail term.

I am also aware of the principles of the Common Law of Contract that make some oral contractual agreements enforceable. So, may I ask: Will this court or any tribunal for that matter adjudicate on the hypothetical case of an office clerk whose employer refuses to pay him the meagre amount orally agreed by both parties, and then lays him off after working for 13 months? Will our court not be technically rigid by asking for a document evidencing labour agreement?

To enthrone labour justice, there is need for effective enforcement of labour laws. But it is important to also note that labour laws in Nigeria are complex and with outdated provisions that make their interpretation and application challenging. This complexity has often led to unpredictable judgments and uncertainty in labour relations and justice. There is therefore an urgent need to align these laws with current realities and international labour standards.

As I take my seat, let me briefly speak to the issue of compensation for injury or disease contracted at the workplace. Based on the duty of care to which workers are owed by their employers, the Employee Compensation Act of 2010 provides comprehensive compensation to those who sustain injury from accidents at the workplace. There is a brilliant disquisition of the Act by Mr Ajibola Olaosebikan, a lawyer. “Despite the existence of robust legal frameworks, several challenges persist in the realm of employee compensation in Nigeria. Enforcement of labor laws can be inconsistent, especially in smaller enterprises or informal sectors where oversight is limited” he wroteafter reviewing all the provisions in the Act. “This inconsistency sometimes leads to exploitation and unfair practices, such as inadequate wages or denial of benefits.”

Many countries have devised creative ways by which workers in the informal sector can access justice, especially when in distress and there is no reason why we should not learn from them. In Canada, for instance, they have the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB), an independent trust agency operating under the Ministry of Labour for small businesses that employ staff like nannies, babysitters, gardeners, bar attendants etc. Regulated by the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act (WSIA), it is a collective liability insurance to which employers subscribe. It provides compensation to employees in the event of a workplace accident.

Finally, we must understand that public interest is served when workers are not only fairly treated but also economically empowered. But in a society where there is weak enforcement of labour laws to protect workers, it is easy for employers to evade legal responsibilities. That’s why and how most of the banks and oil sector companies now deploy graduates as casuals who are paid peanuts and deprived of the opportunity to become mainstream workers.

This is an issue that should be addressed by relevant stakeholders.

What the government, at all levels in Nigeria, must understand is that a system that ensures labour justice also fosters cohesion as addressing grievances in the workplace can prevent social unrest and promote harmony. To the extent that public interest is tied to ensuring a humane interpretation of socio-economic rights, relevant authorities must ensure that workers’ rights are respected, fair wages are paid, and safe working conditions provided. All of these are geared towards balancing the rights of workers with the economic and social well-being of society as a whole. Prioritizing labour justice, therefore, is a public interest imperative.

• You can follow me on my Twitter handle, @Olusegunverdict and on www.olusegunadeniyi.com   

We are dismayed by the latest increase in the pump price of petrol. It looks like the only thing this government is known for is increase in the pump price of petrol without commensurate capacity of Nigerians or mitigatory measures.

Even following the logic of market forces , we find it an aberration that a private company (NNPCL) is the one fixing prices and projecting itself as a hegemonic monopoly.

We challenge the government to go to the drawing board and present us with a blueprint for an inclusive economic growth and national development instead of this spasmodic ad hocism and palliative policy.

It needs no stating the fact that the latest wave of increase has grossly altered the calculations of Nigerians once again at a time they were reluctantly coming to terms with their new realities.

It will further deepen poverty as production capacities dip, more jobs lost with multidimensional negative effects.

In light of this, we urge the government to immediately reverse this rate hike as previous increases did not produce any good result. People only got poorer.

But more fundamentally, the government should be bold enough to tell Nigerians in advance the destination it wants to take the country.

 Comrade Joe Ajaero

          President

As Professor Ishaq Oloyede turns 70 tomorrow, October 10, I pay a special tribute to this astute administrator, educator, author, and scholar, currently the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) Registrar.

As the former Vice Chancellor of the University of Ilorin, Prof. Oloyede's invaluable contributions to the nation through academia and public-sector administration have significantly impacted the academic community.

His impactful tenure at the University of Ilorin, during which he introduced landmark ideas and innovations that helped the institution attain enviable heights, is on record.

Through patriotic dedication and commitment to his craft, Prof Oloyede imparted knowledge and character to thousands of students who underwent his teaching during his glorious and impactful academic career.

Indeed, the bedrock of development lies in education. Developing nations, including Nigeria, are in dire need of more scholars like Prof. Oloyede. His selfless sacrifices and innovative approaches to learning and leadership give hope for a brighter future.

Perhaps more remarkable is Prof. Oloyede's transformative leadership at JAMB. He pioneered and sustained a series of reforms and technological innovations that have made the admission process in Nigeria transparent and credible.

In his eight years of stewardship at the board, thus far, Prof. Oloyede has demonstrated an uncommon commitment to financial integrity and accountability in public service. He has also raised the bar in administration and management.

I am proud of Prof. Oloyede's accomplishments.

The nation owes the Professor of Islamic Jurisprudence a debt of gratitude for transforming JAMB, traditionally a non-revenue-generating government agency, into a consistent contributor to the national treasury through efficient financial management. His contributions to JAMB are invaluable and greatly appreciated.

On this occasion of his 70th birthday, I join members of the academic community, students, JAMB staff, and well-wishers in celebrating this scholar who, in words and deeds, has also done a lot to propagate the Islamic religion.

I pray that Almighty Allah will continue to honour the distinguished professor with health, wisdom and strength to serve the nation for many more years.

In Akwa Ibom state, the political climate is gradually evolving in a manner not seen since the creation of the state and the return of democracy in 1999. Under Gov. Umo Eno, the state is experiencing a more harmonious and cordial relationship between the government and members of opposition parties. It's quite unprecedented.

Politics in the state had always been a winner-takes-all in which the ruling party (PDP) ensured that the perks and lucre were shared only among its members .

There was always a wide gap in political and social status between those whose party was in power and those in opposition. The relationship so strained that attending social function organized by a member of the opposition party could attract sanctions from the party in power for such member(s).

That was the norm until the election of Pastor Umo Eno as the governor of Akwa Ibom state in 2023. Pastor Eno, who described himself as the least qualified for the exalted seat, faced many legal hurdles before a big relief came from the supreme court.

Determined to bring a new lease of life to the politics of the state, Eno publicly announced his desire to embrace every son and daughter of Akwa Ibom state who is ready to add value to the growth and development of the state, irrespective of his social or political inclination.

To match words with action, he personally extended olive branch to all those who worked against his ambition during the election, an invitation that rattled many members of the ruling PDP because it was a complete departure from the partisan politics of the past.

The high point of the governor's reach-out was when he, along with some members of his cabinet and stakeholders of his party, visited the Abuja residence of Chief Godswill Akpabio, shortly after he was elected Senate President.

At the reception party that followed, the governor pledged his readiness to work with Akpabio for the overall interest and development of the state.

Few weeks later, he formally received the Senate President, a prominent leader of the All progressives Congress, at the executive chambers of the government house and later feted the Senate President and his entourage to an elaborate dinner same evening at the banquet hall of Government House.This became a complete turning point in the politics of the state and, for the first time, Akwa Ibom people really understood the meaning of politics of inclusion.

In reverence to the Senate President, the governor ensures that his government gives full compliments to the Senate President anytime he visits the state.

Early this year, Gov. Eno attended the reception organized for the Senate President by the people of the Ikot Ekpene senatorial district with his retinue of commissioners, aides and supporters to add color to the event. An elated Akpabio praised the governor for the synergy he is building to ensure peace and development in the state. Umo Eno's predecessor has a very frosty relationship with Akpabio. 

On countless times either Senator Akpabio or his dear wife has attended events organized by the governor which was a complete departure to the politics of the past that was bedeviled by lack of tolerance and zero cooperation with opposition party members in the state.

Only recently, the governor lost his beautiful wife of over 38 years to the cold hands of death and Chief Akpabio was among the first sympathizers to visit the bereaved governor and consoled him.

Last week after months of preparations for the local government councils election in the state, political pundits predicted a possible clash of interest between the governor and the APC leader. Senator Akpabio, knowing the intrigues that involve local government councils election nationwide, had played down the expectations of his party on the outcomes of the vote.

Records show that its always a field day for the ruling party in each state and no compromise. However, Umo Eno's Political Inclusion saw a complete departure in Akwa Ibom state by surrendering the Senate President's local government council to him and further letting the Minister of State for Petroleum (gas), Ekperikpe Ekpo, to have some councillors in his Ika council area.

Political analysts see the latest compromise as a well designed strategy to further consolidate not just the relationship between the Senate President and the governor, but to pave way to the 2027 politics. Analysts now believe that both the governor and the Senate President should be reelected in 2027 so as to consolidate the new era of inclusion, harmony and development in the state.

Speaking recently on his relationship with the Senate President and APC at a press conference in Uyo, Pastor Umo Eno highlighted that the peace, growth and development of the state remain his priority. 

He maintained that partisan politics ends after election and governance must take centre stage if the state must make any meaningful progress, stressing his willingness to work with any son or daughter of Akwa ibom state irrespective of political inclination.

The political adviser to the governor Dr Godwin Ntukudeh who represented the governor during the 2024 birthday party of the immediate past State Chairman of Young Progressive Party (YPP) in Akwa state, Pastor Nyenime Andy, said the governor insisted that the opposition leader be honored on his day because he is a prominent Akwa Ibom son who has and still contributing his quota to the development of the state. The governor presented him with a beautiful birthday gift.

Mr Aniekan Umana, a former member House of Representatives and Media Consultant to the governor told Journalists in many of the venues where free foods were being distributed by the state government through Bulk Purchase Agency recently that the governor had warned that the food must cut across partisan party lines to every deserved indigene as hunger knows no party or association.

Mr. Iniobong Ekong, a Commissioner for lands and town planning in the state, described governor Umo Eno's style of leadership as very unique and outstanding, stressing that the governor puts the interests of the state far above any personal or partisan interest.

Senator Ekong Sampson who represents Akwa ibom south in the Senate said the political inclusion engendered by the governor has ensured not just peace in the state but rapid development as Akwa ibom people in both federal level and state work in synergy with the common interests of ensuring that the state soars in all ramifications.

Today Akwa ibom state under the leadership of governor Umo Eno has not only demystified government through unparalleled show of love and compassion to the vulnerable persons across the state and his desire to erode completely the barrier created by partisan politics after election which hinders good governance is glaring and receiving wide applause and commendations across party lines.

2027 is fast approaching and if his style of governance and the tempo at which he is copting every willing to work Akwa ibom indigene into his administration at different levels irrespective of political party affiliation is sustained, then his return to the hilltop mansion may be a mere walk over on his would be opponents.

The alarm in Nigeria’s oil and gas industry was first sounded by Mr. Tony Elumelu, the chairman of Heirs Holding.

In 2021, Elumelu invested over $1.1 billion to acquire a 45% stake in the OML 17 oil drilling asset, a venture in which Shell, Total, and Eni relinquished their shares, leaving the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation Ltd (NNPCL) with the remaining 55% on behalf of Nigerians.

To his dismay, in 2022, Elumelu discovered that only a small portion of the crude oil produced from his wells and fed into the Escravos pipeline actually reached its intended destination. The majority of the crude was being stolen by oil thieves who had mastered the technique of illegally tapping into the Escravos pipeline.

It is widely known that the criminal siphoning of our crude oil into vessels, which are then transported to unknown locations by thieves, is robbing Nigeria of desperately needed foreign exchange from oil sales. This theft has severe consequences for the country’s economy.

In a recent interview with the Financial Times of London, Tony Elumelu expressed his frustration that oil theft continues to account for about 18% of production. He emphasized the seriousness of the issue, saying, “This is oil theft, not something small like stealing a bottle of Coke. The government should know who is behind this and should inform us. In the U.S., when Donald Trump was shot at, the authorities quickly identified the assailant. Our security agencies should be able to tell us who is stealing our oil. How can vessels enter our territorial waters without our knowledge?”

In what seems like response to Elumelu’s challenge to Nigeria’s security agencies, a special task force was established by the Chief of Defense Staff, General Chris Musa, to combat the oil theft syndicate. The task force has achieved some success, allowing the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation Ltd (NNPCL) to project an increase in oil production from the current estimate of 1.3 million barrels to 2 million barrels next year.

Alhaji Aliko Dangote, another prominent investor in Nigeria’s oil industry, also voiced concerns about issues in the downstream sector. Dangote, who recently launched a $19.5 billion refinery with a capacity of 650,000 barrels per day, has faced difficulties due to a lack of crude oil supply. Mr. Davakumar Edwin, Vice President of Dangote Refinery, accused International Oil Companies (IOCs) of starving the refinery of crude oil feedstock, which has delayed the supply of petrol to the Nigerian market. Edwin stated, “Aside from Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC Ltd), to date, we have only purchased crude directly from one other local producer (Sapetro). All other producers refer us to their international trading arms.”

He further explained, “For instance, in April, we paid $96.23 per barrel for a cargo of Bonga crude grade, excluding transport. The price included $90.15 for dated Brent, $5.08 for NNPC’s premium (NSP), and a $1 trader premium. Meanwhile, we bought WTI at a price of $90.15 for dated Brent plus a $0.93 trader premium, including transport. When NNPC later lowered its premium based on market feedback, some traders began asking us for a premium of up to $4 million over and above the NSP for a cargo of Bonny Light. Data from platforms like Platts and Argus shows that the prices offered to us are significantly higher than market rates. We had to escalate this issue to the NUPRC.”

Alhaji Aliko Dangote, President and Founder of Dangote Group, echoed Edwin’s concerns but clarified that the NNPC is doing its best. He noted, “Some of the IOCs are struggling to provide us with crude. Everyone is accustomed to exporting, and nobody wants to stop exporting.”

Also, as if in response, President Bola Tinubu has formed a committee led by Finance Minister Wale Edun. This committee has been tasked with developing a framework that will allow crude oil to be sold in naira to local refineries, starting with the Dangote Refinery. Following discussions with stakeholders, the committee has reportedly set a target for next month to begin producing petrol locally, which would help alleviate the pressure on the national treasury caused by the need to provide foreign exchange for petrol imports.

The expected output from the Dangote Refinery could also relieve Nigerians from the dual burden of not only paying high prices for petrol but also wasting valuable time queuing for fuel—an issue that many hope President Tinubu’s intervention will resolve permanently.

It is noteworthy that while Tony Elumelu is shocked by the brazen crude oil theft in the downstream sector, which is causing significant revenue loss to both his company and the country, Aliko Dangote is facing challenges from International Oil Companies (IOCs) that are withholding crude oil feedstock from his refinery. This ultra-modern facility is crucial for ending Nigeria’s reliance on petrol imports, which have long been a major component of the country’s import expenses, especially as the government has been subsidizing petrol prices for years.

These two significant challenges, which have caused sleepless nights for these two indigenous multi-billionaire investors in the oil and gas industry, are critical. If resolved, they have the potential to transform Nigeria’s socioeconomic development from a negative to a positive trajectory.

Fortunately, the outspoken criticism of industry irregularities by these two relatively new entrants into the oil sector is prompting much-needed reforms. The industry is currently undergoing what could be called a facelift through the strengthening of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA), which was passed into law in 2021 but has yet to be fully enforced.

These issues underscore why  understanding the toxic international petroleum politics in Nigeria, discussed in detail in this piece, should concern all Nigerians. Moreover, it is crucial to recognize that the oil and gas sector is the backbone of Nigeria’s economy, and we must protect it fiercely. The high cost of living crisis triggered by President Bola Tinubu’s removal of the petrol subsidy on May 29 last year highlights the central role that crude oil and its derivatives play in our economy and daily lives.

A question likely on the minds of some readers is whether the current upheavals in the oil and gas industry are new issues. The reality is that these challenges have existed since crude oil was first discovered in 1957 and its exploration began in Oloibiri, now part of Bayelsa State. However, the reason these issues—such as crude oil theft and the allocation of oil for local refining—are now receiving more attention is because private investors, who place a high value on accountability, are now involved in the industry.

In the past, when the oil and gas business was solely a matter between the government and International Oil Companies (IOCs), efficiency was not a priority for those on the government’s side. But now, with private investors like Tony Elumelu and Aliko Dangote—who have invested $1.1 billion in oil exploration and $19.5 billion in refining, respectively—these entrepreneurs are determined to protect their investments and ensure a return on their bold ventures.

Faced with the harsh realities and absurdities of the industry, both Elumelu and Dangote became increasingly frustrated when their investment plans were threatened by unexpected saboteurs. Their concern for their investments contrasts sharply with the often indifferent attitude of public servants, who traditionally did not prioritize Nigeria’s 55% equity in joint ventures with IOCs, which Elumelu has now acquired the 45% hitherto held by the transnational oil corporation.This same lack of concern for protecting Nigeria’s interests in crude oil production sharing agreements is why there has been no proper metering system to accurately measure the volume of crude oil pumped into pipelines or shipped abroad until private investors like Dangote entered the scene with his refinery, capable of refining at least half of Nigeria’s present crude oil output.

So, rather than viewing the disruptions caused by the agitations by Elumelu and Dangote as problematic, I see them as opportunities. Their involvement signals a positive shift in the industry as they justifiably questioned what could have happenned to their substantial financial commitments in oil exploration and refining, if the sector was not properly sorted by government. In my view ,Elumelu and Dangote can be seen as catalysts for change in an industry long plagued by complexities and absurdities. Indeed their efforts are beginning to help clean up or sanitize the industry, reinforcing the idea that private sector involvement introduces greater efficiency compared to government-driven operations burdened by bureaucracy.

Most Nigerians would likely be shocked to learn that the lack of ownership mentality among officials responsible for national assets—an attitude reflecting a deep-seated lack of patriotism—is partly to blame for the fact that four federal government-owned refineries have been non-functional for nearly two decades. Equally alarming is the finding by a National Assembly committee that, despite the federal government investing up to $25 billion in public funds over the past decade for the turnaround maintenance of these four refineries, not a single liter of petroleum product has been produced. This situation is appalling, scandalous, and regrettable.

The same lack of accountability and ownership is also why crude oil theft continues to flourish, despite the NNPCL’s claim in its 2023 financial report to have spent around N1.8 trillion on securing its extensive oil and gas assets. Yet, millions of barrels of crude oil are still being stolen in massive ocean-going vessels without detection, contributing to Nigeria’s recent inability to meet its OPEC production quota.

It may surprise some readers to learn that the dysfunction of these four government-owned refineries is also due in part to sabotage, carried out by international organizations in collusion with Nigerian public servants embedded in the crude oil exploration and export value chain, particularly within the NNPC Ltd., which is responsible for importing petrol into Nigeria.

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s revelation adds another layer of complexity. He shared that during his presidency, he urged International Oil Companies (IOCs) to establish refineries in Nigeria, but they refused, citing rampant corruption in the sector. Obasanjo recounted that Shell, for example, declined his offer to take equity participation and manage Nigeria’s refineries, arguing that the refineries had not been properly maintained. Shell’s reasoning was clear: “There’s too much corruption with the way our refinery is run and maintained. And they didn’t want to get involved in such a mess.”

While Obasanjo viewed the IOCs’ rejection as an indictment of Nigerian corruption—a narrative often pushed by the Western world to make Africans blame themselves for the continent’s underdevelopment—I would argue that this refusal was actually a strategic move by the IOCs. As agents of imperialist interests, their primary goal has always been to extract crude oil and other raw materials from Africa, particularly Nigeria, for the industrialization of their home countries, rather than genuinely supporting African industrialization—a promise they frequently make but seldom fulfill, often deceiving those who are unaware of their true intentions.

Most Nigerians would likely be shocked to learn that the lack of ownership mentality among officials responsible for national assets—an attitude reflecting a deep-seated lack of patriotism—is partly to blame for the fact that four federal government-owned refineries have been non-functional for nearly two decades. Equally alarming is the finding by a National Assembly committee that, despite the federal government investing up to $25 billion in public funds over the past decade for the turnaround maintenance of these four refineries, not a single liter of petroleum product has been produced. This situation is appalling, scandalous, and regrettable.

The same lack of accountability and ownership is also why crude oil theft continues to flourish, despite the NNPCL’s claim in its 2023 financial report to have spent around N1.8 trillion on securing its extensive oil and gas assets. Yet, millions of barrels of crude oil are still being stolen in massive ocean-going vessels without detection, contributing to Nigeria’s recent inability to meet its OPEC production quota.

It may surprise some readers to learn that the dysfunction of these four government-owned refineries is also due in part to sabotage, carried out by international organizations in collusion with Nigerian public servants embedded in the crude oil exploration and export value chain, particularly within the NNPC Ltd., which is responsible for importing petrol into Nigeria.

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s revelation adds another layer of complexity. He shared that during his presidency, he urged International Oil Companies (IOCs) to establish refineries in Nigeria, but they refused, citing rampant corruption in the sector. Obasanjo recounted that Shell, for example, declined his offer to take equity participation and manage Nigeria’s refineries, arguing that the refineries had not been properly maintained. Shell’s reasoning was clear: “There’s too much corruption with the way our refinery is run and maintained. And they didn’t want to get involved in such a mess.”

While Obasanjo viewed the IOCs’ rejection as an indictment of Nigerian corruption—a narrative often pushed by the Western world to make Africans blame themselves for the continent’s underdevelopment—I would argue that this refusal was actually a strategic move by the IOCs. As agents of imperialist interests, their primary goal has always been to extract crude oil and other raw materials from Africa, particularly Nigeria, for the industrialization of their home countries, rather than genuinely supporting African industrialization—a promise they frequently make but seldom fulfill, often deceiving those who are unaware of their true intentions.

Before delving deeper, it’s important to recall that oil and gas were discovered in commercial quantities in Oloibiri, modern-day Bayelsa State, in 1957. For years, Nigeria exported crude oil exclusively until the first refinery was established in Port Harcourt in 1965. Back then, all refineries were government-owned, and it was within the government’s prerogative to allocate 445,000 barrels per day (bpd) for local refining at the NNPC-operated facilities.

At the time, everything was managed within the government framework, which only required setting aside the 445,000 bpd needed by the four refineries located in the Niger Delta and Kaduna. Two of these refineries are in Port Harcourt with a combined refining capacity of 210,000 bpd, one in Warri with a 125,000 bpd capacity, and the fourth in Kaduna with a 110,000 bpd capacity.

Initially, the allocated crude oil came from the volume produced by International Oil Companies (IOCs), whose parent companies are based in Europe and Asia. However, today, there are multiple indigenous crude oil producers with significant capacity, as well as a growing number of local private refineries with substantial capacity, making the 445,000 barrels set aside for local refining insufficient.

Isn’t it remarkable that, aside from the persistent issue of crude oil theft, another challenge has been the shortage of crude oil for local refining? Yet, if all goes well, these two long-standing and seemingly insurmountable challenges in the oil and gas industry may soon be relegated to history.

In truth, the primary mission of the IOCs has always been to extract natural resources from Africa to fuel the industrial revolution in Europe, which began with the invention of the loom machine by Jeane-Marie Jacquard in 1804 and the steam engine by James Watt in 1765. Extracting crude oil for refining abroad is part of the agenda set during the Berlin Conference of 1884-85, where Africa was partitioned into territories for European powers under the guidance of Otto Von Bismarck, the German Prime Minister.

As these newly created territories were exploited for raw materials in the past, the current practice of exporting crude oil and other resources to Europe is an old habit that IOCs are reluctant to abandon. This resistance is evident in their opposition to President Bola Tinubu’s directive to sell oil to local refineries in naira. The IOCs seem intent on sabotaging efforts to achieve energy independence, citing commitments to overseas buyers as an excuse.

Given that the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) took nearly two decades (13 years) to materialize and the Dangote Refinery took about seven years to build, why did the IOCs not anticipate that exporting all of Nigeria’s crude oil would no longer be viable? It’s telling that the multinational corporations were aware of the PIA’s implications, as evidenced by their divestment from onshore assets in favor of offshore operations. Yet, they continued to forward-sell Nigeria’s crude oil to foreign buyers, fully aware that the country had committed, through the PIA, to becoming more energy independent.

The primary reason for this situation is that it’s more profitable for the International Oil Companies (IOCs) to export crude oil to their home countries, where it is refined into products like PMS, DPK, AGO, and NAFTA. These products are then sold back to Africa at significantly higher prices. This practice has been the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) of the colonial powers for a long time. As a result, they find it difficult to change their approach and sell crude oil to Nigerian refineries instead.

This continued extraction and export of raw materials from Africa aligns with the imperialist agenda of European countries. However, this long-standing practice (regarding crude oil refining) has been disrupted by the establishment and commissioning of the Dangote Refinery in Lagos last year, much to the dismay of these colonial exploiters.

To better understand the challenges Nigeria is facing, consider the following scenario: IOCs extract crude oil from Nigeria and export it to their home countries at relatively low prices (ranging from $37 per barrel in the 1980s to the current $80-$100 per barrel). There, the crude is refined and then sold back to Nigeria at several times the original cost per barrel. This process not only creates jobs and boosts the economies of the IOCs’ home countries, but it also leaves Nigeria with high unemployment among its youth and environmental degradation due to oil and gas exploration. This dynamic is why Nigeria often experiences a trade deficit, benefiting the home countries of the IOCs.

To further illustrate this point, let’s do a bit of math to compare the price of exported crude oil with the cost of imported petroleum products in Nigeria. A barrel of crude oil, which is equivalent to 42 U.S. gallons or 159 liters, is priced between $80 and $100. In contrast, the current landing cost of a liter of refined petrol imported into Nigeria is at least N1,117 per liter. Although comparing these figures can be challenging due to the different units of measurement—crude oil in barrels and refined products in liters—it highlights the significant markup and the opaque nature of the pricing, making the disparity between crude oil prices and refined product costs difficult to fully grasp.

For those willing to dig deeper, let’s compare the selling price of a barrel of crude oil—currently just $80, the price at which we export it overseas—with the N1,117 per liter landing cost at which we import the 159 liters contained in that same barrel. A quick comparison reveals that, as a net exporter of crude oil, Nigeria is at a significant disadvantage.

This comparison helps explain why our economy is struggling and why it can no longer sustain the burdensome petrol subsidy. It’s clear that the scenario outlined above is a major factor behind Nigeria’s financial deficit, which exceeds N120 trillion.

Given this reality, it’s crucial for us to support and encourage Aliko Dangote not to sell his refinery to the NNPCL, despite his threat to do so. This came after Alhaji Farouk Ahmed, CEO of the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDRA), a subsidiary of NNPCL, wrongly accused Dangote Refinery of attempting to replace the national oil giant as a monopoly.

Moreover, we should encourage other business leaders, such as Chief Mike Adenuga of Conoil, Mr. Femi Otedola of Geregu, (who has been involved in and out of the oil industry), Sahara Energy’s Kola Adeshina, Aiteo’s Benedict Peters, Nestoil’s Ernest Azudialu, and other well resourced Nigerians, to invest more significantly in the sector. This would ensure that Nigerians are fully involved in the entire value chain—from exploration to refining, shipping, and even gas processing, where Julius Rone is making strides with his UTM Offshore.

Remarkably, Alhaji Samad Rabiu, owner of BUA cement, is also reportedly constructing a refinery of considerable scale. This could lead to a situation where Nigeria has the capacity to process crude oil into petrol in excess, much like how the country has become a net exporter of cement, with Dangote Cement and BUA Cement, dominating the African market and keeping foreign competitors like Lafarge and Flour Mills Cement on their toes.

Already , it is a tribute to the entrepreneurship of Nigerians that about five (5) Nigerian banks have spread their footprints into the African landscape with thriving subsidiaries in full bloom.

At this point, I believe that continuing to present additional facts and figures to  justify the need for Nigeria, nay Africa’s independence from being an appendage to other economies and regions would be unnecessary. Rather readers should reflect on the situation and realize that, despite the challenges, our country is on the brink of a significant transformation in the oil and gas sector. So, it should be clear that halting the export of our crude oil and increasing local refining capacity is crucial for job creation, boosting foreign exchange earnings, and enhancing our GDP.

Currently, there are five fully operational modular refineries: Aradel in Port Harcourt, WalterSmith in Imo

State , Edo Refinery and Duport Midstream in Edo State, and OPAC in Delta State, with a combined processing capacity of less than 20,000 barrels per day. These smaller refineries are expected to benefit from President Bola Tinubu’s new directive to sell the 445,000 barrels per day of crude oil reserved for local refining in naira. It is the crude oil reserrve referenced above that was providing the supply for the four NNPCL refineries, which have been non-functional for over a decade despite consuming over $25 billion in turnaround maintenance, without producing even a single liter of petrol.

Hopefully , the present administration would see the wisdom in my  advocacy for the sale of the ailing government refineries to private sector players who would operate them more efficiently as canvassed  in my numerous media interventions over the past decade.

After providing a historical background to connect the past with the current state of the oil and gas industry in Nigeria, including the international factors exacerbating the local refining capacity crisis, it’s time to address the way forward.

As already underscored, International Oil Companies (IOCs) seem to struggle with changing their longstanding business model of extracting raw materials from Africa and processing them into finished products in Europe or Asia. This situation reinforces the theme of my upcoming book, “Africa Exporting Wealth, Importing Poverty,” with the subtitle: “Are Africans Thinking or Sinking?” The book details how the West has systematically underdeveloped Africa by exploiting its natural and human resources, from the era of the slave trade to colonialism, neo-colonialism, and the ongoing practice of imperialism encapsulated in unfair trade practices with Africa as the underdog and victim.

The current conflict between Aliko Dangote, NNPCL officials, and IOCs has exposed how Africa continues to be stripped of its resources. This confrontation represents one of the final struggles of African entrepreneurs with the awareness and determination to resist the ongoing exploitation by Western powers.

The environmental devastation caused by irresponsible resource exploitation in Africa, such as the irreversible damage in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) due to mining, is well-documented. Belgium, the colonial ruler, left the DRC in a blighted state, a situation that persists today. It’s within this broader intellectual framework that I analyze the dispute between NNPCL executives, IOCs, and Dangote Refineries over Nigeria’s control of its petroleum resources.

Through this lens, I hope Nigerians will gain a deeper understanding of the conflict surrounding local petrol refining, which has been oversimplified by some analysts as a lack of planning by Dangote Refinery. In reality, it also stems from a rivalry between two Kano State natives—Aliko Dangote and Samad Rabiu—that has spilled over into the oil industry and society. Though a simplified view, it remains a valid observation.

Rather than engaging in buttonh  heads, the two illustrious kano indigenes Aliko Dangote and Samad Rabiu need to start collaborating and stop sabotaging each other.

In recent times, Nigeria’s economic landscape has been far from promising. With the rising cost of living, increasing inflation, and the general hardship felt by the masses, citizens are growing impatient. Yet, amid this deepening economic crisis, a familiar refrain has emerged from politicians, public figures, and even religious leaders: “Be patient with Tinubu.” This phrase seems to have become the golden ticket for those seeking to curry favor with the president, serving as a passport to earning his goodwill.

The question that remains is whether this call for patience is born out of genuine concern for the nation or a strategic move by political opportunists. In a country where political loyalty often translates into personal gain, it seems that advocating patience has become the new currency for positioning oneself favorably with President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

Over the past months, we have witnessed a surge in politicians and influential voices stepping forward with similar messages. From cabinet members to public figures, the script is almost identical: “Nigerians should be patient; Tinubu has a plan, and the results will come.” These individuals present Tinubu as a visionary whose long-term strategy requires sacrifice and endurance. Yet, to the average Nigerian grappling with hunger and economic instability, such messages can feel far removed from reality.

It is no coincidence that these voices are predominantly those of individuals with a vested interest in aligning with the government. Pleading for patience in the face of national hardship seems to be the latest badge of loyalty, a strategic move that signals unwavering support for Tinubu’s leadership.

For instance, several top officials, including governors and ministers, have taken to the media to urge Nigerians to remain hopeful, often portraying Tinubu as the man with the right solutions to Nigeria’s problems. Whether it is during a public address or through media interviews, this narrative of patience has become an essential talking point for those looking to solidify their position in the president’s good books.

Nigeria’s political history is rife with instances of similar calls for patience during challenging times. From military regimes to civilian administrations, leaders have often asked the people to “tighten their belts” or “endure” for the sake of future prosperity. Under such regimes, however, the promised prosperity rarely materialized, leaving Nigerians disillusioned and discontented.

The Tinubu administration, despite entering office with significant public support, is now grappling with similar challenges. Economic reforms, the removal of fuel subsidies, and other policies meant to stimulate growth have instead resulted in widespread suffering. This has left many questioning when the promised benefits will materialize. The growing frustration of the masses is met with a wave of loyalists urging for more patience, a familiar playbook.

In fact, this strategy closely mirrors tactics used by previous administrations, where political figures leaned on patience as a buffer against growing unrest. But with Nigeria’s economic landscape worsening, the call for endurance rings hollow for many who are unable to feed their families, afford basic necessities, or access adequate healthcare. The patience many politicians are asking for may not be a viable option for ordinary citizens bearing the brunt of the government’s policies.

In Nigerian politics, being aligned with the government of the day often translates to political and economic rewards. Appointments, contracts, and other forms of patronage are distributed to those who show loyalty and support. It is within this framework that we can understand why so many individuals are eager to be seen as champions of Tinubu’s leadership. For many politicians, pledging loyalty is not just about political survival, it is a path to personal gain.

Publicly urging the people to be patient with Tinubu is a calculated move, designed to showcase loyalty while downplaying the real concerns of the populace. However, the message often comes across as disconnected from the everyday struggles of Nigerians. It is one thing to ask for patience, but it is another to fully understand the depth of the suffering Nigerians are currently enduring.

Political figures calling for calm are often insulated from the worst of the economic turmoil. They do not face the same struggles with rising food prices, soaring transportation costs, or a depreciating naira. Many of them live in a bubble, far removed from the realities on the ground. To these elites, patience may seem like a reasonable request, but for ordinary Nigerians, patience has a breaking point.

It is important to ask whether these calls for patience are truly genuine or simply a political tactic. Are these leaders genuinely concerned about the well-being of the masses, or are they more interested in maintaining their proximity to power? For many Nigerians, the repeated promises of future prosperity are beginning to sound like empty platitudes.

What Nigerians are craving is not just patience but transparency and tangible progress. They want to see clear, concrete steps toward economic recovery. They want the government to acknowledge their suffering and take swift action to alleviate it. Empty calls for patience, without corresponding action, only serve to deepen the frustration of the populace.

In contrast, a government that responds to the needs of its citizens and communicates its plans clearly would likely find that people are more willing to endure hardship if they feel included in the process. Right now, that connection between the government and the people seems to be fraying.

For President Tinubu, the challenge is not just one of economic policy but one of trust. He must navigate the fine line between asking for patience and delivering results. While loyalists may continue to push the narrative that “patience is needed,” the president’s ultimate legacy will be shaped by his ability to address the urgent needs of Nigerians. Political favor may be won through calls for patience, but the hearts of the people can only be won through action.

If Tinubu’s administration is to weather the storm, it will need to do more than lean on loyalists to pacify the public. It must demonstrate a clear and decisive path forward. And it must show that patience, if asked for, is accompanied by real progress that benefits the masses, not just the elites.

While patience has become the passport to currying favor with Tinubu, for many Nigerians, the question is: How long can they afford to be patient? For those struggling to make ends meet, patience feels like a luxury they can no longer afford. And if the government does not act swiftly to alleviate their suffering, the reservoir of patience may soon run dry.

Ultimately, the success of Tinubu’s administration will not be determined by how many politicians call for patience, but by how effectively the government addresses the mounting economic challenges. Patience may be a virtue, but for a country in crisis, it cannot be the only answer.