By Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN

According to the learned authors of Merriam-Webster online dictionary, a deputy is ‘a person appointed as a substitute with power to act’ or ‘a second in command or assistant who usually takes charge when his or her superior is absent’.

Collins dictionary captures it in a broader sense when it defines the deputy as ‘the second most important person in an organization such as a business or government department.

In the business world, there is not so much controversy or confusion on the role of deputies as this is most often defined and guarded in order to preserve the succession line. It becomes easy for the deputy to transform himself into the substantive office as he must have had enough time to understudy his predecessor-in-office.

This is not the case with politics however. Section 141 of the Constitution creates the office of the Vice-President while section 142 creates a joint ticket for the President and the Vice-President. The same thing applies to Governors and Deputy Governors.

However, the constitution creates absolute powers in the President and the Governor to the extent that many have referred to the offices of the Vice-President and the Deputy Governor as spare tyres, only needed when the substantive office is vacant.

The experience in Nigeria is that generally speaking, most substantive political office holders find it very difficult to work with their deputies. Many reasons can be adduced for this totalitarian mentality.

There is an entitlement mentality by the holder of the office, who in most cases was a lone ranger when he was bidding for the ticket. This is why you hardly have any candidate for the offices of President or Governor who will announce his running mate prior to the primary election of his political party.

There is a need for the political parties to fill this gap and insert a provision similar to section 142 of the Constitution which prescribes that a candidate for the office of President must nominate a running mate from the same political party.

Once you leave the candidate alone for the primary election without a substantive running mate, he becomes like the hunter who went gaming and is unwilling to share the spoil. If it is after the candidate has won the primary election that he has to pick his running mate, then there is no collaboration because the running mate is more like an appendage.

The other issue is corruption and abuse of power. Where the President or the Governor has been running riot, wielding absolute powers while in office, it becomes difficult to let go, even when his tenure expires. This is so in Nigeria for the fear of losing relevance and also to cover the tracks to avoid embarrassing discoveries that may prove dangerous to the office holder.

The holders of the office do also personalize it, especially the President and the Governors, making it difficult to apply the law for any form of control or oversight, to the extent that family members and relatives are appointed into sensitive positions as a way of fencing off others, such that from the very beginning of their joint tenure, everything is done to checkmate the deputy. In such a scenario, those family members would rather prefer one of their own to succeed the incumbent.

There has been a repetitive pattern in Nigeria whereby deputies are rendered powerless and worthless and any indication of an ambition is viewed as an act of rebellion that must be crushed decisively and mercilessly. This submission mentality is not limited to the executive but rather extends to the legislature, as we saw it play out between the immediate past Speaker of the House of Representatives and his deputy.

The judiciary is equally not spared, given the revelations of Honourable Justice Musa Datijo Muhammad who lamented that he was sidelined as the Deputy Chief Justice of Nigeria. The statistics can be very scary. President Olusegun Obasanjo had a running battle with his Vice, Alhaji Abubakar Atiku, that eventually ended in the Court.

Till date, they have not been able to settle the issues, which spill over to every political campaign. Then we have the case of the current President, Senator Bola Ahmed Tinubu, as governor of Lagos State. It started with his first deputy, Senator Kofoworola Bucknor-Akerele. It was a tug of war between the duo, which eventually led to her resignation. Then came in Mr. Femi Pedro, who was brought in from the financial sector with lots of experience but it was not long before the crisis started, leading to impeachment moves till he too had to resign. In Abia State, there was hell fire between Senator Orji Kalu and his deputy, Senator Eyinaya Abaribe, leading to the celebrated Supreme Court decision.

In his book, ‘Made in Aba’, Abaribe wrote as stated thus:
‘I was not in the league of ‘Egusi’ peelers that thronged his mother’s abode for whatever reason. His minions had not succeeded in binding me to some ethereal commitment on any false loyalty scale. I lasted exactly three years and nine months in office, before I threw in the towel. The one tenure was characterised by three attempts at impeachment. The one thread that runs through them all is that the government can make no error. Once the idea is stuck in the head of the chief executive, persons around him would leave no stone unturned to actualize the desired end.’

Incidentally, Kalu and Abaribe are both Senators in the present National Assembly. In Oyo State, Seyi Makinde has had to yank off his deputy, Hon Rauf Olaniyan. In Kano State, Governor Rabiu Kwakwanso could not stomach his deputy, ditto Governor Godwin Obaseki in Edo State who even after a public apology from his deputy, is still playing God and issuing conditions.

Impeachment of deputies by governors is like some kind of child’s play, with cases of impeachment process lasting less than two days.

The most intriguing case is that of Taraba State, as reported in the case of Danladi v. Dangari as reported in (2015) 2 NWLR (Pt.1442) 1. The facts of the case are as follows. At all relevant times, Alhaji Sani Abubakar Danladi was the Deputy Governor of Taraba State from May 2007 to May 2011. He was re-elected and took another oath of office on 29th May, 2011. On 3rdSeptember 2012, certain members of the Taraba State House of Assembly initiated the process of impeachment against him by signing a Notice of Allegation of Gross Misconduct.

Upon being served with the notice the appellant filed a reply dated 12th September 2012. On 18th September 2012, the House sat and passed a motion pursuant to section 188 (4) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) that the allegations should be investigated.

The Speaker requested the Acting Chief Judge of the State to constitute a seven-man panel to investigate the allegations. The panel was duly constituted and its members sworn in on 24th September 2012. On the same day, the appellant filed an originating summons before the High Court of Taraba State against the chairman and members of the panel seeking two reliefs.

He also filed a motion for an injunction to restrain the defendants from conducting any investigation into the allegations against him.It was the appellant’s contention that notwithstanding the pending suit and motion, the members of the panel proceeded to conduct their investigation.

The appellant appeared before the panel under protest through his counsel. At the hearing five witnesses were called to prove the allegations against him. The appellant was absent.

However one witness was called in his defence after which his counsel sought an adjournment of four days to enable him testify and call his remaining witnesses on ground of ill health. The request was refused. The panel closed the case for the defence, rendered its decision the same day and forwarded its report to the House of Assembly.

Based on the report, the appellant was removed from office the following day, 4th October 2012. As a result of these developments, the appellant sought and was granted leave to amend his originating summons in order to raise some more questions and seek additional reliefs.

The 6th defendant in the case entered a conditional appearance and filed a preliminary objection to the appellant’s suit. The trial court ordered that the objection should be taken along with the amended originating summons.

Consequently, the remaining defendants/respondents aligned themselves with the 6th defendant’s submissions in support of the objection.

The trial court upheld the preliminary objection challenging its jurisdiction to entertain the suit on two grounds: that the suit was improperly instituted by way of originating summons rather than by writ of summons having regard to what it considered to be the contentious nature of the claims and reliefs sought; and that proper parties, namely the Acting Chief Judge and the State House of Assembly were not joined in the suit.

Consequently, the trial court struck out reliefs 1, 2, 4 and 5 of the amended originating summons for being incompetent.Being dissatisfied with the decision of the trial court, the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal, in a considered judgment, resolved Issues 1 and 3 against the appellant and Issue 2 against the respondents and still proceeded to dismiss the appellant’s appeal. The appellant was aggrieved and he appealed to the Supreme Court.

Relying on section 36 of the 1999 Constitution on the issue of denial of the appellant’s right to fair hearing, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and gave an order that the appellant resume his office forthwith and that all his salaries and allowances be paid. More importantly, the Supreme Court held further as follows:

Per GALADIMA, J.S.C. at page 107, paras. G-H:

“This appeal has once again brought to the fore the frequent impeachment of elected politicians, we have witnessed in recent times. As serious as the matter is, the legislators have found a veritable weapon to exit the faces of those they don’t like. It should not be so.

The process of impeachment must be strictly and duly observed so as not to thwart the will of the electorate freely expressed at the polls.” (Emphasis Supplied).

Per OKORO, J.S.C. at page 200, paras. D-F:

“Impeachment is a serious business and seeks to take away the mandate freely given to a person by the electorate. Such a delicate assignment must be handled with care.”

On Monday, October 23, 2023, in a stunning victory for Nigeria, the High Court in London set aside the arbitration award obtained in January 2017 by P&ID, a British Virgin Islands registered company, against Nigeria.

The award was originally for about $6.6bn but had increased to about $11bn as of the date of the court judgment because of interest. P&ID had brought the claim against Nigeria before the arbitral tribunal, alleging that Nigeria breached a gas supply and purchase agreement (GSPA) to supply gas to a P&ID project that was to be located in Calabar, Cross River State.

Nigeria successfully obtained leave of the High Court in London in September 2020 to appeal against the arbitral tribunal award. Hearing on the appeal took place for eight weeks between January and March this year.

While Nigeria’s victory has brought enormous relief to the country, it is crucial to understand the basis for the judgment of the court and the lessons the country should learn from the case.

Several allegations of corruption were at the centre of Nigeria’s challenge to the arbitration award.

Nigeria alleged that P&ID paid bribes to several officials of the Nigerian government involved in the entry into the GSPA between Nigeria and P&ID between 2009 and 2010.

Among the officials alleged to have been corrupted by P&ID were the former Minister of Petroleum Resources, the late Alhaji Rilwanu Lukman, a former NNPC official, the late Mr. Taofiq Tijani and a former Director of Legal Services, the late Mrs.. Grace Taiga.

It was also alleged that P&ID paid bribes to the first lead external counsel for Nigeria during the arbitration proceedings, Mr Supo Shasore, SAN and government lawyers that advised on the arbitration, including Mrs Kemi Adelore, then Director of Legal Services in the Ministry of Petroleum Resources, and
Mr Ikechukwu Oguine, then Coordinator, Legal Services of NNPC, and that these lawyers colluded with P&ID to ‘throw’ the case.

Another key allegation made by Nigeria was that P&ID told lies to the arbitral tribunal to secure the award.

These lies included claims that it had obtained the financing and completed the engineering for the Calabar project when in fact, it had not done either. These lies amounted to perjury and had deceived the tribunal into making the award in P&ID’s favour.

P&ID denied all the allegations and asserted that Nigeria lost the arbitration proceedings because of incompetence on the part of its officials responsible.

Allegations of Corruption

The court upheld the allegations made regarding late Mrs. Taiga and found that some payments she received from P&ID were indeed bribes.

The payments continued until 2020 when the arbitration was in progress, and the court held that P&ID continued to make payments to Mrs Taiga to ensure she did not
reveal the earlier payments made to her.

Thus, the dealings between P&ID and Mrs Taiga related not just to the entry into the GSPA, but also tainted the arbitration proceedings.

This was one of the main grounds on which the arbitration award was set aside.

The court dismissed Nigeria’s allegations of corruption against the late Alhaji Lukman for lack of evidence.

Also, it dismissed the allegations against the lawyers who were involved in Nigeria’s behalf in the arbitration. The court instead found that the lawyers had represented Nigeria honestly and made concerted efforts to resolve the matter in Nigeria’s interest. Concerning Mr Shasore SAN, the court highlighted several steps he took to defend Nigeria.

It noted that the people to blame for any failings in Nigeria’s defence were the senior officials of the Nigerian government who took no action on several recommendations made to them by Mr Shasore on how best to defend the case at the arbitral tribunal.

Perjury

The court agreed with Nigeria that P&ID had lied to the arbitral tribunal about how much progress it had made in obtaining financing and in performing the engineering for the project. These lies, the court found, assisted P&ID in securing the award.

A P&ID witness, the late Mr Michael Quinn, had given a witness statement to the arbitral tribunal
purporting to set out how the GSPA had been entered into. The statement did not mention the payments made by P&ID to the late Mrs Taiga. The court held that if the arbitral tribunal had been aware of the said payments, its decision would likely have been different. That concealment, in the court’s view, amounted also to perjury. These examples of perjury on P&ID’s part constituted the second major basis for the setting aside of the award.

Lessons
One of the major lessons from the case is that the nation must ensure that contracts entered into by government are prepared by competent and experienced legal and other experts.

The court was very critical of the GSPA and the obligations that Nigeria assumed under the contract. While setting aside the award, it noted that Nigeria had failed to provide the right resources for entering into such a significant
contract.

Another obvious lesson is that senior government officials entrusted with decision-making power must show a strong sense of responsibility and should be held accountable where they do not.

The tribunal identified several instances where key recommendations concerning the arbitration were not acted upon by the officials responsible, including Ministers of Justice and of Petroleum Resources.

The court has come to Nigeria’s rescue this time, but it is clear from the judgment that if the heads of the relevant ministries had performed their duties effectively, this case might not have arisen at all.

Jerry Amao wrote in from Lagos

By Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN

There is an ill wind blowing through the fabric of our judicial system that may affect all of us ultimately, if not arrested urgently. In one way or the other, we are all potential litigants. Democracy is accepted worldwide as the best method of leadership recruitment, as exemplified by the secret ballot system whereby the electorate has the golden opportunity of choosing those who will govern them.

The 1999 Constitution prescribes a four-year tenure for all elected positions created under it. In further deference to democratic ethos, election itself has ceased to be the only means of choosing leaders.

Aggrieved persons now have the opportunity to deploy legal means to either challenge the process of leadership recruitment or indeed the outcome of the election proper. In Nigeria, this has been categorized into pre-election matters and election petitions.

Thus, it is possible that the people may elect a Governor through the ballot and he may still be disqualified by the Court, as was the case with Mr. David Lyon. He was elected by the people of Bayelsa State as the Governor but his running mate in the election, who was to be sworn in with him as the Deputy Governor, was disqualified on account of discrepancies in his documents.

Similarly in Kano State recently, the Governor who was declared as elected by the people was ordered to be removed by the court and the certificate of return issued to his opponent.

Under and by virtue of Section 285 (9) of 1999 Constitution, a person who has any reason to challenge the choice of any candidate for any election is at liberty to approach the court to seek any declaration. This is termed pre-election matters.

In the same vein, Section 285 (1)-(4) of the Constitution creates the regime of election tribunals with the exclusive mandate to entertain and determine petitions arising from the conduct of elections and the declaration of winners.

By this arrangement, courts and tribunals have become the final destination in the determination of the winner of any election. These cases are time-bound as they must be concluded within a specific period of time. This should not be an issue at all in normal circumstances where due process of law holds sway but in Nigeria, abnormal things do happen.

Very recently, the Guardian newspaper reported a very disturbing situation, in its October 18 2023 edition. According to the headline of the said report, “INEC Credibility Sinks as 94% Contested Posts Await Tribunal’, rolling out some alarming statistics to the extent that 1,209 out of 1,280 elective offices to be decided by court verdict, free, fair, credible elections held in only 71 polls, representing 5.55%, 24 out of 28 gubernatorial cases for court validation, umpire earmarked N3B to defend decisions in court, electorate blames INEC, politicians, lawyers for flawed democracy, etc.

The Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC is inundated with not less than 1,000 pre-election cases arising from or connected to the 2023 elections. INEC Director, Legal Drafting and Clearance, Mrs. Oluwatoyin Babalola confirmed this in her presentation at a two-day capacity workshop for journalists in Nasarawa State last week.

Substantively, over 1,200 cases are pending before various Election Tribunals for determination. The cumulative result of this is that the political class in Nigeria is very litigious, preferring to contest every electoral issue. This should ordinarily be good news for lawyers as it will keep them busy and bring more income.

But this is not about lawyers as Nigeria is greater than any group of professionals. The reality is that this has caused the political terrain to become uncertain and unsteady. As it happened in Bayelsa State, it is possible to remove a Governor-elect on the eve of his swearing in.

Not long ago, Senator Muhammad Bulkachuwa shocked the nation when he revealed that he had served as courier to assist his fellow legislators to secure some judicial favour to boost their electoral fortunes. Being the husband of the immediate past President of the Court of Appeal who was directly in charge of constituting and managing all election tribunals, the understanding of many is that Senator Bulkachuwa at different times during his tenure as a Senator assisted in influencing judicial decisions one way or the other, through his marital affiliation to a judge. Another Senator, Elisha Abbo accused the current Senate President of masterminding his removal and also plotting that of many others. These statements have been modified, in the usual Nigerian fashion.

Perhaps the most devastating confirmation of the contagious nature of the viruses of election litigations came from the President of the Court of Appeal herself, through the directive that she issued for all election-related appeals from the Northern States to be transferred to the Abuja Division whilst those from the Southern States should go to the Lagos Division. From reports monitored in the media, the directive was issued following allegations and petitions against state tribunal judges alleged to have been compromised by the governors whose tentacles may also extend to appeals pending in their respective states. In simple terms, there is palpable concern from the authorities of the Court of Appeal that election cases are likely to be compromised through corruption and corrupt practices, thus confirming the previous confession of Senator Bulkachuwa and the subsequent allegations of Senator Abbo on the subject matter viruses. Beyond the cold facts of the case and the industry of the lawyers therefore, it has become clear that there are other extraneous factors that determine the outcome of cases in court, especially those related to elections. We cannot throw up our hands in the air in despair but rather face the grim realities as they unfold. If we cannot determine the true winner of elections through the ballot, if the decision of the court on the election has become the buyer’s game, then we are in for trouble and better prepare ourselves for the war to come. One day, the people will revolt and the judiciary itself will cave in.

A virus is an infectious agent that helps to spread negative things, be it diseases in humans or malicious actions affecting data in technology. The two major viruses spreading from election-related cases are Corruption and Delay.

Upon the conduct of any general election, about 400 judges are selected across the nation, on national assignment as judges of election petition tribunals. This assignment takes on average six months to conclude, during which time the regular businesses of the judges are disrupted, suspended or canceled outrightly.

For other judges who are not on this assignment, they are to attend to pre-election matters which are given priority over and above all other cases. This is just for the High Courts. In the appellate courts, election-related appeals dwarf all other appeals and render them comatose.

In times past when we had uniform elections, it was possible to harmonize this regime and console ourselves that it comes once every four years. But we now have off-cycle elections and bye-elections as is the case with the upcoming elections in Kogi, Bayelsa and Imo States in November 2023.

The effect of this is that judges now work round the year in order to determine election-related cases. As a solution, some have suggested pulling out retired judges who are less than seventy years to handle election petitions while some others propose a Special Court.

Whatever the case, it is clear that there is an urgent need to convene a national dialogue on this matter comprising judges, lawyers and legislators, for the purpose of discussing and agreeing upon a workable solution. The diagnosis for now is that there is danger ahead.

The virus of corruption simply kills the judicial system and pollutes our body polity. It makes nonsense of our elections for if it is possible to influence the outcome of election-related cases, why would anyone bother to invest in rigorous campaigns when he can easily save money to buy the case? .

In this frightening scenario, anyone and everyone who has some means of connecting judges can easily be declared the winner. And it doesn’t require that he/she should have enough money to go round.

After all, with the largesse of security votes and limitless allowances surfacing in bank accounts that jump scrutiny, the “winner” can go round to settle when he/she assumes office. This is why politics has become a viable investment in Nigeria such that some banks give out huge loans to fund political ambitions because the return on investment is very sure and huge.

At the 11th convocation ceremony of Afe Babalola University held last week, its founder, Aare Afe Babalola, SAN lamented that politics has become the only lucrative and viable business in Nigeria. And this must be due to corruption and access to free funds. The clock is ticking so fast and something has to be done urgently to arrest the drift.

The political class cleverly amended the Constitution to ensure that political cases are given accelerated hearing, to the detriment of other cases pending in the courts.

The Court of Appeal is overburdened whilst the Supreme Court is thoroughly overwhelmed, now that the apex court has been depleted in the number of justices due to retirement and death.

In the Lagos Division of the Court of Appeal, there is a blanket embargo on other cases not connected with elections as there are no hearing dates for these cases and those earlier fixed for hearing have been vacated so as to give room for election-related appeals.

I call upon the National Judicial Council, the Nigerian Bar Association and the National Assembly to urgently come up with an authoritative platform that will address these issues in order to create a workable solution that will save the judiciary and by extension, Nigeria. We must contain the viruses.

By Abiodun Williams

It is no longer news that one Barr. Ola Olukoyede has been nominated by President Tinubu’s administration as the next Executive Chairman of the EFCC, subject to the confirmation of Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Its amazing how a vast majority in the legal profession are already jubilating over the yet to be precedence that would extended their frontier of their job opportunity to the office of EFCC Chairman, that is if confirmed by the senate. Its rumoured that even the drivers and other support staff of the EFCC are also not left out in the frenzy over illegality.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), established by an Act of the the National Assembly on 12th December, 2002 and amended in 2004 by the administration of President Olusegun Obasanjo can no longer be reversed to a mere ad hoc investigation committee.

We are alarmed by the information on how this administration hopes to destroy the EFCC. Multiple plans are being put in place to either weaken or totally destroy the EFCC. One of such plans is to appoint an unqualified individual and if that is resisted by Nigerians, a move at merger of the EFCC, ICPC and CCB which would allow them appoint a Lawyer as CEO for a hatchet job would be made.

The EFCC Establishment Act. 2004 as amended clearly states the qualifications to the office of Executive Chairman of the EFCC.

Section 2(1) of the Acts states clearly as follow,
a. Chairman who shall‐
(i) be the chief executive and accounting officer of the Commission;
(ii) be a serving or retired member of any government security or law enforcement agency not below the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police or equivaent; and
(iii) possess not less than15 years cognate experience.

Interestingly, the above mentioned section of the law which is as simple in interpretation as ABCD, is going the way of Section 134(2) of the Nigerian Constitution (25 % in Abuja), thereby keeping hired lawyers, public and social commentators alike busy in radio and television stations.

The fundamental question now is, why do they want to destroy the EFCC, the leading anti-corruption agency in Nigeria . How has effort to destroy the EFCC become the highest paid job now in the country, such that the willingness to appear in Radio or Television to argue that is “white is black”.

The fundamental questions now are;
i. Would the same Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria that made the law in question, violate its own Law or move against itself by confirming a Lawyer who has never been enlisted into any security or law enforcement Agency in Nigeria as Chairman of EFCC in disregard or contravention of the EFCC Establishment Acts, 2004 as amended.

ii.If the Nigerian Senate who passed the first law truly knows the importance of fighting corruption, building strong institutions for the nations development, why havent they amended section 2 of the EFCC Establishment Acts to replace the Police Ranking with that of the EFCC since its trained and regimented officers have grown in their ranks and now qualified to lead their agency.

iii. Would the Senate now quickly or secretly amend the EFCC Establishment Acts to accommodate Lawyers, Teachers, Accountants, Doctors, other professionals and in deed all Nigerians as qualified individuals for the office of EFCC Chairman.

Would it also go the way of the NYSC Corper-minister in Federal Republic of Nigeria. It is in deed a very dangerous time for Nigeria *All eyes on the Senate.*

On the other hand, the Pioneer Executive Chairman, Mal. Nuhu Ribadu (AIG Rtd) and the National Security Adviser (NSA) in the present government that nominated a Lawyer for the office of EFCC Chairman ought to recuse himself in all these.

The same Mal. Nuhu Ribadu who became the EFCC Chairman by virtue of his rank as Assistant Commissioner of Police, was the one who initiated the present structure, recruitment, training and deployment of the EFCC cadet superintendent, inspectorate and Assistant Courses in line with the provisions of the Acts.This laudable and prompt initiative of Mal. Nuhu Ribadu is what built the reputable, independent and a 21st century law enforcement agency, EFCC for Nigeria today.

It is understood why the political class may not want an independent and strong institutions (EFCC) which has become the leading and effective anti-corruption Agency in Nigeria and West Africa Sub-region. The EFCC must be protected from destruction because strong institutions are the fulcrum of true democracy. Sadly, the ordinary, patriotic and hardworking Nigerians do not understand that the coup going on against the EFCC is actually against them and Nigeria as a nation.

The immediate past Executive Chairman of the EFCC, Abdulrasheed Bawa CON is a member of the EFCC superintendent cadre, Course 1. This Detective Superintendent cadre has grown from Course 1 to 10. Similarly, Detective Inspectorate cadre has grown from Course 1 to 10 and same applies to the Detective Assistant cadre. These are the regimented personnel who operate the core mandate of the EFCC while looking up to a seamless career progression to the office of the Executive Chairman of the EFCC.

The questions now are;
i. Has mal. Nuhu Ribadu (AIG Rtd), NSA suddenly changed his mind about the structural formation he established in the EFCC.
ii. Was he not consulted or aware of the illegal nomination
iii With a civilian (Lawyer) as Chairman of EFCC, what happens to the mandate of the Commission, the regimented command/operational structure and over 4,000 trained Officers of the EFCC
Iv Has Mal. Nuhu Ribadu compromised or sacrificed the EFCC, an Agency he birthed, toiled day and night to build at the risk of his life.
V. Could there be better legacy or monument Mal. Nuhu Ribadu would want to build for himself while alive than his globally reputed EFCC
Vi. For his intergrity and known principles, Why cant Mal. Nuhu Ribadu defend the EFCC even if it means resignation to prove his innocence or that he is not in agreement with this gravious assault on his legacy, the EFCC.
*All eyes on Mal. Nuhu Ribadu (AIG Rtd) and NSA.*

Similarly, the Security and Intelligence community remain the pillars of constitutional democracy and therefore have onerous task of enforcing or defending the law especially as it now affect their community (EFCC), because no one knows whose turn it is next to be violated.

Society or democracy is in grave danger when strong men are promoted above strong institutions and might above the rule of law. Good governance begins with proper screening and appointment of qualified individuals into public office. *All eyes on the Security and intelligence community to do what is right in the interest of Nigeria and not what the government wants.*

They know that Nigerians are hungry and desperate to survive hence the treatment by those in power. Its a shame that after 60 years of independence, Nigeria is still largely in search of honest, sincere and forthright men & women in gpvernance due to endemic or pervasive corruption.

Many, including the oppressed or victims of this coup against the EFCC have began to queue behind the obvious illegal normination for their pecuniary benefits or just to survive. How low are we going to go as a nation before going up.

“The oppressor would not be so strong if he did not have accomplices among the oppressed” Simone de beauvoir

Williams Is The National Convener Of Save Democracy Group

By Tony Elumelu

Some moments resonate as profoundly remarkable in life, where dreams are born from humble beginnings and transformed into extraordinary realities.

As I stood before 700 UBA graduate trainees, drawn from across Africa, I thought of the long journey that brought me to where I am today. A journey that began with the same vigour, dedication, and hope that I saw in these young Lions and Lionesses.

I had the privilege of having my one-on-one induction session with UBA’s new graduate trainees on Tuesday. I love these sessions, as I eagerly anticipate interacting with the brilliant minds, that become part of our UBA-Tribe.

I, too, started my career as a trainee many years ago, equipped with little more than ambition, a thirst for knowledge, and an unwavering commitment to excellence. I walked that same path as these bright minds, who have now become part of Africa’s Global Bank. Countless challenges and triumphs have marked the way from that moment to this day, each contributing to the story that brought us together.

In these sessions, I make it a point to share fragments of my journey, detailing my processes, highlighting my triumphs, and even discussing my lowest moments.

This practice isn’t just a personal reflection; it’s a conscious effort to ensure everyone can learn from the dedication and hard work that has marked my career. Through these personal stories, bonds are forged, and lessons are imparted.

This ethos of transparency and shared learning is central to my approach and symbolic of the values that drive UBA’s success. As an institution, every stage of one’s career should be marked by growth, mentorship, and the continuous pursuit of excellence.

This same excellence has driven me throughout my career – a vision of creating a bank for all, a bank for Africa and an environment where talent is nurtured, dreams are realized, and excellence is celebrated. It is a vision that has inspired me to create a world class trainee programme, that will nurture future leaders, who mirror the passion and dedication I demonstrated as a trainee myself.

But beyond nurturing future leaders, the UBA GMAP – our bespoke graduate trainee programme, is making significant strides in addressing critical societal issues.

The experience reinforced to me the criticality of institution building. In front of me were a generation of new leaders. UBA has created a six-month programme, identifying the best and brightest young men and women from across Africa. We have invested in and equipped our youth. We have done well and done good.

Our example illustrates why my management strategy and philosophy also address our common African future.

1. Addressing the issue of unemployment through Job Creation

The UBA Graduate Trinee Programme goes beyond its primary goal of nurturing future leaders; it also plays a vital role in addressing the pervasive curse of unemployment across the African continent.

Youth unemployment remains a significant challenge, and UBA actively contributes to the solution. The Group is creating real, tangible jobs for young Africans by providing opportunities through this programme. These jobs not only benefit the individuals involved, but also positively impact our immediate environment and stimulate the economic growth of our continent’s economy.

2. Creating opportunities for and Investing in Young Africans

UBA’s commitment to developing and empowering young talent is a response to the pressing need for opportunities on our continent. GMAP is designed to identify and nurture the potential of young Africans, giving them access to training, mentorship, and real-world experiences essential for their personal and professional growth. It is building to last.

By investing in these young minds, UBA is shaping the banking industry’s future and offering hope and prospects to a generation of African youth eager to contribute to their communities and the broader society.

3. UBA – A Bank for All Ages

The UBA GMAP is compelling evidence that UBA is for all; we are a dynamic and forward-thinking institution dedicated to youth development, which is an integral part of our identity as Africa’s Global Bank.

By investing in the younger generation, we continue to affirm that we are leaders and role models in fostering innovation, diversity, and inclusivity in the financial sector.

I am filled with pride in the UBA Executive Management team and gratitude as I witness this dream of a world-class trainee programme come to life. A programme that represents the culmination of years of hard work, determination, and unwavering belief in the potential of our future leaders.

A total of 107,310 young Africans applied for the programme. After a rigorous selection process, we shortlisted to 47,639. The banking school kicked off with 775 trainee and we successfully graduated 666 young Africans eager to conquer.

This programme is a testament to the incredible journey that each graduating member will embark upon – a journey of growth, learning, and transformation.

To the new members of the UBA Tribe, your journey, much like mine, will be filled with moments of challenge and triumph, and each experience will contribute to your growth. Embrace these opportunities as steppingstones toward your extraordinary reality.

Embark on this journey with both eyes open to the opportunities and challenges ahead and the understanding that we are here to support and empower you every step, just as I have been fortunate to have mentors who shaped my path.

Your dedication, hard work, and pursuit of excellence will shape your future and the future of UBA and the financial industry.

Welcome to the beginning of your remarkable journey.

By Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN

Increasingly but alarmingly, it is gaining ground that Nigerians now believe that justice is for sale. This position seems to be gaining ground increasingly. Is it possible to buy justice? Is it true that some politicians have all manners of mobile injunctions already typed and prepared, stocked in their portfolios and they just bring them out to suit any occasion?

Can it be true that there are some judges who have been earmarked for such jobs as issuing out any order, injunction or judgment? Can it ever be said that parties before a court of law can know their fate even before the case starts?

I am worried and worried. Not long ago, Chief Robert Clarke, SAN, warned about the dangerous dimensions of the influence of politics on justice administration generally. ‘So, one disadvantage in Nigeria today, which we have to look into, is how to curb the excesses of these politicians.

They have ruined the judiciary. I feel sorry for them’, says Chief Clarke. I have also heard speculatively, that hardly is there any judgment from any election tribunal that is not a product of ‘transactions’.

My personal view is that most judges are incorrigible, above board and they decide cases according to law and their conscience, but the things that I hear are very troubling. They are spoken in hushed tones amongst the senior lawyers, they are posted with style on restricted WhatsApp platforms and they are ripe with the clients themselves.

The question then is this: what is Transactional Justice? It is one in which the decision of the court on a case pending before it is procured or influenced by extraneous considerations other than the merit of the case.

Such influence can be financial, tribal, religious or even social. At times it can be relational, such as when family members of a judge are recruited to put pressure on him to bend the scale of justice. The sphere is almost endless.

In Transactional Justice, there are lawyers involved as couriers of monetary offers to judicial officers and it is prevalent mostly in election petition cases. The politicians have become so desperate that they will do just anything to cling on to power, by all means necessary.

The ugly side of this is that once it is possible to influence a judge in a particular judicial transaction, then the door is open permanently for other subsequent influences, as for instance once you are able to sway a judge to tilt the even scale of justice in an election petition, then that judge becomes a permanent customer even in other regular cases, whenever the need arises.

This is how it goes. The litigant hires the very best lawyers in the field of his case, pays them well to handle all legal issues in the open court and then turn around to hire other lawyers or individuals in the background, purely for networking.

These latter set of people have no business in the preparation of the case on the merit, they are not involved in the settlement of pleadings or briefs of arguments and they care less about the knowledge and erudition of counsel on record, but to work to secure victory for the paying litigant at all cost. They know the text of the judgment well ahead of time.

There are other aspects of Transactional Justice, I’m told. Some lawyers have perfected the style of always getting their cases assigned to a particular judge and God save you if you have to appear against them in any case, because you are doomed to always lose any point of law, no matter how brilliant you are and even if that point of law has been settled up to the Supreme Court.

I don’t know how this works but it is said to be very common, especially amongst a few senior lawyers. It will surely take the connivance of court officials and the judge himself for this to happen, because once a judge has noticed the trend that a particular counsel is always appearing before him, almost on a daily basis, then that should raise the flag, if there is no collusion.

Then there are the professional litigants, who have no personal court cases of their own but have been recruited to help monitor the progress of some cases and to help secure victory ultimately. You see them in the courtroom, sitting prominently, for the judge’s attention and recognition. The court registrars know them, to always reserve vintage positions for them in the courtroom.

In some very bizarre cases, they exude such irritating arrogance as to even sit by the entrance of the judge’s chambers, on each day that the cases come up, so that even the opponent would feel the pressure of the unofficial lobby. These ones are in the categories of family members, classmates, religious associates, social partners, either in the club or in the cult. The other side of this is that it gets so bad that even the registrars of the judges at times do complain openly.

How does it sound that judgment is no longer based on law or precedents? That law has become totally unpredictable, even for the same set of facts? We are unable to properly advise clients who approach us for legal counsel, as we now have different decisions, even of the Supreme Court, in the same set of facts and circumstances. Whereas this can be due to human error precipitated by the workload of judicial officers based on the volume of cases that they handle daily, it is also said that it can be the result of Transactional Justice.

Good enough I have not had cause to be involved in any form of Transactional Justice, even for my own personal cases, all of which I believe I have won or lost purely due the facts of the cases and the application of law thereto. But I have no doubt that there is a high possibility that Transactional Justice is real.

Part of the Judicial Oath goes thus: ‘… I will discharge my duties and perform my functions honestly, to the best of my ability and faithfully in accordance with the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the law; that I will not allow my personal interest to influence my official conduct or my official decisions.’

Transactional Justice is allowing personal, family, social or financial benefit to influence judicial decisions. But we all call it the ‘High Court of Justice’, as it is described in the Constitution.

According to the learned authors of the very persuasive Black’s Dictionary of Law, the notion of justice is ‘the fair and proper administration of laws’, meaning that it must be balanced, be equitable, be fair and just and it must substantially conform with known principles and standards of law.

In human affairs, the judge is next to God, which is why they have earned the title ‘My Lord’. In the same way that the words of God become established to man without question, so also are we all enjoined to obey all decisions of courts in order to guarantee peace and orderliness in the society. But then, how do you go about obeying Transactional Judgments, procured through fraud and other extraneous influences?

This has raised a great challenge for the judiciary and the Nigerian Bar Association, to tackle as a matter of national emergency, or else we should all just close down our chambers and leave legal practice for Transactional Lawyers.

Why on earth should I bother myself to prepare for a court case that I know I will win or lose, as the case may be, and one in which the outcome is already predetermined?

Now the trouble in all of these is that the rich and affluent, the ones so very well connected and powerful, will always get the upper hand in situations of Transactional Justice, which will be a game for the highest bidder. The poor man and his lawyer, the weak litigant and the lowly members of society stand to lose in all cases where Transactional Justice is at play, as they simply cannot match the stakes.

The negative consequence of Transactional Justice is that impunity, lawlessness and wickedness will continue to plague society, if the wicked and lawless oppressor cannot even be called to order by the court. When they breach your rights, they then turn around and taunt you to go to court, if you feel sufficiently aggrieved. ‘We will meet in court’, is what you get when you dare challenge impunity.

It has gotten to the point that there are now individuals and even corporate entities that their names evoke fear, such that once you mention their names, people just throw up their hands in the air in total submission, meaning that you waste your time challenging any of their actions in court.

But this should not be at all. We must not drive people to the point of frustration that will lead them to take law into their hands. If the courts cease to be the last hope of the common man, then the consequences can be very dire indeed. The rule of might, the power of money and the influence of man, should not determine the ends of justice.

I believe in my heart as most lawyers do that judges are human and they can err at times, but all cases of Transactional Justice should be met with open resistance and humiliation by all lovers of justice, less we all become helpless victims of injustice, because when judgment is procured by any means whatsoever and howsoever, it ceases to wear the noble garment of justice.

By Bashir Ashura.

As Kwara state grapples with an unprecedented surge in insecurity,our governor,Mallam Abdulrahman Abdulrazaq, seems to be more interested in rubbing shoulders with the power brokers in Abuja than addressing the pressing issues in his home state. This trend has sparked outrage amongst Kwarans who, feeling abandoned, are now clamoring for change.

Abdulrazaq was duly elected to serve the people of Kwara, but his frequent absence and seeming preoccupation with federal politics have left many wondering: who is really in charge of kwara?

The high rate of insecurity, marked by a disturbing increase in banditry, theft, and cultism, is unlike anything the state has faced in the past two decades. Yet, news of the Governor being in town has become a rarity.

These circumstances raise a critically important question. should the Kwara State House of Assembly declare Deputy Governor, Mr. Kayode Alabi, as the Acting Governor? This proposition is not borne out of mere politicking but out of an urgent need for effective leadership. The worsening situation in Kwara requires an on-ground, dedicated, and responsive leader.

The role of a governor extends beyond the ceremonial. It is about service, leadership, and most importantly, presence. The state executive council meetings, for instance, is a very important platforms for discussing and formulating strategic responses to the state’s challenges. Yet, these cannot be adequately executed with a governor who seems to have made Abuja his primary residence.

The people of Kwara are not just demanding the physical presence of the governor. We are calling for a leader who can restore peace and harmony to the state. The acute hardship, irregularities, and security challenges Kwara is currently facing need immediate attention and strategic solutions, not a leader who appears detached from the reality on the ground.

The Speaker Kwara State House of Assembly Rt Hon Yakub Danladi should, therefore, consider the people’s plea. If the Governor will not prioritize the people’s well-being, then perhaps it’s time to allow the Deputy Governor to step into the role. This decisive move could pave way for more effective leadership and offer a glimmer of hope to the distraught citizens of Kwara.

Kwara State, known as the State of Harmony, is currently far from harmonious. Its people are crying out for change, for leadership, and for peace. The question now is whether those in power will listen to our calls and act accordingly. Because, indeed, Kwara deserves better than this.

By

Peter N. Afunanya Ph.D, fsi
Public Relations Officer
Department of State Services (DSS)
National Headquarters
Abuja.

Recently, the media is awash with various commentaries about DSS disobedience to Court Orders. These accusations, as wrong as they are, have peaked in the Emefiele saga. It may interest the public and indeed the avowed critics of the Service to note the following incidents and timelines to show that it has religiously obeyed Court orders in respect of the case and even others.

In 2022, the Service commenced the investigation of Mr Godwin Emefiele on suspicion of Terrorism Financing, Money Laundering among others and subsequently applied to the Federal High Court, Abuja for his arrest and detention. But the Chief Judge objected to the order and clearly stated that the Service did not need an order to investigate or arrest him.

Emefiele was to later obtain a restraining order issued by Justice MA Hassan of the FCT High Court against the Service. Instructively, the DSS obeyed this Order and did not arrest or detain Emefiele.However, on 9th June, 2023, Emefiele was suspended as CBN Governor by the President.

Based on new information and suspected criminal infractions, the Service, as expected by law, arrested and detained him using a Magisterial Order. On 10th July, 2023, Justice Hamza Mu’azu of the FCT High Court, while recognising that the DSS had every legal right to arrest, detain and investigate Emefiele, ordered for his release or prosecution within seven days.

The Service expeditiously and expressly complied with the order and charged him for illegal possession of firearms and ammunition being one of the criminal suspicions. The Muazu Order had, by implication, extended Emefiele’s detention by seven days with effect from 10th July, 2023 when the initial detention order had expired.

Within the same period, Justice Bello Kawu of the same FCT High Court, while dismissing reliefs sought by Peter Abang, Counsel to Emefiele on 14th July, 2023 ordered for the release or prosecution of Emefiele within 48 hours. However, the Service had complied with the seven days ultimatum issued by Justice Muazu. In obedience to rule of law, Emefiele was arraigned before Justice Nicholas Oweibo of the Federal High Court, Ikoyi, Lagos, on 25th July, 2023 for illegal possession of arms and ammunition.

The Service had long issued a press statement over the incident that happened at the Court between its staff and those of Nigerian Correctional Service (NCoS) and pledged to investigate it. Though the investigation is ongoing, the preliminary findings are quite shocking considering the ignoble roles played by some public officials.

As normal with criminal investigations, security agencies re-arrest suspects when there is adequate suspicion of commission of a crime or as may be revealed by an ongoing investigation. Emefiele was re-arrested on the basis of this. Even though the re-arrest was tainted by the overzealousness of personnel of the Service and NCoS, it was nonetheless legally procedural.

Later, the Service applied for an Exparte Order at the FCT High Court presided by Justice Edward Okpe (and not Justice Mu’azu as erroneously and massively reported in the media) to detain Emefiele for 14 days. Against the established rules regarding exparte applications, a lawyer suddenly appeared in the Court for Emefiele. While the Judge did not outrightly reject the DSS request, he struck out the motion upon its withdrawal by the Service counsel. But this is not without his guidance.

Earlier, the Judge had drawn the attention of the counsels to Section 293 of Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) which also recognises the Magistrate Court as a competent Court that can first be approached for an order for custody of a suspect under investigation. In other words, the Service, having taken the hint of the Court, took the right steps. What transpired at the Court was, thereafter, variously misrepresented by some mischief makers. Part of the disinformation is to the effect that the Court “struck out the application and stated that it was an abuse of judicial process”.

That was not what the Court said. What Justice Okpe said was “the Applicant having withdrawn the application, same is hereby struck out”. That was all. The Court records are there. But purveyors of fake news distorted the message to suit their intent; just to make the Service look bad – a sort of giving the dog a bad name in order to hang it.

Many had gone to town with stories of DSS fragrant disobedience to Court Orders especially in view of the last episodes at the High Courts in Lagos and Abuja. With what played out at the Court on 27th July 2023 under Justice Okpe, the Service immediately applied and obtained a detention order from a Magistrate Court. So, Emefiele is legally detained. For reasons that the Emefiele case is subjudice, the Service will restrain from making further comments on the subject matter.

For either lack of knowledge or deliberate act to ignore the truth, there has been sustained bashing of the Service and its leadership in the media and public spaces. It is ironical that the same people who condemn media trial are daily taking the Service through the same. The actual points are however, not lost on the Service. It is aware of the depth of the orchestrations and even deeper plot to incite the judiciary against it.

Targeting DSS DG, YM Bichi, for insidious media attacks is needless. Any DGSS, even if brought from heaven among the angels, will discharge the DSS mandate. There isn’t a time in our national sojourn for greatness that key organs of government will cease to exist or not needed. The DSS, like the CIA, FBI among others, is a major and positive instrument of State administration and management. It is essential for statecraft, governance, stability and public order. Scraping it as being canvassed by the uninformed is unreasonable.

It is indeed obvious the DSS is misunderstood. It is obvious there is a mob action against the Service. Allow the DSS be. Allow Bichi, a fine gentleman officer, be. Support DSS. Support Nigeria. As in the national anthem, Arise, O Compatriots.

Some critics have made varied insinuations including abusing the Service, its leadership and completely distorting the significant historical role of the Service in nation building. Others have said it is wobbling and of no relevance. Laughable. The DSS is not tottering. It is standing and firmly too. Even the worst of its critics knows that the Service has played (and still plays) stabilising roles for the nation. Its loyalty and patriotism are incomparable.

The Service is a stabilizing force for the country’s democracy. Same for the indivisibility and indissolubility of Nigeria’s sovereignty. Only a collaborative support from stakeholders will strengthen this. The Service does not claim to know it all; a reason it allows for constructive criticism and makes out time to explain itself in line with transparency and democratic accountability.

Whether on Emefiele, Bawa or Kanu, the Service has obeyed judicial orders and handled the cases procedurally and in accordance with the rule of law. Critics are encouraged to be a bit more discerning and up their research capabilities. Doing so will reveal that the Service obeys orders. The Court of Appeal judgement on Kanu is recommended for detailed study. Maybe, we can decipher the difference between Discharged and Acquitted and what the use of either or both mean in the final order of a Judge.

The DSS is an ardent respecter of the law. Anyone may argue this but it is true. It is in this regard that it has applied for either a stay or notice of appeal on some of the matters. One who does not obey the laws will not resort to legal procedures like the DSS has done.

Let those seeking justice not intimidate the Judges or derail law enforcement efforts. Judges deliver justice without fear or favour and should be allowed to discharge their duties honourably. For the umpteenth time, the Service reiterates its unequivocal stance on rule of law and respect for the judiciary. This position remains unchanging despite the futile attempts to paint it otherwise.

By NJ Ayuk

For years, on behalf of the African Energy Chamber (AEC), I publicly encouraged Nigeria’s leadership to sign the Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB) into law.

Across its five chapters and 300 sections, the PIB promised to repeal all regulations pertaining to Nigeria’s oil and gas industry, effectively resetting decades of policy gridlock regarding fiscal imbalances and the detrimental effects of crime and corruption. In place of these regulations, the PIA offered a new framework for the industry to abide by, one that would place Nigeria back on track toward progress and prosperity.

On August 16, 2021, we were thrilled to see former President Muhammadu Buhari enact the law — now known as the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) — making all its promising provisions official at long last.

Nearly two years from its passage into law, implementation of the PIA and its initiatives has been slow for numerous reasons, but not without progress, and signals from Nigeria’s new administration indicate that these conditions will not remain the status quo.

After ascending to office in May, Nigeria’s newly elected president, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, hit the ground running in terms of reshaping his country’s approach to petroleum industry relations and preparing to execute the mandates of the PIA.

In July of this year, President Tinubu received the Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC) at the State House in Abuja, assuring its delegates that Nigeria welcomes their business and that his administration is working to remove any policy or procedural bottlenecks detracting from the investment appeal of Nigeria’s gas and deep-water assets.

Considering these recent statements from President Tinubu and a recently released report from his administration’s Policy Advisory Council entitled Enabling Growth in Nigeria’s Energy & Natural Resources Sectors: Sector Challenges and Proposed Interventions, Nigeria’s leadership seems intent on revitalizing the entire energy landscape across the country.

A Need for Intervention

The signing of the PIA represented the culmination of more than 20 years of efforts to reform an oil and gas sector plagued by long-standing problems on multiple fronts.

Despite its long-held status as Africa’s largest oil producer, and sixth largest in the entire world at times, 2022 saw Nigeria drop to fourth place in the African rankings behind Angola, Algeria, and Libya. With its 37.1 billion barrels of proven crude oil reserves and 206.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, traditionally, petroleum products comprise nearly 6% of Nigeria’s gross domestic product, 95% of earnings from foreign trade, and 80% of government revenues.

In defiance of these significant averages, Nigeria’s oil production rate has declined in recent years, down to an average of 1 million barrels per day (mmbpd), nearly halving its OPEC quota of 1.8 mmbpd. Large-scale theft, sabotage, and pipeline vandalism account for much of this drop.

While the combined security efforts of Nigerian military forces and other government agencies under the previous administration did lead to the recovery of millions of liters of petroleum products in their various forms, they did not have a meaningful effect on the downward trend in production. Nigeria’s failure to adequately secure its infrastructure and rein in these production losses has also led international oil companies toward divestment from the region. Nigerian oil and gas sector will be one of the main attractions of the Africa Energy Week (AEW) 2023, which will be held in Cape Town from October 16th to 20th.

Hope on the Horizon

The PIA aims to reverse Nigeria’s course regarding its energy future. With President Tinubu’s endorsement and proactive stance on its directives, we hope to see the PIA’s terms fulfilled and Nigeria finally reoriented toward a more prosperous era.

Efforts to overhaul the Nigerian oil and gas industry date at least as far back as the year 2000 when the Obasanjo administration inaugurated the Oil and Gas Reform Implementation Committee, whose investigations into the Nigerian energy sector eventually led to the PIA’s initial drafts.

First introduced in 2008, the PIB was subject to years of setbacks as legislators debated its content and submitted revisions. The version finally signed into law in 2021 addresses four main areas of concern for Nigeria’s petroleum industry: governance and institutions, administration, host community development, and the fiscal framework. In short, the PIA seeks to convert the governance of Nigeria’s petroleum sector into a more commercial model.

Last summer, the AEC celebrated when the Nigerian National Petroleum Company (NNPC) transitioned to NNPC Limited, a move denoting initial progress toward implementing the provisions outlined in the PIA. This transition represented a shift in how the NNPC would conduct business going forward. Free from Federal Executive Council oversight, the NNPC Limited could now pursue new ventures, become more public-facing with a stock market listing, and compete with other state-owned petroleum companies.

As NNPC Limited, the company has already engaged in re-negotiations of the production-sharing contracts tied to five deepwater blocks, successfully untangling them from decades of disputes.

The transition hasn’t been as smooth for other Nigerian entities affected by the new standards put forth by the PIA. Delays in collaboration between groups like the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) and the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC), attributed to incomplete agenda items like the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) and the Upstream Environmental Management Regulation (UEMR), have stalled the PIA’s full implementation. However, leaders at these authorities have affirmed their commitment to the change and have encouraged all stakeholders to expedite the process.

As detailed in the Policy Advisory Council’s report, President Tinubu and his administration are well aware of Nigeria’s low ratio of revenue to GDP, low investor confidence, and monetary losses in the petroleum sector. However, the report also outlines a path toward a full reversal of these circumstances.

On a timetable covering the first 100 days and stretching outward to 2030, the Policy Advisory Council’s report explains how Nigeria’s petroleum industry can eventually achieve sustainable production rates of 4 mmbpd for oil and 12 billion cubic feet per day (bcf/d) for natural gas.

The Tinubu administration’s short-term goals include recruiting and placing competent leaders in the various ministries, departments, and agencies accountable to the PIA, reforming military task force operations for security, and defining fiscal policies. Moving into 2024—in addition to other security, finance, and regulatory measures—the report calls for promoting a diversified oil and gas industry and developing a gas export strategy.

Attaining Nigeria’s Ideal Future

The Policy Advisory Council’s structured and detailed report sets key performance indicators and milestones for Nigeria in the years ahead, plotting a course to a stabilized and flourishing future for the national economy and its population. The report also serves as a testament to the current administration’s intent to make this future a reality.

As one of the PIB’s most vocal supporters — having recognized its potential as a mechanism for correcting worsening conditions in Nigeria’s energy sector and reinvigorating foreign investment — I urged the previous administration to pass the bill. Considering its slow start despite having been passed into law, these recent and positive developments have given me more confidence that we will see the law fully implemented.

Nigeria still sits atop a wealth of fossil resources that offers up an end to energy poverty and financial instability as long as they are extracted and monetized responsibly and in a manner that benefits all stakeholders. The steps laid out in the Policy Advisory Council’s report lead to this exact outcome, but getting there depends entirely on the full implementation of the PIA.

I implore all of Nigeria’s leaders to continue working with one another to achieve this most critical goal.

By Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN

The prevailing scenario today is that candidates seeking admission into Nigerian universities are required to participate in an examination organized by the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board, JAMB, an agency established in or around 1989 as part of the errors of military regimes in forcing unitary government on a supposed federation.

Since then, it has become compulsory for candidates to participate in the UTME process, for them to gain admission into any university.

Many parents have been thrown into perpetual agony every year, due to the inability of their wards to secure admission into any tertiary institution, such that there are youths in Nigeria who have been on the JAMB radar for over five years, waiting for their letters of admission from the ‘almighty JAMB’.

It has thus become an annual ritual, for the nation to be regaled with the record of performances of candidates who have been compelled to undertake a national examination in order to qualify to be admitted to study in a university. This anachronistic process threw up Mmesoma Ejikeme, the 19-year old girl who shot herself into global limelight the wrong way. How did this happen?

Mmesoma participated in the UTME computer-based test along with other candidates nationwide. She subsequently requested for her results electronically from JAMB and she was informed that she scored 249. Not satisfied with this result, Mmesoma proceeded in what has now become a well-orchestrated crime, to concoct a different result of 362 for herself and by herself.

She instantly became a celebrity, garnering for herself undeserved accolades, awards and several promises for her career. Her claims were refuted and resisted by JAMB, with empirical evidence and data. Mmesoma then deployed social media and made a video of her supposed innocence, trauma and persecution.

That act alone almost drove the entire nation into the precipice. Many who believed her story were not willing to give JAMB the benefit of doubt at all, since Mmesoma claimed that she was traumatized by her own fraud.

Perhaps realizing the damage that this little girl would do to herself and the educational system, the Anambra State government promptly waded in to set up a committee of eminent persons in order to give her a soft landing. It was only a matter of time for her fable to collapse.

Mmesoma has since confessed to the crime and has through her father, apologized to the nation and to JAMB as well. Is Mmesoma not a victim of forced federalism? Was the UTME necessary at all? Should it be the only means of securing admission into the university in a federation?

The JAMB Act was enacted to commence on December 7, 1989, with a mandate for the agency to perform the following functions, under and by virtue of section 5 (1) (a) – (c) and (2) thereof:

5. (1) Notwithstanding the provisions of any other enactment, the Board shall be responsible for –
(a) the general control of the conduct of matriculation examinations for admissions into all Universities, Polytechnics (by whatever name called) and Colleges of Education (by whatever name called) in Nigeria;
© the placement of suitably qualified candidates in collaboration with the tertiary institutions after taking into account –
(i) the vacancies available in each tertiary institution;
(ii) the guidelines approved for each tertiary institution by its proprietor or other competent authority;
(iii) the preferences expressed or otherwise indicated by candidates for certain tertiary institutions and course; and
(iv) such other matters as the Board may be directed by the Minister to consider, or the Board itself may consider appropriate in the circumstances.
(2) For the avoidance of doubt, the Board shall be responsible for determining matriculation requirements and conducting examinations leading to undergraduate admissions and also for admissions to National Diploma and Nigerian Certificate in Education courses, but shall not be responsible for examinations or any other selective processes for postgraduate courses and any other courses offered by the tertiary institutions.”

What section 5 of the JAMB Act reproduced above has done is to place the destinies of candidates in the hands of a government bureaucracy, which partly accounts for the number of youths trooping out of Nigeria for greener pastures.

By including the phrase “by whatever name called” in the reference to tertiary institutions covered by JAMB, it means even universities and polytechnics established and funded by States and private entities have to go through JAMB for admission, through such mysterious criteria like federal character, educationally disadvantaged States, catchment areas, etc.

Paragraphs 27-30 of the Part 2 of the Third Schedule to the 1999 Constitution place matters of university, technological or professional education on the Concurrent Legislative List, with power granted to the States to legislate thereon. So, the issue is why JAMB has become the only institution regulating admission into tertiary institutions.

I acknowledge and indeed applaud the laudable innovations that Professor Ishaq Oloyede has brought to JAMB, especially in alleviating the pains and sufferings that candidates and their parents go through in the process of seeking admission. The effective deployment of technology by JAMB has in no small way reduced the incidences of fraud and manipulation associated with the UTME process.

Eliminating the human factor has also helped to make the process transparent and credible. The need for physical presence in JAMB offices nationwide in order to resolve many issues arising from or associated with the examinations has been addressed successfully.

Various centres have been established by JAMB for the resolution of issues relating to the admission process without having to know anyone or visiting JAMB offices physically. The processes are seamless and effective once you follow the online instructions. But this does not in any way take away the anomaly of the existence of JAMB.

In the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended, it is stated clearly in section 2 (2) that “Nigeria shall be a Federation consisting of States and a Federal Capital Territory.” In the proper definition of a federation, you have the federating units as the strength and power of the federation, with a center created to manage certain peripheral matters that bind the units together.

In a country where private individuals have established their own universities, where religious organisations and corporate entities have their own unique universities, how do you then maintain JAMB as a central agency to determine which candidate these universities will admit based on an examination conducted without the input of the said universities?

In very embarrassing situations, some of the universities have developed their own post-UTME examinations, through which successful candidates in UTME failed post-UTME tests woefully and were thus denied admission.

What prompted this monumental fraud of Mmesoma? It is the wrong emphasis placed upon paper qualification by our institutions and indeed society. The issue of examination malpractices is not limited to Mmesoma but is prevalent in virtually all academic institutions where even parents pay to get their wards to excel.

For other qualifying examinations such as NECO, WAEC, etc, the story of miracle centres abounds all over the place. In a very bizarre situation recently, a lawyer was caught in the examination hall of the Nigerian Law School helping a student to write the bar examinations.

University students are often recruited to be substitutes for candidates in qualifying examinations. In present-day Nigeria, there are many ‘graduates’ who cannot write complete sentences or produce any intelligible essay. At the oral interviews, you get thoroughly embarrassed with the blunders being spewed out by supposed graduates who at times claimed to have master’s degree.

There are many people in various government establishments who cannot defend the degrees with which they occupy their exalted offices and positions. We know these things but we turn the blind eye in the name of ethnicity, religion and at times outright corruption. There are several Mmesomas even in the universities, some as teachers and others as administrators.

In reality however, there are a good number of well experienced persons in various establishments who possess the capacity and know-how but are limited by the absence of paper qualifications. They are able to produce wonderful results based on either their experience or training whilst those who have been imposed upon them through fraudulent paper qualifications cannot match their expertise and utility.

In a peculiar case that the judiciary would have to resolve one way or the other very soon, it has been alleged that the certificate of the National Youth Service of an important personality was forged. It is often said that in Nigeria, many people parade multiple ages for different purposes, such as the official and unofficial ages, at times to beat the statutory prescription for retirement.

The case of Mmesoma then is a testament of the failure of our federation, a demonstration of lack of confidence in our institutions and agencies. JAMB has no relevance in a federation other an avenue to assert control and suffocate the federating units.