Three – maybe three and a half – stories go to the heart of why Nigeria appears stuck in a rut. And for some strange reason, all of them are rooted mainly in energy and power. 

The first is about a project, the Mambilla Hydroelectric Project. If you live in Nigeria – except you’re the Minister of Power, Adebayo Adelabu – there’s a good chance you would have heard about this project, which is located in Gembu, Taraba State. 

In that case, there’s a chance you might also have heard that the national power grid, more in the news for collapsing than for generating power, collapsed three times last week, plunging most parts of the country into darkness. The Minister of Power is too busy making excuses to notice. 

Mambilla, rolling grid collapse

But he doesn’t have to worry. Others are counting the number of grid collapses for him. In its lead story on October 21, PUNCH reported that the national grid has collapsed 105 times in 10 years despite the government’s $1.4 billion in loans to fix the problem. If we still have the appetite for more loans to waste, the report said an additional $2.9 billion from the World Bank could indulge our irresponsibility. 

But that’s just the beginning of the Mambilla story. I’d be foolish to claim there’s one single Mambilla story. There isn’t. But this is a version from several trusted, ringside sources. Sometime in 2003, President Olusegun Obasanjo visited the Three Gorges Dam, the world’s largest power station in China, with an installed capacity of 22,500 MW. 

He liked what he saw and wanted the company to replicate something on a smaller scale in Mambilla. At the time, it was estimated that the dam would generate an additional 3,050 MW for Nigeria, a chronically underpowered country struggling to generate 2,500MW for over 200 million people. The project was divided into three lots at a contract sum of roughly $6 billion to be delivered in five years.

Sunset on a contract

Since the word “contract” and Nigeria are made for trouble, trouble started. Sunrise Power and Transmission Company, promoted by Leno Adesanya, teamed up with North China Power and China Hydroelectric to make a bid for Mambilla. It seemed, however, that that was not the original plan, which was to have China Three Gorges Corporation, the China state-owned power company that built Three Gorges, build Mambilla.

One thing led to another, and the Minister of Power at the time, Dr. Olu Agunloye, who said he believed he was acting on behalf of the Nigerian government, awarded the contract at $6 billion to Sunrise through “a letter of intent” in 2007. 

Sunrise and its Chinese partners turned up at Mambilla, as did China Three Gorges, based on Obasanjo’s invitation: two significant contractors, two separate invitations, one task, and one divided government. But the government soon changed hands. Obasanjo was out, and President Umaru Yar’Adua was in. 

Sorry, we can’t pay

In 2009, Yar’Adua cancelled the Sunrise contract. Adesanya was furious. He went to Arbitration in Paris and was awarded $400 million for the government’s alleged breach. Meanwhile, China Three Gorges backed off at the first smell of trouble, leaving Nigeria to stew in its misery. 

In 2015, President Muhammadu Buhari came in. Former Attorney General and Minister of Justice Abubakar Malami, doing what he did fantastically well, renegotiated the penalty with Adesanya from $400 million to $200 million. Buhari refused to pay, and as Adesanya headed back to Arbitration, the EFCC dragged him and Agunloye, charging the latter with seven counts of forgery, contract award without approval, disobedience to presidential orders, etc. 

Long story short, 12 years after Mambilla was supposed to have been completed with all its transformative promises in power, rail, roads, infrastructure, and jobs (not to mention the missing N30 billion Obasanjo left in the project account), we’re still in a rut, stewing deeper and deeper in the misery of rolling blackouts and collapsing grids.

Isn’t it possible, for God’s sake – and the sake of the bigger picture – for this government to end the drama around the project and save Baby Mambilla from the stale, disposable bathwater?

Wilbros war

This second story illustrates how such a missed opportunity never ends well. It’s the story of Wilbros, one of the biggest things in Port Harcourt, Rivers State, in its heyday. In 2008/2009, when the ego war between Obasanjo and his former deputy, Atiku Abubakar, was at its peak, the EFCC, never missing a chance to outdo itself, said Wilbros senior officials had paid $6 million in bribes to top members of the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP). 

A director of the company pleaded guilty to the charge in a US federal court, and the EFCC pounced. Fair enough, but what was the company, Wilbros, doing, and was it not possible to prosecute the errant directors without destroying the company? At the time of the blowout, Wilbros, a US-Nigerian-based company, was building the West African Gas Pipeline. 

Dream deferred

It was Nigeria’s biggest oil and gas construction company, competing with Saipem and having over 3,000 workers. The gas pipeline was massive. According to the World Bank, completion of the project would have improved the competitiveness of the energy sectors in Ghana, Benin, and Togo by promoting cheaper and environmentally cleaner gas from Nigeria instead of solid and liquid fuels for power generation and other industrial and commercial uses.  

Wilbros was at 80 percent completion of the gas pipeline project when the EFCC struck. The matter dragged and dragged. By 2013, Wilbros’s massive pipeline coating plant was rotting, among other valuable assets worth billions of naira. The company was wrecked by its inability to finish the project, yet nothing emerged from the prosecution of the big names bandied about as suspects, including former GMDs of NNPC. Wilbros sold off its remnant to Ascot, and the rest is history. 

Pan Ocean’s troubled sea

Pan Ocean is the third story. Pan Ocean, an Indigenous oil and gas exploration company, embarked on one of the most audacious projects of its life. Under Dr. Festus Fadeyi, its chairman at the time, the company invested over $500 million in a gas project to feed the Escravos-Lagos Pipeline System and the West African Gas Pipeline. 

It was supposed to have an impact similar to what Wilbros attempted to do. But there was a problem. The chairman, also a significant shareholder in Skye Bank at the time, had allegedly overborrowed from the bank, forcing it to over-leverage. He had reportedly borrowed about N240 billion, over half of the bank’s total debt.

When President Muhammadu Buhari’s government pounced in 2015, some of the funds had found their way into oil mining leases, including OML 98 managed by Pan Ocean, which was among the seven revoked. The critical point is that all asset leases that reverted to NNPCL, ostensibly in the public interest, have served neither the public interest nor those of the original owners. They have become NNPCL’s ATM. 

Mother of them all

The half of the three stories, actually the mother of them all, is the Ajaokuta Steel Company. It’s the story of a wasting N4 trillion asset for another day. It competes with the four state-owned refineries in demonstrating how ego, primordial greed, and monumentally poor judgment could lead to state collapse.

Yet, carefully and thoughtfully managed, these cases could have helped lessen our current misery. 

One man willing to go on the record on this matter, Dan D. Kunle, power and energy expert and professional of over 30 years, told me last week, “It’s an irony that Nigeria is suffering amid these great opportunities when presidential intervention could turn the page and bring this country the relief it needs badly.”

Three stories, one message: Who will bell the cat?

Between 1967 and 1970, Nigeria prosecuted a blood civil war, one of the bloodiest in the annals of modern history. And at the center of that terrible national tragedy is that man of destiny, General Yakubu Gowon, the head of the military administration—the second in the history of Nigeria’s chequered post-independence political history. After the deep euphoria of independence, the 1966 coup and the aftermath of civil war were too disjunctive for a state that was aiming for the status of a key player on the continent and on the globe; a nation state that was supposed to reverse the ills of colonialism and increase the well-being of her citizens. These series of national events were also something that no national leader should be saddled with. And this is because the position General Gowon was meant to defend—upholding the postcolonial status of one Nigeria even in the face of gross national inconsistencies --- one which led to the 1967-70 civil war. But then, who would want to be associated with the dissolution of a state that destiny has called on one to protect? 

General Gowon’s entry into the trajectory of Nigeria’s national project implies that he was called upon to supervise the direction Nigeria would go right from the commencement of nation-building. The responsibility to channel the political development of the Nigerian state was thrusted on his unwilling head, and from a critically debilitating point of extreme disunity. And it is in this sense that we can regard General Yakubu Gowon as the grand personification of the resilient Nigerian spirit. It is very difficult not to believe that Providence had a hand in inscribing Gowon’s life with a very unique purpose that came to finally intersects Nigeria’s. From the face-off with the late General Odimegwu Ojukwu to the crafting of the Aburi Declaration which broke down eventually because of contrasting interpretation of what the accord demands of the federal and Eastern regional governments. The entire trajectory of incidences and events constitute quite an interesting field of study not only for political scientists, but also political psychologists. For instance, what mix of political ego was responsible in tilting the critical situation into a pissing contest between the two national gladiators? 

War is always a terrible business. In the Nigerian case, the variables involved are all too multiple and complex to make any coherent sense. From external business interests to the internal social and ethnic cleavages whose fissiparous tendencies were the primary causes of the conflict. And yet, that war had to be fought, and Gowon had to supervise the looming disintegration of a national project that had barely taken off. If we agree that Providence had thrusted this national destiny on Gowon, we should also know that it is not deterministic. He could have capitulated in following through with the divine responsibility. He did not. He accepted it as God’s will even if he might not have had that spiritual understanding at the time, and he brought Nigeria as far as he could with a mixture of sound and unsound decisions and judgments. Let me highlight just two that speak to how contradictory leadership decisions can sometimes be. 

On October 1, 1970, General Gowon promised to set in place a political and electoral process that will lead to the handing over of the rein of authority to a civil government by October 1, 1976. Unfortunately, the Supreme Military Council was forced to renege on its promise. And the reason was that the political class did not seem ready to take up the great task of moving forward a state that was still reeling from the consequences of the civil war, and the ethnic bitterness that attended it. That decision could be approached from multiple interpretive perspectives. One could ask what gave Gowon the messianic audacity to legislate on the future of Nigeria. After all, the political behavior of Nigerian politicians has not changed since then. Others could point at a key patriotic sensibility that did not want to scuttle the progresses made since the end of the civil war. No one who went through the gruesome war would want to ever have a repeat of it.      

One of the infamous moments of the Gowon administration is the lost opportunity of transforming the public service system in Nigeria through the adoption of the Udoji Commission report and the implementation of its grand managerial paradigm shifting recommendations. The report was initiated as a result of a global managerial revolution that insisted that the old Weberian administration must give way to a new public service that will be flexible, economical, lean, effective and efficient in the achievement of service delivery. The new public service is meant to be modernized and boosted for an output-oriented performance that increase Nigeria’s productive base within a grand architecture of a developmental state – one with a hold on the ‘commanding heights’ of the national economy. Udoji was motivated in its critical assessment of the Nigerian public service by the Fulton Commission Report of 1968 that also took on the British Civil Service and the urgency of its institutional reform. The Udoji Commission was at once inaugurated to deal with the protracted wage and incentives issues that the civil service had been dealing with before independence and which final resolution the Adebo 1971 report passed on to the Udoji Commission for a holistic systemic reconsideration. Unfortunately, the Gowon administration (presumably as concession to the sentiments of his super-permanent secretaries) cling on to the wage components of the Udoji Report and left off the more fundamental dimensions of institutional reform that would have radically improved the capability readiness of the public service system. How could an administration that balked at handing over power to a bunch of unprepared political class not see the significance of preparing the public service system as a condition for national productivity and good governance? Professor Lars Konlind’s perspective on why institutions enter into irredeemable decline, attributed this sense to what happens when an organization shun changes at the peak of its success. Consequently, leaders (political and administrative) develop selective deafness, one which in the Nigeria’s case over-glorifies the ‘I am directed’ Weberian bureaucratic tradition by disregarding the innovations that managerialism portend, one that has earned Nigeria the reputation of the “hesitant reformer”. 

And yet, without being flippant or hagiographic, General Gowon is in my assessment one of the most heroic of Nigerian leaders. He represents a sense of statesmanship that stands in sharp contrast to the intense sense of gratification that characterizes politics today. The trajectory of his statesmanship is significantly defining. To be born before the founding of such a combustible nation as ours, and to have matured to receive a calling to fight a war to elevate an artificial creation of the British colonialist—‘a mere geographical expression’, to quote Chief Obafemi Awolowo—to the status of a state worth preserving, is nothing less than a defining trajectory. When as a nation we were confronted with a “to be or not to be” dilemma in our evolution, General Gowon chose Nigeria. With that choice, General Gowon brought a significant dimension to the importance of the minority ethnic groups in crystallizing the Nigeria Project. That being a clarion call to the majority ethnic groups that Nigeria did not only belong to all of us; it is God’s divine project. 

Despite the faux pas concerning the Udoji Commission Report and its momentous recommendations, the Gowon administration still left an indelible administrative example that replicate the Awolowo-Adebo administrative model in the old western region. The corps of the super-permanent secretaries significantly backstopped the Gowon administration in the policy space that was stampeded during the years of the civil war. I can hypothesize that without that fundamental model as a crucial fulcrum, the civil war would have been worse that it was. And so, as a testament to the possible greatness of the Nigerian state, we already have two versions of the politics-administration model that could be reinvented to stimulate good governance.

Besides, General Yakubu Gowon was not just a normal run-of-the-mill soldier. He was an officer and a gentleman. At a time when the figure of the solider or the image of the Nigerian army has dipped significantly in reputation, Gowon embodied the very essence of military professionalism and reputation for excellence. As a commissioned officer, he was minded about the educational and training extent so much so that he was ready to go the full lengths to prove his thirst for learning to be more and more professional. General Gowon was not content with his prestigious training at Sandhurst, Camberley and Latimer. He just had to eventually undergo the academic rigor of adult education to earn a doctorate degree at the University of Warwick in the United Kingdom. That might have been a personal vision of fulfilment, but it elevated the public perception of what and who an officer should be. With that accomplishment, Officer Gowon became a composite image of a true military professional that is not defined by his brawn or capacity to wield the gun, but by intelligence, intellect and humaneness in a profession defined by its unique masculinity. 

In all, General Yakubu Gowon believes in Nigeria. Only the most wrong-headed critique would not take that as a consequential fact. Indeed, after he had left the corridors of power, General Gowon still holds on to a spiritual responsibility to keep up the Providential imperative that Nigeria is on a divine course to greatness. For being so politically, professionally and spiritually involved in the courses of Nigeria’s nation-building efforts, there is no other way to see General Yakubu Gowon order than as a patriot, and one of Nigeria’s eternal heroes. And there is no other way to cap his many efforts as seeing Nigeria fulfill her divine mandate than to explore his political and nationalist legacies while he is still with us. At ninety, our nonagenarian statesman and general deserves more than national accolades. He deserves to see the Nigeria of is dreams and aspirations.  

All the eight countries that have qualified for the 2024 FIFA U-17 Women’s World Cup quarter-final have been confirmed.

This follows the conclusion of the final group fixtures in the early hours of Thursday morning.

DAILY POST reports that North Korea defeated England 4-0 in their final group game.

Kenya won 2-1 against Mexico, but both teams failed to advance to the knock-out stage after getting the lowest points in their group.

However , the eight countries that have booked their place in the last-8 after the conclusion of the group stage are Nigeria, Poland, United States, North Korea, England, Spain, Ecuador and Japan.

The quarter-final fixtures will commence from Saturday.

[DailyPost]

Members of my generation who lived or spent holidays in Lagos during the late seventies to the nineties remember men whose lives were ruined by gambling. These were people adept at “perming” numbers, even in their sleep, with the assurance they would hit the jackpot the next day. “Koraa dagun lose yi” (the promoter of the gambling house is in trouble this week) was the usual refrain which came with at least “a sure banker.” Yet, for most of these gamblers, it was the story of the fool and his money because their ‘tomorrow’ never came. While that habit was restricted to a few in the past, gambling has now become a serious social problem in Nigeria. And relevant stakeholders are not paying attention. Worse still, school children are increasingly getting hooked on one form of gambling or another. 

Let me be upfront here. I have no problem with adults who gamble. And I am aware of a place in Abuja they call ‘The Great Gambler’ where the movers and shakers of our country gather each weekend to play ‘Kalokalo’ with their loot. But I am concerned when children are introduced to this destructive habit so early in their lives, without any restriction. Section 34 of the National Lottery Act 2005 makes betting illegal for children in Nigeria, as it is in all countries. “Any person who knowingly sells to any person under the age of 18 years any ticket in a lottery operated by a licensee commits an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine of not less than N20,000 or imprisonment for a term of not less than one year or both such fine and imprisonment,” the Act states. But in a milieu where laws are rarely enforced, it is little wonder that across the country today, even primary school children (in uniform) are found in gambling joints during the day.

I am aware that gambling is a huge industry in Nigeria today with several billions of Naira changing hands (including under the table) between and among stakeholders in both the private and public sectors. And it has generated huge employment opportunities. But we must also think about the future of our country and the social dislocation that gambling is causing within our society. With the economic challenge that has made life very difficult for the average Nigerian it is no surprise that many of our people are looking for all manner of ‘miracles’ to survive. It is this desperation that has made gambling all pervasive and the pressure it brings is already accentuating other vices. A joint paper, ‘An Overview of Gambling in Nigeria’ published on the website of the United States National Library of Medicine, and authored by Chinyere Mirian Oguocha, a Nigerian Professor at the Imo State University and Sanju George, an Indian Professor at Rajagiri College of Social Sciences, is quite revealing on this malaise. “In spite of the laws regulating gambling in Nigeria, about 57.2% of school-age children have gambled at least once in their lifetime and 77.6% of these have gambled in the past year, with 58.3% reporting unfettered access to gambling dens,” the duo wrote.

Meanwhile, even when gambling may be advertised as entertainment to deceive the unwary, especially in societies like ours, science has since confirmed it to be a behavioural problem. “Playing a game of chance activates the brain’s reward system, releasing a strong dopamine hit and a feeling of pleasure. The same mechanism is at play whether the person is standing at the roulette table or playing on their phone,” Charlotte Aynsley, an e-safety consultant wrote to affirm what psychiatrists have since discovered. “Psychologists call this effect ‘variable rate reinforcement’. The player, in this case, is rewarded in an unpredictable manner – and the more uncertainty there is, the more dopamine gets released.”

Gambling is considered harmful in numerous ways, including causing financial stress, family dislocations, mental health challenges and domestic violence. In her piece, ‘Game over: the risks of children gambling’, a child psychiatrist, Charlotte Goddard explores associated issues. Referencing statistics from the National Audit Office, she wrote that there are around 55,000 ‘problem’ gamblers aged 11 to 16 in the United Kingdom, with a further 85,000 estimated to be at risk. “A 2019 Gambling Commission survey found 11 percent of 11- to 16-year-olds said they spent their own money on gambling in the past week,” she wrote.

This, of course, is a global problem with young people taking to gambling through internet games without even realising it. “They are not going into bookies,” says Alexa Roseblade, senior programmes manager at GamCare, a charity. “A lot of young people are gambling with friends such as making a bet about who will win a race.” That’s usually how it starts and before they know it, they are hooked. For young people, gambling and gaming are often closely linked, according to Goddard. “Games themselves can encourage behaviour linked to gambling. A game might cost £40 but children are encouraged to spend more money to progress further. There are also issues around ‘loot boxes’, where players are encouraged to buy mystery prizes within a game, without knowing what they will get.”

The issue here is that most countries already recognise the problem. And they are finding both preventive and curative solutions to the challenge. In the UK, for instance, they have NHS’s National Centre for Behavioural Addictions houses, the National Problem Gambling Clinic and the National Centre for Gaming Disorders. There are also parent support groups which aim to help parents set boundaries and communicate more effectively with their children on the danger of gambling. In 2021, the RSHE statutory guidance for schools and education introduced the topic of gambling to the curriculum. But in Nigeria, there are no such interventions, even while many of our young people gamble their future away.

In a society where many people have been conditioned to believe that wealth has no correlation with work, we should not be surprised that young Nigerians are taking to gambling thinking that is the surest route for them to ‘hammer’. The situation is not helped by the economic situation in the country and the dearth of employment opportunities. That has encouraged the proliferation of online sports betting and Cybercafés dedicated to all forms of lottery. But the danger to children should compel action, even though this government is so obsessed with revenue generation. Besides the impact on their performance in school, other tell-tale signs that children might be hooked on gambling include becoming agitated or upset for no apparent reason, withdrawing from family and friends, being secretive about (or always being short of) money etc.

I am delighted that an NGO, ‘Gamble Alert’, has dedicated itself to preventing gambling harm and providing free therapy, emotional support and treatment services for those already addicted. The organisation’s mission is encapsulated in its commitment to creating “a safe haven for individuals harmed by their own gambling or their important others’ gambling to find solace and rediscover their strength.” That ‘Gamble Alert’ focuses on sensitizing young people to the dangers of underage gambling through discussions and educational materials, is commendable. And we need more of such efforts.

In their paper earlier referenced, the duo of Aguocha and George concluded that “There needs to be a wider debate about gambling as a public health issue in Nigeria, involving key stakeholders such as academics, healthcare professionals, policy makers and the gambling industry”. They added: “Positive action is required to minimise gambling-related harm to the people of Nigeria.”

I wholeheartedly concur!

Nigeria and the Challenge of Accountability

(With the theme, ‘Enhancing Accountability: Limiting Vulnerabilities’, the Nigeria Accountability Summit 2024 continues today in Abuja. Below is my keynote speech at the opening session yesterday morning)

I am aware that when you talk about accountability, people think you are referring to money. But accountability is much more than that. For me, nothing illustrates the real essence of accountability better than a story I once shared in my column. Concerned that her son was addicted to eating to much sugar, a mother sought appointment to see the legendary Indian leader, Mahatma Gandhi. When she finally did, with her son in tow, she said: “The whole nation listens to you, please tell my son to stop eating sugar, as it is not good for his health”. Ghandi replied, “I cannot tell him that. But you may bring him back in a few weeks and then I will talk to him.” 

Upset and disappointed, the mother took the boy home. Two weeks later, she came back. This time Gandhi looked directly at the boy and said “Son, you should stop eating sugar. It is not good for your health.” The boy nodded his head and made a solemn commitment to heed the admonition. Puzzled, the boy’s mother asked Ghandi, “Why did you send us away two weeks ago when you could have simply told the boy what you just did?”

That, for me, sums up what accountability is all about.

I am delighted to be here this morning for the Nigeria Accountability Summit (NAS) 2024. I understand that the two-day programme is basically for assessing the progress made in achieving the 8-point agenda of the current administration and related priority areas for government at the subnational levels. I remember that in August 2023, the Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister for the Economy, Wale Edun presented the ‘Roadmap for the Economy’, which highlighted eight priority areas for the administration. They are food security, poverty eradication, economic growth and job creation, access to capital, improving security, rule of law and fighting corruption. It is more than one year since that public proclamation, and the jury is now out as to whether anything concrete has been achieved regarding those lofty objectives.

Since I am not familiar with what President Bola Tinubu has done with his 8-point agenda, I would prefer to restrict my brief intervention this morning to the general notion of ‘accountability’ which is of great importance in all aspects of human endeavour. However, I may also say a few words about the promised food security, job creation, rule of law and all that before I take my seat, although I am more interested in the outcome of your overview of the 8-point agenda.

Accountability is a core pillar of good governance and its relevance in one’s personal and public life cannot be overemphasised. Indeed, at the heart of any meaningful development is accountability and it is enshrined in the 1999 Constitution (as amended). Section 15(5) states that: “the state shall abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power; emphasising the government’s commitment to accountability and transparency.” This is further amplified in Section 16(1): “It is the responsibility of the state to harness the resources of the nation and promote national prosperity and an efficient, dynamic, and self-reliant economy for every citizen.”

There can be no better definition of accountability than the one proffered by this institution. “The concept of accountability is central to discussion related to problems not just in the non-profit and corporate environment but also in the public sector,” quoting from your website. “It is the acknowledgement and assumption of responsibility for action, products, decisions, and policies including the administration, governance, and implementation within the scope of leadership role or employment position and encompassing the obligation to report, explain and answer for resulting consequences.” That for me says it all about why, without accountability, it is impossible to deliver on the public good.

In its ordinary meaning, accountability is an obligation or willingness to accept responsibility for one’s action. It is being held answerable for accomplishing a goal or assignment. It is being self-aware, admitting one’s mistakes and accepting the consequences of one’s actions. Thomas Paine, who authored ‘The Rights of Man’, once wrote that, “a body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody ought not to be trusted by anybody.” The tragedy of Nigeria is that the people and institutions responsible for oversight of public expenditure are themselves not accountable. You find the greatest lawbreakers among our lawmakers. Many of our Judges promote injustice. Let’s not even go to the religious sector where clerics mouth what they neither practice nor believe in.

Some centuries ago, a famous philosopher, Joseph de Maistre famously said: “Every nation gets the government it deserves.” What he meant was that it’s up to the citizens of every nation not only to elect the right leaders, but also to hold them accountable. Unfortunately, Nigerians do not perform this sacred duty; they don’t act as a bulwark against bad leadership. Indeed, a former Minister of Trade and Investment, Mr Olusegun Aganga, said in his book, ‘Reclaiming the Jewel of Africa’ that the average Nigerian citizen “needs to be reminded what it means to be a citizen all over again.” This, of course, is not to suggest that accountability is only for elected officials. For example, citizens should also be accountable for paying tax. Perhaps that is where the problem lies because we live in a country where most shirk this obligation. In countries where the majority of people pay taxes, there is a strong demand for good governance.

Let me now briefly examine a few issues in the 8-point agenda of the Tinubu administration that this session seeks to interrogate. Let’s start with economic growth and food security. Going by the latest World Bank’s ‘Food Security Update Report’, Nigeria is among a few countries that have seen a significant rise in the number of people facing acute food shortages. Year-on-year inflation also surged by 5.98 percent points, according to the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) which last week released the latest Consumer Price Index report, revealing that the headline inflation rate for September rose to 32.70 percent. You can all draw your own conclusions.

That millions of Nigerians go to bed hungry every night is no longer a subject of debate. But it is naive to believe that the food crisis can be resolved without addressing the underlying security problems. With arable land and a good climate, we can adequately feed ourselves. The challenge is that most farmers have abandoned their farms due to fear of being kidnapped or killed. If the security of these farmers is assured, the prices of commodities in the market will slowly but surely come down. Without decisive action on that front, the hunger crises will only deepen, and fuel social unrest. That said, we must commend the military for the sacrifice they continue to make on behalf of our country as they tackle the security challenge.

In a recent post, former Commandant, Nigerian Naval Engineering College, Sapele, Rear Admiral Michael Johnson (Rtd) said any democracy, whether liberal or conservative, participatory or representative, “that doesn’t embrace the highest standards of accountability coupled with justice, equity, and fairness will ultimately fail,” just as “belt-tightening philosophies without accountability will not make the citizens trust those in government.” I agree with him. Telling Nigerians to sacrifice without government officials’ taking the lead is an exercise in futility. If Tinubu wants to succeed, those who serve under him must prioritise the public good, exercise their duties with integrity, and manage public resources judiciously. Now that there are reports that the president is considering a cabinet reshuffle, it is also important to understand that the cost of governance must be drastically reduced. Having 48 ministers at a time when most Nigerians can barely feed does not make economic sense.

When we talk about how a lack of accountability defines public conduct in Nigeria, the situation is worse at the subnational level. Indeed, as things stand in Nigeria today, as I have had cause to point out on several occasions, accountability diminishes as you move from the centre to the other units: states and local governments. In most of the 36 states, governors behave like emperors with the speakers of their states houses of assembly mere errand boys/girls who serve and could be removed at their pleasure. The logical result is that the promise of good governance embedded in the theory of decentralization is being delivered in the breach.

(NOTE: The so-called cabinet reshuffle was announced yesterday afternoon. Five Ministers were sacked. Seven new Ministers were appointed to replace them. So, instead of reducing the number that was already unprecedented, the president only added more. At the rate he is going, we may soon have 100 Ministers!)

As I take my seat, let me congratulate my Aburo and co-convener of this conference, Olusegun Elemo and other members of the organising team. I look forward to the outcome of your sessions today and tomorrow. For us to develop as a country, there must be oversight at every level of government to check public expenditure. There is also a burden on the people to constantly wield their power to vote in the right people at elections, and to organise civic activities to demand accountability from their leaders. If Nigerians want to be respected in Africa and beyond, there must be accountability at various levels of government and in the society at large. 

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

Apart from commercial banks, which have been running away with astronomical profits, the years 2023 and 2024 have been tumultuous years for businesses in Nigeria, leading some to move from the country. The reasons are not far-fetched. They include the devaluation of the Naira, due to the floating of the exchange rate; repeated hikes in the prices of petroleum products because of the removal of fuel subsidy; and high inflation, resulting from the above developments.

It is understandable, therefore, why the trio of telephone service providers in Nigeria, MTN, Airtel, and Glo, have been suffering major losses in revenue since 2023. Their operation is further complicated by the introduction of value-added tax on tower leases in the 2023 Finance Act and repeated power grid failures, leading to power failure in many parts of the country. Nevertheless, despite these harsh conditions these telephone service providers have continued to make some profit.

Unfortunately, consumers bear the brunt of their losses, which are passed to them in the form of poor services. Telephone calls don’t go through. Messages hang or are not delivered. Images fail to load. Yet, even for such unsuccessful deliveries, you may lose credit or data. The result is the frequency of usages, such as ‘poor’ or ‘no network’; ‘network problem;’ and ‘network failure’ among others. No promotional giveaways, such as ‘20% more data’ or ‘100% awoof credit or data’ could compensate for these inadequacies.

Yet another reason for these problems is oversubscription by the service providers. For example, as many as 1000 users may be subscribed to a service node meant for 500 users. There is also the problem of poor equipment maintenance. For example, someone living near a mast told me that no one had come there to inspect it for over three years! Again, consumers suffer the consequences of such neglect.

These inadequacies are particularly felt in online banking. Bank Apps crash or do not work due to network failure. Of course, commercial banks create other problems for their customers. For example, it sometimes takes hours, even days, for transferred funds to show up in the beneficiary’s account, despite instant debit of the payer’s account. Sometimes, the funds don’t even show up at all and repeated calls to the bank may yield no result until you go to a branch yourself. Worse still, ATM machines are often terribly slow, because most of them are outdated. Besides, only 10 Naira maximum is dispensed in most cases. Moreover, you often pay charges for the number of withdrawals you make.

The problem with network failure in Nigeria is part of a huge structural problem. The telephone service providers seem to be piggybacking on the failure of supervision by appropriate government agencies. It is also possible that, where supervision does take place, sanctions are compromised by corruption. Not a few think that the Bobrisky case and its investigations are similarly compromised.

Yet, there are many questions waiting to be answered by the service providers and the supervising agencies of the government. For example, given the existing capacity of installed equipment, how many subscribers could each provider effectively carry without overload? How extensive is each provider’s 4G coverage? This is an important question because data download often slows down or fails completely whenever coverage drops to 3G or below on any service provider’s network.

The truth is that we may not be able to take part effectively in the digital revolution if telephone service providers continue to perform below average. Yet our participation is critical not just for individual telephone services but also for the benefit of our institutions, especially educational and health institutions. Network connectivity is critical to digital success in these institutions. For example, college students and medical doctors learn a lot these days from online resources.

The above observations have serious implications for the economy. So does frequent power failure. According to available data, there are about 27 grid-connected generating plants currently in operation in the Nigerian Electricity Supply Industry (NESI) with a total installed power generation capacity of about 13,000-15,000 MW and an available capacity of just over 5,000 MW. This is a far cry from the estimated 35,000 MW needed for a population of 250 million people.

By contrast, Brazil, with comparable population, climate, and structure of government, has an installed power generation capacity of 150,000 MW and available capacity of at least 130,000 MW! Yet the government plans to add 6000 MW of capacity every year to satisfy growing demand from an increasing and more prosperous population. That is why the government aims at investing over $100 billion over the next five years on power generation, transmission, and distribution. What is even more interesting about Brazil’s energy structure is its diversification. While Nigeria relies on natural gas and hydropower, Brazil derives its energy from a variety of sources—fossil (oil, coal, and natural gas); and renewable (hydropower, wind, and solar). Brazil did not arrive at this level in one day. It is all a result of careful planning and effective implementation from government to government.

That is why the combination of power and network failures needs urgent attention from the government.

In continuation of his interactions with Nigerians in the Diaspora and in keeping with his avowed determination to lead the search for a new Nigeria, the National leader of the Labour Party, who was the party's Presidential flag bearer in the 2023 election, Mr. Peter Obi, begins a three day, three Cities tour of the United States of America.

A statement from Peter Obi Media Reach, POMR, said that the tour will begin on Thursday the 24th, 25th, and 26th of October 2024 and will be undertaken in the three cities of Houston, TX, Los Angeles, CA, and Atlanta, GA.

The tour will be the last leg of his North America Appreciation visits that had earlier taken him to Toronto, Canada; Boston, MA; New York City, NY; West Orange, N; Cherry,y N; Dallas, TX; Charlotte, NC; and Detroit, MI.

The tour is also to underscore Mr Obi's commitment during the 2023 electioneering to consistently engage the Nigeria Diaspora and interact with them constructively in the nation-building debate for the creation of a new Nigeria.
He also uses the tour to sustain, by example,e a new narrative where, unlike before, politicians only visit the national population when seeking their votes and support but hardly returns after elections to show appreciation.

The tours will be mostly interactive to provide Obi the opportunity to once again, through questions and answers, unveil his mission for a new Nigeria that is Possible and to also react to the unpalatable state of the nation.

The former Anambra State Governor remains ever grateful to Nigerians at home and abroad who continue to show unwavering support and trust in him morally, materially, and financially during the 2023 presidential elections.

Signed
Ibrahim Umar
POMR SPOKESMAN

At the end of the 43rd meeting of the Federal Executive Council held on 30 December 1974, the President of the Council, General Gowon delivered a valecdictory speech to the out-going Civil Commissioners.

He observed that the life of the Council would come to an end at the conclusion of the meeting. As recorded by the Official Recorder: “He expressed the nation’s gratitude and his government’s appreciation for the services of the out-going civil commissioners” while recalling “the difficult times and anxious moments of the National Crisis and the Civil War during which they served loyally. He recalled that well over 3,000 memoranda were considered during the life of the present Council (which) dealt with high policy matters and issues of vital importance to the life of the nation. “It was now in the national interest that there should be a change”, he said.

I left the Federal Government on 30 December 1974, having served in the same post as the Federal Commissioner for Works and Housing from 27 May 1967. In January 1975, General Gowon appointed Brigadier Olu Obasanjo to succeed me. It was time for change! Looking back over the years, what was the legacy of the Gowon Governement? What were  our triumphs and our disasters?

I have already  discussed the following major triumphs or achievements by the Ministry of Works and Housing during the Gowon Era:

North-South

1. New two-lane dual carriage highways to make four. The two additional North- South Highways are: Warri – Sapele – Benin – Auchi – Koton Karfi – Abuja – Kaduna Highway; and Calabar -Yola – Maiduguri Highway. The existing two North-South roads (Lagos – Ibadan – Jebba – Kaduna – Kano – Daura; and Port Harcourt – Enugu – Makurdi – Jos) two-lane carriageways were to be reconstructed into two-lane dual carriageways to complement the two new highways.
2. The construction of two-lane dual carriageways of Lagos – Ibadan section of the  Lagos – Ibadan – Jebba – Kaduna – Kano – Daura highway was well under way before I left office. So was the Shagamu – Benin section of Shagamu – Benin – Asaba – Onitsha two-lane dual carriageway.
3. Works on the construction of a great number of roads – North-South or West-East in the 20,000 miles (from under 7,000 in 1967) of federal roads were either completed, or the works were in progress or planned by December, 1974.
4. Huge investment in public buildings, including the Federal Secretariat in Lagos and a federal secretariat in each state capital.
5. Huge investment in housing for civil servants especially the high-rise towers in Lagos to provide housing initally to host the All Africa Festival of Arts and Culture in 1976.
6. The National Housing Authority was set up under the Cabinet Office to provide housing units to the public after the festival. Festac Town was created in Lagos.
7. The establishment of the Federal Mortgage Bank, which took over the assets of the Nigerian Building Society after nationalising the Bntish interests in the latter.
8. Settlement of a well defined and permanent Nigeria/Dahomey (Benin) boundary. There has been no boundary dispute between our two countries ever since.
9. Charter for each of the professions of architecture, engineering, estate Surveying, building technology and land surveys.
10. Change over from Left-hand to Right-Hand Traffic.
11. Regional Centre for Training in Aerospace Survey at the Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife. It admits students from several African countries. Other major projects or achievements initiated by the other ministries, or the Cabinet Office (which include Fetac Town) during the Gowon Era were:
12. Nigerian National Oil Corporation, now Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation.
13. Decimalization. Decimal currency – the introduction of the Naira.
14. The Metric System, or Metrication initiated by the Ministry of Works and Housing, but executed by the Ministry of Trade.
15. Universal Free Primary Education throughout Nigeria, 1974.
16. Membership of OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Producing Countries).
17. National Youth Service Corps (NYSC).
18. Nigerian Enterprises Promotion Act (Indigenisation Decree), 1972 which opened up commerce and industry to Nigerians.
19. Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS).
20. Motor Assembly Plants: – (a) Volkswagen in Lagos; (b) Leylands in Ibadan; (c) Peugeot in Kaduna; (d) DaimlerBenz in Enugu.
21. Agro – allied industries: (a) Edible salt; (b) Sugar plant at Jebba (c) Super phosphate fertilizer project.
22. Agricultural Research Institute – assumption of full funding for the Cocoa Research Institute of Nigeria (CRIN), the Nigeria Institute for Oil Palm Research, the Institute of Agricultural Research at Samaru and the Rubber Research Institute at lyanomo and Akwette.
23. Establishment of the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan. 24. Pulp and Paper Mills at Iwopin, Western State, and another in South Eastern State.
25. Development of Specialist Hospitals in the States which would also cater for development of and increase in medical manpower
26. Nigerian Bank for Commerce and Industry.
27. National Insurance Corporation.
28. Nigerian National Supply Company 29. The 2nd and 3rd Oil Refineries at Warri and Kaduna. There has been no new ones ever since.
30: Federal Revenue Court (now Federal High Court).
31. Federal Court of Appeal (now Court of Appeal).
32. The Industrial Court.
33. Settlement of Nigeria/Cameroon Boundary.  

The judgment of the International Court of Justice at the Hague in the matter of subsequent boundary dispute between Nigeria and the Cameroon 30 years later confirmed largely the legal position taken by the Gowon Government.
 I propose to discuss briefly other achievements of Gowon’s Government, the policies leading to winch were fully discussed in Council before gestation and decisions taken.
I took part in the process.

Closing the Educational Gap : Universal Free Primary Education

The Federal Commissioner for Education,  Chief A.Y. Eke, identified some educational gaps in the field of education. In a memorandum entitled “Closing the Education Gap” presented to Council at its 37th meeting in 1972, he urged the Council to pay attention to the areas of need and come to the rescue of the states.

He referred to the “gross uneven educational development”, especially between the northern and southern states. Although he conceded that there were gaps between Rivers and South Eastern states on the one hand and the Western and Mid-Western states on the other, he nonetheless produced figures to show the division between the north and the south in the field of education:  “In the primary schools, for every child in the northern states, there were four children in the southern states; for every student in the secondary school in the northern states there were five students in the southern states. And for every undergraduate in higher institutions in the northern states, there were six students in the southern States.”

For university education, Chief Eke recommended building “Schools of Basic Studies to enable students from backward areas of the country to have opportunity of higher education”. During discussion, the view was expressed that polarisation of educational development between the north and the south was untenable as there were also educationally backward southern states.  Some members recalled that the Council had in  1969 commissioned the Shomade Committee to study the issue of primary education in  Nigena and that the committee’s report submitted in 1970 recommended the introduction of Free Primary Education for all. The members of the committee included Chief Tayo Akpata, Dr. Mahmoud Tukur, and Professor Otonto (as he then was) Nduka Otonto. The Executice Council was yet to examine its recommendations. The proposals in Chief Eke’s memorandum were however approved by the Council.  

I was in full support of the memorandum on closing the educational gap. A policy of Free Primary Education throughout Nigeria would not only extend to the northern states a scheme initiated 20 years earlier by Chief Awolowo in the West but which failed due to inadequate funding in the East, the policy would also provide adequate funding for the scheme in the southern states. The proposal on establishing eight secondary schools in the less developed areas of the country and provision of funds for the expansion of existing schools in such areas was the answer to the Quota System of Admission of students to King’s College, Lagos, which the King’s College Old Boys Association had always opposed as it seemingly discriminated against merit. The new proposal by the federal ministry would in my view go a long way to bridge the educational gap and eliminate the discrimination and injustice embedded in the quota system of admission to King’s College and Queen’s College, Lagos,  as well as the federal government other colleges.

Formal Launching of the Universal Primary Education Scheme

I had just returned from Mecca and I found my name in the list of Federal Commissioners and officials to accompany the Head of State on his visit to the North-Western State. Another punishing tour, setting out at times at 8.00 a.m. in one part of the vast state like North-West and ending up in another part at 8.00 or 9.00p.m, with little time for lunch. There were receptions and cultural shows at provisional headquarters, visits to schools and army formations, and courtesy calls on the Sultan of Sokoto, Emir of Argungu and other Emirs. The convoy of cars ran at breath-taking speed. And I was yet to recover from the hectic schedule of the Holy Pilgrimage as Amir-ul-Hajj for Nigeria. There was, however, one event which made the North-West tour memorable: the declaration by General Gowon on 20 January 1974 at the Race Course, Sokoto of his Government’s intention to introduce Universal Free Primary Education throughout Nigeria in September 1976. The projection was to enrol 2.2 million children aged 5-6 years in 1976, rising to 2.6 million in 1981
In the words of Chief A.Y. Eke, the Federal Commissioner for Education, in his memorandum presented to Council on 16 January 1974: “The Universal Primary Education would provide an opportunity for the harmonisation of the  content of the educational programme throughout the Federation and facilitate the task of relating the content and direction of education to the social-economic needs of the various communities in the country and superimpose a national purpose on our educational endeavours. Ultimately, it would help to bridge the educational gap between the various states and between the sexes and make it possible to adapt our educational policies to suit our manpower development needs. It would also help to bridge the gap between the rich and the poo± and give democracy a fair chance of success in the country. It would become possible to set unified moral, cultural and spiritual values throughout the country and the task of eradicating corruption would become much easier.”

 The Cabinet Committee’s first meeting was held on 25 June 1974 when an outline of its work was discussed.
At its second meeting on 29 July 1974, we considered six papers, largely on teacher training, expansion of existing buildings and construction of new ones including classrooms, halls, laboratories and staff quarters, recurrent expenditure and funding and provision for teacher trainers.
The third meeting of the Cabinet Committee took place on 13 August 1974.The three papers considered included Revised 1974/75 Recurrent Estimate for Teacher Training College, Disbursement of Recurrent Funds and siting and building of 62 new Teacher Training Colleges for 1975/76 academic year.

The Council considered the First Progress Report of the Cabinet Committee  at its meeting on 21 August 1974 during which the Council among other decisions: (a) Approved an expenditure of N51.046m  expansion and provision of additional facilities for the existing 156 Teacher Training Colleges.

(b) Noted the need for 62 Teacher Training Colleges at an estimated cost of N162.75m.
(c) Approved the recruitment of 1,200 Teacher Educators in addition to 1,000 members of the National Youth Service Corps to be deployed to the Teacher Training Colleges.

Such was the tempo of General Gowon’s Government preparation for the commencement of the UPE Scheme by the Council and the Cabinet Comniittee till  30 December 1974 when I left the Federal Executive Council.
Such was the enthusiasm for laying a solid foundation for the future of Nigeria in the education sector.
It was the lot of the Murtala Mohammed/ Obasanjo regime to implement the Free Primary Education Scheme initiated by the Gowon regime as best as it could.
It is a sad commentary on the quality of political class and its leadership that fifty years after independence, there stifi exists educational gap between the north and the south, or one state and the other. Lack of consistency in pplicy is part of the problem.

Economic Community of West African States

The establishment of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) was another  feather in General Yakubu Gowon’s cap.
In the run-up to political independence, West Africa was dominated by two colonial powers: Great Britain and France. For some years after dependence, West Africa remained polarised: Anglophone and  Francophone.
The economies of the Francophone countries were tied to France much more than the economies of British West Africa to Britain’s economy. Several initiatives were made at forging one large grouping or the other: Lagos in 1963, the Niamey Conference in 1966, and Accra in 1967. The Senegal River States Conference of all states along the Senegal River, also in 1967 led to the first serious attempt at regional grouping in Monrovia in 1968. The Monrovia conference failed to germinate; even the protocol on customs was never signed. In April 1972 however, General Gowon and General Eyadema of Togo 1974 met to revive the effort at a regional economic grouping, cutting across linguistic lines. Following joint delegations of Nigeria and Togo to all the West African States, the Ministry of External Affairs conducted a discreet exploration through our missions in West Africa to find out which countries would be interested in the proposed West African Economic Community. As a result of the investigation, seven out of eleven replies received in August 1972 were referred back to the Mimstry for further clarification There was the problem of France which had been campaigning  vigourously for closer economic ties between French-speaking West African countries and the European Economic Commumty, and did everythmg possible to subvert the creation of the proposed West Africa Economic Community. A meeting of officials was scheduled for January 1973 in Lome. Due to various obstacles, the ministerial meeting which was to follow did not hold until 10 to 15 December, 1973 in Lome to consider the proposal to establish the community submitted jointly by the sponsors, Nigeria and Togo. All the fifteen countries in the West African sub-region (including the newly independent Guinea-Bissan) were represented at the meeting.
The report to Council noted the enthusiasm of member-countries of CEAO – a grouping of French-speaking states, some of whom had earlier on shown a great deal of antipathy towards the proposed community. They not only sent strong delegations but took active part in the deliberation throughout. That bore an eloquent testimony to the quiet diplomacy of the Nigerian and Togolese Governments. The next ministerial meeting was held in Niamey in March 1974 and the final draft Treaty establishing the Economic Community of West African States (ECO WAS) was approved by the Heads of State of all the countries in the West African region later in the year. Under the Treaty, decisions are based on the principle of unanimity of member-countries present at the meetings. Other major decisions taken at the inaugural conference were the establishment of a secretariat based in Lagos and an annual budget and creation of specialised commissions in the following areas:
(i)Trade, Customs, Immigration, Monetary and Payments;
(ii) Industry and Natural esources;
(iii) Transport, Communications and Energy;
(iv) Social and CulturalAffairs.

Nigerian Enterprises Promotion Act

Soon after the end of the 2nd World War (1939-1945), the Socialist Government in Britain extended socialism to the colonies. As a result, the colonial government in Lagos assumed total control of certain sectors of the economy like power generation and distribution (Electricity Corporation of Nigeria, later NEPA), airways and the major ports. The private ports at Sapele and Burutu were taken over by the Gowon Administration.

Commerce was largely dominated by foreign firms from Britain and some European countries Wholesale trade, super markets, sale of equipment and  machinery and the like were handled largely by these firms. Only petty trading was in indigenous hands.
It was this situation – the need “to raise the proportion of indigenous ownership of mdustnal and commercial mvestment I m Nigena” – that led to the promulgation of Nigerian Enterprises  Promotion Decree 1972.  

It was one of the primary objectives of the Admmistration in  its 1970-74 National Development Plan.  
Accordingly, the Federal Commissioner for Industries, Dr Tayo Adetoro brought two memoranda to the draft decree council for approval.
The Supreme Military Council made some minor amendments to the draft decree.
The highlights of the decree were the reservation of certain enterprises like advertising agencies, road haulage, newspaper publishing and printing  exclusively for Nigerians, listed as schedule I.

Those enterprises listed in schedule ll like beer brewing, soft drinks manufacture, construction industry. sundry manufacturing industries – were reserved for Nigerians (including non Nigerian Africans) exclusively where the paid-up share capital was 200,000 pounds or less or the annual turnover was 500,000 pounds or less.

Any enterprise in  schedule II with more than 200,000 pounds share capital or 500,000 in turnover but with less than 40% equity participation by Nigenans was also barred to aliens.

I participated fully in  the Council debates leading to the promulgation of the decree, and in  support of it. Total domination of our commerce and industry by non-Nigerians, especially in areas where the government could not intervene, was intolerable.  But I did intervene in  a public speech to denounce the attempt by Nigerian capitalists who planned to concentrate ownership of the enterprises in  schedules land II in  the hands of a few captains of industry and commerce. This was my reaction to a statement made by Chief Henry Fajemirokun, the President of the West African Chamber of Commerce, who was in support of concentration of shares in the enterprises in a few hands. My stand was this:  indigenisation for the benefit of many, not monopoly by the new Nigerian capitalists, the “nouveau riche”, the captains of commerce. There was an upper limit to the number of shares available to Nigerians in order to have a better spread of the neocapitalists.

National Youth Service Corps

One of the lessons of the Civil War was the need to build a nation of Nigerians  whose devotion and loyalty to the nation would transcend ethnic and social barriers There was the need also to encourage free movement of people and mobility of labour within the country. For these and other reasons, the Federal Govermnent promulgated the National Youth Service Corps Decree 1973. The objectives of the Corps, as stated in the Decree, are:
(a) “to inculcate discipline in Nigerian youths by instilling in them a tradition of industry at work, and of patriotic and loyal service to the nation in any situation they may find themselves;
(b) to raise their moral tone by giving them the opportunity to learn about higher ideals of national achievement and social and cultural improvement;
(c) to develop in them attitudes of mind, acquired through shared experience and suitable training, which will make them more amenable to mobilization in the national interest;
(d) to develop common ties among them and promote national unity by ensuring that – (i) as far as possible, youths are assigned to jobs in states other than their States of origin; (ii) each group, assigned to work together, is as representative of the country as possible; (iii) the youths are exposed to the modes of living of the people in different parts of the country with a view to removing prejudices, eliminating ignorance, and confirming at first hand the many similarities among Nigerians of all ethnic groups;
 (e) to encourage members of the service corps to seek, at the end of their corps service, career employment all over the country thus promoting the free movement of labour;
(f) to induce employers, partly through their experience with members of the service corps, to employ more readily qualified Nigerians irrespective of their States of origin; and
(g) to enable Nigerian youths to acquire the spirit of self-reliance”. The youth corps has helped to bridge the graduate employment gap in certain states in need of such employment, and has over the years given the opportunity to many young Nigerians to know and respect people from other parts of Nigeria, their culture and traditions.
In order to ensure the enduring nature of this institution in the polity, the National Youth Service Corps Act (or Decree No.24 of 1973) is the first of four Acts of the National Assembly preserved and protected under the Constitution of 1979 and of 1999. Its provisions “shall continue to apply and have full effect” like any other provision of the constitution, and “shall not be altered or repealed” except with a two-thirds majority vote of the members of the National Assembly and a similar two-thirds majority vote in eaèh of al least two-thirds of the State Assemblies.

Location of the Second Petroleum Refinery

This was one of the most controversial issues discussed by Council the Gowon regime.

In his memorandum brought to Council in November 1970, Dr. R.A.T Dikko, the Commissioner for Mines and Power admitted that all the serious  proposals received named Lagos as the best location.

The Finance at Economic Committee of officials of Government had recommended the  appointment of consultants to examine the proposals and made recommendation to the Government. He rejected both proposals. Without  any technical advice, he recommended a location in the northern states. This led to a lengthy debate in Council. The Federal Government policy of dispersal of industiies, and avoidance  of too many industries in Lagos for strategic and security reasons was strong  argument for a site in the northern part of Nigeria. A refinery in the north  would entail the construction of an oil pipe – line from the south  to the north for transportation of crude oil, but the possibility of sabotage would draw caution, just as a pipeline for transportation of refined oil from the south to the north. A strong security measure would be needed either way.

The view was strongly expressed that members should avoid planning down economic realities in favour of political expediency. The pattern in  consumption had a great bearing  on the location of the refinery. At this stage  it was also recalled that Council had appointed a committee of officials  to  examine the possibility of uniform prices for petroleum products throughout  the country. This. would of necessity invite the government to subsidise  the  industry.

The Federal Executive Council agreed that independent consultants be appointed to undertake techincal and economic studies on the second refinery, including its location. Early in 1973, the Commissioner for Mines and Power submitted another nemorandum on the subject matter. Members were given only a précis of the consultant’s report, not the report itself. I felt uncomfortable with the refusal to give us the consultant’s report. So did Prof. Bayo Adedeji. It was decided that the report should be circulated to members, and consideration for  the memorandum was therefore deferred.

In his memorandum, the Commissioner for Mines and Power had shifted grounds on location. He no  longer insisted on the location in the northern parts of the country. He was now in favour of Warri for the second refinery, and Kaduna for the third refinery.
In support of Warri instead of Lagos which was recommended by the consultants as the location for the second refinery, Dr. Dikko argued that a refinery should be more of a raw-material oriented industry rather than a market-oriented industry. He stressed the need to decongest Lagos and for even distribution of industries. His support for Kaduna as the location for the third refinery was merely in support of the consultant’s recommendation.

In their report, the consultants considered five major towns and cities – Lagos, Warri, Jebba, Kaduna and Kafanchan as possible locations, and gave a fairly detailed comparison of costs for the various sites. As Lagos consumed about 33% of the petroleum products in the country, and the combined Lagos, West and Mid-Western States consumed in total about 60% of those products, Lagos had a much greater cost advantage over Warri or any other location in the country.

Still on the issue of cost advantage, a refinery in Lagos would be able to produce up to 70,000 barrels of petroleum products per day, enough to meet our immediate domestic needs and also be able to export some quantity as recommended by the consultants. The Ministry of Mines and Power on the other hand recommended smaller refineries in Warri and  Kaduna with capacities of 42,000 barrels per day in Warri and between 20,000 and 30,000 barrels per day in Kaduna.

Finally on the issue of costs, Lagos had a clear advantage over Warri as Warri would require an enlarged port and other infrastructure to accommodate large shipping The view was expressed that if the Ministry of Mines and Power had made up its mind all along that the second and third refineries  should be in Warri and Kaduna respectively (and its memorandum made a case for both, and almost ignored the consultants’ case for Lagos), why appoint  the consultants  at all?

I was in full support of the consultants’ recommendation of Lagos, and I said so in very clear terms. So did Prof Bayo Adedeji.  The Head of State and President of Council, General Gowon, accused the consultants of thinking  in terms of what would be in the ultimate advantage of their own country which had lost grip of oil exploitation in Nigeria.  He counselled that Government decision should not be based on economic factors alone, we should bear in mind social and political factors as well.  He was in full support of the memorandum
The Council approved Warri as the location of the second refinery, with increased capacity as the first refinery in Port Harcourt that is about 3,000,000 tons per annum. It further decided that a lube oil and asphalt plant should be built and integrated with Warri refinery, but incorporated with Port Harcourt Refinery if based on imported crude oil. The Council also approved that the third refinery should be built in Kaduna, but the capacity was to be determined by market research in 1976/77. The atmosphere was tense and  almost throughout the debate, with a  little  humour interspersed occasionally.

Whatever the argument in Council, the Gowon’s regime gave Nigeria two more refineries. And he did not have to import petroleum products in the life of that administration as it  is today the norm. Thirty-four years since the termination of that regime, the oil-rich Nigeria is yet to establish new refineries.
She survives on imported oil products.

Development of Liquefied Natural Gas LNG) Projects

The Federal Commissioner for Mines and Power, Dr. Dilcko, presented four   memoranda to Council between 1972 and 1974 on the subject. The last memorandum was the most contentious, and one of the most controversial in the Gowon administration.  Dr. Dikko explained that pressures had been exerted on him, his officials and on Council members by “highly placed individuals” and that he had been offered money by lobbyists. One highly respected Nigerian who exerted tremendous pressure, but not money, Dr. Dikko emphasised, was Chief Obafemi Awolowo who presented “a very good case for a client which he (Chief Obafem Awolowo) represented as “the legal and economic adviser, consultant and representative. Chief Awolowo presented a proposal to the Ministry on LNG but declared that he was neither a shareholder nor a director in the company. What worried Dr. Dikko was that Chief Awolowo “extended his network of correspondence to his colleagues, some permanent secretaries and to members on the Petroleun Advisory Board, declaring his interest in the venture and soliciting their co-operation, Undoubtedly, Chief Awolowo was very much informed on every stage of the processing of the various bids, and he attacked the bid of a rival company well established in Nigeria”.

Dr. Dikko joined issues with Prof. Bayo Adedeji, the Federal Commissioner for Economic Development and Reconstruction, the contents of whose counter memorandum were “similar to the proposals” of Chief Awolowo. He felt his colleagues should have discussed his own proposals with him before resorting to the unusual action issuing a counter memorandum. In  his defence, Prof Adedeji said that Dr. Dikko did not wait for “clearance of his memorandum with his ministry” under the rules before forwarding it to the Cabinet Office for circulation; hence his counter memorandum (which was non-circulated). He assured his colleagues that he had not been offered any reward, monetary or otherwise, by any company as he had no direct dealing with any.

I was a recipient of Chief Awolowo’s proposal. We put the incident behind us, and proceeded to consider Dr, Dikko’s memorandum. On the main issue, there were twelve offers received from companies in Nigeria and abroad on the development of a viable LNG project in Nigeria. Comparative studies of the various proposals had been made by officials of the Ministry of Mines and Power, and were presented to Council. After an exhaustive debate on the ownership of gas, gas gathering system, the scope of the project, shipping of liquefied gas and selection of technical partners, the Council took a number of decisions, which included:

1. Re-affirmation that the Federal Government should own 55% to 60% equity in any gas-utilising project.
2. Agreement in principle to establish two LNG projects of 1,000 million cubic feet per day capacity.
3. Agreement that the Government should participate in the liquefaction phase in the Gas Gathering System on the basis of 60% ownership.
4. Agreement to take 50% ownership in shipping business.
5. Agreed to invite separately four companies already operating in Nigeria for detailed negotiations for the construction of the LNG plant and LNG tanker.
6. Appointment of consultants.

At a time when our only rival in Africa and Asia was Algeria with two LNG plants and plans to build more, with an advantage of direct shipping to Europe  by pipeline across the Mediterranean Sea, it was our hope that Nigeria’s  LNG project would take off by 1976. Indonesia (now with eight) a Malaysia (five) had not yet come to the stage.
That was forward planning the Gowon Administration for a great industrial power for Africa of today. It was not to be. Gowon’s government was toppled the following year, a that apparently ended the plan for Nigeria’s first LNG plant.
It took almost thirty years of dithering thereafter for Nigeria’s first LNG plant to take off.

Accountability

The issue of accountability has been discussed elsewhere in this book.  We just give a further example of Chief Awolowo ‘s tight hold on our finance.

In 1968, he brought a Council memorandum on Allocation of Funds for  Commissioners stating that Commissioners should be able to serve, matter of courtesy, only light refreshments like coffee, tea, biscuits and soft drinks to their visitors and no more. It was subject to budgetery control. The point was stressed that even that facility should not be abused! Expenses for overseas official tours by federal commissioners and their officials were matters for debate in Council by way of memoranda from the relevant ministry. There were several occasions memorandum on such expenses were brought to Council for approval where there were no provisions or sufficient provisions for the purpose in a ministry’s budget.

The Promise of Return to Civilian Rule and the July 1975 Coup

It has been suggested that a recent administration had an all-star cast of economic managers, perhaps, the best the country had ever seen: economic managers who failed to fix or provide power, telephones, railways or restore the old value of the naira. General Gowon had the best team of economic managers Nigeria has ever had in its almost 50 years history, led by Chief Obafemi Awolowo who did not borrow during the war years. There were Abdul Attah, Allison Ayida, Phillip Asiodu, assisted by Prof. Tunji Aboyade and Prof Bola Onitiri. That was Nigeria’s finest hour.

Impressive as General Gowon’s record of governance was: successful battle for One Nigeria; Rehabilitation and Reconstruction after the Civil War; a new economic and social order and educational foundation for a New Nigeria, a new network of roads and other infrastructures, one element was lacking: a new political order.

A number of us, in the early 1972, held meetings in Lagos and Kaduna, to the knowledge of the military authorities, in preparation for return to civilian rule. Our membership included Civil Commissioners (Federal and State) across the old political spectrum, political leaders across the nation. Chief Awolowo and some of his close associates were not invited to the meeting. But Chief Anthony Enahoro and Mr. J. S. Tarka, Aihaji Aminu Kano and Alhaji Shehu Shagari were in attendance. But the military had other ideas. There was a deep division among the  leadership of the armed forces. There were the few on the one hand who were appointed into political offices since the July 1966 coup as military  governors of the states and whose colleagues perceived as enjoying the pomp of political power. Those happy, few, hardly visited the war front, Iet  alone to be directly involved in the civil war. There were on the other hand  the war heroes and veterans of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Divisions of the Nigeria Armed Forces who prosecuted the Civil War and bore the brunt of war. Four years after the war, the political officers remained in their posts, in the gilted cages, their political postings. General Gowon hesitated to redeploy  them to strictly military duties. This situation caused a great deal of resentment  among the officers on military duties. There was some unease in the army.
Earlier, towards the end of 1970, General Gowon launched his 9-point political programme which included return to civilian rule in 1976 and a review of the constitution.  The constitutional review hardly surfaced thereafter.

In his broadcast to the nation, however, on October 1 1974, General Gowon said that the political leaders had not learnt their lessons, and therefore civil in rule in 1976 was no longer realistic.

It has been alleged by many people that this new position of General Gowon was on the advice of the “Super Permanent Secretaries” who advised the Head of State on assumption of power in 1966 on political issues as well as performing  their traditional duties in  public administration This practice continued after the appointment of civilian Federal Commissioners in May 1967 until Mr. C. 0. Lawson became the Secretary to the Government on  the death of Mr. Abdul Attah in 1972. Mr. Lawson in his attempt to restore  the civil service to its traditional role told his colleagues that he would  lead them to General Gowon outside official duties only on the invitation of Head of State.
The senior officers in the armed forces held a meeting in 1974, and by majority vote decided to rescind the decision to return to civilian rule in 1976. It was not General Gowon’s decision alone to reverse the policy, but he had to carry the can as the Commander-in-Chief.
The general public received General Gowon’s announcement in silence, and  the political leaders in astonishment and with great disquiet. There was muted criticism in the press. The state of emergency proclaimed in January 1966 and renewed in August 1966, remained in force. So too, as a consequence, was the ban on political parties as well as on political activities. But the strain in the armed forces remained. Police intelligence gave General Gowon warnings of the planned putsch. So did other intelligence agencies. Colonel Joseph Garba, the Commander of the Brigade of Guards and a Gowon loyalist, assured General Gowon that there was no truth in the rumour of a planned coup. Some close public service aides of General Gowon urged him to announce the deployment of some of the long serving Military Governors back to the barracks and appoint new ones, but he dithered. If only he carried out the deployment. If only!

General Gowon left Lagos to attend an OAU Heads of State Conference in Uganda late in July 1975. On 29 July 1975, Colonel Garba, announced in a dawn broadcast: “In view of what has been happening in the past few months, the Nigeria Armed Forces have decided to effect a change in the leadership of the Federal Military Government.” Later in the day, Brigadier Murtala Muhammed emerged as the new Head of State. Brigadier Olusegun Obasanjo became the Chief of Staff, Supreme Headquarters, and Colonel Theophilus Danjuma was named the Chief of Staff, Army. Both Colonel Danjuma and Colonel Garba who later became the Federal Cormmissioner for External Affairs were very close to General Gowon. It was a palace coup, a bloodless coup. General Gowon flew from Uganda to Togo where his friend and cofounder of ECOWAS, General Eyadema, offered him an asylum. He soon after left Togo for Britain where he later entered Warwick University to study for his first degree, followed by a doctorate course.

This amiable man, who had no taint of corruption while in office, with some of the best of Nigeria’s political brains in his government, and some of  Nigeria’s finest crop of civil servants around him, left a legacy of public service delivery never witnessed in Nigeria, and is yet to be surpassed.  Some of government’s policies are still being executed by successive governments  till today.  Thirty years on, for an example, the Federal Ministry of Works and  Housing’s plan in his time for a coastal road from the Lagos Bar Beach  to Calabar is still being talked about in political circles as well as government  circles.  It may yet come to pass.

In his time, especially in the early 1970s, General Gowon used to be  greeted by the crowds while on his tours of the country with the slogan “Go  On With One Nigeria.”  For two decades after the 29 July 1975 coup, his political rating was so low that he was badly defeated in a primary election  somewhere in Kaduna State during General Babangida’s tenure. He is now regaining his gait as an elder statesman. He has enjoyed triumph and suffered  one major disaster, not heeding his own 1970 warning of a change. But General Gowon had a fine innings, and left his imprints on the sands of time.  He was, in cricket parlance, bowled out, middle stump. And  his economic  legacy lives on. General Gowon learnt the bitter lesson too late: Do not overstay God’s appointed time. When it is time to go, ‘Go’. Do not overstrain  God’s generosity. But his record in good governance is yet to be surpassed.

• Above are excerpts from the memoir of  Alhaji Okunnu, federal commissioner for Works  Housing  in the government of Gowon, entitled “In the Service of the Nation.”

If there wasn’t this global alliance of mostly English-speaking nations based on common law principles, there would be a need to create one.
Commonwealth leaders are meeting this week on the island of Samoa for our bi-annual summit. Intense discussion over free and fair trade, security, and climate action are occupying us 56 members – all friends and allies.

If an alliance of primarily English-speaking nations rooted in common law and shared commitment to global rules didn’t exist, one would need to be created. Like-minded countries would naturally come together to amplify their values while also providing a mechanism to lend collective heft to the individual economic and geopolitical interests of each member.

The world already has such an organisation, and its bi-annual leadership forum – the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) – is it. Yet, every two years like clockwork, the usual, ill-informed questions about the purpose and future of this oldest international organisation of partner nations appear: How can it survive its members becoming republics? What is the purpose of an institution that is neither a single market nor a regional political union?

The organisation’s demise has been predicted for decades, mostly because of the misunderstanding that becoming a republic means Commonwealth exit. Quite the opposite: it is in fact a path most members have trod.

History aside, today the Commonwealth is more relevant than it has been in decades. The world is moving beyond regional trade and governance blocs, shifting towards global networks of nations with shared interests across regions and hemispheres.

The Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) – spanning the Americas and Asia, and with the accession of the UK, Europe and binding 12 countries in a trade-based pact – is one example; the Alliance for Small Island States (AOSIS), an intergovernmental organisation of low-lying coastal and small island countries, comprising 39 nations stretching across all corners of the globe is another. Though one is for trade, the other for political salience, both are based not on geography but on a common interest – the convening principle for which the Commonwealth is the original item.  

While multi-continental, global networks are back in favour, that doesn’t mean the Commonwealth could not benefit from a rethink. As President of the Commonwealth’s second most populous state, I believe more can and should be done together on economic cooperation and mutual political support.

Bi-lateral agreements between AfCFTA and leading Commonwealth economies such as the UK, India, and Australia would create a web of interlinked trade agreements among Commonwealth nations, driving closer cooperation and deeper integration across the Commonwealth. Britain has proposed a UK-AfCFTA trade agreement. Others should follow.

Nigeria urges larger Commonwealth economies to prioritise importing materials and foodstuffs from African Commonwealth nations.

Supported by bilateral trade agreements, there’s no reason why African coffee or fresh produce couldn’t be offered to Western Commonwealth members at preferential rates in exchange for investment in local processing industries. This would not only integrate our economies but also provide nations like Britain with affordable products they can’t grow while creating jobs in Africa – reducing the need for migration by offering better opportunities at home.

The Commonwealth has finally begun caucusing as a group at the United Nations, a development that surprisingly only became official a few years ago. While not every vote is or should be taken as a bloc, one thing is clear: securing an African seat on the UN Security Council with Commonwealth backing would supercharge the relevance of our 56-country family. This move would decisively prove the Commonwealth’s importance and silence doubts about its future.

Far from done, the Commonwealth’s time has come.  

•Bola Tinubu is the president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria

In the ever-evolving world of social media and pop culture, few personalities have captivated the Nigerian public like Bob Risky. Born Idris Okuneye, the controversial socialite has managed to build a platform that consistently keeps people talking. Whether through his bold cross-dressing, flamboyant lifestyle, or outspoken nature, Bob Risky is a name everyone knows. However, despite this widespread recognition, a fundamental question lingers: Is Bob Risky a genuine celebrity, or does he fit into the category of a “yeyebrity”, a term used in describing individuals who seek fame without any discernible talent or contribution to the nation’s economic growth?

To answer this question, it is important to define what it means to be a celebrity in today’s social media-driven world. Traditionally, celebrities are individuals who attain fame through their accomplishments, whether in music, acting, sports, or other forms of entertainment. A celebrity, by this standard, earns their place in the limelight through hard work, skill, and talent.

However, with the rise of platforms like Instagram, Twitter, and TikTok, fame has taken on a new dimension. Social media has democratized celebrity culture, allowing anyone with an internet connection and a smartphone to build a following and become “famous.” This new breed of public figures includes influencers, YouTubers, and socialites, many of whom have no apparent talent beyond their ability to stir conversation, spark controversy, or share parts of their life that the public finds intriguing.

Given the foregoing backdrop, it is not a misnomer to opine that Bob Risky’s fame is largely a product of this new dynamic. With over five million Instagram followers, the socialite’s influence is undeniable. But is this enough to classify him as a true celebrity?
The reason for the foregoing misgiving cannot be farfetched as Bob Risky first burst onto the scene in 2016, when his bold decision to openly embrace cross-dressing drew widespread attention. In a conservative country like Nigeria, where discussions about gender and sexuality are often taboo, Bob Risky’s decision to flaunt his feminine appearance was revolutionary, and controversial.

Unfortunately, this controversy only helped to increase his fame. Bob Risky’s social media posts, which often feature him wearing elaborate makeup, designer clothes, and expensive accessories, attract millions of views and comments. He has become a fixture of Nigerian pop culture, regularly making headlines for his outspoken opinions and lavish lifestyle.

In many ways, Bob Risky embodies the modern influencer. He has successfully leveraged his platform to promote products, mainly skin-lightening creams and other beauty items, and to establish himself as a businessperson. His ability to monetize his online presence is impressive and demonstrates a level of business acumen that few “yeyebrities” possess.

Supporters of Bob Risky argue that his fame is a reflection of his ingenuity and boldness in the face of societal judgment. In a country where many people are afraid to express their true selves, Bob Risky has used his platform to promote self-expression and individuality. By pushing boundaries and breaking cultural taboos, he has paved the way for conversations about identity, acceptance, and non-conformity.
For many young Nigerians, particularly those within the LGBTQ+ community, Bob Risky is seen as a symbol of liberation. His refusal to be silenced in a society that largely rejects him has earned him a loyal following. In this sense, Bob Risky’s fame is not just about controversy; it is also about the role he plays in challenging the status quo.

Additionally, Bob Risky’s business ventures cannot be overlooked. He has turned his online fame into a source of income, endorsing brands, selling beauty products, and promoting his lifestyle. In a world where social media has become a key marketing tool, Bob Risky’s ability to capitalize on his influence is a mark of his entrepreneurial spirit.

Despite Bob Risky’s undeniable fame and financial success, many Nigerians are not convinced that he is a true celebrity. Critics argue that his rise to prominence is more about shock value than genuine talent or contribution to society. The term “yeyebrity” refers to people who are famous for being famous; individuals who attain attention through controversy or outrageous behavior but lack the substance to back it up.

Against the foregoing backdrop, it is not a misnomer to opine that for these critics that Bob Risky fits squarely into this category. His claim to fame is based largely on his ability to provoke reactions, whether through his cross-dressing, his lavish displays of wealth, or his outspoken personality. Unlike actors, musicians, or athletes who are celebrated for their craft, Bob Risky’s fame does not appear to be tied to any particular skill or talent.

Moreover, some Nigerians feel that Bob Risky’s influence is damaging. His promotion of skin-lightening creams, for instance, has sparked concern among health professionals, who warn that such products can have harmful effects.

Again, Bob Risky’s tendency to flaunt material wealth in a country where many struggle with poverty has also drawn criticism. For these reasons, many Nigerians believe that Bob Risky’s fame is shallow and undeserved.
The debate about whether Bob Risky is a celebrity or “yeyebrity” speaks to a larger issue in Nigeria and across the world: the changing definition of fame. In an era where social media has blurred the lines between celebrity and influencer, the criteria for what makes someone a public figure have evolved.

In the past, being a celebrity meant excelling in a specific field, whether it was music, film, or sports. Today, fame can be achieved simply by having a large online following and staying in the public eye. This shift has created room for individuals like Bob Risky to rise to prominence, even if their fame is not rooted in traditional notions of talent.

So, is Bob Risky a celebrity or a “yeyebrity”? The answer ultimately depends on how one defines fame. If we adhere to the traditional definition of celebrity, fame earned through talent and contribution, then Bob Risky might not fit the bill. His rise is more a product of controversy and self-promotion than any particular skill.

However, if we accept the modern view of celebrity, where social media influence and online presence are enough to build a brand and create a following, then Bob Risky is undeniably a celebrity. He has mastered the art of staying relevant, and in today’s world, that is often all it takes to become a star.

Whether you love him or hate him, Bob Risky has made an indelible mark on Nigerian pop culture. His fame may be unconventional, but it is real. As the debate continues about the nature of his celebrity status, one thing is certain: Bob Risky is not going anywhere, and for better or worse, he will remain a fixture in Nigeria’s social media landscape for years to come. So, given the foregoing argument, the question still begs for answer, “Is Bob Risky a Celebrity or “Yeyebrity”? As you ponder over the arguments made in this context, your answer to the question is as good as mine.