Cement and concrete are synonymous with strength ;the strength of the economy and infrastructural development. Cement is specifically an indicator of how we prioritise housing, roads, and other infrastructure projects that rely on it. When cement prices go up consistently, it reverberates across the country, sending cold chills down the spines of many. It means fewer people can afford homes, a fundamental human right. Although cement is just one ingredient in the construction industry, it has come to represent the industry itself, so the affordability of cement represents the affordability of houses and other concrete-based constructions. To millions of Nigerians who are nursing the hope of owning their own homes, an increase in the price of cement threatens that hope, and in a country where hope is the only viable anchor against many debilitating odds, there is outrage and panic among many. Besides the link of cement to our collective psyche of home ownership, cement is also about the construction industry, public works, local manufacturing industry, and the employment it generates.

Cement And Economic Mix

The current cement price hike is indicative of the economic degradation of Nigeria and the complexity therein. It showcases the interconnectivity of a nexus of factors that come together to have a stranglehold on our economy and how the government tackles the problem of excessive hikes in cement prices often is a case study of the government’s dominant reactionary approach to solving sensitive social issues and a metaphor for wrong application of policy in our society. It also indicates how the government misdiagnoses problems and applies inappropriate treatment at the policy level.

In a mixed economy like ours, the government plays a crucial role in shaping the economy, and in some cases, it is the highest single stakeholder in some sectors of the economy. Nevertheless, its primary role is to create an enabling environment for the market forces to play their role in determining the cement price while ensuring that the regulatory framework constrains the market arbitrariness. This is more preventive than reactionary. However, when the systems and structures put in place to guide the market fail, the government is expected to intervene in the interest of society. This intervention must aim to produce public value by diagnosing and solving problems appropriately. Appropriate diagnoses are pivotal to applying the correct measures that bring sustainable solutions. We miss the point when government officials act like elected kings, using maximum coercive powers to solve a problem that requires thinking and collaboration. Cement is a case in point.

The price of cement, using a 50kg bag as an indicator, between May 2023 and January 2024, a period of about six months, has increased from N4,250-N4,500 to N12,000-N13,000. This is an increase of between 100% to 200%. Almost all construction industry segments reacted to this astronomical rise in price. There was a public uproar, and the government applied two knee-jerk reactions: the first was to threaten the cement producers to bring down prices or face dire consequences and the second was a threat to open the borders and allow massive importation of cement to flood the market and force the price down. This is indicative of the mindset of our government officials. But realistically, we cannot solve problems by threatening everybody.

The most critical underlying factor in the cement price hike albatross is that the government is caught between protectionism (protecting the local cement industry) and trade liberalisation to curtail prices. The politics of the recent cement price hike goes beyond the fractures in the Nigerian economy. There is a perception of the politics of cement monopoly. The Obasanjo presidency initiated a policy of selective protectionism on certain items to protect local industries. Things like cement, fruit juice drinks, pasta and sugar benefited. This enabled significant industrialists to set up enormous plants for these items. There was an unwritten understanding behind these concessions about these local investors reciprocating by keeping prices in check. This is another dimension of the challenge that the government needs to untangle.

Cement  manufacturers have raised fundamental issues that need appropriate diagnosis and solutions proffered. Issues raised by cement manufacturers are grouped into 5: first, with the general paucity of power in Nigeria, almost all manufacturers generate their own energy, and many rely on gas. Despite being a gas-endowed nation, it is simply unavailable – a paradox of plenty. The available gas is denominated in USD and the price has increased by over 300% in the past 6 months. Second, Cement production relies on many imported inputs such as gypsum, machinery,  explosives to blast the mines, spare parts, and propylene to produce bags, all of which are imported using USD. The foreign exchange is just not available, and the USD volatility against the Naira has not helped matters. Third, customs duties are indexed in USD, and lately, it has moved from 450/USD to 1700/USD in just a few months, a more than 300% increase. Fourth, the cost of diesel, which is critical in the transportation of cement and for excavators to mine limestone, has tripled over three months. Fifth, the unfriendly operating environment characterised by corruption, strangulating bureaucracy and  multiple taxation is devastatingly affecting the industry.

All Hands Must Be On Deck

Addressing this issue requires a comprehensive approach involving various stakeholders. A starting point for diagnosis of the challenge is to find out why gas is not available, why we cannot transport cement by rail, what can be done on the matter of foreign exchange components in the cement production sector, tax harmonization, general insecurity, and undue bureaucratic interference to complex issues of market forces. Any solution that does not address these is, at best, jaundiced and unsustainable. It is myopic to think that the government will ignore the significant external and internal intervening variables underpinning the excessive hike in the price of cement, whip the industry to an agreeable price, and assume the problem has been solved.

All factors considered, because of the socio-economic impact of cement, the government needed to diagnose the challenge correctly, consult widely, and develop a sustainable policy solution. The impression I get is that this is not the case . The way we are going, many manufacturing concerns in the country will go down unless something is done about FX, operating environment, import duty, power and, most importantly, corruption. If cement prices continue to skyrocket, the cost of public infrastructure will escalate, many will lose their jobs, and the nation will be thrown into further economic depression. There may not be a straight answer to resolving the paradox of cement price hikes, but it is urgent and imperative that a holistic approach to tackling the problem is followed.

Addressing the high cost of cement requires collaboration between the government, industry players, and other stakeholders to implement sustainable and practical solutions. The government must work with the cement industry to develop policies that stabilise prices and prevent unnecessary fluctuations. It must enforce policies that ensure fair competition and avoid price gouging. It should encourage healthy competition in the cement industry,prevent monopolies, and streamline the regulatory processes. It should invest in infrastructure development to improve transportation networks and reduce the cost of transporting raw materials and finished products. Put mildly, the government must create an external environment that is business-friendly.

The cement industry on the other hand must  implement energy-efficient technologies to reduce operational costs and explore alternative and renewable energy sources to power manufacturing plants. They should invest in research and development to find innovative and cost-effective methods for cement production .

I am in trouble!

I have placed my breasts on a kindled lantern.

Help me! 

If the title misleads you into thinking that this is about mastalgia, please stop reading. What follows is a tale of agony: GBỌ́MÚ LÉ LANTERN! This is the story of a creditor and a debtor. This is about Lapo, a situation where many campus girls find themselves forced to engage in undesirable activities, such as having sex with Okada boys for a meagre sum of N3,000. This occurrence highlights how individuals lose their freedom, how wives become concubines, and how souls are sold. Be strong-hearted.

The last time I was in Ibadan, I visited the Bodija market, a popular food market in the city. The market is in a crowded suburb, which serves as a base for various businesses that cater mostly for foodstuffs and groceries. As I navigated my way through the market, I noticed a crowd gathered around a woman. Initially intending to pass by and mind my own business, but then I heard a loud cry: “Ẹ̀yin èèyàn, ẹ sàánú mi, iná lantern jó mi!”, translated as, “Please, have mercy on me; the fire from a lantern is burning me.” Out of curiosity, I turned to witness the source of the outcry. Before me stood an elderly woman writhing in agony, her cries echoing through the market. Tears streamed down her face as she danced and shook with pain. You could tell she was in distress, her desperate gestures conveying the severity of her predicament. As I observed her plight, I could not help but feel a sense of pity for her unfortunate circumstances.

Curiosity got the best of me, so I approached a trader to inquire about the cause of her calamity. Had she suffered the loss of a child? With no sign of fire in sight, I wondered what could have happened. The trader shared the heartbreaking story of the woman’s misfortune. According to him, the woman had borrowed N150,000 to start her palm oil and rice business, and she was expected to pay back a certain percentage every week. Unfortunately, some thieves burgled her shop during the night and cleared out the entire shop. She got to the market to resume sales as usual, only to find her shop looted and empty. The timing could not have been worse, as it was the day she was due to make her weekly loan repayment. Barely making any sales that week, she found herself in a dire situation. I now understand why she almost stripped herself naked, crying as if he had lost a child.

Please help me,

I have placed my breasts on a hot lantern!

Gbọ́mú lé lantern is a common slang among borrowers of microcredit loans in Nigeria, expressing how excruciating their agonies can be. These loans come with risky terms and conditions, akin to placing one’s breast on a hot lantern – a pain difficult to fathom, let alone endure. Yet, this is the reality for many market men and women, petty traders, and local artisans, who are the major recipients of these microcredit loan schemes. This group of individuals suffer shame and anxiety, driven to depression. The consequences of defaulting on these payments are severe: borrowers risk being locked up in toilets, escorted to beg for alms, having their goods confiscated, or facing various forms of public shame and harassment.

Ó yáwó LÁPÒ,

Ó lọ fi sayé,

Ó yáwó Palmpay, ó lọ fi mọtí.

You took a loan from LAPO. You are using it to flex.

You are using it to buy alcohol.

This implies that the loan obtained from these officers should be strictly used for business purposes, and you do not dare mess with them. They believe that public humiliation is a more effective means of recovering loans than arrests. Arresting defaulters would prevent them from engaging in business activities to repay the loan, providing them with more excuses for delayed payment. Therefore, they resort to public shaming and embarrassment, knowing that defaulters will experience it in the presence of their loved ones, friends, and fellow traders, who are unlikely to stand their loved ones facing such embarrassment and might decide to save them from the shame.

Nevertheless, loan officers will stop at nothing to retrieve their money. Those who sell perishable goods can be somewhat unlucky because of the nature of their goods. If sales are slow, they may end up with losses as the goods may spoil. The trader also shared how a particular fish hawker had been unlucky with the loan scheme twice. On the first occasion, she was locked up in an unlivable space with human waste until a relation came to pay the weekly due. Seven more days, her agony would be repeated. The second time, she was forced to dance around the market as she hawked her fish while the loan sharks sang harassing songs and rang a bell on her head before a good Samaritan bailed her out of their hands. How pathetic!

There is an evident tension that erupts and the expression that signals pain and hardship on the faces of traders and other clients of these microcredit loans at the mention of LAPO (Lift Above Poverty Organization) or SEAP (Self-Reliance Economic Advancement Programme), amongst other loan schemes. The credit officers who work for these microcredit schemes go to the extreme to ensure loan repayment, as any outstanding amount is deducted from their monthly salary, and they suffer other unfair treatment over defaulted loans. This is the motivation for their crude harassment of defaulters.

The prevailing economic hardship in our country often leaves many with no alternative aside from these Gbọ́mú lé lanterns, leaving them indebted and living in constant fear of these loan sharks branded as microfinance loan schemes, with detrimental effects on their health. The thought of the embarrassment one is doomed to face if payment is defaulted is enough to take sleep away from one’s eyes for days. There is perhaps no faster route to hypertension and high blood pressure than to be indebted to these so-called microfinance loan schemes.

Imagine running from pillar to post, robbing Peter to pay Paul, having sleepless nights, lacking peace of mind, and experiencing a health crisis just to pay N20,000. Naturally, being in debt is rarely conducive to peace of mind, but for those who fall prey to these loan schemes, it is not merely the debt itself that poses a problem but rather the draconian consequences of defaulting on repayment and the unforgiving methods employed to recoup funds. Borrowing N50,000 and ending up repaying double is the grim reality for many. While we may say that a lack of adequate information and illiteracy is what pushes people into the nets of these loan sharks, often, people who patronize them feel like they have no other choice than to agree to such enormous interests and outrageous repayment methods. Imagine being faced with the looming deadline for your child’s school fee or the dire request from a hospital that demands payment for life-saving treatment. In such dire circumstances, the choice between risking one’s financial future and securing immediate relief becomes agonizingly clear. For many grassroots men and women, the perceived absence of viable alternatives compels them to risk everything by placing their metaphorical breasts on a searing hot lantern – the all-too-familiar symbol of microfinance loan schemes.

In today’s technologically advanced world, the proliferation of loan apps like OKASH, Fair Money, etc., poses significant risks for borrowers. These apps gain access to sensitive personal information, including bank details like the BVN, NIN, and phone contacts, which they leverage to pursue defaulters. Since there is no privilege of face-to-face contact, they do not physically harass defaulters like the microfinance loan officers do; instead, they harass defaulters by incessantly calling and sending embarrassing text messages to the defaulter’s contact list. If you have ever received a call or text that reads thus: ‘Your contact, Mr Sule, with telephone number *** is a debtor and fraudster who took a loan from our company and has refused to pay. Please compel him to pay, unfriendly measures will be taken as this will be considered a fraudulent act.’ then you are familiar with their tactics. Some will not stop at just calling or texting the people on the defaulter’s contact list but will go to the extent of announcing a defaulter’s obituary. Àwọn wèrè!

Corporate banks have, over the years, rendered most small and medium business owners helpless when it comes to giving out loans. With no hope of financial assistance from regular banks, small-scale business owners turn to microfinance banks who generously give out loans with little or no stress. However, despite the prevalence of loan defaults, it is crucial for loan companies to adopt more humane methods of correcting defaulters rather than resorting to extreme measures such as confinement in pit toilets, public begging, and other notorious methods of loan recovery.

Modáràn o!

Mo ti gbọ́mú lé lantern.

Ẹ gbà mí!

Iná jó mi o!

The uncertainty in the Nigerian economy prompted an emergency meeting between President Bola Tinubu and members of the business community on Sunday.

Prominent among those who attended the meeting at the Presidential Villa Abuja, were the Chairman of Dangote Group, Aliko Dangote, Chairman of BUA Group, Abdulsamad Rabiu, current governor of Anambra State, Charles Soludo, and Chairman of Heirs Holdings, Tony Elumelu, among others.

The host, President Tinubu, told the participants that all stakeholders must look at “what we’re doing right and what we’re doing wrong to bring life back to the economy.”

Tinubu said: “We are very concerned, from students to mothers and fathers, farmers, and traders, and realising that every one of us will have to fetch water from the same well. ⁣

⁣“We’re looking for additional efforts that might help the downtrodden Nigerians and we will provide that hope and reassurance that economic recovery is on its way. ⁣

⁣“We are not saying that we have all the answers. But we will not be blamed for not trying. We assure Nigerians that we will do our best to get our Marshall Plan in place and fashion out the best economic future for this country.”

Emerging from the meeting, Dangote told reporters that it was quite fruitful, as issues bedevilling the Nigerian state, including food, insecurity and the economy, were deliberated upon during the meeting.

He said: “I think we had a very, very good meeting and what we discussed was generally about the economy, food security and security of the nation.

“We discussed everything in detail. And there is the economic Presidential Advisory Committee, which has been set up and I think this will look at all the issues and address them, coming from job creation and food security.

“So, all these things have been discussed in detail. I can’t give you all the details right now, but we are hopeful and we’re a great nation. We have what it takes to turn around the economy and we’re going to do that.”

Also reacting, Abdulsamad Rabiu said it was an open and frank talk about national issues affecting the country.

“It was open, it was frank and it was exhaustive. And some of the issues we discussed for example, like the foreign exchange rate, which we know has always been the problem for the past two or three months.

“We discussed how to bring the foreign exchange rate down because we all know that what is happening as regards the foreign exchange is artificial; it is manipulative and thank God the CBN is doing quite a lot.

“Now, the exchange rate has come down from N1800 to maybe N1600 and N1500 now, and as you all know, everything in Nigeria is indexed to the foreign exchange, especially when it comes to stuff that we import into the country,” the BUA chief executive stated.

“I left this meeting with a lot of enthusiasm, excitement and optimism about the future of our country. I believe that implementing the decisions we arrived at today will propel our economy, help alleviate poverty in the land, help create employment and help put food on the table,” Elumelu added.

On his part, Charles Soludo said it was a tripartite meeting designed to put heads together and think together.

He said Nigeria has one national economy, and it’s the responsibility of the 225 million Nigerians to work together to make it great. We have all the potential and all that it takes to make Nigeria ride through these turbulent times and put the economy back on a sustainable level.

“I think there is unity of purpose, determination, a sense of patriotism and determination by all to make it happen and by the special grace of God, it’s now execution. And this is a standing committee that will be meeting from time to time to evaluate how things are going and make recommendations to Mr. President and the nation as well,” Soludo added.

[DailyPost]

• Ex-VP urges Tinubu to adopt Argentina model

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has urged President Bola Tinubu to emulate his Argentine counterpart, Javier Milei, for accelerated economic growth in Nigeria.

In a tweet posted last night on X, following a report by Reuters International news agency on Argentina’s market optimism, Atiku called for a decisive action to tackle Nigeria’s economic challenges.

“I read a recent report in the Reuters, titled: Argentina’s market double down on Milei as investors ‘start to believe’; I took a keen interest in reading the report because I know quite well that Argentina and Nigeria closed the last quarter of the Year 2023 on a similar path of economic downturn.

“In the case of Nigeria, a new government was installed at or about the middle of 2023; for Argentina, the new government came on board in December; both leaders inherited a disoriented economy, but both applied different measures to recovery.

“President Javier Milei of Argentina was sworn into office on December 10, 2023; he inherited a worse condition than Nigeria’s. But what he did to return his country to a place where investors are ‘starting to believe’ should serve as a lesson to Nigeria’s Bola Tinubu.

“Nigeria is where we are today simply because of what Tinubu has done or did not do; his shifting the blame on the opposition and, even ridiculously, his predecessor is needless and myopic; market forces don’t play politics, they respond to your actions and inactions.

“He came into the office with a comprehensive stabilisation plan, which seeks to implement far-reaching measures within the context of a market-oriented economy; he started off cutting government expenditure by cutting the size of government and wastages; blocked stealing of government funds, and attracted Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) through concessions, tax holidays, and improved ease of doing business.

“President Milei flies regular business class for all his travels and does not offer the presidential fleet of Argentina for his son’s birthday; likewise, there is no settlement for his hangers-on and political allies through unwieldy and burdensome appointments to public offices,” Atiku stated.

The former Vice President drew further contrast between Nigeria and Argentina, saying he has a sure recipe for Nigeria’s economic restoration.

The former Vice President expressed his liking for the Argentine economic turnaround, saying: “I am attracted to the reforms in Argentina because Javier Milei’s stabilisation plan bears a similar emblem with my Recover Nigeria Plan; it is a plan that I am more than willing to disclose details of its workings with the current government in order to take Nigeria out of the depth of hunger and anger that we find ourselves.

“The plan includes strategic steps we must take to recover the economy and make it stronger, dynamic, resilient, and competitive; we had outlined plans to relax the fiscal constraints facing us to include:

• Improving spending efficiency and blocking leakages

• Saving money through:

a. A review of fiscal support for non-performing government enterprises and the privatization of those that cannot sustain themselves.

b. Steps to improve spending efficiency through a gradual reduction in government recurrent expenditures, ensuring that those expenditures reflect higher levels of service delivery. Over the medium term, recurrent expenditures should not exceed 45 per cent of the budget.

 c. A review of government procurement processes to ensure high levels of transparency, competitiveness, and value-for-money and eliminate all leakages.

“Unless, and until there are clear-cut policies and pathway to economic rejuvenation predicated on a leadership led sacrifice, there will be discontentment, especially among the youths, which may find expression in protests and for which it will be silly to continue to blame the opposition for,” Atiku said.

[TheNation]

THE nearest major offseason election in Nigeria is the governorship contest in Edo state, holding a few months away. Understandably, in nowhere else is the political temperature in the country as hot as Edo State where party primaries to select flag bearers for the forthcoming governorship election have just been concluded.

How the primaries were conducted by the 3 major political parties establishes beyond doubt that the average Nigerian politician is not only permanently egoistic but never sincere about what he or she does in furtherance of attaining political power. What the political parties have exhibited in Edo state in the last few weeks confirms that they are made up of people who exploit circumstances, instigate disagreements and have no interest in peace-making in any Nigerian political party.

The on-going pattern of political manipulation in Edo state refreshes memories of how Nigerian politicians usually speak from both sides of their mouths to suit every political development. During last year’s presidential election, it was easy to see how political leaders put a blind eye to every opportunity to unite the country. Instead, they subordinated national unity to self-interest. While some were unable to condemn negative mob actions, others refused to deal with basic issues affecting national unity.

Yet, both factions produced the same candidate and fought assiduously for him to win the governorship election at the time. The public never found out whether it was the winning faction that refused to be magnanimous or if it was the legacy group that was asking for more than makes sense. What was visible from then till now was that each side often drew attention to how the other side was uncooperative. In sane climes where there are selfless and genuine peace-makers in a political party, the crisis could not have lingered-on to meet the next set of electioneering.

But shamefully it did just as it has happened and is still happening in other parties where the primacy of ego reigns. It is that spirit of ‘I will never give up’ that propels one acting chairman who leads a rather rag-tag faction of the Labour Party to engage in a fight to finish with the national chairman who appears accepted by more members. No one in the party has been able to persuade the said leader to make peace with the disgruntled group so he can chair a more robust and united party.

Those aggrieved have thus continued to embarrass the party by throwing real or imaginary allegations at the leadership. If power has blinded the current leader from recognising the adverse impact which irritants can cause an entity, what about the other national leaders of the party, made up of one state governor and some federal and state legislators? Is each of these leaders satisfied with the daily negative publicity that the party is getting?

The same leadership failure resonates in the PDP which has left their Edo governor and his deputy to now function as enemies whereas from 2020 until a few weeks ago, they were models of what great joint ticket holders should be. Is it true that the deputy rejected earlier plans by some godfathers in their former party, the APC to use him to impeach his principal? How true is the report that the governor insisted that he would not accept his invitation to contest under the PDP except his deputy was allowed to run within him? Was the deputy given an open hand to run the state each time the governor travelled in a country where every other deputy was always a spare tyre?

Did the disagreement between the then Rivers state governor and his Edo colleague arise from the latter’s defence of his deputy? If so, is the current fight to finish between the two former friends not a failure of their party elders? As it is with all manipulations, no one knows how the brawl would end because our politicians are always self-seeking, no real group or party interest. When a politician is talking about zoning for equity, it is because it suits his personal interest. In Edo APC, there were reports that zoning had become obsolete hence a panel set up by the acclaimed leader recommended a few aspirants from all the zones.

The advantage of that arrangement was to ensure that strong aspirants from certain areas would not be excluded. But the same leader suddenly asked aspirants from his own zone – Edo North to step down, because their zone already had a Minister. Does the new posture of that leader not amount to zoning under the guise of altruism? Again, is Edo as a state not exposed to losing the best if all the strong aspirants from its Northern zone are excluded by fiat? It does not appear a coincidence that those who first showed disapproval of the outcome of the primaries hail from Edo North.

For instance, one aspirant who currently represents Etsako Central in the House of Representatives was the first to object to the results of the primaries. He no doubt has his reasons. Another leader from the zone, who was once a Commissioner for Information in the state even said APC held no primary in Edo state adding that the acclaimed winner was selected by the party leadership perhaps by remote control. In his words, “they don’t consider us as anything. To them we don’t matter. Those who matter are in the headquarters of the party. They should go and deliver the candidate since they know Edo state more than us. We will be here watching.”

Elections in Nigeria be they party primaries or general elections are never well handled because the politicians themselves have a way of introducing unwholesome practices to the process. The first effort by the APC yielded 3 or 4 winners with the supposed victorious aspirant scoring as much as 40, 000 inflated votes. Luckily for the party, they had the courage to drop one of their experts who has cognate experience in garnering more votes than voters. The PDP primary election figures looked like a consensus amidst some aggrieved aspirants who allegedly scored zero votes plus one who organized his own primaries and declared himself winner.

In the case of the Labour party, one aspirant had to send a petition to INEC before his compromised party officials rushed to hold a contest in the 24th hour. The other faction has also announced its own winner. From the summarized scenario, there is no doubt that the parties would once again, surrender their internal matters to the courts. The authentic factions, the results submitted by only the legally authorised officials, the likelihood that some bonafide delegates may have been disenfranchised and other sundry matters would be determined shortly by the judiciary.

We can only hope that the judgments would not have versions in which the written and the oral would contradict each other. As we await further action, it is certain that not much has changed. Membership registers are still inaccurate; party officials still belong to camps making it difficult for them to be fair and just in handling members. National leadership groups, Board of Trustees etc. are all relying on elected members to organize stomach infrastructure for them.

Under the circumstance, truth would always be scarce just as no one would be ready to play the persuasive role in conflict resolution. Rather than sue for peace, the so-called elders would help their benefactors to rig every contest. In other words, insincerity will always adversely affect the emergence of peace-makers in Nigeria’s political parties. Except steps are taken to redress the situation, making ours a true democracy will remain hard to achieve amidst political manipulation and materialism in Nigeria’s governance framework which encourages conflicts in a system that has no peace-makers

Ayodele Fayose,  ex-governor of Ekiti, says former President Muhammadu Buhari is “not a blessing” to Nigeria.

Speaking in an interview on Channels Television on Sunday, Fayose said the administration of Buhari “drew us back to 50 years of our history”.

Over the past few months, Nigerians have been battling economic hardship as the prices of food and other basic items have skyrocketed.

Protests over the economic hardship have taken place in some parts of the country.

Reacting to the development, Fayose said Tinubu inherited a “dead economy” adding that there is little the president can do to revive the situation within nine months.

The former Ekiti governor accused the Buhari-led administration of destroying the country’s economy.

He asked Tinubu to stop praising Buhari in order not to confuse Nigerians about the “mess” created by the former president.

“Look at the eight years of President Muhammadu Buhari, what will be left of a country like Nigeria as of today?” he asked.

“Even if Tinubu means well, where do you place the debt? Even if Tinubu wants to do the magic, how will he fix the country? There were loans taken in Buhari’s administration, some with 20 to 50 years moratorium.

“Unborn children will face the kind of situation the last administration has plunged this country into.

“The only thing I want to say to President Tinubu is that, without fear or favour, he should stop praising former President Buhari.

“I watched a live television programme of the president telling Nigerians that former President Buhari did well.

“That will cause confusion in the minds of Nigerians. Yes, he is a member of our party and a leader.

“There are so many presentations we can make without celebrating a man who has put Nigerians in this predicament.

“There are things you should not say. You can visit, love, and appreciate him, which is personal to the president.

“Buhari is not a blessing to Nigerians, with all due respect. President Buhari is not a blessing to Nigeria, he drew us back to 50 years of our history.”

[TheCable]

1. The Authority of Heads of State and Government of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) met in an Extraordinary Session in Abuja, Nigeria on 24th February 2024, under the chairmanship of H.E. Bola Ahmed TINUBU, President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Chairperson of the ECOWAS Authority.

2. The Extraordinary Summit was convened to consider the political, peace and security situation in West Africa.

3. Present at the Summit were the following Heads of State and Government or their mandated representatives:

• H.E. Patrice TALON, President of the Republic of Benin.

• H.E. Alassane OUATTARA, President of the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire.

• H.E. Nana Addo Dankwa AKUFO-ADDO, President of the Republic of Ghana.

• H.E. Umaro Sissoco EMBALO, President of the Republic of Guinea Bissau.

• H.E. Bola Ahmed TINUBU, President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

• H.E. Macky SALL, President of the Republic of Senegal.

• H.E. Julius Maada BIO, President of the Republic of Sierra Leone.

• H.E. Faure Essozimna GNASSINGBE, President of the Togolese Republic.

• H.E. Muhammed B. JALLOW, Vice President of the Republic of The Gambia.

• H.E. Amb. Belarmino M. SILVA, Ambassador to the Federal Republic of Nigeria and ECOWAS of the Republic of Cabo Verde.

• H.E. Amb. Alhassan CONTEH, Ambassador to the Federal Republic of Nigeria and ECOWAS of the Republic of Liberia.

4. The Summit was also attended by:

● H.E. Dr Omar Alieu TOURAY, President of the ECOWAS Commission.

● H.E. Amb. Bankole Adeoye, Commissioner for Political Affairs, Peace and Security of the African Union Commission on behalf of the Chairperson H.E. Moussa Faki Mahamat.

● H.E. Leonardo Santos SIMÃO, Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary General for West Africa and the Sahel and Head of UNOWAS.

● H.E. Dr. George Agyekum Nana Donkor, President, ECOWAS Bank for Investment and Development (EBID).

● H.E. Jean-Claude Kassi-Brou, Governor, Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)

● Ambassador Baba Kamara, ECOWAS Special Envoy on Counter-Terrorism.

The Authority, having

5. Received the memoranda of the President of the ECOWAS Commission on the political, peace and security situation in the West African region.

6. Extensively discussed the latest developments in the region.

7. Discussed the situation in the Republic of Niger since 26 July 2023 when the Military of the Republic of Niger overthrew the Government of President Mohamed Bazoum and kept him under house arrest. 

8. Discussed the notifications given by Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger about their decision to withdraw from ECOWAS.

On the Republic of Niger, the Authority

Recalled its decisions taken during the 1st and 2nd Extraordinary Sessions on Niger on 30 July and 10 August 2023 and those taken at its 64th Ordinary Session on 10 December 2023.

9. Notes with regret that despite multiple efforts by ECOWAS, former President Mohamed Bazoum remains in detention and no plan for transition has been developed by the Conseil national pour la sauvegarde de la patrie (CNSP) government of Niger.

10. Recalls the ECOWAS principle of Zero tolerance for unconstitutional changes of government as enshrined in the ECOWAS and African Union Protocol and Charter, respectively, and other instruments.

11. Reiterates its commitment to maintaining dialogue with the Government of Niger with a view to securing the release of President Bazoum and agreeing on a transition timetable.

12. Takes note of the lent period and the approach of the holy month of Ramadan.

13. Also takes note of the appeal made to the leaders of the region by His Excellency General Yakubu Gowon, former Head of State of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and founding father of ECOWAS, the pleas made by the Malehossou Foundation in Benin and several other personalities and humanitarian organizations regarding the situation in Niger.

On the Withdrawal of the Three Countries

14. The Authority notes that the withdrawal will have political, socio-economic, financial and institutional implications for the three countries as well as for ECOWAS as a group. Political and Security Implications

15. The Authority recalled that within the framework of regional cooperation against terrorism, violent extremism, and organized crime, the three countries benefited from USD 100 million mobilized by UEMOA within the context of ECOWAS Plan of Action against terrorism. Moreover, some Fund allocations (USD7.5 m) have been made towards supporting the three countries in acquiring equipment to help their fight against terrorism.

16. The withdrawal will affect security cooperation in terms of sharing intelligence and participation in regional counter-terrorism initiatives, such as the Accra Initiative and Multinational Joint Task Force.

17. The withdrawal may also lead to diplomatic and political isolation at the international scene where the countries have obtained bloc support for their candidates and candidature in the contest for international positions within the African Union, the United Nations, and similar bodies.

Socio-Economic Implications

18. The withdrawal will automatically affect the immigration status of the citizens as they may be required to obtain visa to travel around the region. Citizens may no longer be able to reside or set up businesses under ECOWAS arrangements and may be subject to diverse national laws. The three countries 6 will cease to use ECOWAS passports, ECOWAS Biometric National Identity Card and the region-wide "ECOWAS Brown Card" vehicle insurance.

19. The three member states represent 17.4% of the region’s 425 million population. Even though they represent 10% of the region’s GDP, their departure will constitute a reduction of the market size of ECOWAS.

20. Intra-community trade may also be disrupted, especially trade in unprocessed goods such livestock, fish, plant, agriculture produce, mineral products and Traditional Handicraft Products as well as Industrial Products of Community Origin.

21. The Authority further notes that the three countries are beneficiaries of several regional projects and programmes, notably:

a. The Regional Food Security Reserve (the three countries host stocks from the Regional Reserve for a quantity of nearly 17,000 tons or 52% of the regional stock).

b. The Regional Support Program for Pastoralism in the Sahel (PRAPS – Financed by the World Bank) in the amount of USD 215 million for the three States.

c. The Sahel Regional Irrigation Support Program (PARIS – Financed by the World Bank) in the amount of USD 103.43 million for the three States.

d. The Regional Food System Resilience Support Program (FSRP funded by the World Bank) in the amount of USD 230 million for the three states.

e. West Africa Single Identity and Regional Integration and Inclusion (WURI) project.

f. The ECOWAS Regional Electricity Market (West Africa Power Pool) project that links all member states to a regional electricity grid for improved access to electricity involves the three member states. 

22. The withdrawal of the three Member States could result in the halt or suspension of all ECOWAS Projects/Programmes worth more than US$500 million.

Financial Implications

23. The Authority notes that the two regional financial institutions, EBID and BOAD have considerable exposure in the three countries. EBID currently has 27 ongoing public sector projects in the three countries (Burkina Faso 9, Mali 8, and Niger 10) and a total of 20 private sector projects (Burkina Faso- 5; Mali -13 and Niger- 2). These projects are collectively valued at approximately USD 321,634,253 of which public sector projects constitute 38.1 per cent and private sector projects constitute 61.9 per cent.

24. The bank’s portfolio in the three countries represents approximately 22.5 per cent of the Bank’s total portfolio in the 15 member states. The three countries contributed a total of USD 33,135,445.38 to the capital of the Bank, made up as follows: Burkina Faso - USD 13m; Mali - USD 9.5m; and Niger - USD 10.5m.

Institutional Implications

25. Reviewing the implications at the institutional level, the Authority notes that the withdrawal will not only require the closure of 4 regional entities in Burkina Faso, two regional bodies in Mali and one regional office in Niger, it will also affect the job security of some 130 ECOWAS staff who are citizens of the three countries: 77 from Burkina Faso; 23 from Mali and 32 from Niger. 

THE AUTHORITY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

Release of President Bazoum

26. The Authority calls for the immediate release of His Excellency Mohamed Bazoum, former President of the Republic of Niger as well as his family and political detainees;

On Sanctions

27. The Authority decides to lift with immediate effect the following sanctions imposed on the Republic of Niger:

a. Closure of land and air borders between ECOWAS countries and Niger;

b. Institution of ECOWAS no-fly zone on all commercial flights to and from Niger;

c. Suspension of all commercial and financial transactions between ECOWAS Member States and Niger;

d. Freeze of all service transaction including utility services and electricity to Niger Republic ;

e. Freeze of assets of the Republic of Niger in ECOWAS Central Banks;

f. Freeze of assets of the Niger State, State Enterprises and Parastatals in Commercial Banks;

g. Suspension of Niger from all financial assistance and transactions with all financial institutions, particularly, EBID and BOAD;

h. Travel ban on government officials and their family members.

28. The Authority decides to lift restrictions on the recruitment of citizens of the Republic of Mali to professional positions within ECOWAS institutions.

29. The Authority decides to lift financial and economic Sanctions on the Republic of Guinea. 9

30. The Authority instructs the President of the Commission to invite all four ECOWAS Member States in transition to technical and consultative meetings of ECOWAS as well as to all security-related meetings.

31. The Authority decides to maintain all other measures provided for by the relevant decisions and instruments of ECOWAS and the African Union and to review them from time to time in accordance with progress realized.

32. The Authority calls on ECOWAS Institutions, Member States, WAEMU and all other regional institutions to implement these decisions.

On the Withdrawal of the Three Countries, the Authority:

33. Takes note of the notifications by the three Member States of Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger to withdraw from ECOWAS.

34. Draws the attention of the three Member States to Article 91 of the 1993 ECOWAS Revised Treaty regarding the procedures of withdrawal while urging the countries to reconsider the decision, in view of the benefits that all ECOWAS Member States and their citizens enjoy for being part of the Community.

35. Expresses its Concern over the socio-economic, political, security and humanitarian impacts of the decision, particularly on the citizens of the three Member States and on the regional integration process, and further urges the three Member States to resort to dialogue, negotiation, and mediation to address their concerns.

36. Urges the three Member States to adhere to the provisions of the 1993 Revised Treaty, relating to withdrawal, particularly Article 91.

37. Directs the ECOWAS Commission to sustain the Community’s rapprochement and overtures towards the three Member States and continue to remain seized of the situation.

38. Instructs the ECOWAS Commission to engage the African Union, UEMOA, UN and other international organizations as well as bilateral partners on the issue with a view to convincing the three Member States to remain in the Community.

39. Directs the ECOWAS Commission to broaden the Community outreach towards the three Member States to include traditional and religious leaders, eminent personalities, civil society and women leaders for the unity and security of the region.

40. Reiterates the urgent need for the ECOWAS Commission to expedite the operationalization of the Standby Force in its kinetic mode to fight against terrorism in the region, including the elements of the Multinational Joint Task Force (MNJTF) and the Accra Initiative, as directed by the Authority. In this regard, instructs the Commission as soon as possible to convene the meeting of Ministers of Finance and Defence to propose modalities for financing and equipping the counter-terrorism force.

41. Further instructs the Commission to develop an effective communication strategy in engaging Member States and the Community citizens in view of the ongoing mis/disinformation targeted at undermining ECOWAS.

On the Republic of Senegal

42. The Authority takes note of the end of President Macky Sall’s term of office on 2 April 2024 and commends him for the tremendous achievements in infrastructure and economic development he has realized as President of the Republic of Senegal and for his invaluable leadership in Africa and the world. 11

43. The Authority Calls on all Senegalese stakeholders to give priority to dialogue with a view to preserving the democratic gains of Senegal through a free, inclusive and transparent Presidential election.

On African Development, Sovereignty and Unity

44. The Heads of State and Government underscore their Commitment to Africa’s Sovereignty, independence and unity.

45. In this regard the Authority calls on all Partners to respect the sovereignty and independence of African States and refrain from interferences and meddling that destabilize Member States and adversely impact regional unity.

46. The Authority further calls for an effective global partnership for the region’s socio-economic development through, inter alia, fair trade and climate justice.

Appreciation

47. The Authority expresses its gratitude to His Excellency General Yakubu Gowon for his interest in the welfare of the Community and for his valuable suggestions.

48. The Authority further expresses gratitude to H.E. Bola Ahmed TINUBU, President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Chairperson of the ECOWAS Authority, for convening the Extraordinary Session and for the able manner he has been conducting the affairs of the Community.

Done at Abuja, this 24th day of February 2024

THE AUTHORITY

My Dear Senate President,

Modesty Is a Virtue to Embrace

I hope this letter finds you well, despite the passage of time since we last communicated directly. It is with a heavy heart that I take this public platform to address you, given our longstanding relationship and the mutual respect we have shared. Over the past three years, attempts to reach out to you have been met with silence, prompting me to resort to this open correspondence. It is crucial that I express my concerns openly, not only for your sake but also for the sake of our friends and constituents who may witness this exchange.

As I recently celebrated my 80th birthday, I took the opportunity to reflect on my life's journey and the contributions I have made to our community, state, and nation. In humble acknowledgment of the blessings bestowed upon me by God, I am deeply grateful for the role you have played in shaping my political trajectory. Our association has been mutually beneficial, from my appointment as a minister in 2009 to my participation in the 2014 National Conference, which you recommended me for. Likewise, I recall with fondness the support extended to you before and during the 2007 general elections, which culminated in your successful emergence as the governor of our beloved state. It is evident that our paths have been intertwined in meaningful ways, and it is out of a sense of duty and genuine concern that I implore us to reconnect and offer each other the care and counsel we owe ourselves.   

Your Excellency, as you strive to provide the required leadership as Senate President and Chairman of our esteemed National Assembly, I feel compelled to draw your attention to the critical role that previous National Assemblies, particularly those between 1999 and 2007, played in steering our country towards economic growth and democratic stability. Throughout that time, the National Assembly demonstrated its dedication to accountability and the rule of law. Notably, it was a period when critical anti-corruption authorities were established and regulatory agencies were strengthened, setting the framework for growth and a robust national economy. That era saw phenomenal per capita growth, demonstrating the value of legislative oversight and the preservation of democratic values.

The lessons from this period are clear: a robust National Assembly is essential for fostering economic growth, ensuring respect for the rule of law, and securing justice for all citizens. It is imperative that the legislature serves as a check on the executive, rather than merely acquiescing to its dictates. Regrettably, the Senate and House of Representatives between 2019 and 2023 fell short in fulfilling their constitutional duties. By failing to effectively check the executive and allowing many illegalities to go unchecked, they contributed to the hardships facing our nation today. As you lead the National Assembly, I urge you to heed the lessons of history and prioritize the interests of the people above all else. Uphold the principles of transparency, accountability, and justice, and ensure that the legislature functions as a true bastion of democracy. To accomplish the foregoing, you must speak less, listen to your colleagues more, and monitor the national mood before wielding the gavel.  By doing so, you will lead the National Assembly in collaborating with the Executive and the Judiciary to create a better future for our dear country.

In a televised plenary session last Tuesday, you told Nigerians that you had received an unverified report about the purported allocation of N30 billion to each governor of the Federation by the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) to mitigate inflation and food prices in their states. Before making such a public statement, you as the leader of the Nigerian legislature and one of the highest-ranking officials in the current administration should have thoroughly verified such a claim. The subsequent rebuttal of this claim by Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde and the loud silence from All Progressives Congress (APC) governors suggest you did not double-check the information before giving it the public. This serious error, along with previous blunders, harms your leadership reputation. I urge you to stop making hasty and unfounded claims that could inflame tensions or damage the government and the institution you represent. It is important to apply caution when we speak as leaders.

Sir, I am compelled by a sense of duty to address the inconsistencies that have come to characterise your political expressions, particularly within our beloved Akwa Ibom State. Your Excellency, during the 36th Anniversary Thanksgiving service of our state creation at the Apostolic Church in Uyo in 2023, you declared, “all local government areas in the state as oil producing, and that there should be no distinction among them in terms of sharing of resources or benefits.” I was shocked because throughout your eight years as Governor of the state, you never said so though you were blatant in depriving the oil producing areas of their rights. You refused to establish the Oil Minerals Producing Areas Commission in the state, despite demands and pressures, thus making Akwa Ibom the only oil producing state without this commission. You also diverted most of the NDDC projects to non-oil producing areas of the state. It is now clear how and why you operated that way.

While you have been an apostle of “every local government in Akwa Ibom being oil-producing,” can you now reconcile your claim on the floor of the Senate that the whole of Nigeria is not oil-producing?  In the same service, you directed the state Governor not to implement the law establishing the authentic political map of the state. The law was promulgated by the State House of Assembly in 2023. As a lawyer, former commissioner for local government and former Governor, you cannot deny knowledge of Stubbs Creek Forest and its ownership. Yet as President of Senate which is the country’s foremost lawmaking body, you were asking the governor to disobey a law legitimately made by the state legislature. Would you ask President Bola Tinubu not to implement a law legitimately passed by the National Assembly? Your Excellency, you will agree with me that this is not just the highest level of inconsistency, but also a baseless call for executive rascality and rebellion against the rule of law, and you should be conscious of the consequences.

Again, at another Thanksgiving Service in Eket on February 11, 2024, you advised Governor Umo Eno to reactivate and complete the Qua River Hotel in Eket within the first term of his administration. You claimed you had bought back the property and designed a 16-storey block for the hotel during your tenure as Governor and that this could be completed within two years for the use of ExxonMobil and Ekid people.

Mr. President, you were a commissioner in the administration when this flourishing hotel was thrown away for a paltry N50 million. Immediately after that administration you were Governor for eight years and never talked about the Qua River Hotel. Rather, you embarked on the high-rise Tropicana Recreation Centre in the heart of Uyo, against all entreaties, and without completing it. In the twilight of your administration, you embarked on the Four Point Hotel close to your domain and commissioned it without completion. At that time, Qua River Hotel did not still cross your mind. Why now?

Your Excellency, there is a disturbing video currently circulating in the state where you told Oron leaders that Mobil Producing Nigeria now ExxonMobil was supposed to locate its office in Oron but was taken to Eket because of politics. To the best of my knowledge, you were about five years old when the decision was taken. Agreed, there were alternative locations for the company to choose from. But investment decisions for a renowned multinational corporation like Mobil, are not taken on the spur of the moment or weighted in favour of political considerations as is done in Government House.  As Governor for eight years, it was surprising that you made no effort to change the wrong political judgement and never compensated the Oron people for the perceived unfair treatment. Again, in 2014 when you had unfettered political authority to pick and install an Oron man as governor, you never did so. Why are you inciting divisive sentiments among our people in a peaceful state to destabilize it now?

In your quest to take over Akwa Ibom in 2027, these unamusing pranks will not be compelling enough to attract support. Oron is populated by intelligent and politically savvy people. The 2027 Akwa Ibom governorship election will be more complex than the "Warsaw War" of 2019, which you lost. I, therefore, advise you to apply a little caution; concentrate more on national politics to assist in rescuing the nation from its self -imposed predicaments.

God bless you, Mr. Senate President. God bless Akwa Ibom State and the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Sincerely,

Chief Nduese Essien

Attah of Eket and former Minister of Lands, Housing and Urban Development