PZ Cussons Nigeria PLC has announced that its Board of Directors, after careful deliberation, has decided to convert $34.26 million of its outstanding loan into equity.

In June 2022, PZ Cussons Holdings Limited (PZCH) loaned $40.26 million to PZ Cussons Nigeria PLC (PZCN) to help cover raw material and operational costs, which were difficult to manage due to currency shortages.

However, between 2023 and 2024, the Naira experienced significant devaluation, which negatively impacted PZCN’s financial results and led to a rise in its foreign currency-denominated loans.

In response to these challenges, the company’s board has decided to strengthen its balance sheet by settling the outstanding shareholder loan obligation and reducing exposure to foreign currency fluctuations.

According to a disclosure signed by Alsec Nominees Limited, the company secretary, and published on the NGX on February 15, 2025, the Board stated:

“After extensive discussions, we have agreed that converting a portion of the outstanding loan, amounting to USD 34.26 million, into equity is the most effective strategy to reduce debt and strengthen the Company’s balance sheet, while significantly minimizing the risk of future foreign exchange losses.” 

Post-Conversion, a remaining shareholder loan balance of $6 million will still be payable to PZCH.

Backstory 

In June 2022, PZCH provided a loan of USD 40.26 million to its subsidiary, PZCN, to help the company meet its foreign currency obligations for raw materials and operational expenses.

• However, after the foreign exchange market was liberalized in June 2023, the Naira experienced significant devaluation. This led to an unrealized exchange loss of N157.9 billion and a negative shareholders’ equity of N27.5 billion by May 31, 2024.

Despite these financial challenges, PZCN demonstrated revenue growth, achieving increases of 34% and 42% year-on-year for the full and half financial year periods ended 31 May 2024 and 30 November
2024 respectively.

• Nevertheless, the ongoing depreciation of the Naira continued to negatively affect profits, pushing net equity further into the red, reaching N34.5 billion as of the latest financial results on November 30, 2024.

In response to these difficulties, the Board is actively exploring strategic options to improve the financial health of the company.

• A significant proposal on the table is to convert USD 34.26 million of the outstanding loan into equity.
• This move aims to strengthen PZCN’s balance sheet while minimizing the dilution of minority shareholders.

The Plan 

The plan is to convert part of the outstanding shareholder loan of $34.26 million (N51,795,312,646.72) into equity at a price of N23.60 per share, effective February 12, 2025.

• This will create 2,194,716,637 new ordinary shares at a value of 50 kobo each for PZCH, increasing the company’s share capital by N1,097,358,318.50.
• These new shares will have the same rights as existing ones.

Shareholder approval is required, along with clearance from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for the conversion and registration of new shares on the Nigerian Exchange Limited.

The Board has approved these conversion terms after discussions with PZCH and recommends them for approval at an Extraordinary General Meeting on March 13, 2025, at Transcorp Hilton.

• After the conversion, PZCH’s ownership will grow from 73.27% to 82.79%.
• Other shareholders will see their stakes reduced: CardinalStone will drop from 4.91% to 3.16%, AMCON & PFA will fall from 1.56% to 1.01%, and other shareholders will decrease from 20.25% to 13.04%.

What to know 

• Shareholder loan terms will remain unchanged after conversion, as they are already favorable compared to current lending rates in Nigeria.
• The Board approved the conversion terms after discussions with PZCH and will recommend them for shareholder approval at an Extraordinary General Meeting on March 13, 2025.
• This conversion aims to strengthen the balance sheet, reduce foreign exchange risk, improve financial ratios, restore a positive net asset position, and enhance investor confidence and market value.

[Nairametrics]

Former Senate Chief Whip, Ali Ndume, has urged the Federal Government and the National Assembly to investigate allegations by U.S. Congressman, Scott Perry that the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has been funding terrorist organisations, including Boko Haram.

Naija News reports that the American lawmaker, a Republican from Pennsylvania, made the claim last Thursday during the inaugural hearing of the U.S. House Subcommittee on Delivering on Government Efficiency.

In a viral video, Perry alleged that USAID had been providing up to $697m annually to terrorist groups, including Boko Haram.

Reacting to the allegation during an interview on Channels Television’s Politics Today on Sunday, Ndume lamented over the devastating impact of Boko Haram in the country.

He described the allegation as weighty and worrisome,” stressing the need for a thorough investigation.

“Boko Haram has ravaged not only the North-East but even Nigeria as a whole. You can remember how Boko Haram bombed the police headquarters and the UN office in Abuja. The casualties were enormous. But the security agencies have raised this issue indirectly several times. Even the Borno State government was wary of the operations of some NGOs,” Ndume stated.

He recalled a past security operation where an NGO was allegedly caught training individuals on how to use firearms.

“We have been wondering for years—aside from raids and kidnappings—where are these terrorists getting their funds? It’s worrisome. Now that a U.S. Congressman has openly spoken about it, we can’t dismiss it as just an allegation. It’s more than that. That’s why the Nigerian government and the National Assembly, especially, need to investigate and verify the veracity of such claims,” he added.

He further noted that 400,000 displaced persons from Borno, Adamawa, and Yobe states are currently taking refuge in Niger, Chad, and Cameroon.

“When you look at these figures, it’s alarming. And when you analyze Boko Haram’s modus operandi, you begin to question whether they are receiving supplies from external sources,” he said.

The lawmaker revealed plans to raise a motion in the Senate on Tuesday to push for a formal investigation.

“This is a matter of urgent national importance. We need to set up a strong committee involving security agencies like the Office of the NSA, the DIA, and the DSS because this falls within their responsibilities. It’s not just about internal security,” he stated.

[NaijaNews]

The New Nigeria People’s Party (NNPP) has engaged in war of words with the Patriotic Volunteers, a group within the opposition All Progressives Congress (APC) in Kano state, over the announcement made by the APC group to form what it termed as “shadow government” to checkmate the administration of Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf.

In a statement issued as a counter to the group’s announcement, and signed by the state commissioner for Information Comrade Ibrahim Abdullahi Wayya, the state government described the group’s intention to form a shadow government in the state as not only a desperate and politically motivated scheme but also a dangerous move with serious social and legal implications for the entire state and Nigeria’s democratic system.

The commissioner said democracy does not permit anyone to lose their sense of judgment simply because they have lost relevance within their party’s political structure, adding that the right to freedom of expression does not grant anyone the liberty to make reckless statements or take actions that undermine constitutional governance and the sovereignty of an elected government.

“Let me remind these elements within the Kano APC that, in a democratic system like ours, forming a government within a government is entirely illegal and unconstitutional. A shadow government, as practiced in the United Kingdom, exists within a parliamentary system where opposition parties appoint “shadow ministers” to scrutinize the ruling government. However, Nigeria operates a presidential system, which neither recognizes nor supports such a structure outside the institutional framework of the law,” he said.

The group under the its national President of the group and former Secretary to the State Government (SSG), Alhaji Usman Alhaji, had revealed a plan to form a shadow government apparatus that will effectively put an eye on the state government’s activities..

According to him, the group is planning to assign its members to all the Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) to monitor their activities and make “constructive” criticism that would prompt the government to do the needful.

“This is what is obtainable in the UK where we see opposition parties form the shadow government to checkmate the incumbent one. We are going to replicate it in Kano by assigning our members at MDAs to monitor the activities there and come up with a report. We are committed to doing this, because what we want is a better Kano for all,” he said.

[DailyTrust]

In December 2024, President Tinubu presented a N49.7 trillion budget proposal to a joint session of the National Assembly.

However, on February 5, he notified the lawmakers of an additional N4.5 trillion to the budget figure, raising it to N54.9 trillion.

Out of the figure, N3, 645, 761, 358, 925 trillion is for statutory transfers; N14, 317, 142, 689, 548 trillion is for debt servicing; N13, 064, 009, 682, 673 trillion is for recurrent non-debt expenditure, while N23, 963, 251, 624, 250 trillion is for capital expenditure.

The National Assembly had equally set January 30, 2025, as the target date for the budget approval. But following the inability to conclude budget defence sessions, plenary resumption was postponed to February 4, 2025. The Chairman of the House Committee on Appropriations, Abubakar Bichi, acknowledged that the process was lengthy, involving budget defence, harmonisation and final report submission before final passage.

Surprisingly, on resumption after Christmas break, the President sent two separate letters to the two chambers of the National Assembly, where he proposed to raise the earlier budget from N49.7 trillion to N54.9 trillion, citing additional revenues generated by key government agencies as the rationale behind his action.

He was said to have conveyed the budget adjustment in separate letters to both the Senate and House of Representatives. The letter was read during plenary on the same day by the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio.

Tinubu said the increase was driven by N1.4 trillion in additional revenue from the Federal Inland Revenue Service, N1.2 trillion from the Nigeria Customs Service and N1.8 trillion generated by other government-owned agencies.

After reading the letter, the proposal was referred to the Senate Committee on Finance and Appropriations for urgent review, with Akpabio assuring that the budget deliberation would be concluded before the end of February.

As promised, the National Assembly worked expeditiously to beat the end of February deadline and just last week, February 13, 2025, the Senate passed the 2025 budget with a total figure of N54, 990, 165, 355, 306 trillion.

In his remarks after the passage of the bill, Senator Akpabio, who presided over the session, commended the Finance Committee Chairman, the standing committees chairmen and all members present for their contributions to its passage. He also expressed hope that the budget would be used to move Nigeria forward.

However, economic experts, manufacturers and analysts spoke to DAILY POST, with some describing it as purely academic exercise.

Those pushing this narrative wondered why the president would bring the additional revenue to the 2025 budget instead of putting it into the 2024 budget to ensure that it was 100 percent implemented.

There are those who have argued that it could lead to inflation if not well channeled.

President of the Calabar Chamber of Commerce and Industry (CALCCIMA), David Etim, stated that while budgets are merely projections, their realisation depends on the government’s ability to generate revenue to support them.

“The budget has increased by about N5 trillion. If that amount is directed toward infrastructure development, it will be a game-changer, bringing tangible value to the economy. However, if it is funneled into recurrent expenditures or consumption, it will only fuel inflation,” Etim told our correspondent.

He expressed optimism that the government’s stated goal of reducing inflation to around 24 percent, with a long-term target of 15 percent, suggests that the additional funds would be channeled into productive investments.

“If this money is used for infrastructure, it will boost economic productivity, create employment and help stabilise inflation further,” he added.

Etim also noted that manufacturers stand to gain significantly from improved infrastructure, particularly better road networks that will enhance market accessibility.

“With more roads opening up, access to markets will improve, increasing demand and income for manufacturers,” he explained.

Also, a small and medium enterprises expert and member of the Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI), Daniel Dickson-Okezie harped on the need for strategic allocation of the additional budget.

He emphasised that the ratio of capital expenditure to recurrent expenditure remains low, insisting that the government must prioritise long-term investments over short-term spending.

“In most developed economies, budgets lean more towards capital projects rather than recurrent expenses. We need to adopt this approach now more than ever,” Dickson-Okezie said in an interview.

According to him, capital expenditure, particularly in infrastructure, will have a multiplier effect across various sectors, creating jobs, enhancing business operations, and improving the overall standard of living for Nigerians.

“It is not just about increasing the budget; it is about ensuring that the funds are channeled correctly. If this money is invested wisely, it will drive economic growth and create a lasting impact,” he concluded.

For a former House of Representatives member, Yusuf Mohammed, the proposal is basically academic, as he noted that whether it would generate inflation or boost the economy is neither here nor there.

He argued that since the President told Nigerians that he had gotten some additional revenues from 2024, he would have used the money to implement the 2024 budget instead of putting it into the 2025 budget.

He insisted that since the revenue agencies have improved and are generating more money, it means that the President can also do that projection for 2025 because the revenue generating agencies are bringing more money.

“All these arguments that there will be more inflation don’t add up at all. Several countries in the world like China, are going into serious implementation of infrastructural programmes to boost the economy but here it is not so. We tend to channel our resources into recurrent expenditures.

“The government needs to spend the money it has generated to get the country moving. Instead of keeping the money for 2025, the money should be used to implement all the infrastructural projects and programmes that are included in the 2024 budget.

“And if you do that, you will generate economic activities and more people will be taken off the street and the economy will get moving again. So, the question of whether it will bring inflation doesn’t add up,” he said.

Still pushing that the hike in 2025 budget was not necessary, he stressed that since the 2024 budget has not been implemented 100 percent, the money would have been deployed to ensure that the 2024 was fully implemented.

“The question that we need to ask ourselves is: what is the level of implementation of the 2024 budget? I don’t think it is 100 percent.

“At the last count, someone told me it was just 60 percent. So, if you have additional money, why don’t you implement the budget fully?

“This is because, according to the president, the budget is a plan to get the economy moving. Now you have not implemented the 2024 budget 100 percent and you are keeping the money for next year.

“I strongly believe that we have not fully implemented the 2024 budget and the president should just do that.

“Since we now know from his calculations that the agencies generating revenue will generate more revenue in the coming years, he should simply project that in the coming year, instead of an additional nine percent, he can project 20 or 30 percent and then review the budget accordingly.

“After all, we are expecting that the oil production will still further increase, meaning that there will be a lot of money that will be generated in the coming year.

“In my eight years in the National Assembly, I have discovered that several projects are not completed because of inflation and changes in costs and the rest of them.

“So we have a lot of projects that were started and may not have been completed and if the president had gone to the National Assembly to seek for extension of time for implementation of previous budget, my contention is that since 2025 budget is a plan that is being made and it is not being implemented immediately, if you have additional funds, it would be better applied to the projects that need to be funded but have not been funded.

“Secondly, a budget is a plan; an assumption of the revenue you will get and the expenditure that you are going to incur.

“That means that if the President is now convinced that the revenue agencies are capable of generating more revenues than they used to, and that there are now more people in the tax net than we had before, it means that there should be a change in the 2025 budget.

“And that change should be to tell the National Assembly that he expects more money in 2025, and then to increase the budget to implement all the programmes that he is planning to implement,” he stated.

He believes that the whole idea boils down to politics, stressing: “Like I said, the president and his team are very good at playing politics in the minds of the people and that is what they are doing, to show that they are transparent and that they are doing things that other people have not done before.

“But, my contention is that the National Assembly has always tinkered with revenue projections and made decisions based on its projections year in year out.”

With stakeholders emphasising the need for infrastructures focused spending, the government’s budget execution strategy will be crucial in determining whether the N5 trillion hike would serve as a catalyst for economic expansion or exacerbate inflationary pressures.

Expectations are also high with regards to how the entire budget performs, especially in bringing Nigerians out of misery.

[DailyPost]

Actress and producer Teniola Aladese has revealed how she struggled to come to terms with the tragedy of losing her ex-boyfriend.

In an interview on With Chude, Aladese revealed that her ex-boyfriend passed away just months after their breakup, leaving her with a deep sense of loss and anger towards God.

The actress, known for her role in The Christmas in Lagos, questioned God’s purpose behind her ex-boyfriend’s untimely death, citing his talent, plans and potential.

However, Aladese said she found solace in believing that her ex-boyfriend fulfilled his purpose during his time on earth, leaving a lasting impact on those who knew him.

She said: “He passed a couple of months after we broke up and was even dating someone else after we ended things. We still remained friends, but after he passed, it was a huge blow – on me, on his friends, on his family members. I don’t even want to know how his mum copes. He was the only son. One daughter, one son. 

“For me, it took a lot of reassurance that people come into this world for a certain purpose. Because the reason I was angry with God was that this guy had his whole life ahead of him. He was so talented, he was a writer. He had plans to direct and even after we broke up, he said to me, ‘You are still going to produce my films.’ And so there were all these plans, and just like that, accident and the guy goes. I am like, ‘Why would you allow this to happen?

“Now what I use to console myself is that he was here for a purpose. He left his mark. All of us that were his friends remember him for who he was and for how good of a person he was”.

[TheNation]

The West African Examinations Council, on Sunday, announced the release of the 2024 West African Senior School Certificate Examination results for Private Candidates, Second Series.

This was disclosed in a statement on Sunday by the Acting Head of Public Affairs, Moyosola Adesina.

According to Adesina, a total of 65,023 candidates participated in the examination, with 43,923 candidates, representing 67.55%, scoring credit and above in a minimum of five subjects.

Furthermore, 34,878 candidates, accounting for 53.64% of the total candidates, obtained credit and above in five subjects, including English Language and Mathematics.

Adesina noted that the results reflect a promising performance among candidates.

“The performance of candidates in this year’s examination is encouraging, with a significant percentage achieving credit and above in key subjects,” she said.

For candidates eager to check their results, WAEC has provided a simple online procedure:

Visit the WAEC official results checker website: www.waecdirect.org.

Enter your 10-digit WAEC Examination Number in the designated field.

Input the four-digit Examination Year, for example, 2024.

Select the Type of Examination as ‘Private Candidate Results.’

Enter the e-PIN Voucher Number.

Provide the Personal Identification Number (PIN) from the e-PIN.

Click ‘Submit’ and wait for the results window to display your performance.

Candidates who experience any difficulties accessing their results are advised to contact WAEC through its official communication channels for assistance.

[Punch]

Ayo Adebanjo, 96, was a path through which Nigerian politics could be traced. The politics of the country was mainly about the ruling elites in military fatigue or civil dress ruling at the centre, and conscientious patriots opposing from the sidelines or working from the margins. Adebanjo belonged to the latter.

 At 14, in 1943, he had aligned with the radical Zikist Movement which wanted the British colonialists thrown out of the country, if necessary, by force. This was in contrast to the mainstream politicians who hoped for independence based on the benevolence of the colonialists.

The Zikists were allies of the National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroon, NCNC, led by Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe. But when a more radical and ideologically conscious party, the Action Group, AG, led by Chief Obafemi Awolowo emerged, Adebanjo joined it in 1951.

 The AG was anchored on a welfare ideology with free education and healthcare for all, rural transformation and equity. Adebanjo in contemporary partisan politics, came to embody these aspirations; he wore Afenifere principles like a cloth.

In the 1959 pre-independence general elections, the AG emerged as a pan-Nigeria party, winning 25 seats in the Northern Region, 14 in the Eastern Region, 33 in the Western Region and one in the Federal Territory of Lagos. In contrast, the Northern Peoples Congress, NPC, which had 134 seats, won its seats from the Northern Region. Yet, the propaganda out in the country was that the AG was a regional or sectarian party.

The AG proposed a coalition government with the NCNC in which Azikiwe would be Prime Minister and Awolowo, Deputy Prime Minister or Finance Minister, while the NPC would constitute the opposition party. It believed its welfare programmes would sprout under such a coalition.

It might have assumed that the NCNC would prefer a coalition in which it will be the senior partner. But the latter preferred a coalition with the NPC in which it will be the junior partner, and, rather than be the Prime Minister running the cabinet, Azikiwe would become the mainly ceremonial Governor General or President.

This meant that the AG and Adebanjo were in the opposition. Two years after independence, Awolowo and 26 other members of the AG were charged with treason. Adebanjo was some steps ahead of the law as he fled to Ghana.

Then the Balewa government was overthrown by the military in January 1966. After the second coup in July 1966, the AG leaders were freed and Awolowo became the Finance Minister.

In the Second Republic, the AG, now known as the Unity Party of Nigeria, UPN, lost the elections to the National Party of Nigeria, NPN, and Adebanjo and his fellow party members were back in opposition, taking on the ruling party.

The degenerate and bloody military regimes of Buhari, Babangida and Abacha, brought out the fighting spirit in many patriots, including Adebanjo.

After the annulment of the June 12, 1993 presidential election millions of Nigerians led by the Campaign for Democracy, CD, took to street protests.

In order to strengthen the capacity of the populace to take on the brutal Abacha junta, the CD went into alliance with various groups.

One of the most formidable alliances the CD entered was with the Afenifere, a socio-cultural group with which the AG had explained itself and its welfare policies to the old Western Region. Despite its seeming sectional origins, Afenifere is actually national in thought and action; spreading the nationalist and Pan Africanist ideals of its founding leader, Awolowo.

The CD with its leaders like Beko Ransome-Kuti, Frederick Fasehun and I, held a number of meetings with the then Afenifere leaders, including Adebanjo and former Kwara State Governor, Senator Cornelus Adebayo. The virtually secret meetings were held at the 100, Oduduwa Crescent, GRA, Ikeja, Lagos residence of then Afenifere leader, Chief Alfred Rewane.

It was at those meetings I got close to Adebanjo and learnt practical leadership from the veterans. But those were quite dangerous times. On Friday, October 6, 1995, three gunmen entered Pa Rewane’s house and shot him dead.

We relocated our now, more open meetings partly to Chief Moshood Kashimawo Abiola’s house with Mrs Kudirat Abiola hosting. Those meetings were presided over by Chief Anthony Enahoro.

But nine months later, Mrs Abiola was assassinated by the Abacha killer squad and the meetings shifted and became bigger, transforming into what became known as the National Democratic Coalition, NADECO.

The military regime simply became deadlier with assassinations and bomb blasts. People like Ransome-Kuti and Fasehun were imprisoned, and Enahoro, Bola Tinubu, Wole Soyinka and Dan Suleiman had to flee the country.

However, people like Adebanjo and then Afenifere leader, Abraham Adesanya, remained. Even after the military death squad opened fire on Adesanya’s car, they remained to see the back of the junta.

In the follow-up elections, Afenifere went into alliance to form the Alliance for Democracy, AD. The party had Ambassador Tanko Yusuf as Chairman and Adebanjo as Deputy Chairman.

Adebanjo was the power house of the AD in the South-West. His leadership faced two main challenges in the run up to the gubernatorial elections of 1999. In Ondo State, the primaries were conducted three times, and thrice did Mrs Cecilia Mobolaji Osomo win. But Afenifere decided it could not have a candidate who had defied its directive to resign as Abacha’s Minister of Establishment. So, the ticket was given to Chief Adebayo Adefarati. But the case in Lagos was tougher. While Afenifere was united in Ondo State, it was split in Lagos. Veteran leader, Chief Ganiyu Dawodu, backed Funsho Williams who had served in the military regime. He was leading in the disputed primaries with Tinubu.

The Adebanjo leadership cancelled results from four disputed local government areas and that gave victory to Tinubu.

When the Afenifere chairmanship was open with Adesanya giving up the position, the choice was between Chief Olanihun Ajayi and Adebanjo. But the latter pointed out that they were both from the same Ijebu axis as Adesanya. So, the leadership went to Chief Reuben Fasoranti from the Ondo axis. When Fasoranti became too old to continue, he stepped down for Adebanjo as the new Afenifere Chairman.

However, as the 2023 presidential election approached, the Afenifere declared that the path of equity, fairness and inclusiveness in line with the Afenifere philosophy, was for the country’s presidency to go to Eastern Nigeria as the South-South, South-West and the North had produced the country’s Presidents since 1999. It, therefore, endorsed the Labour Party candidate, Peter Obi.

However, some politicians went to Fasoranti to endorse the candidacy of President Bola Tinubu. But that was not an issue for Adebanjo; he had done his duty. On February 14, 2025, Adebanjo took his eternal bow.

Men of f the Department of State Security, DSS, and Nigeria Police, in tye early hours on Monday, stormed the premises the Lagos State House of Assembly, sealing up the offices of the Speaker, Mojisola Meranda, her deputy and clerk of the house. 

As of 10 am, armed security personnel have taken over the premises at Alausa, Ikeja, and environs frisking every passersby.

Meranda, however, arrived with her convoy at about 11.15am.

Recall that the embattled, former Speaker of the House, Mudashiru Obasa, has sued the state lawmakers challenging his removal as the Speaker of the Assembly.

Obasa, it was gathered, has filed a motion at the Ikeja Division of the State High Court, where he is also seeking an accelerated hearing of his suit.

Obasa was removed in absentia by 32 out of the 40 members of the state Assembly on January 13, 2025. He was in America when he was removed in a situation described as “coup,” by President Bola Tinubu.

The development has generated controversy with members of the Governance Advisory Council, GAC, an apex political decision making body in All Progressives Congress, APC, in Lagos, divided over Obasa’s removal.

READ ALSO: https://reubenabati.com.ng/news/okey-ogbodo-embroiled-in-amede-eha-amufu-election-controversy

Obasa, in the suit, was challenging the legality of his removal from office.

The motion, made available to Vanguard Media was filed on Wednesday, 12 February, 2025, names the Lagos State House of Assembly and Mojisola Lasbat Meranda, current Speaker of the House, as defendants.

In the suit filed by his lawyers, led by Chief Afolabi Fashanu, SAN, Obasa is seeking several reliefs, among which are: “An order fixing a date for the expeditious hearing of the originating summons.

“An order of this Honourable Court abridging the time within which the Defendants may file their response by way of counter affidavits/written addresses as specified by the Rules of this Honourable Court, to 7 days after the hearing and determination of this Application.

“An order of this Honourable Court abridging the time within which the Plaintiff/Applicant may file its Reply of points law, as specified in the Rules of this Honourable Court, to 3 days of the service of the Defendants processes on him.”

Obasa’s application is predicated on nine grounds, including the interpretation of various sections of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (As amended), and the Rules and Standing Order of the Lagos State House of Assembly.

The suit read in part: “This application is predicated among which he stated the suit concerns the interpretation of Sections 36; 90; 92(2)(c); 101 and 311 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (As amended) vis-à-vis ORDER V RULE 18(2) and Order II Rule 9(1)(ii)(iii)(iv)(v)(vi)(vii)(viii) OF RULES AND STANDING ORDER OF LAGOS STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY (which enjoy constitutional flavor and status);

“The action borders on the constitutionality or otherwise of the sitting and proceedings of the Lagos State House of Assembly of the 13th January, 2025 where the Plaintiff herein, as Honourable Speaker was said to be impeached.

“This action challenges the constitutionality of the sitting and proceedings of the Lagos State House of Assembly to sit during recess without the Speaker reconvening the House or giving any other person powers to reconvene the House.

“Public interest requires the case to be heard and determined speedily and expeditiously so that legislative activities in the State is not stalled.

“The legality of the continued sitting of the 1st defendant under the present leadership in violation of the aforementioned laws and rules calls for an urgent determination;

“The nature of this action is such that is required to be heard and determined expeditiously having regard to the exceptional circumstances surrounding same;

“There is need to abridge the time within which the Defendants may file their response to the originating summon as well as time within which the claimant/Applicant may file its reply on point of law; and

“This Honourable Court is imbued with inherent powers to grant accelerated hearing and abridgment of time; and

“It is expedient to grant accelerated hearing of this action and abridgment of time for parties to file the relevant processes in the interest of justice.”

Obasa maintained that none of the parties to the case would be prejudiced or suffer any injustice by the grant to his application.

[Vanguard]

Before and since Nigeria gained independence, the quest for balanced regional development has been a persistent challenge. The vast disparities between the country’s geopolitical zones, each with unique socio-economic needs, have fueled ongoing debates about the most effective development models. Over the decades, Nigeria has experimented with various strategies, yet the gaps remain, feeding a sense of marginalisation and underdevelopment in many regions. The need for tailored solutions to address these disparities is not just pressing, it’s a necessity. One prominent approach has been the establishment of Regional Development Commissions (RDCs), agencies designed to address the peculiar challenges of each region. But as the number of these commissions continues to grow, a fundamental question arises: Are Regional Development Commissions the new deal Nigeria needs, or are they merely political tools serving the interests of an elite few?

The idea of regional development agencies in Nigeria is not new. It dates back to 1960 when the outgoing British colonial government established the Niger Delta Development Board (NDDB). This initiative responded to the recommendations of Sir Henry Willink’s Commission Report of 1958, which identified the Niger Delta as a region requiring special intervention due to its challenging terrain and historical neglect. The Willink Commission was a landmark in Nigeria’s pre-independence political history, tasked with investigating the fears of minorities, particularly the ethnic groups in the Niger Delta, and proposing solutions to address their concerns. Its findings were clear: the Niger Delta faced unique environmental and developmental challenges that would require special attention. Thus, the NDDB was born, intended as a special-purpose vehicle to drive development in the oil-rich but underdeveloped Niger Delta.

However, despite its promising start, the NDDB failed to achieve its objectives. Seven years after its creation, it was dissolved without having made any significant impact. Historical records indicate that political interference, inadequate funding, and a lack of clear strategic direction contributed to its failure. Moreover, the NDDB lacked the legal authority and institutional framework to implement large-scale projects, rendering it ineffective. This failure highlighted the complexities of centralised regional development and set the stage for decades of agitation for more effective solutions. From that period until now, demands for creating region-specific agencies have persisted, with each region clamouring for a development model tailored to its unique needs. This agitation was further fueled by the discovery of vast oil reserves in the Niger Delta, which, while contributing significantly to national revenue, left the region impoverished and environmentally degraded.

The return to democratic governance in 1999 rekindled hopes for a more equitable distribution of national wealth and balanced regional development. It was against this backdrop that the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) was established in 2000 to replace the defunct NDDB and its successor agencies. The NDDC was conceived as a bold solution to the peculiar development challenges of the Niger Delta, which had been plagued by environmental degradation, poverty, and social unrest. With a clear mandate to drive sustainable development, alleviate poverty, and promote peace and security in the region, the NDDC was envisioned as a catalyst for positive change.

However, over two decades later, the NDDC has become synonymous with corruption, political interference, and mismanagement. Numerous audits and investigative reports have exposed how political elites siphoned funds for the region’s development. For example, a 2020 forensic audit revealed that over 6 trillion Naira allocated to the NDDC between 2001 and 2019 was largely misappropriated. The commission’s projects were often abandoned or poorly executed, reflecting a pattern of waste and inefficiency. In 2021, the Nigerian Senate’s investigation into the NDDC’s activities uncovered 12,128 abandoned projects across the Niger Delta, raising serious questions about the commission’s effectiveness and accountability.

The NDDC’s failure to deliver on its mandate has had far-reaching consequences. The Niger Delta remains underdeveloped, with high poverty rates, poor infrastructure, and widespread environmental degradation. Youth unemployment is rampant, contributing to social unrest and militancy in the region. The inability of the NDDC to address these issues has fueled public disillusionment and increased agitation for alternative development models. In 2020, protests erupted across the Niger Delta, with communities demanding accountability and transparency from the NDDC. These protests highlighted the growing frustration among the region’s inhabitants, who felt betrayed by an agency supposed to improve their lives.

The need for targeted regional interventions became even more pronounced in the aftermath of the Boko Haram insurgency in the North East. The insurgency, which began in 2009, devastated the region, displacing millions and destroying infrastructure. In response, the North East Development Commission (NEDC) was established in 2017 to rebuild communities, resettle displaced people, and drive the region’s development. Its mandate included reconstructing schools, hospitals, and other public facilities, reviving the local economy, and promoting peace and stability. However, despite its noble intentions, the NEDC has faced significant challenges. Security concerns have hindered project execution, while corruption and bureaucratic inefficiency have undermined its impact.

In 2022, the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) report revealed that over 100 billion Naira allocated to the NEDC was unaccounted for, sparking public outrage and calls for greater transparency. Investigations uncovered inflated contracts, ghost projects, and political patronage, leading to questions about the commission’s commitment to its mandate. Additionally, the NEDC’s projects have been criticised for being poorly targeted, with many communities most affected by the insurgency receiving little or no support. This has created a sense of neglect and abandonment, exacerbating regional social tensions.

In 2024, the quest for regional development took a new dimension with the establishment of three more RDCs: the North West Development Commission (NWDC), the South East Development Commission (SEDC), and the South West Development Commission (SWDC). Additionally, plans are underway to create the North Central Development Commission (NCDC) and the South-South Development Commission (SSDC). This unprecedented expansion of RDCs was driven by the belief that targeted, region-specific solutions are necessary for addressing Nigeria’s diverse challenges. Proponents argue that these commissions represent a new deal for Nigeria’s regional growth, providing the framework for decentralised governance and fostering regional collaboration, offering a ray of hope for the country’s future.

Supporters of RDCs further argue that regional development agencies are necessary because different geopolitical zones face different challenges that require targeted solutions. For example, the environmental degradation and oil pollution in the Niger Delta require a different approach than the rebuilding of communities devastated by insurgency in the North East. The SEDC could promote industrialisation and entrepreneurship in the South East, while the NEDC could prioritise educational rehabilitation and security in the North East.

RDCs are also seen as a step towards regionalism and political restructuring, enabling greater autonomy and self-determination. By tailoring programmes and projects to leverage regional strengths, RDCs can stimulate economic growth, foster collaboration among states, and enhance synergy with federal development agencies. Advocates argue that this decentralised model can bridge regional inequalities and promote national unity by giving marginalised areas a sense of inclusion and ownership.

However, the optimistic vision of RDCs as drivers of regional transformation is not universally shared. Critics argue that RDCs are often politically motivated, serving as elite channels to siphon public resources. They contend that these commissions are another layer of bureaucracy, adding administrative costs without delivering tangible results. Corruption, patronage politics, and political interference are rampant, with RDCs frequently serving as tools for political manipulation and agents for funding the ruling party’s elections rather than vehicles for genuine development.

Another major criticism is that RDCs are plagued by a democratic deficit. Although they are perceived as regional initiatives, they often lack the power to make critical policy decisions. Instead, powerful political actors outside the respective regions control decision-making processes, prioritising personal interests over regional needs. This undermines accountability and reduces public trust. Furthermore, the standardised template used for all RDCs, regardless of the unique challenges faced by each region, is counterproductive. A one-size-fits-all approach fails to leverage the comparative advantages of each region.

The harsh reality is that RDCs have become centres of corruption that add little value to genuine development. They have evolved into extractive institutions in the mould of what Economist Daron Acemoglu described as institutions created to enrich select members of the elite political class at the expense of the general populace. From the NDDC experience, intervention agencies can function as alternate states, duplicating projects for other government tiers, such as waste management and road construction. This results in resource wastage and project duplication. In many cases, RDCs engage in projects outside their mandate, straining already scarce public funds.

Fundamental reforms are necessary for RDCs to fulfil their promise as regional growth drivers. First, patronage politics must be eradicated through stringent anti-corruption measures and enhanced transparency. RDCs should not serve as political slush funds but as accountable entities focused on real development. Second, strategic planning and effective project execution should replace poor planning and haphazard implementation. Development models should be context-specific, reflecting the unique challenges of each region rather than adopting a one-size-fits-all approach. Public accountability must be prioritised by involving local communities in decision-making, ensuring that projects reflect the people’s needs. Finally, robust monitoring and evaluation systems should be implemented to assess performance and impact.

Regional Development Commissions were conceived as catalysts for equitable development and regional prosperity in Nigeria. However, they have often fallen short due to corruption, inefficiency, and political manipulation. For RDCs to genuinely serve as engines of sustainable development, they must be adequately conceptualised, and we must prioritise transparency, accountability, and effectiveness. It is time to confront the failures of the past and reimagine RDCs as genuine vehicles for regional empowerment and national unity. Whether they rise to this challenge or remain tools of political patronage will determine the future of regional development in Nigeria.

The United States has pencilled 201 Nigerians for deportation amid President Donald Trump’s crackdown on illegal migrants.

Bianca Odumegwu-Ojukwu, minister of state for foreign affairs, spoke about the development when Richard Mills, US ambassador to Nigeria, paid her a courtesy visit at the Tafawa Balewa House, Abuja.

Mills said “those to be repatriated would be dropped in Lagos. There wouldn’t be room for whether it should be in Port Harcourt or Abuja”.

“The first group will be convicted prisoners. Those who committed crimes and are in US prisons,” he added.

“Some of them are those who have clearly violated US immigration laws. They appealed but were denied yet they are still in the US. They have committed immigration crime, people who have been ordered to leave.”

According to a statement issued Sunday by Magnus Eze, the minister’s media aide, both officials addressed concerns about the repatriation system, with Odumegwu-Ojukwu seeking a dignified deportation process for her compatriots.

“With the new administration in the US, we want a situation where there will be commitments. If there will be repatriation, we want dignified return,” she said.

“At the moment, we’re told that about 201 Nigerian nationals are in US immigration camps, and about 85 have been cleared for deportation.

“Will there be any way of ameliorating their pains? This has been of great concerns to not just Nigerian nationals in the US but family members in Nigeria who depend on them for survival, children whose school fees are paid for by these diasporans.

“We are asking as a country whether they will be given ample time to handle their assets or will they just be bundled into planes and repatriated?

“It will really be traumatic especially for those who had not committed any violent crime.”

UNCERTAINTY AROUND DROP BOX VISA SYSTEM, USAID

There has been uncertainty around the drop box process — a visa interview waiver that allows eligible individuals to obtain a visa without a face-to-face interview at the US embassy.

Some media outlets reported that the drop box visa processing option was no longer available for US visa applicants in Nigeria, while others reported otherwise.

Efforts to reach the US embassy for confirmation were not immediately successful.

Odumegwu-Ojukwu also urged the US to issue a statement clarifying its actual position on the drop box system to assuage the concerns of Nigerians.

She also asked that the US reconsider its stance if it was mulling a possible suspension of the policy.

In addition, Odumegwu-Ojukwu expressed worry about the status of USAID, inquiring if it was outrightly dismantled or merely suspended.

Addressing the minister’s concerns, the US ambassador said the drop box visa policy has not been suspended but added that it was being reviewed, as is expected whenever there is a change in administration.

Mills assured that the position of the new US government on USAID, drop box visa system, and other areas would be known in due course.

[TheCable]