Tag: Dakuku Peterside

To be precise from the onset, it is apt to posit that the centrality, omnipresence and ubiquitous nature of petrol in Nigeria has elevated it to the status of a deity in our daily lives. We revere this deity and pray that it never unleashes mayhem on us. Any scarcity or increase in the price of this deity brings untold hardship to Nigerians and we are eager to appease it at any cost. We are hugely dependent on this deity because it is the dominant form of energy that powers our way of living. We are a petrol-fuelled economy. We depend on petroleum products for transportation, domestic generation of power for homes, small and medium businesses, and mechanised farming.

Over the decades, we appeased this deity with a sacrifice called a petrol “subsidy”. Recently, the cost of this sacrifice put a knee on the neck of Nigeria, threatened her with strangulation. To breathe and survive the strangulation, the new administration took a plunge and ended the sacrifice. As expected, with the stopping of the perennial sacrifice the high priests and guardians of the deity are livid and predicting doom and damnation to Nigeria. The deity has unleashed severe punishment on the nation . The increase in petrol price has created hyperinflation, a decrease in real GDP, a cost-of-living crisis, spike in food prices and a loss of disposable income for the citizens. The situation as it stands is precarious . Yet is not intractable. Having opted to stop the deity’s sacrifice, we must work hard to tame the deity – for a man who wants to wrestle with his “deity” must prepare for the battle.

Petrol is a crude oil derivative. Fortunately we have it in abundance. Most Nigerians expect that we should enjoy some benefits and should be a master of the petrol deity. Unfortunately, our history shows that this has not been the case. Instead of mastery over petrol, we have become its slave. This anomaly is directly linked with our failure to refine crude oil for local consumption over the years. The failure of the government to create the right framework to attract investment in refining of crude or resolve the decades-long collapse of refinery infrastructure has left us at the mercy of others. Other people process our oil and determine the price of finished products. For too long, we relied on imported petrol, subsidised the costs and consumed it even when there is no need . So we became almost addicted to it. This created in the minds of our people some entitlement mentality. And we must worship at the altar of petrol as long as we get it cheaply.

Successive governments fed the beast of subsidy, which made it grow bigger until it finally threatened our economic existence. Every government discussed the removal of subsidies, but none dared to try because of fear of the consequences. Goodluck Jonathan administration tried but was forced to reverse it. For so long , most Nigerians- especially those in the low income brackets , saw cheap, subsidised fuel as the only benefit they derived from a morally bankrupt and corrupt Nigerian state. However , when they woke up recently to the sleaze and alleged corruption of the subsidy regime, some started accepting the idea of the end of subsidies. At least to end the corruption anatomy of the so-called subsidy. But removing subsidy has left the price of petrol in Nigeria to the vagaries of fluidity and fluctuation of prices in the international market.

There are five main factors that determine the price of petrol in the international market, and these influence the price of petrol in Nigeria. They include: the cost of crude oil from which petrol is refined ; the cost of the product quoted on Platt, a price benchmark denominated in USD; the freight rate (cost of hiring a tanker to bring the product from where it is refined to where it is used, in our case West Africa); the littering expenses from transhipment and multiple handling; and Naira/ USD exchange rate. Any change in one or a combination of these factors will affect the petrol price in Nigeria. With subsidies gone, we are not protected from these events’ harsh realities. We do not have control over these factors and forces that determine the price of petrol. Therefore, we are at the mercy of this deity.

To survive, we must look for an alternative; fortunately, these alternatives exist though some may be more expensive . The government and our universities have been reluctant to research and explore these alternative energy sources for some inexplicable reasons. There are several alternatives to reduce or replace the use of petrol in the country. These alternatives can help diversify energy sources, promote sustainability, and mitigate the impact of fossil fuel consumption on the environment. Nigeria has significant natural gas reserves. Encouraging the use of compressed natural gas (CNG) and liquefied natural gas (LNG) as vehicle fuels can reduce the dependency on petrol for transportation. Promoting the production and use of Ethanol and biodiesel can provide cleaner alternatives for petrol in transportation.

Promoting hybrid vehicles, which combine internal combustion engines with electric motors, can be a transitional step towards full electrification. Encouraging the adoption of electric vehicles (EV)can significantly reduce petrol consumption. This involves building the necessary EV charging infrastructure and providing incentives for EV adoption, such as tax benefits and subsidies. Investing in renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and hydroelectric power can reduce the dependency on fossil fuels for electricity generation, freeing up more petrol for other uses. Enhancing public transportation systems, such as buses and trains, can reduce the number of individual vehicles on the road and lower overall petrol consumption.

Past administrations ignored these alternatives, and we hope this current administration will focus on them. The petrol price upward swing is not going away too soon. This is a justification for some proceeds of subsidy removal to be applied to investment in viable energy sources and social services like education, health, and affordable public transportation. It is a welcome development that this administration is listening to the yearnings and demands of the citizens. I salute Mr President for calling for a review of the proposal to give N8,000 per month to 12m poor Nigerians and commend the National Economic Council chaired by the Vice President for coming up with an alternative palliative strategy.

I will argue that although there is room for a well-considered palliative scheme for the poorest among us, that must not be the focus, for palliative is merely short-term measures to ameliorate the sufferings, whilst developing alternative energy is the long-term solution and must be the focal point of any government intervention. I cannot emphasise enough the importance of energy production in any modern economy. Production of goods and services for local use and export is fuelled by energy.

In the meantime, there are a few things the government must do to cushion the negative impact of a hike in the price of petrol. First, it must provide proper Communication. The government is losing the battle of properly framing this petrol price increase to its advantage. The dominant frame in the public sphere is suffering – all our people are seeing and hearing is suffering. The government’s spin doctors must rise to the occasion and win the battle for the hearts and minds of the people. This is crucial in transitioning from dependence on petrol deity and maximising alternative energy regime . Secondly , even though the government must allow market forces to determine the price of petrol, it must provide a regulatory framework and infrastructure to influence the market. Therefore, I advocate for adequate regulation, price monitoring, price intelligence (Indicative price versus market price), and some quasi-interventions when necessary. This is important, especially now, because we are still a petrol-dependent economy even though we have deregulated the system and removed subsidies.

Third, implementing energy efficiency measures in industries, buildings, and transportation can help reduce overall energy consumption, including petrol and raising awareness about the benefits of alternative fuels and sustainable practices can encourage individuals and businesses to make environmentally conscious choices. Fourth, supporting businesses, especially SMEs, at this challenging time with the petrol price crisis the country is facing. The government must provide a tax holiday and other incentives to help most of these businesses survive. These businesses are central to our economic activities and must be protected from collapse.

Furthermore, we must admit that the current challenge in Nigeria requires a bold energy policy and a seriously informed economic policy. This time, as hard as it may be on the citizens, provides an opportunity to get things right and push Nigeria towards the path of industrialisation and growth. Government must seize this opportunity to make informed socio-economic choices to cut Nigeria off from continued service of a petrol deity we do not even know. It is important to note that transitioning to alternative fuels and energy sources requires careful planning, investment, and collaboration between the government, private sector, and citizens. Additionally, these alternatives’ specific suitability and feasibility may vary depending on regional factors and infrastructure capabilities.

In conclusion, we must do whatever it takes not to go back to the subsidy. It is an ill wind that blows no one any good. This is a time for everyone to unite and push Nigeria to the next level. It is not a time for scoring cheap political points and doing nothing. Desperate times call for desperate measures. Our collective duty is to provide an energy transition that is sustainable and pulls us out of the shackles of the petrol deity once and for all times.

Touching down at the bustling Beijing Capital International Airport, you cannot miss that China has again opened to the world after COVID-19 shut down, nor will you miss the pervasive positive spirit and a sense of endless possibilities in the atmosphere.

If you have any doubt, a 30-minute drive from the airport to Changping District, North of Beijing, tells the story of a country’s metamorphosis, ancient roots, and what pragmatic leadership can do. I am a guest of the Chinese government from the 20th of August till the 2nd of September. It has proven to be a unique opportunity to understand Chinese leadership thinking and the nation’s development trajectory. It has allowed me to do contrastive leadership and political models between China and Nigeria to see if there are vital lessons to be learnt and applied in Nigeria to accelerate our socioeconomic development.

Although different in many ways, China and Nigeria represent giants in their respective continents (Asia and Africa}. They symbolise the hopes and aspirations of their people in a highly competitive and polarised world dominated for over 500 years by the West.

The story of how China got it right and has become the quintessential alternative economic and political power, whilst Nigeria has, at best, remained stagnant over the past decades, is fascinating. No doubt, a multiplicity of factors contributed to this dichotomous and contrasting outcome, which will merit elaborate analysis at an appropriate forum.

We must delve into their past to understand China’s and Nigeria’s present. First, let us look at China. Chinese civilisation dates to the first Chinese dynasty, Xia, founded in 2070 BC. From the period of this dynasty, through the Middle Han dynasty in the 3rd century to the North Song dynasty of the 10th to 13th century, ancient China was credited with four great inventions: gunpowder, paper making, compass, and moveable-type printing.

In 1961, the Prime Minister of Nigeria, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, enjoined Justice Adetokunbo Ademola to “never waiver from the truth” and a charged him that if he committed a crime and was brought before the justice, he should send him to jail. Balewa understands the importance of judicial independence and the integrity of the judges in fostering an enduring democracy. He understands that the Judiciary in our democracy is the third estate of the realm, the interpreter of the law, the common man’s last hope and the society’s conscience.

It serves as checks and balances of the executive and the legislature while adjudicating criminal and civil matters within the society, punishing offenders, and protecting citizens.

The judges who preside in Courts and the lawyers who prosecute or defend their clients ought to be impartial, upright, diligent, consistent, and open in whatever they do because their character is public property. The judges are the cynosure of the adjudication system and are expected to live above board. This is the ideal. However, this is too far from our current reality.

Recently, there has been a substantial amount of debate, discussion and concerns about the health and reputation of Nigeria’s Judiciary. A cursory review and quasi-research of commentaries on the actions and inactions of Nigerian Judiciary in 5 Nigerian newspapers between September 2023 and September 2023 reveals that 67% were negative, 10% were classified as neutral, and a paltry 23% were positive. The inference to draw is that the Judiciary in Nigeria has been in the news for all the wrong reasons. Why, then, do the commentariat and public view the Nigerian Judiciary mainly in the negative?

Our Judiciary has dug itself into a deep hole of credibility crisis for three key reasons. The first reason is the preponderance of questionable judgements. This is worse with political cum election cases. Some judgements are inconceivable, and it is difficult for right-thinking persons to wrap their heads around them.

From politicians not participating in primaries but becoming substantive candidates to court injunctions against the arrest of politicians or politically exposed people on criminal allegations to unimaginable errors in electoral judgment and judicial procedures, one wonders why we are facing such an epidemic of judicial impunity.

In election-related cases, could the waning quality of judgments be blamed on the unmanageable caseload and the punishing timeline for hearing and delivering judgments in election petition cases? Are the judges sitting on Electoral Tribunal or Appeal in a panel of at least three members able to have valuable conferences to deliberate on the cases argued before them to enable them to make informed decisions? Or is it just a routine ritual where one member cavalierly decides, and the rest chorus their agreement with the lead judgment that they never had the prior privilege to read the draft in advance? Whatever the answers might be to these posers, the Judiciary is fast losing the trust and reverence it used to enjoy from the public.

The second reason is the plethora of embarrassing corruption stories about the Judiciary constantly in the public domain. The public has lost trust in the incorruptible Judiciary, and now the general perception is that the Judiciary is prone to corrupt practices . Although this may be a hasty generalisation because we still have honest and incorruptible judges doing a great job, they hardly get mentioned in the media. Instead, the public is bombarded with news about corruption in the Judiciary.

Besides, the lifestyle of some judges belies the fact that they must be corrupt. We all know that the remuneration of judges and justices (between N450,000 to N750,000) is poor considering their excellent work; some live billionaires’ lifestyles, making people wonder how they come about the money they are spending.

It is public knowledge that judges clamour for jobs in the election petition seasons, and evidence abounds that some of the judges’ lives change overnight after the election petition assignment period. We have proof of some judges being indicted and punished for corruption in the electoral judicial cases saga, but that has not deterred others from engaging in such dastardly art.

The third reason is the panoply of unethical conduct among judicial officers and the slow conduct of cases, especially during electoral adjudication periods. Judicial accountability is far fetched . Justice delayed is tantamount to justice denied. Most Nigerians will shy away from our court system because of the delay in the court process and the recklessness of ending cases mostly on technical issues rather than substantive ones.

This has been made worse by the politicisation of the Judiciary to the extent that some stakeholders call it the “capture of the Judiciary ” by politics. Judges are supposed to be politically neutral and objective, contributing to maintaining a democratic state without bias. However, we notice the involvement of some judges in politics, or their close family members are politicians or politically exposed, and therefore put undue pressure on them and the judicial system. Conflict of interest issues are seen, and politicians use all means necessary to maintain a firm hold on these judges.

The most recent example of how low our judicial system has gone, which is very embarrassing, is the Kano State Governorship Contest Appeal Court judgement. Court of Appeal Kano on November 17 delivered judgement on this case, and parties applied and obtained the certified true copies of the judgement.

Two days later, after Mr Femi Falana raised an alarm that there were significant inconsistencies in the judgement and that what was delivered in court was at variance with copies of the judgement given to parties, the Deputy Chief Registrar of the Court of Appeal on November 22, wrote to lawyers in the case to return the judgement for what he called “Typographical errors”.

Meanwhile, the appellant had already filed its appeal before the Supreme Court. We must interrogate a lot of pertinent issues concerning this issue. First, the Kano Appeal Court judgment was unanimous, and the other two members of the panel of judges agreed with the lead judgment and stated in their contribution that they had read the lead judgement and agreed with it, including consequential orders. So how come there were such blatant “clerical errors, “as stated by the Chief Registrar of the court in his subsequent publicised letter to the lawyers inviting them to apply to correct the errors? Second, why will this clerical error be made at the most essential part of the judgement declaration? Does this smell, taste and feel like human error rather than a deliberate attempt at mismanaging the judicial process? These raises concerns about the industry, quality of judgement, and integrity of the judiciary and men on the Bench.

It is time we explore an alternative forum (Specialist Court) for resolving election disputes or narrow down the grounds on which elections are disputed. In the 2023 general elections, there were gubernatorial elections in 29 states, Houses of Assembly elections in 36 states, and NASS in all constituencies. Disputes arose from almost all these elections. In some cases, multiple parties filed petitions. Given the timelines prescribed in Section 285 CFRN, all these cases arrived at the Court of Appeal at about the same time and are to be determined within the same time frame – a point of thousands of court cases to be determined by a Court consisting of 81 judges (not all 81 would participate) in approximately 60 days. This timeframe covers the period for filing briefs and hearings; in most cases, they are left with barely a week after the hearing of the appeal. With this workload, should we expect justice from the Court of Appeal? Are the mistakes not inevitable? No one advocates for the injustice inflicted on hundreds of thousands of citizen litigants, whose matters have been abeyance until all political matters have been resolved.

Second, this ‘error’ has created a potential constitutional quagmire.The supposed error is contained in the dispositive part of the judgment. Regardless of the content of the judgment, it is the court’s final disposition that is enforceable. What happens if the NNPP and Governor decide not to appeal and insist that the final disposition favours them? This is an opportunity to fight against judicial misconduct, negligence and sloppiness . The police and the anti-graft agencies should investigate this.

Regrettably, the erosion of the independence, integrity and reputation of the Judiciary is a critical aspect of the collapse of our democracy and the rise of impunity and authoritarianism.

These signs are ominous because the failure of the Judiciary is the end of law and order and the genesis of anarchy. Unless the Judiciary is reformed and maintains its integrity, and independence, democracy dies. Members of the Legal profession, especially the Bench, must reflect on the consequences of their actions on society, especially the health of our democracy. All stakeholders must urgently interrogate how the Judiciary, which is supposed to protect and give us justice, became so vulnerable.

John Dewey, an American philosopher of the 20th century, argued that “we do not learn from experience … we learn from reflecting on experience”. At the core of this statement is the critical role of reflection in the learning process.

When we reflect and analyse past experiences, we gain insights, identify lessons learned from our mistakes, and integrate these insights into our lives to make better decisions in the future. In line with this sentiment, the call for electoral reforms is usually high after every election cycle. It has become a priority public commentary issue because of its linkage to the sustainability of democracy and quality of governance. Civil society, opposition politicians and international multilateral organisations are usually at the forefront. The 2023 election is no exception.

The 2023 elections were held under what was considered one of the most responsive and innovative electoral acts since 1999, but it turned out to be one of the most contentious. The degree of contention signals that the quality of election management may have plummeted from our 2015 experience.

Penultimate week, Yiaga Africa, in collaboration with the National Assembly, organised a Town Hall on Electoral Reforms in Abuja. The most critical challenge I see as we embark on the journey of another electoral reform is, given the level of political corruption prevalent in our system, how do we get the average enlightened citizen to believe that the pursuit of electoral reform is worth his time and that democracy has any value beyond periodic election for which he is not sure his vote will count? Sadly, we have attempted four electoral reforms or electoral acts from 2007 to 2022, but the quality of our elections is yet to keep pace .

Why did these electoral reforms not deliver? The reason is plausible. Like everything else in Nigeria, there is a wide gap between laws and the implementation of laws. We fail woefully at implementing laws put in place to make our elections free and fair. It is as if politicians and legal practitioners  actively look for loopholes to either circumvent the law or outrightly disregard it to achieve their electoral desire – which often is to win at all costs.

After an extensive review of the last election, notes shared with me by the former election umpire, Prof.Attahiru Jega  and the brilliant suggestions made at the Yiaga Africa event, i have identified urgent issues to focus on as we march towards 2024/25  electoral reforms. We need to rethink our entire electoral process to make it fit for purpose.

We must identify loopholes and block them altogether. The lacuna in the electoral process is our penchant towards making rules that, at face value, make sense but may not align with our current reality based on technology or our prevailing political attitude. This mismatch leads to unenforceable rules that open itself to judicial interpretation. I will articulate some of these issues thematically below.

The first is relating to the use of technology in elections. We must remove the ambiguity evident in Section 64 of the EA22 and make electronic transmission of results mandatory from the next general elections in 2027, including uploading polling-unit level results and result sheets used at different levels, and invest in  the technology . This was a sticking point in the last election and created many legitimacy issues when handled poorly.

The second relates to political parties and their candidates. The new Act should stipulate sanctions for failure to submit a register of party members not later than 30 days before the date of party primaries, congresses, or conventions concerning Section 77 (3), which the political parties have observed in the breach in the 2023 elections without penalty. It should proscribe cross-carpeting not only for members of the National Assembly but also for elected executives, governors, and Chairmen of LGAs. And empower INEC to prepare for elections to fill the vacancy once it has evidence of the Act of cross-carpeting. The provision that INEC can only fill such vacancies if they have been declared vacant by the Speakers (NA and SHAs) and Senate President is unrealistic as, in practice, they have failed to report such vacancies, as ‘de-campees’ invariably become members of their(Assembly  leaders)parties.

Besides, instead of Sections 86 and 87, which place all the responsibility of monitoring party finances with INEC, given the prevailing tendency of parties and candidates to violate campaign finance limits, this responsibility should either be handled by a newly created agency (in the context of unbundling INEC) or given to an Inter-Agency Committee consisting of INEC, Security, and anti-corruption agencies. Although Sections 31 and 33 specify conditions regulating withdrawal of candidature and substitution, there is a need to place stringent requirements for candidate withdrawal and replacement to prevent abuse of this provision.

The third is related to electoral dispute resolution and Judicial adjudication. Notwithstanding,provisions of Section 29(5), which allows aspirants who participated in primaries to pursue pre-election litigation, there is a need for the legislation to allow even candidates outside the political parties, as well as tax-paying citizens, to file suits against candidates who provide false information to INEC regarding their candidature. Although Sections 132(8) and (9) have given timelines within which the Tribunals and courts of appellate jurisdiction should deliver  verdicts, there is a need, particularly concerning elected executive positions, to ensure that all cases are resolved, and judgments made before the date of swearing-in other as found in Kenya and other African countries .

The fourth relates to voters register  and the voting process. INEC must enhance the quality of the voter register/voter registration process. And the increasing phenomenon of vote buying and vote selling  needs to be explicitly proscribed, with stiff penalties provided. Section 121, which deals with bribery and conspiracy, is insufficient to decisively deal with this phenomenon, which is destructive to the integrity of the elections.

Accordingly, as recommended by the Justice Uwais Electoral Reform Committee, the current statutory responsibility of INEC regarding the prosecution of electoral offenders should go to an ‘Election Offences Commission’. To accelerate the trial and punishment of offenders and address the impunity with which such offences are committed.

The fifth is related to the Institutional Independence and Effectiveness of INEC. We need to rethink the process of nominating and empanelling INEC.

The National Assembly should amend both the constitution and the electoral Act to review the process of appointments into INEC, specifically to divest the power from the appointment of Chairman and National Commissioners from Mr President, to free the commission from the damaging negative perception of “he who pays the piper dictates the tune” and professionalise lower-level administrative appointments, including headship of state offices of INEC.

In this regard, the appointment of Resident Electoral Commissioners should be divested from the president and given to the Commission at INEC, with powers to hire and fire. Also, INEC needs to be unbundled to improve its efficiency and effectiveness in the preparation and conduct of elections, while an independent body should also take the registration and monitoring of the activities of political parties.

Electoral reforms are essential for maintaining and improving the health of a democracy, ensuring that it remains responsive, representative, and accountable to its citizens’ diverse needs and interests. It plays a crucial role in strengthening and enhancing the functioning of democracy by promoting inclusivity, transparency and accountability, electoral integrity, and legitimacy.

Given the importance of electoral reforms to democracy and the quality of governance, we must take it seriously this time. Our democracy is a work in progress; we must do our best to make it functional. Though tortious and painstaking, these extensive reviews are needed to keep reshaping our democracy.

As imperfect as our electoral acts have been, they would have provided better elections if they had been adequately implemented. The bane of our electoral system is our penchant towards subverting the laws, sometimes with great impunity, and our total disregard for the rule of law. As we think about improving the Electoral Act to serve our electoral needs, we must reflect on implementing the Act’s content effectively.

I also call for an attitude change among our politicians who are ingenious in coming up with ways to undermine the Electoral Act to their advantage. The Machiavellian approach to politics will continue to impede our electoral process no matter how perfect our electoral Act is. It is time for real change.

Nigeria lately has been lucky, though, for the wrong reasons. Money has metaphorically been falling from the sky when the nation is in severe economic distress and needs every dollar to meet her obligations.

First, it was the series of Abacha loots. From the United States alone, approximately $332.4 million were recovered. Between March 2021 and May 2022, €6,324,627 was recovered from foreign countries, according to the former Justice Minister, Abubakar Malami.

This is among recoveries from other countries. The latest is from unknown persons and unidentified sources in Jersey, a Channel Island.

The funds worth $8.9m are believed to be proceeds of corruption disguised as government-sanctioned contracts in 2014 for arms purchases but diverted to shell companies.

The silent heist in Nigeria is not executed with masks and guns but with pens and deceit. The nation is robbed of her promise with the bleeding dry of public funds.

In the dance of corruption, Nigeria’s public funds are the unwilling partner, waltzing away from the grasp of those who need it the most. The key actors are those we entrust with our commonwealth.

Though these alleged looted funds, though  were never declared missing  before being recovered now,  raise a lot of fundamental questions and concerns about our public finance management and accounting systems.

To the best of my knowledge, our government has never declared any fund missing, our auditors never raised any red flags about some money that cannot be traced, and nobody has been prosecuted on account of public funds traced to foreign countries.

Since there is no justification for this kind of unaccounted fund that escaped our public finance gatekeepers and National Assembly oversight, the proper inferences  to draw are ; there is a failure of our public finance management system, official fraud, or we are simply a criminal enterprise posing as a responsible Sovereign.

This issue is not peculiar to Nigeria though. The United States, the bastion of democracy and policeman of transparency, once invited Ernst and Young to audit the Pentagon as its Department of Defence is called.

The auditor, mid-way into the exercise, concluded that the financial records of the Pentagon were riddled with irregularities to the extent that a reliable audit was simply impossible. However, the US case is a different context; some funds were untraceable, leading to significant changes.

The Nigerian case is hard to understand. Almost all recovered looted funds can be traced to government officials under the guise of legitimate transactions but end up in private accounts abroad.

Yet nobody is punished, not even the civil servants who are the enablers and the contractors who serve as conduits are called to account.

Each time news of discovery or recovery of looted fund breaks , we are happy. However, the  painful realisation that each recovered loot speaks to the gaps in our governance accounting and audit reporting system is yet to dawn on us.

The brazenness with which  government actors loot  public funds, inspired by the conviction  that there will be no consequences, erases any hope of a pause in official corruption.

Lack of effective internal control, non-tracking of financial transactions, absence of proper and regular audit trails, and weak oversight have combined to rub us of any sense of financial discipline and responsibility.

This explains why no alarm or red flag is ever raised about the misuse of public funds. The criminal prosecution of  the immediate past Accountant General of the country, whose office administered the state treasury, for alleged fraud depicts the depth into which we sank in official corruption.

Failure of governance often goes hand in hand with corruption and lack of accountability. Nigeria’s weak institutions and governance structures generally lead to a lack of stability and hinder the government’s ability to address corruption and public theft issues effectively.

This theft of public funds and failure of governance have had severe consequences for Nigeria’s social and economic development. It has resulted in enduring poverty, inadequate public services, a weakened economy, and a loss of public trust in government.

Another peculiar thing about Nigeria’s official corruption ring is that no tangible effort has been made to address the gaps in the public accounting value chain and our procurement regime and execution monitoring frameworks that serve as enablers.

It sends the signal that it is an embedded culture that is generally acceptable. This is a big dent in our reputation and a significant negative in requesting assistance from multilateral agencies and the global community.

It ought to concern our government that it is the vigilance of other nations financial systems that has helped in the recovery of vast sums of looted funds from Nigeria. There is an urgent need to bring our financial systems surveillance in line with international best practices.

Like  elsewhere, the theft of public funds in Nigeria  is a betrayal of the dreams of our people, a crime that shackles progress and strangles the hopes of a nation.

Theft of public funds in Nigeria isn’t just an economic crime; it is a theft of education, healthcare, and infrastructure, leaving the people to pay the price for the greed of a few.

When public funds vanish into the shadows of corruption, the light of opportunity dims for every Nigerian. We must stand united against the theft that darkens our collective future.

Nigerian citizens who are supposed to be victims of looted funds are either indifferent or complicit by default. Citizens’ activism and demand for accountability on institutions and government officials and a more open government is almost non-existent. Tolerance for corrupt government officials is relatively high for various reasons.

Theft of public funds and failure of governance are serious issues that can have significant consequences for a society. Addressing the theft of public funds and failure of governance requires a holistic approach that involves legal, institutional, and societal changes. It is an ongoing process requiring sustained efforts from domestic and international stakeholders.

We must overhaul our financial management systems and procedures to track and monitor public funds at every stage. We must deepen the adoption of technology for financial transactions and reporting. Government must embrace digital technologies and e-governance initiatives to minimise the manual handling of funds management, reduce corruption opportunities, and enhance transparency and efficiency in public service delivery. This is more important not only to checkmate the continuous looting of public funds but also to stop the re-stealing of the recovered stolen funds from abroad.

We must strengthen our anti-corruption institutions, such as the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).

These institutions must ensure that existing anti-corruption laws are rigorously enforced. This includes prosecuting individuals involved in corrupt practices regardless of their status or influence.

The government must demonstrate a strong political will at the highest levels of government to stop the theft of public funds at all levels of government. Leaders must set an example of integrity and accountability, creating a culture of transparency throughout the government.

They must strengthen internal and external auditing processes to ensure a thorough examination of government expenditures. Independent audit bodies can be crucial in identifying irregularities and holding officials accountable.

The government must establish effective mechanisms to recover stolen assets domestically and continuously through international cooperation. This includes cooperation and collaboration with the international community, international institutions, and other countries to trace and repatriate funds from abroad, share best practices, receive technical assistance, and coordinate efforts against transnational corruption.

We must adopt a multi-dimensional and multi-stakeholder engagement approach to make any meaningful improvement in tackling public funds theft. Civil society organisations, the media, and the public must actively monitor government activities and expose corrupt practices.

This can help create a checks-and-balances system. Citizen activism, advocacy, and public awareness campaigns can help shed light on corrupt practices and push for necessary reforms.

The return of looted funds is not just a financial recovery but a wake-up call to take necessary steps towards rebuilding Nigeria’s integrity, public sector financial control mechanism, audit reforms and securing a brighter future for all Nigerians.

As looted funds find their way back to Nigeria, it is a testament to the global commitment against corruption. We must ensure these resources are invested in projects that benefit the people and strengthen the nation. Repatriating looted funds is more than a legal process; it is a moral imperative. Nigerians are watching and will hold the government accountable for using these funds.

Clean-shaven, suave, upwardly mobile, and incurably optimistic ,Herbert Onyewumbu Wigwe (HOW) was one of the most recognisable figures in the banking space and corporate Nigeria. His official biography could only be written by him. But I hope his example can inspire and influence us. Accurately describing Herbert in one word can be compared to explaining the mystery of centuries in a few words or a wild goose chase. It is a nuanced and complex process.

He was an extraordinary businessman who died alongside his wife and son in the United States of America under exceptional circumstances. His tragic and sudden departure reverberated beyond our shores. But who was Herbert Wigwe? I can only answer this question from the narrow prism of my friendship and many encounters with him.

Herbert and I were members of the same local church assembly, and I witnessed his dedication to spirituality, good works, and commitment to church growth. It is easy to explain because of his solid Christian foundation. Herbert’s father, Elder Shyngle Wigwe, is a pastor in the Redeemed Christian Church of God. Herbert was a man of prayer, which he complemented with a ruthless work ethic. He attributed all his successes to God’s blessings.

Both of us are from Rivers State, and we had many sessions on how best to fix the politics of Rivers and, by extension, improve the State’s development trajectory. Herbert was utterly detached from politics but had deep insight into political manoeuvrings. We debated the affairs of Rivers State and the country, and he baffled me with the precision with which he predicted the outcome of political contests. He would quickly tell you that his political party is Nigeria and no other.

His passion for Nigeria was simply unwavering. Only a few persons can match his faith in Nigeria. He firmly believed that he would impart society by using businesses to provide solutions to society’s needs and create wealth that would touch the lives of many. He was unapologetically capitalist, in the proper sense of it, and he lived his life using capital to solve many societies’ needs, such as creating employment, paying taxes, providing lots of charity, and investing heavily in world-class university education. He used capital as an instrument for socio-cultural upliftment across Africa.

Herbert was a man of bold dreams and obsessed with excellence while making room for unavoidable mistakes. Herbert never gave up on any bold dream, no matter the odds. He rode the waves of challenges and was filled with the spirit of hard work, dedication, and strokes of ingenuity. He had bold dreams in all ramifications, and this was self-evident. First, as a young banker, he teamed up with his friend and partner to acquire “a distressed bank”, rated number 89 then, and turn it around in two decades to become one of the top five banks, with an assets base of over N20.9 trillion, is phenomenal. Herbert, as CEO, set out to build an Access Bank with the vision of becoming the gateway to Africa and the world’s most respected African bank. With a presence in more than 13 African countries plus a footprint in other continents, Access Bank was working towards realising this vision. Second, Wigwe University, which Herbert personally referred to as the “Future Harvard University of Africa”, was another extraordinary, bold dream. He set out to build the best University in Africa, investing $500m in the initial set-up. You do not need further testament that he was a man of bold dreams.

An entrepreneur extraordinaire, his mystique was his ability to sniff out opportunities where others see none, multiplied by the fact that he was one of the most persistent persons I know when going after opportunities. He mentored many budding entrepreneurs, top managers, and top academics in entrepreneurship. Apart from his well-known flagship, Access Bank, he was active in other financial services, construction, oil and gas, aviation, film, and music, and, most recently, the education sector. He made a star success of all his multiple business pursuits.

Herbert’s hidden strength was his ability to connect with people of all classes and cadres, accompanied by a related instinct to simplify complex things in the most basic way. His mastery of Rivers’ version of Pidgin English could only equal his fluency in Queens English. He was among the few successful people referred to as the “original old Port Harcourt boy”. Another strength of his was his courageous, daring, patient, and persistent nature, which added to his relentless ambition to accomplish exceptional things. This attracted to him friends and foes in equal measure.

His philanthropic work in the Herbert Wigwe Foundation, which he founded in 2016, focused on youth empowerment, health, arts, and education. This focus on youth development was central to his mentoring, given his strong belief in the importance of the youth in the development of Nigeria and Africa. He was an art enthusiast and contributed to art development in the country. As the art connoisseur he was, his collection reflected his passion for excellence, diversity, and social purpose. The HOW foundation extensively supported many healthcare projects for the downtrodden among us. His charity works were unique because he loathed publicity about it.

Herbert’s enduring legacy is the power of vision, bold dreams, courage, and determination to pursue it and rally people to accomplish the objective. This is what we need to improve in our public space. History has shown that bold dreams have the power to transform societies. He was exceptionally enterprising and entrepreneurial.

Listening to Herbert talk about his vision was to find yourself in the oasis of inspiration. He genuinely believed that there was nothing you fixed your mind on that you could not accomplish. He had bold dreams for the banking sector, tertiary education, the oil  and gas industry and most importantly society.

What lessons can we learn from him? Herbert epitomised a life of passion, dedication, resilience, and boldness in achieving grand personal and societal visions. He was bold in setting out great goals and pursuing them relentlessly until he reached them. He proves that an unexamined life is not worth living. To achieve greatness and impact on society maximally, one must be purposeful, bold, and patient. Herbert’s hidden strengths prepared him for an eventful life – a life he lived on his terms. His ability to connect with people, courage, daring attitude, ambition, and excellent work ethic are the ingredients of his success and must be emulated. Peter Drucker posits, “The best way to predict the future is to create it.” Herbert created his future and lived it to the full of those he loved.
For our budding entrepreneurs, Herbert left a legacy. He proved the axiomatic expression true: “Entrepreneurship is living a few years of your life like most people won’t so that you can spend the rest of your life like most people can’t.” He made the needed sacrifices at the start of his entrepreneurship and built capital enough to be reckoned among his contemporaries. Steve Jobs posits that “your work will fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work.”

Herbeth did outstanding work; the only way to do great work is to love what you do. Success is not just a product of luck. Hard work, knowledge, skills, and integrity underpin it. Thomas Jefferson argued, “The harder I work, the more luck I seem to have.” Herbert worked hard enough to be lucky. He had an eye for greatness. It is little wonder he set great goals for himself.

John Rockefeller advised that one should not be “afraid to give up the good to go for the great.” Both in banking and establishing a University, Herbert went for greatness and achieved it. We should do the same. As a business and community leader, Herbert understood that the function of leadership is to produce more leaders, not more followers. He created leaders of industries and global advocates of responsible capitalism in the 21st century.

My friend and brother Herbert lived like a candle in the wind. His star burned so brightly but ended so shortly. Greatness in life is not measured in how long one lives but in the impact of one’s life on society. Herbert lived, and he conquered. Adieu, my great visioner!

The debate over which system of government is most appropriate for a multi-ethnic and geographically diverse Nigeria has suddenly resurfaced. This time, it is pushing the fundamental issues of good governance, bread and butter, security, and inclusiveness that Nigeria is grappling with to the back burner.

At the centre of the debate is the agitation for a return to the parliamentary system of government as the structural panacea to Nigeria’s myriads of problems, although Nigeria has long consigned this system of government to history.

Agitating the minds of critical observers of Nigerian politics is whether this renewed debate is political or systemic or is just a symptom of frustration with poor governance outcomes. Will a change from a presidential system of government to a parliamentary system put Nigeria on a trajectory of growth and development? Is there solid evidence that our many woes come from the practice of the presidential system of government, that a change to parliamentary will help us overcome?

The first to fire the salvo was a group of 60 members of the National Assembly that proposed a bill to take the country back to the parliamentary system. Support came from diverse and far-flung quarters in rapid succession, including Afenifere, the pan-Yoruba political platform. We are not alone here.

In late March this year, our neighbour, Togo, adopted a new constitution introduced by members of the ruling party, which transitions the West African nation from a presidential to a parliamentary system. Senegal also witnessed a significant generational shift in electing a new president. Developments in Togo and Senegal would increase the intensity of debate and agitations in Nigeria.

In retrospect, we have tried both the parliamentary and presidential systems at different times. Between 1960 and 1966, referred to as the first republic, Nigeria, like most African countries that just got independence from their British colonial masters, adopted a parliamentary system of government. It had its challenges and strengths.

At the breakdown of the first republic, the popular verdict was that the system was not the most appropriate for us or that the Nigerian political elite could not operate it. The military government of 1976-1978 led by General Olusegun Obasanjo, and the growing political elites considered the pros and cons of the parliamentary system, which was still fresh in Nigeria’s minds, and decided that the cons outweighed the pros. Just before the 1979 military-civilian transition, they chose the presidential system for us.

The justifications for this choice were to improve issues of management of geographical diversity, representation of various groups, repudiating strong ethnic sentiments against national sentiment, and eliminating corruption.
However, like the parliamentary system, the presidential system has merits and demerits.

The most significant challenges of the presidential system as practised in Nigeria are fourfold. The first is the tendency of the executive arm to pocket the legislative arm, which has made nonsense of the principle of separation of power, and checks and balances. The US-type presidential system is predicated upon a system of checks and balances.

This vital principle does not allow for the rascality of any arm of government that may jeopardise the system. Since the return of democracy in 1999, and it is particularly evident at the sub-national level, this principle has been rendered impotent. Second, the enormous powers exercised by the president and governors tend to be abused and often breed dictatorship.

Third, the winner-takes-all-mentality, which leads to the abuse of power of patronage that fuels corruption and exclusion of the majority from mainstream government activities, saps the government’s access to quality leadership potentials within the country. Fourth, the high cost of governance and low accountability have created a government system that is corrupt and overbearing. Our common patrimony is bastardised by a few privileged to be part of the government.

The attempt to revisit the parliamentary system is not unconnected to our current economic challenges, ethnic tensions or separatist agitations, and corruption that has defied solution and gross incompetence of a good number of our political leaders. As a participant-observer, I believe Nigeria’s current governance crisis is less a problem of the system of government and more of political culture, incompetence of operatives and political actors,lack of leadership capacity and moral depravity.

Each system has its pros and cons. Any system can be designed,considering local peculiarities and made to work if run by competent persons who subscribe to a common vision and shared core values and are ready to respect the rule of law. Nigeria’s problems of disunity, lack of patriotism, stunted growth, corruption, and leadership incompetence are neither a product of the parliamentary nor presidential system. It is simply a lack of commitment by the elite to democracy, democratic tenets and the common good. Democracy is not just about representative election, which we practice, though with a massive caveat regarding its credibility. It is more about practising its principles , such as the rule of law, upholding fundamental freedoms of the people, accountability of government to the people, security of life and property, and responsible governance that gives dividends of democracy to the people.

Whether Nigeria should transition to a parliamentary system of government is a complex question that involves weighing various factors, including the country’s political culture, multi ethnic setting , historical context, governance challenges, and aspirations for democratic development. Proponents of a parliamentary system argue that it can promote political stability by ensuring a closer alignment between the executive and legislative branches of government.

In a parliamentary system, the government is typically formed by the majority party or coalition in the legislature, leading to smoother governance than the potential for gridlock in a presidential system. Also, they argue that parliamentary systems often feature a more transparent chain of accountability, as the executive is directly accountable to the legislature. This can enhance transparency and responsiveness to the electorate’s needs.

They further argue that parliamentary systems are more flexible in responding to crises or changing circumstances. If the government loses the legislature’s confidence, it can be replaced swiftly through a vote of no confidence or early elections, allowing quicker course corrections. Lastly, a parliamentary system could better accommodate the representation of various groups by fostering coalition-building and power-sharing among different factions.

Achieving this transition to a parliamentary system requires significant constitutional reforms, which can be lengthy and contentious. It would also necessitate changes to the electoral system and the functioning of government institutions. Nigeria has a long history of presidential governance since gaining independence in 1960.

Transitioning to a parliamentary system would represent a departure from this tradition and may encounter resistance from those vested in the current system. Implementing a parliamentary system would require building institutional capacity, training legislators and administrators, and fostering a political culture conducive to coalition-building and consensus-driven decision-making.
A marked difference between the two systems is the cost of governance versus development, which weighs heavily in favour of the parliamentary system. This may be an attraction for proponents of a parliamentary system. However, it would help if you juxtaposed this with which system is more appropriate for governing a diverse multi-ethnic federation and what system has worked best for the most successful federations in the world.

Opponents of a transition to a Westminster-style parliamentary system have also argued that switching could aggravate the challenges of governability because of our political parties’ high level of indiscipline, poor political culture, ethnic cleavages, and the multi-ethnic nature of our society.

Ultimately, the decision to transition to a parliamentary system should be guided by careful consideration of the preceding factors and a broad-based consultation and consensus-building among stakeholders. It is essential to assess whether such a change would address Nigeria’s governance’s underlying challenges and contribute to its long-term political stability and development.

The inference to draw is that the current agitation is a demand for a new political culture, protest against the high cost of governance, incompetence of the political leadership, bloated bureaucracy, and poor governance outcomes. There is no definite study to show a relationship between a system of government, thriving democracy, and a high standard of living. Nigeria’s problem is not necessarily the system of government we practice but the leadership deficit among the political operatives and actors.

No matter which system is in place, we will have the same results as we are seeing now if the same morally jaundiced and intellectually bankrupt political actors hijack power and rule in their narrow, selfish interests. That is our bane. That is what we must change to survive.