Chibok Shame - The Nation

The Chibok kidnap saga, in its six months, is a test the Goodluck Jonathan Presidency continues to fail. The latest threat to arrest Bring Back Our Girls (BBOG) protesters, led by Oby Ezekwesili, former education minister, is an empty bluff to cover clear impotence.

Mike Omeri, director-general of the National Orientation Agency (NOA), getting whiff of the BBOG lobby’s planned march on Aso Villa to meet the president, issued the threat.

He went into adjectival overdrive, dismissing the protests as “inconsequential” and “unpatriotic”; and climaxed with a flourish that the protests were a “distraction.”
Mr. Omeri did not end his tantrums without the reflex charge that the protests were opposition-driven — the same allegation President Jonathan was levying when the kidnap was still fresh, and a prompt reaction could perhaps have saved the girls. Mr. Omeri then bared his fangs that the BBOG protesters risked arrest.

Mr. Omeri clearly thought his threat would abort the march. Well, it didn’t — which is some good news from a very bad situation. The BBOG protesters have done well by pressing their right to free and lawful assembly. They have proved that in a republican democracy, even the president and his high office are bound by the laws of the land — these same laws that created his office and raised its occupier above co-equal citizens, so the president can deliver on his duties — cannot be taken away by a lowly official of state, which Mr.  Omeri is.

But even the BBOG march only gifted the Jonathan presidency the chance to further belittle itself. First, a contingent of police women cordoned off the gate of Aso Villa. The president apparently was too busy to meet with a group of citizens, among them hurting mothers of the kidnapped girls. The protesters were told to contact Mr. Omeri — the same Omeri that had earlier threatened them with arrest — to read the president’s body language on the matter!

In fairness to the president, he sent a quad of female ministers — Zainab Maina (Women Affairs), Sarah Ochekpe (Water Resources), Lawrentia Mallam (Environment) and Ekon Eyaakenyi (Lands, Housing and Urban Development). But even that proved a cold comfort.  One of the ministers rather trivialised issues, thus underscoring the administration’s crass insensitivity on Chibok.

Told by Dr. Ezekwesili that one of the escaped Chibok girls would address the gathering in Hausa (she was not proficient in English because of Nigeria’s educational collapse), Mrs Ochepe fired back that it was under Ezekwesili’s tenure as education minister that the educational system collapsed. Talk of leaving the ball and going for the leg!

True, Dr. Ezekwesili should not have added the caveat of collapsed education, true as it is. Still, should Mrs Ochekpe have been so insensitive as to launch a spiteful personal attack on Dr. Ezekwesili — an attack that drew stinging rebuke from the protesters? So, because the Chibok girls were no use educationally anyway, their country should not protect them from terrorists? Or did she think attacking Ezekwesili would remove the perceived impotence of the Jonathan Presidency on the Chibok affair?


That attack was simply reckless and Minister Ochekpe did her government no credit by it.
But then so had the First Lady, Dame Patience Jonathan, done her husband no credit, when she tried to put the Chibok kidnap victims in the dock on prime time television. That, of course, backfired in the infamous “Dia ris God ooo …” tragi-comedy.

The president too had lost precious lead time letting himself be misguided that the Chibok kidnap was an opposition ploy to discredit his government. On Chibok, the Jonathan government becomes more discredited by the day — which is a pity: because the government manifests lack of rigour and compassion, which questions the president’s competence to continue holding on to his job.
Let Mr. Omeri be warned: not even the president can take away the rights of citizens guaranteed by the Constitution.

The president too should do the needful and bring the Chibok girls back home, however difficult that is.  The Chibok stain would not go away, despite the childish and contemptible grandstanding by the administration’s officials.
Source: The Nation

Chibok Shame - The Nation

The Chibok kidnap saga, in its six months, is a test the Goodluck Jonathan Presidency continues to fail. The latest threat to arrest Bring Back Our Girls (BBOG) protesters, led by Oby Ezekwesili, former education minister, is an empty bluff to cover clear impotence.

Mike Omeri, director-general of the National Orientation Agency (NOA), getting whiff of the BBOG lobby’s planned march on Aso Villa to meet the president, issued the threat.

He went into adjectival overdrive, dismissing the protests as “inconsequential” and “unpatriotic”; and climaxed with a flourish that the protests were a “distraction.”
Mr. Omeri did not end his tantrums without the reflex charge that the protests were opposition-driven — the same allegation President Jonathan was levying when the kidnap was still fresh, and a prompt reaction could perhaps have saved the girls. Mr. Omeri then bared his fangs that the BBOG protesters risked arrest.

Mr. Omeri clearly thought his threat would abort the march. Well, it didn’t — which is some good news from a very bad situation. The BBOG protesters have done well by pressing their right to free and lawful assembly. They have proved that in a republican democracy, even the president and his high office are bound by the laws of the land — these same laws that created his office and raised its occupier above co-equal citizens, so the president can deliver on his duties — cannot be taken away by a lowly official of state, which Mr.  Omeri is.

But even the BBOG march only gifted the Jonathan presidency the chance to further belittle itself. First, a contingent of police women cordoned off the gate of Aso Villa. The president apparently was too busy to meet with a group of citizens, among them hurting mothers of the kidnapped girls. The protesters were told to contact Mr. Omeri — the same Omeri that had earlier threatened them with arrest — to read the president’s body language on the matter!

In fairness to the president, he sent a quad of female ministers — Zainab Maina (Women Affairs), Sarah Ochekpe (Water Resources), Lawrentia Mallam (Environment) and Ekon Eyaakenyi (Lands, Housing and Urban Development). But even that proved a cold comfort.  One of the ministers rather trivialised issues, thus underscoring the administration’s crass insensitivity on Chibok.

Told by Dr. Ezekwesili that one of the escaped Chibok girls would address the gathering in Hausa (she was not proficient in English because of Nigeria’s educational collapse), Mrs Ochepe fired back that it was under Ezekwesili’s tenure as education minister that the educational system collapsed. Talk of leaving the ball and going for the leg!

True, Dr. Ezekwesili should not have added the caveat of collapsed education, true as it is. Still, should Mrs Ochekpe have been so insensitive as to launch a spiteful personal attack on Dr. Ezekwesili — an attack that drew stinging rebuke from the protesters? So, because the Chibok girls were no use educationally anyway, their country should not protect them from terrorists? Or did she think attacking Ezekwesili would remove the perceived impotence of the Jonathan Presidency on the Chibok affair?

Oil Price Decline Opens Window for Subsidy Removal, Increased Savings

Dr. Okonjo-Iweala, Minister of Finance

As oil prices continue to make their descent and are expected to fall below $80 a barrel, oil market analysts have called on the federal government to seize the window of opportunity provided by the decline to remove the subsidy on petrol and kerosene.

They added that the removal of subsidies on both products would increase distributable revenue to the three tiers of government, especially to cash-strapped states and local governments, from the savings that will be made.

However, under the 2015-2017 Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) and Fiscal Strategy Policy (FSP) submitted by the executive to the National Assembly this week, the federal government has proposed a subsidy budget N971.4 billion for petrol and N250 billion for kerosene for the three years under review. The market analysts recalled that in January 2012 when the federal government removed the subsidy on petrol, oil prices averaged $113.81 a barrel during the month and $111.67 a barrel for the entire year, making it inexpedient and unpopular for the government to have tampered with subsidies at the time.

While acknowledging that removing subsidies just before the elections might not be politically expedient for the Jonathan administration, they said if the policy is properly handled and the price of petrol drops, it could work out to the advantage of the government. “With the price of crude oil sliding to almost $80 a barrel, a price parity has been achieved as the price of refined petroleum products would also decline and this gives the government the opportunity to remove the subsidy on petrol and kerosene.

“Already, the price of diesel, which is a deregulated product has started to decline gradually at fuel stations, as importers are buying it a lower price from traders and refiners overseas. This means that prices of other refined products would also fall,” said one analyst.
When his attention was drawn to the fact that the government is proposing N1.167 trillion as its subsidy bill between 2015 and 2017, he said this was too preemptive in the face of lower crude oil prices, which might not rise for a while due to slowing growth in China and rising shale oil production in the US, which are respectively the highest consumers of crude oil in the world.

“As your paper has already reported, Saudi Arabia, the swing producer, is not in a hurry to cut output, neither is Russia, another major oil producer. So we may have to get used to the idea of lower prices for some time to come.

“This is the time the government should capitalise on the opportunity offered by lower oil prices to remove the subsidy burden which has been serially abused by fraudsters, has cost the country trillions of naira and put undue pressure on the naira by fuel importers who constantly need to buy foreign exchange from the Central Bank of Nigeria.

“Besides, with lower crude oil prices, Nigeria’s foreign exchange earnings are bound to drop, but with a lower or zero subsidy bill, the savings can offset the drop in earnings,” he explained.

He also called on the Federation Accounts Allocation Committee (FAAC) comprising finance commissioners of the states and the Federal Ministry of Finance, which has been agitating for the removal of subsidies to increase their campaign now as the timing couldn’t have been better.

Under the MTEF/FSP submitted by the executive, the federal government has also proposed N570 billion for borrowings in 2015 and plans to spend N259 billion on Subsidy Reinvestment and Empowerment Programme (SURE-P) next year.
It also put states' share from the Federation Account during the next fiscal year at N1.675 trillion and local governments' share at N1.291 trillion.

The document also contains N750 billion estimates for debt service and N11.1 trillion as the total federally collectible revenue in 2015.
In a related development, the Coordinating Minister for the Economy and Minister of Finance, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, has warned against the effects of falling oil prices and called for increased prudence by the three tiers of government in the management of resources.


The minister, who spoke at the National Council for Finance and Economic Development (NACOFED) conference in Enugu yesterday, also gave an update on the state of the global economy, a subject which she told her audience was extensively discussed at the just concluded annual meetings of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF), and how it affects the Nigerian economy.

The IMF had lowered its growth projection for the global economy citing increased uncertainty over sluggish growth and stagnation especially in Europe. Specifically, she spoke about the implication of the decline of the oil price on Nigeria’s economy against the backdrop of other revenue challenges such as oil theft.
She said the executive arm of government had consistently pushed for a lower benchmark price in its discussions with the National Assembly, because price-sensitive country’s like Nigeria which depend on a single commodity like oil for most of their revenue, cannot afford to take things for granted, warning that a steep fall in oil prices could have serious economic consequences.

“We have been preaching prudence in the management of oil revenues because whether the price is high or low, with prudence you can’t go wrong,” she said.

Essentially, the country is facing both price and quantity challenges which deserve serious attention, she said. The minister, however, added that the cooperation between the federal and state governments had helped the country to cope quite well in spite of the challenges.

She urged both tiers of government to quickly draw up contingency plans to deal with the serious challenges posed by the decline in oil prices on the economy, adding that the federal government would soon announce its own contingency plan to deal with the revenue challenges.

Source: Thisday

Oil Price Decline Opens Window for Subsidy Removal, Increased Savings

Dr. Okonjo-Iweala, Minister of Finance

As oil prices continue to make their descent and are expected to fall below $80 a barrel, oil market analysts have called on the federal government to seize the window of opportunity provided by the decline to remove the subsidy on petrol and kerosene.

They added that the removal of subsidies on both products would increase distributable revenue to the three tiers of government, especially to cash-strapped states and local governments, from the savings that will be made.

However, under the 2015-2017 Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) and Fiscal Strategy Policy (FSP) submitted by the executive to the National Assembly this week, the federal government has proposed a subsidy budget N971.4 billion for petrol and N250 billion for kerosene for the three years under review. The market analysts recalled that in January 2012 when the federal government removed the subsidy on petrol, oil prices averaged $113.81 a barrel during the month and $111.67 a barrel for the entire year, making it inexpedient and unpopular for the government to have tampered with subsidies at the time.

While acknowledging that removing subsidies just before the elections might not be politically expedient for the Jonathan administration, they said if the policy is properly handled and the price of petrol drops, it could work out to the advantage of the government. “With the price of crude oil sliding to almost $80 a barrel, a price parity has been achieved as the price of refined petroleum products would also decline and this gives the government the opportunity to remove the subsidy on petrol and kerosene.

“Already, the price of diesel, which is a deregulated product has started to decline gradually at fuel stations, as importers are buying it a lower price from traders and refiners overseas. This means that prices of other refined products would also fall,” said one analyst.
When his attention was drawn to the fact that the government is proposing N1.167 trillion as its subsidy bill between 2015 and 2017, he said this was too preemptive in the face of lower crude oil prices, which might not rise for a while due to slowing growth in China and rising shale oil production in the US, which are respectively the highest consumers of crude oil in the world.

“As your paper has already reported, Saudi Arabia, the swing producer, is not in a hurry to cut output, neither is Russia, another major oil producer. So we may have to get used to the idea of lower prices for some time to come.

MALALA becomes youngest person to win a Nobel Prize

Malala Yousafzai, the Pakistani schoolgirl and education activist, Malala has become the youngest Nobel Peace Prize winner. She was  along with Indian children's rights activist, Kailash Satyarthi jointly awarded the 2014 Nobel peace prize.

She was shot in the head by the Taliban on her way home from school after campaigning for more access to education for girls and has since become recognisable worldwide. 

Malala has travelled far and wide representing hope for children.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee cited the two "for their struggle against the suppression of children and young people and for the right of all children to education.''

Awarding the prize, the committee said that peaceful global development could only come about if children and the young are respected.

Source: Aljazeera

MALALA becomes youngest person to win a Nobel Prize

Malala Yousafzai, the Pakistani schoolgirl and education activist, Malala has become the youngest Nobel Peace Prize winner. She was  along with Indian children's rights activist, Kailash Satyarthi jointly awarded the 2014 Nobel peace prize.

She was shot in the head by the Taliban on her way home from school after campaigning for more access to education for girls and has since become recognisable worldwide. 

Malala has travelled far and wide representing hope for children.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee cited the two "for their struggle against the suppression of children and young people and for the right of all children to education.''

Awarding the prize, the committee said that peaceful global development could only come about if children and the young are respected.

Source: Aljazeera

Why we won’t sell arms to Nigeria, by US Govt.

DESPITE the urgent need for external support for Nigeria to defeat Boko Haram, the United States (U.S.) has declared that it will not sell arms to the Federal Government.

The position of the U.S. was disclosed by the country’s Ambassador to Nigeria, James F. Entwistle.

Entwistle, who spoke in Yola Thursday in an interactive session with journalists after addressing American University of Nigeria (AUN) students and staff on his mission to Adamawa State, explained that the decision of the U.S. government not to sell arms to the country was due to what he described as massive human rights abuses by the Nigeria military.

  “The U.S. government is against human rights abuse by any country in the world. So it will be ungodly for the U.S. to sell arms to Nigeria, a country that its military is notoriously known for human rights abuse. We cannot sell our arms to a country that will use our technology which is meant for defence of the helpless people to harass the helpless citizens”, he said.

  On the Boko Haram’s killings in the north-eastern part of the country, he said that the crisis was getting stronger due to the political undertone and internal sabotage by the people of Nigeria.

  “In the past six months it is very clear the manner Boko Haram is getting stronger that there is internal sabotage. The deadly gang has efficient military operations, the way they operate is clear that they receive military training based on the tactics they employ to operate”, he maintained.

  He said that U.S. government had been training Nigeria military in different fields including information management and war tactics to improve the productivity of both the personnel and officers.

  The U.S. ambassador maintained that Nigeria and his country had a good relationship and that President Barrack Obama was building a stronger friendship between the two countries for economy prosperity of Nigeria.

   “President Jonathan is the only African President that has meetings twice with Obama and another meeting with Obama’s deputy. This is to show that the U.S. government has special interest to support Nigeria to grow fast. The fact that Obama is yet to visit Nigeria cannot be used as a sign that the relationship between the two countries is sour”, he stated.


Entwistle, who said that he was in Yola to monitor the aborted governorship by-election in tomorrow, pointed out that the major problem militating against the development of Nigeria

was corruption, which he said had detained the growth of both democracy and the economy of the country.

  “Corruption is a huge problem in Nigeria, everybody knows about this. Corruption can be tackled in Nigeria only when there are strong institutions like the security agents, judiciary and others.  Individuals should be bold to challenge public office holders on how they get money to buy big cars, build houses in Abuja, Lagos and other parts of the world. The members of the media should be courageous to put Nigerian leaders on the public scale for members of the public to judge their activities in office”, he said.

  On the 2015 general elections, the U.S. ambassador insisted that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) must fashion out modalities that could allow the Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) to vote.

  “It will be constitutionally wrong for INEC to deny these people from voting, if they are excluded from the election it means the election result cannot be credible because some Nigerians are denied their rights to vote. The power of any individual is his rights to vote for the leader of his choice, if you deny him that right, you have taken away his power to question or caution the person in office.  So it is very important for INEC to include the IDPs in the 2015 general elections”, he maintained.

    Entwistle, who rated the American University of Nigeria, Yola as among the best institutions in the world, noted that the school would contribute to the fast development of the country and other African countries.

Source: GUARDIAN

Why we won’t sell arms to Nigeria, by US Govt.

DESPITE the urgent need for external support for Nigeria to defeat Boko Haram, the United States (U.S.) has declared that it will not sell arms to the Federal Government.

The position of the U.S. was disclosed by the country’s Ambassador to Nigeria, James F. Entwistle.

Entwistle, who spoke in Yola Thursday in an interactive session with journalists after addressing American University of Nigeria (AUN) students and staff on his mission to Adamawa State, explained that the decision of the U.S. government not to sell arms to the country was due to what he described as massive human rights abuses by the Nigeria military.

  “The U.S. government is against human rights abuse by any country in the world. So it will be ungodly for the U.S. to sell arms to Nigeria, a country that its military is notoriously known for human rights abuse. We cannot sell our arms to a country that will use our technology which is meant for defence of the helpless people to harass the helpless citizens”, he said.

  On the Boko Haram’s killings in the north-eastern part of the country, he said that the crisis was getting stronger due to the political undertone and internal sabotage by the people of Nigeria.

  “In the past six months it is very clear the manner Boko Haram is getting stronger that there is internal sabotage. The deadly gang has efficient military operations, the way they operate is clear that they receive military training based on the tactics they employ to operate”, he maintained.

  He said that U.S. government had been training Nigeria military in different fields including information management and war tactics to improve the productivity of both the personnel and officers.

  The U.S. ambassador maintained that Nigeria and his country had a good relationship and that President Barrack Obama was building a stronger friendship between the two countries for economy prosperity of Nigeria.

   “President Jonathan is the only African President that has meetings twice with Obama and another meeting with Obama’s deputy. This is to show that the U.S. government has special interest to support Nigeria to grow fast. The fact that Obama is yet to visit Nigeria cannot be used as a sign that the relationship between the two countries is sour”, he stated.

Ebola death toll crosses 4,000

More than 4,000 people have died in the Ebola epidemic that broke out in west Africa at the start of the year, according to the latest figures released by the World Health Organization (WHO).

The WHO on Friday said that as of October 8, 4,033 people have died of Ebola out of a total of 8,399 registered cases in seven countries. The last toll put the figures at 3,865 dead from 8,033 cases.

The seven affected countries are split into two groups by WHO. The first includes Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone -- by far the worst-affected countries. Second group consists of Nigeria, Senegal, Spain and United States, which have seen a small number of highly isolated cases.

Liberia is the worst-hit of all, with 4,076 cases and 2,316 deaths, followed by Sierra Leone with 2,950 cases and 930 deaths.

Guinea, where the epidemic originated in December, has seen 1,350 cases and 778 deaths.

Health workers continue to pay a heavy price for their efforts with 233 deaths out of 416 cases across the countries. Nigeria has now been declared Ebola-free and its toll remained unchanged at eight dead from 20 cases.

There has been one death in the United States and one case contracted in Spain.
The toll remained unchanged in Senegal with one case. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, hit by a separate strain of Ebola from the one raging in West Africa, the WHO said there have been 71 cases and 43 deaths up to October 7.

On Friday the UN special envoy on Ebola said the number of cases was probably doubling every three-to-four weeks and the response needed to be 20 times greater than it was at the beginning of October.

David Nabarro warned the UN General Assembly that without the mass mobilisation of the world to support the affected countries in West Africa, "it will be impossible to get this disease quickly under control, and the world will have to live with the Ebola virus forever."


UN Deputy Secretary-General Jan Eliasson said catching up with "the menacing exponential curve of the virus'' demands a massive scale-up of financial resources, medical staff and equipment.

"I now appeal to all member states to act generously and swiftly,'' Eliasson said.

"Speed is of the essence. A contribution within days is more important than a larger contribution within weeks." Eliasson added.

Source: Aljazeera

Ebola death toll crosses 4,000

More than 4,000 people have died in the Ebola epidemic that broke out in west Africa at the start of the year, according to the latest figures released by the World Health Organization (WHO).

The WHO on Friday said that as of October 8, 4,033 people have died of Ebola out of a total of 8,399 registered cases in seven countries. The last toll put the figures at 3,865 dead from 8,033 cases.

The seven affected countries are split into two groups by WHO. The first includes Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone -- by far the worst-affected countries. Second group consists of Nigeria, Senegal, Spain and United States, which have seen a small number of highly isolated cases.

Liberia is the worst-hit of all, with 4,076 cases and 2,316 deaths, followed by Sierra Leone with 2,950 cases and 930 deaths.

Guinea, where the epidemic originated in December, has seen 1,350 cases and 778 deaths.

Health workers continue to pay a heavy price for their efforts with 233 deaths out of 416 cases across the countries. Nigeria has now been declared Ebola-free and its toll remained unchanged at eight dead from 20 cases.

There has been one death in the United States and one case contracted in Spain.
The toll remained unchanged in Senegal with one case. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, hit by a separate strain of Ebola from the one raging in West Africa, the WHO said there have been 71 cases and 43 deaths up to October 7.

On Friday the UN special envoy on Ebola said the number of cases was probably doubling every three-to-four weeks and the response needed to be 20 times greater than it was at the beginning of October.

David Nabarro warned the UN General Assembly that without the mass mobilisation of the world to support the affected countries in West Africa, "it will be impossible to get this disease quickly under control, and the world will have to live with the Ebola virus forever."

As Nigeria's Oil Dries Up....Okey Ikechukwu

Shortly after he was sworn in as president of the United States, Barrack Obama said the US must look for alternative sources of energy, to reduce its dependence on petroleum products for the bulk of its energy needs.

The emphasis was on biofuels. American farmers were charged with all manner of tasks and the fuel output of various food items was the prime issue at most US research national energy policy discussions.

But fuel yields from most agricultural products were found to be rather unimpressive, given the huge volumes for agricultural products needed as input. The comments on the matter on this page attracted scant attention at the time, but events have now come full circle. The US, which had hitherto been Nigeria’s biggest oil customer, has stopped buying our oil. Last week, we heard it from the US authorities and from official sources in Nigeria that the total volume of oil bought from Nigeria by the US now stands at zero litres.

For a nation that operates an ‘almajiri’ national income management policy, Nigeria is up against the wall as I write. At regular intervals, all states of the federation present their empty plates. The plates are then filled to varying degrees from the federation account, depending on the agreed national sharing formula. There is never a talk about a national production formula. In addition, nearly all the states are in debt. Saving is anathema. The driving disposition of all ‘stakeholders’ in matters pertaining to the national treasury is consumption. No one ever hears about production. Meanwhile, what is being consumed is dug out of the ground by foreign companies whose alleged output we accept in good faith. No one also knows for sure the truth about the actual daily output of Nigeria’s oil fields.

We must wake up to the fact that the America’s quest for an alternative energy source has sounded the death knell for the large quantities of oil that used to go to the US and created new problems. Loss of market and loss of revenue for Nigeria are it! Voila, the grave dangers facing Nigeria and other countries whose economy is highly dependent on revenue from oil! With imports from Nigeria dropping to zero in July, and with clear indications that the situation is now irreversible, are we re-strategizing?


Amidst the declining revenue, disappearing foreign reserves and colossal pressures on the exchange rate, some allegedly knowledgeable experts are saying that the Nigerian economy is more than robust enough to withstand the shock waves all manner of economic counter currents. Brilliant, is it not? A man is told that a trailer has just run over someone and replies with: “Don’t sound so tragic, as a toe is still twitching in the dead man’s crushed right leg!”

That Nigeria in now the first country from which the US, the world’s largest oil producer and consumer has completely stopped buying oil is because of the growing sourcing of very high quality oil from shale. This shale revolution has led to dramatic increase in its domestic production, following the use of such new technologies as horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, or fracking to maximise oil yields. As I write, international oil firms like the Royal Dutch Shell, ExxonMobil, Total and Chevron, which operate most of Nigeria’s major oil fields, are divesting. What is going on today among these oil companies is a portfolio rotation of their assets, as they divert more resources into shale oil production. Does Nigeria have shale in the right quantities and is working towards its commercial exploitation? Shale is more ‘democratised’ in the world than petroleum. Nigeria shares the same fate with countries like Algeria, Libya and Angola, whose high quality crude is similar to the one pumped in the new oil fields of North Dakota. See how our ‘sweet crude’ has now become a curse?

It is interesting that the Middle East nations, like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are less affected by this development, because their lower quality crude oil is still very much in demand by US refineries. The one year old warning of the Minister of Petroleum Resources, Mrs. Diezani Alison-Madueke, about the threat posed to oil producers by energy from shale did not, to my knowledge, elicit a national response or a strategic position document from her ministry. The nation’s switching of more of its oil exports to Asia, and the replacing of US with India as the largest importer of Nigerian oil, is an ostrich move. The truth is that we have a lousy product in a demand-switching world.

The solution is diversification of the national economy. Otherwise Nigeria’s global relevance and economic viability in the medium and long term will become history. Slaves became unwelcome commodity in international trade when mechanisation came on the scene. Coal gave way to petroleum over time. These ‘energy sources’, as well as and national economies that depended on them in a mobile world, collapsed because they were overtaken by the march of events.

Other nations facing the same problem as Nigeria today are also in search of new markets in the same Asia. The possibility of price crashes and all manner of undercutting by marketers will reign.  The giant of Africa must now find other ways of measuring its greatness, besides talking about its large population with limited capacities and misused high income from oil. Almost every country in the world today can produce fuel from shale.

In addition, countries like Ghana, Cote d’Ivoire, South Sudan, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia and Kenya, which have discovered oil in commercial quantities, will not tremble before Nigeria because it once wielded a big purse that it did not manage strategically. Looks like it’s back to our agricultural products of the thirties, forties and fifties; this time with cutting edge technology and a focused national leadership.

Source: Thisday

As Nigeria's Oil Dries Up....Okey Ikechukwu

Shortly after he was sworn in as president of the United States, Barrack Obama said the US must look for alternative sources of energy, to reduce its dependence on petroleum products for the bulk of its energy needs.

The emphasis was on biofuels. American farmers were charged with all manner of tasks and the fuel output of various food items was the prime issue at most US research national energy policy discussions.

But fuel yields from most agricultural products were found to be rather unimpressive, given the huge volumes for agricultural products needed as input. The comments on the matter on this page attracted scant attention at the time, but events have now come full circle. The US, which had hitherto been Nigeria’s biggest oil customer, has stopped buying our oil. Last week, we heard it from the US authorities and from official sources in Nigeria that the total volume of oil bought from Nigeria by the US now stands at zero litres.

For a nation that operates an ‘almajiri’ national income management policy, Nigeria is up against the wall as I write. At regular intervals, all states of the federation present their empty plates. The plates are then filled to varying degrees from the federation account, depending on the agreed national sharing formula. There is never a talk about a national production formula. In addition, nearly all the states are in debt. Saving is anathema. The driving disposition of all ‘stakeholders’ in matters pertaining to the national treasury is consumption. No one ever hears about production. Meanwhile, what is being consumed is dug out of the ground by foreign companies whose alleged output we accept in good faith. No one also knows for sure the truth about the actual daily output of Nigeria’s oil fields.

We must wake up to the fact that the America’s quest for an alternative energy source has sounded the death knell for the large quantities of oil that used to go to the US and created new problems. Loss of market and loss of revenue for Nigeria are it! Voila, the grave dangers facing Nigeria and other countries whose economy is highly dependent on revenue from oil! With imports from Nigeria dropping to zero in July, and with clear indications that the situation is now irreversible, are we re-strategizing?

2015: Why Jonathan may lose as an incumbent...by Bayo Olupohunda

President Goodluck Jonathan

For those who are upbeat about the chances of the incumbent President Goodluck Jonathan winning re-election if he decides to run, I have bad news for them. The President may not only lose in 2015, he could lose by a landslide even with the incumbency factor perceived to be in his favour.

Let’s even consider a massive defeat of an incumbent impossibility; he could still be edged out by a narrow margin. Indeed all evidence point to the first shocking defeat of an incumbent in a presidential election in the country. For the first time ever, it seems the incumbency effect may not matter. While I acknowledge the usual arguments about the incumbent advantage; 2015 may yet prove to be an exception.

Why do I think so? If the supporters of the President can just sit back and remove the scale of sycophancy from their eyes and honestly assess the situation in the country, they will see that in a free and fair election, the President does not stand a chance. I think they may be in for a rude shock. Those who fancy an easy win for Jonathan may have failed to appreciate the enormity of the challenges stacked against his re-election.

But supporters of the administration seem to have been living in denial all this while. For them the President’s victory is a foregone conclusion. Not quite. Their optimism seems buoyed by the gale of endorsements by some phony groups and intimidated Peoples Democratic Party governors who seem not to have any choice anyway. Supporters of the administration have also trumpeted what they considered to be some achievements of the President. But it appears the so-called achievements are known only to them alone. As for Nigerians, it has been a case of the more you look, the less you see when it comes to assessing this administration. In the ultimate decider will be Nigerian voters.

Despite the huge arsenal of funds and state machinery at the disposal of the Jonathan presidency, politics and life often have other plans. This is what recent elections have taught us. The reality is, incumbents can be defeated. It may happen in 2015 – in a few months from now, President Jonathan will find out whether he will be keeping his job. For most voters, their choice will ultimately come down to how they expect either a new president or Jonathan to run the affairs of our country in the next four years. Unfortunately for Jonathan, he does not seem to have much of a presidential record, and a review of it leaves little doubt that Nigerians may want to fire him.


Let me make it clear for people reading this, especially supporters of this administration, the laziest thing will be to dismiss my thoughts as the ranting of a hater of the President or an opposition hatchet job. Far from it, I am completely apolitical. One does not need a crystal ball to see the realities of why President Jonathan should be preparing his handover note. Or shouldn’t he? Here are my reasons. The first is in the changing demographics. Increasingly as we progress in our democratic experience, it is becoming clear that it is the voters that will ultimately determine the fate of candidates.

In the past, defeating incumbents was unthinkable. Incumbents held what proverbialy could be called the yam and the knife – but not anymore. We have the situation where sitting Presidents deploy state machinery to induce and coerce all electoral institutions. In recent governorship elections incumbents have been beaten while some held on to their post by a thin margin. It is no longer easy to steal the people’s mandate. Now if elections are not won by ballot, one can be sure the courts will overturn any stolen mandate. The trend will surely continue in 2015.

If the situation persists, President Jonathan may be Nigeria’s first one-term President. Not even the rallies being held across the country in support of the President may help the re-election. In 2015, the President will be assessed by his performance in the last five years. A look at history has shown that if President Jonathan loses, he will not be the first incumbent to do so.

There have been nearly a dozen one term Presidents who ran for second terms but were denied by voters, in the United States, for example, there have been three one-term presidents since World War II. The most recent one-term president who lost his re-election bid was George H.W. Bush, a Republican who lost to Democrat Bill Clinton in 1992. Republican George H.W. Bush was the 41st President of the United States, serving from 1989 to 1993.

He lost a campaign for re-election in 1992 to Democrat, Bill Clinton. Bush’s official White House biography describes his re-election loss this way: “Despite unprecedented popularity from this military and diplomatic triumph, Bush was unable to withstand discontent at home from a faltering economy and continued high deficit spending.’’

Though some of the one-term US presidents lost due to the prevailing economic, political and social factors of their time; those factors will pale into insignificance when juxtaposed with the failures of the Jonathan presidency. If any of the US presidents had been Jonathan, they would not have even made the mid-term election as they would have been impeached. Unfortunately, we have legislative arms that are largely part of the rot.

But in spite of ongoing propaganda, Nigerians seem to have become wiser—more discerning. They may express their displeasure with this administration in 2015. I have written in this column that the next election may yet be a protest vote by a people tired of this administration’s arrogance, contempt and disdain for their welfare as a people. What will be the greatest obstacle in the path of Jonathan’s re-election is his attitude to corruption. Needless to say that Nigerians have become embarrassed by how corruption scandals at home and abroad have taken a toll on their country’s reputation.

What is worse is Jonathan’s denial of corruption as the cause of our underdevelopment. In several public statements, the President had declared, much to the bewilderment of Nigerians, that corruption is not Nigeria’s problem. The President must know that Nigerians are seriously angry about his ‘body language’ to corruption when allegations of corruption continue to taint his government. This President has too much baggage going into an election year. They will certainly hurt his re-election chances.

For example, Nigerians are scandalised by the President’s refusal to probe the ongoing cash-for-arm scandals rocking his administration. That he has continued to maintain silence even as these allegations continue to taint the integrity of his administration is unnerving to Nigerians. Meanwhile, under this administration, all the agencies meant to fight corruption have also gone comatose. Perhaps it is not a coincidence that this is happening under his Presidency.

The lack of leadership and the damage inflicted on Nigerians living in the North-East by the administration’s delay to confront growing insecurity has had its attendant consequences. The President is going into the election as a largely unpopular candidate. Can Nigerians afford four more years of Jonathan? Something tells me that we may have seen the last of the Jonathan’s presidency. I will be surprised if he is re-elected.

Source:Punch

2015: Why Jonathan may lose as an incumbent...by Bayo Olupohunda

President Goodluck Jonathan

For those who are upbeat about the chances of the incumbent President Goodluck Jonathan winning re-election if he decides to run, I have bad news for them. The President may not only lose in 2015, he could lose by a landslide even with the incumbency factor perceived to be in his favour.

Let’s even consider a massive defeat of an incumbent impossibility; he could still be edged out by a narrow margin. Indeed all evidence point to the first shocking defeat of an incumbent in a presidential election in the country. For the first time ever, it seems the incumbency effect may not matter. While I acknowledge the usual arguments about the incumbent advantage; 2015 may yet prove to be an exception.

Why do I think so? If the supporters of the President can just sit back and remove the scale of sycophancy from their eyes and honestly assess the situation in the country, they will see that in a free and fair election, the President does not stand a chance. I think they may be in for a rude shock. Those who fancy an easy win for Jonathan may have failed to appreciate the enormity of the challenges stacked against his re-election.

But supporters of the administration seem to have been living in denial all this while. For them the President’s victory is a foregone conclusion. Not quite. Their optimism seems buoyed by the gale of endorsements by some phony groups and intimidated Peoples Democratic Party governors who seem not to have any choice anyway. Supporters of the administration have also trumpeted what they considered to be some achievements of the President. But it appears the so-called achievements are known only to them alone. As for Nigerians, it has been a case of the more you look, the less you see when it comes to assessing this administration. In the ultimate decider will be Nigerian voters.

Despite the huge arsenal of funds and state machinery at the disposal of the Jonathan presidency, politics and life often have other plans. This is what recent elections have taught us. The reality is, incumbents can be defeated. It may happen in 2015 – in a few months from now, President Jonathan will find out whether he will be keeping his job. For most voters, their choice will ultimately come down to how they expect either a new president or Jonathan to run the affairs of our country in the next four years. Unfortunately for Jonathan, he does not seem to have much of a presidential record, and a review of it leaves little doubt that Nigerians may want to fire him.

Leadership lessons from Lion

FACT: A Lion’s roar can be heard from five miles away:

LESSON: Make yourself heard

A famous author once said “You may have a heart of gold, but then so does a hardboiled egg.” You may have good intentions in mind, but if you don’t say them out, nobody will know how noble they are. There are plenty of animals that are bigger and stronger and have more stamina than the Lion, there are animals that are faster, there are animals that are even better hunters, but what makes the Lion arguably the most fearsome animal to walk the earth is its voice, its voice is its reputation.

Many of us never met Albert Einstein, but we all have knowledge of him because he had something to say and he said it. Many of us never met people like Adolf Hitler or Mother Theresa of Calcutta, but we know about them because they had statements to make and they made those statements. It is important for you to know that the statement you make is not just about what you say, the things you do and your character is part of what make your reputation.

The Lion knows that its roar precedes it everywhere it goes, that is why it is the epitome of boldness. If you develop your reputation properly, your boldness will increase as well Never make the mistake of believing that your friends, or siblings or neighbours or co-workers should be able to read your mind. Remember what Jesus Christ himself said in Matthew 7:7: “Ask and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock and it shall be opened unto you”. There is nothing to be gained from keeping to yourself, express yourself, if you know you are not extroverted, you can write. If you know you have a talent or a gift, use it. Go out and make friends, a recluse is of no use to anyone. As the popular maxim goes “unless the tortoise sticks its head out of its shell it cannot go anywhere”

FACT: Lions Are Very Social Animals; They Form Groups Called Prides With Sometimes As Many As Forty Individuals In a Pride:

LESSON: Interact With Others So That You Can Get Better

Robert Greene’s eighteenth law of power says: “Do not build fortresses to protect yourself – isolation is dangerous.” Many people believe that life is a road that must be travelled alone and that the task of leadership is a burden that cannot be shared. While these assertions are true to some extent, we all still have to recognize that there is a reason that we have family members, friends, co-workers, bosses, mentors followers or even employees.
They are not just there because they are our blood or they have something to gain from us, they are there to rejoice with us in happy moments, to share sorrows with, to impart knowledge to us and to help us in our travels on the highway of life. One fascinating thing about a pride of lions is that other females are always ready to help a female babysit her cubs when she goes hunting. We should recognize that the reason why the sea is so big is that it has many small rivers, streams, and rivulets feeding it. The leader should recognize himself as a river feeding others and being fed by others in turn. A river which isolates itself, which feeds nothing and which nothing feeds will sooner or later start to stink or dry up. Remember the popular acronym TEAM (Together Everyone Achieves More).

FACT: A Lion can Spend up to 20 Hours a Day Sleeping:

LESSON: There Is a Difference between a Leader and a Slave, Find Time to Relax

The temptation to work and work until one collapses from sheer exhaustion has never been greater than it is in our current society. Every day we wake up, there are always targets to meet, meetings to participate in, dates to keep and objectives to realize. As a result we are tempted to work and work as slaves, we give ourselves freely to our activities and to people around us, yet we fail to realize that we need time for ourselves, we are constantly burnt out and worn out yet we do not see the need to relax.

And so we slave our lives away like worker bees and do not enjoy the short time we have to live. Learn from the Lion who knows that every day it must eat, yet still sleeps for more than half the day. In spite of this perceived irresponsibility, the Lion never goes hungry. The irony of work is that it never finishes, the more you do, the more you still have to do. French playwright Moliere says: “Our minds need relaxation, and give way, unless we mix with work, a little play.” In the insect kingdom workers are the ones that have nothing else to do but work, one of the marks of a leader is that he does not soil his hands with work meant for his followers. If you want to have an enjoyable life, learn to not let activity dominate your life. Find time to relax.

FACT: Lions rarely eat entire prey, they usually leave leftovers for other animals like hyenas AND vultures:

LESSON: the ability to share is the hallmark of a leader

When a man is wrapped up in himself, he makes a pretty small package. Magnanimity is one of the attributes that defines a man as a true leader. Every leader has people following him and it is the duty of that leader to ensure that those followers get a fair distribution of every benefit that accrues to the organization. Being a leader is not just the ability to give commands or share out work, it is also the ability to motivate.

There is nothing that can motivate like reward and incentive, a true leader does not hold these things back. Learn from the popular Yoruba proverb which says “the old man that eats without consideration for the people around him, will carry his load home by himself.” If you want to be respected you must learn to give freely of yourself to others. It is hard to imagine that the Lion in spite of its voracious appetite, and the amount of food needed to satisfy its massive body needs, is still considerate enough to leave leftovers for carrion eaters. There is no level of need that should prevent you from giving to others. Jack London gives us an advice: “A bone to the dog is not charity. Charity is a bone shared with the dog when you are just as hungry as the dog.”

Source: Tribune

Leadership lessons from Lion

FACT: A Lion’s roar can be heard from five miles away:

LESSON: Make yourself heard

A famous author once said “You may have a heart of gold, but then so does a hardboiled egg.” You may have good intentions in mind, but if you don’t say them out, nobody will know how noble they are. There are plenty of animals that are bigger and stronger and have more stamina than the Lion, there are animals that are faster, there are animals that are even better hunters, but what makes the Lion arguably the most fearsome animal to walk the earth is its voice, its voice is its reputation.

Many of us never met Albert Einstein, but we all have knowledge of him because he had something to say and he said it. Many of us never met people like Adolf Hitler or Mother Theresa of Calcutta, but we know about them because they had statements to make and they made those statements. It is important for you to know that the statement you make is not just about what you say, the things you do and your character is part of what make your reputation.

The Lion knows that its roar precedes it everywhere it goes, that is why it is the epitome of boldness. If you develop your reputation properly, your boldness will increase as well Never make the mistake of believing that your friends, or siblings or neighbours or co-workers should be able to read your mind. Remember what Jesus Christ himself said in Matthew 7:7: “Ask and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock and it shall be opened unto you”. There is nothing to be gained from keeping to yourself, express yourself, if you know you are not extroverted, you can write. If you know you have a talent or a gift, use it. Go out and make friends, a recluse is of no use to anyone. As the popular maxim goes “unless the tortoise sticks its head out of its shell it cannot go anywhere”

FACT: Lions Are Very Social Animals; They Form Groups Called Prides With Sometimes As Many As Forty Individuals In a Pride:

LESSON: Interact With Others So That You Can Get Better

Robert Greene’s eighteenth law of power says: “Do not build fortresses to protect yourself – isolation is dangerous.” Many people believe that life is a road that must be travelled alone and that the task of leadership is a burden that cannot be shared. While these assertions are true to some extent, we all still have to recognize that there is a reason that we have family members, friends, co-workers, bosses, mentors followers or even employees.

Why I’m contesting for president again — Buhari

A former Head of State, Muhammadu Buhari, on Tuesday said he would contest the 2015 presidential election on the platform of the All Progressives Congress, APC.

He said he decided to run because the Peoples Democratic Party-led federal administrations from 1999 till date were purposeless and that there appears not to be a government in place in Nigeria at present.

Mr. Buhari, who disclosed this in Abuja while addressing about 60 different groups urging him to run for the presidency said he would make his declaration formal on October 8.

The APC leader criticised the PDP-led administration since 1999, saying they lacked purpose. He said in the circumstance, it is important for him to step in to seek an opportunity to salvage the situation.

According to him, “Today, we are in the 15th year of purposeless leadership by the PDP and all we have seen is unprecedented deterioration in the security and law and order situation, astronomical rise in the incidence and intensity of corruption, and in the failure of governance.

“And as we reach this last lap of the journey, I would like to request that we concentrate all our effort and energy toward realising and achieving change in how this country is run.

“The only way to meaningful change in this country is to vote the PDP out of power to which it was never legitimately elected, anyway. The task before us today is wide ranging and very great. The first and most important is to take away power from those who have been misusing it.

“Indeed, except for the call of patriotism, public-spiritedness and an abiding love for the people off this country, nothing will today make honest, honourable and sane politician want to be saddled with Nigeria and an economy in trouble and a society in even deeper trouble – with its perilous security situation, with its extensive and almost unmanageable corruption and with its pervasive lawlessness. And a government – is there really a government? – that is not working.”

A former vice president, Atiku Abubakar, had last week declared his intention to contest the presidential election on the same APC platform, Nigeria’s main opposition party.

Mr. Buhari, a retired major general, who will be 72 in December, was Nigeria’s military head of state between 1983 and 1985.

He had contested presidential election on three previous occasions, but lost to the PDP candidates.

The former military leader, who joined politics in 2003, contested that year’s election on the ticket of the defunct All Nigeria Peoples Party, ANPP, but came second to the incumbent, Olusegun Obasanjo.

In 2007, he ran again on the platform of the same party, but lost to PDP’s Umaru Yar’Adua.

Mr. Buhari quit the ANPP to float the Congress for Progressives Change, CPC, became its standard bearer in the 2011 presidential poll, but was defeated by President Goodluck Jonathan.

Source: Premiumtimes

Why I’m contesting for president again — Buhari

A former Head of State, Muhammadu Buhari, on Tuesday said he would contest the 2015 presidential election on the platform of the All Progressives Congress, APC.

He said he decided to run because the Peoples Democratic Party-led federal administrations from 1999 till date were purposeless and that there appears not to be a government in place in Nigeria at present.

Mr. Buhari, who disclosed this in Abuja while addressing about 60 different groups urging him to run for the presidency said he would make his declaration formal on October 8.

The APC leader criticised the PDP-led administration since 1999, saying they lacked purpose. He said in the circumstance, it is important for him to step in to seek an opportunity to salvage the situation.

According to him, “Today, we are in the 15th year of purposeless leadership by the PDP and all we have seen is unprecedented deterioration in the security and law and order situation, astronomical rise in the incidence and intensity of corruption, and in the failure of governance.

“And as we reach this last lap of the journey, I would like to request that we concentrate all our effort and energy toward realising and achieving change in how this country is run.

Ekiti indigenes’ll go on exile for Fayose –Falana

Lagos Lawyer, Mr Femi Falana

LAGOS lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana, SAN, has said that some indigenes of Ekiti State are planning to go on exile as soon as the governor-elect of the state, Mr. Ayodele Fayose, assumes office.

Fayose, who won the June 21 governorship election in Ekiti, will be sworn in on October 16.

Falana, who is an indigene of the state, said, “It is clear that the people have been taken back to the era of state-sponsored terrorism. Already, rival drivers’ unions and urchins are unleashing mayhem on innocent people, including judges and judiciary workers.

“Fayose should be advised not to frustrate his own inauguration. With the ongoing political crisis, some development agencies have decided to pull out of the state.

“I know industrialists who have decided to relocate to neighbouring states. I have some friends who have resolved to go on exile from Ekiti State for the next four years.

“The exodus of business and the elite will have adverse effect on the fragile economy of the state because no investor takes funds to any place where the rule of law is in abeyance.”

Asked if the people of the state had made a mistake in electing Fayose as their governor, Falana said the wishes of the people must be respected.

“The Ekiti people are perfectly entitled to elect whoever they like to govern them. That is what bourgeois democracy is all about. Up till now, the world is still paying for the decision of the American people to elect George Bush Jr. I believe that the wishes of the Ekiti electorate should be respected,” he said.


“However, Fayose owes himself a duty to turn away from violence because no leader can govern in an atmosphere of anarchy and chaos. He has to embrace the rule of law,” Falana added.

Reacting to Falana’s claims, a media aide to the governor-elect, Lere Olayinka, said the Ekiti people had made their choice and that “Falana, as a lawyer, should know that he does not have more stake in Ekiti than the over 200,000 Ekiti people, who expressed their preference for Fayose with their votes on June 21.”

Olayinka said, “Ekiti people have spoken loudly with their votes and if the likes of Falana does not like the decision the people have made, they can relocate to wherever they so desire.

“As for Fayose, he will remain committed to the welfare of the teachers, local government workers, civil servants, health workers, okada riders, artisans, market men and women, students and others who gave him their votes on June 21, not minding the anger of the likes of Falana, who believe that Ekiti people cannot choose their own governor.”

Source: Punch

Ekiti indigenes’ll go on exile for Fayose –Falana

Lagos Lawyer, Mr Femi Falana

LAGOS lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana, SAN, has said that some indigenes of Ekiti State are planning to go on exile as soon as the governor-elect of the state, Mr. Ayodele Fayose, assumes office.

Fayose, who won the June 21 governorship election in Ekiti, will be sworn in on October 16.

Falana, who is an indigene of the state, said, “It is clear that the people have been taken back to the era of state-sponsored terrorism. Already, rival drivers’ unions and urchins are unleashing mayhem on innocent people, including judges and judiciary workers.

“Fayose should be advised not to frustrate his own inauguration. With the ongoing political crisis, some development agencies have decided to pull out of the state.

“I know industrialists who have decided to relocate to neighbouring states. I have some friends who have resolved to go on exile from Ekiti State for the next four years.

“The exodus of business and the elite will have adverse effect on the fragile economy of the state because no investor takes funds to any place where the rule of law is in abeyance.”

Asked if the people of the state had made a mistake in electing Fayose as their governor, Falana said the wishes of the people must be respected.

“The Ekiti people are perfectly entitled to elect whoever they like to govern them. That is what bourgeois democracy is all about. Up till now, the world is still paying for the decision of the American people to elect George Bush Jr. I believe that the wishes of the Ekiti electorate should be respected,” he said.