Uncategorized
NASS Replies Buhari on Budget Padding Allegations
The two chambers of the National Assembly on Friday addressed a joint press conference to push back on allegations made by President Muhammadu Buhari that federal lawmakers smuggled frivolous projects into the 2018 budgets.
The conference was addressed by the duo of Senator Aliyu Sabi Abdullahi (spokesperson for the Senate) and Abdulrazak Namdas (spokesperson for the House of representatives).
President Buhari had on Wednesday accused the National Assembly of tampering with the 2018 budget sent to them by cutting essential projects and inserting non-essential ones.
Mr Buhari stated this while signing the 2018 budget into law.
“I am concerned about some of the changes that the National Assembly has made to the budget proposals that I presented,” he said.
“Many of the projects cut are critical and may be difficult, if not impossible, to implement with the reduced allocation. Some of the new projects inserted by the National Assembly have not been properly conceptualized, designed and costed and will therefore be difficult to execute.”
But responding to the allegations, the lawmakers said, “We appreciate the fact that the 2018 Appropriations Law which was passed by the National Assembly on May 16th, 2018 was signed by President Muhammadu Buhari on Wednesday, June 20th, 2018.
“In his speech at the signing ceremony, certain observations were raised about the work of the National Assembly and its Constitutional responsibility to modify and amend the budget estimates submitted to it by the Executive.
“You may recall that when the National Assembly passed the 2018 budget, it gave reasons why the budget was increased and why certain projects and programmes had to be provisioned for. However, due to recent developments, it is once again necessary to let Nigerians know …the justification for our actions on the 2018 budget, which were based on our Constitutional responsibilities.
“Adjustments and reductions in the locations, costs and number of projects approved were made in order to address geo-political imbalances that came with the Executive proposal. The introduction of new projects was done to ensure the promotion of the principles of Federal …Character as contained in Section 14, subsection (3) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended which states that “the composition of the Government of the Federation or any of its agencies and the conduct of its affairs shall be carried out in …such manner as to reflect the federal character of Nigeria…” The number of projects had to be increased in order to give a sense of belonging to every geo-political zone of the country to ensure socio-economic justice, equity, fairness, and to command National loyalty.
“Within the context of the provisions of Sections 4, 80 and 81 of the Constitution, everything that the National Assembly has done is within its powers.
Furthermore, Chapter 2 of the Constitution emphasizes the need for balance, inclusivity, & equity in the distribution of national resources. The annual budget, which symbolizes the distribution of these resources must reflect the aforementioned values, which we swore to uphold.
These Constitutional provisions, in addition to a recent Court judgment have affirmed the fact that the budget process is a ‘joint effort’ that must reflect the input of both the executive and the legislature — the latter being the closest representatives of the people.
However, we are fully aware that the Executive has the exclusive responsibility to execute all parts of the Appropriation Act once it is signed into law.
It is our firm belief that if the President had been properly briefed by his appointees, he would not have raised most of the concerns that he did in his remarks at the budget signing. It is therefore inevitable for the legislature to give members of the public an insight into what transpired during the appropriations process and how we arrived at the decisions that are contained in the 2018 budget.
With the aforementioned background, let us respond to each of the issues raised.
10. On the issue of the period when the budget proposal was submitted & when it was passed by the National Assembly, it is necessary to remind Nigerians that although the budget was submitted in November, as at March 15th 2018 (5 months and 8 days after the budget submission) Mr. President was still directing the Secretary to the Government of the Federation to compel the Heads of Ministries, Departments and Agencies of the Federal Government to appear before the committees of the National Assembly to defend their respective budget.
In addition up till April (6 months after the budget submission), the Executive was still bringing new additions to the 2018 budget which the National Assembly in good faith and in the spirit of collaboration and harmonious working relationship accepted.
More importantly, the 2017 budget, was signed into law on June 5th, 2017 and by the provisions of Section 318 of the Constitution, which defines the Financial Year as “any period of 12 months beginning on the first day of January in any year, or other date as the National Assembly may prescribe” – the 2017 budget lapsed on the 5th of June 2018. This same provision is replicated in the 2017 Appropriation Act.
12. It is important to also note that if not for the fact that the 2017 budget elapsed on the 5th of June 2018, the Federal Government would not have recorded notable capital projects for the just ended financial year. This is because the Federal Government only started releasing funds for capital projects in December 2017 when the funds from the Federal Government’s loans were released and disbursed to contractors.
On the issue of an Organic Budget Law to improve the budgetary process, the proposed law is pending in the National Assembly and cannot be considered without the amendment of Section 81 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) which gives the President the power to propose “estimates” at ANYTIME in the financial year. Nigerians need to know that during the last Constitutional Review exercise, the National Assembly in its wisdom amended this provision and it was approved by over two-thirds of the State Houses of Assembly.
The new Constitution Amendment requires the President to submit the budget not later than 90 days to the end of the financial year. As of today, the President has not yet signed this Constitutional Amendment Bill which would have helped us to have a proper budget alendar, which shall eventually lead to the realization of the proposed January to December budget cycle.
It was stated that the legislature made cuts amounting to N347 billion which were meant for 4,700 projects. Again, these reductions of N347 billion were made from low priority areas to higher priority areas to support the generation of employment for our youth by MSMEs.
We took the decision to reduce the funds in some areas in order to ensure balance and equity in the spread and utilization of our national funds. Additionally, the figures given amounts of the reductions made by the National Assembly were unduly exaggerated as we did not make any substantial reduction on any project to the extent of affecting its implementation.
To give the exact detail of the projects where we made deductions, it should be noted that the counterpart funding for the Mambilla Power Plant, Second Niger Bridge/Ancillary roads, the East-West Road, Bonny-Bodo Road, Lagos-Ibadan Express Road and Itakpe-Ajaokuta Rail ..Project, was reduced by only N3,956,400,290 – which represents only 1.78 % of the total N222,569,335,924 submitted by President Buhari. This left these projects with N218,612,935,634 which cannot negatively affect their implementation.
This obviously contradicts the claim that these projects lost “an aggregate of N11.5 billion”.
Specifically:
A. The counterpart Funding for 3050mw Mambilla Hydropower Project was reduced from N8.5billion to N8.2billion (a reduction of N300million);
B. The construction of the Second Niger bridge including access roads phases 2a and 2b in Anambra and Delta states and other projects in the South East were reduced from N10billion to N9.1billion (a reduction of N900million);
C. The construction of Bodo-Bonny road with a bridge across the Opobo channel in Rivers State was reduced from N10billion to N8.7billion (a reduction of N1.3billion);
D. The funding for the Lagos-Ibadan Expressway was reduced from N20billion to N18billion (a reduction of N2billion), which would not significantly affect the construction of the road in one appropriations cycle;
E. The Railway Projects (Counterpart Funds):
1. Lagos-Kano (ongoing)
2. Calabar-Lagos (Ongoing)
3. Ajaokuta-Itakpe-Aladja (Warri) (Ongoing)
4. Port Harcourt- Maiduguri (New)
5. Kano-Katsina-Jibiya-Maradi in Niger Republic (New)
6. Abuja-Itakpe and Aladja (Warri)-Warri Port and Refinery including Warri new Harbour (New)
7. Bonny deep Sea Port & Port Harcourt of N162,284,335,924 was retained by the National Assembly as presented by Mr. President; and
F. The @nassnigeria increased the aggregate funding for the East-West Road from N11,285,000,000 to N12,085,000,000 because we realized the strategic importance of the road to the entire oil producing areas of our country & the fact that the road project has lingered for too long;
Addressing the issue of the Second Niger Bridge project, apart from early works, as of today, there is no existing contract for the Second Niger Bridge in spite of frequent requests from the National Assembly. The N900million reduced from the N10billion proposed by the Executive was deployed to fund ancillary roads that connect to the Bridge. It should again be noted that the N12.5billion and the N7.5billion appropriated for the Second Niger Bridge in the 2016 and 2017 budget by the National Assembly were never utilized for the project.
We also need to call the attention of the public to the fact that the National Assembly allocated an additional N2billion to the Enugu-Port Harcourt Expressway project. This was more than the Executive proposed.
As part of the implementation of the 2017 budget, the contracts for 15 roads were awarded by the Federal Executive Council with no budgetary provisions. Realizing the importance of these projects, the National Assembly decided to spread the N3.9billion saved from the earlier mentioned projects funding to facilitate the take-off of these projects that include: the rehabilitation of Ikorodu-Shagamu road in Lagos State; the rehabilitation of 9th Mile-Orakam to Benue Border; and the general maintenance of Pankshin – Ballang – Nyelleng – Sararele – Gindiri road in Plateau State, etc. These are the projects purported to be “project inclusions without conceptualization.” On these projects, the National Assembly needs to be commended by Mr. President for helping to support the take-off of these awarded but unfunded projects.
Furthermore, it was stated that the budget of the FCT was cut by N 7.5 billion. This is true. The legislators stand by this decision because, through its oversight of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), the National Assembly discovered that in the 2016 and 2017 budget cycle, there was a severe non-performance of the budgetary allocations to the FCT. During the two years in question, over 50% of the funds that were allocated and released to the FCT were not utilized. These funds were ultimately returned to the treasury.
Hence, in order to ensure that scarce resources were allocated in accordance to ‘needs over wants’, funding for the FCT which has historically been under-utilised were allocated to other MDAs that have demonstrated the capacity to implement their allocation for the development of the nation and its people. It was part of the allocation that we spread over the roads for which contracts were awarded with no budgetary allocation.
On the provisions for strategic interventions in the health sector which were said to be cut by an aggregate of N7.45billion, it is on record that for the first time since the National Health Act was enacted in 2014, the National Assembly made provision of an additional N55billion for funding primary healthcare through the Basic Primary Healthcare Fund which will be sourced from 1% of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
Thus, contrary to the claim that the health sector suffered any budgetary cuts, we actually provided more funds that will make access to health services possible for over 180 million Nigerians.
Premium Times
Uncategorized
Senate Approves Tinubu’s ₦1.77trn Loan Request
The Senate has granted approval to the ₦1.77 trillion ($2.2b) loan request of President Bola Tinubu after a voice vote in favor of the request.
The Senate presided by Deputy Senate President, Barau Jibrin, approved the loan after the Senate Committee on Local and Foreign Debts chaired by Senator Wammako Magatarkada (APC, Sokoto North) presented the report of the committee.
The request which was submitted by the President on Tuesday is part of a fresh external borrowing plan to partially finance the N9.7 trillion budget deficit for the 2024 fiscal year.
Tinubu had on Tuesday written to the National Assembly, seeking approval of a fresh N1.767 trillion, the equivalent of $2.209 billion as a new external borrowing plan in the 2024 Appropriation Act.
The fresh loan is expected to stretch the amount spent on debt servicing by the Federal Government. The Central Bank of Nigeria recently said that it cost the Federal Government $3.58 billion to service foreign debt in the first nine months of 2024.
The CBN report on international payment statistics showed that the amount represents a 39.77 per cent increase from the $2.56bn spent during the same period in 2023.
According to the report, while the highest monthly debt servicing payment in 2024 occurred in May, amounting to $854.37m, the highest monthly expenditure in 2023 was $641.70m, recorded in July.
The trend in foreign debt servicing by the CBN highlights the rising cost of debt obligations by Nigeria.
Further breakdown of international debt figures showed that in January 2024, debt servicing costs surged by 398.89 per cent, rising to $560.52m from $112.35m in January 2023. February, however, saw a slight decline of 1.84 per cent, with payments reducing from $288.54m in 2023 to $283.22m in 2024.
March recorded a 31.04 per cent drop in payments, falling to $276.17m from $400.47m in the same period last year. April saw a significant rise of 131.77 per cent, with $215.20m paid in 2024 compared to $92.85m in 2023.
The highest debt servicing payment occurred in May 2024, when $854.37m was spent, reflecting a 286.52 per cent increase compared to $221.05m in May 2023. June, on the other hand, saw a 6.51 per cent decline, with $50.82m paid in 2024, down from $54.36m in 2023.
July 2024 recorded a 15.48 per cent reduction, with payments dropping to $542.50m from $641.70m in July 2023. In August, there was another decline of 9.69 per cent, as $279.95m was paid compared to $309.96m in 2023. However, September 2024 saw a 17.49 per cent increase, with payments rising to $515.81m from $439.06m in the same month last year.
Given rising exchange rates, the data raises concerns about the growing pressure of Nigeria’s foreign debt obligations.
Channels TV
Boss Picks
DIAMED CENTRE: Kesington Adebutu is a Father in a million – Daughter, Abiola Olorede
By Eric Elezuo
A United States and United Kingdom trained prolific doctor, Dr. Abiola Olorede, the first daughter of accomplished businessman and renowned philanthropist, Sir Kesington Adebukunola Adebutu, is not a run-off-the-mill medical practitioner. She knows her onions, her worth and the mandate she is programmed to fulfill.
She is the Chief Medical Director of the just opened DIAMED CENTRE, a fully equipped diagnostic and medical facility saved with the responsibility of catering to the medical needs of the Nigerian public.
The hospital, which was built and handed over to her by her philanthropic father, is located at Kuboye Street, in the heart of Lekki Island, Lagos.
In this brief chat, the achiever, who lived most of her educational life in Dublin, Poland, expressed her gratitude to a father like no other, and how she and her team intends to make the best of the facility and equipment to totally affect humanity for the better.
Excerpts:
CAN YOU TELL US THE IDEA BEHIND THIS GREAT PROJECT?
Thank you very much, my name is Abiola Olorede, I am a medical doctor by profession. I schooled in Dublin, worked in the United Kingdom and in United States of America. When I came back home to Nigeria after my education including postgraduate studies, I realized that one of the major challenges is that a lot of the diagnostic tools that we need to use for evident-base treatment of our patient were lacking. Since then, I have always had a dream that when i am able to afford it, I will like to have a place that Nigerians can go to as comparable as those round the world because, just as I have always spoken about it, every Nigerian should have any treatment obtainable anywhere in the world in their home country.
CAN I DEDUCE THEREFORE, THAT YOU INTEND TO STOP MEDICAL TOURISM BY ESTABLISHING THIS ALL INCLUSIVE MEDICAL CENTRE?
Hmmm…Intend to stop is a very big word. I am hoping by the service we would offer here, a lot of Nigerians will see it as comparable to anywhere in the world and would want to use it instead of going out of the country. So, a lot of people that go out of the country can benefit from world class treatment in Nigeria.
SO OUT OF ALL YOUR DAD’S PHILANTHROPIC GESTURES, HOW DOES THIS ONE MAKE YOU FEEL?
If you noticed, the Kensington Adebutu Foundation, KAF, as it is fondly referred to, has major pillars and that’s education and health. It does a lot of other projects no doubt. I know that in any society, if the people are not educated, it’s a big loss to the country, if you don’t have the healthy workers too, it’s a big loss. So this brings out much of my pride in the service of Nigeria.
AS A PROUD DAUGHTER, WHAT MORE COULD YOU SAY ABOUT YOUR FATHER?
First of all, I would like to thank him. I tell everybody that he is father in a million. He supported his children over the years, financially, and with wisdom. I’m going up to 60, and my father still supports me pursue my dreams; it’s very rare. I want to thank him from the bottom of my heart. He’s always there, so thank you dad, you are a wonderful dad.
CAN YOU JUST ANALYZE THE KIND OF EQUIPMENT WE HAVE HERE?
We have a lot of facilities that are available, we have 3D monogram, it gives better images, and it’s less painful when you do that. We also have 64 high CT scan, digital X-rays, a lab, Haematology, Dialysis department, Dental suite, Opthalmology and Physiotherapy. We have a fully functional Pharmacy; so it’s like a one stop shop.
We have a Cardiac Suite where you can do ECO and other tests. We engage patients morning to night, make them comfortable as they get their test done. We don’t want you to feel you are in a hospital premises; you come from home and get all your test done.
WHAT DO YOU PROMISE NIGERIANS USING THIS FACILITY?
I promise Nigerians is that only experts, who will give the right diagnosis will be engaged here so we can give world class treatment and service. We want to use evidence and innovations to manage patients. Those are our promises to Nigerians and others as an organization and God will help us deliver all these promises.
AND HOW AFFORDABLE IS IT TO PATRONISE THIS PLACE?
We would try to make it cost effective in as much as medical care is not cheap. I tell people that being healthy is cheaper that being sick and that’s true, and that’s what we hope to accomplish. It is difficult to maintain some of this machines, some of them are very expensive so we must be able to recoop cost to get and replace equipment when due.
Thank you doctor Abiola, you have been very helpful and I wish you well in the management of this facility to the best interest of Nigerians. God bless you ma.
The pleasure is mine
Uncategorized
The Independence of the Judiciary in a Democratic Dispensation (Pt. 4)
By Mike Ozekhome
Introduction
In the last part of this intervention, we examined the abuse of ex-parte orders as part of our survey of the independence of the judiciary. We then moved on to political pressures exerted on the judiciary. We continues with this theme today and extend economic/fiscal pressures which undermines judicial independence. We shall also x-ray the intellectual dimensions of the judicial remit as well as the relevant legal codes for their appointment. Come with me.
POLITICAL INDEPENDENCE (continues)
The duty of maintaining a Judiciary that is free from political influence, an independent and impartial Judiciary in line with section 17(2)(e) of the 1999 Constitution, rests on the honourable men and women on the bench, the political class, the other two arms of government and all and sundry. An independent Judiciary that inspires confidence is a sine qua non for sustainable democracy. Judges have a special role to reject any attempt to undermine the independence of the Judiciary in this dispensation. It is sacred! The admonition of Hon. Justice (Prof.) A.F.D. Kuti in this wise is instructive.
“Of course, judges make laws by interpretations, as judges, by nature and training do not succumb to partisan considerations they are political, they should be abstinat a fabia. They must not allow themselves to be torn apart by any form of differences in our societies… The judges have a duty to chart an independent course and let it be known that the independence of (the) judiciary is of vital importance to the democratic process to maintain Human Rights Provisions and to maintain the non-adoption of sate Region… The Judiciary itself must be like Cinderella living in a glass house, above board like Caesar’s wife, also above suspicion”.
Economic/Fiscal Independence
It is a trite warfare strategy that the easiest way to weaken an army and overrun it is to cut off its supplies and starve it. Vital in the question of independence of the Judiciary is the issue of fiscal autonomy, and proper funding. As soon as we institutionalize the practice of judicial officers going cap in hand to beg for funds from the Executive, the idea of independence of the Judiciary has been trampled upon and blown into smithereens! Independence must involve economic ‘self-reliance’ and fiscal autonomy. By these, we mean that the Judiciary under this dispensation should always be able to have the funds due to it constitutionally falling directly to it without having to approach the Executive for any form of lobbying before funds can be released to it. The Constitution has substantially taken care of this area. It only remains for the frontiers of fiscal autonomy to be widened so that the Judiciary, (especially State Judiciaries) would be able to carry out capital projects so as to maintain befitting physical infrastructure for the Judicial institution. Agbakoba has argued that:
“Judicial Independence is meaningless if it is not accompanied by economic independence. Dishonest judicial staff has no credible claim to judicial independence. It is necessary to take steps to ensure that judges and magistrates can enjoy a professional status capable of guaranteeing them the required amount of professional independence coupled with an adequate remuneration package that can effectively isolate them from pecuniary pressures.”
In Nigeria and under this democratic dispensation, some jurisdictions have had to contend with dilapidated office buildings, inadequate supplies and regular power outages. Starvation of funds is a weapon used by the Executive, the keeper of the Federation purse, to achieve a balance of judicial power by giving judicial officials a sense of economic/fiscal dependency.
To stave off starvation of funds, many countries have had to increase budgetary allocations significantly in favour of the judiciary both to provide adequate physical facilities and to allow for the continuing education of judges, magistrate and their staff. In some cases, as in Madagascar, this new approach has resulted in the establishment of a school solely dedicated to the training of judicial personnel.
The poor state of fiscal ability of the Judiciary in Nigeria today aptly depicts the observation of the Federalist, Alexander Hamilton that:
“The Judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power. It has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no discretion either of the strength or the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may be said to have neither FORCE NOR WILL, but merely judgment.”
Although the salaries and recurrent expenditures of the Judiciary are constitutionally charged upon the Consolidated Revenue Fund, it does not appear that the Constitution specifically ensures the provision for the capital expenditure of the Judiciary. This is another ploy to still keep the Judiciary low and check its ferocity in holding the balance over government excesses. There are other pockets of ploys and half-truths.
It has, for example, been argued from the Bench that the concept of accountability has often been relied upon to justify restricting the administrative independence of the Judiciary. The Executive must, in this democratic dispensation, allow unfettered fiscal independence for the judiciary by freeing its funds from all restrictions so that judges do not have to continue to go to the Executive to seek for funds for capital projects and recurrent expenditure or extra budgetary expenses.
Judicial accountability, in fact, complements and reinforces judicial independence by creating the public confidence on which judicial independence ultimately depends. There is no gainsaying that the point is sometimes made that in relation to their judicial functions, judges are subject to a higher degree of accountability and transparency than any other public officers, or even with the present democratic dispensation, than indeed any holder of political office, be they ministers or special advisers or chairmen or members of parastatals.
It has also been argued from the Bench that financial independence of the Judiciary can only be guaranteed where the ‘order’ allows physical projection and administrative control of finances by officers accountable to the Judiciary.39 The notion of Independence of the Judiciary would remain mere rhetoric without complete fiscal autonomy for the Judiciary.
Intellectual Independence
This subhead is used here in a technical sense as an issue of judicial independence. But, it can best be described by the story in the Bible of Israel’s sojourn in the land of Egypt. A wicked king that hated the Hebrews and was afraid of their independence and prosperity had given an instruction to midwives in this manner,
“When ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women….if it be a son, then ye shall kill him but it if be a daughter, then she shall live…Every son that is born ye shall case into the river, and every daughter ye shall save alive.”
Pharaoh preferred Hebrew females because he was afraid of male power in the event of war with the Hebrews. The same stratagem has been employed to destroy the intellectual vibrancy of the judiciary so as to weaken its independence. The calibre of judges that can stand their ground against assault on judicial independence are those imbued with high independent, incorruptible and analytical mind laced with profound intellectual fecundity. While the High Court Bench has a mixed multitude of judges, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court are filled with such high calibre of intellectually vibrant and independent-minded justices. This would explain why the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court have not only set impressive records of independent-mindedness and incorruptibility. Those two courts can hardly be faulted in the area of independence and absence of external influence. The problem of intellectual freedom mainly lies at the High Court Bench, and the lower benches.
Appointment
By virtue of section 250(3), 256(3) and 271(3) Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, a person shall not be qualified to hold office of Chief judge or a judge of the Federal High Court, Chief Judge or a judge of the High court of the Federal Capital Territory and a judge of a High Court of a state, respectively:
“Unless he is qualified to practise as legal practitioner in Nigeria and has been so qualified for a period of not less than ten years”.
We are not really concerned here about the procedure for appointment of High Court judges. What has threatened the system with collapse is the bare assumption in these constitutional provisions that tends to imply that once a person has spent ten years on earth since he/she was called to the Bar, the person automatically has all the intellectual capability to be appointed a judge.
More than anything else, judicial incompetence (encompassing law intellectually, law productively etc) has contributed to rob the Judiciary the necessary intellectual freedom it needs to assert and guard its independence. According to Schewart:
“The quality of justice….depends more upon the quality of the men who administer the law then on the content of the law they administer.”
In his keynote address at the recent Bar Conference at Enugu, Chief Afe Babalola, SAN, observed on the constitutional qualification for appointment as a judge as follows:
“This allows great latitude for the appointment of ‘any lawyer’ who has met the ten years requirement regardless of where he is prior to his appointment. This explains why a new wig from the Nigerian Law School who, immediately after his call (and probably Youth Service) went straight to work in a company, multinationals and the life without any experience whatsoever in practice could be and are being appointed as High Court Judge”.
At the swearing in of the new Senior Advocates of Nigeria on Monday, September 8, 2003, the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Chief Akin Olujinmi, SAN hinted that more stringent criteria for appointment of judges would be introduced. According to the Chief Law Officer of the Federation:
“We will propose that only those who can furnish evidence of contentious cases they handled in the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal and the High Court within, say, three years preceding their application should be considered for appointment. By so doing, it will be possible to select only seasoned practitioners to occupy positions on the Bench.” (To be continued).
Thought for the Week
“I believe that an independent judiciary is the crown jewel of our constitutional republic. Brett Kavanaugh”. (Charles Evans Hughes).
-
News6 years ago
Nigerian Engineer Wins $500m Contract to Build Monorail Network in Iraq
-
Featured7 years ago
WORLD EXCLUSIVE: Will Senate President, Bukola Saraki, Join Presidential Race?
-
Boss Picks7 years ago
World Exclusive: How Cabal, Corruption Stalled Mambilla Hydropower Project …The Abba Kyari, Fashola and Malami Connection Plus FG May Lose $2bn
-
Headline6 years ago
Rehabilitation Comment: Sanwo-Olu’s Support Group Replies Ambode (Video)
-
Headline6 years ago
Fashanu, Dolapo Awosika and Prophet Controversy: The Complete Story
-
Headline6 years ago
Pendulum: Can Atiku Abubakar Defeat Muhammadu Buhari in 2019?
-
Headline6 years ago
Pendulum: An Evening with Two Presidential Aspirants in Abuja
-
Headline6 years ago
2019: Parties’ Presidential Candidates Emerge (View Full List)