Headline

Opinion: New Electricity Tariffs: Questions-Reuben Abati

Published

6 years ago

January 7, 2020

Editor

By Reuben Abati

The Buhari administration has given Nigerians a most unusual and disturbing New Year Gift, in the form of a proposed increase in electricity tariffs, enforceable from April by the Electricity Distribution Companies (Discos) and to be completed by the end of 2021, with the full backing of the regulator, the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC). What happened? I am in a state of shock. What we knew, what we saw, before now, indeed what we were told, was that the electricity distribution companies were the weakest links in the electricity supply chain. They were accused of different infractions by the Ministry of Power, the Nigeria Bulk Electricity Trader (NBET) and the NERC which included, failure to abide by the provisions of the National Electricity Power Sector Reform Act (EPSRA), violation in particular of Section 74 thereof; failure to make due remittances to the Bulk Trader resulting in huge debts that had become a problem for the sector, and failure to comply with the metering system.

By October 2019, the NERC had served notice that it was prepared to revoke the licenses of the 11 Discos, should they fail within a 60-day deadline, to give reasons to the contrary in defence of their continued presence in the electricity market. The standard official line was that the Discos were incompetent and ineffective, making the value chain difficult for both the Transmission Company of Nigeria (TCN) and the Generating Companies (GENCOs). The DISCOS insisted that they had done nothing wrong. They complained about (i) the huge cost of doing business in the sector; (ii), the failure of government to enforce cost reflective tariffs in line with the Multi Year Tariff Order (MYTO); (iii) electricity theft, (iv) the non-availability of gas due to vandalism, (v) government’s refusal to engage with stakeholders in the sector and (vi) they alleged that government is the biggest debtor in the market due to the refusal of government departments and agencies to pay electricity bills.

The big take-away for me was the persistent threat by the Federal Government of Nigeria that the DISCOs will be scrapped, or that their licenses will be revoked and re-assigned. It was said quite loudly that the current owners of the licenses got involved in the electricity sector not because they have the technical know-how or the financial muscle, but simply because they were close to the Jonathan administration, which accelerated the power sector reform process. Cast in that shape, the electricity sector became part of the unending navel-gazing, Jonathan-caused-it card that has been consistently played by the Buhari administration.

What is shocking however is that the decision to increase electricity tariffs raises more questions than answers. On the surface of it, the Federal Government and its agents have capitulated to the DISCOs. How and why? At what point did the Federal Government buy into the argument of the DISCOs that the most important challenge in the electricity sector is the payment of cost-reflective tariffs? And how was the 77% increase arrived at, with consumers in the South East having to pay more than the rest of the country? Is this a case of ethnic discrimination? Do consumers under Enugu Disco use more electricity? What formula determined the new proposed rates? Well, they tell us it is all based on “changes in macroeconomic variables and available generation capacity”. Please, what does that mean in common man’s language? We have also been told that the proposed tariff hike is a retrospective adjustment to make up for revenue shortfall for the DISCOs from 2016 -2018. So, should the consumer be punished for the regulator’s failure to respect its own enabling Act? And by the way, in the last four years, electricity tariffs have increased by about 300%.

What we see is an excessive emphasis on revenue and profit by those in charge of the service delivery sectors of the Nigerian economy in general. Nobody cares about the consumer. On all fronts, the Nigerian consumer is left unprotected. He or she is perpetually served the short end of the stick, and violated without consultation or respect for his or her right to be heard. The electricity sector is one of the most inefficient sectors in Nigeria. The national grid collapsed more than 10 times in the year 2019. Every month, we were told that gas pipelines had been vandalized. The DISCOs complained endlessly that they were having problems, but they were merely giving excuses. The regulator towards the end of the year introduced a compulsory metering policy and urged consumers to get properly metered to avoid the menace of estimated billing and the grand corruption that comes with it The DISCOs resisted the metering policy and virtually either refused to support it or adopted measures to frustrate it. They circumvented the terms of the policy. Today, most consumers of electricity remain unmetered. They do not enjoy efficient service. They are billed on the basis of some nebulous categorization called “status.” What “status”? The owners of Yola DISCO pleaded force majeure and threw in the towel, but other DISCOs continue to operate without offering the people premium service. This has angered customers across the country. In Benin, the people once carried placards against the electricity distribution company, the BEDC. In other parts of the country, DISCO officials have been beaten up and given a bloody eye.

On top of it all, the proposed increase in electricity tariffs is insensitive to the feelings of electricity consumers. Many Nigerians insist that they are willing to pay for electricity if they get it on a regular basis – for now, we are a nation in darkness. The people want transparency – the pervasive estimated billing system does not promote that, the DISCOs simply charge as they wish on the basis of nebulous factors. The people want meters, but nobody is taking that seriously. The timing and announcement of the proposed increase are also unfair. It is an unkind New Year Gift to a people confronted with a year of more taxes, with Value Added Tax jumping from 5% in 2019, to 7.5% in 2020 along with other taxes under the Finance Act of 2019. Nigerian workers expect that the increase in the new national minimum wage will be fully implemented in the year 2020, but it is obvious as we enter the new year, that the new minimum wage has already been wiped out by increased inflation and taxation. It is ever so convenient for government to punish the common man. In other countries, governance is aligned to the people’s interests and welfare. In Nigeria, our governors seek to inflict pain and punish the people.

The opaqueness in the electricity sector is another problem. It promises to be worse than what we have seen so far in the oil and gas sector and the inefficiency of the oil corporation, NNPC. We are told on one hand that electricity tariffs will go up in April, while at the same time, the regulator announces that the Federal Government will underwrite N544.8 billion Electricity Tariffs Shortfall in 2020. How? Is that a subsidy? And if so, is there a provision for it in the 2020 Budget? N544.8 billion? How was that figure arrived at?

The Federal Government says the intended increase in electricity tariffs is meant to get the sector back on track. Taxing the poor and the impoverished is not the best way to get anything back on track. The electricity sector is in urgent need of a general review and reform, and there are many issues to be addressed. Cost reflective tariffs under the MYTO regime may make the investors happy, but making consumers happier and protecting their interests should be the priority of government. Will increase in tariffs translate into efficiency? I doubt. Efficient service delivery is important. Will government agencies, the biggest debtors in the electricity sector now pay their debts? We don’t know. Or has there been a quid pro quo at the people’s expense? Is government planning to write off the debts of the DISCOs, and forgive their sins? What has happened to the plan to revoke operational licenses in the sector? Too many questions. But that is Nigeria for you. Nothing is ever straight-forward.

II: The Pope And The Woman He Slapped

On New Year’s Eve, December 31, 2019, Pope Francis slapped a woman’s hand as she clung to him, and grabbed him while he was making the rounds greeting pilgrims at the Vatican. The following morning, the Pope apologized for what he called “yesterday’s bad example”. The footage of the Pope, freeing himself from the woman, with a scowl on his face, has since gone viral, but I am pleased that there are more people in support of the Pope than against him. Significantly, there has been no outrage. The Pope’s apology came swiftly in less than 24 hours but he actually didn’t need to apologize because he did no wrong.

What is established is that the Pope, often decorated with the toga of spotlessness, perfection and sainthood is human after all. He is like us. He is one of us. Like everyone else, if he feels threatened or unsafe, he will try to protect himself. The Pope was reacting to an invasion of his space. It is fine to shake hands but some people don’t know when a handshake sends a different signal. They grab. They linger. Women probably understand this better. The moment a handshake becomes an unwanted and unwelcome gesture; the other party is bound to recoil in horror or anger. That is precisely what the Pope did. He slapped the woman’s hand twice and freed himself.

I do not agree with those who argue that this is an indication of lack of clarity about Church teaching or that it is a case of “violence against women.” In any case, the Pope’s hand swat was just a mere tap. This wasn’t a case of an Anthony Joshua slapping an over-eager Asian woman at St. Peter’s square. Where was Vatican Security by the way? In his Angelus remarks on January 1, the Pope delivered a message of hope and preached about “violence against women.” He has been accused of hypocrisy for that but his critics are again unfair to him because the equivalence that they seek to establish with the event of the night before is false.

For me, by offering an apology, the Pope sets a good example and tone for the new year and decade. He reminds us of a value that is increasingly missing in social relations between the powerful and the ordinary in our world. The Pope is leader of over 2.1 billion Catholics in the world. He controls minds and imaginations. To see the head of such a large congregation getting angry in public, and even getting “physical”, is a reminder of the commonality of human emotions, but his apology in an age when many, especially the powerful and the privileged have lost the capacity to say “I am sorry, I didn’t mean to do that” is the most ennobling aspect of the incident. When last have you as a person, tried to say: “I am sorry”? In today’s world, we rarely apologise for the gaps between acts and intentions. We don’t care enough about the feelings of others. People are just intentionally offensive, be they leaders or followers – and that is why the world is such a troubled place today from Ukraine to Crimea, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Israel, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, North Korea and the United States. Even when some people try to be contrite and they offer apologies, they sound more like Prince Andrew of the United Kingdom making empty noise about obvious wrongs, or like Jeremy Corbyn’s hollowness on anti-Semitism.

In this matter, we have focused more on the Pope, perhaps understandably. But let the point be made: that the woman who grabbed him is an archetype for followers who do not know their boundaries. Ordinary people tend to cling to leaders, particularly religious leaders. In the Bible, Luke 8: 40-49, the people crowded and pressed against the Lord Jesus Christ and a woman touched Him prompting Him to ask: “Who touched me?” Someone touched me, I know that power has gone out from me”. These days, the people overdo it, because they believe that their salvation lies with that touch, that encounter with the man of power or the symbol of divine authority. Many Christians worship Man rather than God. But it is perfectly normal for the Pope to act like a human being and good for all of us to see that he is just like “us”.

Headline

Parties’ Deregistration: ADC, Not NDC, is the Target

Published

1 day ago

June 29, 2026

Eric

By Eric Elezuo

As the 2027 presidential election draws closer, intrigues, manipulations and maneuvers have continued to be the order of the day as political parties engage in one gimmick or another to outdo and undo one another.

While some are playing politics of numbers and conviction, others are engaging tendencies that tend to question the status quo and established principles under which genuine democracy is formed. As a matter of fact, fingers have been pointed at the President Bola Tinubu-led Federal government as the brain behind all machinations that have attempted to derail multi-party democracy, and institute a one-party state, which is alien to the Nigerian democratic roots. This is as a result of the constant imbroglio that has consistently engulf almost all the major political parties in the country.

Fresh facts have however, emerged to prove that every act of frustration thrown at the opposition has been indirectly aimed at the main opposition party, the African Democratic Congress (ADC), and its presidential candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar.

According to reliable sources, the recent deregistration of parties, especially the Nigerian Democratic Congress (NDC), was actually targeted at the ADC.

Recall that the Federal High Court in Lokoja, Kogi State, on June, 26, set aside its earlier judgement directing the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to register the NDC as a political party. A ruling that put a question mark on the eligibility of the party presenting candidates in the forthcoming 2027 elections

The presiding judge, Isah Dashen, held that all relevant parties must be heard before any substantive decision can be made in the matter.

The court upheld the application filed by a certain organization, the Peace Movement Party (PMP), ruling that the party was a necessary party to the suit.

According to the judge, the earlier judgement was constitutionally defective as it was delivered without hearing from all interested parties.

He declared that such an omission rendered the entire process null and void.

Mr Dashen further ruled that the status quo be restored to what it was before the December 10, 2025 judgement, pending the determination of the substantive suit.

He also observed that certain material facts were suppressed in the earlier proceedings, which justified the decision to set aside the judgment.

Consequently, the court ordered that the substantive suit should begin afresh, with the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the PMP and the NDC as parties to the case.

According to NAN’s reports, the applicant’s lawyer, Chikezie Ekeocha, told journalists that the PMP approached the court after discovering that NDC’s registration was based on a logo it had previously submitted to INEC before the commencement of the suit.

According to Mr Ekeocha, the court agreed that the applicant’s rights had been affected and consequently vacated the earlier judgement.

“The court has ordered all parties to return to the position they occupied before the judgment of 10 December 2025, and directed the claimants to join all necessary parties to ensure the issues in dispute are effectually and completely determined,” he said.

He explained that the implication of the ruling is that every action taken by INEC in compliance with the now-vacated judgment stands reversed.

“The recognition of the NDC, the issuance of its certificate of registration, its inclusion in INEC’s records, and any appearance on ballot papers arising from that judgement must be withdrawn pending the final determination of the substantive suit,” Mr Ekeocha stated.

He, however, clarified that the substantive case remains before the court and has not been decided.

“The matter has not been concluded. The court merely set aside its previous judgment and directed that the party whose interests were affected be joined so that all sides can be heard before a fresh decision is reached.”

Mr Ekeocha also dismissed suggestions that the court merely ordered parties to maintain the status quo, insisting that the ruling specifically directed a restoration of the position that existed before the 10 December 2025 judgement.

The ruling effectively returns the dispute over the registration of the NDC to the Federal High Court for a fresh hearing, with all relevant parties expected to participate before a new determination is made.

It would also be recalled that a few weeks earlier, the Federal High Court in Abuja, had ordered the deregistration of five political parties including the African Democratic Congress (ADC). The others are Action People’s Party (APP), Action Alliance (AA), Zenith Labour Party (ZLP) and Accord Party.

However, on June 16, the Court of Appeal in Abuja halted the enforcement of the judgement, ruling that it violated its earlier ruling staying proceedings before the Federal High Court.

While INEC awaits the release of the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the judgment to deregister the NDC, the NDC has reacted, rejecting the judgment as travesty of justice.

Lending credence to the notion that the President Tinubu-led administration is basically targeting the establishment of the ADC as a party, and the candidature of its presidential flagbearer, former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar, who is also the presidential candidate of the ADC, has stated categorically that there are plots to prevent the party from participating in the 2027 general election.

Atiku’s position is stated in a statement issued by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu on Monday, notifying the public that he had received credible information suggesting that political and legal manoeuvres were being deployed against the ADC, stressing that the persecution that has been thrown towards the NDC was a clear distraction as the main target is the ADC.

Atiku alleged that anti-democratic elements within the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) were working to ensure that the ADC is excluded from the ballot.

“We are fully aware of their plots. While they seek to sow confusion within the opposition, we know their real target is the ADC because it represents the most credible alternative,” he said.

Atiku called on Nigerians to reject any attempt to determine which opposition parties participate in the election.

“We therefore call on all Nigerians — not just ADC members and supporters — to rise in defense of democracy and reject any attempt by the ruling party to cherry-pick which opposition parties are permitted to participate in the next general election,” he said.

“Our message to the APC and the hooded men plotting in dark chambers is simple: you may conspire, but you will not succeed.

“If the APC is truly confident in its popularity, why is it so terrified of the ADC?”

He said he hoped the information available to him would not materialise but argued that recent political developments made such concerns difficult to dismiss.

“The pattern has become all too familiar. First, institutions that ought to be neutral are drawn into partisan contests,” he said.

“Then, frivolous litigations suddenly gain unusual momentum. Administrative powers are selectively deployed.

“Political pressure is mounted behind closed doors. Before long, democracy itself becomes the casualty.”

Atiku alleged that the ruling party has focused more on weakening the opposition than addressing the country’s economic and security challenges.

“The obsession with silencing the opposition has become so consuming that governance itself has taken a back seat,” he said.

“At a time when Nigerians are battling hunger, inflation, unemployment, insecurity, and collapsing purchasing power, those entrusted with public office appear preoccupied with political survival rather than national survival.”

Nigerians recall that ever since the official rejuvenation of the ADC in June/July of 2025, where the duo of Senator David Mark and Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola emerged as the party’s chairman and secretary respectively, the party has not known moments of peaceful coexistence as litigations from corners unknown have sprang up in a bid to destabilize the party and deprive it of the opportunity of featuring on the ballot paper come 2027.

ADC, as a child of circumstance emerged from the rumbles of the litigation-ridden former main opposition party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), where two factions have consistently remelained at loggerheads over leadership. While the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, who is working assiduously to ensure the reelection of Bola Tinubu, leads one faction, Oyo State Governor, Seyi Makinde, who became a defacto head, leads the other faction. In all, PDP appeared to have no direction, forcing many of its members to jump ship, thereby birthing the ADC, and to a large extent, the NDC, which is presenting Peter Obi as the presidential candidate, with former Kano governor, Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, as his running mate.

Sources also informed The Boss that the hasty reading and passage of the Electoral Act 2026 by the Godswill Akpabio-led National Assembly, with many great areas left unattended to, were also part of the grand design to deprive the ADC the constitutional rights of presenting candidates for the 2027 elections.

But both the ADC and the NDC has vowed that they would follow every process to ensure that the crackdown on opposition parties by the Tinubu administration comes to an abrupt end.

But beyond the intrigues, Nigerians are gearing up to participate fully in the forthcoming election with cross sections of the population either hailing Tinubu for his policies or knocking him for the untold hardship in the land.

Headline

South Africa Nothing Without Africa – MTN Boss, Mcebisi Jonas

Published

3 days ago

June 27, 2026

Eric

The MTN Group Chairman, Mcebisi Jonas, has condemned the ongoing anti-foreigner sentiment in South Africa, describing it as a symptom of State failure being cynically exploited by politicians with no interest in genuine solutions.

The speech is seen as one of the most substantive interventions by a senior business figure into xenophobic crisis currently plaguing South Africa.

Delivered during the funeral service of Zimbabwean-born activist and public servant, Thokozani Damasane, Jonas’ words have sparked a wave of discussion across South African civil society.

“I was thinking, what is home to Damasane?” he said. “Because I understand, and I understood very early in life, that home is where humanity is. Home is about humanness. It is about the good of humanity and striving for the good of humanity.”

Thokozani Damasane was born and educated in Zimbabwe before relocating to South Africa during the post-apartheid transition period. Jonas described him as arriving “as an outcast” into a country still finding its post-liberation footing – and choosing, nonetheless, to commit himself entirely to its struggles and its people.

“He immersed himself deeply into the struggles, into the pains of South Africans, and he became one of us,” Jonas said.

“In Damasane’s strength, our strength as South Africa and South Africans is reflected. And in his weaknesses, our own weaknesses are reflected.”

Speaking further, Jonas blamed the state for the failure being witnessed, emphasising that if foreigners leave South Africa today, the country’s problems will still persist.

“Foreigners can leave tomorrow – inequality will be with us,” he told the congregation.

“Foreigners will leave tomorrow – unemployment will be with us. Foreigners will leave tomorrow – our police will remain corrupt. Foreigners will leave tomorrow – our politicians will still be concerned with one thing: being elected and re-elected.

“The problem is the failure of the state. The State doesn’t manage immigration. It doesn’t manage its borders. It doesn’t enforce
law enforcement. It doesn’t manage education. What are you expecting?”

Jonas argued that this failure created fertile ground for political manipulation. “When people feel the burn, they become vulnerable to politicians whose sole purpose is to be elected and re-elected. Some of them have no credibility whatsoever. But they lead marches and tell our people that the problem is not us – it is foreigners.”

Jonas recounted a conversation he had witnessed between Damasane and a young man who had challenged the right of foreigners to be in South Africa. Damasane’s response, Jonas said, had stayed with him ever since.

“Damasane said to this guy: Just wait fifteen or twenty years. You will also want to leave your country.”

Jonas told mourners those words now carry a weight Damasane may not have anticipated. “As I stand up today, I look at South Africa. The level of oppression and inequality, the level of exclusion of our people, the level of corruption, the betrayal of the dream of liberation – those words of Damasane ring very loud in my ears.”

South Africa is nothing without Africa

Jonas closed with a call for what he described as a return to “national consciousness” – one rooted in continental solidarity and economic interdependence rather than ethnic exclusion.

“We are a nation embedded in Africa,” he said. “And without Africa, our growth as a country – economically – our fortune is intertwined with the growth of Africa. South Africa is nothing without Africa. And Africa is nothing without South Africa.”

He also reframed the question of legacy and identity for Damasane’s children, who were present. “Sometimes this thing called meritocracy is measured in wealth. No. It is values, it is principles, it is integrity. And your father had all of that.”

“We cannot judge people by their origin,” he told mourners. “We cannot determine the legal status of people by their origin.”

Headline

NDC Rejects Court Ruling on Party’s Registration, Heads to Appeal Court

Published

3 days ago

June 27, 2026

Eric

The Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), on Friday, vowed to challenge the judgment nullifying its registration by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), insisting that it would exercise its constitutional right of appeal.

Reacting to the ruling on Thursday, the party’s spokesman, Osa Director, said the NDC was still awaiting the certified copy of the judgment before making a comprehensive statement on the court’s decision.

He, however, confirmed that the party had resolved to head to the appellate court.

“We are still waiting to obtain a copy of the judgment. After reading the comprehensive judgment, we will make a detailed statement,” he said.

The spokesman added: “For now, what is certain is that we will exercise our right of appeal.”

Insisting that the party would challenge the ruling, he said: “It is our constitutional right to appeal, and we intend to exercise that right.”

When asked specifically whether the NDC would appeal the judgment voiding its registration, the spokesman replied: “Yes, the party will appeal the case.”

The party’s reaction came shortly after a Federal High Court sitting in Lokoja, Kogi State, in a judgement that nullified its registration by INEC, a development that could have significant implications for the NDC’s participation in the country’s political process ahead of the 2027 general elections.

The NDC, however, maintained that it would refrain from making further comments on the substance of the judgment until it had studied the full text of the court’s decision.

The party’s planned appeal is expected to set the stage for a fresh legal battle over its status and continued existence as a registered political party.