Opinion

The Oracle: History and Its Unforgettable Events, and Personalities That Shaped Them (Pt 9)

Published

3 years ago

May 21, 2021

Eric

By Mike Ozekhome SAN

INTRODUCTION

Last week, we took on two historical figures, Mungo Park and Hugh Clapperton. These were great men that navigated their ways in the history of mankind. Mungo Park, was prominent known in his alleged discovery of the “River Niger”. Clapperton, on the other hand, was famous for being the first European to make known from personal observation, the Hausa states, which he visited soon after the establishment of the Sokoto Caliphate by the Fula.

Today, we shall take a break from historical figures and discuss historical empires. We have already discussed the Benin Kingdom. Let us today take on the Kanem-Bornu Empire.

THE KANEM–BORNU EMPIRE

The Kanem–Bornu Empire once existed in areas which now from part of Chad and Nigeria. It was known to the Arabian geographers as the Kanem Empire, from the 8th century AD onward and lasted as the independent kingdom of Bornu (the Bornu Empire) until 1900. The Kanem Empire (c. 700–1380) was located in the present countries of Chad, Nigeria and Libya. At its height, the Empire encompassed an area covering not only most of Chad, but also parts of southern Libya (Fezzan) and Eastern Niger, Northeastern Nigeria and Northern Cameroon. The Bornu Empire (1380s–1893) was a state in what is now Northeastern Nigeria. At a time it became even larger than Kanem, by incorporating areas that are today parts of Chad, Niger, Sudan, and Cameroon. The Bornu Empire existed from 1380s to 1893. The early history of the Empire is mainly known from the Royal Chronicle or Girgam discovered in 1851 by the German traveler Heinrich Barth.

In the 8th century, Wahb ibn Munabbih used Zaghawa to describe the Teda-Tubu group, in the earliest use of the ethnic name. Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi also mentions the Zaghawa in the 9th century. Kanem comes from “anem”, meaning “south” in the Teda and Kanuri languages, and hence a geographic term. During the first millennium, as the Sahara underwent desiccation, people speaking the Kanembu language migrated to Kanem in the South. This group contributed to the formation of the Kanuri people. Kanuri traditions state the Zaghawa dynasty led a group of nomads called the Magumi.

This desiccation of the Sahara resulted in two settlements, those speaking Teda-Daza (Northeast of Lake Chad,) and those speaking Chadic (west of the lake in Bornu and Hausa-land).

ORIGINS OF KANEM

The origins of Kanem are unclear. The first historical sources tend to show that the kingdom of Kanem began forming around 700 AD under the nomadic Tebu-speaking Kanembu. The Kanembu were supposedly forced Southwest towards the fertile lands around Lake Chad by political pressure and desiccation in their former range. The area already possessed independent, walled city-states belonging to the Sao culture. Under the leadership of the Duguwa dynasty, the Kanembu would eventually dominate the Sao, but not before adopting many of their customs. War between the two continued up to the late 16th century.

One scholar, Dierk Lange, has proposed another theory based on a diffusionist ideology. This theory was much criticized by the scientific community, as it is considered bereft seriously of direct and clear evidence. Lange connects the creation of Kanem-Bornu with exodus from the collapsed Assyrian Empire c. 600 BC, to the Northeast of Lake Chad. He also proposed that the lost state of Agisymba (mentioned by Ptolemy in the middle of the 2nd century AD), was the antecedent of the Kanem Empire.

Kanem was connected via a trans-Saharan trade route with Tripoli via Bilma in the Kawar. Slaves were imported from the South along this route.

Kanuri tradition states that Sayf b. Dhi Yazan established dynastic rule over the nomadic Magumi around the 9th or 10th century, through divine kingship. For the next millennium, the mais ruled the Kanuri, which included the Ngalaga, Kangu, Kayi, Kuburi, Kaguwa, Tomagra and Tubu.

KANEM’S RISE

Kanem is mentioned as one of three great Empires in Bilad el-Sudan, by Al Yaqubi in 872. He describes the kingdom of “the Zaghāwa who live in a place called Kānim,” which included several vassal kingdoms, and “Their dwellings are huts made of reeds and they have no towns.” Living as nomads, their cavalry gave them military superiority. In the 10th century, al-Muhallabi mentions two towns in the kingdom, one of which was Mānān. Their king was considered divine, believing he could “bring life and death, sickness and health.” Wealth was measured in livestock, sheep, cattle, camels and horses. From Al-Bakri in the 11th century onwards, the kingdom is referred to as Kanem. In the 12th century Muhammad al-Idrisi described Mānān as “a small town without industry of any sort and little commerce.” Ibn Sa’id al-Maghribi describes Mānān as the capital of the Kanem kings in the 13th century, and Kanem as a powerful Muslim kingdom.

The Kanuri-speaking Muslim Saifawas gained control of Kanem from the Zaghawa nomads in the 9th century. This included control of the Zaghawa trade links in the Central Sahara with Bilma and other salt mines. Yet, the principal trade commodity was slaves. Tribes to the south of Lake Chad were raided as kafirun, and then transported to Zawila in the Fezzan, where the slaves were traded for horses and weapons. The annual number of slaves traded increased from 1,000 in the 7th century to 5,000 in the 15th. Mai Hummay began his reign in 1075, and formed alliances with the Kay, Tubu, Dabir and Magumi. Mai Humai was the first Muslim king of Kanem, and was converted by his Muslim tutor, Muhammad b. Mānī. This dynasty replaced the earlier Zaghawa dynasty. They remained nomadic until the 11th century, when they fixed their capital at Nijmi.

Kanem’s expansion peaked during the long and energetic reign of Mai Dunama Dabbalemi (1210-1259). Dabbalemi initiated diplomatic exchanges with Sultans in North Africa, sending a giraffe to the Hafsid monarch, and arranged for the establishment of a madrasa of al-Rashíq in Cairo, to facilitate pilgrimages to Mecca. During his reign, he declared jihad against the surrounding tribes and initiated an extended period of conquest with his cavalry of 41,000. He fought the Bulala for seven years, seven months, and 7seven days. After dominating the Fezzan, he established a governor at Traghan, delegated military command amongst his sons. As the Sefawa extended control beyond Kanuri tribal lands, fiefs were granted to military commanders, as cima, or ‘master of the frontier’. Civil discord was said to follow his opening of the sacred Mune.

KANEM’S DISINTEGRATION

By the end of the 14th century, internal struggles and external attacks had torn Kanem apart. War with the Soa brought the death of four Mai: Selemma, Kure Gana, Kure Kura, and Muhammad, all sons of ‘Abdullāh b. Kadai. Then, war with the Bulala resulted in the death of four Mai in succession between 1377 and 1387: Dawūd, Uthmān b. Dawūd, Uthmān b. Idris, and Bukar Liyāu. Finally, around 1387 the Bulala forced Mai Umar b. Idris to abandon Njimi and move the Kanembu people to Bornu on the western edge of Lake Chad.

But, even in Bornu, the Sayfawa Dynasty’s troubles persisted. During the first three-quarters of the 15th century. For example, fifteen mais occupied the throne. Then, around 1460, Mai Ali Gazi (1473-1507) defeated his rivals and began the consolidation of Bornu. He built a fortified capital at Ngazargamu, to the west of Lake Chad (in present-day Nigeria), the first permanent home a Sayfawamai had enjoyed in a century. So successful was the Sayfawa rejuvenation that by the early 16th century, Mai Idris Katakarmabe (1507-1529), was able to defeat the Bulala and retake Njimi, the former capital. The Empire’s leaders, however, remained at Ngazargamu because its lands were more productive agriculturally and better suited to the raising of cattle. Ali Gaji was the first ruler of the Empire to assume the title of Caliph.

MAI IDRIS ALOOMA

Bornu peaked during the reign of Mai Idris Alooma (c. 1571–1603), reaching the limits of its greatest territorial expansion, gaining control over Hausa land, and the people of Ahir and Tuareg. Peace was made with Bulala, when a demarcation of boundaries was agreed, upon with a non-aggression pact. Military innovations included the use of mounted Turkish musketeers, slave musketeers, mailed cavalrymen, and footmen. This army was organized into an advance guard and a rear reserve, transported via camel or large boats and fed by free and slave women cooks. Military tactics were honed by drill and organization, supplemented with a scorched earth policy. Ribāts were built on frontiers, and trade routes to the north were secured, allowing friendly relations to be established with the Pasha of Tripoli and the Turkish empires. Ibn Furtu called AloomaAmir al-Mu’minin, after he implemented Sharia, and relied upon large fiefholders to ensure justice.

The Lake Chad to Tripoli route became an active highway in the 17th century, with horses traded for slaves. About two million slaves traveled this route to be traded in Tripoli, the largest slave market in the Mediterranean.

Most of the successors of Idris Alooma are only known from the meagre information provided by the Diwan. Some of them are noted for having undertaken the pilgrimage to Mecca, others for their piety. In the eighteenth century, Bornu was affected by several long-lasting famines. Aïr was independently operating the Bilma salt mines by 1750, having been a tributary since 1532.

The administrative reforms and military brilliance of Aluma sustained the Empire until the mid-17th century when its power began to fade. By the late 18th century, Bornu rule extended only westward, into the land of the Hausas of modern Nigeria. The Empire was still ruled by the Mai who was advised by his councilors (kokenawa) in the state Council or “nokena“. The members of his Nokena Council included his sons and daughters and other royalty (the Maina) and non-royalty (the Kokenawa, “new men”). The Kokenawa included free men and slave eunuchs known as kachela. The latter “had come to play a very important part in Bornu politics, as eunuchs did in many Muslim courts.”

During the 17th century and 18th century, Bornu became a centre for Islamic learning. Islam and the Kanuri language were widely adopted, while slave raiding propelled the economy. (To be continued).

THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK

“People are trapped in history and history is trapped in them.” (James Baldwin).

Opinion

Onnoghen, Free at Last

Published

4 days ago

November 12, 2024

Eric

By Prof Mike Ozekhome SAN, CON, OFR, LL.D.

“Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor, it must be demanded by the oppressed” (Martin Luther King, Jnr). Justice Walter Onnoghen who was unfairly disgraced out of office presumably as a crook by former dictator President, General Muhammadu Buhari, has just demonstrated this apophthegum through three appeals, namely CA/A/375/2019; CA/A/37/SC/2019 and CA/373C/2019. He valiantly fought for his freedom through these three appeals against his April 18, 2019 outrageous conviction which was schemed by Buhari and his kitchen cabinet to humiliate Onnoghen out of the Bench so as to make CJN, his preferred candidate (Justice Tanko Mohammed), CJN (rtd.) on the eve of the 2019 presidential election. Buhari knew he had performed dismally and would be rejected at the polls by angry and hungry Nigerians. So he went Judge-shopping. The rest as they say is history. The legal saga of Justice Walter Onnoghen is not just the story of one man’s acquittal, but a larger commentary on the poor state of Nigeria’s judiciary and the ever-present tensions between political power wielders and judicial independence. It is a story fit for a Grammy Award movie. His acquittal on 4th November, 2024, by the Court of Appeal in Abuja, marked a significant chapter in Nigeria’s legal history, casting a powerful shadow of doubt and curious spotlight on the principles of separation of power, due process, the sanctity of judicial independence and the perils inherent in political intervention. The appeal that restored Justice Onnoghen’s hard-earned reputation and returned his assets to him is also a profound testament to the importance of procedural integrity and jurisdictional boundaries in any democratic society.

I had the opportunity in the nineties to appear before the brilliant Judex while he was a High Court Judge of the Cross River State Judiciary, Calabar. I know he was a man of integrity and character. During the infamous Onnoghen’s trial by ordeal, I made many interventions. In one, I said:

“A strong judiciary is one of the irreducible fundamental platforms for any meaningful constitutional democracy. If you terrorise, intimidate, harass and humiliate the judiciary, using strong hand and brute force, it is a stage set for bidding democracy farewell”- Mike Ozekhome, SAN (https://dailytrust.com/ozekhome-charges-judiciary-to-shut-down-courts-over-onnoghen/). (13th January, 2019).

In a world where the judiciary stands as the final arbiter of justice, Justice Onnoghen’s story is one of a victim who faced unprecedented tribulations, endured a long agonising path to redemption. He ultimately emerged victorious. The appeal process that culminated in his acquittal is a reminder that justice may sometimes be delayed, but it can never be forever denied.

HOW THE APPEAL COURT ACQUITED ONNOGHEN
The verdict by the Court of Appeal represented a turning point in a legal drama that had captivated Nigerians and raised profound questions about the nature and quality of justice in the country. On the 4th of November, 2024, a three-member panel led by Justice Abba Mohammed ruled in favour of the ex-CJN, Walter Onnoghen, acquitting him of the charges initially levied in 2019 by the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) in 2019. This decision not only vacated the earlier conviction but also ordered the unfreezing of all his bank accounts, thus restoring his financial freedom that had been denied him since the controversial trial began.

I have been overwhelmingly vindicated in all my angst and ventilations against the victimhood suffered by Onnoghen. Hear me:

“The CJN can be removed from office either if he has been convicted or if under section 291 of the constitution, the Senate affirms a request by the President to remove him by two-third majority vote” – Prof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN (https://www.pulse.ng/news/politics/mike-ozekhome-reacts-to-allegations-against-cjn-onnoghen/zdx9del). (12th January, 2019).

The acquittal judgement was predicated on a legal principle central to the Nigerian jurisprudence which articulates around jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal asserted that the CCT had no authority in the first instance to try and convict Justice Onnoghen having not passed through the National Judicial Council (NJC). This oversight, the appellate court argued, rendered the entire proceedings null and void. This requirement had been emphasized in Nigerian case law with decisions such as FRN v. NGANJIWA (2022) LPELR-58066(SC) and OPENE v. NJC & ORS (2011) LPELR-4795(CA), which clearly emphasise that judicial officers must first be vetted by the NJC before facing any criminal trial by a tribunal or court. This process is designed to protect the judiciary and its judexes from strong-hand politicians and political interference, thus ensuring that judges are treated with the respect, dignity and due process that their offices richly deserve. I had angrily queried:
“…Our system of justice being Anglo-Saxon based, which is accusatorial, meaning that the innocence of a person is presumed. It is different from the criminal justice system of the French model which is inquisitorial, wherein the guilt of an accused person is presumed. This doctrine has been encapsulated in section 36 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, that the person’s innocence is presumed until he has been proven guilty. Assuming for example that Senator Bukola Saraki had been forced to resign his office when charges were brought against him before the same Code of Conduct Tribunal almost three years ago, what would have happened and what would have been his fate when the Supreme Court eventually discharged and acquitted him of the charge, following judgements and earlier order of the Court of Appeal and the Code of Conduct Tribunal itself? If you ask me, I sense serious political undertones oozing from this so-called imminent arraignment of the noble CJN. Question, when did they discover the alleged offence for which they now want to charge him on Monday? Was it just yesterday, was it last week, two weeks or six months ago? The CJN has been in office now for well over one year, how come that this misconduct or whatever offence that he is being alleged, was not seen up to now? How come, that it is just less than 40 days to the 2019 Presidential election, when the CJN is going to play the major role in constituting the Presidential election petition tribunal, that he is being moved against? Who is afraid of the Judiciary? Who is afraid of Justice Onnoghen and his impartiality and straightforwardness? How come we are reducing governance in Nigeria to one of impunity, one of despotism and one of absolutism. Don’t this people know that the world is laughing at us? Did we not see how Dino Melaye was yanked out from police hospital and taken to DSS quarters when he had no business or case with the DSS and DSS had no case against him. Did they not see Dino Melaye, a serving Senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, sleeping in the open yesterday? Do they go on social media and do they watch international televisions? Do they know how the whole world is deriding us in this country? That governance has been reduced to mere witch-hunt, very opaque, very unaccountable, very un-transparent and very very fascist! Can’t they see that?”- Prof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN (https://www.pulse.ng/news/politics/mike-ozekhome-reacts-to-allegations-against-cjn-onnoghen/zdx9del). (12th January, 2019).

My intervention as far back as 2019 served as a reality-check, pointing out that removing a Chief Justice can never be a whimsical decision; it is bound by the checks and balances that keep our justice system watered. My then reference to “impunity, despotism, and absolutism” hit like a huge hammer, evoking the imagery of a judiciary under siege of political transaintionists. By drawing parallels with then Senators Saraki and Dino Melaye’s own public tribulations, I attempted to paint a vivid picture of a prostrate justice system afflicted by power jackbootism.

Justice Onnoghen’s acquittal is a clear victory for judicial integrity, independence and an affirmation that the judiciary cannot be used as a pawn on political chessboards. The ruling also reinforces the fact that procedural lapses, especially in matters bordering on citizens right and high-ranking judicial officers, are unacceptable and grossly violate the principle of fair trial. As the Bible counsels in Proverbs 31:9, “Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy.” This verse captures the essence of due process, emphasizing that justice must be dispensed with fairness and respect for established procedures. I did not mince words then in condemning the executive lawlessness unleashed on Onnoghen:
“It must be pointed out that this latest step by the CCT… appears to be teleguided by the dictatorial Executive, especially the presidency” – Prof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN (https://dailypost.ng/2019/02/13/ozekhome-gives-nine-reasons-cct-arrest-order-onnoghen-cannot-stand/). (14th February, 2019).

The ugly circumstances surrounding Justice Onnoghen’s initial trial and conviction by the CCT underscore the potential dangers when procedural norms are bypassed. My passionate critique of the dastardly role played by the Buhari-led administration from 2015 to 2023 as regards Onnoghen’s trial by ordeal revealed the high stakes which were at play. By overstepping the NJC, I had warned then that unchecked executive power could encroach upon the independence of the judiciary which will ultimately undermine the very foundation of democracy.

THE PRECEDENT OF JURISDICTION AND JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE
Justice Walter Onnoghen’s acquittal by the Court of Appeal is not just a victory for one individual, but a landmark affirmation of a fundamental principle of law, that jurisdiction is the bedrock of any valid legal proceeding. Without proper jurisdiction, any judgement rendered is, as many legal scholars have agreed on, will merely be an exercise in futility. This principle is enshrined in our legal jurisprudence to protect the sanctity of judicial offices and prevent arbitrary persecution. The Court of Appeal’s decision to vacate Justice Walter Onnoghen’s conviction reaffirmed this core legal tenet, sending a clear message that the judiciary is not a toothless bulldog and tool to be wielded by the executive or any other arm of government.

“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” – Martin Luther King Jr. The Nigerian legal framework, supported by landmark cases such as FRN v. NGANJIWA (Supra) and OPENE v. NJC & ORS (Supra), outlines that the NJC must first investigate and make recommendations regarding any allegations against judicial officers before any trial can commence at the CCT. This process serves as a bulwark against arbitrary trials, ensuring that judges are not subjected to undue pressure or political intimidation. I had also then warned about the dangers posed whenever these procedural safeguards are disregarded: “The CCT was unrelenting: it discarded its earlier precedents; ignored court rulings barring it from trying Onnoghen. It was the case of the falcon not hearing the falconer”- Prof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN (https://www.thecable.ng/ozekhome-onnoghen-resigned-because-the-cabal-had-sealed-his-fate/). (6th April, 2019).

Thus, five years ago (2019), I was nothing short of prophetic. I had foreseen the critical blunders and overreaches that would compromise the integrity of the judiciary in the Onnoghen saga. My warnings were very clear then about the dangerous precedent that was being set in bypassing due process and using the judiciary as a tool for political manoeuvring. As events have now unfolded, my observations then have proven me to be a visionary critic who critiques (not criticises) a justice system that was then on the brink. I had cautioned against the erosion of judicial independence in the face of executive influence. I had given nine reasons why the CCT’s arrest order on and trial of Justice Onnoghen could not stand. See:
(https://dailypost.ng/2019/02/13/ozekhome-gives-nine-reasons-cct-arrest-order-onnoghen-cannot-stand/).

My list was not just a check-list of procedural irregularities; it was also an indictment of a system seemingly hijacked by political buccaneers. Each point landed like a blow, revealing layers of oversight that were by-passed; up to the requirement for humane treatment under the ACJA that was ignored. I meticulously built my case, demonstrating that Onnoghen’s trials were not just about one man, but about the sanctity of the judicial process itself. It was persecution, not prosecution.

My vivid metaphor of the then CJN being “mob-lynched,” painted a grotesque picture of a judiciary cornered by hidoues forces intent on humiliation rather than achieving justice.

Justice Onnoghen’s acquittal by the Court of Appeal thus serves as a reaffirmation of judicial independence, reminding all branches of government that the rule of law cannot be compromised for political expediency. As the Bible says in Psalm 82:3, “Defend the weak and the fatherless; uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.” These words resonate deeply in the context of Onnoghen’s trial, encapsulating the judiciary’s duty to protect the innocent from unwarranted persecution and uphold the principles of justice.

POLITICAL UNDERTONES AND THE QUEST FOR JUDICIAL AUTONOMY
Justice Walter Onnoghen’s journey from indictment to acquittal reflects a deeper narrative about the political undertones that permeated his trial. His suspension by then President Muhammadu Buhari which took place only weeks before the 2019 presidential election, had raised significant concerns about the timing and motivations behind the charges. Many saw it as an attempt to influence the judiciary ahead of a critical election, a sentiment I shared and eloquently captured in “Onnoghen… knew that his fate had been pre-determined by the cabal, signed, sealed and delivered”- Prof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN (https://www.thecable.ng/ozekhome-onnoghen-resigned-because-the-cabal-had-sealed-his-fate/). (6th April, 2019)

The timing of the charges, as well as the swiftness with which Onnoghen was brought to trial, laid validation to public perception that Justice Onnoghen was merely targeted for his position and influence within the judiciary. Like I put it then, “Many facts bear this simple deduction out. The petitioner, an NGO, actually committed the Freudian slip by anchoring its petition on ‘bearing in mind the imminence of the 2019 general elections’” – Prof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN (https://dailytrust.com/ozekhome-charges-judiciary-to-shut-down-courts-over-onnoghen/). (13th January, 2019).

The Bible, in Proverbs 21:15, declares, “When justice is done, it brings joy to the righteous but terror to evildoers.” The acquittal of Justice Onnoghen, in this light, is therefore not just a personal victory but a broader triumph for all who value justice and integrity.

Like I noted then, “Justice Onnoghen’s removal was also an attempt by the executive arm of government to have a firm control of the nation’s judiciary”- Prof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN (https://dailypost.ng/2019/02/13/ozekhome-gives-nine-reasons-cct-arrest-order-onnoghen-cannot-stand/). (13th February, 2019).

CONCLUSION

Ultimately, Justice Walter Onnoghen’s acquittal is a landmark victory for judicial independence and a testament to the enduring principles of justice and due process. His journey from indictment to acquittal serves as a potent reminder that the rule of law must remain inviolable, even in the face of political pressures.
Onnoghen’s case will remain a watershed moment in Nigeria’s legal history, a vivid reminder that the judiciary’s role is to safeguard the rule of law, protect citizens’ rights and ensure that democracy even when faced with formidable forces of political influence, triumphs. It should be able to skillfully navigate through the ever present interplay of centripetal and centrifugal forces.

As Nigeria continues to evolve as a work-in-progress, Justice Onnoghen’s exoneration stands as a powerful reminder to us all that, in the words of Proverbs 21:3, “To do what is right and just is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice.” Congratulations, Milord. Enjoy your hard won-back integrity, honour and dignity.

Opinion

Masquerade of Excellence: Celebrating Prof Mike Ozekhome’s Remarkable Journey @ 67

Published

1 month ago

October 14, 2024

Eric

By CDS Omon-Irabor Esq

Chief Prof. Dr. Mike A.A. Ozekhome SAN,
the only masquerade that dances in the farm without cutting a single reed of the yam tendrils.

The Gadfly is climbing the 67th rung on the ladder. From the hills of Agenebode down to the plains of the Iviukwe, the celestials, the principalities and the gods of Weppa and Wano Kingdoms are celebrating this colossus, who came in disguise as a little rough village boy; but very comely and handsome, his divine intelligence surpasses those of his peers.

Taking a sudden flight through primary and secondary schools casaded him into the land of Oduduwa. He anchored his life voyage at the ancestral home of the Yorubas, Ile-ife. Here his projenitors believed to have a temporary abode before sending the last born of the Ogisos Ile-ife (I ran and I became rich, Benin translation). Omonoyan (wrongly called Oromiyan) was sent to go to the land of Igodomigodo where today Chief Mike Ozekhome holds the title of Enobakhare of Benin Kingdom.

This great man had all his trappings, equipped himself and became a lawyer, taking abode in the Delphic Oracle (that is what we called the Chambers of Chief Gani Fawehim). There he became the Aristostle, tampering with the Apologia left at the eye of euroba.

He journeyed on, for no destiny, no chance, no faith, nor circumstance could hinder, control or circumvent the firm resolve of a determined soul in Chief Mike Agbedor Abu Ozekhome as epitomised or postulated.

The great learned Senior Advocate of the masses grudges on, defending the most vulnerable and giving voice to the voiceless and muscle to the powerless.

The Okporokpo of Oleh kingdom, Delta State; the Aimotekpe of Okpeland, the Agbamofin of Ijanikinland, Lagos; the Ohamadike1 of Obibi Ochasi, Imo State; the Ada Idaha of Efik land and the great Akpakpa Vighi Vighi of Edo Land, the land of my ancestors, I salute you for it is morning yet.

There is no space here,for my ink is running dry; but before I drop, I remember your words to me while I was in the dock of the Warri High Court on the 12th day of July, 2013, “Omon, you look worried; mind you, those who think that they can cover the shinning sun with their palms will soon find the heat unbearable”.

Those who stopped you from becoming our Governor in 2003 indirectly made you Governor of all Governors.

In all these odyssey you traversed, behind the dìm unknown standeth God, watching over you, His own.

Obokhian, amonghon, iyare iyare, mooooooh.

CDS Omon-Irabor Esq writes from the hill and the cave of Ebudinland

Opinion

Mr. President: Affordable Fuel is Possible at Zero Subsidy

Published

1 month ago

October 12, 2024

Eric

By Dr. Aliyu U. Tilde

Yesterday evening, I listened attentively to a panel of experts and stakeholders on the BBC program Ra’ayi Riga, anchored by Umaima Sani Abdulmumin. The program ended with a big doubt in my mind regarding a matter purported to be a provision of OPEC and crucial to the price of petrol in Nigeria.

Tyranny

I could not fathom how particularly the representatives of NNPC and IPMAN stressed that Nigerians will be at the mercy of two variables: the international market and the price of the US Dollar in Nigeria. They said OPEC agreement compels member countries to sell allocated domestic crude at international rate even if refined locally. One of them even said the Iran-Israel conflict can cause domestic price of petrol in Nigeria to rise.

So we should expect higher fuel prices anytime the rate of the dollar appreciates in Nigeria and also when, for any reason, there is a rise in the cost of crude in the international market. It is the rule, according to them. Our fate, they claim, is sealed, regardless of our OPEC membership and Dangote refinery. Nigerians will no longer have a stable fuel price.

Trust me, in Nigeria, the equation will be simultaneous. At any given moment, a reason will be found to use either or both parameters to increase pump price. The target of government is to extract more revenue from citizens while the businessmen in Dangote, Major Marketers, NNPCL and IPMAN continue to feed their greed for endless profit with our blood.

One would wonder why OPEC would be so oppressive in inflicting such tyranny on the citizens of its members. Senator Ndume, who was in the panel, said if he cannot understand why, how would they expect a commoner sitting under the tree to do so?

The truth

The truth is that there is no provision like that in OPEC agreements. In fact, the very idea of domestic crude quota arose in realization that citizens of member countries may need to enjoy cheaper oil than the international market price. That is why those citizens have been enjoying cheaper fuel for the past five decades in different countries. Many still do. Why not Nigerians?

If you ask ChatGPT whether OPEC agreement compels member countries to sell crude for domestic consumption at international market price only, this is the answer you get:

“OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) does not directly compel member countries to sell crude oil for domestic consumption at international market prices. OPEC’s primary role is to coordinate and unify petroleum policies among member countries to stabilize oil markets and secure a steady supply of oil.

“However, OPEC’s production quotas, agreements on output levels, and policies can indirectly influence domestic oil pricing. In practice, many OPEC members choose to sell crude oil domestically at subsidized rates or prices lower than the international market. This decision is made at the discretion of individual member countries, often as part of national energy policies aimed at supporting domestic economies and industries. Nonetheless, these policies may vary from one member country to another depending on domestic priorities and economic strategies.

“There is no formal OPEC rule that requires domestic sales to match international prices, though it can be influenced by international agreements and market pressures.”

The Truth

The truth is that the President and Minister of Petroleum can sell our 445,000 barrels a day to Dangote at even N50,000/barrel after taking into consideration the cost of extraction and OPEC will not raise any eyebrow. Dangote can charge the cost of refining, add his profit and sell to NNPCL and IPMAN at, say, N300/litre. On their part the marketers will add their cost of transportation, storage, profit, etc., and sell it to Nigerians at N400/litre. And—boom—we all will be happy.

It is entirely the discretion of the President and his government. So whoever wants to sell our locally produced fuel by that simultaneous equation is on his own. There is no OPEC in the equation.

The Squeeze

Also, among those who would fight against Nigerians enjoying affordable fuel rates are the IMF, World Bank and the West generally. They want the government to squeeze us the more such that we can service our debts and collect more loans from the Shylock. The age long philosophy is: our poverty, their wealth; our pain, their joy.

Added to these are local liberal economists who believe in high taxation, claiming that the blood money will be used to develop our infrastructure, health, education, etc. It is just the same old bunkum selling since 1986 at the debut of Naira devaluation while our infrastructure, hospitals and schools continue to deteriorate in rebuttal of that thesis.

A Call

I call on the President to consider the low income status of our citizen. Only affordable fuel price will hold together our social fabric, ensure our prosperity and guarantee our security. It is zero subsidy because we are not buying it from anyone. It is our oil.

The President must keep in mind that the IMF and oil magnates are not his partners in 2027. He is on his own. They will be there to outlive him and work with the next President. Let this sink into his psyche. Tam!