Opinion

The Oracle: Managing Complex Litigation: A Personal Experience (Pt. 2)

Published

4 years ago

June 3, 2022

Eric

By Mike Ozekhome

INTRODUCTION

Last week, we examined the meaning of the word litigation; the role of the Judiciary and counsel in complex litigation; complex commercial litigation; factors to be considered incommercial litigation and jurisdiction of courts in commercial litigation. Generally, complex commercial litigation is the most common dispute resolution process in Nigeria for resolving high-value disputes and are also resolved through commercial arbitration. It is evidence that commercial arbitration is fast becoming the preferred method of resolving such disputes in Nigeria. Today, we shall conclude our discourse on this germane issue.

APPLICATION OF NIGERIAN LAW

In deciding cases of complex litigation before them, the courts are duty bound to apply Nigerian law. The courts will not apply a foreign law to determine issues litigated before them except in instances where the contract between the parties contains a valid choice of law clause in favour of the laws of a foreign jurisdiction. It must be noted, however, that such law would only be applicable where it is not inconsistent with Nigerian law or against public morality, equity and good conscience. Where there is no settled Nigerian law position on an issue or matter, a settled foreign law position regarding the issue or matter may have a persuasive effect on the Nigerian court.

ADR TO THE RESCUE

Parties are encouraged to resolve their dispute by utilising Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms. Where parties fail to utilise these available mechanisms, the court can refer or subject parties to ADR centres created by the courts, for example, the Lagos State Multi Door Court House. Usually, the court refers parties to ADR at the commencement of proceedings and before trial. In the event that the parties are referred to ADR and are unable to resolve their dispute amicably, they will be referred back to court for trial.

CONCLUSION

In general, complex commercial litigation enjoys little or no difference from standard litigation. The major difference arises in the multiplexity of complex litigation and the expertise needed to handle either. While many lawyers can handle standard litigation, very few lawyers have the expertise of handling complex litigation. There are three major points that every lawyer should engage when planning and managing lengthy complex litigations. These are:

Form and empower a team

Building a solid bench of experienced lawyers for these types of cases is imperative and starts with the identification of a “Vice”, “Deputy” or “Second-in-Command”, who can share in the global view of the case, and assist with its management. Other team members must be experienced with the roles, functions and responsibilities meted out to them. Nonetheless, these other team members should be accorded the opportunity to share in the “big picture” planning, as their ideas or opinions could make the difference between winning and losing. Institutional knowledge that is developed must be shared and documented, otherwise there remains the risk that team members could always leave with their ideas. The team, now in place, must be empowered to perform their roles, and given an understanding of how their contribution is necessary to the overarching strategy. Without such a shared sense of ownership in the case, it is more difficult to keep team members engaged over the length of the matter.

Always document your case

Create a timeline and update it as frequent as possible. Each team member can and should contribute to the case timeline. The practice is invaluable for many reasons, including that it memorializes events and developments (big and small); provides a quick history of the case for new (or forgetful) team members; useful for the summaries included with most motions; and, allows you to constantly validate activity against the case strategy. Such a timeline is also useful for updating clients and mapping out strategies.

Communicate with your client regularly

Update your client regularly and without prompting. This is the most important practice pointer for any type of matter, but it is especially true with complex actions. Like the practitioner, your client is also susceptible to the same fatigue, loss of focus and internal transition. Anticipate this concern (as it is potential impactful on your lawyer–client relationship) with regular updates, and consider providing them access to your litigation timeline (or create and update an abbreviated version for them). This provides ready answers to most client questions, and will indirectly address the time-to-time perception of a lack of progress common to year-long cases. Providing regular updates and showing empathy to the situation will go a long way to keeping your client committed to working with you.

Working on long, complex cases is rewarding, but requires significant effort to maintain the constant energy and focus required throughout. Pre-planning and continued emphasis on these core principles will help lawyers to keep the focus and enjoy successful outcomes in such complex litigation cases.

A LAWYER’S DUTY GOES BEYOND ACHIEVING SUCCESS IN COMPLEX LITIGATION

A peep into the entire programme of this retreat shows wonderful topics ranging from Ethics of the Legal Profession; The Corporate Counsel & Legal Practitioners Rule of Professional Conduct; Trial Proceedings in the Federal High Court; Appeals; What makes a good Legal Department; The Ideal of Corporate Counsel; Review of draft DLS new Commercial Agreement Templates; The Judiciary and Remote hearings: Advantages and Challenges; Managing Complex Litigation – My Experience; Garnishee; Managing Garnishee Orders – The FCTA Experience; to the Role of National Industrial Court in the Enforcement of labour Related Violations, Under the NOGICD Act, and the Conflicting Jurisdictions of the State and Federal High Court – Enhancing Synergy between DLS and in-house Stakeholders, the experience of DDDs. There are also topics which span from can the EFCC Investigate Violations of the NOGIC Act; ADR Methods of resolving Commercial Disputes: – How Arbitration works, – Principles of Arbitration, – Mediation Process, – Conciliation Process; An examination of the arbitrability of violations under the NOGICD Act?; Federal and State Tax Laws and their implications on NCDMBs Mandate; Fundamentals of Maritime Agreements; a primer on Midstream and Downstream Energy Infrastructure Transactions and Agreements; Financing, Structuring and drafting power project Agreements; Essentials of Gas Sales Agreement and the role of GACN; Planning for Effective Performance – Team Building and Attitudinal Change for Effectiveness; Commercial Ventures and Projects; to Procurement. You did not forget to include critical subjects such as the new NOGICD Act Regulations and Strategy for Industry Compliance; Effective use of Microsoft Productivity Tool (Word, PowerPoint, Excel etc.): – Conducting Internet Research, – The Legal Department of the Future, – How Disruptive Trends are creating a new business model for in-house legal, – Legal Technology Adaptation (Data & Security); The Nigerian Procurement Law, Procedure & Practice; The Nigerian Corporate Governance Law and its Application to the Implementation of NOGICD Act; An examination of the Applicability of ICPC Act on the Mandate of NCDMB; and the implications of Nigeria’s WTO and ACFTA’s Obligations on the Implementation of the NOGICD Act; Legal Implications of the Proposed NOGICD Act Amendment bill 2011.

No doubt, the above topics are beautiful, and extensive; and cover the field in terms of enhancement of your work as corporate and commercial lawyers driving the local content of our national industrial life. However, I strained my neck in vain, but could not see any topic that deals with any of the burning national issues of the moment; current issues about Nationhood, insecurity, corruption, and our parlous economy. I thought we should take at least a peep into how our tottering Nation is twiddling Twitter; how Twitter users are to be prosecuted under a non-existent law (remember AOKO V. FAGBEMI (1961) 1 All NLR 400); and section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution. I wanted to see an inclusion of a discourse about how we are operating a Military Decree No 24 of 1999 as our Constitution; about rule of law; democracy; about devolution of powers; resource control; true fiscal federalism and issues concerning self-determination. I yearned to see something, just anything about the incessant rate of kidnappings, armed banditry, Boko Haram; whether State Governors could promulgate laws setting up local vigilante groups.

I did not see any. Because I believe they are important to the very corporate existence of Nigeria and the enablement of a conducive environment for you to operate from your beautiful 17-story edifice in Yenagoa, and the 4 NNPC towers in Abuja, I shall touch them. Permit me to take upon myself the liberty and licence to discuss some of them. Yes, because without security and safety of lives and property, none of us will be present at this beautiful Wells Carlton Hotel built by my good friend, Capt. Hosa Okunbor, I therefore will and must touch them. A lawyer’s role should go beyond these very classroom lectures. Yes, we are all lawyers here.

It should involve participating in the social milieu, finding answers and solutions to complex problems of the society; problems that are at once centripetal and centrifugal. A lawyer must look at the immortal works of the first Nigerian lawyer, Sapara Williams (1855–1915), when he said, “the legal practitioner lives for the direction of his people and the advancement of the cause of his country”. A lawyer must situate his societal role in one or more of the schools of thought in jurisprudence with a view to helping societal growth. Let us therefore first briefly look at the various jurisprudential schools of thought.

REFLECTIONS ON THE MEANING OF LAW

The term “Law” has been defined in different ways by several scholars. The definitions proffered by these scholars are reflections of their environments, their rationale for law and its relationship to justice. These divergent views on the meaning of law culminated into varying schools of thought on the subject which in turn crystallized into what has become generally known as the schools of jurisprudence.

One of the earliest schools of thought on law is the Natural Law School. St. Thomas Aquinas, Socrates, Aristotle, Cicero, John Finn, St. Augustine, etc., are some of the proponents of this school of thought. They believe that there is a universal law from a supernatural being which is discovered by reason or rationalization. The Italian philosopher, St Thomas Aquinas, defined law as:

“… nothing else than an ordinance of reason for the common good, made by him who has care of the community, and promulgated.”

The Positivists School of thought on the other hand, believe that law is made by a sovereign, who serves as the only source of its validity, who imposes both the law and it’s sanctions on the people while himself is exempted from the law. John Austin, one of the proponents of this school of thought, stated in his Lectures on Jurisprudence (1885) that:

“Law is a command from the sovereign person or body in the political society to a member or members of society and supported by sanctions.”

The proponents of the Realist School of thought on the other hand postulated or argued that law should be seen as it is or as it is done in the law court, not as it ought to be or anything else. They argue that what transpires in the law court or what the judges do to arrive at their judgments and those judgments are the law. The American Judge, Oliver Wendell Holmes “The Path of the Law” in Collected Papers, 1920” noted that:

“The prophecies of what the courts will do … are what I mean by the law.”

Benjamin N. Cardozo, who succeeded Oliver Wendell Homes as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, noted in the Growth of the Law (1924) that:

“When there is such a degree of probability as to lead to a reasonable assurance that a given conclusion ought to be and will be embodied in a judgment, we speak of that conclusion as the law.”

The Sociological School of jurisprudence, considers law or legal development from the perspective of the people in the society. Perceiving law as a social phenomenon, the proponents posit the harmonization of law with the wishes and aspirations of the people. According to Rosco Pound (one of the proponents of this school of thought):

“… For the purpose of understanding the law of today, I am content to think of law as a social institution to satisfy social wants – the claims and demands involved in the existence of civilized society – by giving effect to as much as we need with the least sacrifice, so far as such wants may be satisfied or such claims given effect by an ordering of human conduct through politically organized society. For present purposes I am content to see in legal history the record of a continually wider recognizing and satisfying of human wants or claims or desires through social control; a more embracing and more effective securing of social interests; a continually more complete and effective elimination of waste and precluding of friction in human enjoyment of the goods of existence – in short, a continually more efficacious social engineering.”

As stated above, the sociological school is concerned with satisfying the interest of individuals and social institutions. These interests are claims or want or desires which men assert de facto, about which the law must do something if organized societies are to endure. The English philosopher, Thomas Hobbes defined “Law as the formal glue that holds fundamentally disorganized societies together.”

While Oliver Wendell Holmes and Cardozo approached law on the basis of what the Court eventually does, Rosco Pound considers the concept “law” as a social institution to satisfy social want. His view of the law accord with the democratic principle of government. In a democracy, law is the reflection of the will and wish of the society. It is said that if you want to study any society, you have to study the laws enacted by that society. Law, though, a product of the society is the tool for the transformation of a society. Law does not only set the path for change, it is the catalyst for change in any progressive democratic society.

Lastly, the proponents of the Historical School of Thought believe that law is a product of the people’s historical advancement. According to Von Savigny, law is:

“… a result of moments the germ of which, like the germ of the State, remains in the nature of people as being produced for culture and which grows different types from this germ, depending on the environment of the factors that perform on it.”

For Savigny, law is a reflection of the spirit of the people (Volksgeist) that grows with the growth of the people and dies as the nation loses its nationality.

The perspectives of the various schools of thought on the meaning of law are germane to our understanding of law as a tool for social change in Nigeria. Notwithstanding their perspectives, one outstanding feature in the various schools of thought is the need to ensure orderliness in the society through law. We, as lawyers, are the engineers that drive the legal process.

So, permit me therefore henceforth, to speak to these above vexed issues which I raised earlier ex tempore. I believe that your automatic recording of same will enrich your communique that will emanate from this beautiful retreat exercise. Consequently, allow me to speak on Nigeria; where we were; where we are; where we ought to be and how to get there. That is my ex tempore talk henceforth.

FUN TIMES

“E CHOKE HERE NA DIE OOO..

Wife carry her card give hubby to withdraw money and support his business. Hubby carry the same card give side chick to go shopping!! Side chick use the same card go do shopping for wife boutique. As it stands, wife dey receive debit and credit alert at the same time. So wife call DPO to come arrest side chick.. E just shock us say side chick na DPO wife… I go update una later shaa. Make I check egg wey I dey fry for fire”. –Anonymous.

THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK

“Litigation is the pursuit of practical ends, not a game of chess”. (Frankfurter).

Opinion

Open Letter to British Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer by Gold Emmanuel

Published

4 days ago

March 23, 2026

Eric

I. THE LETTER

To: The Rt Hon Sir Keir Starmer KCB KC MP
10 Downing Street
London

Sir Keir,

I hope this letter finds you in jubilant spirit. My name is Gold Emmanuel, and although we have never met, your recent conduct has made this correspondence unavoidable. I will cut straight to the chase without further ado.

History will likely remember you as the first British Prime Minister in the modern era to master the art of flogging a dead horse. During President Tinubu’s March 2026 state visit, the first by a West African leader in thirty‑seven years, you revived a brand of colonial‑era mercantilism that even your predecessors had the sense to leave in the archives. From the moment the Nigerian delegation was ushered from Heathrow with choreographed warmth, to the meticulously staged Windsor banquet with its polished silver, curated smiles and diplomatic theatre, you created the illusion of mutual respect. Yet beneath the chandeliers and velvet tablecloths, you were quietly engineering a £746 million export finance deal designed not to uplift Nigeria, but to resuscitate Britain’s faltering industrial strategy.

The “dead horse” here is the illusion of a partnership of equals. A clinical examination of the Lagos and Tin Can Island port refurbishment contract exposes the gaping loopholes your government has exploited:

– The British Steel Loophole: By ring‑fencing £236 million of the credit for British firms, including a record £70 million lifeline for Scunthorpe‑based British Steel, you ensured that the “loan” never actually leaves the UK. You are flogging the dead horse of Nigeria’s already “red” coffers to resurrect British manufacturing, forcing Nigeria to pay interest on a domestic subsidy disguised as “international development.”

– The Sovereign Risk Vacuum: Instead of genuine private‑sector investment, your administration deployed a Buyer Credit Facility via Citibank, guaranteed by UK Export Finance (UKEF). This ensures the UK is made whole by the Nigerian taxpayer regardless of project success, an extractive model that makes even the most rigid conditionalities of the 1980s appear benevolent.

– The Port‑for‑People Trade: In a move that marks a moral nadir, you tied infrastructure credit to an expedited migration pact. By compelling Nigeria to recognise “UK Letters” for swift deportations, you effectively traded 120,000 tonnes of steel billets for the right to return vulnerable people to a conflict zone.

This migration pact is not merely “sleeky”; it is a calculated circumvention of the 1951 Refugee Convention. By institutionalising “UK Letters,” identification documents issued solely by your Home Office, you have bypassed Article 33, which prohibits refoulement: The forcible return of individuals to territories where they face threats to life or freedom. Your “Expedited Return Protocols” further violate the Convention’s requirement for individualised, non‑discriminatory assessment. You have created a legal loophole that enables mass removals before claims can be judicially reviewed, in direct defiance of the UNHCR’s global mandate.

To understand the true cost of your “success,” one must look beyond the silver service of Windsor to the scorched earth of Kwara State. In February 2026, the Woro and Nuku massacres, the deadliest jihadist attacks outside the North East in a decade, left more than 200 dead and 38 kidnapped. While you discussed “port efficiencies,” Nigerian children were being abducted by the JAS terror group. Your migration pact ignores UNHCR guidance, which expressly forbids the forced return of civilians to regions where they face a real risk of serious harm. You demand “order at the border” while Nigeria faces its deadliest insurgency in years.

The predatory nature of your policy is now unmistakable. You have designed a system to take their money, to make them permanent debtors, and then to deport their citizens into a void of nothingness. You have ensured that the Nigerian treasury is bled dry to support Scunthorpe’s furnaces, while the human beings who sought refuge in Britain are discarded back into the very “virtual vice” of terror, where 1,258 people were slaughtered in the first six weeks of 2026 that they sacrificed everything to escape.

Compared with your predecessors, the cynicism of your approach is staggering. Even under the rhetoric of Empire, there was at least a pretence of building institutions. Under your leadership, the relationship has been reduced to a transaction i.e. Nigeria takes the debt, the UK takes the steel orders and the Nigerian diaspora takes the fall. You have managed to be more extractive than the Conservatives and more indifferent to human rights than the pragmatists of the 1990s.

The “sleeky lender” has indeed found its “clumsy borrower,” but the reverse burden lies at your doorstep. It is not for the Nigerian villager to prove they are in danger; it is for your government to explain how a £70 million steel contract justifies the refoulement of human beings into a war zone. You are not building a bridge between nations; you are constructing a one‑way track for British capital, paved with the discarded dignity of the Nigerian people.

And so, Sir Keir, let us dispense with the pretence. A banquet does not make a partnership. A warm reception does not make a fair deal. And no amount of silverware can disguise a policy architecture built on extraction, dispossession and political convenience. You have chosen the short‑term profit of a loan shark over the long‑term integrity expected of a global leader. History will record it accordingly.

I attach a petition for your perusal before its public release.

II. THE PETITION

PETITION TO THE PARLIAMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM

Subject: Urgent Inquiry into the Ethical and Legal Viability of the UK–Nigeria Export Finance and Migration Partnership

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, concerned observers and citizens, petition the Government to immediately suspend the migration provisions attached to the £746 million UKEF port refurbishment deal with Nigeria.

PETITION GROUNDS
– Violation of International Law: The use of “UK Letters” to bypass sovereign passport verification directly contravenes Article 33 of the 1951 Refugee Convention and undermines the principle of non‑refoulement.
– Unfair Contractual Terms: The “British Steel” ring‑fencing clause constitutes an unethical use of export finance, forcing a developing nation to assume high‑interest debt to subsidise UK domestic industry.
– Security Risk Misalignment: Enforcing deportations while Nigeria remains in a state of high‑intensity insurgency, evidenced by the 2026 Woro and Nuku massacres, is a breach of the UK’s duty of care and human rights obligations.
– Detrimental Financial Implication: The commission and interest structures represent predatory lending. The “sleeky lender” (UK) bears zero project risk while the “clumsy borrower” (Nigeria) mortgages its primary maritime assets, on terms your own Government condemns in loan‑sharking legislation.

ACTION REQUESTED
We call for a full Parliamentary Select Committee inquiry into the “Port‑for‑People” trade‑off and the immediate cessation of forced removals to Nigeria until a full, independent security assessment is completed.

III. PRESS‑READY PUBLIC STATEMENT

For media, civil society and public circulation.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

UK–Nigeria Deal Condemned as “Port‑for‑People Trade‑Off” in Explosive Open Letter to Prime Minister

Gold Emmanuel has issued a blistering open letter to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, accusing his government of reviving colonial‑era mercantilism under the guise of a £746 million export finance deal with Nigeria. The letter alleges that:
– Britain ring‑fenced £236 million for UK firms, including £70 million for British Steel
– The deal forces Nigeria to assume debt for what is effectively a UK domestic subsidy
– The migration pact attached to the deal violates the 1951 Refugee Convention
– Deportations are being accelerated despite escalating jihadist violence in Nigeria

A petition has been submitted to Parliament calling for:
– Suspension of all deportations to Nigeria
– A Select Committee inquiry
– A full review of the UK’s use of “UK Letters” for forced removals

“This is not partnership,” Emmanuel writes. “It is extraction dressed as diplomacy.”

IV. PARLIAMENTARY BRIEFING NOTE

For MPs, Lords, Select Committees.

BRIEFING: UK–Nigeria Export Finance & Migration Partnership

Key Issues:
– Legal: Potential breach of Article 33 of the Refugee Convention
– Financial: UKEF structure shifts all risk to Nigeria
– Industrial: £236m ring‑fenced for UK suppliers
– Security: Deportations to active conflict zones
– Ethical: Migration conditionality tied to infrastructure credit

Recommendation: Immediate Select Committee inquiry and suspension of removals pending security assessment.

V. INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS SUBMISSION VERSION

For UNHCR, OHCHR, Amnesty, HRW.

SUBMISSION: UK–Nigeria Migration Protocol and Risk of Refoulement

The UK’s use of “UK Letters” for expedited removals to Nigeria constitutes:
– A circumvention of Article 33 (non‑refoulement)
– A violation of the requirement for individualised risk assessment
– A breach of UNHCR guidance on returns to conflict zones

The situation in Kwara State and the Middle Belt demonstrates a real risk of serious harm, making forced returns unlawful under international human rights standards.

Requested Action:
Urgent review and public statement from relevant bodies.

Copied

Opinion

Why Investing in People Outperforms Every Resource on Earth

Published

6 days ago

March 21, 2026

Eric

By Tolulope A. Adegoke, PhD

“The truest measure of a nation’s riches lies not in the depths of its mines or the breadth of its fields, but in the minds, hearts, and hands of its people—created in divine image, called to steward creation, and destined to multiply possibilities through faithful cultivation and wise leadership.” – Tolulope A. Adegoke, PhD

In an era defined by finite natural resources, rapid technological change, and global interdependence, a profound truth resonates across philosophy, faith, economics, and management: the greatest wealth is not buried beneath the earth in minerals, oil, or soil, but stands upon it in the form of human beings. This perspective challenges the traditional fixation on extractive riches and redirects attention to the living, creative, and relational capacity of people. Far from a poetic sentiment, it represents a divinely ordained reality, empirically validated across nations, and strategically indispensable for unlocking possibilities at every level of human endeavor—among individuals and communities (peoples), within corporations, and across entire nations.

This comprehensive examination draws upon timeless biblical revelation, rigorous empirical data from global institutions such as the World Bank and the Institute for Economics and Peace, and established principles from strategic management theory to demonstrate that humans constitute the ultimate resource. As stewards created in the image of God, people possess inherent dignity, creativity, and dominion that no mineral deposit or fossil fuel can replicate. Investing in human potential—through education, health, skills, and ethical empowerment—yields exponential returns that transcend material extraction and deliver sustainable prosperity, innovation, and resilience.

Biblical Foundations: Humans as God’s Image-Bearers and Vicegerents

The scriptural narrative establishes human beings as the pinnacle of creation and the greatest earthly asset long before modern economics articulated the concept. In Genesis 1:26–28, God declares, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” This declaration is not incidental; it links the imago Dei—the image of God—with the mandate of dominion. Humans are entrusted with responsible stewardship over creation precisely because they reflect divine attributes: rationality, creativity, relationality, moral agency, and purposeful productivity.

This truth is echoed in Psalm 8:4–6, where the psalmist marvels, “What is man that you are mindful of him, and the son of man that you care for him? Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor. You have given him dominion over the works of your hands.” Humanity’s crowning with glory underscores intrinsic worth that far surpasses any natural resource. Unlike oil reserves that deplete or mineral veins that exhaust, human potential compounds through generations when nurtured.

The New Testament reinforces this dignity. Jesus’ teachings, such as the Parable of the Talents in Matthew 25:14–30, portray God as entrusting resources to servants for multiplication through faithful stewardship—symbolizing the investment in human capacity rather than hoarding material wealth. The apostle Paul further affirms in Colossians 3:10 that believers are renewed “in knowledge after the image of its creator,” emphasizing ongoing development of the mind and spirit. These passages collectively reveal that God ordained humans—not the ground beneath them—as the primary vehicle for realizing creation’s possibilities. Dominion is exercised not through exploitation but through creative cultivation, innovation, and relational justice, making every person a living repository of divine potential.

Empirical Evidence: Human Capital as the Driver of Productivity and National Prosperity

Contemporary data unequivocally validate this ancient insight. The World Bank’s Human Capital Index Plus (HCI+) 2026 report provides compelling global evidence that human development accounts for up to two-thirds of cross-country income differences. The index measures the expected productivity of a child born today based on health, education, and employment outcomes extending to age 65. Striking disparities emerge: GDP per hour worked in the world’s ten most productive countries exceeds that of the ten least productive nations by more than thirty times. These gaps stem not primarily from natural resource endowments but from deficits in nutrition, learning, and workforce skills.

The report reveals sobering realities: 86 out of 129 low- and middle-income countries experienced stagnation or regression in key human capital components between 2010 and 2025. Deficits in these areas are projected to cost children born today approximately half of their potential future earnings. Conversely, countries that prioritize human investment outperform expectations relative to their GDP per capita. High relative performers include Vietnam, India, Malaysia, Jamaica, Kenya, and the Kyrgyz Republic—nations that have leveraged education, health, and skills to drive growth despite modest natural resources.

This pattern refutes the “resource curse” documented in seminal studies, such as Jeffrey Sachs and Andrew Warner’s 1997 analysis, which found that economies heavily dependent on natural resource exports in 1970 grew more slowly over subsequent decades. In contrast, resource-scarce yet human-rich nations have achieved remarkable transformations. South Korea’s economic miracle from 1960 to 1979 was propelled by massive investments in education and productivity rather than physical capital alone. Human capital and total factor productivity explained growth per worker comparably to physical investments, enabling the country to rise from post-war poverty to global industrial leadership without significant mineral wealth.

Singapore offers an equally compelling case. With virtually no natural resources, it achieved a 2023 Human Development Index of 0.946 (ranking among the world’s highest) through deliberate policies in education, healthcare, and skills development. Its transformation from a trading port to a knowledge-based economy illustrates how human ingenuity creates value where raw materials cannot. Japan and Israel similarly demonstrate resilience: Japan rebuilt after World War II through human capital intensity, while Israel—often called the “Start-Up Nation”—thrives on innovation ecosystems fueled by educated citizens despite arid land and limited conventional resources.

Longitudinal cross-country analyses, including Robert Barro’s 1991 study on economic growth, consistently show that higher human capital (measured by schooling and health) correlates with elevated investment rates, lower fertility (enabling demographic dividends), and sustained GDP growth. These empirical patterns confirm that humans are not merely consumers of resources but creators who multiply value exponentially.

Professional Management and Strategic Evidence: Humans as the VRIO Source of Competitive Advantage

Strategic management theory elevates this empirical reality into actionable frameworks. Gary Becker’s pioneering Human Capital (1964, expanded 1975 and 1993) treated education, training, and health as investments analogous to physical capital. Becker demonstrated that such investments yield measurable returns in earnings, productivity, and national growth—explaining the “residual” in economic models that physical capital and labor alone could not account for. Organizations and societies that systematically enhance human capabilities realize compounding advantages.

Peter Drucker, the father of modern management, famously observed in the late 20th century that “the most valuable assets of a 20th-century company were its production equipment. The most valuable asset of a 21st-century institution… will be its knowledge workers and their productivity.” Drucker foresaw the shift to a knowledge economy where human intellect, creativity, and adaptability become the decisive factors. In today’s context of artificial intelligence and digital transformation, this insight has only intensified: technology amplifies human potential but cannot replace the judgment, innovation, and relational intelligence that define knowledge work.

The Resource-Based View (RBV) of the firm, formalized by Jay Barney in his 1991 seminal paper “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage,” provides the strategic capstone. According to RBV, resources deliver sustained advantage when they are Valuable, Rare, Inimitable, and Organized (VRIO). Human capital frequently satisfies all four criteria: it is valuable for generating economic rents; rare in its unique combinations of skills and experience; difficult to imitate due to path-dependent development and tacit knowledge; and organizable through culture, leadership, and systems. Empirical assessments of RBV confirm that firms prioritizing talent development outperform peers reliant on tangible assets. Companies such as Microsoft under Satya Nadella or Google (Alphabet) have achieved market dominance not through superior physical infrastructure but through relentless investment in attracting, developing, and retaining exceptional human talent.

Indispensable Roles: Delivering Possibilities Across Peoples, Corporations, and Nations

At the level of peoples (individuals and communities), humans as the greatest resource translate divine image-bearing into personal agency and collective uplift. Education and health investments empower individuals to exercise dominion creatively—innovating solutions, building families, and fostering communities. Empirical returns are clear: each additional year of schooling can increase individual earnings by 8–10 percent globally, while healthy populations contribute to demographic dividends that accelerate societal progress.

In corporations, strategic human capital management drives innovation, adaptability, and stakeholder value. Talent-centric organizations cultivate cultures of continuous learning, psychological safety, and ethical purpose. They outperform asset-heavy competitors by leveraging knowledge workers to navigate disruption, as evidenced in Deloitte’s 2026 Global Human Capital Trends, which highlight that competitive advantage increasingly depends on human-edge scaling amid AI proliferation. Corporations that treat employees as investments rather than costs achieve higher engagement, retention, and long-term profitability.

For nations, human resource development constitutes the foundation of sovereignty, resilience, and inclusive growth. Policies that prioritize universal health, quality education, and lifelong skills—aligned with the World Bank’s HCI+ recommendations—reduce inequality, mitigate shocks (from pandemics to climate events), and position countries for participation in the global knowledge economy. Nations ignoring this reality risk stagnation, while those embracing it, as Singapore and South Korea have, convert human potential into geopolitical influence and shared prosperity.

Relevance to All-Round Leadership and Global/National Security: Empirical Foundations and Strategic Imperatives

The recognition of humans as the greatest wealth extends profoundly into the realm of all-round leadership and security, where human capital emerges as the indispensable foundation for holistic governance, resilience, and sustainable peace. All-round leadership—integrating self-mastery, visionary foresight, relational wisdom, strategic execution, team alignment, and ethical integrity—cannot flourish in isolation from a well-nurtured populace. Biblical leadership models, such as Nehemiah’s reconstruction of Jerusalem’s walls (Nehemiah 4–6), illustrate this synergy: wise, prayerful, and inclusive leadership combined with empowered citizens to restore both physical and spiritual security. Proverbs 29:18 reinforces the principle: “Where there is no vision, the people perish,” underscoring that visionary leaders depend on developed human potential to translate ideals into enduring stability.

Empirically, the Institute for Economics and Peace’s Global Peace Index 2025 and its Positive Peace framework provide robust international-standard evidence. Positive Peace comprises eight interconnected pillars that build resilience and prevent conflict, one of which is explicitly “High Levels of Human Capital.” This pillar—centered on education, skills, and health—shows one of the strongest positive correlations with overall peacefulness, well-functioning government, low corruption, and equitable resource distribution. Countries ranking high on the Human Capital Index consistently occupy the top positions in the Global Peace Index: Iceland, New Zealand, and the Nordic nations demonstrate how sustained investment in people generates not only economic vitality but also societal cohesion and institutional trust that underpin national security.

In contrast, nations trapped in the resource curse—rich in minerals yet deficient in human capital—exhibit heightened insecurity, including internal conflict, governance fragility, and vulnerability to external shocks. The IEP data reveal that improvements in human capital are among the most powerful predictors of sustained Positive Peace, enabling societies to absorb geopolitical, cyber, or environmental disruptions without descending into violence. The World Economic Forum’s Global Risks Report 2026 and Global Cybersecurity Outlook 2026 further corroborate this: human talent gaps exacerbate cyber vulnerabilities, supply-chain fragility, and leadership deficits in crisis response. Organizations and nations with robust human capital pipelines, by contrast, exhibit superior resilience through adaptive leadership and collective intelligence.

Strategically, all-round leadership thrives when human resources are cultivated as the primary asset. Harvard Business Impact’s 2025 Global Leadership Development Study highlights that organizations prioritizing human capital development produce leaders who excel in navigating volatility, fostering innovation, and upholding ethical standards—precisely the qualities required for 21st-century security challenges. At the national level, this translates into comprehensive security: not merely military defense but human security encompassing economic stability, food sovereignty, cyber defense, and social harmony. Singapore’s transformation and Israel’s innovation-driven defense ecosystem exemplify how human-centered strategies convert potential vulnerability into strategic strength. Investing in people thus becomes both a divine mandate and a pragmatic security imperative, creating resilient leaders and societies capable of stewarding peace amid uncertainty.

Conclusion: A Divine and Strategic Imperative for Investment

The greatest wealth is indeed not in the ground but on the ground—embodied in every human life created in God’s image. Biblical revelation affirms this dignity and dominion; empirical data from the World Bank’s HCI+ 2026, the Institute for Economics and Peace’s Global Peace Index 2025, and decades of econometric research demonstrate its productivity, leadership, and security dividends; and strategic frameworks from Becker, Drucker, and Barney prove its competitive necessity. Across individuals, corporations, nations, leadership, and security architectures, humans deliver possibilities that no extractive industry can match: innovation that solves intractable problems, relationships that build trust and cohesion, visionary governance that prevents conflict, and stewardship that sustains creation for future generations.

The call to action is both spiritual and pragmatic: invest sacrificially in people through education, healthcare, ethical leadership development, inclusive opportunity, and Positive Peace-building initiatives. In doing so, societies honor their Creator, unlock exponential value, fulfill the dominion mandate responsibly, and fortify all-round leadership and security in an interdependent world. In a world tempted by short-term extraction, the timeless truth endures—true riches walk upon the ground, bearing the image of God and the potential to transform everything they touch. Nations, organizations, and communities that recognize and cultivate this reality will not merely survive but flourish, leaving legacies of abundance, wise leadership, and enduring peace for generations yet to come.

Dr. Tolulope A. Adegoke, AMBP-UN is a globally recognized scholar-practitioner and thought leader at the nexus of security, governance, and strategic leadership. His mission is dedicated to advancing ethical governance, strategic human capital development, and resilient nation-building, and global peace. He can be reached via: tolulopeadegoke01@gmail.com, globalstageimpacts@gmail.com

Opinion

My Dear Brother, Dele Momodu by Segun Adeyemi

Published

6 days ago

March 21, 2026

Eric

Permit me to go straight to the heart of this message.

I can no longer pretend that I have not been following the deeply troubling and increasingly vile exchanges involving you and others in recent times.

What has now become a public brawl is unfolding on social media, an arena without boundaries, without gatekeepers and, it would seem, without red lines.

Social media is a most unforgiving theatre. Whatever is said there acquires a troubling permanence.

Long after we are gone, generations yet unborn need only type a name, and every word, spoken or hurled, rises again, fresh and unrelenting.

Should that not give us pause?

Should it not compel restraint in what we say, and even in what we choose to dignify with a response?

Of all those caught in this fray, you are the one I know, and have known for a very long time.

Our friendship dates back to 1977, a year before we gained admission into UNIFE. We worked together then as clerical officers in the University Library under Mr. Dipeolu (I hope I got that right. If I didn’t, I can be forgiven. It’s almost half a century ago).

That was long before fame found you. You were grounded, witty, perceptive and street-smart, yet deeply studious. Innovative. Brilliant. We competed, not in vanity, but in intellect, over the books we had read, the ideas we had encountered.

And we read, voraciously. How could we not, with the rare privilege of unfettered access to a university’s intellectual treasury?

We also had fun, maximum fun. We drank palm wine. We drank beer. We partied. We chased babes.

I remember accompanying you, many times, to visit your dear mother, of blessed memory, at her shop near the palace. She feted us each time. Ever so kind. Ever so motherly.

I recall meeting your brother, Dr. Ajayi, newly returned then, whose sports car was the talk of the town.

I reach back into these memories not out of nostalgia alone, but to establish my bona fides to write you this note, to remind you that I knew you before the noise, before the crowd and before the many voices that now speak at you and about you.

You have always earned your place through hard work, discipline and intellect. Many don’t know this, sadly. They only see the fun-loving Publisher of a popular society magazine.

I am not concerned here with who is right or wrong, nor with what ignited this present _Ija’gboro_, this no-holds-barred street fight where everything becomes a weapon, including shared history and past goodwill.

My concern is you, my friend, my colleague, my brother.

For the sake of all you hold dear; for the memory of your mother, whose dignity and values you carry; and for the sake of God, I urge you: find an off-ramp from this vicious freeway. Step away from this corrosive spiral now.

You are not the sum of the insults hurled at you. You are not the distortion others attempt to project. No.

You will recall that in those Ife days, you held British Philosopher Bertrand Russell in high regard. Russell once observed:

_”The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.”_

Wisdom, my brother, often lies in restraint, in knowing when to disengage from the theatre of noise.

And perhaps you also read the works of another Philosopher, German Friedrich Nietzsche, whose haunting warning feels especially apt at a time like this:

_”He who fights with monsters should be careful lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you.”_

There is yet another truth, often echoed across ages: when one descends into the arena with a beast, the spectators, in time, cease to know the difference. I didn’t say this to insult your opponents in this shameful arena. They are not my concern here.

I say this with all the affection and sincerity of a brother: rise above this moment. Withdraw your dignity from the marketplace of insults. Let silence, where necessary, speak louder than rebuttal.

May God guide your thoughts, guard your words and steady your steps at this time.

Yours ever so sincerely,

Segun ADEYEMI, a veteran journalist