Prof Mike Ozekhome SAN

INTRODUCTION

Nigeria is naturally blessed and endowed amongst the comity of nations, this is notwithstanding her chequered colonial history, and the fight for nationalism. As the largest black race in Africa, often referred to as – “the big brother”, she is blessed beyond measures, but regrettably – beyond resource control. The presence of crude oil in the Nigerian soil has made it topical issues de – die – in – diem. The clamour for equitable and fair benefits of same, led to economic and security disruption by some indigenous groups in the Niger Delta region. The region has been the centre of environment encroachment and degradation, inhumane living conditions and zero attention by the government and multi-national companies on concessions. Life in this region is – brutish, nasty, solitary and wicked. Life is almost unbearable by the residents. The lack of democracy, the dividends and concern by government, couple with greedy influential elites, led to rapid and religious oil theft, bunkering and vandalization of oil pipelines in the region. This vista discusses oil theft in Nigeria, where it takes place, how it takes place, who commits this theft, why the theft, and the attendant cost of same to the economic future of the nation.

Nigeria, the giant of Africa, is the second largest oil and gas producer in Africa. Crude oil is majorly produced from the Niger Delta basin in two types: light, and comparatively heavy. The lighter has around 36 gravities while the heavier has 20–25 gravities. Both types are paraffinic and low in Sulphur. Throughout successive years, incomes and revenues generated from the oil and gas sector have accounted largely for supporting the economy and budget of the nation. The income and revenues also account for high level of the entire Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Nigeria is a major exporter of crude oil and petroleum resources to the United States of America. In 2010, Nigeria exported over one million barrels per day to the US, representing 9% of the U.S total crude oil and petroleum products.

HISTORY OF OIL EXPLORATION

Oil exploration originally dates back to 1903, when the Nigerian Bitumen Corporation carried out exploration in the Niger Delta territory. However, the firm’s operations were stopped due World War 1. Later, licences were granted to D’Arcy Exploration Company and Whitehall Petroleum, but same were returned by 1923 due to lack of discovery of oil in commercial quantity. There was an association of Shell D’Arcy Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria, a consortium of Shel and BP – which commenced work 1937. Oil drilling commenced during 1951 in Owerri, and non – commercial quantity was discovered in Akata, near Eket in 1953.

In a bid to discover oil in commercial quantity, the Oloibiri oilfield was discovered in May, 1956. The Oloibiri Oilfield is an onshore oilfield located in Oloibiri in Ogbia LGA of Bayelsa State, Nigeria. It is located about 45 miles (72 km) east of Port Harcourt in the Niger Delta. The field is about 13.75 square kilometres (5.31 sq mi) and lies in a swamp within OML 29.

The field was originally operated by Shell D’Arcy, which changed its name to Shell-BP Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Limited on 30th April, 1956. Currently, the field is operated by Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Limited (SPDC). Other wells discovered are the Afam and Bomu wells in Ogoni territory.

Towards the end of the 1950s, non-British firms were granted licence to explore for oil: Mobil in 1955, Tenneco in 1960, Gulf Oil, (later Chevron in 1961); Agip in 1962; and Elf in 1962. Prior to the discovery of oil, Nigeria (like many other African countries) strongly relied on agricultural exports to supply its economy. The first oil field at Oloibiri began production in 1958.

Now, it would have been naturally expected that, with these resources, Nigerian citizens would cry no more, and worry no more; but the reverse is the case. Government takes almost all the benefits; the citizens are left with nothing; while rich elites illegally smuggle oil out the country.

Having blazed the history, albeit briefly, we shall now embark on the kernel of this discourse, using the guide from the W3HC.

WHERE IS OIL THEFT CARRIED OUT?

Oil theft is actualized at different points of operations, ranging from the creeks, refineries, roads, waters, etc. It majorly takes place in states where oil is being produced. On July 27, 2023, Tribuneonline.ng.com reported that the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) has disclosed that Nigeria recorded a total of 240 crude oil theft incidents in one week. It said between the 15th and 21st of July, 2023, the incidents were recorded at various parts of the Niger Delta. In a breakdown, it said out of the total incidents, 69 illegal refineries were discovered and destroyed in Uppata and Abua communities in Rivers State, alone.

Also, it said, 27 cases of pipeline vandalism cases were also recorded and repaired, while 30 wooden boats used to convey stolen crude were confiscated in the past week. Interestingly, 13 automatic identification system infractions were flagged using NNPC’s maritime intelligence system and has been escalated to the Navy through NNPCL’S Incidence Management and Reporting Application; while two illegal vessels were arrested and five cases of oil spills were recorded. Note that 13 of these incidences were recorded in the deep blue water; 41 of these incidences were recorded in the Western Region of the Niger- Delta. 169 recorded in the Central Region; while 17 took place in the Eastern part of the-Niger Delta oil-producing region.

Meanwhile, the NNPCL had earlier in July announced that a private security contractor it engaged (Tantila Ltd) intercepted an 800,000-liter capacity vessel with stolen crude oil. The Vessel, MT TURA II (IMO number: 6620462), owned by a Nigerian Registered Company, HOLAB MARITIME SERVICES LIMITED with Registration Number RC813311, was said to be heading to Cameroun with the Cargo when it was apprehended. It said preliminary investigations revealed that the crude oil cargo onboard was illegally sourced from a well jacket offshore in Ondo State, Nigeria.

In Delta State, thieves have built their own 4k.m- (2.5 mile) long pipeline through heavily guarded creeks to the Atlantic Ocean. There, barges and vessels are blatantly and professionally loaded with the stolen oil from a 24-foot rig visible from miles on the open waters.
How do we continue like this?

WHODUNIT?

To succeed in any oil theft, collaboration and firm synergy by species of participants and implementation of their various functions is sacrosanct. The process is situational and complex in nature, depending on the level of the oil theft in question. In large-scale and illegal oil bunkering, corrupt officials in the oil sector allow successful operations of theft. The most appalling fact is that our security agents serve as escort in transporting the stolen crude products. Also, most local citizens in the Niger Delta who are participants in the oil theft trade assist in the illegal refinery of stolen crude oil products and sell them at black markets in local villages.

Speaking during the ministerial briefing by the Presidential Communications team at the State House, Abuja in August, 2022, Melee Kyari fingered “high placed” Nigerians, including the religious/ community leaders and Government officials, as being fully involved in the theft. No names were mentioned. He also disclosed that stolen products were warehoused in churches and mosques with the knowledge of all members of the society, where the incidents occurred, including the clerics.

Prominent Niger Delta leader and former agitator, Mujahid Asari Dokubo, in Abuja, alleged that the bulk cases of oil theft recorded in the oil-rich region are traceable to the Nigerian Army and Navy.

“The military is at the centre of oil theft and we have to make this very clear to the Nigerian public that 99 per cent of oil theft can be traced to the Nigerian military, the Army and the Navy especially,” Dokubo told State House correspondents after he met Bola Tinubu behind closed doors at the Aso Rock Villa, Abuja. He continued thus: “We’re going to walk with an NPPCL and the IOCs to make sure that oil tapped is brought to zero.”, “The blackmail of the Nigerian state by the Nigerian military is shameful. They said they do not have enough armament and people listen to these false narratives. So this blackmail must end. They have enough resources to fight.”

This is appalling, to say the least. Therefore, we shall examine the following as major accomplices in oil theft (bunkering):

MILITARY AND OTHER SECURITY FORCES

Upon the wake of large-scale production if oil, the presidency of Ibrahim Babangida from 1986 to 1993 and his appointment of officials to supervise the oil producing sectors, the Nigerian military has maintained extensive control over the crude oil trade. The military personnel and Joint-Task Force members that are involved in the illegal oil trade primarily serve as armed escorts for the stolen petroleum products during large-scale operations and gather the intelligence that is necessary for avoiding government probes in the region. Involved in this unholy trade are principally the Navy, supported by the Army, Airforce, Police, Customs, NDLEA, Civil Defence, Militants, Political Elites and Government Officials; Oil Companies; communities; local chiefs and sundry religious leaders.

The Nigerian Navy being charged with security on water, frequently and actively seize vessels containing stolen petroleum products from one destination to another. Regrettably, and Pitiably for this nation, accusations are being made against this security forces for oil theft facilitation. The disappearance of captured vessels and re-appropriated sets of seized products to foreign markets is a nagging problem. Also, security agents also pursue oil bunkering allegations against colleagues as means of absorbing sectors of the oil trade and strengthening individual positions in the regions. The albatross of these is that even these top officials are not being investigated and prosecuted, as they enjoy political immunity from the underdogs. The Buhari administration that promised to fight corruption, failed celebratedly. We are in a mess.

THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK

“A century ago, petroleum – what we call oil – was just an obscure commodity; today it is almost as vital to human existence as water”. (James Buchan).

By Prof Mike Ozekhome SAN

INTRODUCTION

In our first instalment in this treatise, we x-rayed the meaning and concept of integrity and human rights after which we looked at the historical sources of human rights. Today, we shall continue and conclude the historical sources of human rights in Nigeria and other countries. We shall later take a critical look at integrity and protection of human rights, the copenhagen document and then conclusion.

HISTORICAL SOURCES OF HUMAN RIGHTS (Continues)

The UDHR has served as a template for subsequent human rights instruments and has had a positive impact on the legal, political, and cultural evolutions of nations and remains the mirror by which every individual and every organ of society” reflects on human rights.

Since the adoption and promulgation of the UDHR 1948, the United Nations has not wavered in its commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights. This explains the subsequent numerous resolutions, declarations and conventions which have been passed in the area of human rights. So important the issue of human rights that virtually all Constitutions, the world over, make provisions for human rights either in the preamble or in the substantive provisions.

AFRICA

In Africa for instance, except for Tanzania, where reference to human right’? is to be found in the preamble to the Constitution, and Malawi where human rights provisions embodied in substantive provisions of independence Constitution were replaced by the generalised references to human rights in the “Fundamental Principles of Government” section on the adoption of the Republican Constitution of 1966, most African constitutions include In their substantive sections provisions for human rights.

NIGERIA

In Nigerian Constitutions, beginning from the post-independence Constitution, due attention has always been given to the issue of human rights. In the 1960 independence Constitution 1963 Republican Constitutions 1979 Constitution. provisions were made for human rights protection. Further, in the 1999 Constitution (as amended), two Chapters spanning 26 (twenty six) sections are devoted to human rights subject. The need for constitutional provisions for human rights cannot be over-emphasised because, it is the state, with its vinous institutions which is primarily responsible for guaranteeing the implementation and enforcement of these rights in respect of its citizens and all those coming under its jurisdiction.

INTEGRITY AND PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

To protect human rights is to ensure that people receive some degree of decent, humane treatment. Responsibility to protect human rights resides first and foremost with the states themselves. However, in many cases, public authorities and government officials institute policies that violate basic human rights. Such abuses of power by political leaders and state authorities have devastating effects. What can be done to safeguard human rights when those in power are responsible for human rights violations?

This is where the importance of integrity cannot be over-emphasised. John Rawls identified the virtues of integrity as “truthfulness and sincerity, lucidity and commitment. Therefore, a democratic government has an obligation arising from its democratic nature to practice authenticity towards citizens, those to whom it is responsible Government, to carry out the protection of human rights in truthfulness and sincerity, lucidity and outmost commitment, since integrity ranks among a democratic government’s primary virtues. Sincere and effective protection of human rights therefore, depends on the compliance of a state and its government, with its human rights obligations.

Establishing a constitutional model in which all human rights are effectively protected is not an easy task. It requires elaborate legislation, effective control over state institutions such as the law enforcement agencies and continuous efforts on the part of numerous other state organs.

The struggle of many countries in Eastern Europe and Africa, which changed from absolutist rule to democracy, to comply with the requirements of democracy and protection of human rights – especially regarding questions of multiparty democracy and effective remedies before national courts – demonstrates the enormous efforts and time that may be needed to ensure effective domestic compliance.

THE COPENHAGEN DOCUMENT

For instance, the 1990 Copenhagen document of the CSCE spells out in detail what internal compliance and integrity in human rights protection may require, inter alia:

• Free elections that will be held at reasonable intervals by secret ballot or by equivalent free voting procedure, under conditions which ensure in practice the free expression of the opinion of the electors in the choice of their representatives.

• A form of government that is representative in character, in which the executive is accountable to the elected legislature or the electorate.

For instance, in the case of I.G.P. v. A.N.P.P (2007) 18 NWLR (Pt. 1066) 457 at 496, paras. C – E (CA)” it was held, that: “The rights to freedom of assembly and freedom of expression are the bone of any democratic form of government. Besides their embodiment in the supreme law of the land, the 1999 Constitution, and the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights adopted as Ratification and Enforcement Act Cap. 10, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990, a plethora of decisions of Nigerian courts have endorsed same. A government which owe its tenure of office to the pleasure of the electorate will always take the issue of protection of human right seriously. Knowing very well that failure to do so will spell its political doom unlike an autocratic or other authoritarian forms of government where the government places itself above the people, rights are bound to be violated ‘with reckless abandon.

• The duty of the government and public authorities to comply with the Constitution and to act in a manner consistent with law;

• The activity of the government and the administration as well as that of the judiciary will be exercised in accordance with the system established by law; respect for that system must be ensured;

• Human rights and fundamental freedoms will be guaranteed by law and in accordance with their obligations under international law; All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law; the law will prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground;

• Everyone will have an effective means of redress against administrative decisions, so as to guarantee respect for fundamental rights and ensure legal integrity;

• Administrative decisions against a person must be fully justifiable and must as a rule indicate the usual remedies available; and

• The independence of judges and the impartial operation of the public judicial service will be ensured. Principles of fair trial are guaranteed and access to justice, to effective remedies, is secured.

Furthermore, to comply with human rights obligations, a state must establish foundations for the rule in accordance with the Constitution will simply display integrity by respecting human rights as enshrined in the Constitution.

• An executive branch that does not abuse discretionary power and seeks to promote the enjoyment of human rights by all under its jurisdiction.

This is in line with the doctrine of Separation of powers as espoused Philosophers and Jurists such as Aristotle, Saint Augustine, John Calvin, Hans Kelsen., John Locke, A.V. Dicey, and of which the fore-most proponent is the French Jurist, Baron de Montesquieu. Montesquieu, argued in the Spirit of Law. that the division between the executive (the legislative institution, which represents the will of the people, and is chosen by free elections held at reasonable intervals under conditions which ensure in practice the free expression of the opinion of the electors in the choice of their representatives. The legislative body should legislate in compliance with international human rights commitments.

A judiciary that protects the human rights of individuals and groups against arbitrary legislative power and guarantees effective remedies and fair trial.

The Spirit of the Laws (De l’esprit des lois, also sometimes called The Spirit of Laws) is a treatise on political theory first published anonymously by Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu in 1748 with the help of Claudine Guerin de Tencin. Originally published anonymously partly because Montesquieu’s works were subject to censorship, its influence outside of France was aided by its rapid translation into other languages. In 1750 Thomas Nugent published the first English translation. In 1751 the Catholic Church added L’esprit des lois to its Index

Librorum Prohibitorum (“List of Prohibited Books”). Yet Montesquieu’s political treatise had an enormous influence on the work of many others, most notably: Catherine the Great, who produced Nakaz (Instruction); the Founding Fathers of the United States Constitution; and Alexis de Tocqueville, who applied Montesquieu’s methods to a study of American society, in Democracy in America. Macaulay offers us a hint of Montesquieu’s importance when he writes in his 1827 essay entitled “Machiavelli” that “Montesquieu enjoys, perhaps, a wider celebrity ‘than any political writer of modern Europe.” Montesquieu spent nearly twenty years researching and writing L’esprit des lois (The Spirit of the Laws), covering many things like the monarch) and the legislature (parliament), which itself was divided between the House of Lords (the aristocracy) and the House of Commons (the people) should, in theory, helps to secure the integrity of the institutions, prevent a concentration of power and promote liberty because the making and enforcing of laws are separated and inexpedient laws or dangerous actions are prevented.

Montesquieu had his greatest influence on the founding fathers of the US, and in particular on James Madison. Madison famously noted that the accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. Where tyranny reigns, human rights take back stage.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, I submit, most respectfully, that in the protection of human rights by any form of government, integrity is a sine qua non. Leaders must imbibe the tenets of integrity in the application of the Constitution, laws and rules. A Leader must understand and appreciate the fact that every human being reserves a great level of autonomy which should not be tampered with in furtherance of selfish aggradisement. Where leaders of a law, social life, and the study of anthropology and providing more than 3,000 commendations.

In this political treatise Montesquieu pleaded in favor of a constitutional system of government and the separation of powers, the ending of slavery, the preservation of civil liberties and the law, and the idea that political institutions ought to reflect the social and geographical aspects of each community.

Thought for the week

“One of the truest tests of integrity is its blunt refusal to be compromised”. (Chinua Achebe).

By Prof Mike Ozekhome SAN

I have just read a most sensational story about the EFCC saying it is still looking for Bello with a view to arraigning him next Thursday. This afterthought step is most unprofessional for God’s sake. I want to believe that the EFCC’s Executive Chairman, Mr Olanipekun Olukoyede, a brilliant lawyer and regulatory compliance consultant who had himself been a former Secretary to the Commission and also Chief of Staff to the then Chairman, Mr Ibrahim Magu, was not aware of this great solecism. It is everywhere on the internet, traditional and social media how the former Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello accompanied by his successor, Governor Usman Ododo, voluntarily physically submitted himself to the EFCC’s headquarters and waited for over three hours to be interviewed.

Pictures showed that he even met physically with the Chief of Staff to the Chairman, Mr Michael Nzekwe (himself a senior lawyer and experienced investigator), but that he was told to go home; only for the same EFCC to lay siege much later on the Kogi State government lodge in Abuja, allegedly seeking to arrest the same Bello who had earlier in the day voluntarily submitted himself for interrogation. It just does not add up. And it just does not make sense to me at all.

Is it that the EFCC was gravely taken aback by the sudden and unexpected appearance in their office of Bello whom it had been looking for since April this year? Or is it that the Commission felt short-changed and belittled by not having the last laugh, pleasure and self-satiation and glorification of physically arresting, chaining and embarrassing Bello so as to later gloat over it in the public domain? I do not and cannot understand this curious twist which appears more like a drama movie piece from Baba Sala’s Alawada Kerikeri histrionic stable. Why this sensational media trial, a needless warped investigative stratagem devoid of hallowed professionalism which I have condemned over the years?

I advise the Chairman, Olukoyede, to immediately investigate his officers over this faux pas and bring them to book for embarrassing the EFCC and subjecting Nigeria’s image to the mud before global circles. Yahaya Bello should go to court and defend himself of the allegations against him, whether malicious, false or well founded. That is the way to go. But the EFCC should also allow Bello have his day in court like other Nigerian citizens under a conducive atmosphere devoid of media trial, harassment and intimidation so as to ensure his fair trial.

Afterall, the Nigerian criminal justice system remains the accusatorial Anglo-Saxon model (where a citizen’s innocence is presumed); as against the Inquisitorial French model (where his guilty is presumed). This presumption of innocence has been entrenched in section 36 of the 1999 Constitution.

A media trial such as we have witnessed since April this year violently detracts and derogates from fair trial as it tars an otherwise innocent accused person with an already guilty paintbrush of shame, odium, obloquy, derision and dehumanization even before he has been arraigned, tried and found guilty by a court of competent jurisdiction. It should NEVER BE.