By Prof Mike Ozekhome SAN

INTRODUCTION

The first part of this treatise commenced appropriately enough with a diagnosis of the problem, with an analysis of how we ‘lost it’ after which we considered the depth of the challenge, the critical situation which presently confronts us. Today, we shall x-ray the prognosis – poor leadership, lack of an autochtonous Constitution and the ambiguous status of local governments. We shall then consider whether peace separation is a solution or not. Please read on.

PROGNOSIS

So, what is the way forward? How do we achieve the Nigeria of our dreams? How can we make democracy work for us? To be sure, there is no fail-safe or fool-proof prescription which, when applied, will suddenly transform Nigeria into an Eldorado or utopia overnight. The cliché might be well-worn, but it is nevertheless, apposite: democracy is a journey, not a destination. Therefore, the challenge – our challenge, all of us collectively – is to commit to imbibing, applying or adopting time-tested ethical values or ethos which have worked for more successful democracies across the world, including some (like the Asian Tigers, Singapore, Hongkong, South Korea, and Taiwan) which – like Nigeria – were once (not too long ago) classed as developing or third-world countries. Indeed, at independence, some of them were arguably less developed than Nigeria. So, what did they get right and we got right? That is the question.

THE BANE IS LEADERSHIP

The answer to this all-important question lies in the socio-political environment in which those seeming miracles took place. While, virtually all those countries had their fair share of military dictatorships and non-democratic (or unelected) central governments, the unmistakable common thread or denominator that they all share is that their leaders were able to galvanize their people to focus on and pursue a common goal: national unity as a bedrock for economic prosperity and sustainable growth. In other words, LEADERSHIP is key. It might also be axiomatic, but a truly effective and pan-Nigerian, selfless, patriotic and committed leadership has been the single most problematic factor behind our nation’s woes. Without such leadership, any talk of transformation is simply a mirage.

Indeed, democracy itself might even be imperiled. This self-evident fact requires little elaboration, as it takes a patriot – a genuine, committed patriot – who prioritizes that nation’s well-being above petty, partisan, political or ethnic/religious interests to deliver on Nigeria’s promise and potential. In other words, a statesman who can see the big picture and envision a country that thrives on the basis of the supremacy of the rule of law.

THE LACK OF AUTOCHTHONOUS CONSTITUTION

This takes us to the next most important ingredient in the tool-kit: legal and/or constitutional reform, and its sub-text: electoral reform. I have spoken extensively about my belief in the shortcomings of the present Constitution. Those views have not changed. Let me reiterate my position that nothing short of a total overhaul of the military-bequeathed contraption called “the 1999 Constitution” (a mere Schedule attached to Decree 24 of 1999) will have the credibility and legitimacy needed to secure the legitimacy, credibility and acceptance (if not obedience) of the overwhelming majority of Nigeria.

We must fashion a brand new Constitution in the style of the independence (1960) Constitution which was negotiated by the then three regions, North, East and West through their elected leaders; as did America between May and September, 1787 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Unfortunately, military adventurists did not allow that experiment to stand the test of time before truncating it along with the 1st Republic. A corollary to this constitutional overhaul is the (arguably even more important) issue of Electoral Reform. The tradition or practice of a 4-year review of our Electoral Act has not stemmed the incidence of pre-election and post-electoral disputation in courts and tribunals – and even violence. The challenge in his regard (like the other aspects of our multidimensional ills) has been – more than anything else – attitudinal: our political class and their foot soldiers should adopt and internalize the culture of good sportsmanship.

Electoral contests should cease being so bitterly disputed and, should, instead be replaced with the spirit of the winners being magnanimous in victory while the losers are gracious in defeat. Elections are not do-or-die affairs. No. Even in a party democracy where the winner takes it all, our electoral outcomes ought to reflect the spirit of our old-new national anthem so that its revival will be meaningful.

This prescription (coupled with the often-suggested establishment of an Electoral Offences Court as well as the reduction in electoral cases which go up to the Supreme Court) ought to ensure a perceptible (if not quite dramatic) drop in election-related cases – at least those which directly challenge the outcome or results of elections.

AMBIGUOUS STATUS OF LGAs

Still on legal/constitutional reform, a related issue is the ‘ambiguous’ status of the lowest tier of government: local governments. While the Constitution (under Section 7) has always recognized their autonomy, the experience (to everyone’s knowledge) is that they have always been hostage to State Governors who stage-manage their elections and – when the tenures of their ‘elected’ officials expire – replace them with hand-picked cronies who will do their bidding and condone the non-remittance of their statutory allocations directly to them.
To his credit, the Attorney-General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, has interviewed boldly through the pending case at the Supreme Court, which for that very reason, I will say no more.

PEACEFUL SEPARATION?

On a larger level, yet another elephant in the room, is the possibility of peaceful separation from those who desire it. I prefer a big, prosperous, united and stable Nigeria. However, where peaceful co-existence is not possible, what do we do? Kill ourselves? No. this is where I borrow the analysis of a commentator (Aminu Sa’ad Bali – amazingtimesng.com, June 19, 2021), who opined that separation is not necessarily about war. He cited the following as examples of Peaceful Separations:

 In 1776, the USA split from the UK.
 In 1830, Belgium separated from the Netherlands.
 In 1965, Singapore split off from Malaysia.
 In 2002, East Timor got split off from Indonesia.
 In 1921, Ireland split off from the United Kingdom, and (possibly in the future) there will be secession of Scotland.
 In 1944, Iceland split from Denmark with remarkable ease.
 In 1905, Norway split from Denmark.
 In 1905, Norway and Sweden also peacefully split ways.
 In 1947, the British India Dominion was partitioned into India and Pakistan.
 In 1971, Bangladesh seceded from Pakistan.
 In 1992-93, the two parts of Czechoslovakia agreed to each go their own way, leading to two separate countries – the Czech Republic and Slovakia after what’s been named the “Velvet Divorce”.
 About the same time, another kind of separation occurred, in Yugoslavia. Unfortunately, this was accompanied by bloodshed.
 In 1965, Singapore split from Malaysia for reasons, which included religion (Malaysia is majority Muslim, Singapore isn’t), ethnic/racial (Singapore has a very large majority Chinese population) and concerns over the Malaysian Bumiputra policy, which was (and is) basically a form of “Affirmative Action” for Muslim Malaysians – who make up the majority population in Peninsular Malaysia.
 Ethiopia and Eritrea, Sudan and South Sudan are now separate countries.
 The old USSR (Soriet) is now broken down into several independent countries.

To the foregoing, I can agree only to the extent that separation is an avenue for healthy competition for development, as in the case of Singapore and Malaysia, India and Pakistan, Norway/Denmark/Switzerland, etc; but not for the sake of it.

In the case of Nigeria, I foresee a healthy rivalry among the original component parts, the North, West and South, each making useful progress while competing with the others. Accordingly, it is not about war; after all, there is nothing wrong for one to decide he is no longer comfortable with the union and wanting to opt out. We call it self determination – a concept recognized by the UNO Charter.

PERCEPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICE HOLDERS

Related to the question of attitude is public perception at the seeming insensitivity of our public officers. In this regard, a lot of disquiet (if not anger) was generated by the news of legislators earmarking the humongous sums of ₦160m to purchase SUVs for each member of the National Assembly. This development was particularly irksome against the backdrop of the lingering (often contentious) issue of a national minimum wage for public workers with government conceding a mere non-living wage of N60,000. This, coupled with other news of more humongous amounts of money – a minimum of ₦500m reportedly earmarked (in some cases, actually collected/received – as so-called constituency allowances by the legislators, contributes in no small measure in eroding public confidence in democracy – or at least our peculiar brand, if not practice, of it. What about two new presidential jets said to have cost a bleeding country like Nigeria a whopping billions of naira. Nigerians believe that the president and legislators should embrace the somber mood of the country and avoid lawlessness and ostentation.

Once again, it is a question of trust or perception that our leaders are either insensitive or simply out of touch with our common reality: the daily grind which is the reality of the common man, given the sheer (and rising) cost of living, rampant inflation and the ever falling nature of the Naira. So this is another issue that needs to be tackled if democracy is to remain attractive to the average Nigerian as a viable governance model: the insensitivity of our elected representatives to the public perception of their lifestyles and incomes/emoluments/perks of office as being out of sync with the hardship which is their lot, and which, has indeed become a new normal.

Our elected leaders must look inward, and do serious introspection and soul-searching by making conscious, deliberate choices which project them as considerate, frugal and sensitive to the economic realities of the time. They must address the popular belief that part of the pressure on the Naira is caused by their demand for foreign currencies (especially the dollar) which is publicly–perceived to be the currency of choice of the political elite, particularly public office holders. (To be continued).

THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK

“In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way”. – Franklin D. Roosevelt.

By Prof Mike Ozekhome SAN

INTRODUCTION

A quarter of a century is a long time in the life of any nation. Nigeria is not an exception. In our case, it has been the longest period of sustained uninterrupted democracy. During that time, children have been born, come of age and become parents themselves. Democracy is the only form of government they have ever known in Nigeria. Their knowledge of military coups has only been gained from stories told by their parents, history books and news from around the world; and in our case, from neighbouring countries in the West African sub-region.

Twenty-five years is certainly enough time for stock-taking and reflection: are we better off today than we were twenty-five years ago under military rule? Has the experience been worthwhile, or is it a catalogue of missed opportunities? Could we or should we have fared better? What did we do wrong or where did we go wrong? How can we improve going forward? Let us attempt some answers, but first a brief look at the past and its challenges which we inherited in 1999.

DIAGNOSIS

Few analyses of Nigeria’s sustained 25 years of democratic rule are more apposite than its comparison by Ashindorbe and Danjibo with the third of three distinct but overlapping processes of democratisation identified by Nic Cheeseman, as follows: First, the transition, when a country adopts multi-party politics (as we did in 1999). The second phase is the reconstitution of a new political order; and the third phase which consolidates the gains of democracy. I agree with them that “two decades after the reintroduction of civilian rule, Nigeria seems to be stuck in the final phase of the democratization process”.

This is because, notwithstanding the undoubted big strides made since then, Nigeria’s democracy is still very fragile; the dividends of democracy are still not immediately tangible. There is increasing inequality between a tiny affluent minority and the overwhelming majority. “Dividends” being a word borrowed from the corporate world to signify distribution of profits or surplus as dividends to its shareholders, we must begin to ask the question whether Nigeria’s peculiar democracy has actually yielded profit from which dividends are expected by the people. For reasons which I will anon outline, I agree with them that the shift from the transition to the consolidation stages of the democratization continuum will require a deliberate public policy framework directed at, amongst others, addressing the ravages of debilitating poverty and penury; the sanitization of the electoral process; deepening fundamental rights and the rule of law and enhancing inclusion of women and the youth in governance.

HOW WE LOST IT

By way of statistics, it will be helpful to contextualize the economic realities of our not-so-distant history in order to see whether democracy has improved our lot or otherwise. In this regard, the following are undisputed facts:

Nigeria developed rapidly in the seventies and eighties. We were a productive and exporting country. We literally swam in crude oil. Nigeria used to have National Development Plan (NDP), e.g, the 1962 – 1968 NDP. Do we plan even for 4 years now, when all our Politicians do is to think about the next elections? Before our tragic fall, we excelled in all economic indices.
i. We had the Ajaokuta Steel Co. Ltd; the Delta Steel company; Steel Companies in Onitsha, Asaba and Owerri; Kano and Katsina Steel Rolling Companies; the Oshogbo, Ikeja, Ikorodu and Ibadan Steel Companies; etc, etc.
ii. We wore clothes at that time which were produced from the United Nigeria Textile Mills in Kaduna and Chellarams in Lagos. They were produced, not from any imported cotton, but from cotton grown in Nigeria, especially in the North and the West.
iii. The Oku Iboku Pulp and Paper Mill supplied our newsprint from its 16,000 hectares tree plantation.
iv. Nigerians cooked with LPG gas stored in gas cylinders that were produced at the NGC factory in Ibadan.
v. Nigerians were mainly flying our airways (the Nigerian Airways) to most places in the world. The Nigeria Airways was about the biggest in Africa at the time. I personally used to fly it to London and USA in the eighties with less than N500 trip.
vi. Nigerians used refrigerators, freezers and air-conditioners produced by Thermocool and Deboo Industries right here in Nigeria.
vii. Bata and Lennard Stores produced our needed shoes from locally tanned leather made in Kaduna.
viii. We drank clean pipe-borne water through pipes locally produced by Kwalipipe based in Kano and Duraplast located in Lagos.
ix. Nigeria was a net exporter of refined petroleum products. Today we import all our refined petroleum products from other countries. We are operating what late Prof Claude Ake once described as a disarticulate economy – an economy where we produce what we do not consume (crude oil), and consume what we do not produce (refined petroleum products).
x. In the eighties, the naira was stronger than the dollar, exchanging between 40k and 80k to one dollar (compared to N1,500 to one dollar today).
xi. We rode in locally assembled cars, buses and trucks. Peugeot cars were produced in a plant based at Kakuri, Kaduna under a joint venture agreement with Peugeot of Paris on 11th August, 1972. Volkswagen cars in Lagos were produced in Lagos, Nigeria (the Beetle) since 1975, until they ceased operations in 1990.
xii. Leyland Company established in Ibadan in 1976 and ANAMCO in Enugu incorporated on 17th January, 1977, but commissioned in January 1980 in agreement with Daimler AG, produced trucks and buses for our use without resort to importation of vehicles (new or “tokunbo”).
xiii. Steyr in Bauchi produced our agricultural tractors and it was not just assembling, we were producing many of the components.
xiv. We had Vono products in Lagos that produced the vehicle seats used by our vehicle plants.
xv. Exide Company in Ibadan produced batteries, not just for Nigeria, but for the entire West African sub-region.
xvi. IsoGlass and TSG also based in Ibadan produced the windshields used by such vehicles without any imports.
xvii. We had Ferodo a British brake company in Ibadan came on song to produce brake pads and discs used by the said vehicles.
xviii. Dunlop established since 1961 in Lagos and Michelin established in the fifties and based in Port Harcourt produced the tyres needed by the vehicles. And these tyres were produced directly from rubber plantations located in Ogun, the then Bendel (now Edo and Delta) and Rivers State.
xix. The radio and television sets were listened to and watched were assembled in Ibadan by Sanyo.
xx. Our toilets were fitted with WC produced in Kano and Abeokuta.
xxi. Nigeria generated her electricity through cables produced by the Nigerian Wire and Cable, Ibadan; NOCACO in Kaduna and Kablemetal in Lagos and Port Harcourt.
xxii. We grew plants that produced our food locally.

It is no exaggeration to say we were producing all of the above and many more at the dawn of democracy in 1999 or at any rate, just before then. How have we fared since then and has democracy made a positive difference or not? That is the question which I shall present and attempt to answer.

THE CRITICAL SITUATION NOW

Multinationals’ exit is said to cost Nigeria about N94tn in five years
The exodus of multinationals from the Nigerian economy is said to have cost the country a N94tn loss of output in five years, according to an economist and former Director of Research and Advocacy at the Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry in Nigeria, Dr Vincent Nwani.

Multiple multinationals have left Nigeria by either scaling down operations, transferring ownership or selling their stakes, the most recent being the sale of beverage company Diageo’s 58.02 per cent shareholding in Guinness Nigeria to Tolaram Group on June 11, 2024.

Over 10 companies shut down operations in 2020, most notably: Standard Biscuits Nigeria Ltd, NASCO Fiber Product Ltd, Union Trading Company Nigeria PLC and Deli Foods Nigeria Ltd.

In 2021, more than 20 companies exited, including Tower Aluminium Nigeria PLC, Framan Industries Ltd, Stone Industries Ltd, Mufex Nigeria Company Ltd and Surest Foam Ltd.

In 2022 alone, over 15 known brands left Nigeria, including Universal Rubber Company Ltd, Mother’s Pride Ventures Ltd, Errand Products Nigeria Ltd and Gorgeous Metal Makers Ltd.

More than 10 major companies left in 2023, notably Unilever Nigeria PLC, Procter & Gamble Nigeria, GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Nigeria Ltd, ShopRite Nigeria, Sanofi-Aventis Nigeria Ltd, Equinox Nigeria and Bolt Food & Jumia Food Nigeria.

In the first six months of 2024, five listed major companies had left Nigeria, including Microsoft Nigeria, Total Energies Nigeria (affected by its divestment), PZ Cussons Nigeria PLC, Kimberly-Clerk Nigeria and Diageo PLC.

Most alarming is a statement credited to the Manufacturing Association of Nigeria (MAN) to the effect that 767 manufacturing companies shut down operations in Nigeria, while 535 experienced distress in 2023 alone.

Procter and Gamble, a household goods manufacturer is restructuring to become a mere importer, while Bolt, a very user-friendly, a ride-sharing and goods delivery app which only opened shop in Nigeria in 2021 to give Uber a run for its money, is also affected.

The divestment gale is also evident in the oil industry, the very live wire of our economy. No fewer than 26 oil companies and investments pulled out and sold their stakes to domestic investors. These include influential oil mining multinationals such as Shell, ExxonMobil and ENI. These companies are going away mainly because of heightened insecurity in the Niger Delta and inability of the Nigerian government to provide their counterpart funds to enable the joint venture agreements to explore and exploit new oilfields. (To be continued).

THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK

“In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way”. – Franklin D. Roosevelt.

By Prof Mike Ozekhome SAN

INTRODUCTION

The 2nd part of this treatise continues where last week’s feature stopped, namely ‘military and other security forces’, followed by ‘resident oil companies’ and ‘the local populace’. I then wonder aloud: ‘why are they stealing Nigeria blind?’. This is followed by another poser: ‘how is oil theft carried out?’, to which I proffer the following answers: (through so-called) ‘hot-tapping’, ‘cold-tapping’, terminal and vehicular transportation’, etc, concluding with what I see as the cost of the phenomenon. In this week’s feature, we shall examine the negative impact of oil theft on our economy and conclude with some recommendations for mitigating oil theft. Please read on.

THE NEGATIVE IMPACT OF OIL THEFT ON NIGERIA’S ECONOMY

The impacts of oil theft in Nigeria cannot be over emphasized. It has led to unstable economy, mass poverty, corruption, security challenges amongst others. It has left Nigeria behind in the race of the third world country. This is not healthy for a developing Nation that is beclouded with so many political and social variables.

1. LOSS OF REVENUE: The Nigerian government has lost substantial revenue, courtesy of oil theft. The stolen oil is sold on the black market, bypassing legal channels and depriving the state of crucial income that could be used for public infrastructure, social programs, and economic development. According to estimates by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), the country lost around $41.9 billion to oil theft between 2009 and 2018. The situation is even worse in the successive years as seen above.

2. CONSTRAINTS IN BUDGET: Oil theft has dealt a negative blow in other sectors. It creates budgetary constraints, leading to government reducing expenditure in other vital sectors germane to livelihood such as the health, education and infrastructural development sectors.
This leads to a lack of investment in these areas, hindering human capital development and overall economic growth. The instability caused by inconsistent revenue inflows also undermines investor confidence and discourages foreign direct investment.

3. ENVIRONMENTAL DISASTERS: Oil spillage is always a likely attendant consequence of production. This has led to pollution in many states of the Niger Delta region. Oil smugglers employ crude and unsafe methods to extract oil, damaging pipelines and infrastructure in the process. These incidents result in widespread contamination of farmlands, water sources, and ecosystems, posing serious health risks to local communities and affecting agricultural productivity. The environmental consequences of oil theft exacerbate the economic challenges faced by Nigeria.

4. SOCIETAL EFFECTS: Oil theft effects the society in various ways. Since it is a lucrative endeavor, the proceeds from oil theft are often used to fund criminal activities, including insurgency, terrorism, and other forms of organized crimes. This creates security challenges, particularly in the Niger Delta region, where most oil theft incidents occur. The presence of criminal networks also fuels corruption and exacerbates social inequality, further hampering economic progress and development.

MY RECOMMENDATIONS

Combating oil theft requires a community effort and approach by the law enforcement agencies, technological advancements, proactive government policies and even the cooperation of local communities.

TECHNOLOGY

Happily, the NNPC launched an App (applications platform) to monitor crude oil theft in the country. The company launched the app in Abuja at the signing of renewed Production Sharing Contracts (PSCs) agreements between NNPC and its partners in oil mining leases.

The platform ‘Crude Theft Monitoring Applications’ was created for members of host communities and other Nigerians to report incidents of oil theft and get rewarded. The Group Chief Executive Officer of the NNPC Limited, Mele Kyari, had in April disclosed that Nigeria lost $4 billion to oil theft at the rate of 200,000 barrels per day in 2022. This is not withstanding the fact that the country already lost $1.5 billion so far in 2022 because pipeline vandalism has escalated. The country was losing 95 per cent of oil production to oil thieves at Bonny Terminal, Rivers State. This is alarming. What is left for the country?

Therefore, there should be a round table conference by relevant stakeholders whose sense of patriotism, integrity and national loyalty are unwavering in this journey of ours – Nation building.

1. SECURITY ENHANCEMENT: security is a key factor in combating oil theft. Enhancing security measures around oil installations, pipelines, and waterways is essential to deter oil theft. The strategies may involve increasing surveillance, deploying advanced monitoring systems, and improving coordination among security agencies.

2. COLLABORATION WITH INTERNATIONAL PARTNERS: Oil theft is a big business, it is more regional and international. Nigeria should collaborate with international partners to combat oil theft. Information sharing, capacity building and joint operations can help disrupt transnational criminal networks involved in oil theft.

3. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: This is one of the most important factors as it permeates the grassroots. Engaging local communities and providing alternative livelihood options can help reduce their reliance on oil theft for income generation. This includes promoting entrepreneurship, vocational training, youth employment, skills acquisition, and sustainable development initiatives.

4. LEGAL REFORMS: Nigeria operates the Rule of Law, and by virtue of this, all actions must be carried out according. Strengthening existing laws and imposing stricter penalties for oil theft offences can act as deterrence. This should be accompanied by an efficient judicial system that ensures speedy trial, prosecution and punishment of offenders. The Judiciary must rise like Daniel, to salvage the situation by dispensing justice without fear or favour, malice or ill-will.

5. NEED TO LEGALISE SMALL SCALE REFINERIES: There is the urgent need to legalise refinery by small scale back water factories, subject to standards and bench mark being given and monitored. This will stop their bad products finding their way into the market (as they do anyway), know innocent consumer’s motor engines. Afterall, Biafra was already refining oil as far back as 1967 (56 years ago) during the three year bloody Nigerian- Biafran Civil War.

CONCLUSION

Oil theft is an enigma to the Nigerian economy and security, the need to prevent same, cannot be overemphasized. The Nigerian government in collaboration in the oil, security, and economic sector must form a synergy to eradicate this cankerworm eating up the flesh of the wellbeing of the Nigerian- state, which is supposed to be an Eldorado.

(The end)

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).