Connect with us

Featured

Dangote Refinery, Fuel Price and the Principle of Back of Forth

Published

on

By Eric Elezuo

For the umpteenth time in as many days, the Dangote Refinery has adjusted the pump price of its petroleum products, with special considerations to the premium motor spirit (PMS), popularly called petrol. This has been the sequence since the America/Israel vs Iran War, which erupted on February 28, 2026; a situation that has called to question the ability of the 650,000 barrels per day capacity refinery to sustain the country in times of crisis.

In a statement made available to newsmen, the Dangote Petroleum Refinery reduced its gantry price for petrol to N1,200 per litre and its coastal price to N1,153 per litre, amid ongoing tensions in the Middle East that continue to shape global oil markets.

The adjustment however, marks a downward review in the company’s pricing structure, and is expected to influence fuel supply costs across distribution channels, including depots and retail outlets. It is however, a far cry in the original price of less than N900, which has been market value in Nigeria before the Gulf imbroglio.

Global oil prices have remained volatile since the outbreak of hostilities involving the United States and Israel on one side and Iran on the other, which has disrupted crude shipments from the Gulf region.

The disruption has pushed Brent crude prices above $100 per barrel, forcing countries to explore alternatives to ensure energy security.

In Nigeria, the spike in global crude prices has translated into higher domestic fuel costs. Petrol, which sold for about N870 per litre before the escalation, now averages around N1,500 per litre in parts of the country.

The Dangote Refinery has repeatedly adjusted its petrol gantry prices in response to fluctuations in global crude markets, with multiple revisions recorded since the crisis began.

Across major filling stations nationwide, petrol prices have hovered around N1,350 per litre and above, contributing to rising transport costs and broader inflationary pressures.

With the latest reduction by the refinery, Nigerians expect a gradual easing of pump prices across filling stations.

As the world oil crisis escalates, many Nigerians believe that it is for a reason such as this that the country is privileged to have the Dangote Refinery within its shores. They maintain that the crisis in the Gulf should have little or no effect on the country as a result of two factors:

1. The refinery is sited within the confines of the Nigeria, and

2. The crude oil (raw material) is sourced locally

They argue that movement is not hampered on international waters or by belligerent activities as a result of the war.

“This crude is produced and sourced here in Nigeria. The refinery is right here in Nigeria. So what explains the dilly-dally in the price of the product as if we have to cross the Strait of Hormuz before making it available to Nigerian consumers,” an Energy expert queried.

He questioned the rationale behind Dangote’s back and forth journey on the price of fuel.

“I don’t think anybody has told us the truth yet. We have the crude, and we have the refinery, so why are we buying the product at exorbitant price, and blaming the war in the gulf for it,” he further noted.

But in defence of the foremost refinery, the Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director of the Dangote Refinery, David Bird, raised concerns over Nigeria’s inability to supply sufficient crude oil to the facility, disclosing that deliveries under the government’s crude supply arrangement are falling significantly short of agreed volumes.

Speaking in an interview on Arise Television, Bird said the refinery, which is currently operating at its full capacity of 650,000 barrels per day, requires between 13 and 15 cargoes of crude monthly to meet domestic fuel demand. However, he said the refinery is only receiving about five cargoes, representing just about 30 per cent of expected supply.

He explained that the gap undermines the effectiveness of the Crude-for-Naira arrangement, a policy designed to supply crude to local refiners at international prices but without foreign exchange exposure.

According to him, while the initiative has helped stabilise Nigeria’s foreign exchange pressures, its implementation has been inconsistent, particularly in terms of both volume and crude quality allocation.

“We have been very vocal that there is an existing arrangement in place under the Crude-for-Naira programme commonly misunderstood as a pricing regime, it is not. It is priced at full international benchmark crude oil pricing, however, without the foreign exchange implication.

“That has been very successful in stabilising the FX and I think Nigeria and our relationship with NNPC and Dangote, we should all be very proud of that. That agreement, however, is not only just from volume but also a quality allocation perspective not being met.

“And our demand of the government is just to be transparent with that allocation methodology  because what we see under that agreement, we should be getting about 13 to 15 cargos a month and that’s what we could process to meet the domestic fuel requirements of Nigeria. Currently we’re only getting five.

“So that’s an underperformance against that pre-agreed volume contract. Second to that is quality. So Nigeria has a wide variety of crude grades all exported from different terminals and we have a preference,” he stressed.

Many Nigerians have divided on for and against the ability if Dangote to sustain local consumption especially in the midst of the crude crunch occasioned by the gulf crisis, others have exonerated the refinery, heaping the blames on the Federal Government-run Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation Ltd (NNPCL), which has failed in its duty of making the required quantity of crude available to the refinery.

It would be recalled that ever since the launch of the Dangote Refinery, the management has consistently been at loggerheads with many petroleum-associated groups over barefaced treachery and backstabbing.

Stakeholders have said that recent developments, especially the ongoing crisis among the gulf states, highlight the strategic importance of strengthening domestic refining capacity, which Dangote, as at today, chiefly represents.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Featured

El-Rufai to Remain in ICPC Custody Till June

Published

on

By

Justice Darius Khobo of the Kaduna State High Court has adjourned the bail hearing of former Governor of Kaduna State, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, to the first week of June, 2026.

El-Rufai is being arraigned on multiple charges bordering on alleged financial crime and abuse of office by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).

“Similarly, another charge, number KDH/KAD/ICPC/01/26, against Mallam Nasir El-Rufa’i and one Amadu Sule (LEDA) has also been filed before a Kaduna State High Court in the Kaduna Judicial Division,” the ICPC said last month.

“The charges in the State High Court case range from abuse of office, fraud, and intent to commit fraud to conferring undue advantage, among others. Both charges were filed by the ICPC on the 18th of March, 2026.”

Speaking after the court session, counsel to the former governor, Ukpon Akpan, kicked against the lingering adjournment of the bail hearing by one presiding judge as politically motivated.

The high-profile case has drawn significant public attention, with heightened security presence observed around the court premises.

The former governor had arrived at the court at about 9 am in a convoy accompanied by ICPC officials and operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS).

During the proceedings, supporters of the former governor gathered outside the courtroom, while security agencies maintained order and restricted movement within the vicinity.

Inside the courtroom, journalists, as usual, were not allowed, as proceedings are expected to focus on arguments presented by both the defence and prosecution regarding the bail request.

At the last sitting, the defence team had maintained that their client poses no flight risk and is willing to comply with all conditions set by the court.

Meanwhile, the prosecution has urged the court to carefully consider the gravity of the charges.

The 66-year-old former governor of Kaduna has been in ICPC custody since February 19 following his release by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

El-Rufai, a former minister of the FCT, was, however, released on March 27 based on compassionate grounds following his mother’s death.

Continue Reading

Featured

Timi Frank Petitions US, Demands Gbajabiamila’s Resignation over ‘Anti-Democratic’ Remarks

Published

on

By

Political activist, Comrade Timi Frank, has called on the United States government to investigate and sanction the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, over alleged actions capable of undermining Nigeria’s democracy.

Frank’s demand followed a viral video in which Gbajabiamila was quoted as telling Hon Leke Abejide, during his wife’s 50th birthday that: “Don’t come to APC. Stay in ADC and scatter them. We like what you’re doing… stay in ADC and win your election… bring Bala Gombe, and we’ll support him. Good luck in court.”

Describing the remarks as “reckless” and dangerous, the former Deputy National Publicity Secretary of the All Progressives Congress (APC), said they point to a deliberate attempt to weaken opposition parties and erode democratic institutions.

“Your statement, as Chief of Staff, raises serious concerns about the determination by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s regime to truncate democracy,” he said, adding that “inference can be made that there is an infringement on the independence of the judiciary.”

He warned that any suggestion that courts could be influenced “undermines public confidence in democratic institutions,” citing references to political actors, including Leke Abejide, as requiring clarification to avoid “dangerous interpretations.”

Frank argued that Gbajabiamila’s comments effectively confirm the Presidency’s involvement in crises rocking opposition parties such as the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Social Democratic Party (SDP), New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), and the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

“When a Chief of Staff speaks, it reflects the body language of the President. This points to a deliberate attempt to weaken opposition and consolidate power,” he said.

He further claimed that state influence, including the use of the judiciary, is being deployed against opposition parties. “The audacity of the statement suggests nothing will happen even if opposition parties are destabilised. That is dangerous,” he added.

Frank described Gbajabiamila as “an alter ego of the President” who had “displayed the arrogance of power,” insisting that public office holders must uphold restraint, respect for the rule of law and constitutional order.

He also urged U.S. authorities to probe Gbajabiamila’s activities and financial dealings.

“As an American citizen, he should be held accountable. We want to know if he is meeting his tax obligations in line with his earnings in Nigeria,” Frank said, describing him as “a bad ambassador of the United States.”

“We want to be sure that all earnings, including those from official and business engagements in Nigeria, are properly declared and taxed,” he added.

On accountability, Frank insisted resignation was the only honourable option.

“We call for your resignation with immediate effect. If such a statement were made in the United States, the official involved would have resigned forthwith,” he said.

He disclosed plans to petition the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria, stressing that “those entrusted with leadership must reflect humility, constitutional awareness and respect for separation of powers.”

“Power is transient, but institutions must endure. Any comment that diminishes their independence must be corrected,” he added.

The call comes amid rising concerns over the stability of Nigeria’s multiparty system and allegations of increasing pressure on opposition parties.

Comrade Timi Frank is the ULMWP Ambassador (East Africa and Middle East) and Senior Advisor, Global Friendship City Association (GFCA), USA.

Continue Reading

Featured

Alleged Coup Plotters Get April 22 Date for Trial, Slammed with 13-Count Charge

Published

on

By

The Federal Government has filed a 13-count charge before the Federal High Court in Abuja against a retired Major General, a retired Naval Captain, a serving police inspector, and three others over an alleged coup plot and acts of terrorism.

The alleged coup plotters, are scheduled to be arraigned tomorrow (Wednesday), April 22, before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

Those named in the charge are Major General Mohammed Ibrahim Gana (rtd), Captain (NN) Erasmus Ochegobia Victor (rtd), Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim, Zekeri Umoru, Bukar Kashim Goni, and Abdulkadir Sani.

Also listed as a defendant, but said to be at large, is former Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, Timipre Sylva.

The charge, filed by the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and signed by the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, accuses the defendants of offences ranging from treason and terrorism to failure to disclose security intelligence and money laundering linked to terrorism financing.

At the centre of the case is an allegation that the defendants conspired in 2025 to undermine the Nigerian state.

According to the charge, they “conspired with one another to levy war against the state to overawe the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,” an offence punishable under Section 37(2) of the Criminal Code.

The prosecution further alleged that the defendants had prior knowledge of a planned treasonable act involving one Colonel Mohammed Alhassan Ma’aji and others but failed to alert authorities.

The charge stated that they, “knowing that and intended to commit treason, did not give the information thereof with all reasonable despatch to either the President or a Peace Officer.”

In another count, the defendants were accused of failing to take preventive steps, as they allegedly “did not use any reasonable endeavours to prevent the commission of the offence.”

Beyond treason, the Federal Government is prosecuting the defendants for terrorism-related offences under the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

The charge alleged that they “conspired with one another to commit an act of terrorism in the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

Particularly, Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim and Zekeri Umoru are accused of participating in meetings linked to terrorist activities.

Prosecutors claim they acted “in a bid to further a political ideology which may seriously destabilise the constitutional structure of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

The charge also accused the defendants of providing support for terrorism, alleging that they “knowingly and indirectly rendered support” to facilitate acts of terror.

In addition, the prosecution alleged a deliberate suppression of intelligence, stating that the defendants “had information which would be of material assistance in preventing the commission of the act of terrorism but failed to disclose the information to the relevant agency as soon as practicable.”

The case further traced financial transactions allegedly linked to terrorism financing, with multiple defendants accused of handling proceeds of unlawful activities.
Bukar Kashim Goni is alleged to have “indirectly retained the aggregate sum of N50,000,000, which forms part of the proceeds of an unlawful act, to wit: terrorism financing,” while Abdulkadir Sani allegedly retained N2 million from a similar source.

Zekeri Umoru, according to the charge, “without going through a financial institution accepted a cash payment of the sum of N10,000,000,” and also retained an additional N8.8 million suspected to be proceeds of terrorism financing.

Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim was also accused of taking possession of N1 million linked to the same alleged scheme.

All financial-related counts were brought under the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

The 13-count charge presents what prosecutors describe as a coordinated network involving security personnel, civilians, and a politically exposed individual, allegedly connected to activities threatening national security.

Continue Reading

Trending