The Nation Newspaper

Category: Femi Macaulay

  • Corruption has friends too

    It is intriguing that a federal legislator proposed a corruption-friendly law that is antagonistic to the country’s fight against corruption. It is unclear whether the idea belongs to the proposer, or whether the proposer is just a messenger who is delivering a message packaged by champions of corruption who are desperate to corrupt the anti-corruption war.

    The so-called Economic Amnesty Bill is particularly thought-provoking because it demonstrates the power of corruption and how the powerful can abuse power in favour of corruption. A report said: “The bill was introduced and read for the first time on June 14, 2017 on the floor of the House and awaits a second reading in July when it would be debated.”

    As the public awaits the debate on the bill in the House of Representatives, there are strong signals that the proposal is unpopular in the public space and offensive to right-thinking people. Did the proposer anticipate the degree of public opposition that the proposal has attracted?  Or did he expect a smooth ride?

    Here is a picture of the bill: “The bill seeks to give looters leeway to escape any form of probe, inquiry or prosecution after satisfying certain conditions. The proposed law is titled, “A bill for an Act to establish a scheme to harness untaxed money for investment purposes and to assure any declarant regarding inquiries and proceedings under Nigerian laws and for other matters connected therewith.”

    Here is an elaboration of the bill: “According to the sponsor of the bill, Linus Okorie (Peoples Democratic Party, Ebonyi State), the bill “seeks to allow all Nigerians and residents, who have any money or assets outside the system or have acquired such money or assets illegally (looted or any variant of the cliché) to come forward, within a set time frame, to declare same, pay tax/surcharge and compulsorily invest the funds in any sector of the Nigerian economy; and be granted full amnesty from inquiry or prosecution.”

    It is easy to see how this bill will help the corrupt and help corruption. Is it possible that Okorie’s proposal reflects the thinking about corruption in his federal constituency?  Are his constituents fully behind him in this pro-corruption campaign?

    Predictably, Chairman, Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption, Prof. Itse Sagay (SAN), said in a statement that showed deep disgust: “In spite of the steep decline in the sense of morality and values in Nigeria in the last 16 years, particularly since this Eight Session of the National Assembly was inaugurated, Okorie’s blatant and brazen advocacy of free looting is nevertheless still shocking to the senses.”

    Sagay added: “That a Nigerian legislator (a lawmaker) can have the effrontery to promote a bill which if enacted into law, will enable looters of our treasury and national patrimony to keep the loot, if only they can acknowledge it as looted, provided they undertake to spend it in Nigeria, is breathtaking. In summary, what Mr. Okorie is encouraging is free plundering of state funds without consequences.  Simply put, it is the legitimating of treasury plundering.  It is clear that if such a bill becomes law, the anti-corruption war is doomed.”

    It is understandable that anti-corruption warriors are shell-shocked by Okorie’s pro-corruption move. It is beyond question that this condemnable looters’ bill further calls into question the quality of lawmaking and the quality of lawmakers in the  federal legislature. What Okorie’s proposal suggests is that there are members of the National Assembly who lack a fundamental understanding of the developmental essence of the legislative role. Certainly, Okorie’s proposal cannot be regarded as an example of progressive thinking.

    There are similar instances of unprogressive thinking that corrupts the image of the federal legislature.  This information illustrates another instance: “A similar move had been suggested at the Senate in May 2016 when the Chairman, Senate Committee on Gas, Bassey Akpan, advocated special amnesty for owners of Nigeria’s stolen money stashed in the various banks across the world should such looters be willing to bring back the money and invest it in the country.”

    It is disturbing that this corruption-friendly idea reportedly suggested by a member of the Senate last year is the same idea that has been formally proposed by a member of the House of Representatives this year, indicating that there are members of the National Assembly who are on the same page on this issue of giving corruption a chance to breathe.

    Okorie’s proposal should have no place among honourable men and women in honourable legislative chambers.  It is an egregious idea that should be treated with utmost contempt.  While its introduction and first reading may be regarded as procedural stages, when it is time to debate the bill, there can be no excuse for not shooting down the absurdity.

    Sagay asked: “Now, what shall we do with Linus Okorie?” He supplied an answer that deserves to be taken seriously:  ”I propose that the House of Representatives should regard Okorie’s bill to be so impertinent and scandalous as to earn him a suspension from the House, for the rest of the Eight Session, i.e., until July 2019.That should serve notice that Nigeria will no longer tolerate such brazen impunity and corruption or its promotion thereof.”

    Perhaps Okorie deserves a more punitive penalty.  It may not be extreme to call for Okorie’s recall.  It is a point to ponder that there has been no reported expression of disappointment and disgust by Okorie’s constituents. The fight against corruption must be fought with every possible lawful weapon.  It is noteworthy that Sagay argued: “Section 15(5) of the Nigerian Constitution provides that ‘the State shall abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power.’ Should a legislator, a ranking public officer, be seen committing a breach of the Constitution, which at the same time constitutes assault on our sensibilities with relish?”

    Clearly, there is a need to improve legislative thinking in the National Assembly, given the negative example of Okorie’s proposal. The country deserves an apology from him for his indecent promotion of an unprogressive  idea that is essentially corruption-friendly.

  • All because of politics

    What is unfair can’t be fair. It is unfair that local council aspirant Bode Adeosun was forced to give up his political ambition following the kidnap of his daughter by kidnappers who demanded his withdrawal from the councillorship race as a non-negotiable condition for the release of the 20-year old kidnapee.

    Adeosun, who was an All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate in Ward C1B of Odi- Olowo/Ojuwoye Local Council Development Area (LCDA) of Lagos, narrated what happened on June 20: “My daughter, Bukola, was sent on an errand with her younger sister by their mother around 9pm, but only the little sister came back saying she could not find Bukola. We subsequently went around looking for her but on our way back around 1:39am we got a call from the kidnappers confirming that Bukola is in their custody. I have also reported the matter to the Divisional Police Officer in Ilupeju. The number was hidden. My daughter would be 20 years on Saturday (June 24) and she just concluded her JAMB exams.”

    When his daughter was released three days later, Adeosun extended his narrative: “My daughter’s abductors were in constant communication with me since the day she was kidnapped. They demanded I should withdraw from the political race if I wanted my daughter back alive. I agreed with their terms and condition because I did not want any harm to befall the innocent girl…Since I am not in the position to announce my withdrawal from the race, the APC chairman in Odi-Olowo/Ojuwoye LCDA did during the APC state rally held on Thursday for all party candidates in all local councils. I assumed the informant of my daughter’s abductors attended the rally. When they heard the announcement from the APC chairman in our council, they called me around 7pm to come to Ifo area of Ogun State to pick up my daughter.”

    He continued: “I pleaded with them to bring her back to the spot she was kidnapped. They hung up and called back around 12am. They said I should pick my daughter up in Danmegoro Street in Mushin. We found her blindfolded and tied with chain. She was almost passing out.”

    A report quoted a source as saying: “Immediately his daughter was released, he removed all his posters around and burnt them right in front of his house, in the full glare of everyone.” Interestingly, this isn’t the first time Adeosun has been pressurised into rethinking his political aspiration. The source also said:  “When he contested in 2002, under the umbrella of the Alliance for Democracy (AD) his house was burnt and he was forced to step down. He had stepped down on two other occasions, until the mandate was given to him now to run. But that again, has been stalled.”

    It is curious that since Adeosun was forced to forget his councillorship dream for his daughter’s sake, things have progressed as if nothing happened.  When the incident happened, a report said: “Contacted, the command’s spokesman, Olarinde Famous-Cole, an Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP), said the police were only aware of a case of missing person. He said: “The family actually reported a case of missing person at the station. They said she went to buy fish within the vicinity around 9pm, but she didn’t return. We are investigating to get more facts from the family.”

    Now that Bukola has been found, it is unclear whether the police have stopped their investigation and closed the case, despite details linking her disappearance with abduction. As things stand, this case is far from closure.

    It is condemnable that the abduction happened. It is even more condemnable that it happened for political reasons. It is unacceptable and should not be allowed to pass without a resolution that would uncover the identities of the abductors and punish them for the crime.

    It is thought-provoking that the APC has not responded to the incident, suggesting that what happened was Adeosun’s business and none of the party’s business.  If Adeosun pulled out of the contest as a result of such brutally coercive action by others interested in the same political position, it should be a matter of serious concern to the party.  Obviously, the method employed to ensure Adeosun’s exclusion had little or no respect for fair play.

    A report said: “A crowd made up of sympathisers and politicians had stormed Adeosun’s home, on Shyllon Street in Ilupeju, following the news of his daughter’s release. Adeosun described the incident as an “unforgettable experience,” saying his daughter was subjected to physical and psychological torture because of politics.”

    What happened to Adeosun’s daughter, and what happened to Adeosun himself, cannot be a positive advertisement for the APC and its claimed progressivism.  If a so-called progressive party can accommodate the unprogressive thinking that led to the unprogressive action, it calls into question the party’s definition of progressive politics.

    There is no doubt that desperadoes planned and carried out the kidnap, which says something about the quality of the party’s membership and leadership. The party’s image has been tainted by the abduction and the surrounding circumstances. The APC needs to move in a concrete way to remove the stain.

    What signal does this kidnapping send to the public, considering the possibility that whoever sponsored it and forced Adeosun to drop his councillorship dream may win the council seat at issue?  Of course, there is also the possibility that the abductors were self-sponsored, and carried out the abduction to pave the way for the election of the person they wanted. Or could the abduction have been done by outsiders, meaning people outside the APC, for the benefit of an aspirant in another party?

    Clearly, Ward C1B of Odi- Olowo/Ojuwoye Local Council Development Area (LCDA) of Lagos is a ward of interest, and it would be interesting to see how things develop there with the approach of the July 22 local government area and local council development area elections in Lagos State.  If the APC’s candidate wins the election in the controversial ward, the winner will carry the burden of the abduction. That may well be the case too, if a candidate from a different party wins.

    It is important to get to the bottom of this curious kidnap and its various dimensions.

  • Reflections on Babalakin’s birthday

    Interestingly, about a week before Dr. Wale Babalakin turned 57 on July 1, Public-Private Partnership (PPP) grabbed the headlines once again as the National Assembly responded to an allegation by  the Minister of Power, Works and Housing, Babatunde Fashola, that the federal lawmakers had unlawfully redesigned the proposed 2017 budget.

    The Senate, in a statement by its Chairman, Committee on Media and Public Affairs, Senator Sabi Abdullahi, said: “It was agreed that we should give the Private Finance Initiative a chance to complement government’s resources in the delivery of critical infrastructure assets across the country.”   The Senate further said: “We are looking for private funds for some of these roads, particularly those with high potential of attracting private investors. These include the Enugu-Onitsha road, Kano-Abuja road and Abuja-Lokoja road. It has been our hope that the Lagos -Ibadan road would be a model for private sector funding of infrastructure in the country.”

    It is noteworthy that the Lagos-Ibadan Expressway has been a road of controversy, especially following the Goodluck Jonathan administration’s 2012 termination of a concession agreement with Bi-Courtney Highways Services Limited (BCHSL), which was supposed to reconstruct and manage the toll road. The past government alleged that the company failed to make progress on actualising the objective of the concession four years after the agreement signed with a preceding administration.

    According to the company, “BCHSL won the concession to reconstruct and manage the toll road for 25 years. It’s a Design, Build, Operate and Transfer (DBOT) arrangement.” The company proudly declared that it rebuilt the Murtala Muhammed Airport (MMA2) in Lagos “against all odds,”  adding,  ”It is the first airport in Africa to be owned by a private company on a Build, Operate and Transfer (BOT) basis, the first of its kind in Nigeria, and it was delivered far ahead of schedule.” MMA2 reportedly handled 20 million passengers and 400, 000 flights in 10 years.

    It is also noteworthy that in the same week airport terminal operator Bi-Courtney Aviation Services Limited (BASL) celebrated the 10th anniversary of MMA 2 in May, Acting President Yemi Osinbajo declared that public-private partnership was important and inevitable for the country’s economic growth. Osinbajo said at the Third Presidential Quarterly Business Forum at the old Banquet Hall of the State House, Abuja: “The real challenge is how to efficiently and faithfully implement these great ideas. I think for effective delivery, this partnership with the private sector is undoubtedly the way to go.”

    The MMA2 anniversary was a fitting time to highlight the minuses that dampened the celebration. The company’s chairman, Babalakin, shed light on the negatives when he spoke to reporters about the government’s contractual infidelity. Babalakin stated: “We got approval since 2007 to operate regional flights from MMA2, but the relevant authorities are frustrating our efforts. We could trace it to both the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) and the Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority (NCAA). It is the airlines that are affected, because they burn aviation fuel moving their aircraft from MMA2 to the international terminal. This would not arise if they had allowed us to operate regional flights from MMA2.”

    A report said Babalakin “urged the Federal Government to pay over N200 billion” to BASL “for failing to hand over the old domestic terminal, otherwise known as General Aviation Terminal (GAT), Lagos.”  According to the report, “Babalakin said the payment was necessary after BASL was awarded damages by the Federal High Court to the tune of over N132 billion in 2012. He said the amount increased to N200 billion, owing to the revenue the terminal operator would have collected as revenue for flights and other commercial activities at the old domestic terminal.”

    Babalakin explained: “As far back as 2012, the Federal High Court awarded damages of N132 billion to Bi-Courtney Airways Limited. Six appeals against the judgment in the Court of Appeal have been dismissed. Even the appeal to the Supreme Court was also dismissed. No nation can truly achieve its potential, if it treats its dynamic citizens this way.”

    There is no doubt about Babalakin’s dynamism. Equipped with a doctorate in Law, Babalakin, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), is also a big player in the business world. Further evidence of his dynamism: “On 7th April 2017, Dr. Babalakin, SAN was appointed as the Pro-Chancellor and Chairman of Council of the University of Lagos (UNILAG);  On 6 January 2017, President Muhammadu Buhari appointed Dr. Babalakin as Chairman of the Federal Government Committee to Re-negotiate the 2009 Agreement between FG and the University Unions.”

    It is worth mentioning that Babalakin is also a striking philanthropist. Among his philanthropic projects: “Donated an 80-bed hostel to the University of Ilorin in the name of his father, Justice Bolarinwa Oyegoke Babalakin; Donated a 500-seater auditorium to the Moshood Abiola Polytechnic in memory of his late mother, Mrs. Ramotu Ibironke Babalakin; Treated 4000 patients with various eye diseases in Owo Local Government under the Foundation set up in memory of his late mother.”

    Babalakin was a qualified speaker on the problematisation of public-private partnership in the country at last year’s Nigerian Economic Summit in Abuja, where he shared some of his company’s experiences in connection with the Murtala Mohammed Airport Domestic Terminal 2, Federal Secretariat, Ikoyi, and Lagos-Ibadan Expressway. His group is controversially enmeshed in disagreements connected with concession agreements with the Federal Government on these particular subjects. Guided by personal experience, Babalakin listed the enemies of progress when it comes to  public-private partnership in Nigeria: the attitude of the government, lack of respect for sanctity of contracts and the rule of law, lack of investor security, corruption and malice.

    It will take much more than words to achieve public-private partnerships that work; and it is only when such collaborations work that the country can enjoy the benefits. The PPP model has worked in the development of sectors such as energy, mining, transportation and telecommunications in other countries.  In Western Europe and U.S.A., for example, private investors are involved in infrastructure development based on concession agreements.

    It is interesting that the Federal Government announced plans to concession 22 airports. “We are grateful to Allah that our eye-opening effort had led to the upgrading of some airports in Nigeria and the decision of the Federal Government to concession airports,” Babalakin said. It remains to be seen whether the process and the outcome of the agreements would advance public-private partnership.

    Babalakin’s promotion of public-private partnership prompts reflections as he celebrates his 57th birthday.

  • Infighting won’t win the fight

    When anti-corruption warriors are divided, it is a disappointing signal about the state of the anti-corruption war. When two major members of the Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC) criticised the Federal Government’s approach to the anti-corruption war, and blamed specific officials for the poor results, it signalled a weakening of the war.

    A June 18 report said: “Speaking in Abuja at a programme organised by the National Association of Seadogs (the Pyrates Confraternity), the Chairman of the panel, Professor Itse Sagay (SAN), and member, Professor Femi Odekunle, attributed recent setbacks suffered by the administration in the prosecution of corruption cases to the fraudulent activities of compromised elements in the judiciary and legislature, and a lack of diligence on the part of some senior government officials. The Chairman of the committee, Prof. Itse Sagay, said the President and his team must come up with new ideas to fight corruption.”

    The report continued: “He said the judiciary was concentrating more on technicalities rather than the spirit of the law and justice. Sagay said, “The Federal Government, particularly the President and Vice-President, who were elected into office principally to eliminate corruption, must go back to their drawing board, search and scan the constitution and other laws to draw the requisite irresistible power to deal firmly with this terrible scourge of our times – otherwise we are all dead.”

    Odekunle was even more pointed and critical, suggesting the intensity of   possible infighting. The report further said: ”Also speaking, Odekunle, in particular, questioned the commitment of the Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami (SAN), to the anti-graft war and also raised a doubt about the integrity of the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal, Mr. Danladi Umar, who discharged and acquitted Senate President Bukola Saraki of all 18 charges levelled against him, on Wednesday.”

    Evidently, the state of the Saraki issue has further exposed the state of the anti-corruption issue. The report said: “The professor of criminology also questioned the resolve of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Walter Onnoghen, to help the Federal Government in the fight against corruption. The event titled, ‘Feast of Barracuda’, had ‘Critical Review of the Anti-Corruption War in Nigeria: Strategies, Challenges and Prospects’, as its theme.”

    Odekunle went far enough to show that the President Buhari administration’s anti-corruption war may be in danger, meaning the anti-corruption warriors may lose the war. Further report: “While exploring the theme, Odekunle, raised eight salient questions which he said members of the public must answer in order to put the recent failures of the anti-graft war in proper perspective. He asked, “Does the Presidency realise that routine crime prevention and methodology, instruments and processes are not adequate in fighting corruption in this country? That is, does the Presidency realise that fighting corruption must be a ‘rofo rofo’ fight? That it is not a question of due process, long process, fair hearing and all those that will give you technical justice instead of real justice?”

    It is thought-provoking that Odekunle raised questions that called into question the performance of the man who chaired the panel which ruled that Saraki had no case to answer. He said: “It is said that he who comes to equity must come with clean hands. In this regard, I ask, what were the details and the resolution of the EFCC matter on Danladi Umar’s bribery case? I don’t know, I’m just asking. Does the DSS possess any information about Danladi Umar on the use or abuse of hard drugs? Is there any record that Danladi Umar had been driving and crashing his car under the influence? These are questions that I don’t know the answers to but I want you to investigate.”

    He also raised questions about the Attorney-General: “Is the Attorney-General of the Federation, who is to lead the anti-corruption fight, going by the way things have been going in the past two years, as committed as others who could have done the job better? I have no answers but I believe if they are answered, it will give us an insight into the cause of our current dilemma in the fight against corruption.”

    Who will supply the needed answers?  Conscious of the gravity of the development, Malami, in a statement signed by his Special Adviser on Media and Publicity, Mr. Salihu Isah and the Special Assistant to the President on Prosecution (AGF Office), Mr. Okoi Obono-Obla, assured Nigerians: “…despite some recent setbacks recorded in some of the cases involving politically-exposed people… the war against corruption is fully on course.”  The statement added: “It shall be fought resolutely, painstakingly, doggedly, purposefully and determinedly with all the constitutional and legal arsenals at the disposal of the Federal Government of Nigeria. The Federal Government is more than ever before committed towards the complete eradication of the scourge of corruption and graft in the country.”

    Malami seems to miss the point. Sagay and Odekunle are arguing for a rethinking of the war strategy and a redesigning of the weapons. The point is: The current anti-corruption war is a new war; it cannot be successfully fought by warriors using old weapons.

    Malami further said in defence of his performance: “Those in a hurry to condemn due to the temporary setbacks recorded lately should tarry awhile because a legal process is deemed not concluded until it terminates at the Supreme Court which is the highest court of arbitration in Nigeria.” This thinking still reflects the old way of fighting corruption.

    The defensive statement said that Malami “is highly disappointed that such accusation and statement could be made by those who ought to know better,” adding that he “is saddened and flummoxed at the attempt to cast aspersion on his integrity, dedication and commitment to the war against corruption which undoubtedly is one of the major cornerstones of the present administration.”

    The question is: What has Malami achieved as an anti-corruption fighter?  The statement gives an answer that deserves to be questioned because it is questionable: “…the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation since his assumption of office has initiated numerous reforms and programmes to drive the war against corruption including the recently launched National Anti-Corruption Strategy, 2017. The National Anti-Corruption Strategy plan is a five-year strategic plan to combat corruption and corrupt tendencies in the country to the barest minimum. It is the first of its kind in the history of the country.” Whether it will work, or win the fight, remains to be seen.

    In the final analysis, what the anti-corruption war needs is a winning   strategy that is seen to be winning.

     

  • Extraordinary Evans

    A curious detail came with the news of the arrest of big-time kidnapper Chukwudubem Onwuamadike, alias Evans. A report in The Guardian said:  ”Early bystanders claimed Evans had exchanged gunshots with the officials before he was captured. A ritual where a broom was inserted into his private organ was then performed as a sort of spiritual disarming before he was handcuffed.”

    Did this happen? If it did, what does it say about the Nigeria Police Force and its methods? If it didn’t happen, what does it say about news gathering and news presentation? The piece of information about the “ritual” reinforced the thriller, no doubt.

    A police source was quoted as saying: “Someone called and gave information on his whereabouts. When we got there, he hid inside the roof of the house. He could not withstand the pressure on him from the police. While Vampire was the most deadly kidnapper in the history of Nigeria and was caught some months ago during a gun battle, Evans remains the most brilliant, richest and craftiest kidnapper in the country’s history.”

    It is remarkable that the police moved with unusual speed in this investigation. Evans, a native of Umudun, Nnewi, Anambra State, was arrested on June 10, at his classy home at Magodo, Lagos, about three weeks after the announcement of N30m bounty by the Inspector General of Police, Ibrahim Idris, for information that could lead to his arrest. He has been on the wanted list of the police in three states, Edo, Anambra and Lagos, for over four years; and police interest in him was renewed by his alleged involvement in the abduction of Innocent Duru, the owner of a multi-national pharmaceutical company in Ilupeju, Lagos.

    He was paraded with others: Felix Chinemerem, Nwosu Chikodi Chukwuma (aka Sado), 42, Suoyo Paul (aka Nwana), 42, Ikenna Emeka, 28, Uchechukwu Amadi and Ogechi Amadi. Evans painted a picture of how he started kidnapping, which added flavour to the thriller: “I was into auto spare parts importation but lost all my money (over N25m) when Customs seized my goods. From there, I relocated to South Africa, where I started peddling drugs. But along the line, my business partner shot me and passed me off as dead. I recuperated, returned to Nigeria and decided to start kidnapping rich men for ransom.”

    Within 10 years, Evans acquired a reputation as a high-profile kidnapper.   A report that captured his criminal trajectory said: “Chief Raymond Okoye was kidnapped in 2015 and was detained for two months until his relatives raised $1million. A trader, Uche Okoroafor, was whisked away in 2015 and held captive for three months until his family paid $1 million. Another businessman, Elias Ukachukwu, was kidnapped in November 2015. He paid $1 million. But the kidnappers refused to release him after collecting the initial ransom.  They demanded another $1million on grounds that the victim’s relatives were rude to them. Ukachukwu stayed in their den for several months and it is unclear how and when he regained freedom. Francis Umeh, an auto parts dealer, was kidnapped in July 2016 at Raji Rasaki Estate, Ago Palace Way, Okota, Lagos. He spent two months in the kidnappers’ den and paid an undisclosed amount of dollars.”

    The report continued: “Evans and his gang met their waterloo with the kidnap of billionaire pharmacist Innocent Duru, who they wanted to kill after collecting a ransom. The victim was with the kidnappers at 21 Prophet Asaye Close, New Igando, Lagos, for over five months. He eventually escaped and gave the police the information which led to the busting of the gang.”

    How Evans managed to evade arrest before he was caught may not necessarily be a credit to him, but a discredit to the police.  Evans gave an insight into how he succeeded as a kidnap kingpin: “I have people heading different sections. There are two gangs that work for me in every operation.  It is not all the time I follow them for the job. Most times, I control them on phone. The two gangs do not know themselves and neither of them knows my house.”

    When Evans expressed remorse after his arrest, it signalled the triumph of good over evil.  ”I am feeling bad. People who are still into kidnapping should quit. They should learn from what has happened to me, “he said.  His unveiling at the Lagos Command Headquarters in Ikeja, Lagos, was a moment of self-assessment and self-judgement. His message to the public is useful and welcome: Crime doesn’t pay.

    After enjoying the proceeds of crime, it is now time for Evans to pay for his crime.  It is noteworthy that  Police spokesman Jimoh Moshood said Evans had two mansions in upscale Magodo GRA Phase II, Lagos, worth about N300 million. He also said Evans “has two houses in highbrow area of Accra, Ghana, among many other properties, such as exotic cars, expensive watches, jewelry he bought from ransom.” The police reportedly recovered AK47 and AK49 rifles, double-barreled long guns, and magazines with ammunition, from the gang, which further reflected the threat they posed to the society.

    The police deserve applause. According to the police spokesman, the operation to catch Evans was successfully carried out by the Inspector General of Police’ (IGP) Intelligence Response Team (IRT), Anti-Kidnapping Squad of the Lagos Police Command and Technical Intelligence Unit (TIU). It is reassuring that he was quoted as saying: “The force would build on this success and continue to prevent kidnap cases and criminality in the country.”

    Now that Evans is in the cage, the case against him and his gang must be pursued with focus. It is noteworthy that, in February, Lagos State Governor Akinwunmi Ambode signed a law stipulating death penalty for kidnappers whose victims die in their custody, and life imprisonment for kidnapping. The Evans case will be an interesting test for this law.

    There are still kidnappers, small and big, outside the cage.  How did Nigeria become a country where kidnapping is big business and kidnappers make mind-boggling money?

  • Biafra fire

    efore the Independent Peoples of Biafra (IPOB), and its noisy leader, Nnamdi Kanu, there was the Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), and its equally loud leader, Ralph Uwazuruike.  Before these separatist reincarnations, there was the Biafran idea that became a dream and culminated in the three-year Nigerian Civil War that ended on January 15, 1970, following the surrender of the Biafran troops to the Federal side.  As observed in The Tragedy of Victory, a civil war account by Alabi Isama, the conflict ended without ending the centrifugal tendencies in the country’s space.

    The resurrection of Biafran separatism and the ramification of the revolt are full of lessons. In December 2015, Uwazuruike must have thought he was taking the idea to the next level. After unveiling his group’s new identity and announcing his new leadership title, he released plans to set up a parallel government in the country’s Southeast and South-south.

    The Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB) was renamed Biafra Independence Movement (BIM), and Uwazuruike said he should be recognised as BIM leader instead of MASSOB leader.

    “Old members will now belong to the new Biafra Independence Movement (BIM) while the MASSOB structure will be reorganised as the youth wing of the Biafra struggle,” Uwazuruike said during a meeting of his group’s zonal and regional administrators. In other words, the struggle was still alive, but would be carried on under a redesigned banner.

    Uwazuruike must have been under the impression that he moved closer to actualising his separatist dream by presenting what was called the 2016 Biafra Budget at the Ojukwu Memorial Library in Owerri, the Imo State capital.   Was Biafra already a reality, and no longer an objective? Who was responsible for making the budget? Who approved it? Where would the funds to operate it come from? Did this budget presentation explain or justify the efforts to generate revenue internally by, for instance, selling so-called Biafra passports as well as MASSOB customised vehicle number plates? Of course, these specific examples were scams.

    Also, Uwazuruike announced the appointment of Rev. Fr Samuel Aniebonam, a Catholic Priest, as the Chairman of the Biafra Independent National Electoral Commission (B-INEC). Uwazuruike said: “The chairman, with other anointed men and women of God as members, will supervise the internal election into the offices of the new Biafra Government on February 22.” How could a group’s “internal election” be for the election of Biafra government officials?

    He continued: “Our election will not be like Nigeria’s election, it will be a transparent one. In Biafra, there won’t be electoral fraud. The tenure of the elected Regional Governor or Minister would be four years and nine months. There shall be no second tenure. Once you are defeated, you won’t appeal in a tribunal against your opponent. This is why members of the commission would be men and women of God.”  He sounded like a Constitution, or like the Constitution. Was there a Biafra Constitution? Who drafted it? Who ratified it?

    The group’s National Director of Information, Sunny Okereafor, was quoted as saying only members of MASSOB and BIM were qualified to vote and be voted for in the elections. Were these the only Biafrans, or the only enfranchised citizens of Biafra? Was the group the same thing as Biafra, or was Biafra the same thing as the group? Okereafor said: “The electioneering has begun; we are conducting elections into all offices from wards to the zones, to elect leaders to administer Biafra. We are going to show Nigeria how to conduct free and fair elections without rigging, intimidation and favouritism.”

    He added: “Biafra will be a country where others would come to learn how democracy works… We want freedom; Biafra is the answer.”  Okereafor reportedly said Biafra would re-introduce its currency as soon as the elections were concluded and winners sworn in.

    The reinvention that invented BIM should be appreciated in its proper context.  As background, it is noteworthy that a faction of MASSOB led by Uchenna Madu had expelled Uwazuruike for alleged misappropriation of funds. Madu was the Director of Information under Uwazuruike in the old power structure.

    The complexion of the conflict was obvious following Uwazuruike’s allegation that Madu got money from the Federal Government to stop pro-Biafra protests. In response, a statement by MASSOB’s Secretary, Ugwuoke Ibem, attacked Uwazuruike and threatened to expose his “atrocities, sabotage and deviation from Biafra’s actualiastion.”

    The statement said: “As the closest officer to the former leader as well as the image maker, our new leader has vowed to expose Uwazuruike’s dealings with the Federal Government under Jonathan; Ezu River case, death of Innocent Ogbuehi (ex-Umuahia MASSOB leader), and other illicit affairs.”  It added: “MASSOB, under Madu, will continue its non-violent agitation with other pro-Biafra groups.”

    How many pro-Biafra groups exist today?  This question is pertinent in the light of developments concerning what may be tagged “The Biafra Project.” It is no news that IPOB, another enthusiastic pro-Bifara separatist group, continues to make the headlines on account of the activities of its leader, Kanu, who is facing treason-related charges for illegally running Radio Biafra.

    When Kanu was granted bail by a Federal High Court on April 25, the joy of his supporters understandably knew no bounds. This report captures the family backing Kanu enjoys concerning his separatist ambition: “The IPOB leader’s mother said she had been having sleepless nights while her son was in detention and thanked God for answering her prayers. Mrs. Kanu thanked all those who stood firm for the Biafra cause and prayed for her son’s release, urging them to keep the faith. Asked if she would advise her son to discontinue his agitation, she cried: “No retreat, no surrender. Biafra is a divine project.”

    The report continued: “Kanu’s mother said the arrest of her son popularised the Biafra agitation and vowed to keep supporting the movement. “My son was raised by God to deliver Biafra and as God delivered Israel so he will deliver Biafra because my son is fighting for his right,” she said.”

    It remains to be seen whether such separatist impulses can correct the imperfections of the country’s federalism.

  • The rich are also poor

    It was the kind of news that was no news.  What the Oxfam International’s Inequality report said was not news to many Nigerians. The report, released on May 17, stated that the combined wealth of five richest Nigerians, put at $29.9 billion, could end extreme poverty in the country. The report, titled ‘Inequality in Nigeria, Exploring the Drivers,’ highlighted the immense and increasing gap between the stinking rich and the stinking poor in Nigeria. Oxfam is “an international confederation of charitable organisations focused on the alleviation of global poverty.”

    Who are these super-rich five whose prosperity could make a difference to the landscape of poverty?  Quoting Forbes, the agency listed the five richest Nigerians as Aliko Dangote, with a net worth $14.4bn; Mike Adenuga, $9.9bn; Femi Otedola, $1.85bn; Folorunsho Alakija, $1.55bn; and Abdulsamad Rabiu, $1.1bn.

    It is thought-provoking that the report said 112 million Nigerians lived in abject poverty, and that the richest man in Nigeria earned 8,000 times more in one day than a poor citizen would spend on basic needs in a year. The report listed Nigeria as one of the few countries where the number of people living in poverty was on the increase despite the growth of the economy, adding that 69 per cent of citizens in the North-East states were living below the poverty line, compared with 49 per cent in the South-West.

    These identified five filthy rich Nigerians may need to enlighten their compatriots, especially the filthy poor, on what they consider to be the purpose of wealth, or what they think should be the point of prosperity. Beyond the phenomenal and dazzling affluence of these Nigerians, and the international focus on their billions of dollars, the question must be asked: How has the country which provided the space for their outstanding success benefited concretely from their deep pockets? In other words, what efforts have they made to help their poor compatriots rise materially?

    Perhaps more fundamentally, it is important to reflect on not only the concept of social responsibility, but also the idea of wealth responsibility or the social duty of the wealthy.  It is illuminating that the legendary US billionaire, Bill Gates, named the world’s richest man by Forbes, provided what may be regarded as a useful guiding principle for the super-rich. He said in an interview: “I’ve been very lucky, and therefore I owe it to try and reduce the inequity in the world. And that’s kind of a religious belief. I mean, it’s at least a moral belief.”

    It is noteworthy that Gates initiated The Giving Pledge campaign in 2010 with co-US billionaire Warren Buffet. This is officially described as “an effort to invite the wealthiest individuals and families in the world to commit to giving the majority of their wealth to philanthropy.”  It is noteworthy that the pledge is “a moral commitment to give,” and “the donation can happen either during the lifetime or after the death of the donor.”   A report said: “An estimate of the contribution promised by the first 40 donors, based on their aggregate wealth as at August 2010, was at least $125 billion…As of April 28, 2011, 69 billionaires had joined the campaign and pledged to give 50% or more of their wealth to charity…As of January 2015, 128 billionaire or former billionaire individuals and couples have signed the pledge.”

    What are Nigeria’s Forbes billionaires doing?  Or perhaps more significantly, what are they thinking of doing? It cannot be enough to luxuriate in luxury, without a thought for the wretched of the country. However, it may be observed that the business of redeeming the country’s numerous poor is probably too critical to be left to what the super-rich might be thinking of doing or what they could do based on their thinking. The poverty of the affluent may be that they are not thinking of doing something or anything for the poor, or that they are doing little or nothing for the poor.

    The Oxfam report also alleged that public office holders stole an estimated sum of $20tn from the treasury between 1960 and 2005. “Despite being Africa’s biggest economy, the share of the national budget allocated to education, health and social protection is one of the lowest in the region,” said the report.  It added:  “In 2012, Nigeria spent just 6.5 per cent of its national budget on education and just 3.5 per cent on health. By comparison, Ghana spent 18.5 per cent and 12.8 per cent, respectively in 2015. As a result, 57 million Nigerians lack safe water, over 130 million lack adequate sanitation and the country has more than 10 million children out of school.”

    The portrait of indigence and its consequences is an inexcusably tragic irony for an oil-rich country, and puts a huge question mark on not only the quality of governance at all political levels in the country, but also the quality of the social responsibility of the rich.  It goes without saying that the country’s poor deserve an urgent solution.

    The overriding concern is whether the people in power and the people who have the power of money are sufficiently interested in providing poverty-reducing opportunities, or even whether they care about anything beyond their pockets. In the final analysis, the picture is that the country’s poor languish at a hard place between the prosperity of power and the power of prosperity.

    It is alarming that the Minister of State for Budget and National Planning, Mrs. Zainab Ahmed, responded to the report without appreciating its signification. The minister, who was represented by the Director of International Cooperation in the ministry, Mr. Eloho Samuel, said: “I was worried by the language, tone and style of the report, and this made me to ask what was at the back of the mind of the authors when the report was being written? Oxfam needs to tune the report and put in an element of diplomacy. The methodology used in the report also raises some questions. Is it for empirical or theoretical purpose? Oxfam needs to tell us in the report what it intends to achieve, what data was gathered, where it was gathered, the sample size and the uses of the data.”

    Ahmed continued: “When I looked at the report, I was worried about certain concepts such as ‘who are the elite?’ There was no definition of terms, such as elite and poverty. More worrisome is if the report falls into the hands of aggrieved individuals, how would they react?

    This is a big question. How would the people react to the news that is no news? There is no doubt that there is a ticking time bomb, which means a bomb blast is predictable.

  • Herbert Macaulay: Celebration of greatness

    On April 17, an interesting letter to the editor appeared in The Nation. It was signed by Mr. Jaiye Ojeikere (MFR), a past President of the Nigerian Institution of Surveyors (NIS). The letter was a response to my column a week earlier, which was titled “Has Lagos forgotten Herbert Macaulay?”

    Mr. Ojeikere wrote: “As little barrack kids from Obalende Police Barracks, 1938-1939, we used to trek to Kirsten Hall in the hope of catching a glimpse of the grand old man and his famous moustache looking out from his balcony. We were lucky on one or two occasions and were rewarded with cheerful smiles. That was more than enough compensation. This was about the time of the song ‘Eki Macaulay, oyinbo alawodudu’.”

    He continued: “During the first half of the existence of Bendel State, I had the good fortune, as Surveyor General, to conduct heads of government and dignitaries round the Survey Division in Benin. We had two prized survey plans: the first was by C.T. Olumide, Benin GRA Layout, 1921, and the other, the 1928 Itsekiri/Urhobo Land-in-Dispute survey plan by Herbert Macaulay. Pa C.T. Olumide became the first President of the Nigerian Institution of Surveyors which body now has an Annual Memorial Lecture to honour him. Pa Herbert Macaulay had the first Nigerian Surveyor’s licence in 1897. The book on the History of Surveying in Nigeria had copious mention of how the Nigerian Institution of Surveyors revered him.”

    This is how the letter ended:  “His part in the birth and growth of Nigerian politics, which was then mainly practised in Lagos, cannot be forgotten. Let it not happen that the contribution of Herbert Macaulay to the growth and development of EKO (Lagos) will not be fittingly recorded, acknowledged and appreciated during the celebration of the 50th year Anniversary of the creation of Lagos State.”

    Indeed, Herbert Macaulay was an illustrious man of many parts. Mr. Ojeikere noted: “Herbert Macaulay was an engineer, a surveyor, an architect, an advocate for peace and equality, a publisher and a writer on contemporary events. He had a highly distinguished family background.”  Herbert Macaulay was all these, and more than these.

    With the support of the Lagos State Government under Governor Akinwunmi Ambode, I was the coordinator of the inaugural Herbert Macaulay Gold Lecture (HMGL) which took place at the Lagos Country Club on May 25. The HMGL is a project of Golden Point Communications.

    The morning rain before the event created a cool atmosphere.  Interestingly, Mr. Ojeikere, now in his eighties, was there. Herbert Macaulay is widely recognised as the “Father of Nigerian Nationalism.”  In his era, he earned the tag: “Champion and Defender of Native Rights and Liberties.”  He was born on November 14, 1864, and died on May 7, 1946. Herbert Macaulay died 21 years before the creation of Lagos State on May 27, 1967.  His 71st death anniversary is happening as Lagos State celebrates its 50th birth anniversary. Death and birth meet in a celebration of life.

    Who was this man who is in the category of all-time greats? Long before Lagos became a megacity famed for its remarkable resilience, a mega figure did mega things to advance its development and the progress of Nigeria.  The title of the lecture: Herbert Macaulay and his relevance to the excellence of Lagos. The distinguished Gold Lecturer shed light on Herbert Macaulay’s greatness and its relevance to the pursuit of greatness by Lagos State, and indeed Nigeria.

    Ambassador Dapo  Fafowora delivered  the maiden Hebert Macaulay Gold Lecture. He is a trained historian and a respected retired diplomat.  His lecture was insightful, enlightening and enlivening.

    Fafowora, a Fellow of the Nigerian Academy of Letters (FNAL), said: “I was only five when Herbert Macaulay died and never met him.  It was as a school boy in Lagos that my late father, who was a civil servant himself in the colonial civil service, and a great admirer of Herbert Macaulay, first told me about him and his relentless struggle against colonial rule in Nigeria. Later, when I was 12, he took me to see Herbert Macaulay’s house, named ‘Kirsten Hall’, at 8, Balbina Street, Lagos, near the water front (the Lagoon). I admired the house and, for years, visited it often as I lived near- by, at Ita- Faji. It was an impressive and elegant one-storey detached building which has, regrettably, since been demolished, giving way to what now looks like a grotesque Post Office junk yard. The site is now at the back of the General Post Office House on the Marina. Long after Herbert Macaulay’s death, the house remained a tourist attraction and a sort of political Mecca for his admirers and political associates. Given his prominence as an outstanding historic and public figure in Lagos, I think the house should have been preserved for posterity, not demolished.”

    Fafowora observed:  “The irony is that it was not the colonial authorities, but an indigenous government, that demolished the house to make way for the General Post Office, a singular display of the lack of a sense of history.”

    After painting a picture of the life and times of Herbert Macaulay, the Gold Lecturer asked a thought-provoking question: “What more can we do to honour and immortalise the memory of this outstanding nationalist and patriot?”  Fafowora’s suggestions:  “First, the Lagos State government should urgently set up a Herbert Macaulay Foundation, with the active and generous support of the private sector, to keep his memory and political ideals alive…Second, this lecture should be made an annual event to mark the anniversary of the death of Herbert Macaulay…Third, a major public educational institution in Lagos, preferably a higher institution, should be named after him. As an alternative, a Herbert Macaulay School of Politics and Government should be established in one of our leading Universities in his honour.  The Lagos State University should be considered for this honour.”

    Further suggestions by Fafowora: “Fourth, in the context of the compulsory teaching of Nigerian history in our secondary schools, particularly in Lagos State, a course on Herbert Macaulay should be introduced and made compulsory in our secondary schools; and Fifth, the Glover Memorial Hall on Customs Street, Lagos, adjacent to the Union Bank headquarters… should, with the permission of its Trustees, be renamed Herbert Macaulay Memorial Hall.”

    I will end with a quote: “Lives of great men all remind us/ We can make our lives sublime/ And, departing, leave behind us/ Footprints on the sands of time.”  That was the poet Henry Wadsworth Longfellow.

  • Herbert Macaulay celebrates with Lagos

    Herbert Macaulay is widely recognised as the “Father of Nigerian Nationalism.”  In his era, he earned the tag: “Champion and Defender of Native Rights and Liberties.”  Although he died 71 years ago on May 7, 1946, at age 81, he remains relevant as Lagos State celebrates its 50th anniversary. The celebration will climax on May 27.

    On May 25, with the support of the Lagos State Government, the inaugural Herbert Macaulay Gold Lecture will take place at the Lagos Country Club, Ikeja. The lecturer, Ambassador Dapo Fafowora, will speak on “Herbert Macaulay and his relevance to the excellence of Lagos.”

    Between 1915 and 1921, Herbert Macaulay was involved in the Apapa Land Case, a celebrated legal battle that pitched him against the colonial government over land ownership in Lagos.  The British authorities held that the colony status of Lagos meant that the indigenous landowners could not be compensated should the government decide to acquire their land for public use.  Based on this policy, the government acquired 255 acres of land in Apapa that belonged to the family of Chief Oluwa, Amodu Tijani, a Lagos white-cap chief of the landowning class. The government offered to pay Oluwa compensation equivalent to the rent for the land, but Oluwa demanded a greater compensation since the government was taking over the land and not renting it.  The ensuing dispute became a court matter, and dragged from 1915 to 1918.

    The court eventually upheld the government’s position, and Oluwa, who was dissatisfied with the judgement, initiated an appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in Britain which was the highest court of appeal in the British Empire in those days. The matter came up before the Privy Council in 1920, and Oluwa had to travel to Britain to present his case.

    Oluwa had the backing of Herbert Macaulay who encouraged him to fight to the finish. This was typical of Macaulay. In view of Macaulay’s anti-colonial credentials, his mastery of English and his oratorical power, the unlettered Chief Oluwa readily appointed him as his interpreter and private secretary, and took him to Britain in connection with the case. The Eleko, the King of Lagos, Oba Eshugbayi, supported the move and gave Oluwa a silver-headed staff to show in Britain that he was a genuine Lagos chief.  Eshugbayi was the custodian of the staff that agents of Queen Victoria of England presented to King Akitoye of Lagos in 1852.

    Chief Oluwa was received by His Majesty, King George V, at the Royal Botanical Gardens, London, on July 24, 1920, with Herbert Macaulay holding the silver-headed staff as a symbol of royalty and royal authority. Oluwa and Macaulay spent 15 months in Britain over the land case. On June 14, 1921, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council gave judgement in favour of Chief Oluwa, and ruled that the colonial government in Lagos should pay proper compensation to the Oluwa land-holding family.

    Following this ruling, the government in 1926 paid Chief Oluwa and his family 22, 500 pounds as compensation for the acquired land. Oluwa in turn paid Macaulay 2, 083 pounds for his services. It is said that Oluwa also offered him a piece of land at Apapa which he refused.

    While Macaulay was in Britain over the Apapa Land Case, he seized the opportunity to draw public attention to the plight of the Eleko, the King of Lagos, Oba Eshugbayi of the Dosumu royal family.  The traditional power of the occupant of the throne of Lagos had been circumscribed by the colonial authorities from the time the British overran Lagos in 1851. The Eleko’s financial position also suffered as a result of British rule which blocked his sources of revenue by weakening his control over the external trade as well as internal affairs in Lagos.

    Nevertheless, to cushion the Eleko, the British gave him what they deemed a compassionate grant. This practice predated Eshugbayi’s reign and the grant was changed from time to time.  In Eshugbayi’s time, his supporters asked the government to increase the grant.  Macaulay was one of those that called for a review of Eshugbayi’s grant.

    When Herbert Macaulay raised the issue in Britain, the government in Lagos felt he had carried it too far, and suspected that Eshugbayi had asked him to press the point home. The colonial government reacted by sponsoring some bendable locals who told the Eleko to send his town crier round to condemn Macaulay’s actions abroad. Eshugbayi found himself in a difficult situation. He couldn’t denounce Macaulay; and he had to be cautious lest he was seen as supporting Macaulay.

    There was a deadlock; and in December 1920 the colonial government stopped paying Eshugbayi the compassionate grant.  More fundamentally, apart from depriving Eshugbayi of the annual payment of 300 pounds, the Governor, Sir Hugh Clifford, declared that the Eleko held “no official position and no political significance.”

    News of this development reached Macaulay in Britain, and he took it as a challenge. When Macaulay returned to Lagos after Chief Oluwa’s land case had been resolved, he focused on the “Eleko Question.” The Eleko matter took a turn for the worse in August 1925 when the colonial government decided to expel Eshugbayi from Lagos. The king relocated to Oyo. The government’s move fired Macaulay’s fighting spirit. He considered Eshugbayi’s expulsion unjust and rose against it.

    The lawyers representing the Eleko eventually took the case before the Privy Council in Britain after failed efforts to get the government in Lagos to bring Eshugbayi to court. In its judgement delivered on March 24, 1931, the Privy Council ruled that Eshugbayi’s expulsion should be examined by the courts in Nigeria within the context of native law and custom.  This ruling changed the tide. Governor Donald Cameron issued an order dated June 29, 1931, cancelling Eshugbayi’s expulsion.

    Eshugbayi made a triumphant entry into Lagos on July 4, 1931, welcomed excitedly by the multitude that turned out in the rain to lead him to Iga Idugaran, the palace, with joyous singing and dancing. Macaulay’s reputation sparkled for he clearly played a significant role in the battle for justice for Eshugbayi.

    As Lagos celebrates at 50, Herbert Macaulay’s spirit is around.

  • An agreement is an agreement

    It was a time to look back, and then look forward. The 10th anniversary of Murtala Muhammed Airport Terminal Two (MMA2), Lagos, was not just about the past. More importantly, it was also about the future.

    Talking of the past, it would appear that airport terminal operator Bi-Courtney Aviation Services Limited (BASL) has had a difficult experience concerning the concession agreement it signed with the Federal Government. The anniversary was a fitting time to highlight the minuses that dampened the celebration.

    The company’s chairman, Dr. Wale Babalakin, shed light on the negatives when he spoke to reporters about the government’s contractual infidelity. Babalakin stated: “We got approval since 2007 to operate regional flights from MMA2, but the relevant authorities are frustrating our efforts. We could trace it to both the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) and the Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority (NCAA). It is the airlines that are affected, because they burn aviation fuel moving their aircraft from MMA2 to the international terminal. This would not arise if they had allowed us to operate regional flights from MMA2.”  He added: “In 2008, the former President Musa Umaru Yar’Adua presided over meetings to resolve all issues about MMA2; despite the directive given by the former president, aviation authorities are yet to honour the concession agreement.”

    A report said Babalakin “urged the Federal Government to pay over N200 billion” to BASL “for failing to hand over the old domestic terminal, otherwise known as General Aviation Terminal (GAT), Lagos.”  According to the report, “Babalakin said the payment was necessary after BASL was awarded damages by the Federal High Court to the tune of over N132 billion in 2012. He said the amount increased to N200 billion, owing to the revenue the terminal operator would have collected as revenue for flights and other commercial activities at the old domestic terminal.”

    It is one thing to unlawfully break a concession agreement; it is another thing to defy lawful sanctions. The situation is compounded when the lawfully determined guilty party carries on as if nothing is wrong.

    Against this background, it is understandable that Babalakin has taken the matter to the court of public opinion. He said: “We are seeking the assistance of all and sundry for the payment of the N200 billion owed to Bi-Courtney Airways Services by the Federal Government. As far back as 2012, the Federal High Court awarded damages of N132 billion to Bi-Courtney Airways Limited. Six appeals against the judgment in the Court of Appeal have been dismissed. Even the appeal to the Supreme Court was also dismissed. No nation can truly achieve its potential, if it treats its dynamic citizens this way.”

    Babalakin continued: “We call on the regulatory authorities to honour the concession agreement, which has been approved by every level of government, including the Presidency and confirmed by all the strata of the courts in Nigeria. This is the only way to reward our pioneering efforts.  We are grateful to Allah that our eye opening effort had led to the upgrading of some airports in Nigeria and the decision of the Federal Government to concession airports.”

    It is interesting that the government announced plans to concession 22 airports. Considering Bi-Courtney’s experience, it would be interesting to observe the process and the outcome of the agreements. The MMA 2, inaugurated in May 2007 by former President Olusegun Obasanjo, prides itself on its status as the first privately funded Design, Build, Operate and Transfer (DBOT) terminal in Nigeria. MMA2 reportedly handled 20 million passengers and 400, 000 flights in 10 years.

    It is noteworthy that in the same week that BASL celebrated the 10th anniversary of MMA 2, Acting President Yemi Osinbajo declared that Public-Private Partnership (PPP)   was important and inevitable for the country’s economic growth. Osinbajo said at the Third Presidential Quarterly Business Forum at the old Banquet Hall of the State House, Abuja: “The real challenge is how to efficiently and faithfully implement these great ideas. I think for effective delivery, this partnership with the private sector is undoubtedly the way to go. So, our approach in this respect and other sectors, the delivery unit will invite and work with private sector players in our delivery clusters to deliver on quality and value in all these various sectors. This we will do in all the identified sectors. We will make ourselves accessible to you as much as possible.”

    At the same forum, the Minister of Budget and National Planning, Udoma Udo Udoma, played up the newly launched Economy Recovery Growth Plan (ERGP), saying that the government would take full advantage of the power of the private sector to get Nigeria out of recession and put it on the path of growth.

    It will take much more than words to achieve public-private partnerships that work; and it is only when such collaborations work that the country can enjoy the benefits.

    Babalakin was a  qualified speaker on the problematisation of public-private partnership in the country at last year’s Nigerian Economic Summit in Abuja, where he shared  some  of  his company’s experiences regarding the Murtala Mohammed Airport Domestic Terminal 2, Federal Secretariat, Ikoyi, and Lagos-Ibadan Expressway. His group is controversially enmeshed in disagreements connected with concession agreements with the Federal Government on these particular subjects. It is worth mentioning that, based on his experience, Babalakin listed the drawbacks to public-private partnership in Nigeria: the attitude of the government, lack of respect for sanctity of contracts and the rule of law, lack of investor security, corruption and malice. It goes without saying that any concessionaire faced with these troubles will have nightmares.

    There is no question about the documented success of the PPP model in the development of sectors such as energy, mining, transportation and telecommunications in other countries. The PPP approach and the concession concept cannot be reasonably discounted in a modern economy, especially considering reported examples in Western Europe and U.S.A. where private investors are involved in infrastructure development based on concession agreements.

    In the final analysis, when a concession agreement generates a disagreement, there may well have been no agreement. The ultimate lessons of the 10th anniversary of MMA2 are: an agreement is an agreement and an agreement should not become a disagreement.