Category: Editorial

IF there is one legislation that is overdue, it would be the one making it mandatory for players in the two dominant sectors in the economy – oil and telecommunications– to list their shares on the Nigerian bourse. Several factors have rendered the legislation being considered by the National Assembly imperative.

The first is that the clamour by stakeholders, rather than abate, has been getting more strident since it was first made some five years ago. The second is the apparent failure of moral suasion in getting the players in the two sectors to reason with the government and other stakeholders, with a view to forging an acceptable compromise. The third is the need to further deepen the capital market now on steady rebound.

We must make the initial point that the Federal Government will not be doing anything novel with the plan to make the listing mandatory. We have ready examples in Kenya, which in 2002 enacted Foreign Investor Regulation, which compelled its multinational operators to list a minimum of 25 per cent reserve of the issued share capital for local investors on the capital market.

Another example is Tanzania, which in February 2010 passed a Communication Bill mandating its mobile telecommunications companies to be listed on the Dar’ es Salaam Stock Exchange. Egypt on its part insisted on partial listing as a condition for the award of a mobile licence to Vodafone, a joint venture between Telecom Egypt and Vodafone.

And what are the concerns of those opposed to the measure? The first is that the decision of whether or not to go public should lie with the companies as private entities; the second is that the legislation could send wrong signals to foreign investors. A third reason that has since emerged is that the rules of the listing are generally inflexible.

While these have some basis, the challenge is to address them in a way to reflect the nation’s larger interest. The nation’s interest here is to get the companies listed as soon as practicable. On the first count, we wonder whether corporate decisions can be expected to override the responsibility of the parliament to make laws for the smooth functioning of the economy. And on the second, it is hard to see the ground on which the proposed law can be said to have offended the ideals of free enterprise – it does not. The proposed law seems to us a direct response to an exigency. Even at that, there is need for the Nigeria Stock Exchange (NSE) and the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) to take another look at the listing rules, with a view to making them simpler.

The more fundamental issue however is the responsibility of the government to promote the greatest good for the greatest number. Contrary to expressed fears, the legislation does not seek to expropriate any portion of the shares of any of the companies; rather, at the heart of the quest is the need for companies to show greater sensitivity to the environment where they derive their sustenance. This obviously goes beyond the mandatory payment of taxes and other rates which they are all too often eager to advertise; it extends to giving the local investing public a stake – call it – an opportunity to share in the fortunes of the companies as co-owners.

We consider it a shame that more than half a century of oil exploration, and more than a decade after the telecommunications revolution, none of the major players in the two sectors have thought it fit to voluntarily list their shares on the nation’s capital market. That should change with the coming law.

Poor leadership and elite conflict account for this tragedy

Reports that Africa is home to 40 percent of the world’s internally displaced persons are another minus for a continent already battling with more than it can cope with of the world’s problems. The continent is said to boast 69.5million of such people, with over 42million of them displaced by natural disasters while the remaining 27.5million were displaced by armed conflicts.

Prof. Dakas CJ. Dakas, Director of Research at the Nigeria Institute of Advanced Legal Studies provided the statistic at a roundtable seminar to mark 50 years anniversary of the African Union (AU). The seminar was organised by the Institute of Peace and Conflict Resolution (IPCR).

It is a matter for regret that this is the kind of thing we are commemorating at the golden anniversary of the AU. The Organisation of African Unity (OAU), AU’s precursor, had very laudable objectives at its founding on May 25, 1963. These included promotion of unity and solidarity of African states; co-ordination and intensification of their efforts to achieve a better life for the peoples of Africa; defending their sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence; eradication of all forms of colonialism from Africa; promotion of international co-operation, among others. Regrettably, 50 years down the line, most of these objectives have been realised in reverse, with the high figures of IDPs recorded on the continent being one of the major minuses.

We can understand if most of the challenges leading to the high IDPs are natural; in which case there is little anyone can do (even in the developed countries) to prevent them. But this is not the case; most of the problems that are displacing millions of people from their homes are manmade and avoidable. Interestingly, too, most of the crises on the continent are more of internal conflicts than external; from the Liberian war, to the Sierra Leone war, the conflicts in Sudan, Cote D’Ivoire, and Chad. Indeed, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Sudan and Somalia continue to have Africa’s largest internally displaced populations, and among the largest in the world. In most cases, the crises leading to the IDPs have to do with leadership and succession disputes that people failed to resolve due to intractable electoral malfeasances. Displacements have also occurred in Nigeria, with a significant number of people rendered homeless by the Boko Haram crisis and floods.

In spite of the preponderance of IDPs in Africa, there was no instrument attending to their plight until December 6, 2012, when the Kampala Convention came into force. Sixteen countries, including Nigeria had, by year end, ratified it and by so doing making a legal commitment to address all causes comprehensively. They have also committed to assisting and protecting IDPs and their human rights, including the creation of safe and sustainable conditions for voluntary return, local integration or settlement elsewhere in the country.

But the issue goes beyond ratifying the instrument; there must be genuine commitment and efforts to eradicate the very causes of the problem. Take Nigeria for instance, our response to emergencies alone remains disgusting, with the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) functioning without adequate funds, personnel and equipment.

Lack of good governance remains a major cause of conflicts in Africa. Of course this includes corruption which is a major disincentive to donors who would have loved to help reduce the trauma of IDPs.

Africa can do with far less IDPs. And, as Prof. Dakas noted, we must properly understand the causes of IDPs and accept the fact that it is an African problem that must be solved by Africans. When we reduce political and ethno-religious tension leading to conflicts and hence IDPs on the continent, we would be able to make significant savings from money expended on arms and ammunition, and thus free more resources to address other serious problems confronting the continent.