•‘States should approach Supreme Court on power sector decentralisation’
Dr Fodil Olanrewaju Mohammed-Noah is an energy law expert, an electricity rights advocate, Fellow of the Centre for Petroleum, Energy Economics and Law (CPEEL), University of Ibadan; Associate-in-Chambers, Wale Taiwo & Co; and Principal Counsel, MC Noah & Associates (Legal Practitioners). In this interview with Deputy News Editor JOSEPH JIBUEZE and ADEBISI ONANUGA, he analyses the limits of the Federal Government’s powers in the 1999 Constitution regarding electricity distribution.
Since 1972, in the days of the National Electricity Power Authority (NEPA) and through the era of the Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) till date, the Federal Government of Nigeria has been the sole regulator of the power sector. From the outcome of our research, we discovered that the Federal Government is not the only regulator required to participate in the power sector. So, as far as the constitution is concerned, right from the 1963 Constitution, 1979 Constitution and 1999 Constitution, electricity is not the sole preserve of the Federal Government to manage. We discovered that the distribution segment of the power value change, being the one that is closest to the consumers, is the exclusive preserve of the state.
What is the extent of the Federal Government’s powers over distribution?
The Federal Government, through its agency (Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission), has little or no role to play in the distribution network, including licensing the distribution companies (DISCOs). It is a clear violation of the Constitution for the Federal Government to license the DISCOs. It is the business of the individual states to do that within their domains. That is what the Constitution stipulates. In 1963, the Federal Government and respective state governments could freely legislate on electricity operations in Nigeria. However, the powers of the two levels of government to make law on electricity as an item are limited under the 1979 and 1999 constitutions. In other words, while the Federal as well as the respective subnationals can freely participate in any segment of the power value chain under the 1963 Constitution, such latitude is not allowed under the 1979 and 1999 Constitutions.
What are the relevant sections in the 1999 Constitution?
Under Item F, Part 2, Second Schedule to the 1999 Constitution, the powers of both the Federal Government and state governments to legislate in the power sector were limited. Those powers were arraigned under paragraphs 13, 14, and 15 of the aforesaid Item F in such a way that the Federal Government’s powers are encapsulated in Paragraph 13 thereof, while the areas in which the state governments are allowed to participate are enshrined in Paragraph 14 thereof. For the avoidance of doubt, Paragraph 15 of Item F, Part 2, Second Schedule to the 1999 Constitution defined the word ‘distribution’ as the supply of electricity from a substation to the ultimate consumer. Section 4 of the 1999 Constitution provides the guiding principles governing the state of affairs for both the Federal Government and the respective state governments and this applies to all items in the Concurrent Legislative List. So, under Section 4, the constitution provides the extent to which the Federal Government only can go in legislating on an item, while it also provides for the extent to which the state governments can go. A similar instance is found in an item relating to revenue generation where the constitution allocates certain powers to the Federal Government as well as the state governments and demarcates the area of influence of each level of government. For instance, the constitution has made it the role of the Federal Government to collect Company Income Tax, However, Personal Income Tax falls within the purview of the state to collect; notwithstanding that the policy area of those taxes is prepared and made by the National Assembly as represented by the Senate and House of Representatives.
Can you further explain these constitutional limitations?
In item F of Part II, Second Schedule to the 1999 Constitution, as amended, three components: power generating stations, transmission systems and distribution systems are found in paragraphs 13, 14, and 15 thereof. While Paragraph 13 of Item F creates a column where the Federal Government can make law, Paragraph 14 provides a column where the state governments can legislate upon. Specifically in paragraph 13 (a) of Item F, the National Assembly can make laws relating to the establishment of generating plants like Kanji, Shiroro, and Jebba dams and most lately, we have the Kashambila dam that has just been inaugurated. Also, we have Egbin Power Station which is the largest thermal station in Nigeria. Those are the areas in which the Federal Government can validly make laws.
How about the states?
Also, in paragraph 14 (a) of item F, Part II, 2nd schedule to the 1999 Constitution, the states are empowered to generate electricity and establish power-generating plants. It means that in electricity generation, both the Federal Government represented by the National Assembly and the state houses of assembly can validly make laws.
Does this apply to the transmission segment?
Also, in the transmission segment, both the Federal Government and the state governments can validly legislate under Paragraphs 13 (b) and 14 (b) of item F, Part II, 2nd schedule to the 1999 Constitution. However, by section 4 (5) of the 1999 Constitution, there is this proviso. Where we have an item upon which the Federal Government and the state governments can validly legislate, the moment the Federal Government makes a law to govern that area, the power of the state would go into abeyance. It is not that they don’t have that power, but they won’t be able to exercise same because there is an existing legislation of the Federal Government on that same subject matter, notwithstanding that the state governments can also legislate on that area. So, by the principle of covering the field (also known as the inconsistency rule), the power of the state governments to make laws will be frozen at that particular point in time.
How about the distribution segment?
In the last segment called Distribution Network, the Federal Government has no say, as a general rule. It is the states’ exclusive preserve to manage the distribution network of the power value chain. The Federal Government has little or no role to play. If there is going to be any role as far as the constitution is concerned, under Paragraph 13 (d), Item F, Part II, 2nd Schedule to the 1999 Constitution (as amended), it is only in the borderline area. If the Federal Government deemed it necessary to participate in the distribution value chain, it could only do so through the borderline areas which fall within a radius of areas partly within Nigeria and partly outside Nigeria. And that one is a question of fact. If that one does not exist, the state government is the only exclusive regulator of the distribution side of the power value chain.
Where does distribution network fall?
We have two network systems in Nigeria, and they are monopolistic in nature. We have a transmission system which is a monopoly of a kind. We also have a distribution system. So the transmission System is managed by the Transmission Company of Nigeria (TCN). That one was not privatised till date. It is in the hands of the Federal Government. We now have a distribution system. That is what the NERC is managing. In 2013, the Federal Government privatised that segment of the power value chain. That is a different network and that’s why we have 11 DisCos. We have examples of these networks in Eko Disco and Ikeja Electric. So Eko Disco and Ikeja Electric are the ones managing Lagos electricity through a license given to them by NERC.
Can it be said the Federal Government has usurped the function of Lagos in that area?
Yes. They took it and it is unconstitutional. No law gives them the power to do so. So it is a violation of the constitution for the Federal Government to do so and they have been doing this as far back as 1972 when NEPA was created; when electricity management was centralised through NEPA. Before then, we had the Niger Dam Authority (NDA). We also had the Electricity Corporation of Nigeria (ECN). Those are the entities that supplied electricity then at both generation and distribution levels. They were separate entities. But in 1972, under the Yakubu Gowon Administration, it was centralised to form NEPA. That was what obtained until 2005 when we had the Electric Power Sector Reform Act of 2005 during the Obasanjo Administration that oversaw the power sector reforms.
How would you situate the power plants established by states?
We have some electricity power operators called Independent Power Producers (IPP). They allow them to generate electricity through a license. It is still within the overriding control of the NERC. It is even an anathema to have what we call the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC). It should be the Federal Electricity Regulatory Commission. This coinage (FERC) takes into cognisance that states have the right to set up their own electricity regulatory agencies without any interference. In the U.S. from where we drew our inspiration for electricity management, we have what you call the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Also, we now have the State Public Utility Commission (SPUC). Both operate hand in hand. While the FERC of U.S. handles power in bulk that move from one state to another, the SPUC, handles power within their domain. In fact, they are the ones that can fix tariff on electricity that flows within their domain. The significance of managing distribution network is that they must be the one that will license DISCOs.
So, the Federal and state governments can validly legislate on electricity?
Yes! It is called the Concurrent Legislative List. Electricity has been there as far back as 1963, and it has not changed to date. It is found in Item F, Part II, Second Schedule to the 1999 Constitution. There is this perception from the public and some lawyers who pontificate on both radio and other media houses that electricity falls within the exclusive legislative list. It’s wrong. It is a wrong perception. It is an error. I will show you where you can find my position in our constitutions. I can show you where it falls in the 1963 Constitution, 1979 Constitution, and 1999 Constitution (as amended).
What about the states like Abia nd Enugu that are already setting up power stations?
Let me tell you what is different there. If you use the word power station, they are still within generation. It is not distribution. Generation is different from transmission and distribution. Let me now give you an instance. By having a generator at home, you are generating in your own house. The generator itself is a generation plant. So let’s demystify what they are doing in Aba and Enugu. They are only generating. But the problem lies with the systems, the two systems that are monopolistic in nature. The transmission system is a monopoly in the power sector all over the world. It is a monopoly and not everybody can operate there. Then we now have distribution. It is instructive to note that in Paragraph 13 (b) of Item F, Part II of the Second Schedule to the 1999 Constitution, generation and transmission of electricity were mentioned; while the word ‘distribution’ was conspicuously absent in the Federal Legislative Column. However, in the state legislative column under Paragraph 14 (b), generation, transmission, and distribution of electricity are conspicuously present. The only constraint is that, in respect of generation and transmission, the state governments may have their powers curtailed in view of Section 4 (5) of the 1999 Constitution.
Do states need to apply for license to manage distribution?
No. The Federal Governmnt, however, thought it had that power. It does not. In fact, the state does not need to write a letter to the Federal Government for permission to manage the distribution segment of the power value chain. I’m not bothered about the generation. The Federal Government can continue to keep Jebba Dam, Shiroro Dam, as well as Kainji Dam. Interfering with the flow of water from sources in any part of Nigeria is the exclusive preserve of the Federal Government. Such interference is a red zone for the states. In the same vein, electricity distribution is a kind of red zone for the Federal Government to participate in. The state government cannot even waive its right such that it enures to the benefit of the Federal Government. The only area where the Federal Government can participate in distribution activity is when it covers an area partly within Nigeria and partly outside Nigeria.
For example, we are giving Benin Republic electricity. So if you have borderline area that the Federal Government supplies power to and it runs into the Benin Republic, it has the exclusive preserve of that distribution network. It must also be noted that, apart from transmission lines which have 330KV, 132 KV, distribution lines have the trio of 33KV, 11KV, and 415 Volts.
Do you think the fact Federal Government owns most power infrastructure is a factor?
No! The moment something is done, and such thing violates the constitution, it is subject to annulment by our courts. It does not matter if such an act is being repeated for upward of 50 years. Once it is shown that such an act is beyond the constitutional purview of what Section 4 of the Constitution prescribes, our courts will move in to stop any excess in the exercise of legislative power. Both Federal Government and state governments are creations of the constitution.
Has a court ruling or order been validating that section?
Section 4 of the 1999 Constitution validates itself since it is clear. This area of research is novel. There has not been any step taken to deal with that area. But we have seen that the principle that guides all these activities is still Section 4 and we have seen some activities that indicate areas where the principle has been applied. For example, during Obasanjo’s era as the President, he seized local government funds and Lagos State went to court. The Supreme Court held that the Federal Government has no right to do so. There is an example of revenue allocation too. There are many cases relating to these items of the constitution where Section 4 comes to play to deal with it. The latest one is the steps taken by the Attorney General of the Federation on Local Government fund to show that the fund is not meant for the states. They only take it for and on behalf of the Local Governments under them. And now it has been settled by the pronouncement of the Supreme Court under section 232 of the constitution. That one has been settled. But this one has not been tested, and that’s why it is novel in the history of our electricity management. It is so clear that it doesn’t need too much noise to remediate it and the long years of violation of the constitution does not ripen it into something that is right.
Do you think states have the capacity in their own right to handle this distribution?
Let me tell you. They have. We are talking about states. We are not talking about individuals now. Forget about governors. With the pronouncement of the Supreme Court on the right of local government to manage their own fund themselves taking effect, next election will be tough and competitive because some people with capacity will come up to contest. There will be more capable hands that will contest local government elections in the next dispensation. It is going to be a fight. It will give room for competition, healthy competition. Can the state do it? There are many things states are doing efficiently more than the Federal Government. I can say this conveniently that corruption, because I was asked at the ARISE TV interview about the capacity of the states as if governors are demons, how can we curb corruption? Let me tell you, the worst form of corruption is violation of the constitution. If the constitution is not violated, there will be a limit to which corruption can fester; if the laws are being implemented, there will be little people that would violate the law. So, the states can do a lot and the example of this is this: Lagos state can handle its security through various security outfits they have. You will realise that when South Western states were establishing Amotekun, Lagos state did not do so because it already had an outfit that is working; an outfit that is fit for purpose. Also, Lagos state, through its efforts in the transport system, has been a consultant to many states, and this workable model is being replicated at the federal level; including taxes. I don’t know whether you’re aware that they are trying to reform tax management at the federal level when Lagos state has done it over the years.
Would you advise states to seek its interpretation? How can they begin to implement this section?
The states are already agitated seriously and I am aware of that. Many of them erroneously were doing laws on this area. The laws will meet brick walls in the Electricity Act in view of section 4(5) of the 1999 Constitution. You know, when this dispute happens, nobody will go outside the law. Even if the Federal Government has to contest, it will contest within the confines of the constitution. This is Electricity Act of 2023 that the President assented to on the 8th June, 2023. The wrong impression is that this Electricity Act now gave states right to participate in the power sector. It is a lie from the pit of hell. That was why I said that as far back as 1963, state governments have that power, notwithstanding the existence of Electricity Act. In fact, the research went further to discover that we have close to nine provisions in this Act that offend the 1999 Constitution. Sections 34, 63, 68, 113, 114, 115, 116, 226, and 232 of Electricity Act 2023 have provisions relating to distribution segment of the power value chain which offend the 1999 Constitution. Those provisions are all amiable to nullification if the states approach the court because those provisions will be affecting the power of the state to play its rightful role in the power sector. Don’t get me wrong. The area that exclusively enures to the benefits of the states is the distribution network. If the states successfully take over distribution network, it will create needed stability in the power sector.
When our President was governor of Lagos state, the state partnered Enron as a generation company, this laudable but audacious move failed to succeed because of the distribution network. This is because when you produce power, you must evacuate it to a system and that system is transmission system. From there, it will be transferred to distribution. One important thing is this: the states don’t need transmission network to get light to the ultimate consumers. They don’t need it. The Federal Government acknowledged this when the NERC made a regulation in 2012 called Independent Electricity Distribution Network of 2012. What that one says is that they can create an independent system that will link to the distribution system to provide light. They don’t need to go through transmission. This means that when you evacuate power from the generation company to the states, the states don’t need transmission. In Benin Republic, there was no transmission network because the country relies on our transmission network to feed its distribution system. Nigerian government supplies the French-speaking country. I have been to Benin and Togo, in respect of this research to see how the distribution network works. They don’t have transmission, and they’re having light. They don’t generate at a large scale. They rely on Nigeria for power supply. If they have generation, at all, it may be off grid, like the, solar energy. They can have that. They can even have generators like you have in your homes.
So what is your advice to deal with this situation?
My advice is simple. In order to deal with the stumbling block, there is need to seek the interpretation of Section 4 of the 1999 Constitution as it applies to electricity as an item in the concurrent legislative list. I was, sometimes, at the Lagos State Ministry of Energy where I was reliably informed that a law to govern electricity is in the offing. I am equally aware that the state had in place before now the 2018 Lagos State Electric Power Sector Reform Law. The wrong impression is that, since electricity Act has come up, the states are now making laws pursuant to the Electricity Act. My position is that they are wrong. They should make their own law in line with the constitution and simultaneously seek the interpretation of Section 4 of the 1999 Constitution as amended. They don’t need to even seek the permission of the Federal Government.
You’re saying that the Electricity Act is not binding on the states?
No! But because of Section 4(5) of the 1999 Constitution, the Supreme Court will be the appropriate arbiter to deal with the situation under Section 232 of the Constitution. What that provision states is that when there is a dispute between states and the Federal Government any aggrieved entity can approach the Supreme Court for resolution. As of now, the states do not feel there is a dispute; they are just grumbling.
But Ekiti State has made a law?
Yes. Ekiti State has made a law the way Lagos State did in 2018.The state desired by its law to take over the distribution network. There was thinking towards that direction. However, the state was advised that such attempt will not be possible; and I agree that it will not be possible. What the state can do is to approach the Supreme Court under section 232 of the 1999 constitution and invokes its original jurisdiction to interpret Section 4 of the constitution vis a visItem F, Part II, Second Schedule to the 1999 Constitution as amended. What the states need is to take control of the distribution network. The Federal Government will still be in charge of the transmission network because transmission network is useful to other West African countries. You can see that when Niger Republic had diplomatic issues with ECOWAS, the Federal Government shut down its transmission line that supplies the French-speaking country thereby leading to disruption of the country’s economy. Nigerian electricity is the sole preserve of our economy. If electricity is not gotten right, there will be no development. And we have been in this for the past 40 years. If we don’t deal with it by doing the right thing, we will still be in it for the next 40 years. So, any of the state governments can approach the court by invoking the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to interpret those provisions of the constitution relating to electricity. If the states take over the distribution network, there will be much more investments and electricity by nature thrives on economies of scale. The more energy we have, the less our cost. We have 5,375 megawatts at the highest. I learnt that in 2020. 2.8 megawatts was added, while the US has over 1,325 terawatts of actual electricity generation. This is not megawatt. Megawatt means 1,000,000 {1 million} watts. Gigawatt means 1,000,000,000 {1 Billion} watts. When you now have 1 terawatt, it means that you have 1,000,000,000,000 {1 trillion) watts of energy. We are talking about actual generation capacity which is different from installed capacity. Nigeria of over 200 million people has just a little above 12,000 megawatts installed capacity of energy and we are unable to generate half of that. We only have, at the peak, 5,375 megawatts. Perhaps, this is because we are not using electricity for development. Perhaps, the meagre amount of energy is even too much for us because what we usually need energy for is just bulb, fan, may be Air Condition (AC). This stems from the fact that Nigeria is a showroom economy; a dumping ground for all manners of imported goods.
How is it done in other climate that all is so well?
We were inspired during the 1979 move to the presidential system. We adopted wholesale the concept of electricity management in the USA. The USA is a prototype federation. It is the most recognised federation all over the world. So, we adopted the US-type Federal system of government. As we are habitual lawbreakers in Nigeria- both governed and government- we do it things wrongly in every aspect of our lives. Look at 6-3-3-4, educational system. It was adopted wholesale from the US, but we are still doing WAEC. And we don’t need WAEC. The 6-3-3-4, Senior Secondary School Certificate covers that part of the educational level. We are still doing WAEC till date. Notwithstanding that we claim we adopt 6-3-3-4 from US since mid-80s during Babangida’s regime. But we are still doing it the wrong way, and we are still doing the same thing here in electricity and that is why we don’t have electricity. Obasanjo wrote in his book, My Watch, that eight years is not enough to fix the problems in the power sector; even if we have all the money required to fix same. I did concur in my research with his conclusion and I dare say, 40 years also is not enough to fix the problems if we are still doing it the wrong way.
USA has one of the highest transmission lines in the world and that is about 600 kilovolts (KV). But in Nigeria, we have 330 kilovolts. During the Jonathan era, they wanted to do up to 700. We like dreaming. We continue to dream; when that dream expires, we start another dream. That’s what we do in Nigeria. So USA is an appropriate example of a federation that got it right in its electricity governance. It is not that USA does not have challenges. In fact, my research goes on to discover that there is no electricity management in any part of the world that does not have its own fair of challenges. But when there is robust reform process in place, such a process will take care of those challenges.
So, what is our own situation like?
In our own case, it is as if we are still in the 1930s of the US. In 1930s, the country had its own fair share of challenges; although they were all surmountable. Presently, USA has electricity in excess. But in our own case, we are in dire need of electricity like someone in coma. Without it, there will be no development. Without it, there will be no company to operate optimally. We’ll just become showroom for other countries to showcase their products. We’ll now be a buying and selling country (mercantile economy) and that is what is creating unemployment in Nigeria, and it is leading to insecurity. If you are not electricity secured, there will be no security in Nigeria.
So, what is the way out?
What should be done is this. Any of the state governments can approach the court. The right relating to electricity regulation concerns the states than any other non-state actors. Instead of going cap in hand to the Federal Government to beg for license, the states can get it right by taking the bull by its horns. Doing this can create an economy of a kind such that the IGR of each state will soar. We have a country; a beautiful country that is untapped. What we can use to tap it is electricity. So if the states approach the Supreme Court to interpret section 4, vis-a-vis item F, showing that the Federal Government has no right to manage distribution network of the power value chain, this will enhance stability in the constituent states. That is where the money is. It is the DISCOs that take money from the consumers and pay generation companies as well as the Transmission Company. I have seen reports of how these DISCOs are mismanaging a humongous amount of electricity earnings in the power sector. They don’t have exclusive ownership of that money. They have to give out to the transmission. But they are perpetually in arrears of their due remittances.
Is it subsidy that prevents them from paying other deserving operators?
No. Ordinarily, you know, we have very little power and I have said that electricity, as a product thrives on economies of scale. The more power you get the lesser costs it attracts, we don’t need less than, at least to start with a 100,000 megawatts. We are in 5,000 megawatts. Very few companies, very few industries in Nigeria; at their optimal capacity, can consume 5,000 megawatts. The highest electricity-generating country in the world is China, followed by US and you can see the population. Unfortunately, our population is going on a geometric progression while we are even retrogressing in our electricity. We are supposed to be at par with our population because every part of the community is being developed to consume more electricity. The moment you have one bungalow becoming four, it means that they need more power. If you want to measure poverty, you measure it by the amount of power available to you. To identify a poor man, check the amount of energy available for his use. That is energy poverty. So the states now can approach the Supreme Court, invoke the original jurisdiction of the court under Section 232 of the Constitution. What makes it so beautiful is that the facts available to deal with the situation are not contestable. They are so clear, clearer than what obtained in the local government fund dispute, which has been settled now. In this present scenario, the issue that arises for determination is: who has the right to manage distribution network? That is the simple question to settle by the court. The interpretation of this by the Court may necessarily not go beyond the application of literal rule. The Court may not find the need to apply progressive rule of interpretation as it did in the local government fund decision. By that decision, the Federal Government has the power to withhold any local government fund that does not have elective officials. I strongly believe that this modest endeavour by the states will succeed. When it succeeds, it will positively impact the economy in all the states because they will be in charge of their electricity. It is not out of place to opine that the worst form of hunger in Nigeria is the need for light to power our homes, businesses, industries, etc. If electricity is available, we’ll be able to produce more food through, mechanised farming. Many investors in Nigeria did show interest in investing in the generation segment of the power value change, but when you have distribution network that is out of tune with reality, such investments will not materialise. If the state government takes charge of the distribution network, at least Lagos state will feel the impact. Lagos is struggling and I pity Lagos State. Lagos State is one of the foremost states that, have a lot of potential, and they are ready to explore it. In 2017 or thereabout, the super minister; the former governor of Lagos State; Babatunde Raji Fashola, SAN because of his influence as Minister of Power, Works and Housing, was able to secure a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between TCN and Eko Atlantic to supply 20 megawatts of power so that they can power that edifice. After he left, I doubt if that MOU still subsist. The Eko Atlantic is the creation of the state. They have it. If they have the distribution network, there is no problem to supply them power within the state. There will be more generation company that will crop up because they are ready to go as I saw, and as I witnessed in the Lagos Ministry of Energy. They will be able to manage electricity within the state. They don’t even need the transmission network where the national grid collapses every time.
What is the installed electricity capacity?
We have over 12,000 megawatts of installed capacity. Yes. The transmission network has up to 8,100 capacity to hold power while the distribution network is at the level of 5,000 plus. But the moment transmission network gets to 6,000 megawatts, there will be a curve and there will be a collapse. It is struggling to hold up to 6,000 megawatts/hour of electricity. It will collapse because there’s a limit to which it can handle. But there is a beautiful concept in the Constitution. There’s a robust concept created for electricity in the Constitution, but we did not make use of it. If the states, as I repeat, go to the Supreme Court; validate their position, they will be able to generate more investments for generation that will link distribution networks. If that was done during the present President’s era while he was governor in 2001, he would be able to succeed in his effort to light up Lagos. Unfortunately, ENRON collapsed because there was nowhere to evacuate and push the power to. The highway through which electricity passes is the network and as I said, it is monopolistic in nature. This problem is further compounded by the rent-seeking attitudes of those presently managing the distribution network. They don’t mean business. They don’t even desire more power because of the windfall necessitated by uncharitable estimated billing. In fact, they reject power in some situations because they believe that they won’t be able to pay back the amount of energy willed to them and that is why they don’t even like to have more power as they get more money through estimated billing.
That’s why they keep us in darkness?
Yes. Estimated billing, that’s where they make a lot of money. I did a research on estimated billing, and I see in my research; using my flat as a case study on amount of energy I consume through metered and through un-metered billing. Six months of estimated billing, they told me that I consumed over 3,000 kilowatts of energy. Whereas, when I was metered within one year, it was around 700 kilowatts. In monetary terms, I was made to pay over N100’000 in estimated billing. Whereas, through metered billing, I was made to pay around N23’000 within a year.
Is there any solution to the incessant collapse of the grid?
The solution is to decentralise. The philosophy behind electricity management is that in a federation like ours, we cannot survive with centralised governance. We can only survive with the decentralisation of the power systems. It is not rocket science. The constitution has provided for it for the past 50 years, only that we refuse to follow it. Nigeria is a country where we don’t have respect for rule of law. The only fruit that respect for rule of law can provide is stability, efficient administration, economic progress, and satisfaction among citizens. Energy deficiency can create insecurity in the system and that is exactly what we are having. If you want to stop it, even in the interim as a stopgap, the states must be up and doing. They must take the bull by the horn like the Attorney General of the Federation did two months ago to resolve the crisis of Local Government fund. I believe these states can do a lot if this decentralised option is undertaken. We only need to follow the constitution. It’s there. It will be most uncharitable if a foreign expert is brought in to advise us – for a humongous fee – that we should hand over this distribution network to the states. You know, Nigerians like anything imported, including imported advice. If one expert, who comes into Nigeria by invitation, now advises our state actors on this, they will be eager to implement it because such advice is made in abroad.
