PRESS RELEASE

Someone asked me what I would do if I lost my election petition appeal at the Supreme Court. In response, I said that as long as Nigeria wins, the struggle would have been worth the while. By that, I meant that the bigger loss would not be mine but Nigeria’s if the Supreme Court legitimizes illegality, including forgery, identity theft, and perjury.

If the Supreme Court, the highest court in the land, implies by its judgment that crime is good and should be rewarded, then Nigeria has lost and the country is doomed irrespective of who occupies the Presidential seat. If the Supreme Court decides that the Electoral umpire, INEC, can tell the public one thing and then do something else in order to reach a corruptly predetermined outcome, then there is really no hope for the country’s democracy and electoral politics.

Obviously, the consequences of those decisions for the country will not end at the expiration of the current government. They will last for decades. I am absolutely sure that history will vindicate me. We now know what the Supreme Court has decided.

At critical points in my political life, I always ignored the easy but ignoble path and chosen the difficult but dignified path, the path of truth, of morality, of democracy and rule of law.

I always chose freedom over servitude, whatever the personal discomforts my choice entails. When I joined politics, the critical challenge was easing the military out of power so that civilian democratic governance could be restored in Nigeria. It later became a very defining struggle, and, as one of the leaders of that struggle, I was targeted for elimination.

In one incident, nine policemen guarding my home in Kaduna were murdered in an attempt to assassinate me. I was also forced into exile for nine (9) months. In addition, my interest in a logistics company that I co-owned was confiscated and given to friends of the military government. As Vice President in the civilian government that succeeded the military, I, again at great personal cost, chose to oppose the extension of the tenure of the government beyond the two four-year terms enshrined in our constitution.

In response to the official backlash against me, I instituted several cases in the courts, which led to seven landmark decisions that helped to deepen our democracy and rule of law. At the current historic moment, the easier option for me would have been to fold up and retreat after the mandate banditry perpetrated by the APC and INEC.

But I went to the Nigerian courts to seek redress. I even went to an American court to help with unravelling what our state institutions charged with such responsibilities were unwilling or unable to do, including unravelling the qualifying academic records of the person sworn in as our President and by implication, hopefully who he really is.

I offered that evidence procured with the assistance of the American Court to our Supreme Court to help it to do justice in this case. I give this background to underscore that what we are currently dealing with is bigger than one or two presidential elections and is certainly bigger than Atiku Abubakar. It is not about me; it is about our country, Nigeria. It is about the kind of society we want to leave for the next generation and what kind of example we want to set for our children and their children.

It is about the reputation of Nigeria and Nigerians in the eyes of the world. We showed incontrovertible evidence that Bola A. Tinubu was not qualified to contest the Presidential Election because he forged the qualifying academic certificate, which he submitted to INEC. In fact, a simple check of Tinubu’s past records in its possession would have shown INEC that Tinubu broke the law and should not have been allowed to contest the election.

We showed irrefutable evidence of gross irregularities, violence, and manipulations during the elections. We showed incontrovertible evidence that INEC violated the Electoral Act and deliberately sabotaged its own publicly announced processes and procedures in order to illegally declare Tinubu elected. The position of the Supreme Court, even though final, leaves so much unanswered.

Even the rebuke by retired Justice Musa Dattijo Muhammad is a confirmation from within the apex court that all is not well with the Supreme Court. The court and indeed the judiciary must never lend itself to politicization as it is currently the norm with nearly every institution in Nigeria. By the way, the strong rebuke of the apex court by the revered Justice, who had meritoriously served for more than four decades, should not be swept under the carpet.

The alarm raised by Justice Muhammad and recently, former INEC Chairman, Attahiru Jega, offer Nigerians an explanation into why the electoral and judicial system have become the lost hope of the common man.

Judges are no longer appointed based on merit but are products of the interplay of politics and nepotism. Worse still, the appointment of electoral officials has also been hijacked by the ruling party as seen in the latest nomination of Resident Electoral Commissioners where card carrying members of the ruling party and aides to politicians in the APC are being appointed into INEC. When two critical institutions like the court and the electoral commission are trapped in an evil web of political machination, it becomes next to impossible for democracy to thrive.

As a stakeholder in the presidential election of February 25, I, along with other well-meaning Nigerians have done my bit in ensuring that our democratic process enjoys the privilege of full disclosure of the character deficiencies of the current political leadership. I also believe that even if the Supreme Court believes otherwise, the purpose of technology in our electoral system is to enhance transparency and not merely as a viewing centre. We have to move with the world and not be stuck in time.

Implications of PEPC and Supreme Court judgments

I leave Nigerians and the world to decide what to make of the Supreme Court’s unfortunate decision. But here’s my take. The judgments of the PEPC and the Supreme Court have very far-reaching grave implications, including the following:

One is the erosion of trust in the electoral system and our democracy. Nigerians witnessed as the National Assembly changed the electoral law to improve transparency in the process. Of particular importance was the introduction of modern technology to help eliminate the recurring incidents of electoral manipulation, particularly during the collation of results. Nigerians and the world also witnessed as the leadership of the INEC, especially its Chairman and National Commissioner for Voter Education reassured Nigerians on national television multiple times that the use of that technology would be mandatory.

Yet that same INEC undermined the use of that technology during the elections and collation process and declared as winner someone who clearly did not win the Presidential election. They then went further to take sides in the courts in a dogfight to defend their illegality. Who would convince the millions of Nigerians to vote in future elections after they suffered endlessly on queues to register to vote, to collect PVCs and to vote, based on INEC’s assurances only to see their votes stolen and given to someone they did not vote for?

When people lose trust and confidence in elections, democracy is practically on life support. And by affirming and legitimizing the continued lack of transparency in our electoral system the courts are continuing to usurp the rights of voters to elect their leaders. The other grave implication is that contestants in Nigeria’s elections should do whatever is necessary to be declared the winner. That includes identity theft, impersonation, forging of educational and other documents, perjury, and violence.

And, as they do so, they should ignore whatever the law says and whatever assurances from the leadership of the electoral umpire about what the law says and what they would do in compliance. And they would do so knowing that our courts would approve of their behaviour or at best pretend not to take any notice of it. The third is that if you are robbed of victory, do not bother going to court for redress because your glaring evidence of the robbery will be ignored in favour of the mandate bandit.

Also, your lawyers, however distinguished and accomplished, may be ridiculed by the judges who may also go out of their way to make even a stronger case for the so-called “winner” than even their own lawyers were able to do. These are clearly self-help strategies and actions bereft of the law and constitutionalism. Only lawlessness and anarchy will result from such, with violence, destruction and implosion and loss of our country likely to follow.

I believe that we still have a small window to prevent these from happening. I still believe that we can rescue this country from the strange imposters that have seized it illegally and are holding it by the jugular. Let me caution that the leaders of those African countries that have completely collapsed into chaos never came together one day and agreed to collapse their countries. Rather their countries collapsed because of the incremental and compounding individual and collective utterances and actions of those leaders.

Nigerians know more about the person sitting in office as their President and how he got there, and the dangers that it portends for them and the country. It is for them, especially the younger generation whose futures are to be shaped by that man, to decide what they want to do with the knowledge.

Now, let me give a historical perspective to the constitutional evolution that gave birth to the 1999 Constitution. In the build up to the current democratic dispensation, agitation was rife amongst members of the political class and a large number of civil society bodies to envision a constitution that would operate a democracy in a functional order after the nasty military regimes. These agitations and necessities of the circumstance of that time led to the convocation of the 1995 Constitutional Conference, which I was privileged to be a part of, alongside other prominent political actors.

The Constitutional Conference was expected to create the frameworks upon which a new constitution would be built in order to make the dreams of a democratic society. A number of far-reaching reforms and recommendations were made, which drew from our past experiences and aimed at safeguarding the new constitution from the mistakes of the past.

One such headline recommendation was the concept of rotational presidency anchored on the principle of 6 years single term among the 6 geopolitical blocks. Even the notional idea of delineating the country along geo-political blocks was a creation of the 1995 conference. Another thematic recommendation at the conference was that the Federal Capital Territory should be given the democratic opportunity to elect for itself a mayor who shall emerge from popular franchise. These two recommendations were part of the landmark reforms that were submitted to the military government that convoked the Constitutional Conference.

However, and rather disappointingly, the government that midwifed the current democratic dispensation and enacted what is now known as the 1999 Constitution, expunged these two recommendations from what eventually became the body of legislation to govern our fledgling democracy.

As for me and my party this phase of our work is done. However, I am not going away. For as long as I breathe I will continue to struggle, with other Nigerians, to deepen our democracy and rule of law and for the kind of political and economic restructuring the country needs to reach its true potential. That struggle should now be led by the younger generation of Nigerians who have even more at stake than my generation.

So, let me make a few proposals that I believe will help. We can urgently make constitutional amendments that will prevent any court or tribunal from hiding behind technicalities and legal sophistry to affirm electoral heists and undermine the will of the people. Our democracy must mean something; it must be substantive. Above all, it must be expressed through free, fair and transparent elections that respect the will of the people.

Firstly, we must make electronic voting and collation of results mandatory. This is the 21st century and countries less advanced than Nigeria are doing so already. It is only bold initiatives that transform societies.

Secondly, we must provide that all litigation arising from a disputed election must be concluded before the inauguration of a winner. This was the case in 1979. The current time frame between elections and inauguration of winners is inadequate to dispense with election litigations.

What we have currently is akin to asking thieves to keep their loot and use the same to defend themselves while the case of their robbery is being decided. It only encourages mandate banditry rather than discourages it.

Thirdly, in order to ensure popular mandate and real representation, we must move to require a candidate for President to earn 50% +1 of the valid votes cast, failing which a run-off between the top two candidates will be held. Most countries that elect their presidents use this Two-Round System (with slight variations) rather than our current First-Past-the-Post system.

Examples include France, Finland, Austria, Bulgaria, Portugal, Poland, Turkey and Russia, Argentina, Brazil, Ivory Coast, Sierra Leone, Namibia, Mozambique, Madagascar and even Liberia where a run-off is expected to hold in the coming days.

Fourthly, in order to reduce the desperation of incumbents and distractions from governing and also to promote equity and national unity, we need to move to a single six-year term for President to be rotated among the six geo-political zones. This will prevent the ganging up of two or more geo-political zones to alternate the presidency among themselves to the exclusion of other zones.

@inecnigeria should be mandated to verify the credentials submitted to it by candidates and their parties and where it is unable to do so – perhaps because the institutions involved did not respond in time - it must publicly state so and have it on record.

A situation where a candidate submits contradictory credentials to INEC in different election cycles and the electoral umpire accepts them without question points to gross negligence, at best, or collusion to break the law by the leadership of the INEC, at worst. The submission of contradictory qualifying documents by a candidate as well as those found to be forged or falsified should disqualify a candidate even if the falsification or forgery is discovered after the person had been sworn into office.

The burden of proving that a document submitted to INEC is forged should not be on the opposing candidates in the election. It is never the responsibility of an applicant for a job to prove that the person who eventually got the job did so with forged documents.

In addition to these proposed constitutional amendments, the Electoral Act should be amended to provide that, except where they explicitly violate the Constitution and other laws, the rules and procedures laid down by the electoral umpire and made public for the benefit of the contestants and the voters will be treated as sacrosanct by the courts in deciding on election disputes.

A referee cannot be allowed to set the rules for the game only to change or ignore them when one side has scored a goal or is about to win the match. We must restore confidence in our electoral system which the current leadership of INEC has completely eroded and undermined. Also, we need well-thought out provisions in the legislation and regulations to reform the judiciary, including the introduction of an automated case assignment system; transparency in the appointment of judges; a practice directory that stresses that the goal of judges in election cases should be to discover and affirm voters’ choice rather than disregarding voters’ choice for the sake of technicalities.

There should also be publicly available annual evaluation of the performance of judges using agreed criteria. By improving the transparency of the electoral process and reducing the incentives to cheat, in addition to transparency in the appointment of judges and other judicial reforms, the number of election petitions as well as corruption in the judiciary will be significantly reduced. More importantly, we would have succeeded in taking away the right to elect leaders from the courts and return it to the voters to whom it truly belongs.

Gentlemen of the Press, I thank you profoundly for listening. May God bless you, and may God bless the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

** Being text of a World Press Conference on the Presidential Election Petition Judgement by Atiku Abubakar, former Vice President of Nigeria (1999-2007) and Presidential Candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party in the 2023 Election, at the PDP Headquarters in Abuja on Monday, 30th October, 2023.

All Progressives Congress (APC) says Nigeria is greater than the “unrealised” presidential ambition of Atiku Abubakar, candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), in the February 25 election.

The ruling party was reacting to a press conference by Abubakar on Monday organised to react to the ruling of the supreme court that upheld the election of President Bola Tinubu.

Following his defeat at the supreme court, the former vice-president said the judiciary has become the lost hope of the common man.

In a statement on Monday, Felix Morka, APC spokesperson, said Abubakar should accept defeat as a statesman.

“It is delusional for Atiku, and his degenerate PDP, to have expected the courts to rely on their bogus, flimsy, unverifiable, uncorroborated, illogical and hearsay evidence to upturn an election that was conducted in substantial compliance with the Constitution and electoral laws of our land,” the statement reads.

“Thankfully, it does not lie in Atiku’s mouth to declare what constitutes ‘incontrovertible evidence’.

“That is the constitutional duty of the courts and which they have discharged honorably and creditably.

“For a serial election loser whose life ambition is to rule the country, we understand how pained and utterly distraught Atiku must be.

“However, to continue to deny and disrespect the collective will of Nigerians, disparage the judiciary, incite rage and call our democratic institutions into question is beyond the pale.

“Atiku, you are right that this is not and cannot be all about you. Yes, it is about Nigeria. Nigeria is greater than your unrealized ambition to be president. Nigeria must move and has moved on.”

Morka said Abubakar missed an opportunity during his press conference to redeem himself as a stateman.

The Cable

Members of the Paliamentary Staff Association of Nigeria (PASAN) has embarked on a nationwide strike over delay in granting financial autonomy to state assemblies.

On Monday, the Sokoto, Nasarawa, Katsina, Abia, Anambra and Jigawa chapters of the association shut down the houses of assembly in their respective states.

The union had given state governments a 21-day ultimatum and further extended it to one week.

In May 2020, former President Muhammadu Buhari signed an executive order granting financial autonomy to the legislature and judiciary across the 36 states of the country.

However, the former president suspended the gazetting of the order after a pushback from governors.

In the 2022 constitution amendment, some of the bills that scaled through included financial autonomy for state legislature and judiciary.

The bills were subsequently signed into law by Buhari in March.

Speaking with journalists, Abubakar Yusuf, chairman of the Sokoto chapter, said the strike was an extension of their ongoing struggle that began in 2020.

“As you may recall, we took similar action in 2020. Following interventions from various sectors, we reached an agreement promising full financial autonomy for the legislative arm of government,” Yusuf said.

“However, former President Muhammadu Buhari signed an executive order to secure the financial autonomy of the legislature and the judiciary.

“After resolving the legal complexities, the order was reaffirmed and the former president initiated a committee for its full implementation.

“This progress has stalled following transition of government.”

Yusuf added that the association had patiently awaited progress on the government promises and gave it a 21-day ultimatum to address their concerns.

“Regrettably, no action was taken. Consequently, today, we have taken the step of indefinitely locking all state assemblies, including the national assembly, until our demands for full implementation are met,” he said.

‘NO AUTONOMY, NO LEGISLATOR, NO WORK’

In Nasarawa, Suleiman Oshafu, chairman of the union, said the strike is total and urged the governors to do the needful by implementing financial autonomy for state houses of assembly.

“As financial autonomy will promote accountability, transparency and good governance in the country,” Oshafu said.

“What we want from the government is that all state legislature must be granted financial autonomy.”

He urged members of the association to stay at home until further directive from the national leadership of the association.

In Abia, Sunday Kalu, the chairman, said the union has decided to embark on indefinite strike until their demands are met.

“In Abia, we have not gotten the administrative autonomy which is paramount,” he said

“We are calling on the state government to do the needful by constituting the assembly commission and then the financial autonomy.”

‘ANAMBRA ASSEMBLY IN BAD SHAPE’

The PASAN chapter in Anambra expressed concern over “the poor working condition” in the state assembly.

“Some states including Anambra have failed to implement section 121 of the constitution 5th alteration which granted full financial autonomy to the house of assembly,” Abraham Okoye, the chairman, said.

“In Anambra, the former Governor, Dr Willie Obiano signed a law granting the legislature and the judiciary autonomy to manage their funds. In August 2022, the assembly also passed a resolution calling for the full implementation of the law.

“Till now, the present governor is yet to implement the law. PASAN and our counterpart in the Judiciary have written several letters to this effect to no avail.

“The executive should allow the legislature to breathe and function optimally. That is our prayer.

“PASAN Anambra seems to be the worst in the country. The state assembly is in bad shape, nothing is working.”

The Cable

Constitutional lawyer and pioneer Secretary-General of Ohanaeze Ndigbo Worldwide, Ben Nwabueze, has passed on at the age of 94.

On behalf of the family, Eni Nwabueze said burial arrangements for the Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) would be announced in due course.

“With great sadness, we announce the passing on of our patriarch, Ben Nwabueze, pioneer Secretary-General of Ohanaeze Ndigbo and Oduah Afo-na-Isagba of Atani, Anambra State, who died in his Lagos apartment about 4.00p.m. on Sunday, October 29, 2023, aged 94. He lived an exemplary life of consequence,” the statement read.

Anambra Commissioner for Information, Paul Nwosu, also confirmed the news.

Nwabueze was born in Atani, in the Ogbaru Local Government Area of Anambra State. The President-General of Atani Town Union, Arinze Nzeli, also confirmed the death in a statement, yesterday.

To honour the former Minister of Education, Ohanaeze Ndigbo, the apex Igbo socio-cultural organisation, will observe four traditional market days.

Nwabueze, fondly referred to as the “Professor of Professors,” was born on December 22, 1931, in Atani, Ogbaru Local Council of Anambra.

In a statement, yesterday, the Chidi Ibe-led Ohanaeze noted: “As we mourn the loss of this extraordinary scholar and statesman, Ohanaeze Ndigbo, together with the entire Igbo-speaking states, including Anioma in Delta State and Ikwerre in Rivers State, will observe four traditional market days of mourning to honour Nwabueze. We implore all Igbo sons and daughters, both at home and in the Diaspora, to join us in this solemn period of reflection and remembrance.”The organisation appealed to President Bola Tinubu to immortalise the don by naming one of the newly-approved federal universities after him.

The Guardian

Israel pushes deeper into Gaza and frees Hamas captive; Netanyahu rejects calls for cease-fire

Israeli ground forces pushed deeper into Gaza on Monday, advancing in tanks and other armored vehicles on the territory’s main city and freeing a soldier held captive by Hamas militants. The Israeli prime minister rejected calls for a cease-fire as airstrikes landed near hospitals where thousands of Palestinians are sheltering beside the wounded.

The military said a soldier captured during Hamas’ brutal Oct. 7 incursion was rescued in Gaza — the first rescue since the weekslong war began. Military officials provided few details but said in a statement that Pvt. Ori Megidish, 19, was “doing well” and had met with her family.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu welcomed her home, saying the “achievement” by Israel’s security forces “illustrates our commitment to free all the hostages.”

He also rejected calls for a cease-fire to facilitate the release of captives or end the war, which he has said will be long and difficult. “Calls for a cease-fire are calls for Israel to surrender to Hamas,” he told a news conference. “That will not happen.”

Netanyahu, who faces mounting anger over Israel’s failure to prevent the worst surprise attack on the country in a half century, also said he had no plans to resign.

Hamas and other militant groups are believed to be holding some 240 captives, including men, women and children. Netanyahu has faced increasing pressure to secure their release even as Israel acts to crush Hamas and end its 16-year rule over the territory.

Hamas, which has released four hostages, has said it would let the others go in return for thousands of Palestinian prisoners held by Israel, including many implicated in deadly attacks on Israelis. Israel has dismissed the offer, and Netanyahu said the ground invasion “creates the possibility” of getting the hostages out, adding that Hamas will “only do it under pressure.”

Hamas released a short video Monday purporting to show three other female captives. One delivers a brief statement — likely under duress — criticizing Israel’s response to the hostage crisis.

It was not clear when the Hamas video was made. The Associated Press usually refrains from reporting details of hostage videos because they show individuals speaking under duress and are often used for propaganda purposes.

Amos Aloni, whose daughter Danielle appeared in the video, told reporters that he and his wife were shocked to see her on TV but felt “relief from her being alive and seeing her.”

The U.S. is providing weapons shipments on an almost daily basis to Israel, Pentagon deputy press secretary Sabrina Singh told reporters.

Despite the rising number of civilian casualties, “we are not putting any limits on how Israel uses weapons,” Singh said. “That is really up to the Israeli Defense Force.”

The Israeli military has been vague about its operations inside Gaza, including the location and number of troops. Israel has declared a new “phase” in the war but stopped short of declaring an all-out ground invasion.

Larger ground operations have been launched both north and east of Gaza City. Israel says many of Hamas’ forces and much of its militant infrastructure, including hundreds of kilometers (miles) of tunnels, are in Gaza City, which before the war was home to over 650,000 people, a population comparable to that of Washington, D.C.

Though Israel ordered Palestinians to leave the north, where Gaza City is located, and move south, hundreds of thousands remain, in part because Israel has also bombarded targets in so-called safe zones. Around 117,000 displaced people hoping for safety are staying in hospitals in northern Gaza, alongside thousands of patients and staff, according to U.N. figures.

The U.N. agency for Palestinian refugees, known as UNRWA, says nearly 672,000 Palestinians are sheltering in its schools and other facilities, which have reached four times their capacity.

UNRWA head Philippe Lazzarini accused Israel of “collective punishment” of the Palestinians, and of forcing their displacement from northern Gaza to the south, where they are still not safe.

The death toll among Palestinians passed 8,300, mostly women and children, the Gaza Health Ministry said Monday. The figure is without precedent in decades of Israeli-Palestinian violence. More than 1.4 million people in Gaza have fled their homes.

Over 1,400 people have died on the Israeli side, mainly civilians killed during Hamas’ initial attack, also an unprecedented figure.

Lazzarini said 64 of the agency’s staff were killed in the past three weeks, the latest just hours before he addressed an emergency U.N. Security Council meeting, when an agency security official was killed with his wife and eight children.

Most Palestinians in Gaza “feel trapped in a war they have nothing to do with,” he said.

Video circulating on social media showed an Israeli tank and bulldozer in central Gaza blocking the territory’s main north-south highway.

The video, taken by a local journalist, shows a car approaching an earth barrier across the road. The car stops and turns around. As it heads away, a tank appears to open fire, and an explosion engulfs the car. The journalist, in another car, races away in terror, screaming, “Go back! Go back!” at approaching vehicles.

The Gaza Health Ministry later said three people were killed in the car that was hit.

Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari, an Israeli military spokesman, declined to comment on where Israeli forces are deployed, but said additional forces had entered Gaza and operations would continue to “expand and intensify.”

The military said troops have killed dozens of militants who attacked from inside buildings and tunnels. It said that in the last few days, it had struck more than 600 militant targets, including weapons depots and anti-tank missile launching positions. Palestinian militants have continued firing rockets into Israel, including toward its commercial hub, Tel Aviv.

Hamas said its fighters clashed with Israeli troops who entered from the northwest. It was not possible to independently confirm battlefield claims made by either side.

Meanwhile, crowded hospitals in northern Gaza came under growing threat.

Gaza’s Health Ministry shared video footage that appeared to show an explosion and a column of smoke near the Turkish-Palestinian Friendship Hospital for cancer patients. The hospital director, Dr. Sobhi Skaik, said it had sustained damage in a strike that endangered patients.

All 10 hospitals operating in northern Gaza have received evacuation orders, the U.N.’s office for the coordination of humanitarian affairs said. Staff have refused to leave, saying evacuation would mean death for patients on ventilators.

Strikes hit within 50 meters (yards) of Al Quds Hospital after it received two calls from Israeli authorities on Sunday ordering it to evacuate, the Palestinian Red Crescent rescue service said. Some windows were blown out, and rooms were covered in debris. It said 14,000 people are sheltering there.

Israel says it targets Hamas fighters and infrastructure and that the militants operate among civilians, putting them in danger.

Beyond the fighting, conditions for civilians in Gaza are continually deteriorating.

With no central power for weeks and little fuel, hospitals are struggling to keep emergency generators running to operate incubators and other life-saving equipment. UNRWA has been trying to keep water pumps and bakeries running.

On Sunday, the largest convoy of humanitarian aid yet — 33 trucks — entered the territory from Egypt, and another 26 entered Monday. Relief workers say the amount is still far less than what is needed for the population of 2.3 million people.

The fighting has raised concerns that the violence could spread across the region. Israel and the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah have engaged in daily skirmishes along Israel’s northern border.

In the occupied West Bank, Israel carried out airstrikes Monday against militants clashing with its forces in the Jenin refugee camp. Hamas said four of its fighters were killed there. As of Sunday, Israeli forces and settlers have killed 123 Palestinians, including 33 minors, in the West Bank, half of them during search-and-arrest operations, the U.N. said.

AP

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Zelensky ‘feels betrayed’ by West – Time

Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky feels “betrayed” by his Western backers, who have denied him the support and attention he has grown used to, his aides told Time magazine. According to the report, published on Monday, the president’s circle now see him as “delusional” and the conflict with Russia as impossible to win.

Zelensky and his advisors spoke to the US magazine after the Ukrainian president visited Washington last month. Unlike the hero’s welcome he received last December, the most recent visit saw Zelensky grilled about corruption in Ukraine and forbidden from addressing lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

Despite US President Joe Biden’s pledge to support Kiev “for as long as it takes,” Congress has failed to agree on a new aid bill for Ukraine. Ten days after Zelensky returned to Kiev from Washington, lawmakers managed to pass a spending bill to avert a government shutdown, but only after stripping $6 billion in Ukraine funding from it.

“Zelensky feels betrayed by his Western allies. They have left him without the means to win the war, only the means to survive it,” Time wrote, citing a member of his team. 

“The scariest thing is that part of the world got used to the war in Ukraine,” Zelensky said. “Exhaustion with the war rolls along like a wave. You see it in the United States, in Europe. And we see that as soon as they start to get a little tired, it becomes like a show to them: ‘I can’t watch this rerun for the 10th time’.”

Zelensky told Time that he still believes that his forces can defeat Russia on the battlefield, and that he will not entertain any negotiations with Moscow, despite Ukraine’s summer counteroffensive failing to achieve its objectives and resulting in what the magazine called “enormous losses.” According to the most recent Russian figures, the Ukrainian military lost more than 90,000 men between early June and the beginning of this month.

“He deludes himself,” one of Zelensky’s closest aides told Time. “We’re out of options. We’re not winning. But try telling him that.”

The outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war has drawn the attention of the West away from Kiev in recent weeks, with the Pentagon surging troops and weapons to the Middle East and US House Speaker Mike Johnson prioritizing a vote on military aid to the Jewish state instead of Ukraine.

“It’s logical,” Zelensky told Time, adding that while “the world’s help is needed” in Israel, “we lose out.”

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Ukraine boosts grain deliveries to Black Sea ports as new export route working

The success of Ukraine's new Black Sea export corridor has led to a sharp increase in the number of rail wagons heading to the ports of Odesa region, a senior railways official said on Monday.

Valeriy Tkachov, deputy director of the commercial department at Ukrainian Railways, said on Facebook that over the last week the number of grain wagons heading to Odesa ports increased by more than 50% to 4,032 from 2,676.

In August, Ukraine launched a "humanitarian corridor" for ships bound for African and Asian markets to try to circumvent a de facto blockade in the Black Sea after Russia quit a deal that had guaranteed Kyiv's seaborne exports during the war.

Later, a senior agricultural official said the route - which runs along Ukraine's southwest Black Sea coast, into Romanian territorial waters and onwards to Turkey - would also be used for grain shipments.

More than 700,000 metric tons of grain have left Ukrainian ports via the new route since August. Ukraine shipped up to six million tons of grain per month from its Black Sea ports before Russia's full-scale invasion in February 2022.

Ukraine's first deputy farm minister said last week that grain shipments through the new corridor may exceed one million metric tons in October.

However, ministry data showed on Monday that overall grain exports fell by about 50% in October due to logistics difficulties.

Ukrainian officials say more that 50 cargo vessels have entered the corridor since it came into operation in August.

Ukraine's government expects a grain and oilseeds harvest of 79 million tons in 2023, with a 2023/24 exportable surplus of about 50 million tons.

RT/Reuters

Businesses, governments, and investors were already navigating a foggy global landscape before the tragic events unfolding in the Middle East. But the horrible conflict between Hamas and Israel, which has already led to enormous suffering and claimed the lives of thousands of civilians, including so many children, has introduced a new layer of uncertainty for the global economy, the subject of this commentary. Even in the highly unlikely event that the geopolitical situation improves rapidly in the region and beyond, a deep sense of uncertainty will remain, driven by five economic and financial factors.

First, the global economy’s major growth engines are currently under strain. With Europe teetering on the brink of recession and China stalling, the US economy has emerged as the main driver of global growth. This became particularly evident in the third quarter of 2023, with the United States’ growth estimates impressing once again.

But even America’s growth outlook is uncertain. Over the past 15 months, the consensus of analysts about the US economy’s direction has oscillated wildly between four scenarios: soft landing, hard landing, crash landing, and no landing. Although the prevailing view now is that the US is headed for a soft landing, forecasts may well shift toward a hard one over the coming weeks.

When the growth narrative of the world’s largest economy, with its mature institutions and diversified productive base, can change so easily, it is no wonder that uncertainty in the rest of the world is even more pronounced. Instead of resembling a normal bell-shaped distribution of potential outcomes with a single peak and slender tails, the global outlook looks like a multimodal distribution with fat tails on either end, suggesting a higher likelihood of extreme events.

On the positive side, as Gordon Brown, Michael Spence, Reid Lidow, and I argue in our new book Permacrisis, advances in generative artificial intelligence, life sciences, and clean energy have the potential to enhance productivity and boost potential GDP growth significantly. On the other end of the distribution, there is the risk that a set of vicious cycles will aggravate cascading effects.

Second, the journey toward this uncertain future is fraught with peril. The most immediate risk is the recent spike in global borrowing costs as markets adapt to the likelihood that the US Federal Reserve and other major central banks, having hiked interest rates aggressively – albeit belatedly – to counter inflation trends they initially misdiagnosed – will maintain elevated rates for an extended period.

Third, the persistence of this interest-rate outlook increases the risk of recessions and financial-market turbulence. We saw early signs of this in March when balance-sheet mismanagement and slippages in bank supervision led to the failure of some regional US banks.

Fourth, the global economy and key financial markets like the one for benchmark US government bonds now lack key top-down anchors such as growth momentum, confidence in policymaking signals, and stabilizing financial flows.

As economic-policy tools become more subordinate to political and geopolitical considerations, the already weak outlook for global growth may well deteriorate. Monetary policy faces a credibility threat and genuine structural uncertainties about the equilibrium level of interest rates and the delayed effects of a remarkably concentrated rate-hiking cycle. Moreover, shrinking central-bank balance sheets and the absence of an effective policy framework compound the challenge of determining the right inflation targets in a world economy characterized by an insufficiently flexible supply side.

Amid growing deficits and rising interest payments, there is also the question of who will absorb the significant surge in government debt issuance. For more than a decade, the Fed has been the most reliable buyer of US government bonds, owing to its seemingly limitless money-printing capabilities and minimal price sensitivity. But, having been forced by inflation and other excesses to shift from quantitative easing to quantitative tightening, the Fed is now a reliable net seller. International buyers also appear more cautious, partly owing to geopolitical tensions. Moreover, many domestic institutional investors, such as pension funds and insurance companies, have already accumulated significant bond holdings, incurring substantial mark-to-market losses.

Without these economic, policy, and technical anchors, the global economy and capital markets resemble boats in a rough and unpredictable sea. That brings us to the fifth driver of global uncertainty: the inadequate response to long-term crises like climate change and widening economic inequality. The longer we wait to tackle these problems, the greater the eventual costs will be. Our insufficient actions today ensure that we will face more complicated economic and political obstacles down the line.

As we write in Permacrisis, today’s world has been shaped by three ongoing failures: the repeated inability to achieve consistent and inclusive growth that also respects our planet; recurrent domestic-policy errors; and the constant lack of effective global policy coordination at a time when shared challenges demand collective action. Together, these failures have had profound economic, financial, institutional, sociopolitical, and geopolitical ramifications.

That is the bad news. The good news is that we have the capacity to solve these problems and turn today’s vicious cycles into virtuous ones. But to implement the major shifts required to achieve this goal, we need visionary political leadership at the national level and increased global awareness of our shared challenges. Absent such leadership, we risk leaving our children and grandchildren a world plagued by economic and financial instability, domestic political unrest, and geopolitical turmoil.

Project Syndicate

As a young computer developer, I never had any aspirations of being a manager, let alone a CEO.

When I started my career some 30 years ago, everybody in my field seemed to be following the so-called IBM model of climbing the corporate ladder — starting at the entry level for a few years and then hopping from rung to rung into more senior managerial roles. It wasn't for me.

Luckily for me, I worked for a progressive company that understood the need to create dual career paths. You could remain an individual contributor, sometimes leading technical projects, or you could be a manager. I chose the technical track, rising through my field until there was nowhere left to go but the C-suite. Now that I'm here, I see a huge problem.

The average person has no interest in being a manager anymore.

My company recently ran a survey of 1,000 full-time employees across the U.S. who are not already in a managerial position. A meager 38% said they were interested in becoming a people manager at their current company. This problem crosses industries and borders. We're seeing clients in all lines of work struggling to fill frontline management positions.

It's becoming clear that companies have to adapt to fill these gaping voids, and the stakes couldn't be higher. Picture a Jenga tower — there are only so many blocks you can remove from the middle before the top comes crashing down.

Why management roles have grown less attractive

There was a time when the title manager meant prestige, respect, maybe even admiration — a chance to lead, a pathway to the top. But that dynamic has been shifting for decades and can now feel out-of-touch and out-of-date.

This management backlash has roots in several places. For one, trust in leadership has eroded sharply. Only 21% of workers strongly agree that they trust the leadership in their company, and the number has been on the decline since the pandemic.

At the same time, the "individual contributor" has enjoyed increasing status in many circles, especially in the tech community. A talented developer, for instance, can rise through the ranks of a company without managing people. Ultimately, their pay and perks may end up being comparable with senior people leaders, without ever having to wrestle with the challenges that go along with management.

Meanwhile, the pressures on managers are only growing. Familiar challenges with delivering results and bottom-line value have been augmented in recent decades with mounting HR responsibilities. For many, the stress and time commitment of management simply outweigh any added benefits.

Indeed, of all the insights gleaned from this survey, one stood out to me more than any other — people see managerial responsibilities as a non-starter for work-life balance. Among those we surveyed, 40% said their biggest worry with becoming a manager was increased stress, pressure and hours. When we asked people to identify their top ambition, 67% said spending more time with their friends and families and 64% said being more physically and mentally. The lowest priorities were becoming a C-suite executive (4%) and becoming a people manager (9%).

How to fill the 'missing middle'

This management gap couldn't come at a worse time. As companies struggle with disruptions from AI, increasing automation and a tight labor market, clear leadership is needed more than ever, but it's getting hard to find.

So how can companies fill the "missing middle" — and make management aspirational again?

One important step is to redefine the meaning of manager. Partly, this is about reconceptualizing the role. The tech industry, for instance, has popularized "player-coaches:" employees who continue to contribute as individuals, while also leading small teams of trusted colleagues. While this balance can be challenging to strike, the upside is sustained engagement with your field and growth of new management skills.

At the same time, companies are finding new ways to valorize management. When McKinsey asked middle managers what they wanted more of, the obvious answer was bonuses. In a competitive market, many companies are dishing out signing bonuses to attract talent into the pipeline. According to a 2021 survey, 43% of hiring managers were offering more paid time off and 40% were offering better job titles to win the war for talent. It's not all about perks, however. Middle managers also said they wanted to be rewarded with increased autonomy and more responsibility.

An equally critical step is to help managers handle those increased responsibilities with better technology — enabling them to extend spans of control while diminishing toil and grunt work. Take the challenge of handing out raises. Traditionally, this process required a manager to manually evaluate every employee and come up with a number and a rationale for each one. But new tools are taking the guesswork and paperwork out of the equation. We use a smart compensation tool to evaluate performance metrics and create a clear picture of what a person is paid relative to their peers, and relative to industry standards. This not only removes risk of bias but also cuts down on time. There are similar tools for goal-setting and skills-mapping, lessening the burden of regular performance reviews while making them more meaningful.

Behind all these efforts lie advances in collecting and sharing people data. The better we can arm frontline managers with insights about their teams, the faster they can make the right decisions.

In a world with fewer managers, these steps mean companies can increase spans of control while maintaining productivity, reducing stress and saving people time. In the end, it's not just for retaining current managers, but recruiting new ones. Consider this: Deloitte found 73% of managers said they should be a model of well-being for their employees, but only 35% of employees could see that in their manager. Until we give them the time and resources to do their jobs effectively and happily, people will continue to have reservations about moving up in the ranks. The Jenga tower will continue to sway — if not collapse.

Entrepreneur

At least two new Resident Electoral Commissioners (RECs) appointed by President Bola Tinubu may be card-carrying members of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), the president’s party.

Two other nominees are also found to be long-term allies of prominent politicians serving in the Tinubu administration.

President Tinubu last Wednesday announced the nomination of 10 Resident Electoral Commissioners (REC).

The nominees are Etekamba Umoren (Akwa Ibom State), Isah Ehimeakne (Edo), Oluwatoyin Babalola (Ekiti), Abubakar Ma’aji (Gombe), Shehu Wahab (Kwara), Bunmi Omoseyindemi (Lagos) and Aminu Idris (Nasarawa).

Others are Mohammed Yelwa (Niger), Anugbum Onuoha (Rivers), Isma’ila Moyi and (Zamfara).

In announcing the nominations, presidential spokesperson Ajuri Ngelale noted that the president exercised the powers granted him by Section 154 (1) of the Nigerian constitution and Section 6 of the Electoral Act (2022).

“Tinubu expects the new appointees to abide by the highest standards of professional and ethical conduct in the discharge of their duties,” Ngelale said.

Initial confusion

However, there was confusion initially over the nomination of the new RECs. Ngelale had earlier in the afternoon issued a statement containing the names of nine nominees.

The nine nominees were Isah Ehimeakne (Edo), Bamidele Agbede (Ekiti), Jani Bello (Gombe), Taiye Ilayasu (Kwara), Bunmi Omoseyindemi (Lagos), Yahaya Bello (Nasarawa), Mohammed Yalwa (Niger), Anugbum Onuoha (Rivers) and Abubakar Dambo (Zamfara).

But by the time the second list of RECs came out, there were 10 names with the inclusion of Umoren from Akwa Ibom.

Also, five nominees that made the initial list were dropped. They are Messrs Agbede (Ekiti), Bello (Gombe), Ilayasu (Kwara), Yahaya Bello (Nasarawa), and Dambo (Zamfara).

No reason was given for the changes.

RECs ties with Tinubu, APC, others

To ensure the neutrality of the electoral umpire, Nigerian law prohibits the appointment of members of political parties as resident electoral commissioners, individuals who coordinate INEC activities in different states.

However, at least four of the RECs nominated by Tinubu are known to have ties with him, the APC or politicians in his government.

They are Umoren, Shaka, Omoseyindemi and Onuoha.

Umoren is a member of the APC and a long-time ally of the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio.

He served as the Chief of Staff at the Akwa Ibom State Government House when Akpabio governed the state between 2007 and 2014.

Akpabio also nominated him to serve as the Secretary to the State Government (SSG) under his successor, Udom Emmanuel, then an ally of Akpabio. Umoren was only sacked in 2018 following a fallout between Akpabio and Emmanuel, which also led to the removal of other key allies in the state executive council.

August 2018, during a welcome rally for Akpabio in Uyo, Umoren and other sacked members of Emmanuel’s state executive council embraced the All Progressives Congress (APC).

In what could best be described as an induction into the party, Umoren accepted a broom, an emblem of the APC, from Akpabio on stage and chanted APC through the speakers.

“Akwa Ibom, you are in safe hands,” he told the audience as he shook the broom vigorously.

Another open supporter of Tinubu and the APC is the nominee for Edo State REC, Isah Shaka.

PREMIUM TIMES reviewed Shaka’s digital footprint and found multiple social media posts before, during and after the 2023 general elections that showed his bias towards Tinubu and his party, the APC.

In one of such posts reviewed by this newspaper, Shaka took to social media to list reasons other Nigerians should support Tinubu just like he was doing.

In another post a few days before the presidential election held on 25 February, Shaka showered praises on Tinubu on his Facebook page.

“He is the issue,” he wrote of Tinubu on 18 February. “He is the subject matter. He is the target. He is the Numero Uno in this game. He is the subject of discussion across the Nation. He is the owner of the game. He that wrestles with him sharpens him and makes him pay attention. He is the Jagaban. He is the President of Nigeria 2023-2032 By his grace Almighty God.”

Again, minutes after INEC declared Tinubu winner of the presidential election around 4 a.m. on 1 March, Shaka took to his page to congratulate the party. “Congratulations to all APC families,” he posted.

Curiously, on Friday shortly after PREMIUM TIMES reviewed Shaka’s Facebook page where he scribbled some of his thoughts, his profile and posts were removed from the social media platform.

The Lagos REC nominee, Bunmi Omoseyindemi, had enjoyed political patronage from Tinubu and his allies since 2001. He was appointed chairman of the Lagos State Traditional Medicine Board in 2001 when Tinubu governed the state, a position he held until 2015.

In 2016, he was appointed an electoral commissioner in the Lagos State Independent Electoral Commission (LASIEC) by the then-governor Akinwunmi Ambode who was also an ally of Tinubu at the time.

Another REC nominee, Onuoha was found to be an ally of a top official of the Tinubu administration. He has been close to the Minister of Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike.

Onuoha was a Special Adviser on Lands and Surveys to Wike until 2019 when he was crowned as a traditional leader in Rumuepirikom, Obio/Akpor Local Government area in the state – the same community Wike hails from.

However, before he was appointed as a Special Adviser to Wike, he had in 2007, served as the Commissioner, Legal and Political Parties Monitoring at the Rivers State Independent Electoral Commission (RSIEC). He was one of the nine-member RSIEC Electoral Commissioners sworn in by the then-governor, Rotimi Amaechi, in 2007. They were led by the late Nimi Briggs, an emeritus professor.

Ex-INEC staff make list

The president also nominated four former officials of INEC as RECs from Ekiti, Kwara, Nasarawa and Zamfara states.

The Zamfara REC nominee, Isma’ila Moyi, was an official of the commission. He retired as a director of the Stores Directorate at the INEC headquarters in Abuja in 2015. Before then he had served as an administrative secretary for the commission in Zamfara, Sokoto, Adamawa, Katsina, Borno and Kano states.

The REC nominee for Nasarawa State, Aminu Idris, is a former director of Election Planning and Management (EPM) at the INEC headquarters.

While the nominee for Kwara State REC, Wahab, is a former INEC administrative secretary in Benue State, the Ekiti REC nominee, Oluwatoyin Babalola, was INEC’s director of Legal Drafting and Clearance.

What the Law says

The third schedule to the Nigerian 1999 Constitution prohibits the appointment of a partisan person into INEC in Item F, paragraph 14.

“There shall be for each State of the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, a Resident Electoral Commissioner who shall be a person of unquestionable integrity and shall not be a member of any political party,” section 14, 3(b) states.

Section 6 of the Electoral Act (2022) added that the appointees “shall be answerable to the Commission” and “shall hold office for a term of five years from the date of his or her appointment which may be renewable for another term of five years and no more.”

The section also said the appointments must be in accordance with the Federal Character Commission Act.

“The Resident Electoral Commissioner appointed under the Constitution may only be removed by the President, acting on an address supported by a two-thirds majority of the Senate praying that the Resident Electoral Commissioner be so removed for inability to perform the functions of the office, whether arising from infirmity of mind or body or any other cause, or for misconduct,” the section states.

Jega’s warning

A few days before Tinubu nominated the new RECs, a former chairperson of Nigeria’s Electoral Commission, INEC, Attahiru Jega, criticised the existing laws that empower politicians to appoint top officials of the commission.

Jega, who headed the electoral commission from 2010 to 2015, said such nominees are usually not thoroughly screened, a situation he said has a ‘damaging effect’ on the integrity of elections.

“The appointment of Resident Electoral Commissioners should be divested from the president and given to the Commission at INEC, with powers to hire and fire,” he said at a retreat for members of the Senate in Akwa Ibom State.

Like Buhari, Like Tinubu

With the new appointments, Tinubu appears to be following the path of his predecessor, former President Muhammadu Buhari.

Buhari had on multiple occasions nominated partisan individuals and persons with integrity issues as INEC RECs, drawing widespread criticism from Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) and members of the public.

In 2017, Buhari nominated Olalekan Raheem, a member of his party, the APC as REC from Osun state. The Senate stood down his nomination for being a card-carrying member of the APC, which he established during his screening by the senators. Although he claimed to have ditched party politics, it didn’t change his fate.

In 2021, Buhari’s nomination of Lauretta Onochie, a known member of his party, drew another round of criticisms and condemnations from the public.

Although the Senate rejected her nomination, it was not due to her party affiliation.

The chairperson of the Senate Committee on INEC at the time, Kabiru Gaya, said she was disqualified because there was no vacancy in the Delta State slot where Buhari nominated her to represent.

Onochie was later appointed the chairperson of the board of the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) by the former president.

Last year, at least four of the 19 REC nominees by Buhari were found to either be members of political parties or have corruption baggage. The Senate, however, went ahead to confirm their appointments.

Gaya, a member of the ruling APC said at the time that the 19 nominees were confirmed because the petitions against them were not enough to stop the Senate from approving them.

The Adamawa scenario

During the last general elections, the sordid effect of the phenomenon Jega criticised, played out in Adamawa when the state’s former REC, Hudu Ari, illegally announced a winner in the governorship elections even though the collation of results was still in progress and when he was not empowered to do so by law.

His action provoked chaos across the state, leading to a mob brutalising a National Commissioner of the commission, Abdullahi Zuru, a professor. Yet, all the Electoral Commission could do was to nullify his pronouncement, which until the latest amendment of the electoral act in 2022, may have been binding.

INEC also suspended him and recommended him for punishment by the then President, Buhari, the only one empowered to sack him.

Screening and Confirmation

It remains to be seen if the Senate will confirm the nominees with partisan interests considering what the law says.

The confirmation of the nominees’ appointments is subject to a two-thirds vote of the members of the Senate who are expected to screen them.

If confirmed, they are to serve a five-year term each, and can only be removed by the president and a two-thirds vote from the National Assembly.

Rarely in modern times can so few have tried to take so much from so many. If Nigeria had lost its arbitration dispute with Process & Industrial Development in a London court on 23 October, it would have cost our people close to $1 billion.

We won, and all decent people can sleep easier as a result. Justice Robin Knowles said Nigeria had been the victim of a monstrous fraud. But it was a close-run thing. As the judge said: “I end the case acutely conscious of how readily the outcome could have been different, and of the enormous resources ultimately required from Nigeria as the successful party to make good its challenge.”
But ordinary Nigerians never took the decisions that ended up before Knowles. Had Nigeria lost, it would have required schools not to be built, nurses not to be trained and roads not to repaired, on an epic scale, to pay a handful of contractors, lawyers and their allies – for a project that never broke ground.

How did it get to this point? How did Nigeria prevail? Was this a one-off, or par for a shabby and distasteful course? What are the lessons for the future?

The ‘P&ID Affair’ was already firmly set by the time I came into office in 2015. A company registered in the British Virgin Islands that no one had heard of, with hardly any staff or assets, had won a contract to build a gas processing plant in Cross Rivers state. The company was owned by Irish intermediaries who knew Nigeria well and had done business in everything from healthcare to fixing tanks.
The previous government could not supply the gas. The plant was never built. Construction was not started. P&ID did not even buy the land for the facility. But the contract, incredibly, was clear: P&ID could sue Nigeria, and claim all the profits it might have made over 20 years as if everything had been completed.

Nigeria was in court in London, trying to talk down liability and costs. Back at home, fixers were looking to work out a quiet settlement. This is often the way. A lot of contracts end up in dispute. P&ID won a settlement in 2017 of $6 billion, with compound interest. People, including out of work ex-British Cabinet Minister Priti Patel, were queuing up to insist we paid, or risk Nigeria becoming an untrustworthy trade pariah.

It was clear that far from the whole story had been told. I tasked Abba Kyari, my chief- of-staff and Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, with finding a way, even at that late stage and despite so much conflicting advice, to get us a fair hearing. Working with a number of different agencies and senior officials of government, we began to find a huge amount of evidence, not all of which Knowles was to accept. But he agreed that P&ID had paid bribes. He agreed that one of P&ID’s founders had committed perjury. And he agreed that P&ID had somehow found in its possession a steady supply of Nigeria’s privileged internal legal documents, outlining our plans, strategies and problems.
My own view is that this whole, sorry affair shows how important it is to follow the legal process in resolving a dispute. It shows that given time and opportunity for each side to present their case, the temple of justice can satisfactorily resolve all disputes without resort to extra-judicial measures. It was definitely worth the struggle: this was an attempted heist of historic proportions, an attempt to steal from the treasury a third of Nigeria’s foreign reserves.

But even at this moment, we should note what the English judge cautioned. The arbitration process in London “was a shell that got nowhere near the truth.” We need better contracts, in the public and private sector. And we need greater transparency: the reality is that, had P&ID not conjured up quite such an outlandish ransom, they may have found themselves in the same place as the myriad other invisible contractors who all too often quietly take Nigeria for many millions in out of court settlements. Sterner sanctions are indicated for Nigerian public officials who have been proven to connive with foreign criminals to defraud our country.

Nigeria has won this battle with corruption, but the war is far from over. As Knowles concluded: “This case has also, sadly, brought together a combination of examples of what some individuals will do for money. Driven by greed and prepared to use corruption; giving no thought to what their enrichment would mean in terms of harm for others. Others that in the present case include the people of Nigeria, already let down in so many ways over the history of this matter by a number of individuals in politics and administration whose duty it was to serve them and protect them.” Well said.

** Buhari was Nigeria’s President from 2015 to 2023.