WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Russia restricts entry to border areas in southern Belgorod region

Russia's southern region of Belgorod is restricting entry from Tuesday to 14 areas on the border with Ukraine that are subject to heavy attack from Kyiv's forces, measures that appeared to be part of a Kremlin strategy to set up a border buffer zone.

Belgorod Governor Vyacheslav Gladkov said the restrictions applied to the localities "where the pertaining operational situation is extremely difficult," according to the Interfax news agency.

The move follows on from the Kremlin's order to protect Russian territory from Ukrainian attacks and secure areas and facilities so they are beyond the range of Ukrainian fire.

Under the restrictions, outlined by Gladkov last week in a video posted on the Telegram messaging app, checkpoints are to be set up outside the localities, public transport is barred and anyone wishing to visit must advise local authorities in advance.

"Entry will be permitted only for male adults with strict rules: in armoured vehicles with military electronic equipment and in bullet-proof apparel and helmets, accompanied by servicemen or local officials," Gladkov said.

Gladkov did not explicitly say civilians were being evacuated, but said it was "unacceptable" to allow women and children in the restricted areas and all property would be kept under strict guard.

Ukraine has subjected Russia's southern border regions to daily shelling and drone attacks, particularly settlements on or near the border in Belgorod region.

Russian forces launched a cross-border incursion in May into areas of Ukraine's Kharkiv region across from Belgorod region and the military had taken control of several towns and villages.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has said in recent weeks that Kyiv's forces had stabilised border areas.

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

US-made HIMARS launcher get destroyed in Ukraine

The Russian Defense Ministry has shared footage purporting to show the destruction of another US-supplied Ukrainian HIMARS multiple rocket launcher system in a ballistic missile strike.

The system was discovered by a surveillance drone and was tracked to a hangar in the village of Novopetrovka, in Ukraine’s Nikolayev Region. The location was hit by a ballistic missile fired by an Iskander-M system, the Russian military reported on Monday, adding that the HIMARS and its crew had been destroyed. 

Drone footage of the strike showed the hangar being obliterated, with a secondary detonation, presumably in the launcher’s ammo stock, observed at the site.

The Russian military has consistently hunted high-value Ukrainian assets, including from the HIMARS family. Over the past few weeks, multiple launchers of this type have reportedly been destroyed, with some of the strikes captured in drone footage released by the Russian Defense Ministry.

HIMARS launchers have been long touted by Kiev as an ultimate long-range, high-precision weapon to strike Russian high-value assets such as command points or ammo stockpiles. However, Moscow has accused Ukraine of routinely using the systems to launch indiscriminate attacks on Russian territory, including on civilian targets.

Reuters/RT

Two hundred and thirty-four years ago, Adam Smith, a Scottish philosopher and political economist died on 17 July, 1790. Born in 1723, Smith is generally eulogised as the “Father of Capitalism,” “Father of Economics,” and for “putting economic development on the map as a subject for general analysis.”

The ‘founders’ of the United States (US) viewed his ideas as a critical work of national wealth, statecraft and societal development. Karl Marx benefited immensely from Smith’s ideas in the evolution of Marxism.

But since the late 1970s, neoliberal forces who claim to have Smith in their DNA, have turned economics upside-down and inside-out. They have mathmaticalised and statisticalised economics to make it appear scientific, but expelled the logic, orderliness, consistency, and predictability that makes mathematics and statistics scientific. Neoliberalism is more of abracadabra, mysticism, and witchcraft. It is not a problem-solving, but problem-aggravating ism.

Yet, it has emerged triumphant due to its application of crude and naked power. Neoliberalism was imposed globally through deceit and crude force. Its major forces, which control the international financial institutions – the United Nations, World Trade Organisation (WTO), amongst others – use these institutions to globalise neoliberalism. Like Fela Anikulapo’s song “Zombie,” it has only one way: “there is no alternative” to neoliberalism.

They further undermined subjects that seriously challenge the ‘intellectual’ bases of neoliberalism. These include the ‘Economic Doctrines/Thoughts,’ ‘Economic History,’ ‘Economic Sociology’ and ‘Political Economy,’ to which Smith paid tireless attention in his works. These were systematically wiped out from the curricular of tertiary education institutions. Yet, these were the subjects Smith organically interrogated in his books: The Theory of Moral Sentiments (TMS) (1759); An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (TWN) (1776); Lectures on Police, Revenue, and Arms (1763); and Essays on Philosophical Subjects (1795), amongst others.

Although Smith never used the term ‘development’, but in his TWN, he used ’improvement’ to connote ‘development.’ To him, development arose to manage the crisis brought about by the breakdown of subsistence economy, which is manifested in the emergence of division of labour (DOL). Development, to Smith, means the increase in the productive activities of a nation; growth of national wealth; and improvement in the standard of living of the citizenry.

Development, he argued, occurs in a “natural order” and in an “unnatural and retrograde order.” The first occurs naturally, instinctually, spontaneously, and independently of human intentions. It began from agriculture, on to manufacturing and, then international trade. It first arose from the countryside to the towns, which it supplied with the “means of subsistence, and the materials of manufacture.” Thus, it predated and preceded towns.

Smith preferred this order because it is less risky. The landlord’s land is “under his view and command, and his fortune is much less liable to accidents… The capital of the landlord… is fixed in the improvement of his land… (which) seems to be as well as secured as the nature of human affairs can admit of.”

The second is the opposite of the first and was brought by human interference. Yet, Smith argued, that the “unnatural and retrograde order” has contributed to development. For example, that international trade widens the market, expands productivity, increases profits, sharpens competition, develops DOL/technology, grows the national wealth, and improves citizens’ welfare.

Production and the reproduction of wealth are, therefore, central to Smith’s doctrine on development. Despite this, he posited that the capitalists, if unchecked, will disrupt societal development. First, that their desperation to acquire monopoly position restraints free competition; reduces the employment of productive labour; negatively affects the quality of commodities; discourages commerce; kills initiative; and decreases state revenue.

Secondly, that monopoly profits adversely affect the mobility and allocation of resources; destroys the initiative and frugality of the capitalists; hinders their incentive and capacity to earn; retards capital accumulation; negatively affects the wealth of nation; and disastrously disturbs societal development.

Thirdly, that capitalists’ payment of low wages affects workers’ health, obstructs industrial peace; decreases labour productivity; and stagnates the development of DOL/technology. Therefore, he posited, the interests of capitalists are: “always in some respects different from, and even opposite to, that of the general public.”

Smith, accordingly, recommended that: “The proposal of any law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order, ought always to be listened to with great precaution, and ought never to be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most suspicious attention. It comes from an order of men, whose interest is never exactly the same with the public, who have generally an interest to deceive and even to oppress the public and, who accordingly have, upon many occasions, both deceived and oppressed it.”

Smith advocated that individuals should be encouraged to pursue their legitimate business, but not at the expense of society. For, society: “cannot subsist among those who are at all times ready to hurt and injure one another.” Therefore, individuals must control their do-or-die desperation for profit, otherwise the state must administer social justice.

Man, he wrote, must: “humble the arrogance of his self-love, and bring it down to something which other men must go along with.” For: “In the race for wealth, and honours, and preferements, he may run as hard as he can, and strain every nerve and every muscle, in order to outstrip all his competitors. But if he should jostle, or throw down any of them, the indulgence of the spectators is entirely at an end. It is a violation of fair play, which they cannot admit of.”

Smith opposed state participation in economic enterprises. Rather, he advocated that the state should focus on providing security, justice, and orderly development. It should particularly create a conducive atmosphere for free enterprises to exist, facilitate the perfect operation of the market, and encourage the development of DOL/technology. Free competition, he argued, allows the attainment of modest wealth, and makes it difficult for the capitalists to easily amass great wealth, without alertness, creativity, drive, innovation, and industry.

But Smith equally advocated that the state must ensure workers are well paid because they are the creators of wealth. The payment of poor wages, he argued, affects workers’ health; disturbs industrial peace; reduces national wealth; and obstructs development.

In contrast, the payment of “liberal” wages gives workers additional incentives to work dedicatedly; build a healthy, industrious labour force; improve their standard of living; produce and reproduce a healthy working class; and increase the wealth of nation.

Smith was for the integrated development of agriculture, manufacturing, and trade, in which the capitalists and workers grow and develop. Not so neoliberalism, which focuses on capital at the expense of labour. In contrast to neoliberalism, he was for the flourishing of free enterprise, not super monopoly capitalism.

He argued for “liberal” wages, while neoliberalism is against the payment of living wages, except when workers threaten the system. Neoliberalism is for cowboy capitalism, while Smith was for a state that is capable of disciplining and, does discipline, all classes. Neoliberalism is for a state which doggedly stands for monopoly capitalism.

Neoliberalism is far deadlier in underdeveloped countries, where it is wreaking havoc like Ebola.

** Ahmed Aminu-Ramatu Yusuf worked as deputy director, Cabinet Affairs Office, The Presidency, and retired as General Manager (Administration), Nigerian Meteorological Agency, (NiMet). Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Africa’s wealthiest man Aliko Dangote said he is willing to give up ownership of his multibillion-dollar oil refinery to the state-owned energy company NNPC Limited.

The billionaire spoke as a new dispute with one of the key equity partners in the plant heats up in the latest phase of a bitter row with regulatory authorities in Nigeria.

The 650,000 barrel-per-day refinery, which came to life last year after a decade of prolonged construction, cost $19 billion, more than double the initial estimate, promising to help wean Africa’s biggest oil producer off its reliance on fuel from overseas and save up 30 per cent of the total foreign exchange spent on importing goods.

“Let them (NNPCL) buy me out and run the refinery the best way they can. They have labelled me a monopolist. That’s an incorrect and unfair allegation, but it’s OK. If they buy me out, at least, their so-called monopolist would be out of the way,” Dangote told PREMIUM TIMES in an exclusive interview on Sunday.

“We have been facing fuel crisis since the 70s. This refinery can help in resolving the problem but it does appear some people are uncomfortable that I am in the picture. So I am ready to let go, let the NNPC buy me out, run the refinery.”

The multisectoral investor’s big bet on oil and gas, which he ventured into following years of relatively stress-free dominance of Nigeria’s cement, salt and sugar industries, is turning out problematic in its early days.

Set for its first roll-out of petrol to the Nigerian market in August, the mammoth plant has been operating just above half its capacity since the January start of refining operations, constrained in part by difficulties in sourcing crude from international producers.

Dangote Refinery said those companies are either demanding outrageous premiums before agreeing to supply crude or simply claiming the product is unavailable.

NNPC, once a sweetheart of the refiner before the current dispute soured relations, had delivered only 6.9 million barrels of oil to the plant as of May since last year, according to S&P Global Platts, a tracker of supply data.

NNPC Limited has a supply deal with the company dating back to the commencement of operations and previously agreed to a 20 per cent equity participation, the refinery saying only 7.2 per cent has been fully paid for before the deadline issued to the company to acquire the stake.

Starving the refinery of the feedstock required to keep it running at present capacity means it has turned to countries like Brazil and the US to bridge the gulf in supply.

“As you probably know, I am 67 years old, in less than three years, I will be 70. I need very little to live the rest of my life. I can’t take the refinery or any other property or asset to my grave. Everything I do is in the interest of my country,” Dangote told PREMIUM TIMES.

“This refinery can help in resolving the problem but it does appear some people are uncomfortable that I am in the picture. So I am ready to let go, let the NNPC buy me out, run the refinery. At least the country will have high-quality products and create jobs,” he added.

Dangote said the obstacles his refinery is facing seem to have vindicated friends and associates who conselled him to tread with caution as he pumped billions of dollars into the Nigerian economy.

“Four years ago, one of my very wealthy friends began to invest his money abroad. I disagreed with him and urged him to rethink his action in the interest of his country. He blamed his action on policy inconsistencies and shenanigans of interest groups. That friend has been taunting me in the past few days, saying he warned me and that he has been proven right,” the businessman said.

Last month, Devakumar Edwin, who serves as the vice president, oil and gas, at the Dangote Group accused the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) of allowing marketers to import dirty fuel into the country.

That has drawn a reprisal from the main watchdog of Nigeria’s midstream and downstream operations whose chief, Farouk Ahmed, claimed diesel from the plant as well as the one from modular refineries like Waltersmith and Aradel contain high sulphur levels.

A high sulphur content in fuel could be injurious to vehicle engines and is known to be harmful to the environment in that it further heats up the fast-warming climate.

“The AGO quality in terms of sulphur is the lowest as far as West Africa’s requirement of 50 parts per million (ppm). Dangote refinery, as well as some major refineries like Waltersmith refinery, produce between 650 ppm to 1,200 ppm. So, in terms of quality, their quality is much more inferior to the imported quality,” Ahmed told journalists last Thursday.

On Saturday, Dangote debunked the claim during a tour of both Dangote Petroleum Refinery and the Dangote Fertiliser Limited complex by members of the House of Representatives, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abbas and other members.

The company in a statement said the representatives observed the testing of Automotive Gas Oil (diesel) from two petrol stations alongside Dangote Petroleum Refinery, praised the company for its significant investments and contributions to Nigeria’s development.

“The Chairman of the House Committee on Downstream, Ikenga Ugochinyere, and Chairman of the House Committee on Midstream, Okojie Odianosen, oversaw the collection of samples from the Mild Hydro Cracking (MHC) unit of Dangote refinery for testing of all the samples,” the statement said.

“Lab tests revealed that Dangote’s diesel had a sulphur content of 87.6 ppm (parts per million), whereas the other two samples showed sulphur levels exceeding 1800 ppm and 2000 ppm respectively.

“Dangote emphasised that these findings debunked claims made by Farouk Ahmed, CEO of the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Authority, who recently asserted that imported diesel surpasses domestically refined products. Ahmed had alleged that Dangote refinery and other modular refineries like Waltersmith and Aradel produced diesel with sulphur content ranging from 650 to 1200 ppm—a statement criticised by many Nigerians as a tactic to favour imported products over local ones.”

Dangote openly challenged the regulator to compare the quality of refined products from his refinery with those imported, advocating for an impartial assessment to determine what best serves the interests of Nigeria.

On Saturday, the businessman announced plans to halt his investment in Nigeria’s steel industry to avoid being accused of monopoly.

“You know, about doing a new business which we announced, that is, steel. Actually, our board has decided that we shouldn’t do the steel because if we do the steel business, we will be called all sorts of names like monopoly. And then also, imports will be encouraged,” Dangote said.

PT

The Federal Government, through the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority, is expecting fresh reports to confirm the real sulphur content of the diesel produced by the Dangote refinery as the company debunked claims of inferior fuel production.

The NMDPRA spokesman, George Ene-Ita, in an interview with our correspondent, said the agency had done its job and would not engage in a media fight with anybody over the claims made by the NMDPRA Chief Executive, Farouk Ahmed, that Dangote’s diesel has more sulphur content than imported one.

According to Ene-Ita, the authority has about 15 engineers and scientists embedded in the Dangote refinery, whose fresh report about the refinery’s sulphur content will be out on Monday (today).

Punch

In a country grappling with multidimensional poverty affecting 133 million of its citizens, the Federal Government's recent announcement of distributing 740 truckloads of rice across Nigeria's 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) is not just inadequate—it's an insult to the intelligence and dignity of Nigerians.

Let's break down the numbers: Each 25kg bag of rice, when cooked, feeds approximately 100 people one meal. The government's “grand gesture” amounts to 20 trucks per state, each carrying 1,200 bags. This translates to a single meal for 2.4 million people per state, or a total of 88.8 million meals nationwide.

At first glance, 88.8 million meals might seem substantial. However, when juxtaposed against the 133 million Nigerians living in multidimensional poverty, the inadequacy becomes glaring. This "palliative" measure reaches only 67% of those in dire need, and that's assuming perfect distribution—a naive assumption given government’s history of relief efforts marred by corruption and mismanagement.

Moreover, this is not a sustainable solution but a one-time handout. A single meal of plain rice, devoid of any accompanying essentials like salt, stew, protein or even the means to cook it, is hardly a remedy for the systemic issues plaguing Nigeria's economy and food security.

The government's approach reeks of short-sightedness and a fundamental misunderstanding of the scale of the problem. Instead of addressing the root causes of food insecurity and poverty—such as improving agricultural productivity, creating jobs, and stabilizing the economy—they offer a band-aid solution that barely covers the wound.

This rice distribution scheme is not just ineffective; it's a misallocation of resources that could be better invested in long-term solutions. The logistical costs alone of transporting 740 trucks across the country could have been channeled into agricultural subsidies, infrastructure development, or education programmes that would yield more sustainable benefits.

Furthermore, the announcement of this scheme through the Minister of Information and National Orientation smacks of political posturing rather than genuine concern for citizens' welfare. It's a public relations stunt designed to create the illusion of action while sidestepping the hard work of implementing real, impactful policies.

The Nigerian people deserve more than empty gestures and photo opportunities. They need a government that understands the depth of their struggles and is committed to comprehensive, long-term solutions. This rice palliative scheme is not just inadequate; it's a testament to the disconnect between the government and the realities faced by millions of Nigerians every day.

As citizens, we must demand better. We must call for policies that address the systemic issues underlying poverty and food insecurity. A government that truly cares for its people would invest in sustainable agriculture, create job opportunities, and implement social safety nets that provide consistent support, not just sporadic handouts.

The rice may temporarily fill some stomachs, but it leaves the larger hunger for justice, equality, and true economic empowerment unsatisfied. It's time for the Tinubu government to stop treating symptoms and start curing the disease of poverty that afflicts the nation. Anything less is not just insufficient—it's an affront to the dignity and potential of the Nigerian people.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

President Joe Biden announced Sunday that he is dropping his reelection bid against Donald Trump, in a social media post that sent political shockwaves around the country and threw an element of turmoil into the election just months before voters go to the polls.

Biden’s decision came on the heels of a poor debate performance that prompted many rank-and-file Democratic lawmakers to urge him to withdraw from the race. The president said he will address the nation later this week “in more detail about my decision.”

Biden threw his support behind Vice President Kamala Harris to be the Democrats’ new candidate, and she vowed to “earn and win” the nomination.

Republican leaders attacked Harris and said she shares responsibility for the policies of the Biden administration. Former President Donald Trump said Biden “was not fit to run for president,” and he also called for the second debate to be moved from ABC to the Fox News Channel, which is seen as friendlier to him.

Democrats hail Biden’s decision to not seek reelection as selfless. Republicans urge him to resign

Democratic lawmakers are hailing President Joe Biden’s historic decision not to seek reelection as putting his country and his party before himself.

Republicans are calling on him to leave office as well, saying that if he is unable to run, then he’s unable to serve as president.

AP

Israel shoots down missile fired from Yemen after striking Houthis

Israel said it shot down a missile launched from Yemen on Sunday and the Yemeni Houthi movement said it had fired several missiles at the Israeli city of Eilat after Israel's first public strike against the Iran-aligned group a day earlier.

The Houthis have launched missiles and drones at Israel and disrupted global trade through the Red Sea in response to Israel's assault on Gaza, further destabilising the Middle East as war in the Palestinian enclave rages on after nine months.

Israel says the Houthis have launched 200 attacks against it since the Gaza war began, many of them intercepted and most of them not deadly.

But a rare Houthi drone strike on Friday hit Tel Aviv and killed one person, prompting Israel to announce its first strikes against the group on Saturday. The strikes by warplanes hit near the Yemeni port of Hodeidah and killed six people, local medics said.

The Houthi movement, known formally as Ansar Allah, said on Sunday it would continue to attack Israel in response.

Houthi spokesperson Mohammed Abdulsalam told Qatar's Al Jazeera TV there would be "no red lines ... all sensitive institutions ... will be a target for us."

The Israeli military said its Arrow 3 missile defence system had shot down a surface-to-surface missile projectile launched from Yemen on Sunday before it crossed into Israeli territory.

Before the interception, air raid sirens sounded in the Red Sea port city of Eilat, sending residents running for shelter.

Sunday's attack prolonged an escalation of violence between Israel and the Houthis that began with the Houthi drone strike that hit the centre of Tel Aviv on Friday. One man was killed and four other people were wounded, officials said.

The Israeli warplanes' air raid on Hodeidah on Saturday killed six people and wounded more than 80, medical sources in Yemen told Reuters, describing all as civilians.

Images from the scene showed a fiery blaze and dense smoke rising from the site of the strike. A Houthi-run TV channel said the strikes had hit an oil facility and power station.

Israeli officials say Hodeidah port has been used by the Houthis to receive weapons shipments from Iran.

PROXY BATTLE

The exchanges are part of a spillover from the Gaza war that has drawn in regional and world powers.

Iran-aligned groups including the Houthis have fired rockets and missiles at Israel saying they are doing so in support of Palestinians and the Islamist militant group Hamas that governs Gaza. The United States and its allies back Israel and provide weapons to it.

The war began on Oct. 7 after a Hamas-led attack on southern Israel in which about 1,200 people were killed and over 250 taken hostage back to Gaza, according to Israeli authorities.

Israel has since bombed and invaded Gaza as part of what it says is a campaign to eliminate Hamas, killing nearly 39,000 people, according to health officials in the enclave.

The Houthis, who control much of the north of Yemen and other large population centres, have previously claimed targeting Eilat and other attacks directed at Israel, saying they are acting in retaliation for Israel's war on Gaza.

The group has also attacked Red Sea shipping routes for months.

Hamas' allies include Iran-backed groups such as the Houthis, Hezbollah in Lebanon and Iraqi paramilitaries.

The Houthi movement consists primarily of members a minority Shi'ite Muslim group in Yemen and has controlled the country's capital, Sanaa, for years.

Reuters

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Two Ukrainian military trains hit in missile strike

Two Ukrainian military trains, carrying dozens of pieces of hardware, have been destroyed in a ballistic missile strike, the Russian Defense Ministry reported on Sunday, sharing drone footage of the attack.

The trains, carrying equipment and personnel of the 41st mechanized brigade, were discovered at a railway station near the town of Barvenkovo, located near the border between Ukraine’s Kharkov Region and Russia’s Donetsk People’s Republic. Each train consisted of at least 20 flatbed cars, the ministry said.

Infrared footage captured by a surveillance drone shows a ballistic missile fired by an Iskander-M launcher striking the station, with multiple fires observed on the ground after the hit. The strike was closely followed by another one, with a missile striking the second train, footage shows.

According to the military’s estimates, there were more than 60 pieces of military hardware, including 14 US-made International MaxxPro mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicles (MRAPs) and ten Canadian-made Roshel Senator armored personnel carriers (APCs), as well as other armored and soft vehicles. Up to 240 Ukrainian servicemen were killed or injured in the strike.

In recent weeks, the Russian military has repeatedly targeted Ukrainian forces in redeployment, striking military trains and road convoys, inflicting heavy casualties and damage on Kiev’s forces.

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Zelenskiy calls for long-range weapons after drone attack on Kyiv

Ukraine needs long-range weapons to protect its cities and troops on the frontline from Russian bombs and drones, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said on Sunday after a massive overnight drone and missile attack.

Russia launched its fifth drone attack on Kyiv in two weeks overnight, with Ukraine's air defence systems destroying all the air weapons before they reached the capital, Ukraine's military said.

Ukraine's air force said on Telegram that its air defence systems destroyed 35 of the 39 drones and two cruise missiles that Russia had launched overnight. The weapons, the air force said, targeted 10 of Ukraine's regions.

It was not immediately clear how many drones were launched at Kyiv. There were no casualties and no significant damage reported, Serhiy Popko, head of the Ukrainian capital's military administration, said on the Telegram.

"During last night alone, the Russian army used almost 40 'Shaheds' against Ukraine. Importantly, most of them were shot down by our defenders of the sky," Zelenskiy said on Telegram, referring to the drones.

He said it was necessary to destroy Russian bombers at Russian air bases to protect Ukraine from air raids.

"Our sufficient long-range capabilities should be a fair response to Russian terror. Everyone who supports us in this supports the defence against terror," Zelenskiy said.

Zelenskiy renewed his call for Western allies to allow long-range strikes on Russia on Friday in London, saying Britain should try to convince its partners to remove the limits on their use.

NATO members have taken different approaches to how Ukraine can use weapons they donate. Some have made clear Kyiv can use them to strike targets inside Russia while the United States has taken a narrower approach, allowing its weapons to be used only just inside Russia's border against targets supporting Russian military operations in Ukraine.

Russia launched three Iskander ballistic missiles, Ukraine's air force said, without saying what happened to them.

The military administration of the Sumy region in Ukraine's northeast bordering Russia said on Telegram that a Russian missile damaged critical infrastructure in the Shostkynskyi district of the region.

The administration did not provide detail on what infrastructure was hit.

There was no immediate comment from Russia about the attacks. Moscow says it does not attack civilian targets in Ukraine.

"These systematic attacks ... with drones, once again prove that the invader is actively looking for an opportunity to strike Kyiv," Popko said. "They're testing new tactics, looking for new approach routes to the capital, trying to expose the location of our air defence."

RT/Reuters

At the end of July 2017, the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime, UNODC, and Nigeria’s National Bureau of Statistics, NBS, issued a joint report on the public experience of and response to bribery in Nigeria. Among its findings, the report ranked several institutions with reference to public perceptions or experience of demand for bribes from officials at the point of service delivery. With a score of 46.4%, the report ranked the Nigeria Police Force highest in public perceptions of bribery. The report also noted that “at 33 per cent the prevalence of bribery in relation to prosecutors is the second highest, closely followed by judges and magistrates, at 31.5 per cent.”

It took a little while before the National Judicial Council, NJC, could dignify the report with acknowledgement. When it did, it was not to show institutional contrition for the serious findings contained therein or indicate what it would do to address it. Rather, in a release issued 18 days after the report, the NJC took issue with its content and rankings, complaining that it found the conclusions of the report “not only subjective but speculative”. Tellingly, the Council acknowledged that “there are a few bad eggs in the judiciary, like in every other arm of Government”, but rhetorically asked how many of the 1,059 judges and about 4,000 magistrates had been “caught receiving bribe”. With a touch of institutional insouciance, the NJC thundered: “How many Judges or Magistrates have been arrested and/or prosecuted and convicted of corruption till date?” 

To the extent that it telegraphed the dispositions of the NJC on the question of judicial integrity, the contents of this release were staggering in many respects. First, for an institution lacking in direct electoral legitimacy, the NJC did not appear to be particularly bothered about the foundations of the pedestal on which the judicial institution whose authority it is supposed to guarantee, oversights the elected branches or brings to the resolution of disputes. Instead, it appeared to be entirely comfortable to compete with the average politician or bureaucrat in the grubbiness league tables. 

Second, the Council put forward an implausible threshold for judicial accountability, confining it only to when a judge is actively caught in the act of bribery. If this were to be the standard of accountability applicable to judges, it would place them well below the average criminal, in terms of credibility. For the record, the applicable standard at common law is not whether or not a judge has been caught in the act of receiving a bribe but that nothing is “done which creates even a suspicion that there has been an improper interference with the course of justice.” 

Third, in querying how many judges and magistrates had been successfully prosecuted for such issues, the Council clearly diminished the role of judges in bringing about success or failure of accountability for the failure of judicial integrity, placing the burden for that outside the realm of judicial responsibility. 

The month preceding the UNODC-NBS report that drew its ire, at the beginning of June 2017, the NJC had announced the “recall” of six of the eight judges, whom it had previously suspended from judicial duties. The EFCC was also interested the case of one of them(names withheld) until the Appeal and the Supreme Courts cleared him without acquitting him.  

This sequence of complicit jurisprudence effectively killed any fantasies of judicial accountability in Nigeria, all but clothing judges with impunity for acts and crimes that no one would brook if committed by lesser mortals. Despite the clear findings of its own committee of investigation, the NJC allowed the judge and many of his ilk to return to judicial functions. The consequences of this sequence have not been slow to advertise themselves. 

Seven years after their first report of 2017 that roiled the NJC, at the beginning of July 2024, the UNODC and NBS issued the report of their third survey on corruption as experienced by the population of Nigeria. This 170-page report contains 15 references to judges none of which is particularly flattering. Among its many findings, the report deadpans that “among all types of public official for which there was sufficient data, with an average of NGN 31,000, the largest cash bribes were paid to judges and magistrates, followed by Customs or Immigration Service officers (NGN 17,800) and members of the armed forces (NGN 16,600).” 

It is a fitting coda to the tenure of outgoing Chief Justice of Nigeria, Olukayode Ariwoola, that the judiciary that he will leave behind has toppled both the Police and Customs services to reach the top of the institutional corruption grease pole in Nigeria. That is not a mean feat. The report finds a close relationship between corruption and nepotism, noting that “around 60 per cent of public sector applicants in Nigeria were hired as a result of nepotism, bribery or both – about 1.2 times the share found in the 2019 survey.”

When he retired as a Justice of the Supreme Court 20 years ago, Samson Odemwingie Uwaifo feared that the appellate courts “may soon be infested if not already contaminated with” the vice of judicial corruption. Today, his fears appear to have come true to an extent that even he would find frightening. That has been made possible with the baleful benediction of the National Judicial Council under its current leadership. In 2017, it took the Council 18 days to finish reading the first UNODC-NBS Corruption Experience Report. We will hopefully find out soon enough how long it will take the Council to digest the 170-page-long successor to that report in 2024. 

A professor of law, Odinkalu can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.