National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) says Indomie noodles manufactured in Nigeria is safe for human consumption. 

The agency said the noodles do not contain ethylene oxide.

Health officials in Malaysia and Taiwan said they had detected ethylene oxide in Indomie’s special chicken flavour noodles.

Ethylene oxide is a colourless and odourless gas that is used to sterilise medical equipment and plastics. It is said to be a cancer-causing chemical.

Mojisola Adeyeye, NAFDAC director-general, said the agency would begin random sample tests of the noodles from May 2.

Speaking with journalists on Thursday, the director-general said during the probe, samples of chicken flavoured instant noodles of various brands and the seasonings were drawn from the production facilities across the country.

She said the exercise was to ensure that the investigation was robust and cover other instant noodles brands manufactured in Nigeria, besides Indomie.

She said the agency also visited markets and retail outlets in the major cities of Lagos, Abuja, and Kano and drew samples of instant noodles for laboratory analysis.

“The market visits served as surveillance for the presence of the Taiwan and Malaysian special chicken noodles in the Nigerian market,” she said.

“The samples drawn from production facilities and trade were properly packaged and delivered in good condition to our central laboratory, Oshodi, Lagos, where analytical activities commenced immediately in accordance with international standards and methods of analysis.

“The technique using gas chromatography with mass spectrometry detector was deployed.

“A total of 114 samples of instant noodles and the seasonings were received.

“We did not only analyze for ethylene oxide and its derivative 2-chloroethanol in the noodles and seasonings; we also analysed for other contaminants such as mycotoxins and heavy metals in the samples.

“Ethylene oxide or its derivative was not found in any of the instant noodles produced in Nigeria and their seasonings.

“The level of mycotoxin and the heavy metals were within the internationally acceptable limit. Therefore, the noodles made in Nigeria are very safe to eat.”

 

The Cable

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Ukraine hits bridge linking Crimea to mainland in blow to Russian supply route

Ukrainian missiles on Thursday struck one of the few bridges linking the Crimea Peninsula with the Ukrainian mainland, Russian-appointed officials said, cutting one of the main supply routes for Russian occupation forces in southern Ukraine.

Meanwhile on the eastern front, Ukrainian forces were containing Russian troops and have not allowed "a single metre" of Russian advances, Ukraine's Deputy Defence Minister Hanna Maliar said on the Telegram app on Thursday.

She added Ukrainian forces on the southern front, where several villages were retaken last week, were "gradually moving forward. We have had partial success. We are pushing back the enemy and levelling the front line".

Ukraine is attacking Russian supply lines to disrupt Moscow's defence of occupied territory in the south, where Kyiv is in the early stages of its most ambitious counteroffensive of the 16-month-old war.

Kyiv says it has recaptured eight villages so far, but it has yet to commit the bulk of its forces to the fight and its troops have yet to reach the main Russian defensive lines.

Vladimir Saldo, head of the Russian-installed administration in occupied Kherson province, released video of himself on the Chonhar road bridge, where craters were blasted through the asphalt.

"Another meaningless act perpetrated by the Kyiv regime on orders from London. It solves nothing as far as the special military operation is concerned," he said, vowing to repair the bridge and restore traffic. Ukraine did not claim responsibility for the bridge attack.

The bridge is one of a handful of access roads to Crimea, which a narrow isthmus links to the Ukrainian mainland.

Alternative routes require hours-long detours over roads in poor condition. Russia's RIA new agency quoted Russian-installed transport officials as saying repairing the bridge could take weeks.

The bridge is beyond range of the battlefield rockets Ukraine has used for a year, but within reach of newly deployed weapons such as British and French air-launched cruise missiles, allowing Kyiv to hit logistics routes Russia had deemed safe just weeks ago.

'PSYCHOLOGICAL IMPACT'

The strike was "a blow to the military logistics of the occupiers", said Yuriy Sobolevsky, a Ukrainian official on the governing body for the Kherson region.

"There is no place on the territory of Kherson region where they can feel safe," he said.

Russian investigators said four missiles were fired by Ukrainian forces at the bridge, the RIA news agency reported. It quoted a spokesman for military investigators as saying markings on one missile suggested it was made in France.

Ukraine's Maliar said fighting in the Lyman sector, in the north of Donetsk region, was "the most difficult".

In the south, Ukrainian forces continued their offensive aimed at moving towards the city of Melitopol in the Zaporizhzhia region and the port of Berdiansk on the Sea of Azov, she said.

Russia says it has fended off the Ukrainian counterattack and inflicted heavy casualties, which Ukraine denies.

Russian mercenary chief Yevgeny Prigozhin accused the leaders of the Russian military of lying to President Vladimir Putin and the Russian people about the extent of Russian losses and setbacks in Ukraine.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has acknowledged that progress has been slow so far, but says his troops are advancing cautiously into heavily mined and well-defended areas to minimise losses.

Zelenskiy on Thursday accused Russia of planning a terrorist attack on the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, Europe's largest, which is in Russian-held territory near the front line. Moscow denied any such plan.

In a video statement on Telegram, the Ukrainian president said Moscow had prepared an attack that would release radiation from the plant but did not provide evidence.

Zelenskiy also claimed in his nightly video address that Russia had formed teams to collect and hide bodies of people killed in the Kakhovka dam collapse this month in southern Ukraine. Ukraine and Russia have accused each other of being behind the dam breach.

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called out Russia on Thursday for killing 136 children in Ukraine in 2022, adding its armed forces to a global list of offenders, according to a report to the U.N. Security Council seen by Reuters on children and armed conflict.

Russia has denied targeting civilians since it invaded Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022.

In London, Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal said he was certain Ukraine will have received the $6.5 billion it needs this year for its rapid reconstruction from pledges made at a conference that closed on Thursday.

 

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Kiev regime’s losses indicate West intends to fight Russia until last Ukrainian — Putin

The West can supply additional military equipment to Ukraine but it does not have an endless amount of manpower to work with, meaning Western countries intend to fight Russia until the last Ukrainian, Russian President Vladimir Putin pointed out at a briefing with permanent Security Council members.

"I realize that this is preliminary information because it is impossible to get a complete picture of the battlefield but overall it is clear. One can conclude that, of course, it is possible to supply additional hardware but the mobilization reserve is not infinite," the Russian head of state said commenting on the data on Ukrainian equipment and personnel losses provided by Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu and Security Council Secretary Nikolay Patrushev.

"It seems that Ukraine’s Western allies have indeed decided to fight Russia until the last Ukrainian," the president stressed.

During the meeting, Putin listened to Shoigu’s report on Ukrainian losses and then compared that information with the data obtained by Patrushev via other channels. "Nikolay Platonovich, I asked you to maintain interaction with your colleagues from various agencies in order for us to have an objective picture of what is going on," he explained, asking for an account of "how it looks from the point of view of various agencies participating in the special military operation." "It is clear that the main responsibility rests with the Defense Ministry but nevertheless, other agencies also accumulate information," the Russian president added.

According to the Defense Ministry and Security Council, Ukrainian personnel losses have surpassed 13,000 people. Putin was also interested in how the Defense Ministry assessed the prospects of new supplies of Western military hardware.

Having listened to the reports, the president emphasized that Ukrainian army reserves had not been exhausted and Russian commanders should be practical when planning combat operations. "One has to proceed from the premise that the adversary’s advance potential has not been exhausted; a number of strategic reserves have not yet been engaged and I am asking to keep this in mind when planning combat operations. It is necessary to proceed from the real situation," Putin concluded.

** Current counteroffensive ‘not decisive’ – Kiev

Ukraine is already planning for its next ‘counter-offensive’ using the US-made Abrams tanks, Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba told state broadcaster Suspilne on Thursday.

Washington promised Kiev about 30 Abrams tanks back in January. Asked whether they might arrive in time for the current operation, Kuleba said Ukrainians should look to the future instead.

“There is hope, but one should not think only in terms of this counter-offensive,” he said. “You should not look at this counteroffensive as the last and decisive one. There will be so many counteroffensives, as many as is needed to expel Russia from our territory.”

The Abrams is a “much more complex design” than the German-made Leopards that Ukraine was provided in the spring, Kuleba added. 

Kiev launched its long-heralded attack on June 4, deploying several brigades armed with American Bradley infantry fighting vehicles and German-made Leopards against Russian defenses in Zaporozhye and southern Donetsk. 

President Vladimir Zelensky acknowledged on Wednesday that the advance had been “slower than desired.” Anonymous Western officials told CNN on Thursday that the attack was “not meeting expectations on any front.” 

According to the Russian military, Ukrainian troops were stopped cold on the screening line, losing up to 13,000 casualties and 800 armored vehicles. Briefing President Vladimir Putin on Thursday, Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu and National Security Council Secretary Nikolay Patrushev spoke of 13 Western-made tanks being destroyed in the 16 days of fighting.

Ukrainian losses reportedly include 246 tanks, 152 infantry fighting vehicles – including 59 Western-made ones – 443 armored vehicles, 279 field artillery pieces and mortars, 42 multiple rocket launchers, ten fighter jets, four helicopters and 264 drones, according to the briefing.

Several Russian regions and organizations have offered bounties for the destruction or capture of any Leopard, Abrams or UK-made Challenger tanks provided to Ukraine. The first million-ruble prize for killing a Leopard was paid out to a Russian serviceman earlier this week. 

** NATO ‘out of the question’ for Ukraine right now – Scholz

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has argued that NATO should use its upcoming summit to marshall more military aid for Ukraine rather than pushing for the country to join the bloc. The US-led alliance is divided on the speed of Ukraine’s accession, with Britain demanding a fast-tracked process.

“We have to take a sober look at the current situation,” Scholz told parliament in Berlin on Thursday. Scholz added that Ukrainian officials have admitted “that joining NATO is out of the question” for as long as the conflict with Russia is raging, and the Western bloc should focus on other means of “support” for Kiev.

"Therefore, I suggest we focus on the top priority in Vilnius, namely strengthening the combat power of Ukraine," he argued, referring to the July summit in the Lithuanian capital.

"Our goal is… a sustainable military support of Ukraine, including with modern Western weapons,” he said, adding that EU and G7 nations could work out “security guarantees” for Ukraine in the absence of full NATO membership.

NATO’s official position on Ukrainian membership remains unchanged since 2008, when it declared that Ukraine “will become a member” at an unspecified point in the future. As long as the conflict with Russia is ongoing, this will be unlikely to shift, as Ukraine joining NATO would place the bloc at war with Russia. Prospective members can only join with the unanimous consent of all existing members.

Nevertheless, the European Parliament wants NATO leaders to use the Vilnius summit to extend a membership invitation to Ukraine, as do Polish, Lithuanian, and Ukrainian lawmakers. The UK backs these calls for urgency, with Foreign Secretary James Cleverly stating earlier on Thursday that London “would be very, very supportive” of NATO expediting Ukraine’s accession to the bloc.

“The Ukrainians have demonstrated their commitment to military reform required for NATO membership through their actions on the battlefield, and I think all NATO allies recognise that,” Cleverly added, without explicitly saying whether NATO should wait for the conflict with Russia to be resolved first.

For the time being, the US remains opposed to any fast-track process. Last week, US President Joe Biden stated that Ukraine would have to meet the same standards as everyone else and that “we are not going to make it easy.” 

 

Reuters/Tass/RT

 

 

 

South Kordofan residents flee as new front in Sudan war develops

Residents of the city of Kadugli in southwest Sudan began fleeing the city on Thursday as tensions escalated between the army and a powerful rebel group, threatening to open another area of conflict in the country's ongoing war, witnesses said.

Mobilisation around Kadugli, capital of South Kordofan state, and an escalation of fighting in Darfur come after nearly 10 weeks of fighting focused in the capital, Khartoum, between Sudan's army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF).

The United States and Saudi Arabia adjourned talks they had been facilitating in Jeddah, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Molly Phee said at a congressional hearing in Washington.

"The format is not succeeding in the way that we want," she said, after a series of violated ceasefire agreements.

Since mid-April the war has uprooted more than 2.5 million people from their homes and threatened to destabilise neighbouring countries suffering from a combination of conflict, poverty and economic pressures.

In the fighting between the army and the RSF, army air strikes on Thursday morning hit areas of southern Khartoum and Omdurman, and the RSF responded with anti-aircraft weaponry, residents said.

ESCALATION IN THE WEST

The army on Wednesday accused the SPLM-N rebel group led by Abdelaziz al-Hilu, which controls parts of South Kordofan state, of breaking a long-standing ceasefire agreement and attacking an army unit in the city.

The army said it had fought back the incursion but sustained losses.

South Kordofan has Sudan's main oil fields and borders West Darfur State as well as South Sudan.

The SPLM-N, which has strong ties to South Sudan, also attacked the army in the South Kordofan city of al-Dalanj on Wednesday, as did the RSF, residents said.

Residents of Kadugli said the army had redeployed forces to protect its positions in the city on Thursday, while the SPLM-N was gathering in areas on the outskirts.

There were electricity and communications outages as well as dwindling food and medical supplies, they said.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

The war has also brought an eruption of violence in Darfur, with the West Darfur city of El Geneina worst hit.

In Al Fashir, capital of North Darfur, the army and the RSF clashed violently, including around the main market, witnesses said after having deployed across the city on Thursday, witnesses said.

Nyala, capital of South Darfur and one of Sudan's largest cities, has also seen clashes between the army and RSF in recent days, amid electricity and communications blackouts. Both cities had been relatively calm after locally negotiated truces.

 

Reuters

Those familiar with road travel before fancy luxury buses and jeeps displaced wooden-back Bedford light trucks, famously called mammy wagons, might remember this ubiquitous message in cursive, bright colours scrawled on the rear and sometimes on the sides of trucks plying highways in Nigeria’s Southeast: “No condition is permanent.”

I’m not quite sure what the motivation was. My guess is that it was a message of comfort to the despairing and a warning to those who take life too seriously: No condition is permanent. 

True in life as in politics, that message rang again this week with wide-sweeping changes announced by President Bola Tinubu that could affect top appointees in up to 567 parastatals, government departments and agencies. 

You would be forgiven to think it was not a transition from one All Progressives Congress (APC) government to another. The scope, speed and extent of the changes from Tinubu’s inauguration on May 29, make it look like a hostile takeover, the sort of thing one might have expected if the opposition had won the presidential election.

No one is exactly sure of the number of persons that may have been affected by the changes announced this week. But even if allowance is made for a few parastatals whose CEOs may remain in place and will now report directly to the President, instead of the boards which have now been dissolved, we may be looking at over 3,000. That is, assuming that each of the roughly 570 affected establishments has a board of at least six members. Often, the figure is higher.

Regardless, every job loss is different in its own way, both in how it affects those directly 

involved and those who depend on them. Each political appointee has a personal story not conveyed in the usual press headlines of how many have been beheaded, politically, and how many more heads may roll. Like sharks, the press loves the smell of blood, as long as it is not their own.

It doesn’t matter how prepared those fired may be, they never seem prepared enough when the hammer eventually falls. It’s human nature. And those who take their place never fully learn the lesson of the message on the back of those Southeast bound trucks until they, too, become victims. 

Imagine, for example, the response of former Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Babachir Lawal, when six years ago he was told of a statement by the Presidency announcing that he had been removed as he emerged from a meeting in the Presidential Villa.

“Who is the Presidency?”, Lawal asked State House reporters in a voice full of blessed self-assurance.

Well, that was his last question as SGF. He found, to his shock and surprise, that no condition is permanent. He had indeed been removed “with immediate effect,” with barely enough time to gather his files.

He should have learned from the public encounter of the great Nnamdi Azikiwe with Ukpabi Asika, who had been seconded by the military from the University of Ibadan to be civilian administrator of the Eastcentral State. Azikiwe had criticised Asika’s administration and the administrator didn’t like it at all. 

He replied mocking Azikiwe as “ex-this, ex-that, and ex-everything else,” adding that Azikiwe was just a politician craving relevance. 

Azikiwe, who had the gift of asking his adversaries to go to hell and still make them look forward to the trip, replied Asika that one day, he too, would be ex-administrator of the Eastcentral State, as Asika’s father had also become ex-post master general of the post office in Onitsha, his hometown. The message on the back of the mammy wagon, he told Asika, is the inevitable story of every appointee: No condition is permanent.

Leader of the APC and former governor of Osun State, Bisi Akande, among the lucky few who lived to tell his own story recalled in My Participations, how in 1984 after General Muhammadu Buhari’s military coup, “fallen big men of yesterday wept like babies” when soldiers descended on them as was often the case during military rule. 

In the last 24 years of civilian rule, the experience of political appointees has been somewhat different. Perhaps former President Olusegun Obasanjo holds the record of the highest number of federal firings, especially after he retired scores of military officers who had been “politically exposed”, and followed up with public sector reforms that left even scores more out of jobs.

Perhaps because Obasanjo’s successors between 2007 and 2015 were also from his Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), and also because of his longevity in office, no other PDP president after him retired or sacked as many political appointees as he did. 

Sixteen years after Obasanjo left office, Tinubu, a president from a rival party, appears ready to upend a record that once again reminds the public of the message on the back of the mammy wagon. 

Even Buhari, who took over the reins of power as president from the opposition and matched Obasanjo’s two-term four-year tenure, did not seem to have the amount of appetite for table-shaking that Tinubu has shown in less than one month in office. 

Apart from retaining the service chiefs he inherited from former President Goodluck Jonathan for nearly three months, for example, Buhari also retained the suspended Central Bank Governor, Godwin Emefiele, and a number of heads of MDAs, first appointed by Jonathan.

Of course, Buhari made some changes. But with a few exceptions, he seemed to make changes only at gunpoint. Which was neither necessarily strategic nor carefully thought out. 

There were cases where as a result of poor record-keeping, for example, appointees whose tenures were due escaped removal or where the president yielded to political pressure to extend the tenures of persons who had no business staying on. 

Buhari’s 30-year absence from power, his nearly zero rigorous public activity after office, his narrow, clerically-biased social circle, and his introverted style were major handicaps after his election as president. 

His poor health in his first term did not help matters also. Yet, not a few close to him said once he made appointments, he had a tendency to abdicate rather than delegate responsibilities, often letting some of his appointees run amok.

That is partly why Tinubu’s actions in the last few weeks, especially the sackings this week, are looking like a hostile takeover. 

But they are not. A number of the decisions taken by Tinubu since he assumed office, particularly the removal of petrol subsidy and unification of the exchange rate, were long overdue. Buhari ignored calls to act, even from a few inside his inner circle, choosing instead to bury his head in chaos under a rubble of debt. 

As for the dissolution of the boards and the removal of service chiefs, it’s a ritual of every new government. The problem, in Buhari’s case, was a frighteningly bizarre absentmindedness or perhaps indifference, that left vital positions, especially in the Judiciary, unfilled; and overdue retirements unattended or indulged by unwarranted extensions.

On the whole, under Buhari, it seemed, once appointments were made, “all conditions were permanent!”

To be fair, accusations of nepotism against him during his first term were not entirely justified, at least up to December 2018. The data which I obtained from the Presidency at the time showed a distribution of 278 to 289 in the appointments of heads of parastatals and Federal agencies between the South and the North, as a whole. 

Contrary to the trope of nepotism at the time, the Northcentral and Southwest had 102 and 101 respectively. The story changed in Buhari’s second term. And now, the public is watching to see how Tinubu, who has started the difficult task of correcting the outrageous lopsidedness in Buhari’s second term, manages the process.

Announcement of new policies and personnel changes, however crucial they may be, are only a form of signalling. The more difficult part would be what follows next, especially the institutional changes required to make public offices more responsive, less amenable to the whims of appointees and accountable and service-driven.

For now, I recommend the message on the back of the mammy wagon to both the incoming and outgoing appointees: No condition is permanent.

** Ishiekwene is Editor-In-Chief of LEADERSHIP

This time eight years ago, Nigerians still basking in the euphoria of having a martinet president began to ascribe all kinds of wonderful happenstances to his body language. So excited were the supporters of former President Muhammadu Buhari about the country’s potential under him that they attributed some magicality to otherwise routine happenings. Civil servants resume work at 8 am as expected of them? It was Buhari’s body language that motivated them to their newfound sense of responsibility. Did the electricity company supply power for 18 hours a day instead of their habitual six hours? Yes, that must be Buhari’s body language generating more megawatts. You somehow managed to drive through Lagos without your entire day expended in the soul-crushing traffic? Thanks to Buhari’s body language, hallelujah!

While it lasted, Buhari’s body was like the shadow of Apostle Paul in the Bible. It cured the sick! So great was the illusion that a president’s mere body language can change the norms of a beleaguered nation that some clowns even campaigned that Buhari should be allowed to suspend the constitution just so that the constraints of democratic principles would not incommode his supposed quest to give Nigeria the much-needed moral renewal. Looking back at the abuse of power that characterised his tenure, one cannot but be grateful to those who never mortgaged their common sense to give Buhari any freer hand to operate. Imagine yielding to the shoddy thinking that reduced the creativity of leadership to the mystique of body language instead of the rational processes of policymaking, outcomes assessments, and regular revisions.

Bringing up this recent past is to remind us that, at the inaugural phase of a leadership era, people generally get frenzied on their expectations of a new beginning that every whiff of air that passes under their nostrils is taken as a fresh breath. For instance, it is only three weeks into a new era. Nobody has yet seen any material impact of his policies on anyone’s lives, but some brown nosers are already declaring Bola Tinubu to be the best president Nigeria has ever had. Like Buhari’s body language, another leader whose aura will solve problems is being deified.

It is also troubling how, due to the same euphoria, some economic decisions are being cheered on as necessary pain. They are passing off hard decisions as a matter of “suffer now, enjoy later” without considering enough that one must survive before enjoying Eldorado.

To an extent, there is a basis for the heightened expectations. Tinubu has managed to pull off certain economic decisions like the fuel subsidy removal that his predecessors could not push through. Previous governments, composed of unreconstructed welfarists and miseducated socialists, insisted on those policies even as they enervated the economy. The fuel subsidies not only failed to benefit people as promised, but also subjected them to emotional blackmail. Every failure of the government was blamed on the insistence of the already impoverished to consume cheap petrol. Tinubu took advantage of the transition phase of the government to make some of these changes.

Within the same block of time, they have also announced the removal of the subsidies on electricity tariff and their plans to introduce VAT on diesel. All these supposed harsh measures are coming in the wake of Nigerians’ survival of Buhari’s nightmarish years, including a misconceived naira redesign policy that declined their purchasing power. Tinubu also signed the Student Loan Bill, an indication that the cost of post-secondary education will shoot up. And who knows what is next. Is it that the government considers the patience of the impoverished infinitely elastic, or is there a deliberate tactic to push people off the edge?

Perhaps they do not know what it means to be poor. Last week, I wrote on how the provision of the Student Loan Bill demonstrates that the government’s indices for calibrating poverty are incoherent and faulty. They expect a person (or their family) to live on a paltry <N42,000 monthly to be considered poor enough for the loan. Yet, such a person is still expected to provide at least two guarantors “each of whom must either be a civil servant of at least level 12, a lawyer with at least 10 years post-call experience, or a judicial officer, or a justice of peace.” If you are that poor, it is also improbable you will have ready access to those people who will sign off your loans. The ideas being expressed through policies so far betray an inchoate understanding of what constitutes poverty in Nigeria. At the rate people are being stretched, they will be crushed before their poverty is cured.

We heard versions of “suffer now, enjoy later” under Buhari too. We truly suffered, yes, but did anyone eventually enjoy the promised benefits? Some of the Buhari policies we were told to quietly swallow so that everything good could come were ultimately reversed when they failed their mission. Those ideas that were vociferously defended by supposed analysts who insisted we have had it too good for so long had to be eventually dissolved without achieving much. We should not have to go through that all over again and within the same period too. Nigerians like to talk so much about how we do not learn from our history because the history curriculum has been withdrawn from schools. Yet, we have customarily repeated the same history that unfolded before their very eyes.

We should be savvier this time round. Instead of merely praising a government for making decisions that have yet to translate into a better life, we should be asking why we should suffer any more than we have done. The whole idea of “suffer now and enjoy later” has been the story of our Nigerian lives. Suffer is, in fact, what we have been doing all our Nigerian lives. That is why our religious houses are always full of people begging God—who has grown indifferent—to alleviate our suffering. There is hardly anyone of us whose Nigerian lives is not wrapped up in suffering and expectations of when it finally ends. Yet, hardly anything good ever comes from suffering. It does not always get better; people just get used to the conditions. Some even assume they are privy to some higher truth because they are in pain. Prolonged suffering could become the reality of life to the point that any slight deviation is attributed to some magical force. That is why those who refrigerators saw 18-hour electricity under Buhari quickly attributed it to the miracle of his body language.

People should not be cajoled into accepting suffering based on the expectation that some bright future has been lit at the end of the tunnel. What if one dies inside the tunnel? If there will be a positive end to this, we will have to demand it. The government should be made to communicate where this is leading. To what end is all the suffering? Interestingly, there has been more analysis of the effects of Tinubu’s policies done by social media influencers than communication from government strategists. There should be an idea of where all of these are going, the government’s own share of the sacrifices, and how to cushion the effects of its policies. By that, I do not mean sending the vice president to go and distribute another ten thousand naira per person in the marketplaces.

Even when all kinds of subsidies were in place, Nigeria was not altogether a pleasant experience. The country takes and takes from you, leaving you drained of all virtue. Taking subsidies away based on the myth of some future enjoyment is a tacit indictment that you—rather than a government that lacks imagination—are why the country is so dysfunctional.

 

Punch

The best of the best fail. It's how you respond that leads to success.

In a recent interview, I was asked to reflect on the last decade of my company, Cloud for Good, and share what I would have changed along my journey. After a brief moment of reflection, I realized there was only one true answer: nothing. Don't get me wrong, I've made plenty of decisions that didn't work out. I've started lines of business that had to be ended prematurely, implemented thrown or revised procedures and made my share of wrong hires. But the truth is I don't view these momentary moments of adversity as failures — they are teaching and learning moments.

My company would not be in the position it is today if not for these mistakes, and I know I wouldn't be the person I am today without those bumps in the road.

Taking steps to success

Shortly after NBA superstar Giannis Antetokounmpo's team, the Milwaukee Bucks, were eliminated from the 2023 playoffs, a reporter asked him if he viewed the season as a failure. Coming into the season, the Bucks were projected to be one of the season's top contenders, and the team entered the playoffs as the top seed in the Eastern Conference. The Miami Heat would go on to defeat the Bucks in the first round of the playoffs, marking only the sixth time in NBA history an #8 seed defeated a #1 seed. Historical precedent and significance aside, Antetokounmpo was taken aback by the very question.

"Every year, you work towards something," the NBA star said. "It's not a failure. It's steps to success."

As entrepreneurs, we know all the buzzwords, self-help, and business development terms associated with this mindset. "Fail forward," "Fail fast, fail often," etc. It's true that to succeed, we must be open to truly failing, but we must consider these terms carefully and understand potential ramifications before failing for failure's sake.

As Antetokounmpo suggests, iteration is the key to truly growing and succeeding. Finding success requires opening oneself up to the possibility of failure. Still, the central conceit of this mindset is that mistakes will be learned from, perspective will be granted, and we, as entrepreneurs, will become better prepared to face our challenges with each passing challenge.

However, all of this is easier said than done, so let me share with you a few of the most important lessons I've learned on my journey to success.

Maintain an even keel

I'm a big believer in celebrating success, but I also believe in the virtue of humility. Much in the way that we must acknowledge failure without letting it demoralize us, we must also do the same for success and not let short gains go to our heads and cloud our judgment. By staying humble, you can ensure that successes are followed by properly acknowledging the teamwork or sacrifice that made that success possible.

It also becomes easier to view failures or setbacks as learning opportunitieswhen you zoom out and understand that ups and downs, wins and losses, are all part of the cyclical game we play. Don't get too down on yourself if things don't work out as planned. Just figure out what went wrong and do the work to establish a better path forward. Likewise, don't become self-aggrandizing after a few wins, as the pendulum might swing to the other end before you know it.

Accept change, expect improbability

My experience is based in the technology field, which is continuously refining and evolving. In my line of business, those that succeed are those that are most prepared for the next update, or the next big product launch, to come around and drastically alter the realities of our daily working lives. While tech does move faster than many other industries, the fact remains that every single industry will eventually weed out those beholden to routines and old ways of thinking.

Failure should always precipitate change. When failure strikes, you are doing yourself a disservice if you aren't looking to refine or reinvent the thought processes that preceded the failure. Embracing change and understanding that the implausible can and will happen allows us to protect our mental health and encourage progressive development in our thinking. Sometimes the best things we can do is reflect on the changes we didn't see coming so that when the next round of acceleration arrives, our mental states will be better prepared to adjust accordingly.

Build a team worth relying on

One of the quickest ways to assure destruction is believing you have all the answers. While it's true that entrepreneurs must have the self-confidence and self-reliance necessary to forge their own path, it would be foolish to think success is found entirely independently. The most successful people have the most well-built teams comprised of diverse thought leaders unafraid of telling you "no" or "maybe there's a better way to do this."

Teams are there to help filter ideas, provide feedback and help create new paths forward when failure inevitably strikes. Learn to cherish the brainstorming sessions where 10, 50 and 100 ideas are thrown around in search of the one winning idea. Prepare for the meetings that need another meeting and maybe another after that. Good ideas win when the right people gather around the table. Those you allow into your inner circle will have had their fair share of failures too, and they will be the trust advisors you seek as a result of growing from those failures.

Understand that highs and lows shouldn't distract you from daily consistency. Change is a certainty worth preparing for, and no one truly succeeds on their own. Failure often goes hand in hand with ambition. Remember this the next time a product launch goes awry, a promising new hire turns out to be a poor fit, or your next quarter's earnings projections fall short.

If you're built for the long haul, failure won't stop you, but handling failure, the wrong way just might.

 

Entrepreneur

We are urgently working to deliver more for people and the planet. Multiple, overlapping shocks have strained countries’ ability to address hunger, poverty, and inequality, build resilience and invest in their futures. Debt vulnerabilities in low- and middle-income countries present a major hurdle to their economic recovery, and to their ability to make critical long-term investments.

We are urgently working to fight poverty and inequalities. An estimated 120 million people have been pushed into extreme poverty in the last three years and we are still far from achieving our United Nations sustainable development goals (SDGs) by 2030. We should thus place people at the centre of our strategy to increase human welfare everywhere on the globe.

We want a system that better addresses development needs and vulnerabilities, now heightened by climate risks, which could further weaken countries’ ability to eliminate poverty and achieve inclusive economic growth. Climate change will generate larger and more frequent disasters, and disproportionately affect the poorest, most vulnerable populations around the world. These challenges cross borders and pose existential risks to societies and economies.

We want our system to deliver more for the planet. The transition to a net zero world and the goals of the Paris agreement present an opportunity for this generation to unlock a new era of sustainable global economic growth. We believe that just ecological transitions that leave no one behind can be a powerful force for alleviating poverty and supporting inclusive and sustainable development. This requires long-term investment everywhere to ensure that all countries are able to seize this opportunity. Inspired by the historic Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, we also need new economic models which recognise the immense value of nature for humanity.

We are convinced that poverty reduction and protection of the planet are converging objectives. We must prioritise just and inclusive transitions to ensure that the poor and most vulnerable can fully reap the benefits of this opportunity, rather than disproportionally bearing the cost. We recognise that countries may need to pursue diverse transition paths in line with the 1.5C limit depending on their national circumstances. There will be no transition if there is no solidarity, economic opportunities, or sustainable growth to finance it.

We, leaders of diverse economies from every corner of the world, are united in our determination to forge a new global consensus. We will use the Paris Summit for a New Global Financing Pact on June 22-23 as a decisive political moment to recover development gains lost in recent years and to accelerate progress towards the SDGs, including just transitions. We are clear on our strategy: development and climate commitments should be fulfilled and, in line with the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, we recognise that we need to leverage all sources of finance, including official development assistance, domestic resources and private investment.

Delivering on that consensus should start with existing financial commitments. Collective climate-finance goals must be met in 2023. Our total global ambition of $100bn (£78bn) of voluntary contributions for countries most in need, through a rechannelling of special drawing rights or equivalent budget contributions, should also be reached.

No country should have to wait years for debt relief. We need greater and more timely cooperation on debt, for both low- and middle-income countries. This starts with a swift conclusion of solutions for debt-distressed countries.

A top priority is to continue ambitious reform of our system of multilateral development banks, building on the existing momentum. We are asking development banks to take responsible steps to do much more with existing resources and to increase financing capacity and private capital mobilisation, based on clear targets and strategies in terms of private finance contribution and domestic resource mobilisation. These financial resources are essential, but this reform is about far more than money. It should deliver a more effective operational model, based on a country-led approach. We also need our development banks to work together as an ecosystem, closely with other public agencies and streamlined vertical funds – and, where appropriate, with philanthropists, sovereign wealth funds, private finance and civil society – to deliver the greatest impact.

Technology, skills, sustainability, and public and private investment will be at the core of our partnerships, to promote voluntary technology transfer, a free flow of scientific and technological talents, and contribute to an inclusive, open, fair and non-discriminatory economy. We will promote an agenda of sustainable and inclusive investment in developing and emerging economies, based on local economic value added and local transformation, such as fertiliser value chains. This comprehensive approach will require new metrics to update our accountability instruments.

Public finance will remain essential to achieving our goals. We should start with strengthening our instruments (the International Development Association, the International Monetary Fund’s Poverty Reduction and Growth Trust and Resilience and Sustainability Trust, the International Fund for Agricultural Development, the Green Climate Fund, and other concessional windows of our banks, as well as the Global Shield against Climate Risks). But we acknowledge that meeting our development and climate goals, including the fight against hunger, poverty, and inequality; adapting to climate change; and averting, minimising and addressing loss and damage, will require new, innovative, and sustainable sources of finance, such as debt buy-backs, engagement from sectors that prosper thanks to globalisation, and more trusted carbon- and biodiversity-credit markets.

Increasing resilience through a comprehensive suite of financial instruments is a priority. We need a stronger global safety net, based on prearranged approaches, to adapt and mitigate the impacts of climate change, especially when disasters hit. This implies climate and other disaster-resilient deferral mechanisms, insurance nets and emergency-response financing, including a more sustainable financing model of humanitarian aid.

Achieving our development goals, including climate mitigation, will also depend on scaling up private capital flows. This requires enhanced mobilisation of the private sector with its financial resources and its innovative strength, as promoted by the G20 Compact with Africa. This also requires improving the business environment, implementing common standards and adequate capacity building, and reducing perceived risks, such as in foreign exchange and credit markets. This may require public support, as well as sharing reliable data. Overall, our system needs to lower the cost of capital for sustainable development, including through the green transition in developing and emerging economies.

Our work together is all about solidarity and collective action, to reduce the challenges facing developing countries and to fulfil our global agenda. We will continue to press for progress, leveraging other important events, including the G20 summits in India and Brazil, the SDG summit and the COPs, starting with Cop28 in the United Arab Emirates this year. In all of our upcoming international works and negotiations, we will seek to advance concrete actions that deliver on the promise of the SDGs, for our prosperity, people, and planet.

** Emmanuel Macron is president of France. Mia Mottley is prime minister of Barbados. Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is president of Brazil. Ursula von der Leyen is president of the European Commission. Charles Michel is president of the European Council. Olaf Scholz is chancellor of Germany. Fumio Kishida is prime minister of Japan. William Ruto is president of Kenya. Macky Sall is president of Senegal. Cyril Ramaphosa is president of South Africa. Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan is president of the United Arab Emirates. Rishi Sunak is prime minister of the UK. Joe Biden is president of the US

British High Commissioner to Nigeria, Richard Montgomery, said, on Wednesday, that the number of Nigerians travelling to the United Kingdom via study route had multiplied five times in the last three years.

Montgomery explained that his country’s decision banning international students from bringing family members with them to the UK starting 2024 was to avoid overburdening the country’s housing infrastructure and to control the inflow of migrants.

“Many more students are trying to bring their dependents with them…but it’s not always possible to find the housing and services to meet all the needs of all our existing student population…we’ll have to manage our migration in and out of the UK,” Montgomery told State House correspondents on Wednesday on emerging from a closed-door meeting with Vice President Kashim Shettima, at the Presidential Villa, Abuja.

Wednesday’s meeting comes one month after the new British envoy to Nigeria handed his letter of credence to former President Muhammadu Buhari on May 18.

On May 23, the UK Home Office said international students, including Nigerians, would no longer be able to bring family members with them to the UK starting January 2024.

It also announced that overseas students would be stopped from switching from the student visa route to a work visa until their studies have been completed.

The decision has been greeted with mixed reactions from international students, schools, and some British lawmakers, who argued that the regulation would aggravate labour shortages in critical sectors, such as health care and threaten the country’s global standing as a top destination for international talents.

But in response to a question from our correspondent, the British High Commissioner gave reasons for the regulation, saying, “I think there are two issues here. The first is, it’s not always possible to find the housing and services to meet all the needs of all our existing student population.”

“And second, reasonable people would accept that we have to manage our visitor numbers and we’ll have to manage our migration in and out of the UK just as the Nigerian government would do.”

Montgomery revealed that “the number of Nigerian students coming to the UK has increased fivefold in the last three years,” noting that “It is a fantastic success story for our universities and we are really delighted that so many Nigerians are coming to the UK.”

He, however, said, “That issue was not raised in the meeting (with the Vice President) just now. But I would like to put the media debate about it in a broader context.

“Last year (2022), for example, the UK granted three million new visas, of which 325,000 were to Nigerians.

“Nigerian visitors constitute over 10 per cent of the people coming to London and the UK.

“It’s a fantastic success story for our universities. And we are really delighted that so many Nigerians are coming to the UK.”

The British envoy revealed that his discussions with the VP highlighted the current policy direction of the Bola Tinubu administration, which, he said, was being warmly received by UK investors.

“As I discussed with His Excellency, the big economic decisions being taken by this government are really important and are being noticed around the world: the removal of subsidy, the exchange rate reform, all of that create a much better investment environment.

“I was in London last week; I was briefing my ministers, but I was also talking to British business in finance, banking and investment sectors. They are all responding very positively to these first decisions,” Montgomery stated.

The discussions also featured areas of assistance by the British government to cushion the effects of the discontinuance of petroleum subsidy, which has spelt “tough times” for Nigerians.

“We know that there are tough times that are going on at the moment, inflation and unemployment.

“The Vice President and I also touched on some of the measures that might be possible to cushion the blow of some of these economic pressures.

“But I think the big issue is that these reforms help put Nigeria on a higher growth path; they will attract more investments and the United Kingdom and the city of London see Nigeria as a big opportunity going forward.

“I will be doing my part to try to boost those, enhance trade and investment,” he noted.

 

Punch

Labour Party presidential candidate, Peter Obi, on Wednesday, tendered tons of electoral documents, including Permanent Voter Cards (PVC) records before the Presidential Election Petition Court in Abuja.

In furtherance of his suit challenging President Bola Tinubu’s victory in the 25 February presidential election, Obi, through his lawyer, Livy Uzoukwu, presented certified true copies (CTCs) of documents detailing the total number of registered voters and PVCs.

Uzoukwu said the electoral documents were from the 32 states of the federation.

He further listed other documents to include – CTCs of supplementary INEC Results Viewing report regarding three local government areas of Benue State, two LGAs of Cross River State, 13 LGAs of Lagos State and one council area of Gombe State.

The lawyer also tendered a certificate of compliance concerning the conduct of the presidential poll in Edo State.

Kemi Pinheiro, who represented INEC at the proceedings, did not oppose its admissibility.

But the legal teams of Tinubu and the APC kicked against its admissibility.

Wole Olanipekun and Lateef Fagbemi, who represented Tinubu and the APC, respectively, promised to give reasons for their objections in their final arguments in the suit.

More witnesses

At the resumed hearing on Wednesday, one of Obi’s lawyers, Patrick Ikwueto, led more witnesses to prove his client’s case against the president.

The eighth witness, Chubuike Ugwuoke, mounted the box, where he adopted his witness statement on oath.

Ugwuoke, a cyber security expert, was subpoenaed to testify before the five-member panel of the court chaired by Haruna Tsammani.

He tendered a press statement that was issued by INEC before the general elections.

The press statement issued in November 2022 by Festus Okoye on behalf of INEC debunked an “alleged plot to abandon transmission of polling unit results to IReV portal.”

“The claim is patently false,” Okoye said in the statement, assuring Nigerians that “the Bimodal Voters Accreditation System (BVAS) and INEC Results Viewing (IReV) (portal) have come to stay for Voter accreditation and uploading of polling units results in real-time in Nigeria.”

Okoye, an INEC commissioner in charge of voter education, explained that the IReV is one of the innovations introduced by the electoral umpire to guarantee electoral integrity and credibility in Nigeria.

But during the 25 February presidential election, INEC failed to transmit polling station results in real-time as promised electronically.

Its inability to comply with the said electoral guidelines forms one of the grounds for Obi and other petitioners’ suits to overturn Tinubu’s victory.

Also, Ugwuoke presented a report called “Meta data.”

But INEC, APC and Tinubu objected to the admissibility of the document, promising to provide reasons in support of their objection.

The respondents’ lawyers urged the court to defer Ugwuoke’s cross-examination until Thursday, which the court granted.

Thereafter, Obi’s ninth witness, Onoja Sunday, mounted the witness box.

Sunday, a staff member at Women & Child Rescue Initiative, a not-for-profit organisation, adopted his witness statement and presented his staff identity card to the court.

Under cross-examination by Abubakar Mahmoud, INEC’s lawyer, Sunday said he was not a political party member.

But while being cross-examined by Emmanuel Ukala, a lawyer in Tinubu’s legal team, the witness said he was subpoenaed in his capacity using his permanent residential address.

Recalling his observation during the polls, Sunday said electoral officials failed to upload the presidential election results to the IReV portal.

Kefas Iya, the 10th petitioner’s witness, said he worked as a member of the ad-hoc staff during the presidential election.

Iya, a civil servant, told the court that he supervised 24 polling stations in his Ward at Madagali LGA in Adamawa State.

He said INEC officials could not upload the presidential election results from the polling units.

Iya said the PDP presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, won the presidential election in Adamawa, his home state.

The court adjourned the hearing in the case until Thursday.

 

PT

Allied Peoples Movement (APM) has closed its case against President Bola Tinubu’s election, after calling one witness to support its petition.

Chichi Ojei, APM’s candidate, had scored 25,961 votes during the February 25 presidential election.

The party is contending that Tinubu was improperly sponsored by the All Progressives Congress (APC) since he nominated Kashim Shettima as his vice-presidential candidate for the election.

It claims that at the time Shettima accepted to be APC’s vice-presidential candidate, he was still the party’s candidate for Borno central senatorial district.

At the court session on Wednesday, the party called its sole witness, Aisha Abubakar, APM’s assistant welfare officer.

Led in evidence by Gideon Idiagbonya, APM counsel, Abubakar adopted her witness statement on oath.

Under cross-examination by Kemi Pinheiro, INEC lawyer, the witness admitted that she could not confirm when the electoral commission received the notice of substitution of the candidate for Borno central.

Lateef Fagbemi, APC’s lawyer, presented a certified true copy of a supreme court judgement which dismissed a suit filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) against Shettima’s alleged dual nomination.

Abubakar confirmed the authenticity of the apex court’s verdict and it was subsequently admitted in evidence despite an objection by the APM’s lawyer.

SUIT ADJOURNED TO JULY

On his part, Wole Olanipekun, Tinubu and Shettima’s counsel, made the witness read several relevant paragraphs of the supreme court verdict.

The excerpts of the court’s judgment were to establish the frivolity of the petition challenging Tinubu’s election on the grounds of double nomination.

After listening to all parties in the suit, Haruna Tsammani, chairman of the panel, ordered the respondents to file their final written addresses within 10 days from Wednesday.

He ordered the APM to file its written address within seven days after the respondents’ filing.

The court then adjourned further hearing in the suit to July 14.

Meanwhile, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) could not proceed with its petition due to shortage of time. Consequently, the court adjourned the hearing to Thursday.

 

The Cable