Following a ruling by the Confederation of African Football (CAF) in favor of Nigeria’s Super Eagles, reports from Libya indicate that Nigerians in the country are now facing targeted crackdowns.
The CAF decision, which imposed a fine and awarded Nigeria three points after alleged mistreatment of the Super Eagles, has reportedly led to rising anti-Nigerian sentiment.
In Tripoli, Adenaike Emmanuel, a Nigerian resident, shared that arrests of undocumented Nigerians have already begun.
Libyan media and local blogs have fueled tensions by calling for fines and arrests, allegedly holding Nigerian workers responsible for the financial penalty imposed by CAF.
The incident underscores the Super Eagles’ troubled trip to Libya, which was marked by delays and logistical issues.
CAF’s ruling, perceived as punitive by Libyans, appears to have ignited resentment, with some Libyans viewing the Nigerian community as a scapegoat for the controversy.
I have been inundated with inquiries of what I would have done differently if I were at the helm of affairs of our country. I am not the president, Tinubu is. The focus should be on him and not on me or any other. I believe that such inquiries distract from the critical questions of what President Bola Tinubu needs to do to save Nigerians from the excruciating pains arising from his trial-and-error economic policies. However, I understand and appreciate the challenges faced by citizens in seeking alternatives to what is not working for them. I hope Tinubu and members of his administration are humble enough to borrow one or two things from our ideas in the interest of the Nigerian people. I would now go ahead and articulate some of our ideas that would have had the potential to transform our beloved country. IN GENERAL We would have planned better and more robustly: My journey of reforms would have benefited from more adequate preparations; more sufficient diagnostic assessment of the country’s conditions; more consultations with key stakeholders; and better ideas for the final destination. We would have been guided by my robust reform agenda as encapsulated in ‘My Covenant With Nigerians’, my policy document that sought to, among others, protect our fragile economy against much deeper crisis by preventing business collapse; our document had spelt out policies that were consistent and coherent. We would have sequenced my reforms to achieve fiscal and monetary congruence. Unleashing reforms to determine an appropriate exchange rate, cost-reflective electricity tariff, and PMS price at one and the same time is certainly an overkill. Add CBN’s bullish money tightening spree. As importer of PMS and other petroleum products, removing subsidy on these products without a stable exchange rate would be counterproductive. We would have been more strategic in our response to reform fallout. We would not over-estimate the efficacy of the reform measures or underestimate the potential costs of reforms. I would recognise that reforms could sometimes fail. I would not underestimate the numerous delivery challenges, including the weaknesses of our institutions, and would work assiduously to correct the same. I would, as a responsible leader, pause, reflect, and where necessary, review implementation. I would have led by example. Any fiscal reform to improve liquidity and the management of our fiscal resources must first eliminate revenue leakages arising from governance, including the cost of running the government and the government procurement process. I (and members of my team) would not have lived in luxury while the citizens wallow in misery. We would have communicated more effectively with the people, with civility, tact, and diplomacy. Transparent communication with the public is essential to build public trust, which in turn is important to ensure that the public understands what the government is doing. We would have consulted more with all stakeholders to learn, negotiate, adapt, and modify, among other policy goals. We would have demonstrated more empathy. My Reforms would wear a human face. We would have been more strategic in the design and implementation of reform fallout mitigating measures. I would not run a ‘palliative economy’ yet, we would have a robust social protection programme that will offer genuine support to the poor and vulnerable and provide immediate comfort and security to enable them to navigate the stormy seas. SPECIFIC MEASURES We would have undertaken extensive reforms of the public sector institutions to maximize reform impact. We would have placed special focus on security viz • Commenced on day one, the reform of security institutions with improved funding, and enhanced welfare. My Policy Document had spelt out a Special Presidential Welfare Initiative for security personnel that we would implement • Adopted alternative approaches to conflict resolution such as diplomacy, intelligence, improved border control, deploying traditional institutions, and good neighbourliness. We would have launched an Economic Stimulus Fund (ESF), with an initial investment capacity of approximately US$10 billion to support MSMEs across all economic sectors. How would this have been funded? Details are in my Policy Document. Alongside the ESF, we would have launched a uniquely designed skills-to-job programme that targets all categories of youth, including graduates, early school leavers as well as the massive numbers of uneducated youth who are currently not in education, employment, or training. To underscore our commitment to the development of infrastructure, an Infrastructure Development Unit (IDU) directly under the President’s watch would have come into operation. The IDU will have a coordinating function and a specific mandate of working with the MDAs to fast track the implementation of the infrastructure reform agenda within the framework provided herein. The IDU will hit the ground running in putting the building blocks for our private sector driven Infrastructure Development Fund (IDF) of approximately US$25 billion. To engender fiscal efficiency and promote accountability and transparency in public financial management, we would have committed to a review of the current fiscal support to ailing State-Owned enterprises. We would’ve also begun a process review of government procurement processes to ensure value-for-money and eliminate all leakages. We would have initiated a review of the current utilization of all borrowed funds and ensured that they were deployed more judiciously. SUBSIDY REMOVAL Yes, I have always advocated for the removal of subsidy on PMS because its administration has been mildly put, opaque with so much scope for arbitrariness and corruption. Mind boggling rent profit from oil subsidy accrued to the cabals in public institutions and the private sector. I would have prioritized the following: First, tackling corruption. Fighting corruption should have commenced with the repositioning of the NNPCL, which is a huge beneficiary of the status quo. Its commitment to reform and capacity to implement and enforce reforms is suspect. The subsidy regime has provided an avenue for rent seeking, and the NNPCL and its guardians will be threatened by reforms. Second, paying particular attention to Nigeria’s poor refining infrastructure. We are by far the most inefficient OPEC member country in terms of both the percentage of installed refining capacity that works and the percentage of crude refined. We would’ve commenced the privatization of all state-owned refineries and ensure that Nigeria starts to refine at least 50% of its current crude oil output. Nigeria should aspire to export 50% of that capacity to ECOWAS member states. Third, adopt a gradualist approach in the implementation of the subsidy reforms. Subsidies would not have been removed suddenly and completely. It is instructive that when I was Vice President, we adopted a gradualist approach and had completed phases 1 and 2 of the reform before our tenure ended. The incoming administration in 2007 abandoned the reforms, unfortunately. The majority of the countries that review or rationalize subsidy payments adopt a gradualist approach by phasing price increases or shifting from universal to targeted approach (Malaysia, 2022 and Indonesia, 2022 -2023). In many EU economies, complete withdrawal often takes 5 years to effect. The gradualist approach allows for adjustments, adaptation and minimizes disruptions and vulnerability. Fourth, implement a robust social protection programme that will support the poor in navigating the cost-of-living challenges arising largely from reform implementation. We would’ve invested the savings from subsidy withdrawal to strengthen the productive base of the economy through infrastructure maintenance and development; to improve outcomes in education and healthcare delivery; to improve rural infrastructure and support livelihood expansion in agriculture; and develop the skills and entrepreneurial capacity of our youth in order to enhance their access to better economic opportunities. ON FOREIGN EXCHANGE REFORMS I also made a commitment to reform the operation of the foreign exchange market. Specifically, there was a commitment to eliminate multiple exchange rate windows. The system only served to enrich opportunists, rent-seekers, middlemen, arbitrageurs, and fraudsters. What would I have done? A fixed exchange rate system was out of the question because it would not be in line with our philosophy of running an open, private sector friendly economy. On the other hand, given Nigeria’s underlying economic conditions, adopting a floating exchange rate system would be an overkill. We would have encouraged our Central Bank to adopt a gradualist approach to FX management. A managed-floating system would have been a preferred option. Atiku Abubakar is Vice President of Nigeria (1999-2007) and Presidential Candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (2023) Abuja
The only thing obscene about the Federal High Court proceedings in Abuja on November 1, was the nature of the charge, which is allegedly treason. Minors, that is if they are less than 16 years, are usually treated as adults when they are found committing crimes. So had they been charged for the right offences in the territory of the States where they allegedly misconducted themselves, I would have had no problems. For me, the highest offences that they could have been charged for are ‘conduct likely to cause a breach of the peace’ ‘unlawful assembly’ ‘willful destruction of public property’ ‘theft’ otherwise known in the South of Nigeria as ‘Stealing’ and other offences of like nature I.e., ‘Affray’, which are not only State Offences but bailable offences. Thus, the Attorney General of the Federation has no locus to charge any of the young men we saw in the dock for any offence committed during the #end bad governance riots within the territory of their respective States. It is a complete caricature of the Federalism that we claim to operate in Nigeria, where State Governments abdicate their responsibilities to the Federal Government and turn a blind eye to the pillaging of the rights of their citizens. For the avoidance of doubt, there was nothing treasonable in the conduct of these children or young men as discernible from the charge and if our systems were working, they could easily have been charged for the offences mentioned above in Juvenile or Magistrate Courts, within the territory of the States where it is alleged they committed those riot induced offences. One point that is clear here, which appears to have been glossed over by a lot of us is that the defendants, be they children or adults, have already spent over three months in very dehumanizing detention conditions. This is very inhuman and a breach of their fundamental rights. It is my view that even if they committed the offences they are being accused of, (certainly not Treason), the maximum sentences that could have been handed down should have been reasonable fines and in serious cases, imprisonment not exceeding three months in the proximate correctional facility or borstal institution. Federal Government intervention typified by this unwarranted movement to Abuja was totally unnecessary and a failure of our systems. We rightly ought to feel a collective sense of guilt and shame. I call on the federal government to discontinue these charges and release all those charged for these State offences, with adequate rehabilitative compensation paid to them. One last point is to interrogate the sense of responsibility of those who have the custody of these young men since they were arrested and incarcerated three months ago. What happened to the monies voted for taking care of them whilst in custody? Did any of them die in custody? These, to me, are the points to interrogate. If the federal government or the President is serving Nigerians, there ought to be a multi-departmental inquiry into this matter. The whole saga seriously questions our ability to govern ourselves as an independent nation. Thus, it is not always about aspiring to be named to the Security Council of the United Nations, it is about whether we are a civilized nation worthy of standing shoulder to shoulder with other responsible nations whose systems work. It is also not about throwing palliatives and food rations to us as solutions to clear existential problems of insecurity. There is much work to do ahead. It is time to re-engineer Nigeria.
The recent submission of four executive tax reform bills to the National Assembly by President Bola Tinubu has sparked intense debate. Central to the controversy is Zacch Adedeji, Chairman of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), whose clarifications on the reforms have yet to clear the air but intensified discussions. At first glance, the four bills appear to serve distinct purposes: The Nigeria Tax Bill seeks to harmonise various tax laws to reduce multiplicity; the Nigeria Tax Administration Bill focuses on standardising tax processes and compliance requirements; the Nigeria Revenue Service Bill aims to replace the FIRS Act and establish a National Revenue Service (NRS) to be responsible for collecting both domestic and international revenues; and the Joint Revenue Board Bill will create a framework for resolving revenue conflicts between states and local governments. A key aspect of these proposals involves replacing the FIRS with the NRS, which would become a central and most powerful revenue service in the history of Nigeria with the task of being the only agency responsible for collecting all government revenues, including those currently managed by other agencies in oil, customs, and port and other sectors. It will be more powerful and influential than the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and Nigeria National Petroleum Company NNPC and others. Another contentious point is the proposed Value Added Tax (VAT) distribution model. Under the new framework, states receiving VAT collections would retain significant revenue. However, some northern leaders fear this model will disproportionately benefit states where companies are headquartered rather than those where goods and services are consumed. In a statement from Alhaji Muhammad Inuwa Yahaya, Gombe State’s Governor and Chairman of the Northern Governors Forum, northern governors opposed the proposed derivation-based VAT distribution model, citing concerns that it would disadvantage their states. They urged National Assembly members to reject any legislation perceived as unfavourable to any region of the country. The communiqué stated: “The Forum is concerned by the recent Tax Reform Bill sent to the National Assembly, especially the proposed shift to a derivation-based VAT distribution model, which disadvantages the North.” The governors reaffirmed their commitment to national development while emphasising the need for equity in policy implementation to prevent any geopolitical zone from feeling marginalised. Consequently, the following day, the National Economic Council (NEC), chaired by Vice President Kashim Shettima, recommended President Tinubu withdraw the Tax Reform Bills from the National Assembly. The NEC convened for its 144th meeting at the State House in Abuja, where state governors and Federal Executive Council members, including Finance Minister Wale Edun and Budget and National Planning Minister Abubakar Bagudu, participated. Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde remarked that the council recognised the necessity for further understanding and alignment on the bills, emphasising that more comprehensive consultation would be in the nation’s best interest. Despite this recommendation by Nigerian governors and federal cabinet members in NEC, President Tinubu asserted that he would not withdraw the proposed tax reform bills. His spokesperson, Bayo Onanuga, indicated that the president believes the legislative process should continue, allowing room for input and adjustments through public hearings. Tinubu remains committed to reforming Nigeria’s tax system. Through these proposed bills, the government aims to streamline tax administration, enhance efficiency, and align with global best practices. The bills—the Nigeria Tax Bill, Nigeria Tax Administration Bill, Nigeria Revenue Service (Establishment) Bill, and Joint Revenue Board Establishment Bill—seek to unify tax processes, reduce overlapping responsibilities, and simplify compliance for both businesses and individuals. It is widely believed that Zacch Adedeji, as the Executive Chairman of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), is the driving force behind these reform proposals. His educational background, prior positions, and current role have established him as one of the most influential figures in Tinubu’s administration. Born on January 8, 1978, in Ogbomosho, Oyo State, Adedeji graduated with first-class honors in Accountancy from Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), Ile-Ife, where he also obtained his Master’s and PhD in the same field. He began his professional journey at Procter & Gamble (P&G) as Corporate Finance Manager for West Africa and later as Finance Leader for SAP Implementation. He also served as Finance Commissioner in Oyo State under Governor Isiaka Ajimobi (2011–2015). He was appointed Executive Secretary of the National Sugar Development Council (NSDC) by President Muhammadu Buhari before becoming the Executive Chairman of FIRS under President Tinubu. While his political ambition is fuzzy—having avoided any major controversy—some suspect his positions on tax reform and proposed legislation harbour hidden agendas. In light of these concerns, he proactively engaged with members of the National Assembly following the submission of the bills. He addressed both the Senate Committee on Finance, chaired by Senator Sani Musa, and the House of Representatives Committee, led by Hon. James Faleke. Adedeji articulated the reforms’ goals, emphasising the need to harmonise existing tax laws, streamline administration, and align Nigeria’s tax system with global standards. He conveyed that the reforms aim to consolidate disparate tax laws and enhance transparency while improving efficiency in revenue collection. He highlighted that these changes would modernise Nigeria’s tax system, adapt to the realities of the digital economy, and position the country attractively for investment. He confirmed that no additional taxes would be introduced, aligning with President Tinubu’s commitment to “not taxing poverty and inflation.” However, until the full details of the bills are made public, speculation will undoubtedly continue. The discrepancy between President Tinubu’s stance and Vice President Shettima-led NEC’s recommendation only adds to the confusion. The contradictory stance of FEC and NEC is indeed puzzling, especially considering the All Progressive Congress (APC) controls governance at the national and state levels. A unified and diplomatic approach would have been more effective in addressing the tax reform proposals unless the drama was a deliberate script for political purposes. As the debate continues, Adedeji’s true intentions and the broader impact of these reforms on Nigeria’s economy remain in question. The outcome will undoubtedly shape the nation’s economic trajectory.
Yushau A. Shuaib is the publisher of PRNigeria and Economic Confidential. yashuaib@yashuaib.com
Ahead of the November 16 Governorship election in Ondo state, Kogi State Governor, Ahmed Usman Ododo has called on members of Egbira people in the state to vote for the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its candidate, Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa to sustain the achievements of the APC government in the state. Governor Ododo who is the deputy chairman of the election management and strategy committee of the Ondo State Governorship Election Campaign Council made the call while addressing party supporters at the APC rally in Owo. The Governor described Ondo state as a second home for Egbiras and urged them to repeat the feat of the 2020 Governorship election during which the APC recorded overwhelming victory in the state. “I have come to thank you for the support you gave the APC in the last governorship election in Ondo state. “I am aware that we have a large population of our people in Owo, Ifo and Ose local government areas, as well as other parts of Ondo state and I want you to take our message to all of them. “Come November 16, 2024, I urge you to vote for the APC and Lucky Aiyedatiwa as the Governor of Ondo State.” Governor Ododo assured the people of Ondo State that the APC and its candidate, Lucky Aiyedatiwa will deliver the desired dividends of democracy to the people of the state by improving physical infrastructure, access to education, healthcare, water and sanitation, agricultural development, and security of lives and property across communities in the state. He reaffirmed the commitment of the APC administration at both national and sub-national levels to recognize and reward the people for the confidence reposed in the party. He described Governor Aiyedatiwa as a tested hand who can be trusted to build on the pedestal of growth and development already attained by Ondo state under the late Governor Oluwarotimi Akeredolu who died in December, 2023. “We know Governor Aiyedatiwa, he has been tested and can be trusted. We want continuity and consolidation and he has started very well. “I want to let you know that the Ebira, Igala and Okun communities in Ondo state are hundred percent behind you. They will all come out en masse on November 16 to vote for you.” This was even as Governor Aiyedatiwa emphasized the importance of unity and peaceful co-existence among ethnic groups residing in Ondo state. He promised to create more opportunities for non-indigenous communities in the state if elected in the November 16 election. At a courtesy visit earlier, the Ohinoyi of Anegbira in Owo, Adayi Isa Ahmed had expressed delight in receiving Governor Ododo, saying that Egbira people in Ondo will vote for the APC candidate, Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa in the governorship election. He commended Governor Aiyedatiwa for appointing five members of the Egbira community into positions of authority in his administration and promised that the people will reciprocate the kind gesture by mobilizing more votes than what was achieved in the last governorship election in the state. The APC rally in Owo was attended by members of the Egbira community from Utose, Omolonge, Utelu, Agopanu and others from the six local government areas in Ondo north senatorial district and other parts of the state.
In the wake of Nigeria’s #EndBadGovernance protests, which turned violent and demanded greater accountability, several teenagers largely arrested from Northern Nigeria are now facing trial. These minors, according to government allegations, participated in actions deemed treasonable, which included waving foreign flags and calling for a military takeover of the government. The situation has sparked widespread debate regarding the appropriateness of subjecting minors to trials on charges as severe as treason. Nigeria’s constitution defines treason as any act aimed at overthrowing the government or subverting state authority. Under the Criminal Code Act and Penal Code Act, treason carries severe penalties, including life imprisonment or even the death penalty in extreme cases. The government argues that the actions of these minors waving foreign flags and calling for military intervention constitute treason. However, such charges require evidence of clear intent to subvert the government. The severity of the charge has raised questions about whether teenagers fully understood the implications of their actions, given that many may have participated in the protest without comprehending its political consequences. Nigeria’s legal system provides specific protections for minors, defined as individuals under 18, under the Child Rights Act (CRA) and Child’s Rights Law. These laws emphasize rehabilitation and reintegration over punishment for minors involved in criminal activities, aiming to guide young offenders back toward positive contributions to society. The CRA requires that minors be tried within the juvenile justice system, which ensures confidentiality, considers the child’s age and circumstances, and generally prohibits harsh penalties. While the CRA has not been adopted by every state, its principles reflect Nigeria’s commitment to the welfare of minors. As a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Nigeria is obligated to treat minors in ways that prioritize their best interests, focusing on rehabilitation rather than punishment. Article 40 of the CRC underscores that children in conflict with the law should be treated in a manner that fosters their reintegration and constructive role in society. The CRC further emphasizes that children should not be deprived of liberty except as a last resort and for the shortest possible time. Nigeria’s obligations under the CRC highlight the need for alternatives to punitive measures in cases involving minors, even if their actions are deemed unlawful. Furthermore, the trial of minors on charges of subversion or treason has precedence in various countries, with each case offering valuable lessons on the importance of proportionate responses. During and after the Gezi Park protests in 2013 and subsequent anti-government demonstrations, Turkey prosecuted a number of minors under terrorism and anti-state laws. Some teenagers were accused of inciting violence or being involved in plots against the state. Although Turkish law has provisions for juveniles, some minors faced serious charges in adult courts under anti-terrorism legislation. In the United States, there have been instances where minors in the United States were charged with serious offenses for participating in political protests. For example, during the Black Lives Matter protests, some teenagers were arrested on charges like rioting, incitement, or even terrorism in specific cases. However, these cases typically moved through the juvenile justice system, focusing on rehabilitation over punitive measures. In Hong Kong, China, during the 2019 pro-democracy protests, authorities charged minors with offenses related to national security. While some faced detention, many were later given probation or community service, with Hong Kong’s courts considering their age and level of involvement. In Iran, following recent anti-government protests, Iranian authorities arrested minors, charging them with sedition or threats to national security. The international community condemned these actions, emphasizing that minors’ involvement in politically motivated activities should not be grounds for harsh penalties without due process. In light of both national laws and international standards, Nigeria can adopt 3 measures to handle this sensitive case in a manner that aligns with legal standards and the best interests of minors. 1. Prioritize Juvenile Courts and Diversion Programs. Given the age of the alleged offenders, trials should be conducted within the juvenile justice system, which focuses on rehabilitation. 2. Consider Lesser Charges. Rather than pursuing treason charges, which carry extreme penalties, the government could consider charges such as unlawful assembly or disturbing the peace. This would acknowledge the importance of upholding the law while also recognizing that minors may not fully grasp the consequences of their actions. 3. Involve Community-Based Programs. Drawing on Nigeria’s tradition of community support and youth development, the government could involve community leaders, families, and NGOs in addressing minors’ grievances. Programs focused on civic education and conflict resolution could help these minors understand their rights and responsibilities in a way that promotes constructive future engagement. In conclusion, the ongoing trial of minors in Nigeria over their alleged participation in the #EndBadGovernance protests reflects a complex intersection of law, politics, and children’s rights. While the government is obligated to maintain order, it must also uphold Nigeria’s commitments to protecting minors under both national law and international conventions. By considering the age and understanding of the accused, focusing on rehabilitation, and potentially downgrading charges, Nigeria can handle this case in a manner that respects its legal obligations while addressing public order. Drawing lessons from other countries, Nigeria has an opportunity to demonstrate leadership in upholding the rights and welfare of children in politically sensitive situations. Abdulrazaq Hamzat is the Executive Director of Foundation for Peace Professionals.
No fewer than 76 teenagers appeared in a court in Abuja, Nigeria Federal Capital Territory (FCT) for arraignment on alleged treason charges for participating in the August #EndBadGovernance nationwide protest. Some of them collapsed inside the court as their trial commenced today, November 1.
The Nigerian Army, under 1 Division and defunct Operation WHIRL PUNCH (now Sector 1 Operation GANSAN YAMMA) has narrated how its men and offers mounted several pressures on bandits for the release of Dr. Ganiyat Nurudeen Popoola who was kidnapped along with her husband, Sqn Ldr Nurudeen Abiodun Popoola and teenage nephew, Master Folaranmi Abdul Mugniy on December 27, 2023, at their official residential home (Doctors’ Quarters at the National Eye Centre in Kaduna). The Army said in a statement today, November 1, that since her abduction, several kinetic and non-kinetic operations were undertaken to secure her release from the terrorists captivity, adding that the efforts yielded partial positive result with the release of her husband Sqn Ldr Popoola on March 8, 2024. “The terrorists had made several demands for ransome money amounting to more than one hundred million naira and some logistics items including motorcycles from the family members before the commencement of intense military kinetic operations that denied them freedom of movements out of their enclaves in the forests and access to basic logistics such as food. “The combined effects of this operation mounted so much pressure on the terrorists that eventually led to a plea by the terrorists for amnesty to enable them to surrender. Their plea was subsequently considered on some given conditions, including the immediate release of Dr. Ganiyat and her nephew among others. “The terrorists finally accepted the given conditions but also requested for the return or payment of compensation for their cattle killed or recovered during various kinetic operations which were handed over to Kaduna State Livestock Agency for custody and further necessary actions.
“The prolonged ordeal had inflicted immense emotional and psychological trauma on Dr Ganiyat’s immediate family and friends particularly her husband and five children including an infant who was being catered for by her extended family members. “Accordingly, Sqn Ldr Popoola and their three daughters; Muadha, Mazeeda and Mariam who are all pupils of Air Force Comprehensive Secondary School Kaduna have visited to see Dr Ganiyyat at 1 Division Medical Services and Hospital in Dalet Barracks Kaduna on 31 Oct 24 where she is presently being medically examined but in high spirits. She will thereafter be taken for debriefing and further psycho-social support by appropriate authorities.”
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has made it clear to the north and members of the National Economic Council (NEC), that he would not withdraw the Tax Reform Bills presently before the National Assembly. The National Economic Council, which made the recommendation to the President to withdraw the bills to allow for wider consultations, is made up of the Vice President as chairman, governors of the 36 states and other key officers. The Northern leaders, including the governors, traditional rulers and others had earlier raised eyebrows over, and rejected the contents of the bills. In a statement today, November 1, by Presidential Media Adviser on Information & Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, the President insisted that the bills would go through the necessary legislative processes. The President enjoined the State Governors who are members of the NEC chaired by Vice President Kashim Shettima, to make inputs during public hearing rather than asking him to withdraw the bills. President Tinubu commended the National Economic Council members, especially Vice President Kashim Shettima and the 36 State Governors, for their advice, saying however that the legislative process, which has already begun, provides an opportunity for inputs and necessary changes without withdrawing the bills from the National Assembly. He advised the governors and others to allow the process to take its full course, even as he said that he is ready for further consultations and engagement with key stakeholders to address any reservations about the bills while the National Assembly considers them for passage. Parts of Onanuga’s statement go thus: “President Bola Tinubu has received the National Economic Council’s recommendation that the tax reform bills already sent to the National Assembly be withdrawn for further consultation. “When President Tinubu set up the Presidential Committee on Tax and Fiscal Policy Reform in August 2023, he had only one objective: to reposition the economy for better productivity and efficiency and make the operating environment for investment and businesses more conducive. This objective remains more critical even today than ever before. “The Committee worked for over a year and received inputs from various segments of society across the geopolitical zones, including trade associations, professional bodies, different Ministries and Government Agencies, Governors, traders, students, business owners, and the organised private sector. “The tax reform bills that emerged were distilled from the extensive work of the Presidential Committee. “The tax bills before the National Assembly aim to streamline Nigeria’s tax administration processes, completely overhaul the nation’s tax operations, and align them with global best practices. “Below are the major highlights of the four Bills. 1. The Nigeria Tax Bill: This Bill seeks to eliminate multiple taxation and make Nigeria’s economy more competitive by simplifying tax obligations for businesses and individuals nationwide. 2. The Nigeria Tax Administration Bill (NTAB): This Bill proposes new rules governing the administration of all taxes in the country. Its objective is to harmonise tax administrative processes across federal, state and local jurisdictions to ease taxpayers’ compliance and enhance the revenue for all tiers of government. 3. The Nigeria Revenue Service (Establishment) Bill: The Bill seeks to re-establish the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) as the Nigeria Revenue Service (NRS) to better reflect its mandate as the revenue agency for the entire federation, not just the Federal Government. 4. The Joint Revenue Board Establishment Bill: This Bill proposes creating a Joint Revenue Board to replace the Joint Tax Board, covering federal and all state tax authorities. The fourth bill will also establish the Office of Tax Ombudsman under the Joint Revenue Board, protecting taxpayers’ interests and facilitating dispute resolution. “The bills’ overarching objective is to effectively coordinate federal, state, and local tax authorities, thereby eliminating the overlapping responsibilities, confusion, and inefficiency that have plagued tax administration in Nigeria for decades. “Under existing laws, taxes like Company Income Tax (CIT), Personal Income Tax (PIT), Capital Gains Tax (CGT), Petroleum Profits Tax (PPT), Tertiary Education Tax (TET), Value-Added Tax (VAT), and other taxing provisions in numerous laws are administered separately, with individual legislative frameworks. “The proposed reforms seek to consolidate these numerous taxes, integrating CIT, PIT, CGT, VAT, PPT, and excise duties into a unified structure to reduce administrative fragmentation. “While there may be differences in approach or specific provisions of the new tax bills, what is not in contention is the need to review our tax laws and how we administer them to serve our overall national development agenda. “President Tinubu will continue to respect and welcome the advice and recommendations of the National Economic Council, an essential constitutional organ of government on economic matters.”
The Niger State House of Assembly has called on the military to take decisive action against bandit groups reportedly operating on the grounds near the Kontagora Army Barracks.
The call came following the recent abduction of over 20 passengers traveling along the Mariga-Kontagora road on Thursday, October 31.
According to Barrister Abdulmalik Sarkin-Daji, the Speaker of the Niger Assembly and Mariga Constituency representative, bandits blocked the road between Baban-Lamba and Beri, seizing passengers from five vehicles and moving them to a forest near the military training ground.
Sarkin-Daji highlighted that victims previously held in the same area, after their families paid ransom, confirmed they were held in a forest within sight of the army barracks.
Despite military denials, the Speaker insists that the assembly’s findings reveal the bandits have been using the vicinity as a hideout to launch attacks and detain captives. He urged the military to thoroughly investigate local complaints and prevent the forest from being used as a “safe haven” for bandits.
“Dismissing these reports endangers our communities,” Sarkin-Daji stated, emphasizing the Assembly’s determination to seek federal intervention for the safety of their constituents.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
“The prolonged ordeal had inflicted immense emotional and psychological trauma on Dr Ganiyat’s immediate family and friends particularly her husband and five children including an infant who was being catered for by her extended family members.
What I Would Have Done Differently If… By Atiku Abubakar
I have been inundated with inquiries of what I would have done differently if I were at the helm of affairs of our country. I am not the president, Tinubu is. The focus should be on him and not on me or any other. I believe that such inquiries distract from the critical questions of what President Bola Tinubu needs to do to save Nigerians from the excruciating pains arising from his trial-and-error economic policies. However, I understand and appreciate the challenges faced by citizens in seeking alternatives to what is not working for them. I hope Tinubu and members of his administration are humble enough to borrow one or two things from our ideas in the interest of the Nigerian people. I would now go ahead and articulate some of our ideas that would have had the potential to transform our beloved country.
IN GENERAL
We would have planned better and more robustly: My journey of reforms would have benefited from more adequate preparations; more sufficient diagnostic assessment of the country’s conditions; more consultations with key stakeholders; and better ideas for the final destination.
We would have been guided by my robust reform agenda as encapsulated in ‘My Covenant With Nigerians’, my policy document that sought to, among others, protect our fragile economy against much deeper crisis by preventing business collapse; our document had spelt out policies that were consistent and coherent.
We would have sequenced my reforms to achieve fiscal and monetary congruence. Unleashing reforms to determine an appropriate exchange rate, cost-reflective electricity tariff, and PMS price at one and the same time is certainly an overkill. Add CBN’s bullish money tightening spree. As importer of PMS and other petroleum products, removing subsidy on these products without a stable exchange rate would be counterproductive.
We would have been more strategic in our response to reform fallout. We would not over-estimate the efficacy of the reform measures or underestimate the potential costs of reforms. I would recognise that reforms could sometimes fail. I would not underestimate the numerous delivery challenges, including the weaknesses of our institutions, and would work assiduously to correct the same. I would, as a responsible leader, pause, reflect, and where necessary, review implementation.
I would have led by example. Any fiscal reform to improve liquidity and the management of our fiscal resources must first eliminate revenue leakages arising from governance, including the cost of running the government and the government procurement process. I (and members of my team) would not have lived in luxury while the citizens wallow in misery.
We would have communicated more effectively with the people, with civility, tact, and diplomacy.
Transparent communication with the public is essential to build public trust, which in turn is important to ensure that the public understands what the government is doing.
We would have consulted more with all stakeholders to learn, negotiate, adapt, and modify, among other policy goals.
We would have demonstrated more empathy. My Reforms would wear a human face.
We would have been more strategic in the design and implementation of reform fallout mitigating measures. I would not run a ‘palliative economy’ yet, we would have a robust social protection programme that will offer genuine support to the poor and vulnerable and provide immediate comfort and security to enable them to navigate the stormy seas.
SPECIFIC MEASURES
We would have undertaken extensive reforms of the public sector institutions to maximize reform impact.
We would have placed special focus on security viz
• Commenced on day one, the reform of security institutions with improved funding, and enhanced welfare. My Policy Document had spelt out a Special Presidential Welfare Initiative for security personnel that we would implement
• Adopted alternative approaches to conflict resolution such as diplomacy, intelligence, improved border control, deploying traditional institutions, and good neighbourliness.
We would have launched an Economic Stimulus Fund (ESF), with an initial investment capacity of approximately US$10 billion to support MSMEs across all economic sectors.
How would this have been funded?
Details are in my Policy Document.
Alongside the ESF, we would have launched a uniquely designed skills-to-job programme that targets all categories of youth, including graduates, early school leavers as well as the massive numbers of uneducated youth who are currently not in education, employment, or training.
To underscore our commitment to the development of infrastructure, an Infrastructure Development Unit (IDU) directly under the President’s watch would have come into operation. The IDU will have a coordinating function and a specific mandate of working with the MDAs to fast track the implementation of the infrastructure reform agenda within the framework provided herein. The IDU will hit the ground running in putting the building blocks for our private sector driven Infrastructure Development Fund (IDF) of approximately US$25 billion.
To engender fiscal efficiency and promote accountability and transparency in public financial management, we would have committed to a review of the current fiscal support to ailing State-Owned enterprises. We would’ve also begun a process review of government procurement processes to ensure value-for-money and eliminate all leakages.
We would have initiated a review of the current utilization of all borrowed funds and ensured that they were deployed more judiciously.
SUBSIDY REMOVAL
Yes, I have always advocated for the removal of subsidy on PMS because its administration has been mildly put, opaque with so much scope for arbitrariness and corruption. Mind boggling rent profit from oil subsidy accrued to the cabals in public institutions and the private sector.
I would have prioritized the following:
First, tackling corruption. Fighting corruption should have commenced with the repositioning of the NNPCL, which is a huge beneficiary of the status quo. Its commitment to reform and capacity to implement and enforce reforms is suspect. The subsidy regime has provided an avenue for rent seeking, and the NNPCL and its guardians will be threatened by reforms.
Second, paying particular attention to Nigeria’s poor refining infrastructure. We are by far the most inefficient OPEC member country in terms of both the percentage of installed refining capacity that works and the percentage of crude refined. We would’ve commenced the privatization of all state-owned refineries and ensure that Nigeria starts to refine at least 50% of its current crude oil output. Nigeria should aspire to export 50% of that capacity to ECOWAS member states.
Third, adopt a gradualist approach in the implementation of the subsidy reforms. Subsidies would not have been removed suddenly and completely. It is instructive that when I was Vice President, we adopted a gradualist approach and had completed phases 1 and 2 of the reform before our tenure ended. The incoming administration in 2007 abandoned the reforms, unfortunately. The majority of the countries that review or rationalize subsidy payments adopt a gradualist approach by phasing price increases or shifting from universal to targeted approach (Malaysia, 2022 and Indonesia, 2022 -2023). In many EU economies, complete withdrawal often takes 5 years to effect. The gradualist approach allows for adjustments, adaptation and minimizes disruptions and vulnerability.
Fourth, implement a robust social protection programme that will support the poor in navigating the cost-of-living challenges arising largely from reform implementation. We would’ve invested the savings from subsidy withdrawal to strengthen the productive base of the economy through infrastructure maintenance and development; to improve outcomes in education and healthcare delivery; to improve rural infrastructure and support livelihood expansion in agriculture; and develop the skills and entrepreneurial capacity of our youth in order to enhance their access to better economic opportunities.
ON FOREIGN EXCHANGE REFORMS
I also made a commitment to reform the operation of the foreign exchange market. Specifically, there was a commitment to eliminate multiple exchange rate windows. The system only served to enrich opportunists, rent-seekers, middlemen, arbitrageurs, and fraudsters.
What would I have done?
A fixed exchange rate system was out of the question because it would not be in line with our philosophy of running an open, private sector friendly economy. On the other hand, given Nigeria’s underlying economic conditions, adopting a floating exchange rate system would be an overkill. We would have encouraged our Central Bank to adopt a gradualist approach to FX management. A managed-floating system would have been a preferred option.
Atiku Abubakar is Vice President of Nigeria (1999-2007) and Presidential Candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (2023)
Abuja