Feature/OPED
Where Is Lagos State Water Corporation?
By Jerome-Mario Chijioke Utomi
Objectively speaking, the purpose of this piece is not to merely identify the physical location of the Lagos State Water Corporation. This author, like the generality of Lagosians, is aware that its headquarters are in Water House, Ijora, Lagos, while the corporation’s supervisory ministry, the Lagos state Ministry of Water Resources, is located within the state secretariat, Alausa, Ikeja, the state capital.
Beyond these highlights, what essentially necessitated the question Where Is Lagos State Water Corporation? stemmed from the awareness that the Lagos State Water Corporation, a public institution established to provide Lagosians with safe drinking water in sufficient and regular quantity, maintain good quality service through revenue generation to sustain operations, meet customer expectations by planning sustainable growth and promote community health by good portable water, has persistently remained elusive in its delivery to Lagosians of this essential mandate. Further qualifying the development as a crisis is the awareness that this failure and failings on the part of the state government occurs in the face of global recognition of water as a prime necessity of life; that all living animals and plants cease to exist without it.
Historically, the Lagos Water Corporation (LWC) has gone through various developmental stages since its inception. It was formerly known as the Federal Water Supply (Under Federal Government), established in 1910 with the construction of Iju Waterworks. The waterworks was commissioned by Mr Lord Luggard, the then Governor General of Lagos, in 1915 at Obun Eko Area of Lagos. The Iju treatment plant has a design capacity of 2.4 million gallons per day (MGD) and was constructed primarily to supply Water to the Colonial residents of Ikoyi in those days. In order to meet the water demand of the ever-increasing population of the state, water facilities such as treatment plants and equipment were installed under the corporation’s continuous expansion schemes.
This led to the construction of Ishasi (1976) and Adiyan Waterworks (1991). The First Executive Governor of Lagos State, Lateef Kayode Jakande, changed the name of the agency to Lagos State Water Management Board (LSWMB) in 1979. The Lagos State Water Corporation (LSWC) was formally launched in 1986 by the then Military Administrator of Lagos State, Group Captain Gbolahan Mudashiru.
Later, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the third Executive Governor of Lagos State, rechristened it to the Lagos Water Corporation (LWC) in 2004 by virtue of Lagos State Water Sector Law (No. 14).
However, despite these virtues and attributes, it remains by all standards an unpleasant story that years after, calls by residents, good-spirited Nigerians, development professionals and media professionals were made on Lagos state government to address the protracted water scarcity in the state, especially as it prides itself as a mega city, but sadly, it continued to wear the toga of a location where access to formal clean water is abysmally low, with the majority of its residents relying on the informal sector comprised of wells, boreholes, rivers and rainwater. From Ketu to Ikorodu, Ogba Ikeja to Ajah, and Surulere to Alimosho, the story is the same.
Separate from the fact that this dangerous oversight is laced with the capacity to make non-sense of the current effort to better the life chances of Lagosians, if not given the urgency of attention that it deserves, there exist reasons why this development is troubling.
Going by the United Nations declaration, there is sufficient water to satisfy the needs covered by the right to water in virtually all countries of the world – it is much more a question of equitable distribution.
On average, overall household water use accounts for less than 10 per cent of total water use, while industry and agriculture are the largest water users. The right to water is limited to basic personal and domestic needs, which account for only a fraction of overall domestic use. Even in the context of climate change, which affects overall water availability, water for personal and domestic uses can still be ensured if prioritized as required by human rights law.
Aside from the awareness that all every Lagosians needs is 20 litres per capita per day as a minimum quantity required to realise minimum essential levels of the right, making the situation a reality to worry about is that the water scarcity, which started one morning, has suddenly strolled into months. And have exposed residents to daily search for water in sources that their level of hygiene could neither be ascertained nor guaranteed. This is not the only apprehension. The predicament is made worse by the awareness that residents of the area with private boreholes who would have helped ameliorate this suffering are daily frustrated by the poor electricity supply in the area needed to operate the borehole. No thanks to the electricity distribution company operating in the location.
Admittedly, Lagosians know that the government can’t solve all their problems, and they don’t want to either. But they (Lagosians) know that there are things they cannot do on their own but must require government support. A very good example of such responsibilities includes but is not limited to the supply of clean water to the citizenry, electricity and provision of schools in an environment that works.
One fact, going by the global demand that we must not shy away from, is that it is true that investing in water and sanitation is costly. Yet, evidence has shown that the cost of not ensuring access to drinking water and sanitation is even higher in terms of public health and lost work and school days.
For each dollar invested in water and sanitation, on average, there is a return of eight dollars in costs averted and productivity gained.
Also, the human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation are subject to progressive realization. Thus universal coverage does not need to be achieved immediately, but every State must demonstrate that it is taking steps towards this goal to the maximum of its available resources and continually moving in this direction.
Now, let’s cast a glance at the consequences of such failures. First, apart from the fact that Lagos state, with its mega city status, ought to have outgrown a city where residents will, in this 21st century, rely on private water vendors for their daily water needs while those that have no resources to engage these vendors are forced to the derogatory level of scooping water from gutters. And, as we know, contaminated water and poor sanitation are linked to the transmission of diseases such as cholera, diarrhoea, dysentery, hepatitis A, typhoid, and polio. Absent, inadequate, or inappropriately managed water and sanitation services expose individuals to preventable health risks. Away from health considerations to other consequences that are international/global in outlook.
According to Resolution A/RES/64/292, United Nations General Assembly, July 2010 and General Comment No. 15, UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, November 2002, the Human Right to Water and Sanitation is a principle that acknowledges that clean drinking water and sanitation are essential to every person’s life. It was recognised as a human right by the United Nations General Assembly on 28 July 2010. To further add a background, the Resolution calls upon States and international organizations to provide financial resources, help capacity-building and technology transfer to help countries, in particular developing countries, to provide safe, clean, accessible and affordable drinking water and sanitation for all.
Again, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights adopted General Comment; Article I.1 states that “The human right to water is indispensable for leading a life in human dignity. It is a prerequisite for the realization of other human rights”. Comment No. 15 also defined the right to water as the right of everyone to sufficient, safe, acceptable and physically accessible and affordable water for personal and domestic uses.
Beginning with sufficiency, the water supply for each person must be sufficient and continuous for personal and domestic uses. These uses ordinarily include drinking, personal sanitation, washing of clothes, food preparation, and personal and household hygiene.
According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), between 50 and 100 litres of water per person per day are needed to ensure that most basic needs are met, and few health concerns arise. On safety, the water required for each personal or domestic use must be safe, therefore, free from microorganisms, chemical substances and radiological hazards that constitute a threat to a person’s health.
Talking about acceptability, water should be of acceptable colour, odour and taste for each personal or domestic use. All water facilities and services must be culturally appropriate and sensitive to gender, lifecycle and privacy requirements. Everyone has the right to a water and sanitation service that is physically accessible within or in the immediate vicinity of the household, educational institution, workplace or health institution.
Finally, for the corporation to operate as an effective and efficient state government parastatal that is charged with the responsibility of providing portable and safe water to over 18.0 million people in Lagos State, this piece holds the opinion that the present administration in the state must increase the corporation’s total water production capacity in the state which, going by reports is presently lower than the water demand by Lagosians.
Also, as noted elsewhere, the corporation should develop a renewed effort to solve the problem of water shortage and ensure a steady supply for the growing population of Lagos by implementing the Lagos Water Supply Master plan as a “Road Map”.
Utomi is the programme coordinator (Media and Policy) at the Social and Economic Justice Advocacy (SEJA), Lagos. He can be reached via [email protected] or 09032725374
By Nafisat Damisa
Introduction
The proliferation of generative AI has transformed Nigeria’s cybercrime landscape, enabling deepfake fraud, automated social engineering, and AI-enhanced phishing at scale. In early 2024, scammers using AI-generated deepfake videos impersonating a company’s CFO defrauded a Hong Kong finance worker of $25.6 million. As similar threats emerge in Nigeria’s fintech sector, this article examines whether the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act 2015 (as amended 2024) is legally adequate, or whether Nigeria’s evidentiary and accountability frameworks are too weak to support effective prosecution of AI-driven cybercrime
Current Legal Landscape
Nigeria’s primary legal framework on preventing cybercrime is the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act 2015, amended in 2024 to address cryptocurrency transactions, cyberbullying and various forms of digital misconduct. Complementary frameworks include the National Information Technology Development Agency Act 2007, the Nigerian Data Protection Act 2023, and sectoral regulations such as the CBN’s Risk-Based Cybersecurity Framework. However, the majority of these frameworks were issued far before now, and emerging risks like AI-driven threats are not really being addressed. The Act nowhere mentions “artificial intelligence,” “algorithm,” or “autonomous system.” Notably, the National Artificial Intelligence Commission (Establishment) Bill, 2025, is currently pending before the Senate. If passed, it would establish a dedicated commission to coordinate AI strategy, research, and ethical deployment. However, the Bill in its present form focuses primarily on development and innovation promotion, with limited provisions on criminal liability, evidence handling, or enforcement against AI-facilitated cybercrime, leaving the core accountability and evidentiary gaps largely unaddressed.
AI as a Double-Edged Sword
AI paradoxically enables both defence and attack. Nigerian financial institutions deploy AI for real-time fraud detection and pattern recognition. Conversely, cybercriminals exploit generative AI for deepfake creation, automated credential stuffing, and convincing phishing tailored to Nigerian English and Pidgin. The same technology that powers fraud detection systems can be weaponised to evade them. Take justice delivery as an example, the Evidence Act 2011 (as amended 2023) admits computer-generated evidence under Section 84, but remains silent on AI’s capacity to seamlessly generate or alter electronic records, creating “doctored AI-generated evidence”. These and many more issues await Nigeria’s digital space in the coming years.
The Legal Gaps
There are multiple critical gaps that undermine AI governance. For this article, three are considered. First, no framework attributes criminal liability when an autonomous AI commits an offence. The question of whether the developer, user, or owner should bear criminal responsibility for the acts of an autonomous system remains entirely unanswered under Nigerian law, leaving prosecutors without a clear legal theory of culpability.
Second, Section 84 of the Evidence Act 2011 governs computer-generated evidence but does not address AI-generated outputs. The Act’s definition of “computer” excludes AI’s cognitive processing capabilities, creating a statutory blind spot where evidence produced by generative or autonomous systems falls outside the existing admissibility framework.
Third, Nigeria lacks any framework for mandatory AI-generated content labelling, impeding deepfake traceability. Computer-generated evidence under Section 84 of the Evidence Act 2011 remains admissible if unchallenged at trial, a dangerous precedent for AI evidence, as opposing parties may lack the technical capacity to mount any challenge at all.
Comparative Jurisdictions: Rich Laws, Tangible Results
Jurisdictions with advanced AI laws demonstrate clear outcomes. The EU AI Act (Regulation 2024/1689) mandates transparency obligations, requiring synthetic content labelling and informing individuals when interacting with AI systems; non-compliance triggers significant penalties. The US Algorithmic Accountability Act of 2023 is a proposed Act that will require impact assessments for high-risk AI systems in housing, credit, and employment, with FTC enforcement and a public repository. China implemented mandatory measures for the Identification of AI-generated (Synthetic) content. These rules, mandated by the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) and others, require explicit (visible labels) and implicit (watermarks/metadata) identification for all AI-generated text, images, audio, video, and virtual scenes to ensure transparency, traceability, and combat disinformation. These laws contribute to measurable results: forensic traceability, expedited prosecution of deepfake fraud, and clear liability chains. Nigeria has none of these.
Hope or Illusion?
Without legislative intervention, AI’s promise against cybercrime remains an illusion. Nigeria requires the following to boost its hope:
- Amendment of the Cybercrimes Act to include AI-specific offences and mandatory content provenance standards;
- Revision of Section 84 of the Evidence Act 2011 to address AI-generated evidence credibility, not merely admissibility;
- Investment in digital forensic capabilities is currently hampered by inadequate enforcement, weak forensic capabilities, and a lack of specialised personnel; and
- A risk-based framework drawing from EU and US models.
- Review of both secondary and tertiary education curricula to address the knowledge gap in AI and prepare the next generation for the AI-driven future.
Conclusion
AI can help curb cybercrime in Nigeria, but only if legal capacity catches up with technical capability. The Cybercrimes Act 2024 amendments were a step forward, but they did not address AI accountability, algorithmic transparency, or evidentiary credibility. The pending National Artificial Intelligence Commission Bill, 2025, signals legislative awareness, but without substantive provisions on liability, evidence, and enforcement, it cannot fill the existing gaps. The effectiveness of existing frameworks remains a question. An optimistic but cautious path exists, but until Nigeria enacts AI-specific legislation, whether through amending the Cybercrimes Act, revising the Evidence Act, or strengthening the pending Bill, weak laws will remain unable to support strong technology.
Nafisat Damisa is a Legal Research Associate in Olives and Candles – Legal Practitioners. For further information, enquiries, or clarification, please contact Nafisat via: [email protected] or [email protected]
By Isah Kamisu Madachi
As of April 30, 2026, the crude price is said to have reached $125 in the global market. The all-time high price per barrel was recorded in 2008, when it surged to $147. It is obvious that the price is heading in that direction or even towards what experts have predicted — crude reaching a new all-time high of $150 in the near future if crude passages remain closed in the Middle East, which would ultimately come with several disproportionate challenges for businesses and households.
In Nigeria, what began as a mild adjustment in the price of gasoline and other refined crude products has not stopped anywhere until it reached N1,400 per litre of petrol at filling stations. When the price was surging, experts in energy, economics, marketing, business and other relevant fields tried to come up with explanations for how Nigeria, despite housing the largest petrochemicals refinery in Africa and being one of the largest oil-exporting countries on the continent, would continue to absorb this shock.
Despite our advantages, Nigeria recorded the world’s second-highest surge in petrol prices following the escalating geopolitical tension in the Middle East. In Africa, Nigeria has the highest spike, with many sources citing it at 39.5% and above. Even non-oil-producing countries in Africa, and countries that do not refine a drop of oil, did not experience this surge. Also, African countries like South Africa at 1%, Morocco at 2.1%, and Tanzania at 2.7% experienced far smaller increases that are nowhere near Nigeria’s.
To put it in context, South Korea, Japan, and China are among the foremost dependents on the Strait of Hormuz, whose closure escalated the crude price, but none of these countries has recorded even a 20% increase in their petrol prices. Nigeria does not import its crude through the Strait of Hormuz. Yet, as an oil-exporting nation, we have suffered some of the sharpest petrol price increases in Africa.
What went wrong in Nigeria to warrant this surge is not the primary focus of this piece. What lies ahead is. As a result of the increase in petrol prices, Nigerians have been disproportionately affected. Life has become unbearably difficult, with sharp increases in transportation costs, rising food prices, and higher costs of goods and services. Even charging points that used to collect N150 for charging a phone or battery now charge N300 or more.
As it stands, the gap between the current crude price and the predicted new all-time high is about $25. This means that if the passages continue to remain closed, we are not far from another historic price peak. It is even said that reopening the passages may not immediately stabilise prices, as crude tankers would still take time to reach their destinations.
What this means for Nigeria is another sharp increase in refined petroleum product prices, which could trigger another wave of stagflation. Already struggling, Nigerians do not deserve this. They are only just adapting to the post-subsidy era, yet are being hit again by another round of global geopolitical tensions. Many are already in deep energy poverty, with businesses struggling due to unstable electricity supply.
Therefore, as crude oil prices hover above $125 per barrel and threaten to reach the predicted $150 if disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz persist, Nigeria must act decisively to shield its citizens. The Dangote Refinery exists. Nigeria refines oil. What the federal government owes Nigerians at this point is a deliberate policy decision to make that the refinery serve domestic needs first, with pricing that does not mirror whatever is happening in the global market. That is not complicated; other oil-producing countries do exactly this.
The NMDPRA has the authority to act on this. The question is whether there is a political will to act before another price wave hits and Nigerians are once again left to absorb what their counterparts elsewhere never have to.
Sub-national governments also have something to do. Commercial motorcyclists and small business owners are the people who feel every petrol price increase the hardest and the fastest. Pushing CNG and LPG adoption among this group beyond the FCT and Lagos, with genuine support, would cushion a significant part of the next shock. Expanding solar access in underserved communities would do the same. A shop owner running on solar is not at the mercy of the next diesel price spike.
These solutions are quite feasible. Nigeria has attempted versions of them before. Where we often seem to get it wrong is in execution, and Nigeria has to treat this with the same urgency and seriousness as given to elections, for the well-being of its citizens. The only thing that has never matched the problem is the seriousness of the response.
Isah Kamisu Madachi is a policy analyst and development practitioner. He writes via [email protected]
By Gbolahan Oluyemi
In 2025, the National Pension Commission (PenCom) directed all Licensed Pension Fund Operators (LPFOs) to demand a Pension Clearance Certificate (PCC) from service providers before engaging their services. This new policy typically affects various types of entities, including small and medium-scale enterprises, most of which are not usually compliance-driven. Following this directive, the PCC has become an essential compliance document for both large, medium and small-scale firms. This article provides a guide on what a PCC is, why it matters, and how it can be obtained.
What is a Pension Clearance Certificate (PCC)?
A Pension Clearance Certificate (PCC) is an official document issued by PenCom confirming that an organisation has complied with the provisions of the Pension Reform Act. It is an annual document that must be renewed every year at no cost. The yearly renewal is intended to ensure that organisations treat compliance as a continuous activity rather than a one-off act.
Why is a PCC Important?
The PCC is important because it demonstrates that an organisation is compliant with the provisions of the Pension Reform Act, especially as it relates to employee pension contributions under Section 4 (1) of the Pension Reform Act and subscription to group life insurance under Section 4 (5) of the Pension Reform Act. It is also required for certain transactions, such as government contracts and engagements with compliance-sensitive partners. In essence, a PCC assures investors, partners, and clients that your business is properly structured and compliant with regulatory requirements.
Who Needs a Pension Clearance Certificate?
Under Nigerian law, companies with three or more employees are required to participate in the Contributory Pension Scheme (CPS). If your organisation employs at least three staff members and provides or intends to provide services to Licensed Pension Fund Operators (LPFOs) or other regulated entities, you are expected to obtain a PCC annually.
How Do I Obtain a PCC?
PenCom issues the PCC electronically and at no cost through its web portal: https://pcc.pencom.gov.ng/. Please note that Applicants who are just beginning compliance and remitting employees’ pensions are required to first obtain an employer code from a Pension Fund Administrator (PFA). This code is necessary to initiate the PCC application on the PenCom portal.
Upon logging into the portal, you will be required to complete your company profile by providing your date of incorporation, contact details, and website (if applicable), as well as uploading your CAC documents.
Next, you will upload an Excel schedule (using the template provided on the website) containing your employee list. After this, you will be required to upload Excel sheets detailing pension contributions. You will also need to upload your organisation’s group life insurance documentation and payment instrument.
Finally, you will review your application and submit it for further processing by PenCom. Before commencing an application, ensure you have the following:
- Certificate of Incorporation (CAC documents)
- Group Life Insurance Policy for employees
- Evidence of Pension Fund Administrator (PFA) registration for employees
- Three years’ proof of monthly pension remittances, including penalties for any defaults (where applicable). For companies less than three years old, provide proof of remittances from the date of incorporation
- A valid Tax Identification Number (TIN)
- An employee schedule showing staff details and contributions (usually in Excel format) Templates are available on the PenCom portal
Also note that for the portal to accept employee details and remittance records, employees must have completed their data capture with their respective Pension Fund Administrator and updated their records to reflect their current employer.
Conclusion
Obtaining a Pension Clearance Certificate in Nigeria may seem technical at first, but once proper processes are established, it becomes routine. The key is consistency in remittance, maintenance of accurate records and prioritisation of compliance in overall operations.
For many Nigerian businesses, the PCC is more than a regulatory requirement; it is a mark of credibility. In a competitive environment, that credibility can make all the difference.
Gbolahan Oluyemi is a Legal Practitioner and currently leads Olives and Candles – Legal Practitioners. For further information, enquiries, or clarification, please contact Gbolahan via: [email protected] or [email protected]
-
Feature/OPED6 years agoDavos was Different this year
-
Travel/Tourism10 years ago
Lagos Seals Western Lodge Hotel In Ikorodu
-
Showbiz3 years agoEstranged Lover Releases Videos of Empress Njamah Bathing
-
Banking8 years agoSort Codes of GTBank Branches in Nigeria
-
Economy3 years agoSubsidy Removal: CNG at N130 Per Litre Cheaper Than Petrol—IPMAN
-
Banking3 years agoSort Codes of UBA Branches in Nigeria
-
Banking3 years agoFirst Bank Announces Planned Downtime
-
Sports3 years agoHighest Paid Nigerian Footballer – How Much Do Nigerian Footballers Earn