Connect with us

Feature/OPED

Subsidy Removal: Beyond Tinubu, Kyari’s Personal Interests

Published

on

subsidy removal tinubu kyari's personal interests

By Mohammed Usman

One of the major highlights of the new administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has been the suspension of the payment of subsidy for premium motor spirit, PMS, commonly called petrol.

Though there have been so many reforms introduced into the system since its inauguration on May 29, 2023, the removal of fuel subsidies seemed to have been the most daring move ever made by any administration.

Come to think of it, as critical as fuel subsidy removal is to the turnaround of the economy; successive governments have made brick walls in their attempts to end the subsidy regime.

And, ever since that May 29th, 2023 pronouncement, a lot of dust has been raised from different quarters, either from the uninformed or from the camp of those who benefited, albeit criminally or otherwise, while the subsidy regime held sway. And a lot of water has passed under the bridge, too, including threats of strike.

However, it is pertinent to dig deep into this matter. Was removing the oil subsidy the right step in the right direction, or was it another government’s way to punish the masses?

Some say it is a wicked act by the president, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, aimed at impoverishing the masses further. Others say it is the handiwork of the group chief executive officer, GCEO, of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, Mallam Mele Kolo Kyari. In this regard, the two top government functionaries have been the objects of attacks and accusations both in beer parlour discussions and in the press.

However, to the informed, this remains the most courageous move to place the country on the strongest path to its economic recovery.

The concept of fuel subsidy is not new to our national discourse. In fact, the subsidy has been in place in Nigeria since the promulgation of the Price Control Act in 1977. It was put in place to cushion the effects of the global inflation of the 1970s.

In recent years, rather than being a blessing, subsidy payments have placed a huge economic burden on the government. The sectors that were affected negatively were the educational and health, and housing sectors.

In justifying the subsidy removal, the government said subsidy removal would free up public funds for more meaningful infrastructure and developmental programs that stimulate industrialisation and create jobs, economic growth and social prosperity.

For example: Almost N12 trillion spent on subsidy in the last four years is more than sufficient to develop any of the following projects: 2,400, hospitals of 1000 bed capacity across 774 local government areas; or 500,000 new houses to provide shelter to over 3.5 million Nigerians; or 27GW of electricity generation; or skill up and provide education up to tertiary levels for over 2 million Nigerians.

It also said it would create a market reflective downstream, which invariably stimulates more downstream investments, especially in the domestic refining space, thereby creating more jobs, prosperity, and growth.

The removal, according to the government, would eliminate the unhealthy price arbitrage with neighbouring countries, thereby preventing the diversion and smuggling of gasoline outside the nation’s borders, which bleeds our economy, as well as reduce corruption surrounding internal product diversion as many marketers procure gasoline at subsidised, regulated wholesale prices but still sell at deregulated retail prices.

It stated that the rich benefit more from the subsidy than the poor as they have a higher number and capacity of vehicles to buy more gasoline; removal of the subsidy creates an opportunity to redistribute this benefit directly to those who need it more.

Subsidy removal also enables responsible gasoline consumption, which reduces waste as the prices are more market reflective, and the demand for the product will rebalance itself with the new price realities.

It equally allows the full recovery of upstream revenues, which enables reinvestment required to grow our national petroleum production and reserves and overall forex earnings.

The removal also would strengthen the naira as the growth of our foreign exchange earnings combined with a reduction in product consumption reduces pressure on forex, thereby strengthening the naira.

It would also reduce product scarcity, opening market reflective prices to bring in more players, and create a more efficient market, thereby reducing fuel scarcity and its adverse effects on the economy.

The removal is also expected to reduce the growing and unsustainable budget deficit and, consequently, the debt burden, creating a more robust economic and sustainable future.

Successive governments had sunk trillions of naira into the subsidy payments. In 2006, the Obasanjo regime earmarked N1.9 trillion for these payments. Do not forget that during the period under review, the naira exchanged at N130 to a dollar, making the amount $14.6 billion. This amount was to spike in 2007 when the same government spent N2.3trn, or $17.96bn, with naira exchanging for N128 to a dollar.

The above amount either tripled or quadrupled under the Yaradua/Jonathan administration as well as the Buhari administration. Now that the dollar is hovering around N800 in the exchange rate, one wonders what would be the fate of the economy in the next six months had the subsidy stayed.

Probably, this would have been the basis of the constant warning from international agencies of the dangers of accommodating this burden called a subsidy. Prior to the removal of the subsidy, there were damning reports from the International Monetary Fund, IMF, and the World Bank concerning oil subsidy.

In its report titled, “Macro Poverty Outlook for Nigeria: April 2023” the World Bank said macroeconomic stability had weakened amidst declining oil production, costly fuel subsidies and other factors, further pushing millions of Nigeria into poverty, and that might become worse if the subsidy stayed up to June on 2023.

The report further said: “With Nigeria’s population growth continuing to outpace poverty reduction and persistent high inflation ratio, the number of Nigerians living below the national poverty line will rise by 13 million between 2019 and 2025 in the baseline projection.”

The bottom line is that in the last two decades, the fuel subsidy has cost the nation several trillions of naira. Even if it is narrowed down to between 2005 and now, the government spent approximately N21 trillion on subsidy payments alone.

The last regime of President Muhammadu Buhari, having realized the dangers ahead, stopped making provisions for the payment in June 2023 when his government would have expired. It was, therefore, incumbent on the incoming administration to pick up the gauntlet and do the needful.

From the onset of the existence of the subsidy, a certain set of individuals had smiled to the bank with each payment. It turned out that something that was done to assuage the suffering of the masses became an avenue for people with greedy and unscrupulous oil marketing companies to divert money into their pockets by sheer unconscionable criminality,

Speaking in a nationwide broadcast last Monday, President Tinubu reiterated on the benefit of the subsidy removal to Nigerians. He said in a little over two months, his government had over a trillion naira “that would have been squandered on the unproductive fuel subsidy, which only benefitted smugglers and fraudsters. That money will now be used more directly and more beneficial for you and your families.

“For several years, I have consistently maintained the position that the fuel subsidy had to go. This once beneficial measure outlived its usefulness.

“The subsidy cost us trillions of Naira yearly. Such a vast sum of money would have been better spent on public transportation, healthcare, schools, housing, and even national security. Instead, it was being funnelled into the deep pockets and lavish bank accounts of a select group of individuals.

“To be blunt, Nigeria could never become the society it was intended to be as long as such small, powerful, yet unelected groups hold enormous influence over our political economy and the institutions that govern it.

“The whims of the few should never hold dominant sway over the hopes and aspirations of the many. If we are to be a democracy, the people and not the power of money must be sovereign.”

However, notwithstanding the president’s speech, the organized labour ordered workers to resume strike on Wednesday after talks with the government failed to yield positive results.

This is in spite of palliatives proposed by the federal government to ameliorate the perceived suffering the fuel subsidy removal would throw up.

This raises the question as to what Nigerian labour is up to. Is labour truly yearning for the progress of Nigeria, or is it being sponsored by enemies of Nigeria?

At this critical period of our nation, we urge Nigerians to come together to support the good vision of the president to make the nation great because, from all indications, both President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Mallam Mele Kyari, the NNPC GCEO mean well for Nigeria.

Usman, a public commentator, wrote in from FCT, Abuja.

Feature/OPED

Ledig at One: The Year We Turned Stablecoins Into Real Liquidity for the Real World

Published

on

Ledig

Ever tried sending a large amount of money into or out of certain markets and felt your stomach twist a bit? That was the feeling many companies carried long before Ledig existed. Delays. Guesswork. Phone calls that sounded unsure. People waiting on people, and no reliable derivatives hedging protocol to shield them from currency swings. It was messy.

That frustration is what pushed us to open Ledig to the world a year ago. We wanted a system built for big transfers. Not a few hundred dollars. Serious amounts. A hundred thousand. A million. Even more. And we wanted it to move in seconds, not a strange timeline that no one could explain.

So, we built a setup that lets companies bring in stablecoins and get local currency out quickly. We also kept the opposite direction just as clean. Local currency in, stablecoins out. Both ways needed to feel the same because business doesn’t move in only one direction. Some clients even switch between the two during the same week.

In the early days, people sent smaller amounts to test us. Fair enough. But once they saw a large payment settle almost instantly, confidence spread. This is how we crossed our first $100M. Most of that came from global companies working across Africa and other emerging markets. These firms care about stability, not buzzwords. They just want their money to land where it should.

A lot of the magic sits behind the scenes. Wallets. Local settlement tools. A solid FX engine that adjusts as needed. None of this appears on the surface. All a user sees is a simple dashboard or a set of API calls that get the job done. They don’t even need to think about crypto. The tech exists under the hood, doing the heavy lifting quietly.

But fast movement alone wasn’t enough.

Ledig derivatives hedging protocol

There was another problem staring companies in the face. Currency swings. And they hurt. Imagine finishing a project today and waiting ninety days to get paid in a currency that drops often. By the time the company receives the money, the value has fallen so much that the profit is almost gone. This is a real issue, and many firms have lived through that shock.

This is where our derivatives hedging protocol stepped in. It lets companies lock in their value early so they don’t get caught off guard later. The product ran off-chain at first and still passed $55M in activity. Now we’re taking the derivatives hedging protocol fully on-chain. We picked Base for this next step because it fits the type of stablecoins our settlement system relies on. It also gives companies a clean, transparent environment to execute derivatives hedging protocol strategies built for actual commercial needs rather than trading games.

It took time to get here. Our team is small, which surprised a lot of people, but that worked in our favour. We avoided noise. We focused on building pieces that work. Think of it like a set of tools. One tool converts stable to fiat. Another handles fiat to stable. Another manages FX. Another supports treasury. Another delivers hedging to protect value. Each tool works alone, but when a company puts them together, they get a full workbench that covers money movement and risk in one place.

We rarely talk about revenue publicly, but the business is in a good place. The real sign of health is that companies keep trusting us with large transactions. Not one-off tests. Proper flows. The kind that supports payrolls, suppliers, expansion, and daily operations. In markets where delays can break everything, this matters.

Looking ahead, our focus for 2026 is simple. Bring the derivatives hedging protocol on-chain at scale. Grow our liquidity pipeline so larger payments stay just as smooth as they are today. Strengthen our licensing and regulatory setup, so bigger institutions can work with us without extra steps. And continue tightening the entire system so companies entering emerging markets can do it with far less stress.

Ledig is one year old. The mission is still the same. Move large amounts of money fast. Protect companies from painful currency swings using a battle-tested derivatives hedging protocol. Build tools they can rely on without worrying about how the background tech works.

This is just the beginning.

Continue Reading

Feature/OPED

If You Understand Nigeria, You Fit Craze

Published

on

confusion nigeria

By Prince Charles Dickson PhD

There is a popular Nigerian lingo cum proverb that has graduated from street humour to philosophical thesis: “If dem explain Nigeria give you and you understand am, you fit craze.” It sounds funny. It is funny. But like most Nigerian jokes, it is also dangerously accurate.

Catherine’s story from Kubwa Road is the kind of thing that does not need embellishment. Nigeria already embellishes itself. Picture this: a pedestrian bridge built for pedestrians. A bridge whose sole job description in life is to allow human beings cross a deadly highway without dying. And yet, under this very bridge, pedestrians are crossing the road. Not illegally on their own this time, but with the active assistance of a uniformed Road Safety officer who stops traffic so that people can jaywalk under a bridge built to stop jaywalking.

At that point, sanity resigns.

You expect the officer to enforce the law: “Use the bridge.” Instead, he enforces survival: “Let nobody die today.” And therein lies the Nigerian paradox. The officer is not wicked. In fact, he is humane. He chooses immediate life over abstract order. But his humanity quietly murders the system. His kindness baptises lawlessness. His good intention tells the pedestrian: you are right; the bridge is optional.

Nigeria is full of such tragic kindness.

We build systems and then emotionally sabotage them. We complain about lack of infrastructure, but when infrastructure shows up, we treat it like an optional suggestion. Pedestrian bridges become decorative monuments. Traffic lights become Christmas decorations. Zebra crossings become modern art—beautiful, symbolic, and useless.

Ask the pedestrians why they won’t use the bridge and you’ll hear a sermon:

“It’s too stressful to climb.”

“It’s far from my bus stop.”

“My knee dey pain me.”

“I no get time.”

“Thieves dey up there.”

All valid explanations. None a justification. Because the same person that cannot climb a bridge will sprint across ten lanes of oncoming traffic with Olympic-level agility. Suddenly, arthritis respects urgency.

But Nigeria does not punish inconsistency; it rewards it.

So, the Road Safety officer becomes a moral hostage. Arrest the pedestrians and risk chaos, insults, possible mob action, and a viral video titled “FRSC wickedness.” Or stop cars, save lives, and quietly train people that rules are flexible when enough people ignore them.

Nigeria often chooses the short-term good that destroys the long-term future.

And that is why understanding Nigeria is a psychiatric risk.

This paradox does not stop at Kubwa Road. It is a national operating system.

We live in a country where a polite policeman shocks you. A truthful politician is treated like folklore—“what-God-cannot-do-does-exist.” A nurse or doctor going one year without strike becomes breaking news. Bandits negotiate peace deals with rifles slung over their shoulders, attend dialogue meetings fully armed, and sometimes do TikTok videos of ransoms like content creators.

Criminals have better PR than institutions.

In Nigeria, you bribe to get WAEC “special centre,” bribe to gain university admission, bribe to choose your state of origin for NYSC, and bribe to secure a job. Merit is shy. Connection is confident. Talent waits outside while mediocrity walks in through the back door shaking hands.

You even bribe to eat food at social events. Not metaphorically. Literally. You must “know somebody” to access rice and small chops at a wedding you were invited to. At burial grounds, you need connections to bury your dead with dignity. Even grief has gatekeepers.

We have normalised the absurd so thoroughly that questioning it feels rude.

And yet, the same Nigerians will shout political slogans with full lungs—“Tinubu! Tinubu!!”—without knowing the name of their councillor, councillor’s office, or councillor’s phone number. National politics is theatre; local governance is invisible. We debate presidency like Premier League fans but cannot locate the people controlling our drainage, primary schools, markets, and roads.

We scream about “bad leadership” in Abuja while ignoring the rot at the ward level where leadership is close enough to knock on your door.

Nigeria is a place where laws exist, but enforcement negotiates moods. Where rules are firm until they meet familiarity. Where morality is elastic and context-dependent. Where being honest is admirable but being foolish is unforgivable.

We admire sharpness more than integrity. We celebrate “sense” even when sense means cheating the system. If you obey the rules and suffer, you are naïve. If you break them and succeed, you are smart.

So, the Road Safety officer on Kubwa Road is not an anomaly. He is Nigeria distilled.

Nigeria teaches you to survive first and reform later—except later never comes.

We choose convenience over consistency. Emotion over institution. Today over tomorrow. Life over law, until life itself becomes cheap because law has been weakened.

This is how bridges become irrelevant. This is how systems decay. This is how exceptions swallow rules.

And then we wonder why nothing works.

The painful truth is this: Nigeria is not confusing because it lacks logic. It is confusing because it has too many competing logics. Survival logic. Moral logic. Emotional logic. Opportunistic logic. Religious logic. Tribal logic. Political logic. None fully dominant. All constantly clashing.

So, when someone says, “If dem explain Nigeria give you and you understand am, you fit craze,” what they really mean is this: Nigeria is not designed to be understood; it is designed to be endured.

To truly understand Nigeria is to accept contradictions without resolution. To watch bridges built and ignored. Laws written and suspended. Criminals empowered and victims lectured. To see good people make bad choices for good reasons that produce bad outcomes.

And maybe the real madness is not understanding Nigeria—but understanding it and still hoping it will magically fix itself without deliberate, painful, collective change.

Until then, pedestrians will continue crossing under bridges, officers will keep stopping traffic to save lives, systems will keep eroding gently, and we will keep laughing at our own tragedy—because sometimes, laughter is the only therapy left.

Nigeria no be joke.

But if you no laugh, you go cry—May Nigeria win.

Continue Reading

Feature/OPED

Post-Farouk Era: Will Dangote Refinery Maintain Its Momentum?

Published

on

dangote farouk ahmed

By Abba Dukawa

“For the marketers, I hope they lose even more. I’m not printing money; I’m also losing money. They want imports to continue, but I don’t think that is right. So I must have a strategy to survive because $20 billion of investment is too big to fail. We are in a situation where we will continue to play cat and mouse, and eventually, someone will give up—either we give up, or they will.” —Aliko Dangote

This statement reflects that while Dangote is incurring losses, he remains committed to his investment, determined to outlast competitors reliant on imports. He believes that persistence and strategy will eventually force them to concede before he does.

Aliko Dangote has faced unprecedented resistance in the petroleum sector, unlike in any of his other business ventures. His first attempt came on May 17, 2007, when the Obasanjo administration sold 51% of Port Harcourt Refinery to Bluestar Oil—a consortium including Dangote Oil, Zenon Oil, and Transcorp—for $561 million. NNPC staff strongly opposed the sale. The refinery was later reclaimed under President Yar’adua, a setback that provided Dangote a tough but invaluable lesson. Undeterred, he went on to build Africa’s largest refinery.

As a private investor, Dangote has delivered much-needed infrastructure to Nigeria’s oil-and-gas sector. Yet, his refinery faces regulatory hurdles from agency’s meant to promote efficiency and growth. Despite this monumental private investment in the nation’s downstream sector, powerful domestic and foreign oil interests may have influenced Farouk Ahmad, former NMDPRA Managing Director, to hinder the refinery’s operations.

The dispute dates back to July 2024, when the NMDPRA claimed that locally refined petroleum products including those from Dangote’s refinery were inferior to imported fuel.  Although the confrontation appeared to subside, the underlying rift persisted. Aliko Dangote is not one to speak often, but the pressure he is facing has compelled him to break his silence. He has begun to speak out about what he sees as a deliberate targeting of his investments, as his petroleum-refining venture continues to face repeated regulatory and institutional challenges.

The latest impasse began when Dangote accused the NMDPRA of issuing excessive import licenses for petroleum products, undermining local refining capacity and threatening national energy security. He alleged that the regulator allowed the importation of cheap fuel, including from Russia, which could cripple domestic refineries such as his 650,000‑barrel‑per‑day Lagos plant.

 The conflict intensified after Dangote publicly accused Farouk Ahmad, former head of NMDPRA, of living large on a civil servant’s salary. Dangote claimed Ahmad’s lifestyle was way too lavish, pointing out that four of his kids were in pricey Swiss schools. He took his grievance to the ICPC, alleging misconduct and abuse of office.

It’s striking how Nigerian office holders at every level have mastered the art of impunity. Even though Ahmad dismissed the accusations but the standoff prompting Ahmad’s resignation. But the bitter irony these “public servants” tasked with protecting citizens’ interests often face zero consequences for violating policies meant to safeguard the Nation and public interest.

The clash of titans lays bare deeper flaws in Nigeria’s petroleum governance. It shows how institutional weaknesses turn regulatory disputes into personal power plays. In a system with robust norms, such conflicts would be settled via clear rules, independent oversight, and transparent processes not media wars and public accusations.

Even before completion, the refinery’s operating license was denied. Farouk Ahmad claimed Dangote’s petrol was subpar, ordering tests that appeared aimed at public embarrassment. Dangote countered with independent public testing of his diesel, challenging the regulator’s claims.

He also invited Ahmad to verify the tests on-site, but the offer was declined. Moreover, NNPC initially refused to supply crude oil, forcing Dangote to source it from the United States a practice that continues.

President Tinubu later directed the NNPC to resume crude supplies and accept payment in naira, reportedly displeasing the state oil company. In addition to presidential directives, Farouk claimed Dangote was producing petrol beyond the approved quantity and insisted that crude oil be purchased exclusively in U.S. dollars a condition Dangote accepted.

From the public’s point of view, the Refinery is a game-changer for Nigeria, with the potential to end fuel imports and boost the economy. With a capacity of 650,000 barrels per day, it produces around 104 million liters of petroleum products daily, meeting 90% of Nigeria’s domestic demand and allowing exports to other West African countries.

The Dangote Refinery is poised to earn foreign exchange, stabilize fuel prices, and strengthen Nigeria’s energy security. However, the ongoing dispute surrounding the refinery underscores the challenges of aligning national interests with regulatory and institutional frameworks.

The Dangote Refinery’s growing dominance has sparked concerns among stakeholders like NUPENG and PENGASSAN, who fear it could lead to a private monopoly, stifling competition and harming smaller players. This concern stems from the refinery’s rejection of the traditional ₦5 million-per-truck levy on petroleum shipments.

However, Dangote has taken steps to address these concerns, reducing the minimum purchase requirement from 2 million liters to 250,000 liters, opening the market to smaller operators and strengthening distribution networks. The refinery has also purchased 2,000 CNG trucks to maintain operations, emphasizing its commitment to making energy affordable and accessible

Many are watching closely to see if Dangote’s actions are driven by a desire for transparency and fairness in Nigeria’s oil and gas sector or private business interests. Did Dangote genuinely want to fight the corruption going on in the sector?, Will Dangote refinery operate for the common good or seek market dominance? Did Farouk Ahmad act in the public interest or obstruct the refinery for hidden oil interests? Will the Dangote Refinery Maintain Its Momentum in the Post-Farouk Era?The dispute between Dangote and Farouk Ahmad remains shrouded in mystery, with the ICPC investigation likely to uncover the truth

To many, the government faces a delicate balancing act: protecting local refiners while ensuring fair competition. While some argue that Dangote’s success shouldn’t come at the expense of smaller players, others see it episodes like this reveal persistent contradictions: powerful interests, fragile institutions, and blurred lines between regulation and politics.The Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) promised a new era of clarity, efficiency, and accountability, but its implementation has been slow. The PIA’s success hinges on addressing these challenges.

What benefits one party can indeed threaten another. Despite entering the sector with good intentions, Dangote has faced relentless pushback, all eyes are on whether the refinery can sustain its momentum. Analysts and commentators are sharing their perspectives based on available data from relevant institutions. If anyone spreads false information, the truth will eventually come out

Dukawa is a journalist, public‑affairs analyst, and political commentator. He can be reached at [email protected]

Continue Reading

Trending