Connect with us

Feature/OPED

African Union and G20: Future Geopolitical and Economic Implications

Published

on

G20 New Delhi, 2023 African Union and G20

By Professor Maurice Okoli

Johannesburg was the scene for the 15th BRICS — Brazil, China, India, Russia and South Africa — summit held in late August, during which leaders raised the African Union’s permanent seat in the G20. In early September, New Delhi is the scene for the G20 summit to discuss the changing geopolitical situation and global development and most likely to make historic approval of AU’s permanent seat in G20.

South Africa and India are both members of BRICS and are both members of G20. President Cyril Ramaphosa witnessed two new African States (Egypt and Ethiopia) entry into BRICS. On the other hand, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi seeks admission for the African Union (an organization of 54 member states) into G20.

As the BRICS leaders converged in Johannesburg, the consensus was to undertake collective work towards a multipolar world. Taking this muscular step in the current geopolitical changes means opening a new chapter in human history. It is a strong resolve by nations of the global south represented by the vast majority of the world population to end many years of colonialism and neocolonialism forever and to establish a new world order and the political, economic and cultural system that encourages equitable development of all nations, elimination of poverty and creation of decent living for all.

In New Delhi, however, the summit chorus will have a different rhythm, as the G20 members are wealthy nations mostly from the Global North. These are also well-represented in all international organizations and well-structured institutions, including the World Bank (WB) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). One distinctive feature here is that the G20 brings together both rich and poor nations, and of India a key member of both clubs.

Noticeably, there are wide policy differences: while BRICS is considered as evolving into some geopolitical rival to the Global North, some BRICS members hold confrontational opinions and thoughts. Emerging nations are simply “looking for alternatives, not replacements” of any system; despite the fact that some differences in policy approach, the desire for BRICS expansion also showed the demand for a change.

For this discussion, it is necessary to note two distinctive features here; the first is that G20 plays an important role in shaping and strengthening global architecture and governance on all major international economic issues.

The second is that BRICS expansion was “more about progressive efforts to find a system that will help to solve the problem of poverty, hunger, and the underdevelopment of billions of people in the developing countries demonstrated by the horrendous migrant crisis where thousands of desperate people are assembling at national borders like between the US and Mexico or be it along the Mediterranean which has already become a mass grave for migrants) of showing that developing countries are heartily rallying to their side against Western hegemony rather than concrete plans to work together.

For African States, BRICS serves as an alternative avenue to explore its support against further economic exploitation and control interruption in their internal affairs in the continent and to assert their right to process their resources and produce value-added goods as means of becoming middle-income societies in the foreseeable future through high technology and industrialization largely ignoring the fact that much rather depends on their policies and approach as well as system of governance.

AU on the Summit Agenda

As the BRICS group grows, the G20 will also expand in numerical strength. The pendulum is noticeably turning; global leaders have already supported the appeal for admission of the African Union (AU) into the G20. The G20’s three-day conference this September 9-10 in New Delhi, India, will definitely push AU’s ascension with a permanent seat in the powerful group, making an indelible milestone history for both AU and G20.

While witnessing this historical moment, the greatest questions for politicians, academics, the business community, and the general public are the strategic significance and geopolitical implications for the African Union as a continental organization and for Africa.

Long before the summit, Modi said India, as a G20 host, would be inclusive and invited the African Union to become a permanent member. The concern was similar during the time of forming the Non-Alignment Movement (NAM), which until today embraces in its entirety the Global South. The NAM meets regularly to deliberate on pertinent issues affecting its members.

Modi underlined India’s role as the G20 host this year and hinted that it would focus on highlighting the concerns of the developing world, and has unreservedly proposed the African Union to become permanent members of the forum. “We have a vision of inclusiveness, and with that vision, we have invited the African Union to become permanent members of the G20,” Modi said as he addressed the Business 20 Summit in New Delhi.

The G20 is an industry event and part of the summit of the G20 leading rich and developing nations. Over three days, industry and policy leaders from around the world have discussed themes like building resilient supply chains, digital transformation, debt distress facing developing countries and how to advance on climate change goals. Their recommendations will be shared with the G20 governments, according to the organizers.

A key part of that strategy is bringing the African Union into the G20 fold, analysts say. “When India assumed the G20 presidency last December, we were acutely conscious that most of the Global South would not be at the table when we meet,” said External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar. “This mattered very much because the really urgent problems are those faced by them. … And India, itself so much a part of the Global South, could not stand by and let that happen.”

He said the G20 has so far deliberated on rising debt, sustainable development, climate action and food security, among other issues that affect low to middle-income countries. “The core mandate of the G20 is to promote economic growth and development. This cannot advance if the crucial concerns of the Global South are not addressed,” Jaishankar added.

During the previous summit, G20 nations agreed to work on reforms to the World Trade Organization; at the Rajasthan meeting, for instance, G20 members agreed to improve WTO functioning and strengthen trust in the multilateral trading system. The G20 takes in nations conducting over 75% of global trade and is presently functioning under the Indian presidency.

Proposed reforms would include having a well-functioning Dispute Settlement System accessible to all members by 2024, as per the official statement. Disputes over trade are largely persistent. India’s trade deficit with China is the highest of any country and stood at $101.28 billion in 2022, according to official data. Now, there are similar arguments and concerns over China’s trade with Africa.

Global Leaders Call for AU’s Membership

At the same time, world leaders have overwhelmingly declared support and viewed it in a broader context that the African Union has a permanent representation at G20. As part of the priority call for some structural reforms, the African Union’s permanent membership will top the agenda, which Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has proposed granting at the upcoming summit in New Delhi.

Interestingly, the African Union’s proposed ascension unto G20 has unflinching support from many leaders, at least over the past few years. It includes the United States, Europe, China, India and Russia.

President Joe Biden, during the US-Africa Leaders’ Summit held mid-December 2022, described it as a platform for 49 African leaders + the African Union to jointly pitch their collective expectations and aspirations in the emerging new global world.

Scanning through the discussions, what is probably appealing is the United States’ desire towards (re)defining its relationship with Africa on African terms. In addition, Biden has urged that the African Union be given a permanent seat in the G20 – an influential collection of the strongest economies in the world. South Africa is the only member of the continent. Notwithstanding any criticisms, Biden has thrown his backing behind the African Union, securing a permanent membership in G20, which will enhance economic ties in its own right with Africa.

As Chair of the African Union (2022 – 2023), Senegalese President, Macky Sall, asserted that Africa’s future prosperity is linked to the global economic system; the African Union, on behalf of Africa, uses its leadership and geo-strategic position to optimize necessary links suitable for economic development, industrialization and promoting trade with the continent, and for the next generations.

Sall emphasized several reasons, such as the necessity of adopting fundamental policy leveraging the industrialized poles rather than partitioning the world, describing this step as a smart decision in the age of multi-polarity. Due to the geopolitical importance of the United States, African nations need not jettison their cooperative relations but make strong calls for restructuring and reforms to lobby for long-term strategic and inclusive relations.

Early April 2023, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed an order to endorse Russia’s updated foreign policy concept, which was compiled and presented by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The new concept was updated to incorporate additional measures and redefine parameters of necessary actions in relation to the United States, Western and European confrontation and determine important roles in the emerging multipolar world by the Russian Federation. In the same document, and even long before its adoption, Russia has consistently been advocating for United Nations reforms, calling for broadening the representation of Africa and in other similar foreign organizations, including the G20.

Without mincing words, Putin said: “Russia proactively supported the initiative to grant the African Union membership in the Group of 20. It is the right decision reflecting the reality and the balance of power in today’s world.” In addition to that, Moscow supports the legitimate aspiration of African States to pursue their own independent policy to decide on their own future without imposed ‘assistance’ by third parties.

President of the People’s Republic of China, Xi Jinping, during the China-Africa Leaders’ Dialogue held August 24 in Johannesburg, rained praises that Africa has made big strides on the path of independence, seeking strength through unity and integration. With steady progress under Agenda 2063 of the African Union (AU), the official launch of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), and growing coordination among the sub-regional groups, Africa is becoming an important pole with global influence.

Xi Jinping also said that “China will continue to support Africa in speaking with one voice on international affairs and continuously elevating its international standing. China will work actively at the G20 summit to support the AU’s full membership in the group. China supports making special arrangements on the U.N. Security Council reform to meet Africa’s aspiration as a priority.”

The new historic galloping convergence between G20 and the African Union really requires close attention since it will definitely reshape the growing relations, which is most important in the emerging multipolar world. At least the African side of it largely boils down to the acceptance speeches, the main long-term objectives and the primacy of conceptual ideas of the President of Comoros Islands and Chairperson of the African Union (2023 – 2024), Azali Assoumani, Chairman of African Union Commission, Moussa Faki Mahamat, will definitely remain for future generations.

Among high dignitaries also in attendance to witness AU’s ascendency into G20 are Egyptian President and 2023 Chairperson of NEPAD, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, and Nigerian President, Bola Ahmed Tinubu. Director-General of the World Health Organization, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus from Ethiopia, and Director-General of the World Trade Organization, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala from Nigeria.

By joining G20 this September 2023, the AU, with a permanent seat, will now have the explicit, solid voice to make cases on behalf of Africa, especially in this crucial time of political and economic reconfiguration. The processes could present, to some extent, complexities and contradictions.

Nevertheless, in view of the substantial expertise accumulated down the years, the next logical step is to foster dialogue and exchange experience, with the aim of optimizing all aspects of integration processes, including the political, economic and cultural spheres and collaborating on the widest possible range of external issues, at the forefront of integrating with G20.

It primarily highlights the fulfilment of the promise promoted widely at conferences and summits and further re-enforces the necessity for a multifaceted partnership with Africa by the G20. It is one step, if not a big leap forward from mere intentions, diplomatic niceties, and rhetoric previously expressed to concrete deeds making Africa more visible in G20. It has many interpretations, though, depending on diverse perspectives, politics, economy and social and cultural.

Importance of B20 Business Platform

On its website, India’s G20 says Nigerian Tony Elumelu, Chairman of Heirs Holdings, is named to co-chair the Business 20 (B20) India Action Council focusing on African economic integration. Established in 2010 within the G20, it comprises corporate business enterprises and organizations and serves as the official platform for dialogue between the G20 and the global business community.

Africa is undoubtedly facing greater multifaceted challenges, and these will definitely continue in the near future, so it implies that the B20 has a pivotal role and a unified voice in uniting global business leaders to provide their perspectives on matters concerning global economic and trade governance and determine its slice for Africa.

With the global attention turning to Africa, this also underscores the ambitious endeavour of African economies toward achieving continent-wide economic integration. It emphasizes the need for the B20 to unite and provide substantial support in facilitating the success of this integration process, ultimately contributing to African economic development.

Without overestimating its importance, this platform has a meaningful advantage for Africa and beyond. By facilitating increased business participation in Africa, international cooperation in this realm will create an enabling environment conducive to inclusive growth.

G20 – Economic Implications for Africa

The African Union’s strategic framework Agenda 2063 highlights the importance of preserving African values and unity, and Pan-Africanism.

As we expect in coming years, AU has to use its G20 membership – a qualitatively new status – for the development of high-tech and export-oriented industries in the sector. It has laid the groundwork for expanding areas of collaboration and launching ambitious long-term projects rather than engaging in geopolitical games.

The basic question here is what needs to be done to bring about a substantial improvement in collaboration between G20 and the 54-member African Union. The new global challenge is not only lining up for or in search of new funding but rather completely new mindsets about economic development paradigm shift. Today, Africa is one of the most promising and fastest-growing regions of the world, with leading powers actively competing with one another.

Seemingly, the accelerated economic integration processes have become an overarching trend throughout the world. Therefore, the AU has to critically revitalize this economic integration with the G20 to provide new perspectives on crucial projects related to infrastructure, logistics, energy, trade, agricultural and industrial development, digitalization, migration policy, and employment.

At first, since its creation, G20’s primary tasks included supporting the economic development of the Global South, but it has, over these years and to a considerable extent, distanced from its initial driven visions, promoting a more inequitable distribution of resources and supporting largely a unipolar sort of world. It is, therefore, necessary to use the platform to think of building an alternative mechanism for international cooperation with a focus on the developing world.

Final Hope for Africa

With the current situation, G20 is now only a formidable alliance that fosters its members. The majority of developing nations, mainly located in the south, including Africa, express growing frustration over outdated structures of global governance and under-representation in many international organizations that no longer reflect the realities of the 21st century. Hence, one of the important questions taking place at the summit is seeking collaboration between G20 and the African Union.

Judging from the historical landmark, the AU has the potential, despite the widespread political vulnerabilities, to make an invaluable contribution to developing and tackling current economic challenges facing Africa, with its estimated 1.4 billion people, by collaborating and partnering through G20. After all, the G20 members account for nearly 85% of the global Gross Domestic Product (GDP), have bilateral and multilateral relations, and in addition, multiple partnerships with Africa.

By simple definition, the G20 includes the world’s 19 wealthiest nations plus the European Union. With the African Union, it becomes G21 or G20+African Union. The 54-member AU was created in May 1963 and is now experiencing dynamic political changes in the landscape. It has unique stipulated models of transforming the continent – incorporated into what is popularly referred to as the AU Agenda 2063.

Professor Maurice Okoli is a fellow at the Institute for African Studies and the Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences. He is also a fellow at the North-Eastern Federal University of Russia. He is an expert at the Roscongress Foundation and the Valdai Discussion Club.

As an academic researcher and economist with a keen interest in current geopolitical changes and the emerging world order, Maurice Okoli frequently contributes articles for publication in reputable media portals on different aspects of the interconnection between developing and developed countries, particularly in Asia, Africa and Europe. With comments and suggestions, he can be reached via email: markolconsult (at) gmail (dot) com

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Feature/OPED

Moving the Stablecoin Conversation From Hype to Utility in Africa’s Next Payments Evolution

Published

on

Rajat Mishra Onafriq

By Rajat Mishra

For much of the past decade, discussions around stablecoins have been dominated by cryptocurrency speculation. Increasingly, however, stablecoins are emerging as practical financial infrastructure for moving money across borders, managing liquidity and improving payment efficiency.

The real opportunity lies not in choosing between traditional finance and digital assets, but in building an integrated financial ecosystem where both work together to improve efficiency, broaden financial access and deepen economic connectivity across the continent.

Despite significant advances in financial inclusion and digital payments, moving money across African borders remains far more difficult than it should be. Businesses continue to face challenges when making cross-border payments. Fragmented payment networks, multiple intermediaries, and lengthy settlement processes increase costs and create operational inefficiencies.

Remittance providers, the specialised financial services that millions rely on to send money home, face many of the same structural challenges. These providers play a critical role across the continent. In fact, 19 of Africa’s 54 countries receive remittance inflows equivalent to at least 4% of their GDP. Yet Africa remains the world’s most expensive region to send money to.

These challenges are not a reflection of remittance providers themselves, but of the fragmented banking and settlement infrastructure underpinning international money movement. Financial institutions must often manage liquidity across multiple disconnected currency markets while relying on complex correspondent banking networks and clearing systems. The result is higher costs, slower settlements, and capital that remains unnecessarily locked up.

One of the most immediate opportunities for stablecoins lies in improving cross-border settlement. Consider a Kenyan business importing goods from South Africa. Under traditional settlement models, payments often pass through multiple correspondent banking relationships, involve several foreign exchange conversions, and can take days before funds reach the intended recipient.

Stablecoin-enabled settlement rails have the potential to reduce much of this friction by enabling value to move more efficiently between financial institutions across markets. The result can be shorter settlement times, greater transparency and improved predictability for businesses operating across borders.

The benefits extend well beyond businesses. For millions of Africans working abroad, remittances remain a financial lifeline, helping families pay school fees, healthcare costs and daily living expenses. Yet sending money home often involves navigating a complex chain of money transfer operators, correspondent banks, and local payout partners, with each additional layer introducing costs and delays.

Stablecoins can help streamline the backend movement of funds between institutional participants, reducing settlement costs and improving efficiency across the value chain.

For end users, the advantage is simplicity. Recipients do not need to interact with, or even understand stablecoins directly. They continue to receive money through familiar, trusted channels, whether a local bank account or mobile money wallet, only faster and at a lower cost.

Beyond payments, stablecoins also address one of the less visible but most significant challenges in cross-border finance: liquidity management. Financial institutions operating across multiple markets must constantly ensure they have sufficient funds in the right currency, in the right jurisdiction and at the right time. Today, this often requires pre-funding accounts across multiple countries, a costly practice that traps large amounts of capital and limits financial flexibility.

Stablecoins introduce a new model for moving value across borders in near real time, enabling institutions to manage liquidity dynamically as demand arises. This can reduce the need for large pre-funded balances, improve treasury efficiency and free up capital that can be deployed more productively. Ultimately, these efficiencies can translate into faster settlements, lower costs, and better services for businesses and consumers alike.

However, the true value of stablecoins will not come from isolated blockchain networks operating independently of existing financial systems. Their long-term impact will depend on how effectively they integrate with banks, mobile money platforms, payment service providers and existing payment infrastructure. Interoperability will be critical to ensuring payment flows move seamlessly between systems, markets and currencies. The goal should be to strengthen and modernise today’s payment ecosystem, not replace it.

From experiment to infrastructure: what global moves are telling us

Some of the clearest signals that stablecoins are moving from experimentation to infrastructure are coming from card networks. Mastercard’s reported agreement to acquire BVNK, valued at up to $1.8 billion, points to a strategic investment in the settlement layer connecting stablecoin rails with traditional banking and reflects growing institutional confidence in stablecoin-enabled cross-border payments.

Visa’s expansion of stablecoin-backed cards through Stripe’s Bridge to more than 100 countries reflects a complementary strategy. Rather than acquiring infrastructure outright, Visa is leveraging its existing global network as the final distribution layer for stablecoin-funded payments.

The inclusion of African markets is particularly significant. It signals growing confidence that stablecoin-backed payment instruments can operate alongside, and in some cases complement, the mobile money ecosystems that already dominate wallet-based payments across much of the continent.

Taken together, these developments point to a broader shift. Card payment networks are moving from observing the stablecoin conversation to investing directly in the infrastructure that underpins it. For Africa, the implication is not that stablecoins will replace existing payment rails, but that success will increasingly belong to institutions capable of orchestrating multiple settlement rails – cards, bank transfers, mobile money and stablecoins- within a unified, interoperable ecosystem. Local market expertise, regulatory relationships and last-mile distribution will remain decisive competitive advantages.

Building for scale through trust and regulation

But despite their potential, stablecoins cannot operate outside the boundaries of regulated financial systems. Their long-term viability across Africa depends on clear regulatory frameworks, robust compliance standards and trusted infrastructure that supports transparency, risk management and consumer protection.

We are already seeing this evolution. In markets such as South Africa, institutions facilitating cross-border settlements must navigate increasingly sophisticated regulatory requirements, including approvals for certain offshore crypto-related activities. Globally, initiatives such as the OECD’s Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework (CARF) and expanded Travel Rule obligations are raising expectations around reporting, tax transparency and compliance.

These developments reinforce a simple reality: stablecoin infrastructure does not reduce compliance obligations. It raises the bar for governance, transparency and institutional risk management. The objective is not to bypass regulation, but to build interoperable payment systems that can innovate confidently within it.

From the edges to the plumbing

The stablecoin conversation is steadily moving beyond speculation and towards practical implementation. What once sat at the edges of the payments debate is becoming part of the plumbing of cross-border finance rather than a parallel system to it.

The question is no longer whether stablecoins have a role to play in payments. The question is where they deliver the greatest value. In Africa, that value is increasingly clear: faster settlement, improved liquidity efficiency and more connected cross-border commerce. The winners will not be those that replace existing financial systems, but those that successfully connect stablecoin rails with the banks, mobile money networks and payment providers that already power the continent’s economy.

For pan-African payment networks such as Onafriq, the priority is ensuring that emerging technologies complement the financial infrastructure businesses and consumers already trust, rather than introducing new layers of complexity.

The opportunity lies in connecting stablecoin settlement with banks, mobile money networks and payment providers, ensuring the benefits of this new infrastructure deliver tangible outcomes for African businesses and consumers.

Rajat Mishra is the CPO for Network Product & Deputy Group CPIO at Onafriq

Continue Reading

Feature/OPED

The Quiet Strength of Kaduna’s Fiscal Discipline and Public Finance

Published

on

Kaduna's Fiscal Discipline

By Sani Abdulrazak, PhD

The irony in governance is that the projects that capture public imagination are often the least difficult to appreciate. A newly commissioned road, a modern school, a renovated hospital or a flyover bridge speaks for itself. Fiscal discipline does not. Yet, behind every lasting development lies an often-overlooked virtue: the prudent management of public resources. Governments are judged ultimately not by the abundance of their income but by the wisdom of their choices in spending that income. Though prosperity is desirable as we all know, we have to admit that stewardship is equally indispensable. When public finance is guided by discipline rather than expediency, governments create not only projects but also the confidence that today’s development will not become tomorrow’s burden.

It is against this backdrop that Kaduna State’s fiscal journey deserves careful reflection.

Governor Uba Sani assumed office in May 2023 at a time when the state, and by extension the country’s economic landscape, was anything but forgiving. The removal of fuel subsidy, exchange-rate volatility, persistent inflation, and rising debt-service obligations placed unprecedented pressure on governments at every level. States were confronted with a difficult reality: revenues were uncertain, the demands of citizens were increasing, and the cost of delivering public services was rising sharply. In such circumstances, leadership is tested less by ambition than by restraint. The challenge is not merely to spend, but to spend wisely.

One of the defining features of Kaduna’s public finance strategy has been its emphasis on fiscal prudence. The evolution of Kaduna’s budgets illustrates this approach. The approved 2023 budget stood at approximately ₦376 billion, with about 64 per cent allocated to capital expenditure. By 2026, the state’s budget had expanded to approximately ₦985.9 billion, with nearly 71 per cent earmarked for capital projects. While a larger budget does not automatically translate into better governance, the increasing share devoted to capital expenditure suggests an intention to invest more heavily in assets capable of generating long-term social and economic value.

It is important to note that Kaduna’s fiscal philosophy appears to rest on the belief that sustainable development cannot be separated from responsible financial management. Whether this approach ultimately delivers all the expected outcomes will be judged by history. But the effort to align expenditure with development priorities represents a significant dimension of governance, one that often receives less public attention than it deserves.

Like most Nigerian states, Kaduna relies on a combination of statutory allocations from the Federation Account and internally generated revenue (IGR).  Available fiscal reports indicate that Kaduna has continued efforts to strengthen its internally generated revenue through reforms in tax administration and improved collection mechanisms. While revenue generation alone is not evidence of economic prosperity, it provides government with greater fiscal flexibility and resilience, particularly during periods of national economic uncertainty. Equally important is the principle that expanding the revenue base should not be confused with imposing heavier burdens on taxpayers. The more sustainable path lies in improving efficiency, reducing leakages, and encouraging economic activity that naturally broadens the tax net.

Another pertinently salient aspect of Kaduna’s fiscal approach that deserves attention is the administration’s stated commitment to avoiding new borrowing while continuing to service inherited debt obligations. In a federation where public borrowing has become a common instrument for financing development, such a position reflects a cautious philosophy of public finance. According to official statements, the government has prioritised meeting existing debt commitments while financing new projects through budgetary allocations, statutory revenues, and other available funding sources rather than contracting fresh loans. The most overlooked measure of fiscal discipline is not the size of a budget or even the amount of revenue collected. It is the willingness of a government to treat public funds as a trust rather than an entitlement. Financial prudence is rarely dramatic, but it is often decisive. It is the quiet habit of making difficult choices today so that tomorrow’s opportunities are not compromised by yesterday’s excesses.

There is, pertinently, external evidence to suggest that Kaduna’s emphasis on fiscal discipline is not merely a government narrative. In the 2025 Transparency and Integrity Index of the Centre for Fiscal Transparency and Public Integrity (CeFTPI), Kaduna ranked first among Nigeria’s 36 states for the second consecutive year, scoring 49.08 per cent and recording the country’s highest score; 80 per cent, in the Control of Corruption variable. The assessment covered fiscal transparency, open procurement, human resources, control of corruption and citizen engagement.  This was not an isolated recognition. In the 2024 edition, Kaduna again ranked first among the states, ahead of Kano and Kogi, while in the 2023 Transparency and Integrity Index it placed second nationally with 59.7 per cent.

More recently, the 2025 Phillips Consulting State Performance Index placed Kaduna third among the 36 states and awarded it an Excellent Four-Star rating, with fiscal management among the areas assessed.  These assessments do not, by themselves, prove that every naira has been optimally spent, nor do they erase the challenges confronting the state. They do, however, provide an important independent corroboration that Kaduna’s efforts in transparency, accountability and public-sector financial management have been noticed beyond the corridors of government. In public finance, therefore, such external assessments are worth considering.

Yet, no appraisal of public finance can be complete without acknowledging its limits. Fiscal discipline, however commendable, is not a panacea for every economic challenge. Kaduna, like every other state in Nigeria, operates within a national macroeconomic environment over which it has limited control. Inflation continues to erode purchasing power, businesses contend with high operating costs, exchange-rate volatility affects production and investment, and many households still struggle with the rising cost of living. These realities remind us that sound state finances cannot, by themselves, insulate citizens from broader economic shocks.

This distinction is important because it separates governance from circumstance. A prudent administration may not be able to determine the value of the naira or the global price of commodities, but it can determine how efficiently public resources are managed, how transparently budgets are implemented, and how wisely limited revenues are allocated. In that sense, fiscal discipline should not be judged by whether every economic hardship disappears, but by whether government responds to those hardships with responsibility and not recklessness.

Kaduna’s experience suggests an appreciation of this responsibility. The emphasis on capital investment, efforts to strengthen internally generated revenue, and the administration’s declared preference for avoiding new borrowing while servicing inherited obligations point to a philosophy that values sustainability over expediency. These choices contribute to a financial culture that seeks to preserve the state’s capacity to invest, grow, and respond to future challenges.

That is not to suggest that the work is complete. Public finance is never a finished project; it is a continuous exercise in adaptation. As Kaduna’s economy evolves, expectations will also rightly rise; citizens will demand greater efficiency in service delivery, stronger budget implementation, improved transparency, broader private-sector participation, and measurable improvements in living standards. Fiscal discipline must therefore remain dynamic, ensuring that every naira spent delivers the greatest possible public value.

Prudent financial management remains the quiet strength of Kaduna’s fiscal discipline and public finance. It is a strength that is rarely seen or acknowledged by the majority; the strength to prioritise sustainability over excess and fiscal adventurism. It is important to note that the loudest achievements may command today’s headlines, but it is often the quiet virtues- prudence, discipline, accountability, and foresight- that shape tomorrow’s verdict. In public finance, as in life, the strongest foundations are rarely the most visible, yet they are almost always the most enduring.

Sani Abdulrazak, PhD, is a writer, researcher and public affairs analyst based in Zaria, Kaduna State.

Continue Reading

Feature/OPED

On Onaiyekan—When Heaven Becomes Corruption’s Laundromat

Published

on

corruption in nigeria

By Prince Charles Dickson Ph.D

Nigeria is perhaps the only country where a politician may steal enough money to build three universities, donate twenty bags of rice to a prayer house, and immediately be introduced as “a great philanthropist and pillar of the faith.” The congregation applauds. The cleric smiles. Cameras flash. Heaven receives a bank alert it never requested.

“Sai Baba! Sai Malami!” the praise singers thunder, while the distinguished guest adjusts his cap, grips his prayer beads and looks humbly into the middle distance. By evening, another politician is occupying the front pew of a cathedral, lifting two hands in worship, although one suspects the third invisible hand is still inside the public treasury.

This is the Nigerian religious-political circus: spectacular costumes, sacred vocabulary, endless pilgrimages and remarkably little evidence of moral transformation.

We must begin with an important correction. It is neither fair nor provable to claim that 99.99 per cent of corrupt politicians are practising Muslims and Christians. What can be said is that Nigeria is overwhelmingly populated by people who identify as Muslim or Christian. Pew Research Centre estimates that Muslims and Christians together constitute virtually the entire population. Consequently, most politicians, honest or dishonest, will publicly identify with one of those religions.

The real scandal, therefore, is not that corrupt politicians belong to religions. It is that corruption appears perfectly comfortable living beside loud professions of faith. It eats breakfast with Christianity, attends afternoon prayers with Islam, and sleeps peacefully beneath framed quotations from scripture.

Nigeria has produced a curious creature: the devout kleptocrat.

He fasts, but the treasury must break the fast. He pays tithe, but not tax. He performs ablution, but refuses institutional cleansing. He kneels before God and places the country beneath his shoe.

He asks forgiveness every week without returning what he took.

He sponsors pilgrimages with money that could have equipped hospitals, then asks the pilgrims to pray for Nigeria’s development. This is like stealing somebody’s generator and requesting prayers for the darkness in his house.

Christianity does not teach this. Islam does not teach it. African traditional morality does not teach it. Even ordinary home training does not teach it.

Both Islam and Christianity treat public trust, justice, compassion, honesty and care for the vulnerable as serious moral obligations. Neither faith provides a theological washing machine into which stolen funds can be inserted and brought out smelling of incense. A pilgrimage is not a corruption amnesty. A church donation is not a plea bargain. Sponsoring religious programmes does not convert public theft into charity.

You cannot steal a community’s borehole and donate bottled water during Ramadan. You cannot divert teachers’ salaries and build a church auditorium. You cannot inflate a road contract, abandon the road, then organise a thanksgiving service after surviving an accident on that same road.

At some point, even hypocrisy deserves professional embarrassment.

The economic context makes the performance more offensive. Claims that “over 79 per cent” of Nigerians are poor depend on the definition and dataset being used, so that figure should not be repeated as a settled fact. However, the verified picture is already grim enough. The World Bank estimated that more than half of Nigerians were living in poverty in 2025, while its Nigeria country assessment says poverty remains widespread and that poorer households may spend up to 70 per cent of their income on food.

Meanwhile, nearly 35 million Nigerians were projected to face acute or severe food insecurity during the 2026 lean season, the highest level recorded for the country in the relevant analysis.

These are not decorative statistics. They represent children arriving at school too hungry to learn, parents dividing one meal into three diplomatic portions, pensioners choosing between medication and food, and graduates discovering that their certificates have become expensive bookmarks.

Against this background, unexplained political wealth is not merely vulgar. It is morally violent.

The statement that any present or former officeholder possessing ₦5 billion must automatically be a thief may satisfy public anger, but law and fairness require greater care. Some politicians had legitimate businesses, inheritances or investments before entering office. Wealth alone is not proof of theft.

However, unexplained wealth is a legitimate basis for scrutiny. Where a public officer’s assets are wildly inconsistent with lawful earnings, the burden of public explanation becomes unavoidable. Nigeria’s Code of Conduct system requires public officers to declare their assets and liabilities, while the Code of Conduct Bureau is responsible for receiving, examining and monitoring those declarations.

The correct democratic question is therefore not simply, “Are you rich?”

It is: What lawful activity produced this wealth, when was it earned, was it properly declared, were taxes paid, and can the explanation survive independent investigation?

A senator cannot tell citizens that wealth is a “mystery of God” when his declared salary is public knowledge. Divine favour is not an accounting category. “Grace” cannot explain twenty-seven properties, twelve companies and a warehouse full of dollars. Even manna came with distribution rules.

The deeper problem is that parts of Nigeria’s religious establishment have become involved in an unhealthy exchange with political power. Politicians provide money, access, vehicles, land and proximity to government. Religious leaders provide legitimacy, titles, photographs, prayers and a moral raincoat.

The politician arrives as “His Excellency, the divinely chosen servant-leader.” Nobody asks how the servant acquired a private jet while the people he serves cannot afford transport. Nobody wants to upset the offering basket. Prophecy suddenly develops selective eyesight.

To be balanced, many Nigerian clerics, Muslim and Christian, speak courageously against corruption, defend vulnerable communities and refuse political capture. Many politicians also practise their faith sincerely and serve without stealing. The disease is not universal.

But the silence of influential religious institutions is often too expensive to ignore.

A cleric who constantly condemns young people for indecent dressing but cannot condemn officials who undress the national treasury has misplaced his moral measuring tape. A preacher who sees spiritual danger in hairstyles but none in budget padding needs more than revelation. An imam who lectures poor traders about honesty while celebrating officials with inexplicable fortunes has reduced religion to ceremonial wallpaper.

Religious leaders must recover the courage to ask unpopular questions. Before accepting a massive donation from a public official, they should ask whether the donor’s known income can reasonably support it. Institutions should publish major political donations and establish ethical rules governing gifts from politically exposed persons. Stolen money does not become holy because it enters a religious account.

The state must also stop outsourcing accountability to divine judgement. Nigerians frequently say, “God will judge them,” which is true within religious belief, but God also gave the country auditors, investigators, courts, journalists, voters and laws. Waiting exclusively for celestial prosecution is institutional laziness wearing a prayer shawl.

Asset declarations should be effectively verified, and greater public access would strengthen accountability. The ICPC has itself previously advocated publication of public servants’ declared assets as an anti-corruption measure.  Investigative institutions must follow money without consulting party membership, regional origin, denomination or prayer vocabulary. A thief speaking in tongues and a thief reciting Arabic remain thieves requiring evidence-based investigation and lawful prosecution.

Citizens also have work to do. We cannot condemn corruption in Abuja while celebrating it when “our son” returns home with unexplained wealth. Communities organise receptions. Traditional titles multiply. Clerics pronounce blessings. Relatives announce that God has finally remembered the family. Nobody asks what job produced the convoy.

Our outrage is often tribal, partisan and denominational. We investigate opponents and interpret allies. When their politician steals, it is corruption. When ours steals, it is strategic empowerment of the constituency.

Nigeria will not defeat corruption until stolen wealth becomes socially shameful rather than socially impressive.

The politician who cannot explain his fortune should not receive a chieftaincy title, front-row seat, honorary doctorate or harvest-launch chairmanship. He should receive questions. Many questions. Questions with documents attached.

Religion must become more than pilgrimage photographs, prayer caps, rosaries, flowing gowns and amplified declarations of righteousness. True faith must disturb injustice. It must make theft uncomfortable, generosity accountable and leadership answerable.

Otherwise, the mosque becomes a photo studio, the church becomes a reputation-repair workshop, and religion becomes perfume sprayed over the odour of public theft.

The final question is not whether Nigerian politicians pray. Many clearly do.

The question is whether their prayers have ever met their consciences. Because a nation cannot shout “Amen” loudly enough to convert corruption into governance. Either way—May Nigeria win.

Continue Reading