Connect with us

Feature/OPED

Niger Delta, NHRC and PIB

Published

on

Niger Delta

By Jerome-Mario Utomi

I never had expected that opinion articles about the Niger Delta, a region bedevilled by tremendous odds with an improbable chance of survival, will precisely in a space of four days come from me in this quick succession as I have other pressing concerns to comment on.

But this particular one stems from a reaction by a reader to the earlier one entitled Why Niger Delta is troubled. The piece, which had the resonated chant of a crude oil spill in Polobubo/Opuama Communities, Warri North Local Government Area of Delta as its central plot, among other things, classified the critical issues confronting the region as follows.

First, the existence of multiple but an absolute regulatory framework that characterises the oil and gas exploration and production in Nigeria and fuels International Oil Companies (IOCs’) reluctance to adhere strictly to the international best practices as it relates to their operational environment.

Secondly, the unwillingness of successive administrations to identify the Niger Delta as a troubled spot that must be regarded as a special area for purposes of development-as recommended by the colonial government long before independence.

While commending efforts made by the people of Polobubo/Opuama community, particularly lawyers under the umbrella of the Gbaramatu Lawyers Association (Gbaramatu Oloutomo-Abu Gbolei), who in an open letter dated March 8, 2021, issued a 14-day ultimatum to the owners of the facility to address the present challenge, the said reader (mentioned above) lamented that such efforts will continue to be frustrated by both national and foreign media as they will not accord it the needed attention/prominence.

He, therefore, advised that to make such an effort most rewarding, the community should approach/ petitions National Human Right Commission (NHRC).

NHRC, he explained, was established by the National Human Right Act 1995, to; create an enabling environment for extra-judicial recognition, promotion, protection and enforcement of human rights, in addition to providing a forum for public enlightenment and dialogue on human rights while facilitating the implementation of Nigeria’s various international and regional treaty obligations on human rights issues.

Though I was totally disoriented by his position on the National Human Rights Commission, I tried not to betray my disagreement with such position. Alas! I could not pretend for too long that I was flowing for he soon observed the utter confusion and frustration raging in my mind.

To douse the nagging helplessness enveloping me as regards his suggestion about going to NHRC, I explained to him that the reservation in my view does not reflect a lack of respect for the Commission. Rather, it is predicated on the memories of their not too deeds towards the region which about a year ago formed a similar intervention, entitled; Re-thinking the National Human Rights Commissions (NHRC) roles in the Niger Delta.

As a background, the plight of the people of the Niger Delta region explains a painful consequence of prostrated neglect and low investments in the region by our leaders and in order words, act as an essential step towards understanding action-decision, or error of judgment that currently perpetuates poverty, consolidates powerlessness and promotes restiveness in the region.

In the same vein, there are many institutional failures that have kept the region on its knees.

But among these failures, the inability of the National Human Rights Commission to rise onto its constitutional responsibility to the people of the region. A failure that has resulted in the generation of misinformation, disinformation, innuendos, falsehood and outright assault on reason(s) fuelling the backward nature of the Niger-Delta regions.

Notably, so many families in the region have witnessed so many disappointing moments as a result of the government’s insensitivity. The government on its part has made so many speeches and excuses without adopting or abiding by the basic principles that helped other nations grow in social cohesion or through equitable sharing of benefits from the mineral deposits from the region.

And in the face of these verifiable violations and deprivations, the National Human Rights Commission failed to inform the government that it is only through equity, justice, and restructuring of the nation that the country would enjoy economic and social progress that flows from stability.

The stunning thing about the commission’s inaction is that it is happening when the global community is aware that communal rights to a clean environment and access to clean water supplies are being violated in the region, with aquifers and other water supply sources being adversely affected by industrial or other activities without the communities being adequately compensated for their losses. And the oil industry by its admission has abandoned thousands of polluted sites in the region which need to be identified and studied in details.

Shockingly ‘interesting’ is that despite the not too impressive performance of NHRC, The commission is not without supporters.

While many argue that the commission cannot be blamed for environmental woes resulting from oil exploration and production in the Niger Delta region as the agency cannot investigate without complaint or petition from either group or individual- as wading in without invitation amounts to descending into the arena.

Some expressed the views that the plight of the Niger Deltans resulting from faulty/weak legal framework should be directed to the National Assembly as the commission is not the legislative arm of the government.

To others, expecting the commission to enforce compliance will translate to waiting till eternity as they are neither staffed with security operatives like the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) nor equipped with technical knowledge like the Federal Ministry of environment, to detect when organisations are not applying international best practices in their operations.

Though clear enough, this point cannot hold water when faced with a number of embarrassing facts.

Fundamentally, separate from the belief that ‘the environment is as important to the nation’s well-being as the economy and should deserve similar attention, their arguments remain sophistry looking at the functions and powers of the commission as provided in Section 5 of its enabling Act.

It provides that the commission shall deal with all matters relating to the promotion and protection of human rights as guaranteed by the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and other human rights instruments to which Nigeria is a party; Monitor and investigate all alleged cases of human rights violations in Nigeria and make appropriate recommendation to the federal government for the prosecution and such other actions as it may deem expedient in each circumstance. And assist victims of human rights violation to seek appropriate redress and remedies on their behalf.

Admittedly, NHRC may not have the power to make laws as argued by some commentator, but it can engineer people-purposed oil exploration and production regime by collaborating with the National Assembly through sponsorship of Bills and Memoranda; NHRC may be technically disempowered to investigate or detect operators non-adherence to the international best practice, but have the power to productively partner with other government Ministries and agencies that perform this task both effectively and efficiently; the Commission may not be capped with the task force to enforce standards, but can assist communities where such violation has taken place with legal actions against such violator. The vitality of such support will enrich litigation in favour of the communities; deepen the respect for the Commission among the operators while lifting litigation cost from communities.

There are other similar but separate examples.

Without going into specifics, concepts, provisions and definitions, it’s been identified that oil exploration and production in Nigeria are guided by so many laws. Yet, available data and our mind’s eye testify that these laws/Acts in question are no longer achieving their purpose.

Against this backdrop, Nigerians would have expected NHRC as a responsive and responsible organization to ask; if truly these laws are fundamentally effective and efficient, why are they not providing a strong source of remedy for individuals and communities negatively affected by oil exploration and production in the coastal communities as the lives of the people in that region currently portrays? If these frameworks exist and have been comprehensive as a legal solution to the issues of oil-related violations, why are they not enforceable?

While the watching world expects answers to these questions, this piece, believes that signing the Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB) and not NHRC will save the region.

To explain this fact, going by what industry watchers are saying, the Bill, if passed to law, will engineer the development of host communities in ways that entail all-encompassing improvement, brings a process that builds on itself and involves both individuals and social change. Attracts growth and structural change, with some measures of distributive equity, modernization in social and cultural attitudes, foster a degree of transformation and stability, bring an improvement in health and education and an increase in the quality of lives and employment of the people.

This claim is ‘more pronounced in sections on community relations provisions such as Section 241 which among other provisions mandates that Settlors (a holder of an interest in a petroleum prospecting licence or petroleum mining lease or a holder of an interest in a licence for midstream petroleum operations, whose area of operations is located in or appurtenant to any community or communities) shall incorporate a trust for the benefit of the host communities.

The constitution of each host community development trust, the bill added, shall provide that the applicable host community development trust fund be used exclusively for the implementation of the applicable host community development plan.

There is also another ingrained way of how the Bill will assist in clearing the Augean Stable in the Niger Delta. This has to do with the Prohibition of Gas Flaring in section 104. Going by its provisions, the Bill in a bid to fulfil its obligations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and similar conventions, demands strict adherence to a gas flaring plan.

A licensee or lessee, it explained, producing natural gas is expected to, within 12 months of the effective date; submit a natural gas flare elimination and monetization plan to the commission, which shall be prepared in accordance with regulations made by the commission under this Act. A Licensee or Lessee who fails to adhere to the provision shall pay a penalty prescribed pursuant to the Flare Gas (Prevention of Waste and Pollution) Regulations.

With these and other provisions, there is no doubt that if the Federal Government is interested in serving and saving the people of the Niger Delta region, they are left with no other option than to pass and sign the PIB to law.

Since its objectives will foster sustainable prosperity within host communities and provide direct social and economic benefits from petroleum operations to host communities while enhancing peaceful and harmonious co-existence among licensees or lessees and host communities.

Jerome-Mario Utomi is the Programme Coordinator (Media and Public Policy), Social and Economic Justice Advocacy (SEJA), Lagos. He could be reached via [email protected] or 08032725374.

Feature/OPED

Guide to Employee Training That Reinforces Workplace Safety Standards

Published

on

Workplace Safety Standards

Workplace safety is not sustained by policies alone. It is built through consistent training that shapes daily behaviour, decision-making, and accountability across every level of an organisation. When employees understand not only what safety rules exist but why they matter, they are far more likely to follow them and intervene when risks arise. Effective safety-focused training protects workers, strengthens operations, and reduces costly incidents that disrupt productivity and morale.

As industries evolve and workplaces become more complex, employee training must go beyond basic orientation sessions. Reinforcing safety standards requires an ongoing, structured approach that adapts to new risks, changing regulations, and real-world job demands. A thoughtful training strategy helps create a culture where safety is a shared responsibility rather than a checklist item.

Establishing a Foundation of Safety Awareness

The first purpose of workplace safety training is awareness. Employees cannot avoid hazards they do not understand. Comprehensive training introduces common workplace risks, clarifies acceptable behaviour, and sets expectations for personal responsibility. This foundational knowledge empowers employees to recognise unsafe conditions before incidents occur.

Safety awareness training should be tailored to the specific environment in which employees work. Office settings require education on ergonomics, electrical safety, and emergency evacuation procedures, while industrial workplaces demand detailed instruction on machinery risks, protective equipment, and material handling. When training reflects actual job conditions, employees are more engaged and better equipped to apply what they learn.

Clear communication is essential during this stage. Using plain language and real examples helps employees connect training concepts to daily tasks. When safety awareness becomes part of how employees think and talk about their work, it begins to shape behaviour consistently across the organisation.

Integrating Safety Training into Daily Operations

Safety training is most effective when it is integrated into everyday work rather than treated as a one-time event. Ongoing reinforcement ensures that safety standards remain top of mind as tasks, equipment, and responsibilities change. Regular training sessions create opportunities to refresh knowledge, address new risks, and correct unsafe habits before they lead to injury.

Incorporating short safety discussions into team meetings helps normalise these conversations. Supervisors play a critical role by modelling safe behaviour and reinforcing expectations during routine interactions. When employees see safety emphasised alongside productivity goals, it reinforces the message that both are equally important.

Hands-on training also strengthens retention. Demonstrations, practice scenarios, and real-time feedback allow employees to apply safety principles in controlled settings. This experiential approach builds confidence and reduces hesitation when employees encounter hazards in real situations.

Aligning Training with Regulatory Requirements

Workplace safety training must align with applicable regulations and industry standards to ensure legal compliance and worker protection. Laws and regulations change frequently, making it essential for organisations to keep training materials updated. Failure to do so can expose employees to unnecessary risk and organisations to legal consequences.

Training programs should clearly explain relevant safety regulations and how they apply to specific roles. Employees are more likely to comply when rules are presented as practical safeguards rather than abstract mandates. Documenting training completion and maintaining accurate records also demonstrates organisational commitment to compliance.

Many organisations rely on support from compliance training companies to navigate complex regulatory landscapes and design programs that meet both legal and operational needs. These partnerships can help ensure training remains accurate, consistent, and aligned with evolving requirements without overwhelming internal resources.

Encouraging Participation and Accountability

Effective safety training depends on active participation rather than passive attendance. Employees should be encouraged to ask questions, share concerns, and contribute insights based on their experiences. When workers feel heard, they become more invested in maintaining a safe environment.

Creating accountability is equally important. Training should clarify individual responsibilities and outline the consequences of ignoring safety standards. Employees need to understand that safety is not optional or secondary to performance goals. Reinforcement from leadership ensures that unsafe behaviour is addressed consistently and constructively.

Peer accountability also strengthens safety culture. When training emphasises teamwork and shared responsibility, employees are more likely to watch out for one another and intervene when they see risky behaviour. This collective approach reduces reliance on supervision alone and builds resilience across the workforce.

Adapting Training for Long-Term Effectiveness

Workplace safety training must evolve alongside organisational growth and workforce changes. New hires, role transitions, and technological updates introduce risks that require refreshed instruction. Periodic assessments help identify gaps in knowledge and opportunities for improvement.

Data from incident reports, near misses, and employee feedback provides valuable insight into training effectiveness. Adjusting content based on real outcomes ensures that training remains relevant and impactful. Organisations that treat training as a dynamic process are better equipped to respond to emerging risks.

Long-term effectiveness also depends on reinforcement beyond formal sessions. Visual reminders, updated procedures, and accessible reporting tools help sustain awareness. When safety standards are supported through multiple channels, employees receive consistent cues that reinforce training messages daily.

Conclusion

Reinforcing workplace safety standards through employee training requires intention, consistency, and adaptability. Training that builds awareness, integrates into daily operations, aligns with regulations, and encourages accountability creates a safer environment for everyone involved. When employees understand their role in maintaining safety, they are more confident, engaged, and prepared to prevent harm.

A strong training program is not simply a compliance exercise. It is an investment in people and performance. Organisations that prioritise meaningful safety training protect their workforce while fostering trust, stability, and long-term success.

Continue Reading

Feature/OPED

Debt is Dragging Nigeria’s Future Down

Published

on

more concessional debt

By Abba Dukawa 

A quiet fear is spreading across the hearts of Nigerians—one that grows heavier with every new headline about rising debt. It is no longer just numbers on paper; it feels like a shadow stretching over the nation’s future. The reality is stark and unsettling: nearly 50% of Nigeria’s revenue is now used to service debt. That is not just unsustainable—it is suffocating.

Behind these figures lies a deeper tragedy. Millions of Nigerians are trapped in what experts call “Multidimensional Poverty,” struggling daily for dignity and survival, while a privileged few continue to live in comfort, untouched by the hardship tightening around the nation. The contrast is painful, and the silence around it is even louder.

Since assuming office, Bola Ahmed Tinubu has embarked on an aggressive borrowing path, presenting it as a necessary step to revive the economy, rebuild infrastructure, and stabilise key sectors.

Between 2023 and 2026, billions of dollars have been secured or proposed in foreign loans. On paper, it is a strategy of hope. But in the hearts of many Nigerians, it feels like a gamble with consequences yet to unfold.

The numbers are staggering. A borrowing plan exceeding $21 billion, backed by the National Assembly, alongside additional billions in loans and grants, signals a government determined to keep spending and building. Another $6.9 billion facility follows closely behind. These are not just financial decisions; they are commitments that will echo into generations yet unborn.

And so, the questions refuse to go away. Who will bear this burden? Who will repay these debts when the time comes? Will it not fall on ordinary Nigerians already stretched thin to carry the weight of decisions they never made?

There is a growing fear that the nation may be walking into a future where its people become strangers in their own land, bound by obligations to distant creditors.

Even more troubling is the sense that something is not adding up. The removal of fuel subsidy was meant to free up resources, to create breathing room for meaningful development.

But where are the results? Why does it feel like sacrifice has not translated into relief? The silence surrounding these questions breeds suspicion, and suspicion slowly erodes trust.  As of December 31, 2025, Nigeria’s public debt has risen to N159.28 trillion, according to the Debt Management Office.

The numbers keep climbing, but for many citizens, life keeps declining. This disconnect is what hurts the most. Borrowing, in itself, is not the enemy. Nations borrow to grow, to build, to invest in their future. But borrowing without visible progress, without accountability, without compassion for the people, it begins to feel less like strategy and more like a slow descent.

If these borrowed funds are truly building roads, schools, hospitals, and opportunities, then Nigerians deserve to see it, to feel it, to live it. But if they are funding excess, waste, or luxury, then this path is not just dangerous—it is devastating.

Nigeria’s growing loan profile is a double-edged sword. It can either accelerate development or deepen economic challenges. The key issue is not just borrowing, but what the country does with the money. Strong governance, transparency, and investment in productive sectors will determine whether these loans become a foundation for growth or a long-term liability. Because in the end, debt is not just an economic issue. It is a moral one. And if care is not taken, the price Nigeria will pay may not just be financial—it may be the future of its people.

Dukawa writes from Kano and can be reached at [email protected]

Continue Reading

Feature/OPED

Nigeria’s Power Illusion: Why 6,000MW Is Not An Achievement

Published

on

Nigeria Electricity Act 2023

By Isah Kamisu Madachi

For decades, Nigeria has been called the Giant of Africa. The question no one in government wants to answer is why a giant cannot keep the lights on.

Nigeria sits on the largest proven oil reserves in Africa, holds the continent’s most populous nation at over 220 million people, and commands the fourth largest GDP on the continent at roughly $252 billion. It possesses vast deposits of solid minerals, a fintech ecosystem that accounts for 28% of all fintech companies on the African continent, and a diaspora that remits billions of dollars annually.

If potential were electricity, Nigeria would have been powering half the world. Instead, an immediate former minister is boasting about 6,000 megawatts.

Adebayo Adelabu resigned as Minister of Power on April 22, 2026, citing his ambition to contest the Oyo State governorship election. In his resignation letter, he listed among his achievements that peak generation had increased to over 6,000 megawatts during his tenure, supported by the integration of the Zungeru Hydropower Plant. It was presented as a great crowning legacy. The claim deserves scrutiny, and the numbers deserve context.

To begin with, the context. Ghana, Nigeria’s neighbour in West Africa, has a national electricity access rate of 85.9%, with 74% access in rural areas and 94% in urban areas. Kenya, with a 71.4% national electricity access rate, including 62.7% in rural areas, leads East Africa. Nigeria, by contrast, recorded an electricity access rate of just 61.2 per cent as of 2023, according to the World Bank. This is not a distant or poorer country outperforming Nigeria. Ghana’s GDP stands at approximately $113 billion, less than half of Nigeria’s. Kenya’s economy is around $141 billion. Ethiopia, which has invested massively in the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam and is already exporting electricity to neighbouring countries, has a GDP of roughly $126 billion. All three are doing more with far less.

Now to examine the 6,000-megawatt, Daily Trust obtained electricity generation data from the Association of Power Generation Companies and the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission, covering quarterly performance from 2023 to 2025 and monthly data from January to March 2026. The data shows that in 2023, peak generation was approximately 5,000 megawatts; in 2024, it reached approximately 5,528 megawatts; in 2025, it ranged between 5,300 and 5,801 megawatts; and by March 2026, available capacity had declined to approximately 4,089 megawatts. The grid never recorded a verified peak of 6,000 megawatts or higher. Adelabu had, in fact, set the 6,000-megawatt target publicly on at least three separate occasions, missing each deadline, and later admitted the target was not achieved, attributing the failure to vandalism of key transmission infrastructure.

In February 2026, Nigeria’s national grid produced an average available capacity of 4,384 megawatts, the lowest monthly average since June 2024. For a country with over 220 million people, this means electricity supply remains far below national demand, with the grid delivering only about 32 per cent of its theoretical installed capacity of approximately 13,000 megawatts. To put that in sharper comparison: in 2018, 48 sub-Saharan African countries, home to nearly one billion people, produced about the same amount of electricity as Spain, a country of 45 million. Nigeria, the continent’s most resource-rich large economy, is a significant part of that embarrassing equation.

The tragedy here is not just technical. It is a governance failure with compounding human costs. An economy that cannot provide reliable electricity cannot competitively manufacture goods, cannot industrialise at scale, cannot attract the volume of foreign direct investment its endowments warrant, and cannot build the digital infrastructure that would allow it to lead on artificial intelligence, data governance, and the emerging critical minerals economy where Africa’s next great opportunity lies. Countries with a fraction of Nigeria’s mineral wealth and human capital are already debating those frontiers. Nigeria is still campaigning on megawatts.

What a departing minister should be able to say, given Nigeria’s endowments, is not that peak generation touched 6,000 megawatts at some unverified moment. He should be saying that Nigeria now generates reliably above 15,000 megawatts, that rural electrification has crossed 70 per cent, and that the country is on a credible trajectory toward the kind of energy sufficiency that unlocks industrial growth. That is the standard Nigeria’s size and resources demand. Anything below it is not an achievement. It is an apology dressed in a press release.

The power sector has received billions of dollars in investment across multiple administrations. The 2013 privatisation exercise, the Presidential Power Initiative, the Electricity Act of 2023, and successive reform promises have produced a sector that still, in 2026, cannot guarantee eight hours of reliable supply to the average Nigerian household. That a minister exits that ministry citing a megawatt figure that fact-checkers have shown was never actually reached, and that even if reached would be unworthy of celebration given Nigeria’s potential, captures the full depth of the problem. The ambition is too small. The accountability is too thin. And the country deserves better from those who are privileged to manage its extraordinary, squandered potential.

Isah Kamisu Madachi is a policy analyst and development practitioner. He writes via [email protected]

Continue Reading

Trending