Feature/OPED
Now That There Is No Immediate Threat of Floods in Nigeria
By Jerome-Mario Chijioke Utomi
Seemingly good news came recently the way of Nigerians living in the flood-prone areas of the country. The message, which was from the new Minister of Water Resources and Sanitation, Prof Joseph Utsev, among other remarks, stated that ‘there is no immediate threat of flooding in the country.
Utsev, who spoke to newsmen in Abuja on Friday, explained that the Nigeria Hydrological Services Agency (NIHSA) had observed an increase in the volume of flow along the River Benue system, registering a flow level of 8.97 meters today. This, he said, was insignificant, as compared to a flow level of 8.80 meters on the same date in 2022, noting that reports from inland dams, including Kainji, Jebba, and Shiroro, also showed a consistent flow regime.
While this piece of information is celebrated, one vital question crying for an answer is: What are the tiers of government in Nigeria currently doing/ appropriate measures to ensure preparedness to minimize the potential impact of flooding during the peak of the rainy season?
The above poster becomes well appreciated when one remembers that last year (2022), raving floods which lasted over two months reportedly hit parts of Nigeria; according to the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA), about 2.5 million persons were affected and over 603 persons killed by the flooding. Within the period under review, houses and farmlands were submerged in Lagos, Yobe, Borno, Taraba, Adamawa, Edo, Delta, Kogi, Niger, Plateau, Benue, Ebonyi, Anambra, Bauchi, Gombe, Kano, Jigawa, Zamfara, Kebbi, Sokoto, Imo, Abia States, and the Federal Capital Territory.
Without any shadow of a doubt, flooding, as noted in a similar piece in the past, is a natural disaster. A natural disaster, going by information available at Wikipedia, a global information power horse, is “the negative impact following an actual occurrence of natural hazard in the event that it significantly harms a community”. A natural disaster can cause loss of life or damage property and typically leaves some economic damage in its wake. It includes events such as a flood, earthquake, or hurricane that causes great damage or loss of life’.
However, while Wikipedia’s intention for classifying flood as a natural disaster is understandable and commendable, some questions immediately come to mind as to whether the series of floods that ravaged communities, villages, towns and cities in the past truly qualifies as an act of God/natural disaster. In the applied sense of the word, it cannot, in all honesty, be qualified as a natural disaster or an Act of God and even though it has taken a great toll on Nigeria and its economy,
Aside from the lackadaisical attitude displayed over the years by both past and present Governments, the above opinion is predicated on the mountains of early warning signs which ought to have activated some remedial measures but was not hearkened to by any of the tiers of government.
In 2012, for example, when the flood of unimaginable magnitude and volume first occurred, President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan (GEJ), as he then was, during a visit to flood victims in Lagos, promised to create an artificial/dry lake to contend with future surge in flood. As at the time of leaving office in May 2015 (that was three years after the promise was made), not even a pit was dug.
Between 2015 and now, President Muhammadu Buhari, who succeeded former President Jonathan, did next to nothing to resolve the issue of flooding in the country.
Let’s assume that he (Buhari) lacks the needed leadership and creative prowess to generate ideas in this direction. One should have expected him to, at the very least, implement/execute the proposed Dam in Adamawa state, as suggested years ago, to take care of flood eventualities. After all, leadership is a continuum. There is also a saying that if you cannot create, copy!
The truth is that we failed as a nation in all these directions, and therefore, we lack the moral justification as a nation to describe flood as an unexpected occurrence.
But instead of doing the needful, we fail in our responsibility as a nation and attribute the same failure to God. What has happened in the past as it relates to flooding were totally, squarely and completely leadership failures. It is a sign of an absence of foresighted leadership in the country. It tells a story of people whose poor leadership has drained their rational will, a nation devoid of proactive leadership but filled with sets of reactors masquerading as leaders.
Fundamentally, the inability of the government to manage the flooding in the country all these years further serves as proof that ‘poverty of our leaders certainly does not mean material poverty, but lack of commitment to duty, lack of vision and greediness characterized by corruption’. That is the only possible explanation. If not poor leadership, how do we explain the fact that each year, the three tiers of government periodically gather to share the National Ecological Funds and yet cannot tackle the issue that is as simple as a flood?
For a better understanding of the argument, the ecological fund was established in 1981 through the Federation Account Act 1981, on the recommendation of the Okigbo Commission, Decree 36 of 1984 and 106 of 1992, as well as the allocation of Federation Account modification order of 2002 subsequently modified the act. The prime objective of this initiative was to have a pool of funds that would be solely devoted to the funding of ecological projects to ameliorate serious ecological problems nationwide. This is at variance with the practice elsewhere in the world where funds are set aside, especially for natural disasters.
In the United States, for example, there are at least four major pieces of Federal Legislations enacted for this purpose: the Water Quality Act of 1965, the Water Pollution Control Act and its amendment of 1972(PL92 500), the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1976 (PL 94 800), The Toxic Substance Control Act of 1983 (PL 94 469) and Comprehensive Environmental Response. Compensation and Labiality Act of 1983 (CERCLA) (PL96 510).
These laws all make provisions for funding and other facilities for the protection, monitoring and remediation of polluted aquifers. The funds are additional to the existing periodic statutory allocation to the United Environmental Protection Agency and are also readily accessible to local governments and individuals. Looking at the above explanation will elicit the question as to why ecological funds are not readily available for use in a period such as this. As the flood rages, the question that is as important as the flood itself is: What is the nation doing to prepare for the next one because we know that it will happen again in the near future?
Finally, even as Nigerians continue to celebrate the cheerful from the Minister that there is no threat to lives and properties, especially those states that are contiguous to Rivers Niger and Benue, this piece, on a final note, calls on relevant agencies of all the three tiers of government in Nigeria, particularly the flood-prone states such as Delta, Kogi and Bayelsa, among others, to ensure preparedness and deploy appropriate measures to minimize the potential impact of flooding during the peak of the rainy season.
Nigerians, on their part, must unlearn the ‘culture’ of indiscriminate waste disposal and, in its place, imbibe the tradition of organized waste management. Non-Governmental Organizations and Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) should, as part of their Corporate Social Responsibilities (CSR), train Nigerians on waste-to-wealth practice.
These are little efforts that will produce great results.
Utomi is the Programme Coordinator (Media and Public Policy) at Social and Economic Justice Advocacy (SEJA). He writes via [email protected]
By Sani Abdulrazak, PhD
It is a boom season for Nigerian Governors; at no time before have they had it this much. Huge sums of money are being allocated to them every month. To whom much is given, they say, much is expected. What are the visible things they have put in place commensurate with the allocations they receive? How do we hold them accountable for such?
Nigeria today faces one of the widest electricity supply gaps in the world. Despite having an installed generation capacity of over 13,000 megawatts, the country still struggles to generate and distribute between 4,000 and 5,500 megawatts on most days for a population exceeding 220 million people. Experts estimate that Nigeria requires at least 30,000 megawatts to enjoy stable and functional electricity, while industrial economies of comparable size generate far more. Recent reports from the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission and industry operators revealed that many power plants operate below 40 per cent capacity due to gas shortages, poor infrastructure, transmission bottlenecks, and weak investment. The consequences are devastating. Small businesses spend billions annually on diesel and petrol generators. Manufacturers relocate to neighbouring countries with better energy systems. Investors avoid regions where production costs are inflated by unstable electricity. According to several business and energy reports, unreliable electricity continues to cost Nigeria billions of dollars yearly in lost productivity, collapsed businesses, unemployment, and reduced foreign direct investment. In Northern Nigeria, especially, where industrialisation is already fragile, unstable electricity has become a direct enemy of economic growth, security, and prosperity.
Nothing will boost and improve our local economy, especially here in Northern Nigeria, like the provision of stable electricity. Recently, the president smartly threw the ball into our Governors’ court by signing the Electricity Act. The Electricity Act by Bola Ahmed Tinubu gave states the power to decentralise electricity. We have seen states like Abia State, Lagos State and Ogun State grabbing the opportunity with both hands in order to boost the local economy.
It left me wondering what Northern states are doing about this. Are our people aware of this great opportunity to compel our Northern Governors to provide stable electricity to us? Or are they so consumed with who occupies what office? Or “Falle nawa ne”? Why are our Northern know-it-all Analysts and intellectuals silent about this now, only to hammer on the same issue years later when the opportunity is probably no longer there? Will our traditional rulers save us by echoing it into our leaders’ ears?
Electricity is no longer merely a social amenity; it is the backbone of modern civilisation. Every thriving economy is powered first by energy before politics, rhetoric, or propaganda. Stable electricity determines whether factories operate efficiently, whether hospitals can preserve lives, whether schools can provide quality learning environments, whether technology hubs can emerge, and whether local entrepreneurs can compete globally. Nations do not industrialise in darkness. History has repeatedly shown that economic revolutions are built upon reliable energy systems. From China to India, from South Korea to Rwanda, serious governments understood that a constant electricity supply is the oxygen of development.
Sadly, Northern Nigeria still behaves as though electricity is a luxury rather than an economic necessity. In many parts of the region, communities spend more time discussing political appointments and ethnic calculations than discussing energy policy, industrial development, or economic competitiveness. Yet, no serious investor will establish industries where electricity remains uncertain for most hours of the day. No meaningful manufacturing revolution can occur where generators roar louder than factories. Our youths cannot become globally competitive in digital innovation when power outages interrupt learning, research, and productivity every few hours.
What makes the current moment even more painful is that the constitutional and legal opportunity now exists for states to take charge of their electricity future. The decentralisation enabled by the Electricity Act allows states to generate, transmit, and distribute electricity independently under their own regulatory frameworks. This means governors can no longer endlessly blame Abuja for every darkness their people endure. The era of absolute dependence on the national grid is gradually fading. States willing to think ahead can establish independent power projects, attract private investors, support renewable energy initiatives, and create regional energy markets capable of transforming their economies.
Already, signs of this new direction are emerging. Lagos State has moved aggressively toward controlling its electricity market and attracting independent suppliers. Energy reforms and localised agreements are being pursued to reduce dependence on the unstable national grid and improve supply to businesses and residents. Other states are beginning to recognise that power supply is no longer solely the responsibility of the Federal Government. The question now is whether Northern states will rise to the occasion or continue watching from the sidelines while others move ahead economically.
Even though the “fabled” Northern elites and elders are still struggling to define what regional development is, let alone develop a realistic framework and awareness about it, we would be grateful if they could lend a hand in the actualisation of a stable power supply, the stream that waters the root of development.
Kaduna State, for example, has a Governor amongst Governors, a serving Speaker of the Federal House of Representatives, and two senior, powerful ministers. I hope, pray, and expect Kaduna State to take the lead in the North in providing a stable, uninterrupted power supply to its people. Kaduna possesses the intellectual capacity, political influence, industrial history, and strategic importance to become the energy model for Northern Nigeria. If properly harnessed, stable electricity in Kaduna alone could revive industries, empower small businesses, strengthen agriculture processing, create jobs for thousands of youths, and attract investors back into the state.
Northern Nigeria cannot continue to lament insecurity, poverty, unemployment, and underdevelopment while ignoring one of the foundational pillars of economic transformation. Stable electricity will not solve every problem overnight, but without it, many other solutions will remain ineffective. We must begin to ask tougher questions of those entrusted with public resources. Citizens must move beyond political sentiments and demand measurable development. Governors who receive enormous allocations monthly must show visible investments in energy infrastructure, industrial expansion, and economic productivity.
The future belongs to regions that understand that development is deliberate, not accidental. We can no longer afford leadership without vision or citizens without demands. The opportunity is here. The law is now favourable. The resources are available. What remains is political will, public pressure, and leadership that understands that darkness has never built any civilisation.
Long live the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Sani Abdulrazak writes from Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria and can be reached via email at [email protected]
By Nafisat Damisa
Introduction
The proliferation of generative AI has transformed Nigeria’s cybercrime landscape, enabling deepfake fraud, automated social engineering, and AI-enhanced phishing at scale. In early 2024, scammers using AI-generated deepfake videos impersonating a company’s CFO defrauded a Hong Kong finance worker of $25.6 million. As similar threats emerge in Nigeria’s fintech sector, this article examines whether the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act 2015 (as amended 2024) is legally adequate, or whether Nigeria’s evidentiary and accountability frameworks are too weak to support effective prosecution of AI-driven cybercrime
Current Legal Landscape
Nigeria’s primary legal framework on preventing cybercrime is the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act 2015, amended in 2024 to address cryptocurrency transactions, cyberbullying and various forms of digital misconduct. Complementary frameworks include the National Information Technology Development Agency Act 2007, the Nigerian Data Protection Act 2023, and sectoral regulations such as the CBN’s Risk-Based Cybersecurity Framework. However, the majority of these frameworks were issued far before now, and emerging risks like AI-driven threats are not really being addressed. The Act nowhere mentions “artificial intelligence,” “algorithm,” or “autonomous system.” Notably, the National Artificial Intelligence Commission (Establishment) Bill, 2025, is currently pending before the Senate. If passed, it would establish a dedicated commission to coordinate AI strategy, research, and ethical deployment. However, the Bill in its present form focuses primarily on development and innovation promotion, with limited provisions on criminal liability, evidence handling, or enforcement against AI-facilitated cybercrime, leaving the core accountability and evidentiary gaps largely unaddressed.
AI as a Double-Edged Sword
AI paradoxically enables both defence and attack. Nigerian financial institutions deploy AI for real-time fraud detection and pattern recognition. Conversely, cybercriminals exploit generative AI for deepfake creation, automated credential stuffing, and convincing phishing tailored to Nigerian English and Pidgin. The same technology that powers fraud detection systems can be weaponised to evade them. Take justice delivery as an example, the Evidence Act 2011 (as amended 2023) admits computer-generated evidence under Section 84, but remains silent on AI’s capacity to seamlessly generate or alter electronic records, creating “doctored AI-generated evidence”. These and many more issues await Nigeria’s digital space in the coming years.
The Legal Gaps
There are multiple critical gaps that undermine AI governance. For this article, three are considered. First, no framework attributes criminal liability when an autonomous AI commits an offence. The question of whether the developer, user, or owner should bear criminal responsibility for the acts of an autonomous system remains entirely unanswered under Nigerian law, leaving prosecutors without a clear legal theory of culpability.
Second, Section 84 of the Evidence Act 2011 governs computer-generated evidence but does not address AI-generated outputs. The Act’s definition of “computer” excludes AI’s cognitive processing capabilities, creating a statutory blind spot where evidence produced by generative or autonomous systems falls outside the existing admissibility framework.
Third, Nigeria lacks any framework for mandatory AI-generated content labelling, impeding deepfake traceability. Computer-generated evidence under Section 84 of the Evidence Act 2011 remains admissible if unchallenged at trial, a dangerous precedent for AI evidence, as opposing parties may lack the technical capacity to mount any challenge at all.
Comparative Jurisdictions: Rich Laws, Tangible Results
Jurisdictions with advanced AI laws demonstrate clear outcomes. The EU AI Act (Regulation 2024/1689) mandates transparency obligations, requiring synthetic content labelling and informing individuals when interacting with AI systems; non-compliance triggers significant penalties. The US Algorithmic Accountability Act of 2023 is a proposed Act that will require impact assessments for high-risk AI systems in housing, credit, and employment, with FTC enforcement and a public repository. China implemented mandatory measures for the Identification of AI-generated (Synthetic) content. These rules, mandated by the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) and others, require explicit (visible labels) and implicit (watermarks/metadata) identification for all AI-generated text, images, audio, video, and virtual scenes to ensure transparency, traceability, and combat disinformation. These laws contribute to measurable results: forensic traceability, expedited prosecution of deepfake fraud, and clear liability chains. Nigeria has none of these.
Hope or Illusion?
Without legislative intervention, AI’s promise against cybercrime remains an illusion. Nigeria requires the following to boost its hope:
- Amendment of the Cybercrimes Act to include AI-specific offences and mandatory content provenance standards;
- Revision of Section 84 of the Evidence Act 2011 to address AI-generated evidence credibility, not merely admissibility;
- Investment in digital forensic capabilities is currently hampered by inadequate enforcement, weak forensic capabilities, and a lack of specialised personnel; and
- A risk-based framework drawing from EU and US models.
- Review of both secondary and tertiary education curricula to address the knowledge gap in AI and prepare the next generation for the AI-driven future.
Conclusion
AI can help curb cybercrime in Nigeria, but only if legal capacity catches up with technical capability. The Cybercrimes Act 2024 amendments were a step forward, but they did not address AI accountability, algorithmic transparency, or evidentiary credibility. The pending National Artificial Intelligence Commission Bill, 2025, signals legislative awareness, but without substantive provisions on liability, evidence, and enforcement, it cannot fill the existing gaps. The effectiveness of existing frameworks remains a question. An optimistic but cautious path exists, but until Nigeria enacts AI-specific legislation, whether through amending the Cybercrimes Act, revising the Evidence Act, or strengthening the pending Bill, weak laws will remain unable to support strong technology.
Nafisat Damisa is a Legal Research Associate in Olives and Candles – Legal Practitioners. For further information, enquiries, or clarification, please contact Nafisat via: [email protected] or [email protected]
By Isah Kamisu Madachi
As of April 30, 2026, the crude price is said to have reached $125 in the global market. The all-time high price per barrel was recorded in 2008, when it surged to $147. It is obvious that the price is heading in that direction or even towards what experts have predicted — crude reaching a new all-time high of $150 in the near future if crude passages remain closed in the Middle East, which would ultimately come with several disproportionate challenges for businesses and households.
In Nigeria, what began as a mild adjustment in the price of gasoline and other refined crude products has not stopped anywhere until it reached N1,400 per litre of petrol at filling stations. When the price was surging, experts in energy, economics, marketing, business and other relevant fields tried to come up with explanations for how Nigeria, despite housing the largest petrochemicals refinery in Africa and being one of the largest oil-exporting countries on the continent, would continue to absorb this shock.
Despite our advantages, Nigeria recorded the world’s second-highest surge in petrol prices following the escalating geopolitical tension in the Middle East. In Africa, Nigeria has the highest spike, with many sources citing it at 39.5% and above. Even non-oil-producing countries in Africa, and countries that do not refine a drop of oil, did not experience this surge. Also, African countries like South Africa at 1%, Morocco at 2.1%, and Tanzania at 2.7% experienced far smaller increases that are nowhere near Nigeria’s.
To put it in context, South Korea, Japan, and China are among the foremost dependents on the Strait of Hormuz, whose closure escalated the crude price, but none of these countries has recorded even a 20% increase in their petrol prices. Nigeria does not import its crude through the Strait of Hormuz. Yet, as an oil-exporting nation, we have suffered some of the sharpest petrol price increases in Africa.
What went wrong in Nigeria to warrant this surge is not the primary focus of this piece. What lies ahead is. As a result of the increase in petrol prices, Nigerians have been disproportionately affected. Life has become unbearably difficult, with sharp increases in transportation costs, rising food prices, and higher costs of goods and services. Even charging points that used to collect N150 for charging a phone or battery now charge N300 or more.
As it stands, the gap between the current crude price and the predicted new all-time high is about $25. This means that if the passages continue to remain closed, we are not far from another historic price peak. It is even said that reopening the passages may not immediately stabilise prices, as crude tankers would still take time to reach their destinations.
What this means for Nigeria is another sharp increase in refined petroleum product prices, which could trigger another wave of stagflation. Already struggling, Nigerians do not deserve this. They are only just adapting to the post-subsidy era, yet are being hit again by another round of global geopolitical tensions. Many are already in deep energy poverty, with businesses struggling due to unstable electricity supply.
Therefore, as crude oil prices hover above $125 per barrel and threaten to reach the predicted $150 if disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz persist, Nigeria must act decisively to shield its citizens. The Dangote Refinery exists. Nigeria refines oil. What the federal government owes Nigerians at this point is a deliberate policy decision to make that the refinery serve domestic needs first, with pricing that does not mirror whatever is happening in the global market. That is not complicated; other oil-producing countries do exactly this.
The NMDPRA has the authority to act on this. The question is whether there is a political will to act before another price wave hits and Nigerians are once again left to absorb what their counterparts elsewhere never have to.
Sub-national governments also have something to do. Commercial motorcyclists and small business owners are the people who feel every petrol price increase the hardest and the fastest. Pushing CNG and LPG adoption among this group beyond the FCT and Lagos, with genuine support, would cushion a significant part of the next shock. Expanding solar access in underserved communities would do the same. A shop owner running on solar is not at the mercy of the next diesel price spike.
These solutions are quite feasible. Nigeria has attempted versions of them before. Where we often seem to get it wrong is in execution, and Nigeria has to treat this with the same urgency and seriousness as given to elections, for the well-being of its citizens. The only thing that has never matched the problem is the seriousness of the response.
Isah Kamisu Madachi is a policy analyst and development practitioner. He writes via [email protected]
-
Feature/OPED6 years agoDavos was Different this year
-
Travel/Tourism10 years ago
Lagos Seals Western Lodge Hotel In Ikorodu
-
Showbiz3 years agoEstranged Lover Releases Videos of Empress Njamah Bathing
-
Banking8 years agoSort Codes of GTBank Branches in Nigeria
-
Economy3 years agoSubsidy Removal: CNG at N130 Per Litre Cheaper Than Petrol—IPMAN
-
Banking3 years agoSort Codes of UBA Branches in Nigeria
-
Banking3 years agoFirst Bank Announces Planned Downtime
-
Sports3 years agoHighest Paid Nigerian Footballer – How Much Do Nigerian Footballers Earn