Feature/OPED
The Sochi Summit and the Pride of Africa
By Kester Kenn Klomegah
After nearly three decades of extremely low political, economic and cultural engagement, Russia is indeed returning to Africa. For obvious reasons, Russia’s relations with Africa turned extremely worse as some diplomatic representations were unexpectedly cut, all cultural centers closed, and many projects were suspended. Of course, relations with many foreign countries have faded into the background compared with the challenges the country had to deal with in order to preserve its statehood.
Understandably, Russia has had to struggle with its post-Soviet internal and external problems especially during the first decade, from 1991 till 2000, which has been described by policy experts as the “Lost Decade on Africa”.
Still the second decade, 2000 to 2010, saw the reawakening with decades among the Kremlin, Government officials and academic researchers debated consistently whether “Russia needs Africa or Africa needs Russia” while African leaders were already turned towards Asian and the Gulf regions especially China and often asked why wake up the “Sleeping Giant Bear”. China became the best development suitor in Africa.
During this period, Russia seems to have attained relative political and economic stability. “As we regained our statehood and control over the country, and the economy and the social sphere began to develop, Russian businesses began to look at promising projects abroad, and we began to return to Africa,” noted Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov early September when he addressed students and staff of Moscow State Institute for International Relations.
This process has been ongoing for the past 15 years. The return is now taking the form of resuming a very close political dialogue, which has always been at a strategic and friendly level, and now moving to a vigorous economic cooperation.
To reflect and consolidate these trends and in order to draw up plans for expanding consolidated partnerships with the African countries, President Putin initiated the Russia-Africa Summit last year during the BRICS summit in Johannesburg. The initiative was strongly supported. This October, it will be implemented under the co-chairmanship of the heads of Russia and Egypt, since this year Egypt is heading the African Union.
Further, from my research and monitoring, it is interesting to recall here that during the BRICS summit in Durban, on March 26-27, 2013, BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) discussed, among other topics, “BRICS and Africa: Partnership for Development, Integration and Industrialization.”
The BRICS membership gives an additional competitive advantage. Firstly, none of the members of this association is tainted with a colonial past on the African continent, and second, the BRICS member countries as a matter of principle do not interfere in the internal affairs of African countries. None of the BRICS member countries spread democracy in Africa by force or impose their values with the help of expeditionary corps and air strikes.
The U.S. and the European Union (EU) monopoly in African countries is steadily coming to an end, as new players have come to the African continent, namely the BRICS countries. Russia is now the new force. Russia’s renewed interest in Africa is due to a desire to restore its previous influence and to build allies as it experiences growing criticism by Western countries.
During my long years of research has shown me that Africa is a huge continent that still requires economic development. Its active demographic growth and abundance of natural resources are creating conditions for the emergence of probably the world’s biggest market in the next few decades.
Today, Africa moves towards raising its social, economic, scientific and technological development, and is playing a significant role in international affairs. African states are strengthening mutually beneficial integration processes within the African Union (AU) and other regional and sub regional organizations across the continent.
Furthermore, African leaders keep in mind other key questions such as rising unemployment, healthcare problems and poor infrastructure development. That is, they now focus on measures toward realizing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
So, in the contemporary period, Russia and Africa have to, both at a bilateral level and in various multilateral formats, take significant new steps forward in new joint projects in extractive industries, agriculture, healthcare, and education. Besides, there are aspects of the diplomacy that really need focus, for example cultural and social spheres as well as the use of soft power. Indeed, the forthcoming Russia-Africa summit in Sochi on October 23-24 should lay the necessary foundation for improving all these for a stronger partnership.
Quite recently, Foreign Affairs Minister Lavrov assertively acknowledged “Africa is one of our priorities. Our political ties in particular are developing dynamically. But economic cooperation is not as far advanced as our political ties. We believe that we should promote joint activity in order to make broader use of the huge potential of Russian-African trade and investment cooperation.”
Political dialogue: Russia has intensified promoting political dialogue, including the exchange of visits at the top levels. Interaction between foreign ministries is expanding. Last year, 12 African foreign ministers visited Russia. According to my calculation, Sergey Lavrov and his deputy Minister, Mikhail Bogdanov, have held talks with nearly 100 African politicians including ministers, deputies between January and September 2019. Bogdanov has interacted with all African ambassadors in Moscow.
Lavrov conducted bilateral dialogue with African countries at the UN in New York, between September 24 and 30, 2019. Lavrov held talks with Foreign Minister of Algeria Sabri Boukadoum, Foreign Minister of Morocco Nasser Bourita and Prime Minister of Sudan Abdallah Hamdouk among others.
During their conversation on the sidelines of the 74th Session of the UN General Assembly, all the sides discussed matters concerning the further expansion of multifaceted partnership, foreign policy collaboration in regional and international affairs.
With other questions such as the practice of democracy, Russia does support whatever regime is in power. While this makes its policy predictable, it does not encourage good governance and democratic practices in those countries that are severely challenged in these areas. Many other countries follow this practice and even countries like the United States, which often do speak out forcefully on behalf of good governance, are not always consistent.
Economic and investment cooperation: Africa truly is a continent of new opportunities and there is huge potential here for developing economic ties. Many see Africa’s growth primarily not because of aid, it is because of businesses and entrepreneurship, consistent efforts at creating wealth and employment. Africa in the 21st century does not need charity but wants to be an economic partner. African countries are not lacking the resources to boost the relationship, but the will power has always been put on hold or totally ignored.
Russia has shown strength in Africa in niche sectors such as nuclear power development, launching African satellites, and constructing energy and mining projects. It has been seeking to exploit conventional gas and oil fields in Africa; part of its long-term energy strategy is to use Russian companies to create new streams of energy supply. With regard to other economic areas, it may have to identify more sectors like this rather than compete head-to-head in a wide range of sectors with European Union countries, China, the United States, India, and others.
But U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration said recently that “Russia has bolstered its influence with increased military cooperation including donations of arms, with which it has gained access to markets and mineral extraction rights. With minimal investment, Russia leverages private military contracts, such as the Wagner Group, and in return receives political and economic influence beneficial to them.”
While Russians are aware of the equal competitive conditions in the continent, Africans on the other hand view Russia as another fairly large trading partner and, probably a stabilizing and balancing factor to other foreign players. In terms of stringency of strategic outlook and activeness on economic engagement, the country is seriously lagging behind China, U.S., EU, the Gulf States, India and Brazil.
Trade: Russian aid, trade, and investment in Africa, especially Sub-Saharan Africa, are modest. Russian exports to Africa have been growing modestly and reached $18.5 billion in 2017. Russian imports from Africa have been flat and totaled only $2.1 billion in 2017. This was well below Turkey’s trade with Africa in 2017.
Russian trade is heavily concentrated in North Africa, especially with Egypt. Noticeably, Russia’s relationship with North Africa is more significant. Nevertheless, Russia apparently wants to maximize the business relationship rather than the aid relationship. The problem is that Africa has little that Russia wants to buy.
It is, however, necessary to raise trade and economic ties to a high level of political cooperation. Russia and Africa have to show not only an exceptional commitment to long-term cooperation but also readiness for large-scale investments in the African markets taking into account possible risks and high competition.
Equally important are African businesspeople who are looking to work on the Russian market. Definitely, time is needed to solve all these issues including identifying and removing obstacles to mutual bilateral trade and investment.
Weapons and arms diplomacy: After the collapse of the Soviet era, Africa owed US$20 billion, later written off. This debt was due to weapon and arms delivery to Soviet allies including Ethiopia, Angola, Zimbabwe, Mozambique and a few other African countries. Now, Russia is the largest seller of arms to Africa and is willing to sell to any country. This gives it a certain advantage as many Western countries prohibit arms sales to a few countries.
More recently, Russia has made significant arms deals with Angola and Algeria. Egypt, Tanzania, Somalia, Mali, Sudan and Libya have also bought arms from Russia. The Russians also provide military training and support.
In Africa, Russia seeks to guarantee security. In the classical sense, security guarantees imply something different. Russia has very warm, historically developed relations since their decolonization. This forms the theme for the Sochi summit: “For Peace, Security, and Development” which organizers explained would serve as the foundation of the final joint declaration.
Soft power interplay: Experts and members of the Valdai Discussion Club noted that soft power has never been a strong side of Russian policy in the post-Soviet era. Federation Council and State Duma, both houses of legislators, enacted a law that banned foreign NGOs from operating in the Russian Federation. As a result, African NGOs that could promote people-to-people diplomacy and support cultural initiatives as well to push for good image, is non-existent.
On education and culture. Simply cultural cooperation could be described as catastrophic. With education, Russia now offers a few state scholarships. Official figures from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs pegged it at 15,000 students, only one-third of this receives Russian grants. The remaining two-thirds are fee-paying clients. The Ministry of Higher Education told me last month during interview discussions that there are nearly 21,000 African students while some in the far regions are still undocumented. This also means that African elite and the middle class pay approximately US$75 million annually to Russian educational institutions. Average tuition is US$5,000 per year.
Over the years, one of the key challenges and problems facing Russian companies and investors has been insufficient knowledge of the economic potential, on the part of Russian entrepreneurs, the needs and business opportunities of the African region. Africa needs broader coverage in Russian media. Leading Russian media agencies should release more topical news items and quality analytical articles about the continent in order to adequately collaborate with African partners and attract Russian business to Africa. The media can, and indeed must be a decisive factor in building effective ties.
After several years of consistently constructive criticisms, Russian authorities have ignored media cooperation. Russia could use its media resources available to support its foreign policy, promote its positive image, disseminate useful information about its current achievements and emerging economic opportunities especially for the African public.
Russian media resources here, which are largely not prominent in Africa, include Rossiya Sevogdnya (RIA Novosti, Voice of Russia, Sputnik News and Russia Today), Itar-Tass News Agency and Interfax Information Service. Besides, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs could use its accreditation opportunities to allow African media to work in Russia. While the Foreign Ministry has accredited foreign media from Latin America, the United States, Europe and Asian countries, none came from sub-Saharan Africa. Instead of prioritizing media cooperation with Africa, high-ranking Russian officials most often talk about the spread of anti-Russian propaganda by western and European media in Africa.
Professor Vladimir Shubin, Deputy Director of the Institute for African Studies under the Russian Academy of Sciences, reiterated: “Russia is not doing enough to communicate to the broad public, particularly in Africa, true information about its domestic and foreign policies as well as the accomplishments about Russian culture, the economy, science and technology in order to form a positive perception of Russia abroad and a friendly attitude towards it as stated by the new Concept of the Foreign Policy.”
Russia-Africa Summit: Russia holds its first summit in October. Through this, Russia and Africa aim jointly at advancing relations to a fundamentally new level and a wider dimension. Of course, Africa is not fully satisfied with Russia due to its “diplomatic niceties” and largely unfulfilled pledges and promises. Russia already has a plethora of post-Soviet bilateral agreements that it is now implementing, with some degree of limitations, in various African countries. It’s clear that Russia might not make any public financial commitment as many foreign countries have done over the years. But Russia needs to demonstrate that it has a plan to engage Africa in a significantly greater way than it has in recent years.
According to my investigations, Russia would sign 23 new bilateral agreements with a number of African countries and issue a joint declaration that would lay down a comprehensive strategic roadmap for future Russia-African relations.
Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, while addressing the Russia-Africa Economic forum in July also added his voice for strengthening cooperation in all fronts. “We must take advantage of all things without fail. It is also important that we implement as many projects as possible, that encompass new venues and, of course, new countries,” he said.
Medvedev stressed: “It is important to have a sincere desire. Russia and African countries now have this sincere desire. We simply need to know each other better and be more open to one another. I am sure all of us will succeed if we work this way. Even if some things seem impossible, this situation persists only until it has been accomplished. It was Nelson Mandela who made this absolutely true statement.”
In July, President Vladimir Putin took part on third day of the International Parliamentarian Forum that also brought African legislators, emphasized that “the modern world needs an open and free exchange of views, confidence building and search for mutual understanding”.
Indeed, judging from the above discussions about the changing geopolitical relations, after the first Russia-Africa Summit, there has to be a well-functioning system and mutual willingness in the spirit of reciprocity to achieve a more practical and comprehensive results from the new relations between Russia and Africa.
Kester Kenn Klomegah is an independent researcher and policy consultant on African affairs and Brics. He is the author of the Geopolitical Handbook titled “Putin’s African Dream and The New Dawn: Challenges and Emerging Opportunities” devoted to the first Russia-Africa Summit 2019.
By Fola Baderin
By 2030, more than 25 billion devices are expected to be connected worldwide, each one a potential gateway for both innovation and risk. Already, 87% of companies identify AI as a top business priority, and over 76% are actively using AI in their operations. These numbers reflect a profound shift: technology is no longer a backstage support act but a strategic force shaping economies, societies, and everyday life.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the Internet of Things (IoT) sit at the heart of this transformation. Together, they are redefining how decisions are made, how risks are managed, and how value is created across industries. From hospitals monitoring patients in real time to banks using predictive analytics to stop fraud before it happens, AI and IoT are moving from abstract concepts to everyday business tools.
Yet this expansion comes with complexity. As organisations embrace cloud platforms, remote work, and IoT‑enabled systems, their digital footprints grow larger, and so do the threats. Cybersecurity has become a frontline issue, no longer a technical afterthought but a pillar of resilience and trust.
The role of IT has changed dramatically. Once focused on maintenance and uptime, IT teams now sit at the centre of strategy and risk management. Cloud‑first architectures and interconnected networks have introduced new vulnerabilities, forcing IT leaders to act not just as problem‑solvers but as proactive partners in innovation.
AI is proving indispensable in this new environment. It can analyse vast datasets, detect anomalies, and automate responses at machine speed, capabilities that traditional approaches simply cannot match. Combined with IoT, AI delivers real‑time visibility across connected devices, enabling predictive maintenance, intelligent monitoring, and faster decision‑making. These are not abstract benefits; they are the difference between preventing a cyberattack in seconds or suffering a costly breach.
But the story is not only about opportunity. The rapid adoption of AI and IoT raises pressing questions about ethics, privacy, and governance. Automated decision‑making must be transparent, accountable, and fair. Organisations also face a widening skills gap, as demand for professionals who can responsibly manage advanced technologies outpaces supply.
Striking the right balance between innovation and control is essential. Security‑by‑design principles, strong governance frameworks, and continuous risk assessment are no longer optional extras. They are the foundation for trust in a digital economy.
Looking ahead, IT will continue to evolve as AI and IoT become embedded in everyday operations. Success depends not only on adopting advanced technologies, but on aligning them with business goals, regulations, and culture.
For Nigeria, this transformation is both a challenge and an opportunity. With its vibrant fintech sector, growing digital economy, and youthful workforce, the country is well‑placed to harness AI and IoT for growth. Lagos alone hosts hundreds of startups experimenting with AI‑driven financial services, while smart city initiatives in Abuja and other urban centres are exploring IoT for traffic management, energy efficiency, and public safety.
At the same time, Nigeria faces unique vulnerabilities. The country has one of the fastest‑growing internet populations in Africa, but also one of the most targeted by cybercriminals. Reports suggest that Africa loses over $4 billion annually to cybercrime, with Nigeria accounting for a significant share. As more devices and systems come online, the stakes will only rise.
Government policy will play a decisive role. Nigeria’s National Digital Economy Policy and Strategy (2020–2030) already highlights AI and IoT as critical enablers of growth. But translating policy into practice requires investment in infrastructure, stronger regulatory frameworks, and public‑private collaboration. Without these, the promise of AI and IoT could be undermined by weak security and poor governance.
Education and skills development are equally vital. Nigeria’s youthful population which is over 60% under the age of 25 represents a massive opportunity if properly trained. Universities and technical institutes must integrate AI, cybersecurity, and IoT into their curricula, while businesses should invest in continuous upskilling. Otherwise, the skills gap will widen, leaving organisations vulnerable and innovation stunted.
Ethics and trust must also remain central. Nigerians are increasingly aware of data privacy concerns, from mobile banking to health records. Embedding transparency and accountability into AI systems will be critical for public acceptance. Leaders must ensure that innovation does not come at the cost of fairness or human rights.
Real‑world examples already show the potential. Nigerian hospitals are beginning to explore AI‑enabled diagnostic tools, while logistics companies use IoT to track deliveries in real time. These innovations demonstrate how technology can improve lives and strengthen businesses, but they also highlight the need for robust safeguards.
Ultimately, Nigeria’s digital future will be shaped not only by technology but by leadership. IT leaders, policymakers, and entrepreneurs who embrace AI and IoT responsibly with a clear focus on security, ethics, and long‑term value creation. This will be best positioned to navigate an increasingly complex threat landscape. The question is no longer whether to adopt these technologies, but how to do so in a way that builds resilience, trust, and sustainable growth for Nigeria’s digital economy.
Fola Baderin is a cybersecurity consultant and AI advocate focused on shaping Nigeria’s digital future
By Blaise Udunze
When the federal government approved the write-off of about $1.42 billion and N5.57 trillion in legacy debts owed by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC Ltd) to the Federation Account, it was rightly described as a landmark decision. After years of disputes, reconciliations, and contested figures, Nigeria’s most important revenue institution was, at least on paper, given a cleaner slate.
The approval, contained in a report prepared by the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC) and presented at the last year November meeting of the Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC), effectively wiped out 96 percent of NNPC’s dollar-denominated obligations and 88 percent of its naira liabilities accumulated up to December 31, 2024. It resolved long-standing balances arising from crude oil liftings, joint venture royalties, production-sharing contracts, and related arrangements.
Judging it critically, the decision carries both promise and peril, but can be viewed from the perspective of a country desperate to restore confidence in public finance management. It offers an opportunity to reset relationships, clean up accounting records, and move forward under the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA). Yet, it also exposes deep structural weaknesses in Nigeria’s oil revenue governance, weaknesses that, if left unaddressed, could turn today’s debt relief into tomorrow’s fiscal regret.
Context matters. The debt write-off comes not during a period of revenue abundance, but at a time when Nigeria’s upstream revenue performance is under severe strain. According to the same NUPRC document, the commission missed its approved monthly revenue target for November 2025 by N544.76 billion, collecting only N660.04 billion against a projected N1.204 trillion.
Royalty receipts, the backbone of upstream revenue, tell an even starker story. It is alarming that against an approved monthly royalty projection of N1.144 trillion, only N605.26 billion was collected, leaving a shortfall of N538.92 billion. Cumulatively, by the end of November 2025, the revenue gap stood at N5.65 trillion, with royalty collections alone falling short by N5.63 trillion. These figures underscore how fragile Nigeria’s fiscal position remains, even as trillions of naira in historical obligations are being written off.
To be fair, the debts forgiven were not incurred overnight. They are the product of years of disputed remittances, lacking transparent accounting practices, and overlapping institutional roles, particularly under the pre-PIA regime. As petroleum economist Prof. Wumi Iledare has repeatedly observed, the former Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation combined regulatory, commercial, and operational functions, making revenue reconciliation cumbersome and frequently contested.
That legacy continues to haunt the system, as witnessed with the ongoing dispute between NNPC Ltd and Periscope Consulting, the audit firm engaged by the Nigeria Governors’ Forum, over an alleged $42.37 billion under-remittance between 2011 and 2017, which illustrates how unresolved the past remains. Though NNPC insists all revenues were properly accounted for as claimed, Periscope maintains that significant gaps persist, forcing FAAC to mandate yet another reconciliation exercise. This recurring pattern of audits, counterclaims, and stalemates has weakened trust in the federation revenue system and eroded confidence among states that depend on oil proceeds for survival.
Crucially, the debt write-off does not mean NNPC has turned a corner financially. Statutory obligations incurred between January and October 2025 remain on the books, amounting to about $56.8 million and N1.02 trillion. Although part of the dollar component was recovered during the period under review, the accumulation of new liabilities so soon after reconciliation raises uncomfortable questions about whether old habits are being replaced with genuine fiscal discipline.
More troubling still is what NNPC’s own audited financial statements reveal about its internal financial health. Despite recording a profit after tax of N5.4 trillion on revenues of N45.1 trillion in 2024, the company’s inter-company debts ballooned to N30.3 trillion, representing a 70 per cent increase within a single year. This is not debt owed to external creditors but largely obligations between NNPC and its subsidiaries, effectively the company owing itself.
Records show that of 32 subsidiaries, only eight are debt-free, and the rest, particularly the refineries, trading arms, and gas infrastructure units, remain heavily indebted to the parent company. There was a recurring cycle where profitable units subsidise chronically underperforming ones, and accountability steadily erodes because cash that should fund maintenance, expansion, and efficiency improvements is instead trapped in internal receivables.
The refineries offer a stark illustration whereby the Port Harcourt Refining Company alone owed N4.22 trillion in 2024, more than double its 2023 figure, while Kaduna and Warri refineries followed closely, with debts of N2.39 trillion and N2.06 trillion respectively. Despite the repeated failed turnaround maintenance with many years of rehabilitation spending, none have operated sustainably at commercially viable levels. Their continued dependence on financial support from the parent company highlights the cost of postponing difficult restructuring decisions.
And, for this reason, international observers have long warned about these structural weaknesses. One of the critics, the World Bank, has repeatedly flagged NNPC as a major source of revenue leakages. It further noted that the persistent gaps between reported earnings and actual remittances to the Federation Account. Even after the removal of petrol subsidies, the bank observed that NNPC remitted only about 50 per cent of the revenue gains, using the rest to offset past arrears. Such practices, while perhaps defensible in internal cash management terms, undermine fiscal transparency and weaken Nigeria’s macroeconomic credibility.
This is why the central issue is not the debt write-off itself, but what follows it because debt forgiveness is not reform. Without firm safeguards, it risks entrenching the very behaviours that created the problem in the first place. As Prof. Omowumi Iledare has warned, the scale and pace of the inter-company debt build-up represent a governance test rather than a mere accounting anomaly. Allowing subsidiaries to operate indefinitely without settling obligations is incompatible with the idea of a commercially driven national oil company.
The fact remains that if NNPC wants to function as a true commercial holding company under the PIA, it must enforce strict settlement timelines, restructure or divest non-viable subsidiaries, while clearly separating legacy debts from new obligations. With this, it holds subsidiary leadership accountable for cash flow and profitability. Independent, real-time audits and transparent reporting must become routine features of governance, not emergency responses triggered by controversy.
There is also a broader national implication. At a time when Nigerians are being asked to accept higher taxes, reduced subsidies, and fiscal tightening, large-scale debt write-offs without visible accountability risk undermining the legitimacy of the entire revenue system. Citizens cannot be expected to bear heavier burdens while systemic inefficiencies in the country’s most strategic sector persist.
Of a truth, the cancellation of NNPC’s legacy debts could mark a turning point in Nigeria’s fiscal governance, but only if it is not treated as its conclusion but the beginning of reform.
If discipline, transparency, and commercial accountability follow, the decision may yet help reposition NNPC as a profitable, credible, and PIA-compliant institution. If not, today’s clean slate will simply defer the reckoning until the next reconciliation, the next audit dispute, and the next fiscal crisis.
Blaise, a journalist and PR professional, writes from Lagos and can be reached via: [email protected]
By Dr Austin Orette
The grandiosity of Nigerians when they discuss events and situations can be very funny. If the leaders use this kind of creativity in proffering solutions, we may be able to solve some of the problems that plague Nigeria perennially.
There seems to be a sublime affectation for new lingos when the system is being set to punish Nigerians. It is a kind of Orwellian speak.
Recently, there was no electricity throughout the country. The usual culprit and government spoke; people came out to tell us the power failure was due to the collapse of the National grid. Does it really matter what is collapsing? This is just an attempt by some government bureaucrats to sound intelligent.
Intelligence is becoming a borrowed commodity from the IMF or World Bank. What does it mean when you tell Nigerians that the national grid collapsed? Is that supposed to be a reassurance, or it is said to give the assurance that they know something about the anemic electricity, and we should get used to the darkness. This is a language that is vague and beckons the consumer to stop complaining. Does that statement mean anything to Nigerians who pay bills and don’t see the electricity they paid for? If they see it, it comes with an irregular voltage that destroys their newly purchased appliances. Just tell or stay quiet like in the past.
Telling us that a grid collapse is a lie. We have no national grid. Do these people know how silly their language sounds? Nigeria produces less than 10,000 megawatts of electricity for a population of 200 million people. How do you permutate this to give constant electricity to 200 million people? It is an insult to call this low output a national grid. What is so national about using a generator to supply electricity to 200 million people? It is simple mathematics. If you calculate this to the minute, it should not surprise you that every Nigerian will receive electricity for the duration of the blink of an eye. They are paying for total darkness, and someone is telling them they have an electricity grid.
If you can call the 10,000-megawatt national grid collapsed, it means you don’t have the mind set to solve the electricity problem in Nigeria.
To put it in perspective is to understand the basic fact that the electrical output of Nigeria is pre-industrial. Without acknowledging this fact, we will never find solutions as every mediocre will come and confuse Nigeria with lingos that make them sound important.
It is very shameful for those in the know to always use grandiose language to obfuscate the real issues.
South Africa with a population of sixty million produces about 200,000 megawatts of electricity daily. Nigeria produces less than 10,000 megawatts. Why South Africa makes it easy to lift the poor from poverty, Nigeria is trying to tax the poor into poverty.
The architects of the new tax plan saw the poor as rich because they could afford a generator.
A non-existent subsidy was removed, and the price of fuel went through the roof. Now the government says they are rich. What will they get in return for this tax extraction? Why do successive Nigerian governments always think the best way to develop Nigeria is to slap the poor into poverty? What are the avenues for upward mobility when youth corps members are suddenly seen as rich taxpayers? Do these people know how difficult it is to start a business in Nigeria?
After all the rigmarole from Abuja to my village, I cannot get a government certificate without a-shake down from government bureaucrats and area boys. The government that is so unfriendly to business wants to tax my non-existing businesses. Are these people in their right state of mind? Why do they think that taxing the poor is their best revenue plan? A plan like this can only come from a group of people who have no inkling of what Nigerians are going through. People can’t eat and the government is asking them to share their meager rations with potbellied people in Abuja.
Teach the people how to fish, then you can share in their harvest. If an individual does what the government is doing to Nigerians, it will be called robbery, and the individual will be in prison. When the government taxes people, there is a reciprocal exchange. What is being done in Nigeria does not represent fair exchange.
Nigerians have never gotten anything good from their government except individual wealth that is doled out in Abuja for the selected few.
The question is, will Nigerians have a good electricity supply? NO. Will they have security of persons and properties? No. Will they have improved health care? NO. Will there be good roads? No. Will they have good schools and good education? No.
Taxation is not good governance. A policy like this should never be rushed without adequate studies. Once again, our legislators have let us down. They have never shown the people the reason they were elected and to be re-elected. They are not playing their roles as the watchdog and representatives of the people. Anyone who voted for this tax bill deserves to lose their positions as Senators and Members of the House of Representatives.
We are not in a military regime anymore. Nigerians must start learning how to exercise their franchise. This taxation issue must be litigated at the ballot box. The members of the National Assembly have shown by their assent that they don’t represent the people.
In a normal democracy, taxation without representation should never be tolerated. They must be voted out of office. We have a responsibility and duty to use our voting power to fight unjust laws. Taxation without representation is unjust. Those voted into power will never respect the citizens until the citizens learn to punish errant politicians by voting them out of office. This responsibility is sacred and must be exercised with diligence.
Dr Austin Orette writes from Houston, Texas
-
Feature/OPED6 years agoDavos was Different this year
-
Travel/Tourism9 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 agoFirst Bank Announces Planned Downtime
-
Banking3 years agoSort Codes of UBA Branches in Nigeria
-
Sports3 years agoHighest Paid Nigerian Footballer – How Much Do Nigerian Footballers Earn