General
Nigerian Investors Accuse Top MLM Leaders of Abetting Omegapro Fraud
By Modupe Gbadeyanka
Some top multi-level marketing (MLM) leaders have been accused of supporting a Dubai-based company, Omegapro Forex and Investment Trading Company, to defraud Nigerians.
A statement signed by Dr Ope Banwo, the Coordinating Attorney of Omegapro Action Nigeria Class (OANC), a group formed by affected investors, identified Tomiwa Orunnipin, Samuel Ajibare, Leo Bonaventure and others as those who abetted the foreign firm to dupe its Nigerian victims of over N100 billion.
It was gathered that those affected include widows, retirees, high-net-worth individuals, big business people, and even young people just starting in life.
How The Fraud Was Hatched
Omegapro Forex emerged on the scene, promising Nigerians and investors in general a pathway to financial success.
The investment scheme gained popularity and trust among Nigerians and in the world, as many saw it as a ticket to financial freedom. However, little did they know that it was going to be one of the biggest investment tragedies in Nigeria’s history.
With an intricate web of deception and manipulation, alleged promoters of the scheme, including Daniel Onoja, Tomiwa Orunnipin, Samuel Ajibare, Leo Bonaventure, and several top leader MLM Diamonds, painted the image of a foolproof investment opportunity with high returns and a secure investment environment.
Alleged promoters and agents such as Grace Udenwa Udoye, Wuraola Fadairo Orunupin, Olasebikan Oladapo, Maryann Ilorah, Chinwe Ikpe, Ajibare Olushola Ebunoluwa, Dotun Fatoyinbo, Dr Afoma Nwolisa, and Matthew Ogunmodede, marketed the venture aggressively, touting its legitimacy and potential for lucrative earnings.
At that rate of marketing, investors couldn’t help but take the bait, especially as top agents and promoters in the MLM industry who carried significant influence within their networks also participated in the marketing exercise for Omegapro.
They leveraged their status, persuading thousands of investors to entrust their hard-earned money with Omegapro. Their endorsements created an illusion of credibility that typically lured in unsuspecting Nigerians.
Aside from this, they kept assuring Nigerian investors that rigorous due diligence had been conducted by them on Omegapro’s Dubai-based owners and operations, implying that it was a legitimate and low-risk investment.
This way, investors put in their entire life savings, and pensions, while some even sold their houses and properties to invest in the Omegapro ‘Forex’ trading activities.
For their services, these top promoters allegedly collected a 10 per cent commission from the Omegapro Dubai company as a finders fee from the investment of every unsuspecting investor they referred to the scheme by selling it as a forex trading company.
At the height of what has now been declared a mega scam by investors, several of these top agents and promoters like Daniel Onoja, Tomiwa Orunnipin and Bonaventure Igboanugo allegedly earned over $50,000 weekly as finders’ fee commissions from 1000s of unsuspecting Nigerians whom they kept leading to believe that Omegapro was a legit Forex Trading Company. Cumulatively, they allegedly earned over $2 million each in just a couple of years.
The Dubai company allegedly owned by known Dubai-based scammers such as Andreas Szackas, Dilawar Singh, and Mike Simms with a long history of scamming people went as far as giving the investors a back office that showed that forex trading was going on in the company. These alleged forex trading activities have since been exposed by the USA CFTC as an elaborate scam to lure in people interested in forex trading on a global level.
According to Barrister Banwo, top promoters and agents of the biggest global forex scams in history allegedly used the illegal commissions and proceeds from this Omegapro Ponzi scheme to buy huge mansions in choice places in Nigeria, Canada, the USA, and the United Kingdom leaving investors in pain.
“Daniel Onoja recently celebrated the purchase of a multi-million-dollar house in Canada, while Leo Bonaventure, recently posted videos of the housewarming of his own amazing multi-billion naira estate in Lagos. On his part, Leo Bonaventure recently obtained a micro-banking license,” Banwo said.
While the promoters of the alleged scam smiled at the bank, investors have been crying having realised that the alleged due diligence said to have been conducted was non-existent, and their funds gone.
Interestingly, an investigation has now shown that experts in forex trading had for the past three years been sounding the alarm bells that Omegapro was a scam and a Ponzi scheme.
These experts wrote articles and posted videos about Omegapro, however, these Nigerian top agents and promoters pretended they did not see any of these warning signs as they continued to promote Omegapro as a foolproof investment.
Climax Of The Scam
The pains of Omegapro’s investors began in September 2022, when Omegapro Dubai leaders, their collaborators all over the world, and Nigeria suddenly announced that its system had been hacked, and it stopped releasing payments of matured investments to investors all over the world. A few weeks later, the Dubai owners announced that they were migrating all their investors’ accounts to a new company called Brokers Domain until they could fix the breach in their system. Investors all over the world started getting nervous with some asking tough questions.
Then around April 2022, while over $1 billion of investors’ money in over 70 countries remained frozen, the owners and their top agents and collaborators announced the formation of a new company called Go Global and began aggressively recruiting Omegapro investors to invest in the new company with promises that their investments in Omegapro would soon be released.
Many investors fell for this and started promoting the new Go Global company, while others started seeing the handwriting on the wall.
Finally, in August 2023, the Omegapro owners based in Dubai, and their top promoters and agents announced that they would not be able to pay anyone’s Omegapro investment because the United States CFTC had frozen their accounts over some investigations affecting one of their partners named Mike Simms. However, they could not explain how Omegapro money could have been seized in the USA when they had earlier confirmed that the company does not have any office in the USA and did not have any license to operate direct or financial transactions in the USA.
As suspicions grew, with many investors asking for more details of this shocking announcement, Omegapro leaders abruptly closed its doors, and many of their top Nigerian agents and promoters also went underground, leaving thousands of investors all over the world, including over 250,000 Nigerian investors in despair.
The company’s Dubai-based owners, Dilawar, Singh, and Paulo, and other top agents allegedly made millions of dollars in investments from over 70 countries all over the world, including an estimated N200 billion coming from Nigerian investors.
Amidst reports of a petition to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Interpol, and a pending class action lawsuit by affected Nigerian investors in the name of Omegapro Action Nigeria, one is forced to X-ray the involvement of these agents and promoters all over the world, especially those of Omegapro agents in Nigeria who aided and abetted the Dubai company to scam their citizens.
Questions such as were they complicit in the scheme, did they knowingly promote a fraudulent venture, or were they also victims of deception, were they willing accomplices, unwitting victims, should they be made to refund the billions of Naira they received in commissions for luring unsuspecting members of the public into parting with their hard-earned money into this global scam have been asked.
Typically, some maintain that the promoters are guilty of not doing their due diligence while promoting Omegapro thus leading to the loss of thousands of Dollars.
For this sect, the ruling is simple, a refund, at the minimum, the commissions earned from the illegal forex trading scheme is a must.
General
2027: SERAP Urges Tinubu, Atiku, Obi, Others to Declare Assets, Liabilities
By Adedapo Adesanya
The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has urged all 19 presidential candidates announced by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to publish details of their assets and liabilities ahead of the 2027 elections.
The group also urged the candidates’ spouses, and where applicable, their unmarried children under 18, to do the same.
It further advised the candidates to disclose the legitimate sources of their significant assets and publicly reject vote-buying and electoral bribery before and during the election.
The organisation called on the candidates to instruct their parties, campaign organisations, agents and supporters not to offer or distribute money, gifts or other material inducements in exchange for votes.
The presidential candidates are President Bola Tinubu (APC), Mr Atiku Abubakar (ADC), Mr Peter Obi (NDC), Senator Sandy Onor (PDP), Mr Omoyele Sowore (AAC), Mr Donald Duke (PRP), Mrs Okwori Ada Elizabeth Frederick (NDP), Mr Chukwu Anita Zugwai (YPP), Mr Rufai Adekunle Omoaje (AA), and Mr Adenuga Sunday (Boot Party).
Others are Mr Memeh Samuel (DLA), Mr Nwanyanwu Daniel Danerechukwu (ZLP), Mr Okereke Sunday Chibuzor (LP), Mr Okereke Iken Esther (NRM), Mr Abbas-Bin Aliyu (ADP), Mr Dikwa Suleiman Mohammed (NNPP), Mr Adebayo Adewole Ebenezer (SDP), Mr Seyi Makinde (APM), and Mr Yusuf Kabiru (APP).
In an open letter to the candidates dated August 8, 2026, and signed by SERAP Deputy Director Kolawole Oluwadare, the organisation urged them to “go beyond the bare legal minimum and voluntarily embrace higher standards of transparency, accountability and integrity in seeking Nigeria’s highest elected office.”
SERAP said candidates seeking Nigerians’ mandate to exercise constitutional powers over public finances, natural resources, appointments and security institutions should be willing to subject their personal financial affairs to reasonable public scrutiny before asking for votes.
“Nigerians should not be asked to choose between candidates on the basis of who can spend the most money. They should be able to choose on the basis of policies, competence, integrity, character and their vision for Nigeria,” the organisation said.
SERAP said voluntary pre-election disclosure would enable voters to assess potential conflicts of interest and significant sources of wealth, strengthen public confidence in the electoral process and provide a baseline against which future changes in assets could be assessed if a candidate is elected.
“The 2027 presidential election presents an opportunity for political leaders to show that public office is a public trust. Candidates who voluntarily disclose their assets and reject vote-buying can show that they are prepared to uphold the transparency and accountability they promise to deliver if elected,” it said.
The organisation also cited constitutional and international provisions in support of its call, noting that although the 1999 Constitution, as amended, does not expressly require presidential candidates to publish their asset declarations before an election, it embodies principles of transparency, accountability, integrity in public office and meaningful participation in government.
SERAP noted that the Constitution already requires elected public officers, including the President, to declare their assets and liabilities.
It cited Paragraph 11 of Part I of the Fifth Schedule, which requires public officers to submit declarations of their properties, assets and liabilities, including those of unmarried children under 18, as well as Section 140(1), which requires a person elected President to make the prescribed declaration before assuming the functions of office.
On vote-buying, the organisation said the persistent use of money, gifts and other inducements to influence voters was a major threat to electoral integrity.
“We are also concerned about the persistent use of money, gifts and other inducements to influence voters. Vote-buying directly undermines the constitutional principle that sovereignty belongs to the people,” it said.
SERAP cited Section 14(2)(a) of the Constitution, which provides that sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria, as well as Section 125 of the Electoral Act 2026, which it said criminalises bribery and related conduct intended to procure the return of a person to elective office or the vote of an elector.
It added that vote-buying was particularly harmful amid poverty and economic hardship because it exploits economic vulnerability and risks turning a constitutional political right into a financial transaction.
It, therefore, urged the 19 presidential candidates to publish their assets and liabilities before the election, including relevant assets and liabilities of their spouses and unmarried children under 18, and disclose the legitimate sources of significant assets, including business interests, investments, real property, substantial gifts and inheritance, while protecting legitimate personal security and privacy.
The organisation also asked the candidates to commit to updating their public declarations if elected and explaining material increases in wealth; publicly reject vote-buying and electoral bribery; instruct their campaign organisations and political associates not to distribute money, gifts, food, transportation benefits or other material inducements in exchange for votes; report credible allegations of vote-buying involving their campaign organisations to the appropriate authorities; and sign and publish a public integrity pledge committing themselves, their parties and campaign organisations to peaceful, transparent, accountable and corruption-free elections.
“The choice before Nigerians in 2027 should be a choice based on ideas, policies, competence and integrity—not on who can spend the most money or conceal the most wealth,” it said.
General
REA is an Institution for Expanding Opportunity—Tegbe
**Tasks Board to Prioritise Improving Livelihoods of Nigerians
By Modupe Gbadeyanka
The newly inaugurated board of the Rural Electrification Agency (REA) has been advised to prioritise the well-being and economic progress of ordinary Nigerians in every decision it makes.
This charge was given by the Minister of Power, Mr Joseph Tegbe, when he inaugurated the board, which has the former Governor of Ekiti State, Mr Ayodele Fayose, as chairman, and Mr Abba Aliyu as its chief executive.
Mr Tegbe described the board’s constitution as consistent with President Bola Tinubu’s drive to strengthen governance and accountability across public institutions.
He further described the agency as an institution for expanding opportunity, noting that every mini-grid, solar home system and electrified market, school, health centre or farm represents an investment in human capital and economic inclusion.
He pointed to REA’s existing programmes, the Energising Education, Economies and Agriculture Programmes and the Africa Mini-Grids Programme, as evidence of that strategy at work, and noted that the Board, constituted under Section 130 of the Electricity Act, takes office at a defining moment for the organisation.
On governance, the Minister drew a clear line between the board’s non-executive role of strategic direction and oversight and management’s responsibility for day-to-day execution.
He noted that the board meets quarterly to review performance while management retains operational latitude between meetings, subject to full accountability.
Mr Tegbe commended Mr Fayose’s record as a former Governor of Ekiti State, assuring of the Ministry’s continued partnership and a description of electricity as an instrument of inclusion, opportunity and prosperity.
In his remarks, the board chairman described President Tinubu’s decision to appoint Mr Tegbe as a statement of seriousness rather than a routine appointment, a signal that the administration would settle for nothing less than a lasting solution to Nigeria’s power problem.
He called the Minister a technocrat whose technical depth and managerial competence have already produced a positive turning point for the sector, affirming that REA’s leadership was proud to work with him on that effort.
General
How Airports Can Reduce Ground Emissions Before Full Infrastructure Upgrades
Airport sustainability is no longer a separate environmental project. It is becoming part of daily operational planning, procurement, infrastructure development, and airline partnership discussions. For many airports, the main pressure is to reduce emissions on the ground, improve airside efficiency, and prepare for stricter environmental expectations, while continuing to support aircraft reliably every day.
The challenge is that infrastructure does not change overnight.
Full electrification remains an important direction for aviation ground operations. Fixed 400 Hz power, electric ground support equipment, charging infrastructure, energy management systems, and cleaner stand concepts are all part of the future airport. But in practical terms, many airports are still working through phased investment plans. Grid capacity may be limited. Charging points may not yet cover all operational areas. Remote stands, maintenance zones, cargo aprons, and temporary operating areas may still depend on mobile equipment.
This is where the sustainability conversation needs to become more realistic.
Airports do not have to wait for a complete infrastructure transformation before reducing emissions. There are practical steps that can be taken now, especially in aircraft ground power. The key is to look at emissions reduction as a staged process, not a single final destination.
One of the first areas to assess is the age and efficiency of existing diesel ground power units. In many operations, older GPUs continue to provide essential support because they are mobile, familiar, and independent from fixed power systems. But older diesel platforms may no longer fit the expectations of modern airport sustainability strategies. They can become harder to justify in procurement discussions, environmental reporting, and long-term fleet planning.
Replacing outdated diesel equipment with lower-emission alternatives can be a meaningful step. A modern diesel GPU with Stage V / Tier 4 Final engine technology, for example, can help operators reduce the environmental impact of ground power while keeping the operational independence that many stands and service areas still require. This does not replace the need for electrification. It helps bridge the gap while infrastructure continues to develop.
That bridge matters because airside operations are rarely uniform.
A major hub may have fixed power at many contact stands, but still rely on mobile GPUs for remote aircraft positions, maintenance activities, irregular operations, or construction phases. A regional airport may not yet have the capital or grid capacity for large-scale electrification. An MRO facility may need mobile power that can move between aircraft, hangars, and outdoor working areas. A ground handler may need equipment that supports mixed aircraft types under high turnaround pressure.
For these environments, sustainability must work in real conditions. A solution that looks good in a strategy document but does not support the daily operating model will not last.
Decision-makers should therefore evaluate aircraft ground power through several practical questions. Where is fixed power available today? Where is it planned next? Which stands still require mobile equipment? How many hours do diesel GPUs operate per day? Which aircraft types are supported? Are units oversized, outdated, or difficult to position? Is the equipment aligned with current emissions standards? Can it support cleaner operation where grid power is available?
These questions often reveal that the best path is not a single equipment choice, but a balanced fleet strategy.
Fixed power should be used where infrastructure is mature and operationally reliable. Battery-powered equipment can be introduced where duty cycles, charging plans, and climate conditions are suitable. Lower-emission diesel and plug-in hybrid ground power units can support areas where independence, runtime, and flexibility remain critical. Together, these solutions allow airports to reduce emissions without weakening operational resilience.
Plug-in hybrid utility power functionality is especially relevant in this transition phase. When external utility power is available, the unit can operate with reduced fuel use. When it is not available, the same equipment can continue supporting aircraft independently. This gives airports and operators more flexibility as infrastructure develops stand by stand, rather than forcing a complete change before the airside environment is ready.
Compact design also plays a role in sustainable operations. Airports often focus on emissions, but space efficiency is part of the same discussion. Crowded aprons create movement challenges, increase operational friction, and affect safety. A compact mobile GPU that provides the required output without adding unnecessary equipment bulk can support cleaner, more organized, and more efficient aircraft servicing.
This is why modern ground power procurement should not be based only on output figures. Power rating matters, but so do emissions performance, footprint, maneuverability, serviceability, spare parts strategy, operating environment, and fit with future infrastructure plans. Airports need equipment that can serve today’s operation while remaining relevant as sustainability expectations continue to rise.
For a deeper look at how this transition applies to aircraft ground power, ElectroAir has outlined its view on lower-emission ground power and the practical role of modern mobile GPUs in supporting airport sustainability before full electrification is possible. The company’s ElectroAir APA-100 is one example of this approach, combining compact mobile design, Stage V / Tier 4 Final engine technology, and optional plug-in hybrid utility power for operators that need both reliability and a more future-conscious path.
The next stage of airport sustainability will be built through practical progress. Some changes will come from major infrastructure investment. Others will come from better equipment decisions, smarter fleet planning, and the replacement of outdated assets with more efficient alternatives.
For airports, the priority is not to choose between today’s operation and tomorrow’s goals. The priority is to connect them. Ground power is one of the places where that connection can already begin.



