Connect with us

Opinion

Who’s Afraid Of Restructuring?

Published

on

Every human society is forced to make changes from time to time in order to accommodate the effects of three dynamic forces, namely, rapid increases in human population, aspirations, and knowledge, referred to as “triple explosions”. Therefore, the crux of the restructuring controversy has to do with a nation’s political economy which is largely a process of determining who gets what and who controls that process, in a dynamic society. When such process becomes static, unjust and structured in favour of a privileged few, then agitation for equity arises.
The dynamic nature of human aspirations is such that some powerful people can strive to own the whole world and try to enslave others, if they can have their way. Similarly, human knowledge expands in proportion to the challenges arising from human aspirations and expanding population, such that there is a countervailing force to briddle mad human ambitions. Like Chinua Achebe would say: When birds learn to fly without perching, hunters learn to shoot without aiming. Thus we are reminded through idioms that life shuns one-sidedness.
The “Arab Spring” was such an idiom to which Mohamed El Baradei, former director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, responded with an admonition: “repression + absence of social justice + denial of channels for peaceful change = a ticking bomb”. A situation, according to Schwartz’s 1st law, where less than 20% of a population controls and enjoys more than 80% of the resources of a nation, while “Nigeria has the highest number of world’s poor people”, cannot be described as just.
Any structure which sustains such lop-sidedness calls for a peaceful change. Can we not see a ticking bomb, via oil and gas natural resources all located in the southern parts of Nigeria? Is it a secret that the Nigerian Civil War (1967-1970) was fought and won primarily on the basis of control of mineral oil and gas? Is it a secret that Petroleum Decree/Act of 1969 and the Land Use Act which followed soon after had some ulterior motives? Why was late Senator Francis Ellah shouted down on the floor of the Senate in the 1970s as he tried to raise issues on indirect imposition of a war indemnity on a section of the country? Are the above issues not clever schemes?
Those who are afraid of a genuine restructuring of the Nigerian polity include those who would be jittery over a demand to publish names of beneficiaries of oil block allocations. They include those who restructured and re-designed the original Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB) into a Petroleum Industry Governance Bill (PIGB) as No.1 of a 5-Part break-down. Why should Petroleum Host Community Bill become the last or least item of importance, whereas the zone and source of the natural resources should have primary attention?
Did Petroleum Decree of November 27, 1969, not transfer ownership of all the oil and gas reserves in the Niger Delta zone to the entire Nigerian nation? Did that clever scheme not deprive the oil-producing zone 50% derivation benefit, then transferred to the Nigerian nation? It took intense lobbying and pressure for the derivation formula to be restored to 1.5% and which now stands at 13%. Are these schemes not unjust structures?
Is it not true that the National Assembly acted with an unusual sense of urgency in approving the modified Petroleum Industry Governance Bill (PIGB) within 23 minutes? Would it be wrong to suggest that some highly placed Nigerians are merely fronting for some multinational interests, waiting on the wings to buy over Nigeria’s oil and gas reserves under the cloak of divestment of upstream sector of the industry? Is it not true that seaports in southern parts of Nigeria are deliberately being placed in a state of mortgage? Why is it considered needful to embark on a Dry Port project in Kaduna which would cost quite some money?
The clamour for resource control had been drowned to the extent that it would hardly be revisited or revived. Those who are afraid of restructuring of the Nigerian polity would include those who saw to it that the latter-day effort of the Jonathan administration to reposition the country was treated as rubbish. It was with much glee that El Rufai once told Nigerians that restructuring was in the agenda of the current administration. But it was disappointing to hear the same administration describe the call for a restructuring of the polity as reflecting “parochial” interests.
Can any scheme or interest be more parochial than the disenfranchisement of a section of the country of their natural resources? To effect such clever schemes everything is done to encourage and sow the seeds of division, animosity and disunity among the marginalized groups of people through political shenanigans. We are seeing the thin division between war and politics, especially with someone celebrating the “Winning of Akwa-Ibom State” – thanks to the Will of God!
It would appear that states in southern Nigeria are under a siege, with various agencies and institutions serving as handy tools for intimidation purposes. With Delta State governor switching camp, is it not obvious that the Niger Delta zone is Nigeria’s most beautiful bride to woo and win? Why?
It is quite instructive that the President with-held his assent to the cleverly re-designed Petroleum Industry Governance Bill (PIGB) – thanks to the outspokenness of Dr Okey Ellah. The underlying motive of the Bill can easily be figured out by any discerning person. Therefore, is Nigerian politics not driven by the intrigues of the oil and gas industry? Would vested interests in that industry not be afraid of restructuring of the Nigerian polity? Impoverishment of a majority of Nigerians via the inordinate ambitions of empire builders demands that structures which facilitate such anomaly should be changed peacefully. Have valued public assets not been privatized and sold for peanuts?
Dr Amirize is a retired lecturer, Rivers State University, Port Harcourt.

 

Bright Amirize

Continue Reading

Opinion

Trans-Kalabari  Road:  Work In Progress 

Published

on

Quote:”This Dream project  is one of  the best things that have happened  to the people and residents of Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas in recent times.”
This is the concluding part of this story featured in our last edition.
Good road network helps farmers to convey their agro-allied products to  commercial hubs where buyers and sellers meet periodically to transact business. Road network engineers and motivates people resident in unfriendly geographical terrains, like riverine areas,  to own property and shuttle home with ease. Some people will prefer living in their own houses in a more serene and nature-blessed communities to living in the city that is fraught with  pollution, and other environmental, social and economic hazards. Prior to the cult epidemic that ravaged parts of Rivers State, the Emohuas, Elemes, Ogonis, and Etches were known for rural dwelling. Most public servants from these areas do their official and private transactions from  their villages. For them it was comparatively easier to live in the village and engage in a diversified economic endeavours through farming, fishing or other lucrative business without outrageous charges and embarrassment associated with doing business in Port Harcourt, where land is as scarce as the traditional needle.
That is why the decision to construct the Trans-Kalabari Road by the administration of Dr. Peter Odili was one of the best decisions that administration took. When Dr. Odili vacated office as the Rivers State Governor, Rt. Hon. Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi took over and awarded contracts for continuation of the road project which in my considered view is the felt need of  the people of Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas. Unfortunately, Rt. Hon. Amaechi’s efforts to drive the project was sabotaged by some contractors some of whom are Kalabari people. The main  Trans-Kalabari Road is one project that is dear to the people and residents of Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas of Rivers State. This is because through the road commuters can easily access several communities in the three local government areas. For instance, the road when completed will enable access to eight of the ten communities in Degema Local Government Area,  namely: Bukuma, Tombia,  Bakana, Oguruama, Obuama, Usokun, Degema town  and the Degema Consulate. It will also link 15 of the 16 communities in Asari Toru Local Government Area. The communities are: Buguma, the local government headquarters, Ido, Abalama, Tema, Sama, Okpo, Ilelema, Ifoko, Tema, Sangama, Krakrama, Omekwe-Ama, Angulama. The road will also connect  14  of 17 wards in Akuku Toru Local Government Area, and other settlements. It is interesting to note that It is faster,  and far more convenient and economical for the catchment Communities on the Trans-Kalabari Road network to go to the State Capital than the East West Road.  The people of the three local government areas will prefer  to work or do their transactions in Port Harcourt from their respective communities to staying in Port Harcourt where the house rent and the general cost of living is astronomically high.
 Consequently, development will seamlessly spread to the 28 out of 34 communities of Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas. The only Communities that are not linked by the road project are Oporoama in Asari Toru,  the Ke and  Bille Communities in Degema Local Government Area and the “Oceania” communities of Abissa, Kula, Soku, Idama, Elem Sangama of Akuku Toru Local Government Area. But because of the economic value of the unlinked Communities to Nigeria, (they produce substantial oil and gas in the area), the Federal, State Governments and the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC), can extend the road network to those areas just as Bonny is linked to Port Harcourt and the Lagos Mainland Bridge is connecting several towns in Lagos and neighbouring States.Kudos to previous administrations who  had constructed the Central Group axis.
 However, what is said to be the First Phase of the Trans-Kalabari Road project is actually a linkage of the “Central Group” Communities which consists of Krakrama, Angulama, Omekwe. Ama, Omekwe Tari Ama, Ifoko, Tema, Sangama. It is the peripheral of the Trans-Kalabari Road. The completion of the  Main Trans Kalabari project will free Port Harcourt and Obio/Akpor areas from congestion. It will motivate residents and people of the three local areas to contribute to the development of their Communities. If the Ogonis, Etches, Emohuas, Oyigbos, Okrikas, Elemes can feel comfortable doing business in Port Harcourt from home, residents and people whose communities are linked to Port Harcourt through the Trans-Kalabari Road will no doubt, do likewise. The vast arable virgin land of the Bukuma people can be open for development and sustainable agricultural ventures by Local, State and Federal Government.
It is necessary to recall that the Bukuma community was host to the Federal Government’s Graduate Farmers’ Scheme and the Rivers State Government moribund School-to-Land Scheme under Governor Fidelis Oyakhilome. Bukuma was the only community in Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas that has the capacity to carry those agricultural programmes. However the lack of road to transport farm produce to Port Harcourt and facilitate the movement of the beneficiaries of the scheme who lived in the community which is several miles away from the farms, hampered the sustainability of the programme. The main Trans-Kalabari Road remains the best gift to the people of Degema, Asari Toru, and Akuku-Toru Local Government Areas. Kudos to Sir Siminilayi Fubara.
By: Igbiki Benibo
Continue Reading

Opinion

That  U.S. Capture of Maduro

Published

on

Quote:”Strategic convenience does not nullify sovereignty. Political frustration does not authorise military abduction.”
The first part of this story was published in our last edition.
 
In Africa and the Middle East, regime change—whether by invasion, proxy warfare, or sanctions—has often left behind fractured states, weakened institutions, and prolonged instability. Washington’s motivations in Venezuela are widely understood: vast oil reserves, alliances with U.S. rivals, and symbolic defiance of American influence in the Western Hemisphere. But none of these reasons confer legal or moral legitimacy. Strategic convenience does not nullify sovereignty. Political frustration does not authorise military abduction. If every powerful nation acted on its grievances in this manner, global chaos would inevitably follow. International law provides mechanisms for accountability. Under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), individuals accused of crimes against humanity or other grave offences are subject to investigation and prosecution through judicial processes.
Likewise, extradition treaties, mutual legal assistance agreements, and Interpol mechanisms exist to ensure accountability while respecting due process. These frameworks were designed precisely to prevent unilateral enforcement of “justice” by military force. The most profound consequence of America’s action may not be in Caracas, but in the precedent it sets. If the world accepts that a superpower can unilaterally depose another country’s president, then the foundation of the international system is weakened. Sovereignty becomes conditional—no longer a right, but a privilege tolerated at the discretion of the powerful. Going forward, if another country invades its neighbour, will the United States retain the moral authority to impose sanctions or demand restraint? Some analysts already warn that parallels between Russia’s actions in Ukraine and America’s conduct in Venezuela risk further eroding global norms. Selective adherence to international law breeds cynicism and accelerates the drift toward a world governed by force rather than rules.
Power—military, economic, or political—should serve human progress and collective well-being, not domination and destruction. For African nations, many of which emerged from colonial rule through bitter struggle, this precedent is especially alarming. Sovereignty is not an abstract legal concept; it is a hard-won shield against external domination. Any erosion of that principle anywhere weakens it everywhere. Africa’s painful history of foreign interference makes this lesson especially urgent.  For me, the real issue is not whether Nicolás Maduro is a good or bad leader. That judgment belongs, first and foremost, to the Venezuelan people. The larger issue is whether the international system still operates on law—or has quietly reverted to hierarchy. If America insists it is defending global order, it must ask itself a difficult question: can an order survive when its most powerful guardian feels entitled to violate it? Until that question is answered honestly, the capture of a foreign president will remain not a triumph of justice, but a troubling symbol of a world drifting from law toward force.
If the United States felt so strongly about the allegations of terrorism, drug trafficking  against Maduro, were there no other lawful options? Judicial accountability, diplomacy, regional mediation, and multilateral pressure may be slow and imperfect, but they reflect respect for international law and sovereign equality. Military seizure is a blunt instrument. It humiliates institutions, radicalizes populations, and hardens resistance. It may remove a leader, but it rarely resolves the underlying crisis. History teaches that military interventions seldom result in stable democratic outcomes. More often, they breed resentment, resistance, and long-term instability. For the sake of global order and the rule of law, the United States should reconsider this path and recommit to diplomacy, legal cooperation, and respect for the sovereign equality of states. Former U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris reportedly described the invasion of Venezuela as “unlawful and unwise,” warning that such actions “do not make America safer, stronger, or more affordable.” Her words reflect a growing recognition, even within the United States, that force without legitimacy undermines both moral authority and global stability.
Should what happened in Venezuela serve as a wake-up call for corrupt African leaders who undermine the people’s right to choose their leaders? The answer is yes. The capture of Maduro should alarm African leaders who manipulate elections, weaken institutions, suppress opposition, undermine citizens’ rights, or cling to power at all costs. Venezuela faced widespread criticism over disputed elections and repression long before this episode, and that context shaped how the world reacted. This does not justify foreign military intervention, but it highlights an uncomfortable truth: prolonged democratic decay isolates nations and invites external pressure—from sanctions to diplomatic censure. Global opinion matters, and legitimacy at home strengthens sovereignty abroad. The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and several African leaders have rightly condemned the events in Venezuela, invoking the principles of sovereignty and non-interference enshrined in international and regional law.
Beyond condemnation, however, African leaders must look inward. The continent’s future cannot be built on repression, constitutional manipulation, and personal greed. Leadership must reflect the will of the people, not desperation for power. Two days ago, a social commentator on a radio station argued that Trump’s action—though condemnable—demonstrates how far a leader can go for his country’s interest. According to this view, he did not intervene in Venezuela for personal enrichment, but to strengthen his nation. In stark contrast, many African leaders plunder their own countries. They siphon public resources, impose crushing taxes and harmful policies, and leave their citizens poorer—all for selfish gain. That contradiction is the deeper lesson Africa must confront.True sovereignty is protected not only by international law, but by accountable leadership at home.
 By:  Calista Ezeaku
Continue Reading

Opinion

Kudos  Gov Fubara

Published

on

Please permit me to use this medium to appreciate our able governor, Siminalayi Fubara for the inauguration of the 14.2-kilometre Obodhi–Ozochi Road in Ahoada-East Local Government Area.  This inauguration marks a significant milestone in the history of our communities and deserves commendation. We, the people of Ozochi, are particularly happy because this project has brought long-awaited relief after years of isolation and hardship.
The expression of our traditional ruler, His Royal Highness, Eze Prince Ike Ehie, JP, during the inauguration captured the joy of our people.  He said, “our isolation is over.”  That reflects the profound impact of this road on daily life, economic activities, and social integration of the people of Ozochi and other neighbouring communities. The road will no doubt ease transportation, improve access to markets and healthcare, and strengthen links between Ahoada, Omoku, and other parts of Rivers State.
The people of Ahoada, Omoku, and indeed Rivers State as a whole are grateful to our dear governor for this laudable achievement and wish him many more successful years in office. We pray that God endows him with more wisdom and strength to continue to pilot the affairs of the state for the benefit of all. As citizens, we should rally behind the governor and support his development agenda. Our politicians and stakeholders should embrace peace and cooperation, as no meaningful progress can be achieved in an atmosphere of conflict. Sustainable development in the state can only thrive where peace prevails.
Samuel Ebiye
Continue Reading

Trending