Opinion

Sharing Of Revenues And Loots

Published

7 years ago

October 3, 2018

A Political Bureau set up in 1987 to work out a political blueprint for Nigeria observed in its report that the allocation and sharing of revenue have been among the most contentious and controversial issues in the nation’s political history. Since 1946, various formulae had evolved, none of which gained general acceptance among the component units of the country.
There was a Philipson Commission on revenue sharing or allocation which was based on the principles of derivation and even progress. In 1951 there was another review of revenue allocation which retained the principle derivation but added the principles of needs, national interest and granted fiscal autonomy for the three Regions. In 1953 the principle of derivation was given greater emphasis, with revenues derived from import duties and excise tax going to he regions.
In 1958, a revenue sharing commission retained the principles of need, even development, derivation and fiscal autonomy, but introduced a Distributable Pool Account (DPA). That was the beginning of the slogan of sharing “national cake.” With the creation of Mid-Western region in 1964, the sharing formula was adjusted giving the North 42 percent, East 30 percent, West 20 percent and Mid-West 8 percent. Principle of land mass featured prominently.
With 12-state structure in 1967, the next revenue sharing formula was by Decree No. 15 of that year, whereby the old principles were retained, giving the Northern states the old region’s 42 percent and the six Southern states sharing what remained in the Distributable Pool Account. Decree 12 of 1970 reduced the sharing principles to two, based on population and equality of states. Revenue from export duties was reduced from 100 percent to 60 percent because of post-war reconstruction, justifying federal government’s monopoly.
In 1971 and 1975 radical changes took place, reducing revenue going to the states, with Decree No. 6 of 1975 making states’ share of oil revenue 20 rather than 45 percent. Aboyade committee (1977) recommendations were considered too technical and rejected. Okigbo Presidential Commission (1980) recommended 53 percent share for federal government but that was increased to 55 percent. Allocation to local governments was reduced to 8 percent from 10; states had 30 percent and 7 percent went into Special Funds.
Adjustments were made in 1981 by a revenue act, leaving federal government’s share unchanged, local governments share was increased to 10 percent; states’ share to 30.5 percent, reducing the Special Funds to 4.5 percent. Decree No. 36 of 1984 gave state governments 32.5 percent, reducing the Special Funds further to 2.5 percent.
Decree No. 49 of 1989 established the National Revenue Mobilisation, Allocation and Fiscal Commission, with mandate to mobilize and review public sector revenue, including disbursement, etc. With Decree No. 3 of 1991, revenue allocation formula was altered as follows: federal government 50 percent, state governments 25 percent; local governments 20 percent and special funds 5 percent. In less than 6 months this formula was changed to 48.5; 24 and 20 percents respectively for the three tiers of government.
The purpose of these citations is to emphasise the fact that the nation’s revenue sharing formulae have been quite unstable. The scrambles for creation of more states are associated with the desire to share or benefit from the proverbial national cake. The era of looting of the national treasury is associated with military rule. What is quite obvious in Nigeria’s political and economic history is that there are imbalances and lop-sidedness which give rise to instability and frictions. These issues have not been resolved.
The same instability and lop-sidedness that have characterised revenue sharing formula, coupled with deliberate looting of the nation’s resources, are also playing out in the sharing of recovered loots. The purported formula of “poorest of the poor” being used for disbursement of recovered loots tends to follow the same pattern of selectiveness and arbitrariness.
Who determines the “poorest of the poor” in each of the states of the federation? Would political and sectional interests not render the exercise of sharing of recovered loots unreliable and unfair? Even though international interests are involved in the loot sharing exercise, can there be any guarantee of transparency in the disbursement of the funds?
The most glaring indication of imbalance and lop-sidedness in the disbursement of recovered loots is the attitude towards the zones that produce the mineral oil which provided the revenue that was looted. Have various spurious formulae and principles not been used in the past in revenue allocation and sharing in Nigeria? To say the least, mineral oil producing communities are among the poorest and most marginalized people in the Nigerian federation. Mineral oil producing localities deserve a fair treatment.
Dr. Amirize is a retired lecturer, Rivers State University, Port Harcourt.

Bright Amirize

Opinion

Beyond the Adichie Tragedy

Published

3 days ago

March 16, 2026

The Tide

Quote:: “Justice must never depend on fame, wealth, or connections. The child of a roadside trader deserves the same standard of care as the child of a globally celebrated writer. When accountability works only for the prominent, public trust in institutions quietly erodes.”

Public reaction to the suspension of doctors by the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria (MDCN) following the death of the son of celebrated Nigerian writer Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie reveals something deeper than outrage over a single tragedy. Across social media and public commentary, a recurring sentiment stands out: many Nigerians believe justice was served only because of the prominence of the family involved. Comments such as “The doctors were punished because Chimamanda is well known,” or “If it was a poor man’s child, the case would have been swept under the carpet,” capture a troubling lack of faith in the system.

Whether these perceptions are always accurate is not the most important issue. What should concern the nation is that so many citizens instinctively believe that justice in Nigeria often depends on status, wealth, or influence.The tragedy that befell the Adichie family is heartbreaking. No parent should have to bury a child, particularly under circumstances that raise questions about professional responsibility. But beyond the grief lies a larger national concern: medical negligence in Nigeria is far more widespread than the few cases that attract public attention. Across the country, families quietly lose loved ones in hospitals and clinics under troubling circumstances. Patients are sometimes misdiagnosed. Emergency cases may be delayed. Surgical procedures may be mishandled, while basic standards of care can be compromised due to negligence, poor supervision, or systemic pressure on medical staff.

In many situations, grieving families simply accept their loss and move on, believing there is little they can do. The result is what can only be described as a silent epidemic of unreported medical negligence.In more developed healthcare systems, such incidents rarely go unexamined. Independent regulatory bodies investigate complaints, enforce professional standards, and sanction erring practitioners. In the United Kingdom, for instance, the Care Quality Commission inspects hospitals, clinics, and care providers to ensure strict compliance with safety and quality standards.Nigeria does have oversight institutions, notably the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria. However, enforcement often appears inconsistent, and many cases of negligence never reach the stage where regulators can intervene. Sometimes victims are unaware of the complaint process. In other cases, fear, cost, or bureaucracy discourage families from seeking justice.

While government institutions must improve their oversight mechanisms, citizens must also confront a difficult truth: Nigerians often fail to pursue their rights when they are violated. Too frequently, when injustice occurs, people retreat into resignation. Instead of filing complaints or seeking legal remedies, many respond with the familiar phrase: “God will judge them.” Faith is important, but it should not replace civic responsibility. A society that leaves accountability solely to divine intervention risks allowing negligence and impunity to flourish. Some commentators have suggested that the Adichie family likely pursued the matter relentlessly through petitions and formal complaints before authorities acted. If that is the case, it demonstrates a path other citizens can follow. When malpractice occurs, persistence in seeking justice can make institutions respond.

If more families reported cases of medical negligence to the appropriate authorities, regulatory bodies would have stronger grounds to investigate. Public pressure would also push healthcare institutions to improve their standards. Negligence, as defined by Nigeria’s Supreme Court in Odinaka v. Moghalu, refers to the failure to do what a reasonable and prudent person would have done under similar circumstances. Within medical ethics, physicians are expected to provide competent care with compassion and respect for human dignity. These principles form the foundation of the duty of care that patients rely upon. Citizens must therefore be able to recognise signs of negligence and take appropriate steps to seek redress. Patients and families should learn to document incidents, keep medical records, ask questions about treatment decisions, and report suspicious circumstances surrounding medical care.

Where necessary, formal complaints should be lodged with regulatory authorities or pursued through the courts. Civil society organisations, advocacy groups, and the media also play a crucial role. By exposing cases of negligence and demanding accountability, they help ensure such incidents do not disappear into silence. A healthcare system shielded from scrutiny cannot improve. Nevertheless, responsibility cannot rest solely on citizens. Government must take decisive steps to strengthen healthcare regulation and reduce medical negligence. Hospitals and clinics—both public and private—should undergo regular inspections to ensure compliance with professional standards, safety protocols, and ethical guidelines. Persistent violations must attract meaningful sanctions. Legal practitioner and Senior Advocate of Nigeria Olisa Agbakoba has suggested the creation of an independent health regulatory authority and the restoration of Chief Medical Officers at federal and state levels.

In the past, these officials, alongside health inspectors, helped enforce professional standards and ensured accountability within healthcare facilities. Government must also invest more seriously in the training and continuous education of healthcare professionals. Medicine is an evolving field, and practitioners must constantly update their knowledge and skills. Mandatory professional development programmes, stricter licensing renewal requirements, and improved mentorship systems could help reduce errors arising from outdated practices or inadequate training. At the same time, systemic challenges within the healthcare system cannot be ignored. Many Nigerian doctors and nurses work under extremely difficult conditions—overcrowded hospitals, outdated equipment, staff shortages, and overwhelming patient loads. Such pressures increase the risk of mistakes and professional burnout.

Improving healthcare infrastructure, funding, and staffing is therefore not merely an administrative matter; it is a fundamental requirement for patients’ safety. Equally important is transparency when allegations of negligence arise. Investigations must be timely, credible, and accessible. Families deserve to know what happened to their loved ones and whether professional standards were breached. Regulatory bodies must ensure that findings are communicated clearly so that public confidence in the healthcare system is strengthened. The tragedy that drew national attention to medical negligence should not be treated as an isolated incident involving a prominent personality. Rather, it should serve as a wake-up call for systemic reform.

Every Nigerian life carries equal value. Justice must not depend on prominence or privilege. When citizens demand accountability and institutions respond with fairness and transparency, trust begins to grow. Nigeria’s health sector is filled with dedicated doctors, nurses, and medical workers who save lives daily despite difficult conditions. Recognising their commitment, however, should not prevent society from confronting the reality that negligence sometimes occurs—and when it does, it must be addressed firmly. If this painful moment encourages Nigerians to speak up, demand accountability, and push for stronger regulatory systems, it may yet produce meaningful reform. Citizens must refuse to accept negligence as fate, while government strengthens oversight and improves healthcare conditions. Only through this collective effort can Nigeria build a healthcare system where every patient—regardless of social status—receives safe, responsible, and dignified care.

By: Calista Ezeaku

Opinion

As The World Celebrates Women

Published

3 days ago

March 16, 2026

The Tide

Quote:” “Every woman who works tirelessly to raise her children, run a business, support her family or contribute to her community is shaping the future of society. These quiet, everyday efforts may not always make headlines, but they remain the foundation upon which strong families, communities and nations are built.”

The celebration of International Women’s Day offers another important moment to reflect on the strength, resilience and achievements of women across the world. It is a time not only to celebrate the progress made over the years, but also to recognise the courage, determination and commitment that continue to define women’s contributions in every sphere of society. Across the globe, women are steadily breaking barriers and redefining possibilities. From leadership and governance to science, education and enterprise, women continue to prove that their capacity to contribute meaningfully to development is limitless. Particularly inspiring are the strides being made by women across Africa and here in Nigeria. In many instances, these achievements are recorded despite limited access to resources and opportunities when compared with their counterparts in other parts of the world. Yet, through determination, hard work and resilience, women continue to rise above these challenges and make their mark

In Nigeria today, the role of women in national development is increasingly evident. Women are actively shaping policies, building businesses, strengthening institutions and supporting communities. Their influence can be seen in sectors such as healthcare, education, media, technology and public administration. Through dedication and innovation, they contribute significantly to the growth and stability of the nation. In Rivers State, women have also distinguished themselves in remarkable ways. Across different sectors, they continue to make meaningful contributions to the political, economic and social advancement of the state. Many are thriving as entrepreneurs, running successful businesses, supporting their families and creating opportunities for others. Others are making valuable contributions within the healthcare sector, working tirelessly as doctors, nurses and administrators to improve the wellbeing of communities.

Women in the state are also excelling in academia, nurturing young minds and contributing to knowledge through teaching and research. In the media and communication sector, they play critical roles in information dissemination, shaping public conversations and telling the stories that matter to society. Within government institutions and the civil service, women continue to demonstrate professionalism, competence and dedication to duty. Over the years, Rivers State has produced women whose accomplishments have earned them respect and admiration both within and outside the state. The Deputy Governor of Rivers State, Professor Ngozi Nma Odu, stands as one such example. A seasoned academic and public servant, she continues to demonstrate the capacity of women to contribute meaningfully to governance and policy development. Her presence in such a high office serves as encouragement to young women who aspire to leadership and public service.

Similarly, the Head of Service of Rivers State, Dr. (Mrs.) Inyingi S. I. Brown, has demonstrated strong leadership within the public service. Her role in coordinating and strengthening the activities of the civil service reflects years of dedication, professionalism and commitment to service. Another notable example is Justice Mary Odili, whose distinguished career in the judiciary stands as a testament to discipline, excellence and commitment to justice. Her years of service at the highest level of Nigeria’s judicial system have made her a respected figure and a source of inspiration to many. While these women have earned public recognition for their contributions, it is equally important to acknowledge the countless women whose efforts often go unnoticed. Across homes, workplaces and communities, many women continue to make sacrifices that sustain families and strengthen society. Every woman who works tirelessly to raise her children, run a business to support her family, contribute to community development or serve diligently in her workplace is also making a significant impact.

These everyday efforts, often carried out quietly, remain vital to the growth and stability of society. As we reflect on the significance of this occasion, it is important to remember that every woman’s contribution matters. Whether in leadership positions or within the everyday responsibilities of life, the role of women remains central to the progress of our communities.To every woman striving to achieve her dreams despite the challenges along the way, your efforts are valid, seen and meaningful. Your journey matters. Your resilience, dedication and determination continue to inspire hope for a better and more inclusive society.

Happy International Women’s Day.

By: Ledornubari@star

Opinion

Agony In Ivory Tower

Published

1 week ago

March 9, 2026

The Tide

Quote: A university that tolerates missing scripts, result manipulation and ‘sorting’ is not merely failing students—it is quietly destroying the moral foundation of education itself.”

The sad cases of missing scripts, compulsory Sorting, inputting of wrong results and other obnoxious practices in some public universities, leave much to be desired. One cannot imagine how a student will be compelled to suffer consequences of the flagrant negligence of a Head of Department, a lecturer, Department staff or an ICT staff.Many academic and non academic staff in several public universities seem to be performing far below standard, thus unproductive to the university system. The unacceptable cases of sorting, missing scripts, missing results, inputting of wrong grades to students, should not be mentioned in a university, not even in any academic community. This is because people who are employed to work in various positions should have cognate work experience and unquestionable competence. They should not be seen as certificate welding illiterates but people who have been proven to be worthy in learning and character, diligent and competent to carry out assigned responsibilities with minimal or no supervision.

The university as a citadel of learning should boast of men of integrity, people who are repositories of applied knowledge and competence to drive the much desired holistic development in a nation that functions on quality teaching and learning. A situation where a student having gone through the crucibles of learning and written a prescribed semester examination or class-based evaluation test, is told that his or her script is missing or that he or she did not participate in that academic exercise, or must sort to pass, is an unpardonable error and a height of callousness. In fact some lecturers and staff of Departments are using the seeming systemic defect (which is their architecture) as an opportunity to extort students. Sometimes it is discovered much to students chagrin that the supposed missing script was later discovered when a ransom was paid.

Since a lecturer, or Head of Department has in their disposal both Yam and the knife and determines who takes what (if they wish to give without strings), students have no alternative but to submit to their importunate demands in order to graduate at record time.Such practices should be unheard of in an institution that should be a vanguard of moral and ethical values and conduct. What people learn in school constitute their behavioural patterns in the society. Where the school as an agency of socialisation cannot drive positive change first in its immediate environment, then the objective of education as a bedrock for the development of society, is inevitably compromised and counter-productive. The German Reformer, Dr. Martins Luther was quoted as saying, “I advise parents not to put their wards or children in any school where the Bible is not being used as a rule of life because such institutions will unnecessarily be corrupt”.

Gleaning from Luther’s sentiment one can deduce that the lack of respect and regard for values as well as the absence of the fear of God is the greatest undoing of most public schools. Another major challenge is that lack of Information, Communication and Technology literacy or compliance on the part of some lecturers and heads of department, may have informed the decision to give students’ scripts to secretaries to compile and input students results thereby making the secretaries the determinants of students’ fate. It is not saying a new thing that some of the secretaries in the process of compiling results have inputted wrong results, omitted names or down graded some students or given unmerited grades to others.Society today is ICT-driven and ICT-literacy enhances efficiency, speed and a reasonable degree of accuracy if the person behind the computer is level headed, articulate, competent, alive to responsibilities and is aware that negligence on his or her part is not only tantamount to a disservice to the university but to the students who may not graduate at record time because of his or her (computer operator’s) gross ineptitude or carelessness.

The ICT era makes the carrying of hard copy of results obsolete as lecturers through the Heads of Department can log on to the central server of the Exams and Records (if any) or ICT unit and input students’ results directly. By so doing the incessant cases where result on spread sheet is different from the one published online, more often than not, caused by abject negligence, will be avoided. The process will also end the intermediary services of some staff in the universities’ Information, Communication and Technology Department which has become a money spinner-a lucrative source of income to many of them. In fact some ICT staff reserved the power to award grades to students depending on students’ degree of compliance to terms and conditions. They can dubiously make or unmake a student. The university community should be considered too lofty to have careless, negligent, immoral and academic or professionally deficient people as academic or non-academic staff.

The Governing Councils and Senates of universities should be proactive in addressing the menace of missing Script, inputting of wrong results and sorting. This is necessary to end the slogan “Education is scam” so the system can produce quality students who are truly found worthy in learning and in character by operators who exemplify diligence, moral and ethical values. The much-needed reform must begin within the institutions themselves, because the future of any society is shaped in its classrooms.

By: Igbiki Benibo