Opinion

Fuel Subsidy Scam: Should FG Adopt Report?

Published

14 years ago

April 30, 2012

The Farouk Lawan-led House of Representatives Probe Committee on fuel subsidy recently submitted its report to the Presidency which indicted some major oil companies and highly-placed Nigerians, including top politicians.

Our Staff Writer, Calista Ezeaku and Photographer, Dele Obinna, went round the city to seek people’s opinion on whether or not Federal Government should adopt the report. Their response:

Prince Emmanuel Ogba, Niger Delta Youth

Coalition

I think the report should be fully implemented by the federal Government. But the issue of dragging the Minister of Petroleum, Dizeiani Allison-Maduke, into it is very wrong. They are just trying to rubbish her name because right from the onset, she was the one kicking against subsidy. She was the one that made Nigerians know that the money being spent on fuel subsidy was much, revealing that there was a certain cabal benefiting from that. So they should not rope her in because she insisted that they should do away with subsidy.

That is very wrong because she is the only person we have there in the Petroleum sector. And being a Minister of the Niger Delta, she cannot sabotage her people.

I’m not trying to defend her because she is from the Niger Delta, if she was from the North I will say the same thing.

But if at the end of the day she is found guilty, she should face the penalty. The Niger Delta Youth Coalition is coming up with a protest in favour of Dizieani on Wednesday.

Dizieani was not indicted in that report, so they should not rope her in. The House of Representatives want to rope her in but from the report from the NNPC, she was not involved in all those things they are talking about.

So the federal government should adopt the report and the companies and individual, indicted should be prosecuted.

Mr. Koshi John – Media Worker. Yes, the report should be adopted because the way I look at the law makers, they are fighting for the masses. The other way round, I look at it from the angle of government not being willing to make effort to see that the masses benefit from the natural gift from God, because the removal of subsidy on fuel early this year, has affected every aspect of our life. And the worst part of it is that the money realised from this is being shared by just a few group of people, without the general people seeing the benefits of the fuel subsidy removal.

So, the report should be adopted because that was what the committee was set up to do. The report should be adopted immediately and all the people indicted should be brought to book. They should be prosecuted because this is something that is causing serious damage to the country.

Proper action should be taken on them so that other people watching them, should not be found doing the same thing tomorrow. Nobody indicted in that report should be excluded just because he is from Niger Delta or whatever. Once anybody is found guilty, he should be brought to book.

But can federal government adopt the report and prosecute the indicted persons? That is where Nigerians are discouraged. The fact is that we don’t even have confidence in them (those in government) any more. In Nigeria, only the common man is always brought to book. That is why, when we heard about James Ibori’s judgment in London, we were very excited. And how I wish that could be done here in Nigeria. Government officials embezzle public funds, saving the money for their generations yet unborn, while the people who own the money are suffering and they are watching the masses languishing in poverty.

So, to me, the people indicted in the report even deserve death sentence. When the fuel subsidy was removed in January many people resigned from their working places because the cost of transportation became higher than their salaries.

And when you resign there is nothing for you to do to earn a living and some of such people were committing murder, sad enough a few people are benefiting from the system. So they (the indicted persons) should not be spared at all.

Mr. Akpos Etioms – Insurance under writer. I think this is a very trying time for this administration, especially for Mr. President, because this is an issue that will put his credibility to test, especially as most of the people indicted contributed a lot to enthrone the President.

But what I will say there is that I want the President to ensure that the country holds him in trust because he was elected by the generality of the people. And this fuel subsidy is a national issue that affected the entire nation, especially at the beginning of this year when the fuel subsidy was removed.

So, whoever was indicted should be brought to book, irrespective of how highly placed the person may be. That will give the citizens the assurance that this government is actually a government of the people. So I think the government should take action now.

In the past, government had deceived the people but this time around the people especially the civil society groups, Labour Congress and other organised groups in the country have risen to their rights. They have said it openly that the President should take action, because one of the reasons for the January fuel subsidy strike was the cabal that has robbed the society, that has drained the economy of the country. Civil Society groups and labour have come out openly to tell Mr. President to take action now.

So, I believe government will take action now.

Dr. George Ellah – Medical Practitioner. The report should be looked into and the National Assembly should act on it because the Committee was set up to help us find a way out of the fuel subsidy problems. Some people in some quarters say there is no fuel subsidy, others say there is fuel subsidy.

Infact recently I read in one of the newspapers, where Prof. Tam David-West was saying that there’s nothing like subsidy. For such a highly profiled person to make that kind of comment, it means that there’s something we need to look critically into.

So, that report should be looked into. Infact a white paper should be published so that the public can really know and understand what is going on? What has been happening, what the present situation of things are? And where we have to go from here?

Some people say that some of those indicted in the report were those who sponsored President Goodluck Jonathan’s election, if that is true then it is common sense that it may be difficult for him to do any thing against them.

However, justice is justice. And justice delayed is justice denied. The President must at this point in time, look at the general interest of Nigerians. One person is not above the whole nation. We are talking about the life and welfare of 150 million Nigerians that is at stake in this matter.

While some of those people may have sponsored the election of the President, what the President should do at this point in time is to take a bold step and do act in the interest of Nigerians.

He must take this hard decision and make sure that no offender goes unpunished.

Mr. Obirido Abat – Businessman. I think the normal course of action should follow, that is justice. Because if this trend continues, we shall have no nation. Some highly placed persons who had opportunity to have contracts, to do business with government did not do it decently, then the full weight of the law should follow, otherwise this nation will not survive.

If we continue this way, watching people take away what belongs to the public, what belongs to 150 million Nigerians and nothing is done, there will be a time nothing would be left at all. It has already been said that this nation is a failed state and these are features of a failed state. And if we don’t arrest this trend then there will be no Nigeria for us again.

I don’t see this report going the way of previous reports, because this is from the National Assembly. In the past the National Assembly seemed indisposed to handle corruption issues. This is the only regime the national assembly is waking up to tackle corruption issue. So, I think since the general public and the national assembly have woken up, it will not go the way of the past where reports were submitted and no actions were taken.

I want the federal government to put necessary machineries in motion. I know that the EFCC is already at work. Nobody, no organisation should be spared so that this trend of corruption will stop. It is corruption that is killing this nation. If you remove corruption, this country will be one of the best countries in the world to live in. Any body, any organisation that was indicted should be tried.

Mr. Biragbara Jolly – Businessman. In my own view, those indicted should be prosecuted, so that others will learn lessons from them.

We have seen some past African leaders prosecuted for offences committed while in office. Things like that can also happen in Nigeria. Let government sit up. Let the President show Nigeria a difference. He said this is a transformation government, let the right thing be done. Justice should prevail.

Opinion

Bazia EXCO @ One: NUJ Rivers Reawakened

Published

13 hours ago

March 23, 2026

The Tide

Quote: “For the first time in years, Rivers journalists are not just hearing promises—they are seeing a union that works.”

The first year in office of the Paul Bazia-led executive of the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ), has offered something many had almost given up on—renewed confidence in union leadership. For a body as critical as the NUJ, whose responsibility goes beyond professional coordination to include the welfare, protection, and continuous development of journalists, expectations are always high. Unfortunately, past experiences had conditioned many members to expect less—less action, less visibility, and less impact.This is why the past twelve months stand out. Within a relatively short period, the Bazia-led administration has demonstrated a level of drive that distinguishes it from its predecessors. There is a noticeable shift from inertia to activity, from routine administration to purposeful leadership. Initiatives captured in the one-year report point to an executive that understands both the urgency of its mandate and the frustrations of its members.

Particularly commendable is the renewed attention to journalists’ welfare. For too long, welfare issues have lingered without meaningful resolution, leaving many practitioners feeling unsupported. The current leadership’s efforts—through engagement, structured support, and timely interventions—signal a welcome change in priorities. Equally important is the push toward professional development. In an era where journalism is rapidly evolving, capacity building is no longer optional. The administration’s commitment to training and skill enhancement reflects an understanding that a stronger union must be built on more competent and competitive professionals. There is also something to be said about visibility and voice. A vibrant NUJ must not only serve its members internally but also stand as a credible voice in the public space—defending press freedom, promoting ethical standards, and constructively engaging critical issues.

Encouragingly, the current executive appears more present and responsive, giving the union a renewed sense of relevance. Perhaps what resonates most, however, is the sense of movement. For many members, the difference between the present and the immediate past is not subtle—it is clear. Where there was once stagnation, there is now direction. Where there was doubt, there is growing belief. Beyond the visible strides recorded within this first year, what perhaps deserves even greater applause is the restoration of institutional confidence within the Nigeria Union of Journalists. For a long time, many members had grown disenchanted, viewing the union more as a ceremonial body than an active force capable of defending their interests and advancing their welfare. That narrative, however, is gradually changing. The Bazia-led executive has not only initiated programs but has also rekindled a sense of belonging among members.

Meetings appear more purposeful, engagements more intentional, and decisions more reflective of collective interest. This psychological shift—subtle as it may seem—is one of the most critical achievements of the past year, because a union that its members believe in is already halfway to effectiveness. It is also important to underscore the contrast with the immediate past, not as an exercise in criticism, but as a necessary context for measuring progress. Where previous administrations struggled to translate plans into action, the current leadership has shown a greater bias for execution. Projects that once lingered in discussion stages are now seeing tangible movement, and issues that were previously deferred are receiving attention. This difference in approach—moving from prolonged deliberation to decisive action—has helped reposition the union as a more responsive and relevant institution.

While no administration is without its shortcomings, the willingness to act, even in the face of constraints, marks a significant departure from what members were accustomed to. Looking ahead, the expectations of members—and indeed the wider public—will only grow stronger. With a solid first year behind it, the Bazia-led executive now carries the burden of consistency. Members will expect deeper welfare interventions that go beyond immediate relief to more sustainable support systems. They will look for expanded training opportunities that prepare journalists for the rapidly changing media landscape. They will also expect a firmer, more courageous voice on issues affecting press freedom and professional integrity. Above all, they will demand continuity—assurance that the progress recorded so far is not a fleeting phase but the beginning of a sustained transformation.

Meeting these expectations will not be easy, but it is precisely this challenge that defines enduring leadership. That said, this moment of applause must also serve as a moment of reflection. A strong first year inevitably raises expectations. Journalists in Rivers State will now look beyond initial achievements toward consolidation. Welfare interventions must become more structured and far-reaching. Training programs must be sustained and expanded. Advocacy must become more consistent and impactful. Most importantly, the unity of the union must be strengthened, ensuring that all members feel included and carried along. Transparency will also be key. Continued open communication about finances, decisions, and challenges will deepen trust and set a standard for accountable union leadership. The task ahead is clear: to convert early momentum into lasting institutional progress.

For the Bazia-led executive, the opportunity is significant. It has, within one year, reawakened belief in what the NUJ Rivers State Council can be. The next step is to ensure that this renewed energy does not fade, but instead becomes the foundation of a stronger, more responsive, and more respected union. For the members, the message is equally clear—expect more, demand more, and support what works because in the end, a vibrant union is not built by leadership alone, but by a collective commitment to progress. And for now, under Bazia, that progress has truly begun.

By: Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi

Opinion

As Service Chiefs Relocate To Borno

Published

13 hours ago

March 23, 2026

The Tide

Quote:”Relocation may signal urgency, but without structural reforms, it risks becoming a cycle of temporary relief and recurring crisis.”

Here we go again. We have seen this script play out before. Under the administration of Muhammadu Buhari, service chiefs were directed to relocate to security hotspots as a demonstration of urgency and resolve. Today, under Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the same approach is being repeated. Following the recent suicide bombing in Maiduguri, Borno State, which claimed scores of lives, the President ordered the immediate relocation of service chiefs to take charge of the situation. On paper, the directive appears logical and commendable. It suggests a hands-on approach aimed at enhancing coordination among security agencies, improving response time, and restoring public confidence. However, the critical question remains: has this strategy ever truly worked? Experience suggests otherwise. While such relocations often create a temporary sense of calm, the effect is usually short-lived.

The presence of high command tends to produce what may be described as “cosmetic stability”—a brief period of intensified operations and visibility. Yet, once the service chiefs return to Abuja, the underlying problems resurface. A clear example can be drawn from January 2018, when President Buhari ordered the then Inspector General of Police, Ibrahim Idris, to relocate to Benue State in response to escalating violence. At the time, the directive was widely praised. Yet years later, killings, displacement, and destruction of livelihoods persist, raising doubts about the long-term effectiveness of such measures. This recurring pattern has led many observers to describe relocation orders as political theatre—a performative gesture designed to project action rather than deliver sustainable results. While this may seem harsh, it is difficult to ignore the structural deficiencies that continue to undermine the nation’s security framework.

First is the issue of intelligence. Effective security operations depend not just on troop deployment but on timely, accurate, and actionable intelligence. Yet the nation’s intelligence-gathering mechanisms, particularly at the grassroots level, remain weak and poorly coordinated. Relocating service chiefs does little to address this fundamental gap. There is also the challenge of resources. Many security personnel on the frontlines continue to grapple with inadequate equipment, insufficient logistics, and poor welfare conditions. In such circumstances, the physical presence of top commanders cannot substitute for the systematic investment needed to strengthen operational capacity. Equally important is the issue of sustainability. Security is not achieved through sporadic interventions but through consistent, long-term strategies.

The relocation of service chiefs is, by its nature, temporary and does not build enduring institutions capable of sustained response. Beyond these concerns lies a pressing question: what criteria determine which states receive such high-level attention? While Borno has long been an epicentre of insurgency, other states such as Plateau and Benue have also experienced alarming levels of violence, including banditry and communal clashes. Why were similar measures not applied there? The truth is that the nation’s current approach to tackling insecurity is insufficient. One alternative that has gained traction is the establishment of state police. Nigeria’s policing system remains highly centralised, with command structures controlled from Abuja—a model that has proven increasingly inadequate in addressing localised security challenges.

State police would allow for more community-based policing, enabling officers familiar with local terrain and dynamics to respond more effectively. It would also improve intelligence gathering, as local officers are more likely to build trust with residents. However, the idea is not without its critics. Concerns have been raised about the potential for abuse by state governments, particularly in using the police to intimidate opponents or suppress dissent. Funding is another major challenge, as many states already struggle to meet basic financial obligations.These concerns are legitimate but not insurmountable. They can be mitigated through robust legal frameworks, effective oversight mechanisms, and a clear delineation of powers between federal and state authorities. Establishing independent State Police Service Commissions to handle recruitment, discipline, and promotions could help safeguard institutional integrity.

In addition to decentralising policing, there must be a renewed focus on intelligence reform. Investing in modern surveillance technologies, data analysis, and inter-agency coordination is essential. Security agencies must move beyond reactive strategies and adopt proactive approaches that anticipate threats. Equally important is addressing the socio-economic drivers of insecurity. Poverty, unemployment, and lack of education continue to create fertile ground for criminality and extremism. Any meaningful security strategy must therefore include efforts to improve livelihoods, expand access to education, and promote inclusive development. Furthermore, there is a need for greater accountability within the security sector. Transparent evaluation of strategies, clear performance benchmarks, and consequences for failure are necessary to ensure that policies are not just announced but effectively implemented.

Ultimately, the fight against insecurity requires more than symbolic gestures. It demands bold, innovative, and sustained reforms that address both immediate threats and their root causes. The relocation of service chiefs may offer temporary visibility, but it cannot substitute for a comprehensive national security strategy. The nation stands at a critical juncture. Continuing to rely on approaches that have yielded limited results in the past is unlikely to produce different outcomes. It is time to rethink, recalibrate, and rebuild a security architecture that is responsive, resilient, and grounded in the realities of our society.

By: Calista Ezeaku

Opinion

Beyond the Adichie Tragedy

Published

1 week 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