Opinion

Delay In Implementation of UNEP Report, In Whose Interest?

Published

14 years ago

August 13, 2012

One year after the United Nations Environmental programme
(UNEP), submitted assessment report on Ogoniland, the Federal government is yet
to act on the recommendations of the report which include clean up and
remediation of the area. Our Correspondent, Calista Ezeaku went to town to
sample views on the delayed implementation of the report. Nwuieh Donatus Ken
captured their facial expressions.

Chief Gilbert Warinee – Community Leader

I come from an oil bearing community where we have
precisely, over sixteen oil wells. And the UNEP report was one of the reports
Ogoni people had in the history of the operation of Shell oil company in Ogoni
land. And the entire Ogoni people are not happy over the delay in
implementating that report because it was one of the best scientific reports we
have ever had. And we feel that if that report is implemented, it will do a lot
to benefit the entire Ogoni people. We feel that if that report is implemented,
it will tackle some of the problems we have in Ogoniland.

We are still dialoguing, pleading with government to act on
the report. But at the end of the day, we will not have any other option than
to seek redress because it was one of the best reports we feel that was done to
Ogoni people. So for now, we are still dialoguing and consulting because we,
the Ogoni people are peaceful, we don’t make problems. So we are still pleading
with government to implement that report.

We do not want government to set up any other committee to
look into that report because that report is of international standard, and so
we expect government to come and implement it.

The state government should join the Ogoni people to plead
with the federal government to implement the report. Ogoni belongs to Rivers
State and Rivers State should prevail on the federal government to implement.

I was a member of that UNEP Board. To the best of my
knowledge, I was the focal person in Ogoni land that represented the entire
Khana local government Area. I was a member of the UNEP Consultation Committee.
So I know much about that report, how it started and how it ended and even when
it was submitted. So since after that investigation, we are not happy because
the whole area is polluted, we don’t even have drinking water. And by the
report we had, Ogoni people have lost lives, because the whole area was devastated,
the whole area was polluted. We had expected that by now, even as common as
potable drinking water would have been provided by government. But we are still
drinking the water that make people lose their lives.

So we are not happy. We want government to immediately
implement that report, Shell had always said that all that happened in Ogoni
land was sabotage but by the report, we have seen that Shell was instrumental
to all the pollution, all the devastation we have in Ogoni land, because for
donkey years Shell has been operating in the area and has not done anything to
alleviate the sufferings of the people. And so, both Shell and the federal
government should come together and implement that report.

Alhaji Umaru Sornda Ewunee, an artist

On the issue of that UNEP report, we can see that the
Federal government is delaying, Shell is delaying. They know the lives of the
Ogonis are at stake here. All our environment, our sources of existence have
been devastated by the pollution and for them not to come and clean up the
area, it then means they don’t regard us. This was what Ken Saro Wiwa was
talking about before he was killed. And the continued delay of this clean up is
really affecting us. We really want them to come and clean up the area because
it is affecting us. For example, in my community, Kpean in Khana LGA, which is
one of the oil producing areas, this thing has been happening.

The first time it happened in 1975, it was like that, since
then the whole community has been suffering from pollution. Our source of
drinking water is polluted because of oil exploration. In 2006, there was
another explosion and it was burning for about six months. For about six
months, the fire was raging and it damaged the environment. So we don’t see why
they should not come and clean up the whole place.

The truth there is that the Ogoni people are going to come
out in protest if they don’t come up with any remedial measure. I believe this
second time we will come out, it will be the end of every thing with the
Federal government. Our first coming out was on January 4, 1993 when the whole
Ogonis came out and protested against the environmental problems caused by
Shell in the area. So if we come out this second time, it is going to be very
serious.

We heard the state government has been sending drinking
water to the people, particularly the Eleme people in tanks. That is
appreciated but for how long can that continue? How can we continue like that?
The best thing they should do is to come and clean up the place to give us good
source of drinking water. Our streams where we used to get drinking water from
are polluted. We don’t have any source of drinking water in my community, the
so-called bore holes sunk by Shell are not working. All that you see there are
just empty over head water tanks. Because of the devastation of the area,
erosion has set in and the whole place is contaminated, including oil spillage
and the rest of them.

So they should come and clean up the place so that we can
start to enjoy normal life again.

Mr. Benedict Tambari – Environmentalist/Politician

The federal government is merely playing politics with the
UNEP report. If not, why should the Federal government come up with another
thing they called Hydro carbon Pollution Restoration Project (HYPREP) instead
of implementation of the report that was submitted one year ago.

It clearly shows lack of sincerity on the part of the
federal government. The way the government reacts to environmental issues in
the Niger Delta, particularly in Ogoniland is condemnable.

Why should government be going the way they are going on an
issue that concerns the lives of the people. These are people that depend on
the soil and the rivers for their livelihood. Today, all that have been
polluted as a result of oil exploration that has been going on here for years,
both the federal government and the oil companies are finding it difficult to
compensate the people whose means of livelihood has been damaged and who are
exposed to all kinds of sickness due to the poor environment they dwell in.

Now, let me remind government that the youth restiveness in
the Niger Delta started because of the government’s total neglect on the
region.

You cannot oppress the people and mete out injustice on them
and expect them to keep quiet. I pray government should not push the Ogonis too
far. We are bonafide citizens of this country and should be treated as such.

Eucharia Somiari – Pepple, Lawyer

The United nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), does not
have to come to this place to tell us what and what not to do. Ordinarily, it
is clear, we know what to do. Clean up has to be done.

We should have carried out our own investigation on
Ogoniland to know the depth of damage that has been done. We should have done
that not to get people from abroad to do that and in reparation they would have
scooped the land, and remove all that affected area and use other fresh soil to
replace the damaged soil. The particular company that owns that field should
have done that.

The beneficiaries of that field, should have done the
reparation to know the extent of damage. That is their responsibility.

The compensation is not only in cash. What is compensation?
Compensation is bringing back a person to the position the person was before
the damaging incident took place . So, how was the soil before that incident
took place? You have to bring back that soil to what it used to be before that
incident.

The legal implication of the delay in the implementation of
that UNEP report is that they have not done anything.

They were supposed to do something before UNEP came. UNEP
has come and made some pronouncements and written to them, they are not still
taking a decision, the Ogonis should seek redress. And how will they seek the
redress? They need to seek redress with the court, with the UNEP report. And if
they have independent people, specialists that have tested the soil and made
their reports, they should join their report with the UNEP report and seek
redress.

So, I think the Federal government should set up a panel to
look into that UNEP report and take a decision concerning it. They have to
really look into that report because the people are still the way they are, and
they are Nigerians, irrespective of where they come from. So, it is very
important they look into that report.

Mrs Lilian Okonkwo, a journalist

I’m sorry to say this, but I see the delay in implementation
of the UNEP report as something usual. It is the Nigerian style. Of course, we
know that the period a report is approved and the period of implementation
could be two years, three years. And so, this is not a different case. It is
our style.

But having said that, I think it’s unfortunate, because the
Ogoni issue is an issue that needs urgent attention, talking about cleaning up
the place because the people are suffering. You will hear there is no water for
drinking. The place is polluted. And so, I think that this issue should not go
the way other issues go in Nigeria, because we know that the Ogoni case is
supposed to be a special case. It is one of the major issues that have caused
problems in Niger Delta. So if an international body has looked at the
situation there and said certain things should be done, those recommended steps
should be taken. It should not go the Nigerian way. There should be an
improvement from this Nigerian factor. The recommendation should be carried out
without delay.

The state government and the Niger Delta Development
Commission (NDDC), should work towards the fast implementation of the report
because it will enhance the living standard of the people. If there are ways
the state government can ameliorate the sufferings of the affected communities
by establishing one or two things for them, it will be highly welcomed.

Mr. Godspower Nwoke, teacher.

Sometimes it really bothers me the way things are going on
in this country. God in his own wisdom deposited the oil in the Niger Delta,
but instead of the people of the Niger Delta benefitting from the oil, we are
being exposed to all kinds of diseases as a result of the oil exploration while
the resources are used and squandered by those in power and as well as used to
develop other parts of the country.

When the UNEP report was submitted last year, we saw it as a
good thing coming to Ogoni land. We were even hoping that the scientific report
done in Ogoni will be extended to other communities in the Niger Delta whose
farm lands, water and the entire environment have been damaged because of oil
actitivites going on there.

And for federal government to sit on the report for over one
year now, is rather very unfortunate.

Opinion

Checking Voter Apathy In Nigeria’s Electoral Process

Published

11 hours ago

October 26, 2026

The Tide

Quote:“Apathy may express frustration, but surrendering our votes only gives others greater power to determine our future. Nigeria needs credible elections, accountable leaders and citizens who refuse to abandon their democratic rights.”

“I actually don’t know what is wrong with this country called Nigeria. Nothing will ever make me go out under the scorching sun to vote for anybody again. After all, my vote doesn’t count. “We go out and vote, but in the end, they announce whatever result they want and tell the opponents to go to court. Is this the Nigeria we all want?” These are the frustrations of many Nigerians who have lost faith in the electoral process. For them, elections have become a cycle of high expectations, alleged irregularities and disappointing outcomes. Consequently, many are becoming indifferent to how political leaders emerge and what they do after assuming office. This growing voter apathy poses a serious threat to Nigeria’s democracy and must be addressed before the 2027 general election.

Some politicians, including councillors, local government chairmen, members of the House of Representatives, senators and governors, have disappointed the people they were elected to represent. Constituents who expect their representatives to address pressing community needs often complain of neglect, poor performance and limited engagement after elections.bAs Chinua Achebe’s celebrated novel, “Things Fall Apart”, suggests, things appear to be falling apart in Nigeria’s electoral system. Yet, withdrawing from the electoral process is not the solution. Rather, it could worsen the situation by allowing a relatively small proportion of voters to determine the country’s political future. Recently, the National Orientation Agency (NOA) launched a nationwide grassroots mobilisation campaign to address voter apathy, vote buying and electoral violence ahead of the 2027 general election.

The campaign, themed “Your Vote, Your Voice, Our Future: Say No to Apathy, Vote Buying and Violence. Let’s Build a United Nigeria in 2027,” was inaugurated in Abuja. Speaking at the event, the Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mohammed Idris, commended the agency for the initiative, emphasizing that citizens must recognize the importance of their votes in determining the country’s political leadership and future. He warned that voter apathy, vote buying and electoral violence threatened democratic development, calling for stronger collaboration among government institutions, electoral authorities, security agencies, community leaders and citizens. The Director-General of the NOA, Mallam Lanre Issa-Onilu, explained that the agency would deploy its state directorates across the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory to promote responsible electoral participation.

The campaign will use local languages, radio programmes, town hall meetings, community dialogues, drama and digital platforms to reach Nigerians in both urban and rural communities. The Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Joash Ojo Amupitan, also reaffirmed the commission’s commitment to conducting free, fair, transparent, inclusive and credible elections in 2027. He stressed the importance of early preparation, stakeholder collaboration and active citizen participation. These initiatives are commendable. However, their success will depend on sustained implementation rather than public announcements alone. Voter education must continue beyond election periods, while electoral institutions must demonstrate through their conduct that citizens’ votes deserve protection.

The government, political parties, electoral authorities and civil society organisations (CSOs) all have important roles to play. First, governments must demonstrate genuine commitment to credible elections by rejecting electoral manipulation, vote buying and the use of thugs to intimidate voters. Electoral offences must be investigated and prosecuted in accordance with the law. Security agencies must also remain professional and impartial throughout the electoral process. Beyond elections, elected officials must deliver the dividends of democracy. Reliable electricity, accessible healthcare, quality education, good roads and employment opportunities can help restore public confidence in governance. Citizens are more likely to participate when they see that democracy can improve their lives.

Political officeholders must also change their attitude towards their constituencies. Representatives should maintain regular contact with their constituents, explain their activities and demonstrate how they address local concerns. Representation should not end with election campaigns, nor should elected officials remember their constituents only when another election approaches. CSOs and political parties must intensify voter education, helping citizens understand that voting is a fundamental democratic right and an important means of holding leaders accountable. Voters should also learn to verify electoral information, report irregularities through appropriate channels and reject inducements that compromise their choices.

The electorate, too, has responsibilities. Voters must resist the temptation to sell their votes for money, food or other temporary benefits. Although economic hardship makes such inducements attractive to some, selling a vote undermines the opportunity to demand accountable leadership. Equally important is the rejection of electoral violence and misinformation. Nigerians must learn to disagree politically without becoming enemies. Citizens should verify claims before sharing them, particularly on social media, and report suspected electoral malpractice to the appropriate authorities. Participation also extends beyond voting. Citizens can attend community meetings, question elected representatives, monitor public projects and demand transparency between elections.

Nevertheless, citizens cannot be expected to sustain enthusiasm when credible complaints are ignored or electoral processes lack public confidence. INEC must therefore strengthen transparency, improve election logistics, communicate promptly and ensure that electoral complaints are handled in accordance with the law. Where disputes arise, the courts must provide lawful remedies. Nigeria’s democracy cannot thrive when eligible voters surrender their voices out of frustration. Restoring participation requires more than urging people to turn out on election day. It demands credible elections, responsible leadership, effective civic education and accountability. The 2027 general election presents an opportunity to rebuild public trust.

The NOA campaign is a welcome step, but all stakeholders must translate its message into action. Every eligible Nigerian should understand that a vote is not merely a mark on a ballot paper; it is an opportunity to influence the country’s future. Apathy may express frustration, but active and responsible participation offers a better chance of achieving change. The time to restore confidence in Nigeria’s electoral process is now. The earlier we act, the better for our democracy and future generations.

By: Calista Ezeaku

Opinion

Oil Exploration Mustn’t Cost Lives

Published

11 hours ago

October 26, 2026

The Tide

Quote: “No oil vessel, commercial contract or operational deadline is worth the loss of innocent lives; where environmental grievances are ignored and dialogue gives way to confrontation, the entire society pays a price that no compensation can adequately erase.”

The recent boat tragedy in Kula Kingdom, Akuku-Toru Local Government Area of Rivers State, has highlighted the troubling relationship between petroleum operations, environmental grievances and the safety of oil-producing communities. The reported loss of lives during a confrontation over an oil vessel is a painful reminder that commercial interests must never overshadow human life. The incident occurred on October 20, 2026, along the Robertkiri waterways of Kula, when a community boat capsized amid tensions surrounding the movement of the ANAMBRA BASIN Floating Storage and Offloading (FSO) vessel. Community members were reportedly protesting unresolved concerns over an alleged oil spill, environmental remediation and other outstanding obligations. Reports initially indicated that 10 people were feared dead. However, TheCable reported on October 23 that seven people had died, with five bodies recovered and two others missing. Investigations are needed to establish the circumstances surrounding the incident.

The tragedy raises fundamental questions about how disputes between oil-related businesses and host communities are managed. Why should disagreements over environmental concerns and contractual obligations escalate into situations involving loss of lives? What mechanisms exist to address grievances before they develop into dangerous confrontations? These questions demand urgent and impartial answers. For decades, communities across the Niger Delta have complained about oil pollution, damaged fishing grounds, declining livelihoods and inadequate environmental remediation. In riverine settlements such as Kula, fishing sustains many households. Pollution therefore threatens not only the environment but also food security, family income and children’s welfare.

Allegations of oil spills must not be dismissed as routine complaints or obstacles to petroleum operations. They require prompt investigation, independent environmental assessment and appropriate remediation wherever pollution is established. Disputes over compensation or contractual obligations should be resolved transparently, using verifiable records rather than confrontation. The incident also highlights the need to clarify responsibilities among vessel owners, contractors, petroleum operators and other parties. Max Shipping Services Limited, owner of the ANAMBRA BASIN vessel, has denied responsibility for the underlying oilfield operations and explained that the vessel was hired to Menal Technical Services Limited. These claims must be examined alongside community allegations and available evidence. No company should be condemned without proof, but contractual arrangements must not shield anyone from established responsibility.

Equally important is the reported involvement of armed security personnel in the confrontation. Security agencies have a legitimate duty to maintain law and order and protect lives. However, their operations require professionalism, restraint and sound judgement, especially in tense communities. Armed personnel deployed to manage disputes should help de-escalate tensions, protect civilians and facilitate peaceful resolution. Investigators must establish the circumstances surrounding their deployment, the sequence of events leading to the boat’s capsizing and whether reasonable precautions were taken. All parties deserve a fair hearing, and anyone found culpable should face appropriate legal consequences. The Rivers State Government must not treat the incident merely as a marine accident without examining its underlying grievances.

Beyond expressing sympathy, government should support a credible investigation, assist affected families and facilitate engagement among the community, companies and regulatory agencies. Every necessary effort should also be made to locate the missing persons. Environmental and petroleum regulators must independently investigate the alleged spill and determine whether remediation is necessary. Where pollution is confirmed, responsible parties must fulfil their legal obligations. The Petroleum Industry Act provides a framework for host-community development and environmental responsibilities; these provisions must deliver practical protection for affected communities. Community leaders and youths must equally pursue legitimate demands through peaceful and lawful channels. This does not require silence in the face of pollution or alleged breaches of agreements. Rather, petitions, negotiations, peaceful protests and legal remedies can advance accountability without exposing residents to avoidable danger.

Companies and contractors must maintain effective communication with host communities and address complaints promptly, rather than engage only when disputes threaten operations. Government must intervene early, not wait until tensions erupt. Transparent agreements, independent assessments and accessible grievance mechanisms can prevent misunderstandings from escalating into deadly confrontations. The Niger Delta has endured decades of environmental concerns and disputes over the benefits and burdens of petroleum extraction. Its people should not have to risk their lives to secure attention to legitimate grievances. Oil revenue cannot justify preventable deaths or the neglect of communities where extraction takes place.

The Kula tragedy must become a turning point. Authorities must establish the truth, determine responsibility based on evidence, support bereaved families and ensure legitimate environmental concerns receive attention. Ultimately, petroleum operations should be judged not only by revenue generated or crude oil transported, but also by whether host communities enjoy environmental protection, economic opportunity and personal safety. Oil profits must never cost lives. Kula deserves justice, transparency and lasting solutions. The deaths on its waterways must not become another statistic in the Niger Delta’s troubled history. They must remind every responsible institution that no commercial interest is more valuable than human life.

By: Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi

Opinion

Gift Or Will: Why Wait Until Death To Give?

Published

1 week ago

October 19, 2026

The Tide

Quote:”The value of wealth is measured not only by what a person leaves behind but also by the good it accomplishes during that person’s lifetime. Why wait until death to give when we can make a meaningful difference in the lives of those we love today?”

Will and gifts are subjects that many people, particularly in this part of the world, are reluctant to discuss. This may be due to the misconception that they are matters reserved for the dying and that talking about them could somehow invite death. Yet, both are important subjects that everyone, young and old alike, should understand. Every property owner should ask a fundamental question: Why wait until death before allowing the people we love to enjoy the fruits of our labour? Many parents spend their productive years acquiring houses, land, businesses and other valuable assets, yet postpone sharing these blessings with their children and loved ones until they are no longer alive. They prepare Wills, appoint executors and hope their wishes will eventually be fulfilled. But is there a case for giving more generously during one’s lifetime?

A Will is an important legal instrument, and nobody should be discouraged from making one. However, lifetime gifts deserve greater attention because they allow property owners to witness the benefits of their generosity and, where properly completed, transfer ownership before death. One practical difficulty with inheritance is that writing a Will does not automatically make the property available to beneficiaries upon the testator’s death. Ordinarily, executors must obtain a grant of probate from the appropriate Probate Registry before administering the estate under the Will. The process may involve producing the original Will and death certificate, identifying executors and beneficiaries, preparing an inventory and valuation of assets, completing prescribed forms, paying applicable fees and satisfying other registry requirements. Procedures vary across jurisdictions in the country and depend on the circumstances of each estate.

Where documentation is incomplete, the estate is complex or questions arise about the Will, administration may be delayed. Matters become more difficult when a relative or beneficiary challenges the Will, enters a caveat or commences litigation. Legal expenses accumulate, family relationships deteriorate, and intended beneficiaries may wait for years before receiving their inheritance. A child expecting to inherit a house may be unable to deal freely with the property while administration remains outstanding. Similarly, a beneficiary hoping to use inherited funds to establish a business may be frustrated by delays. Across Nigeria, families have experienced difficulties accessing their late parents’ estates because of disputes over Wills and prolonged legal proceedings. See Dan Jumbo v Dan Jumbo. Where a court declares a Will invalid, those named as beneficiaries may lose their entitlement under that document, and the estate may instead be distributed under the applicable intestacy rules. Consequently, people the deceased deliberately intended to benefit may receive nothing under the disputed Will. Ajibaiye v Ajibaiye

This does not mean every challenge will succeed or that all beneficiaries will necessarily be excluded. It nevertheless highlights a risk in postponing every act of generosity until death: the intended beneficiaries may have to establish their entitlement through a process whose outcome is uncertain. A lifetime gift, commonly called a gift inter vivos, is a gift intended to take effect during the donor’s lifetime. Where validly completed, ownership of the transferred interest generally passes to the beneficiary, and the property ordinarily ceases to form part of the donor’s estate.This distinction is significant. A beneficiary who acquires valid ownership of property during the donor’s lifetime does not ordinarily have to establish entitlement to that property through the donor’s Will. The claim rests on the completed transfer rather than a testamentary promise. For instance, a parent with several properties may transfer a house to a child who needs accommodation or give land to another who wishes to build a home. A business owner may transfer an interest in a business to a child already involved in its management. These arrangements provide practical support while allowing the giver to witness the benefits.

Properly completed lifetime gifts may also reduce the assets that must subsequently pass through probate, potentially simplifying the administration of the remaining estate. However, such transfers must comply with applicable law. A mere declaration or unfulfilled promise to give land may not be sufficient. Depending on the circumstances, a gift may require an appropriate deed, acceptance, execution, registration and any necessary consent. Sections 21 and 22 of the Land Use Act 1978 regulate certain dealings involving statutory and customary rights of occupancy. Lifetime gifts are not immune from disputes though. Transfers may be challenged on grounds such as fraud, undue influence, incapacity or failure to comply with legal formalities. Proper legal advice and documentation are therefore essential. Encouraging lifetime gifts does not mean abandoning Wills. A Will remains useful for assets an owner wishes to retain throughout life, property acquired later and assets not transferred before death. It also allows the testator to appoint executors and give instructions for distributing the remaining estate.

Property owners must also avoid giving away assets indiscriminately. Adequate provision should be made for personal upkeep, accommodation, healthcare and other financial responsibilities. Parents should never be pressured into transferring their entire estates or surrendering their financial independence. Where a donor wishes to retain the right to occupy a gifted house, that arrangement should be properly structured and documented. Ultimately, the value of wealth is measured not only by what a person leaves behind but also by the good it accomplishes during that person’s lifetime. A gift of land may enable a child to build a home; financial assistance may help a young person establish a business; and a properly transferred property may provide security while the donor is still alive to share in the beneficiary’s joy. Probate is a necessary safeguard, not a reason to dismiss Wills. Nevertheless, where appropriate, lifetime gifts can reduce the property left for administration and help beneficiaries avoid waiting for assets that could have been transferred earlier.

My appeal is simple: let us cultivate a culture of thoughtful giving. Make a Will, but also consider what you can responsibly give today. Seek legal advice, document your intentions and ensure every transfer is properly completed. Why wait until death to give when we can make a meaningful difference in the lives of those we love today?

By: Calista Ezeaku