Editorial
That Demand For Emergency Powers
As the National Assembly resumes from
recess this week, Nigerians may have
to start a debate on whether or not President Muhammadu Buhari should be granted special (emergency) powers to fix the economy. Already, the controversy on the subject is indicative of its importance.
According to reliable sources, the Presidency has put together what is tagged as “Emergency Economic Stabilisation Bill 2016” and would formally present it to the National Assembly when it resumes. Already, the contents and prayers of the bill are so far-reaching to justify fears in some sections of the country.
Some analysts have stated that Nigeria had gone through two earlier recessions, one of which was under the same Muhammadu Buhari. They insist that the administration does not need any emergency economic powers because the same was applied on the previous recessions and it failed.
They believe that a different strategy was required because the fall of the mono-product economy that caused the last recessions is the same responsible for the current one. Apart from revelations that such powers were used to rob Nigerians in the past, the hope of doing things the same way and expecting something different is particularly condemnable.
While re-echoing the saying that the Nigerian President is the most constitutionally empowered in the world, they feared that such extra powers can also be abused. The thinking is that a President, who spent all his adult life in the military, has all the instincts of a dictator. Of course, power corrupts and absolute powers even worse.
That is why we think that this piece of legislation should be looked at with every sense of maturity and responsibility. It is true Nigeria is in a recession and many persons cannot wait to get out of it, but should Nigerians lose their freedoms in the process or be exposed to lawless state, where one man will be empowered to do as he pleases?
Already, the administration has given reason to many people to doubt their understanding of economic matters and the freeness to deal with all Nigerians fairly and equally. People still refer to the lopsided appointments at the federal level, the indifference to the fatal activities of herdsmen and the denials of electoral promises made to Nigerians.
The Tide doubts that the emergency powers are truly needed for the purpose of doing something different for the economy. This is moreso, because if the President is to pursue any major change in the way the economy is managed, the first step should have been to fire the economic team. To expect the same persons to introduce change is out of order.
We are indeed bothered that some persons would want Nigeria to drop aspects of her laws before they can function. Nigerians chose democracy because it has answers to all these challenges, especially the economy. Anyone who is not able to function under a lawful State is not fit to operate in a democracy and should look elsewhere.
In fairness to the Federal Government, the emergency powers may be well intended and aimed at healing the economy, but the details of the law and its dependable implementation is what everybody cannot vouch for. This is even made stronger by the promulgation of Decree 20 in 1984 under the same circumstance that compromised the lives of Nigerians.
In the current bill, the administration seeks wide ranging powers to among others drop some extant laws and use executive orders. If allowed, the law will empower the administration to sell some important national assets, drop due process in contract awards and do virement unilaterally among others.
The administration needs a lot of trust to be given such powers, which can easily slide into autocracy. As a country that has become politically warped, the sale of national assets and award of contracts without due process can be too much of an advantage for a particular people.
The National Assembly must take all these into consideration as it works on this bill that is full of so many loopholes for national calamity.
Editorial
Making Rivers’ Seaports Work
When Rivers State Governor, Sir Siminalayi Fubara, received the Board and Management of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA), led by its Chairman, Senator Adeyeye Adedayo Clement, his message was unmistakable: Rivers’ seaports remain underutilised, and Nigeria is poorer for it. The governor’s lament was a sad reminder of how neglect and centralisation continue to choke the nation’s economic arteries.
The governor, in his remarks at Government House, Port Harcourt, expressed concern that the twin seaports — the NPA in Port Harcourt and the Onne Seaport — have not been operating at their full potential. He underscored that seaports are vital engines of national development, pointing out that no prosperous nation thrives without efficient ports and airports. His position aligns with global realities that maritime trade remains the backbone of industrial expansion and international commerce.
Indeed, the case of Rivers State is peculiar. It hosts two major ports strategically located along the Bonny River axis, yet cargo throughput has remained dismally low compared to Lagos. According to NPA’s 2023 statistics, Lagos ports (Apapa and Tin Can Island) handled over 75 per cent of Nigeria’s container traffic, while Onne managed less than 10 per cent. Such a lopsided distribution is neither efficient nor sustainable.
Governor Fubara rightly observed that the full capacity operation of Onne Port would be transformative. The area’s vast land mass and industrial potential make it ideal for ancillary businesses — warehousing, logistics, ship repair, and manufacturing. A revitalised Onne would attract investors, create jobs, and stimulate economic growth, not only in Rivers State but across the Niger Delta.
The multiplier effect cannot be overstated. The port’s expansion would boost clearing and forwarding services, strengthen local transport networks, and revitalise the moribund manufacturing sector. It would also expand opportunities for youth employment — a pressing concern in a state where unemployment reportedly hovers around 32 per cent, according to the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS).
Yet, the challenge lies not in capacity but in policy. For years, Nigeria’s maritime economy has been suffocated by excessive centralisation. Successive governments have prioritised Lagos at the expense of other viable ports, creating a traffic nightmare and logistical bottlenecks that cost importers and exporters billions annually. The governor’s call, therefore, is a plea for fairness and pragmatism.
Making Lagos the exclusive maritime gateway is counter productive. Congestion at Tin Can Island and Apapa has become legendary — ships often wait weeks to berth, while truck queues stretch for kilometres. The result is avoidable demurrage, product delays, and business frustration. A more decentralised port system would spread economic opportunities and reduce the burden on Lagos’ overstretched infrastructure.
Importers continue to face severe difficulties clearing goods in Lagos, with bureaucratic delays and poor road networks compounding their woes. The World Bank’s Doing Business Report estimates that Nigerian ports experience average clearance times of 20 days — compared to just 5 days in neighbouring Ghana. Such inefficiency undermines competitiveness and discourages foreign investment.
Worse still, goods transported from Lagos to other regions are often lost to accidents or criminal attacks along the nation’s perilous highways. Reports from the Federal Road Safety Corps indicate that over 5,000 road crashes involving heavy-duty trucks occurred in 2023, many en route from Lagos. By contrast, activating seaports in Rivers, Warri, and Calabar would shorten cargo routes and save lives.
The economic rationale is clear: making all seaports operational will create jobs, enhance trade efficiency, and boost national revenue. It will also help diversify economic activity away from the overburdened South West, spreading prosperity more evenly across the federation.
Decentralisation is both an economic strategy and an act of national renewal. When Onne, Warri, and Calabar ports operate optimally, hinterland states benefit through increased trade and infrastructure development. The federal purse, too, gains through taxes, duties, and improved productivity.
Tin Can Island, already bursting at the seams, exemplifies the perils of over-centralisation. Ships face berthing delays, containers stack up, and port users lose valuable hours navigating chaos. The result is higher operational costs and lower competitiveness. Allowing states like Rivers to fully harness their maritime assets would reverse this trend.
Compelling all importers to use Lagos ports is an anachronistic policy that stifles innovation and local enterprise. Nigeria cannot achieve its industrial ambitions by chaining its logistics system to one congested city. The path to prosperity lies in empowering every state to develop and utilise its natural advantages — and for Rivers, that means functional seaports.
Fubara’s call should not go unheeded. The Federal Government must embrace decentralisation as a strategic necessity for national growth. Making Rivers’ seaports work is not just about reviving dormant infrastructure; it is about unlocking the full maritime potential of a nation yearning for balance, productivity, and shared prosperity.
Editorial
Addressing The State Of Roads In PH
Editorial
Charge Before New Rivers Council Helmsmen
-
News9 hours agoNew INEC Chair Pledges Free, Fair, Credible Polls
-
Nation9 hours agoNIOB President Calls For Innovation, Entrepreneurship In Housing Delivery
-
News9 hours agoNLNG, NCDMB Unveil ICT Centre In P’Harcourt To Boost Tech Skills
-
Business8 hours agoNigeria’s Gold, Other Solid Minerals Being Stolen – NEC
-
Niger Delta8 hours agoOando Recommits To Education …Assures Continuous Partnership With RSU
-
Politics7 hours agoReps Ask FG To Curb Arbitrary Rent Hike Nationwide
-
Opinion11 hours ago
Fuel Subsidy Removal and the Economic Implications for Nigerians
-
Featured7 hours agoFubara Pledges Cleaner Gateway To PH City …Visits New Dumpsite At Igwuruta
