Opinion

Beyond Legal Reform On Power Sector (1)

Published

3 years ago

April 14, 2023

Following the recent constitutional amendment assented to by President Muhammadu Buhari, the power sector regulatory body- the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) now has powers to grant States license to generate, transmit and distribute electricity. Prior to the review, the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as ammended) in Articles 13 and 14 though positioned electric power in the concurrent legislative list for federal and state governments to legislate on electricity matters, however, restrained the powers. The states then were only permitted to interfere in areas not covered by the national grid system within that state. Interestingly, the recent amendment reviewed Article 14(b) and liberally expands the powers of states to generate, transmit and distribute electricity to areas covered by the national grid unlike pre-reform regimes. What then are the implications of the powers extended to the states to generate electricity even in areas covered by the national grid?
For decades and even with the privatisation of the sector in 2013, the electricity value chain, especially transmission and distribution are literally monopolistic. The reason for this is that even when the electricity value chain has been unbundled and components privatised, the value chain remains highly integrated due to the nature of the electricity product. Electricity in the form of electrons travels at the speed of light from generation to consumption points. Without integration, the disruptions due to poor coordination between components of the value chain can result in poor delivery.
In developed utilities, competitiveness has been introduced through market and regulatory reforms which facilitate consumers to select their preferred generators depending on tariff differences. Advanced metering technology makes this possible. More recently technological innovations are creating opportunities for households and electricity consumers to explore self-generation options apart from public grid systems. The available options range from conventional generators, solar and wind generators. An important incentive for self-generation is that the deployed smart metering solutions facilitate the sale of excess self-generated power back to the grid.
The liberalisation of the states to generate, transmit and distribute electricity has subtly de-monopolised the long existing monopoly of the value chain, making way for free competition in the market through states. Possibly, some states will subsequently make investments in the power sector that will give rise to more electricity generation and supply. However, the question is, how much of additional generated power can be accommodated and integrated into the current Nigerian grid system?
Arguably, there may be a dire need for states to massively invest in further strengthening electricity network infrastructure which has been one of the major causes of the unstable poor supply in many parts of the country. There are privately-owned distribution infrastructure that have been in use for over four decades, hence, the need for upgrade. Equally, some government owned power generating plants which are yet to be concessioned and the Transmission Company of Nigeria (TCN) require significant capital outlay in order to upgrade the assets to the growing national power demand. Even if there was sufficient generated electricity, in most cases, those worn-out infrastructure may be incapable of accommodating such load. As such, we see excess generated electricity, unutilised. Modern technology has provided grid support and ways excess energy can be stored and utilised appropriately. This must be explored.
Given all these challenges and emerging opportunities, the most optimal way to leapfrog in the provision of improved reliable electricity, is for the state governments to consider how the potential investors would leverage on existing NERC regulations in third-party investments, franchising and eligible customer regulations before awarding investments in generation, transmission and distribution to new entrants. This way, legal hitches in utilising existing infrastructure which are privately owned can be avoided.
Depending on how the states intend to operate, the synergy between existing investors and new entrants would open up massive novel opportunities and would also see a rise of prosumers. This means producing consumers; if states allow individuals with capacity to generate their own power and distribute. This can be a good foundation to usher in clean renewable energy sources. In countries like the United Kingdom, innovative incentives (though limited in time) like feed in tariff, renewable obligation certificates were created to encourage generation of clean power through renewable sources by individuals, small and big companies alike. In fact, in the UK, some incentives like Contract for Difference, Smart Export Guarantee, Renewable Heat Incentises, etc. that encourage, support and incentivise the generation and distribution of clean energy through renewable sources are still operational.
Additionally, job creation and employment opportunities will also be a consequence of the implementation of the powers of the state. The underlying economic, social and financial advantages that would result from this are enormous. Thus, liberalising the states to generate, transmit and distribute electricity is a step in the right direction.
On the other hand, with all the positive impacts this recent amendment would likely bring to the sector, the future of existing GenCos, Transmission Company of Nigeria (TCN) and DisCos remain uncertain. With the previous monopolistic nature of the value chain, the sector battled liquidity crises, etc. Operating within an open market structure, leaves the fate of these market operators uncertain. States operating their own transmission networks may imply that the TCN which is the only body in the value chain that is 100 percent government owned and not privatised is now decentralised.
Furthermore, human capital flight may also be one of the setbacks that the current market operators may experience as states would source experienced and capable individuals to manage the state power investments. Declining collection efficiency may also be experienced especially where consumers are at liberty to switch from one electricity company to another. Consequently, the modalities for operations of the state with respect to generation, transmission and distribution of electricity must be clearly stated by NERC, the regulator. NERC may have more work to do in terms of providing innovative guidelines for customers to switch or migrate from one network to another and not just allow it to be solely an internal affair of the state.
According to the World Bank, “Nigeria has the largest number of people without access to electricity in the world”. The World Bank further states that “the power sector has not been able to keep up with demand or provide reliable supply to existing customers. Businesses in Nigeria lose about US$29 billion annually because of unreliable electricity”.
Optimistically, with the implementation of this reform by states, especially if renewable energy sources are incorporated, Nigeria may witness a record decline in the number of people without access to electricity as well as see significant improvement in electricity supply, and ultimately boost the economy. However, the success is dependent on implementing business models that would promote synergy and collaboration between the existing distribution investors and the new entrants to avoid potential rivalry that could lead to legal hitches.
Ani is a Lawyer & Renewable Energy Expert, and reachable through email: nkemani2011@yahoo.comBeyond Legal Reform on Power Sector.
By Ani Nkemjika Nnenne
Following the recent constitutional amendment assented to by President Muhammadu Buhari, the power sector regulatory body- the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) now has powers to grant States license to generate, transmit and distribute electricity. Prior to the review, the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in Articles 13 and 14 though positioned electric power in the concurrent legislative list for federal and state governments to legislate on electricity matters, however, restrained the powers. The states then were only permitted to interfere in areas not covered by the national grid system within that state. Interestingly, the recent amendment reviewed Article 14(b) and liberally expands the powers of states to generate, transmit and distribute electricity to areas covered by the national grid unlike pre-reform regimes. What then are the implications of the powers extended to the states to generate electricity even in areas covered by the national grid?
For decades and even with the privatization of the sector in 2013, the electricity value chain, especially transmission and distribution are literally monopolistic. The reason for this is that even when the electricity value chain has been unbundled and components privatized, the value chain remains highly integrated due to the nature of the electricity product. Electricity in the form of electrons travels at the speed of light from generation to consumption points. Without integration, the disruptions due to poor coordination between components of the value chain can result in poor delivery.
In developed utilities, competitiveness has been introduced through market and regulatory reforms which facilitate consumers to select their preferred generators depending on tariff differences. Advanced metering technology makes this possible. More recently technological innovations are creating opportunities for households and electricity consumers to explore self-generation options apart from public grid systems. The available options range from conventional generators, solar and wind generators. An important incentive for self-generation is that the deployed smart metering solutions facilitate the sale of excess self-generated power back to the grid.
The liberalization of the states to generate, transmit and distribute electricity has subtly de-monopolized the long existing monopoly of the value chain making way for free competition in the market through states. Possibly, some states will subsequently make investments in the power sector that will give rise to more electricity generation and supply. However, the question is, how much of additional generated power can be accommodated and integrated into the current Nigerian grid system?
Arguably, there may be a dire need for states to massively invest in further strengthening electricity network infrastructure which has been one of the major causes of the unstable poor supply in many parts of the country. There are privately-owned distribution infrastructure that have been in use for over four decades, hence, the need for upgrade. Equally, some government owned power generating plants which are yet to be concessioned and the Transmission Company of Nigeria (TCN) require significant capital outlay in order to upgrade the assets to the growing national power demand. Even if there was sufficient generated electricity, in most cases, those worn-out infrastructures may be incapable of accommodating such load. As such we see excess generated electricity, unutilized. Modern technology has provided grid support and ways excess energy can be stored and utilized appropriately. This must be explored.
Given all these challenges and emerging opportunities, the most optimal way to leapfrog in the provision of improved reliable electricity, is for the state governments to consider how the potential investors would leverage on existing NERC regulations in third-party investments, franchising and eligible customer regulations before awarding investments in generation, transmission and distribution to new entrants. This way, legal hitches in utilizing existing infrastructure which are privately owned can be avoided.
Depending on how the states intend to operate, the synergy between existing investors and new entrants will open up massive novel opportunities and will also see a rise of prosumers. This means producing consumers; if states allow individuals with capacity to generate their own power and distribute. This can be a good foundation to usher in clean renewable energy sources. In countries like the United Kingdom, innovative incentives (though limited in time) like feed in tariff, renewable obligation certificates were created to encourage generation of clean power through renewable sources by individuals, small and big companies alike. In fact, in the UK, some incentives like Contract for Difference, Smart Export Guarantee, Renewable Heat Incentives, etc. that encourage, support and incentivize the generation and distribution of clean energy through renewable sources are still operational.
Additionally, job creation and employment opportunities will also be a consequence of the implementation of the powers of the state. The underlying economic, social and financial advantages that will result from this are enormous. Thus, liberalizing the states to generate, transmit and distribute electricity is a step in the right direction.
On the other hand, with all the positive impacts this recent amendment will likely bring to the sector, the future of existing GenCos, TCN and DisCos remain uncertain. With the previous monopolistic nature of the value chain, the sector battled liquidity crises, etc. Operating within an open market structure, leaves the fate of these market operators uncertain. States operating their own transmission networks may imply that the Transmission Company of Nigeria (TCN) which is the only body in the value chain that is 100% government owned and not privatized is now decentralized.
Furthermore, human capital flight may also be one of the setbacks that the current market operators may experience as states will source experienced and capable individuals to manage the state power investments. Declining collection efficiency may also be experienced especially where consumers are at liberty to switch from one electricity company to another. Consequently, the modalities for operations of the state with respect to generation, transmission and distribution of electricity must be clearly stated by NERC, the regulator. NERC may have more work to do in terms of providing innovative guidelines for customers to switch or migrate from one network to another and not just allow it to be solely an internal affair of the state.
According to the World Bank, “Nigeria has the largest number of people without access to electricity in the world”. The World Bank further states that “the power sector has not been able to keep up with demand or provide reliable supply to existing customers. Businesses in Nigeria lose about US$29 billion annually because of unreliable electricity”.
Optimistically, the implementation of this reform by states, especially if renewable energy sources are incorporated, Nigeria may witness a record decline in the number of people without access to electricity as well as see significant improvement in electricity supply, and ultimately boost the economy. However, the success is dependent on implementing business models that will promote synergy and collaboration between the existing distribution investors and the new entrants to avoid potential rivalry that can lead to legal hitches.

By: Ani Nkemjika Nnenne
Ani is a Lawyer & Renewable Energy Expert, and reachable through email: nkemani2011@yahoo.com

Opinion

Agony In Ivory Tower

Published

23 hours 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

Opinion

Strength of Emotional Equality

Published

23 hours ago

March 9, 2026

The Tide

Quote: “Love thrives not when one gives more, but when both give fully — not in competition, not in performance, but in partnership.”

In every healthy relationship, there exists an invisible balance. It is not measured in grand gestures, expensive gifts, or public displays of affection. It is measured in something quieter and far more significant: emotional equality. When couples stand on equal emotional grounds, love becomes less of a negotiation and more of a partnership. Emotional equality does not mean both individuals express love in identical ways. It does not require matching personalities or mirroring temperaments. Rather, it speaks to balance — a shared willingness to invest, to communicate, to be vulnerable, and to grow. It is the difference between two people walking side by side and one person constantly trying to catch up.

In many relationships, imbalance begins subtly. One partner initiates most conversations. One apologizes more frequently. One carries the emotional labor — remembering important dates, managing conflicts, sensing tension, and attempting reconciliation. Over time, this uneven distribution of emotional effort breeds exhaustion. The partner who gives more begins to feel unseen. The one who gives less may grow comfortable in emotional passivity. Love, in such a space, starts to tilt — slowly at first, then significantly. Resentment can creep in quietly, disguising itself as patience. Silence may replace honest dialogue. What once felt effortless begins to feel heavy.

When couples stand on equal emotional grounds, responsibility is shared. Both people are accountable for the health of the relationship. If conflict arises, neither hides behind silence nor dominates through control. Instead, they engage. They listen. They speak honestly without weaponizing words. Equality creates safety — and safety strengthens intimacy. It allows both individuals to express needs without fear of ridicule or rejection. One of the most overlooked aspects of emotional equality is vulnerability. True connection requires courage. It demands that both partners risk being misunderstood. But when vulnerability is one-sided, it becomes exposure rather than intimacy. If one person consistently opens up while the other remains guarded, trust cannot fully deepen.

Equality ensures that emotional risks are mutual. Where one shares fears, the other shares too. Where one admits weakness, the other responds with openness rather than judgment. In such a space, authenticity flourishes. Another crucial element is validation. In emotionally balanced relationships, both partners feel heard. Their concerns are not dismissed as “overreactions.” Their feelings are not minimized or compared. When couples operate on equal emotional ground, they acknowledge each other’s experiences as legitimate. They may not always agree, but they always respect. Validation does not mean surrendering one’s viewpoint; it means recognizing that another’s emotional reality matters.

Equality also protects individuality. Contrary to popular belief, healthy love does not erase personal identity — it enhances it. When both partners are emotionally secure, they do not feel threatened by each other’s independence. Personal ambitions are encouraged, not resented. Friendships are respected, not restricted. Growth is celebrated, not feared. Standing on equal emotional grounds means neither person shrinks to accommodate the other. Instead, both expand, knowing the relationship is strong enough to hold their evolution. Power dynamics often expose emotional inequality. When one partner controls communication — appearing and disappearing unpredictably, withholding affection, or using silence as leverage — imbalance emerges.

Emotional dominance weakens intimacy. It creates anxiety instead of assurance. But when couples share emotional power, there is consistency. There is clarity. There is no need to decode affection because it is offered freely and intentionally. It is important to understand that equality does not imply perfection. Couples will still disagree. They will face stress, miscommunication, and moments of frustration. However, when emotional footing is equal, conflict does not threaten the foundation. Instead, it becomes an opportunity for understanding. Both partners approach challenges as teammates rather than opponents. They choose resolution over ego and repair over pride.

Time often reveals whether emotional equality truly exists. In the early stages of love, intensity can disguise imbalance. Enthusiasm feels mutual. Effort appears equal. But as routine settles in and novelty fades, the structure of the relationship becomes clearer. Who still initiates? Who still invests? Who still shows up consistently? Sustainable love requires sustained balance. It is built not merely on attraction, but on deliberate reciprocity. Standing on equal emotional grounds requires intentionality. It demands honest conversations about needs and expectations. It requires both partners to examine their habits — whether they withdraw during tension, avoid accountability, or rely on the other to carry the emotional weight. Emotional maturity is not about avoiding conflict; it is about handling it responsibly and returning, again and again, to shared ground.

Perhaps the greatest benefit of emotional equality is peace. There is no constant anxiety about where one stands. No guessing games about commitment. No fear that affection may suddenly disappear. Instead, there is stability. There is reassurance. There is mutual effort. In a world where relationships often blur the lines between attention and commitment, equality offers clarity. It reminds us that love should not feel like competition or performance. It should feel like partnership. When couples stand on equal emotional grounds, they build something resilient. They build trust that does not fracture easily. They build respect that does not depend on mood. They build a connection rooted not only in passion but in balance. And in that balance, love finds its strength — not in who gives more, but in how both give fully.

By: Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi

Opinion

NDDC: Time To Illuminate Homes

Published

1 week ago

March 2, 2026

The Tide

Quote:“Twenty-five years on, the Niger Delta cannot celebrate illuminated streets while families sit in darkness. Development must begin inside the home — where children study, businesses grow, and lives are built — before it glows on the roadside.”

The Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) was established in 2000 with a clear and urgent mandate: to facilitate the rapid, even, and sustainable development of Nigeria’s oil-producing Niger Delta region. The creation of the Commission followed decades of agitation over environmental degradation, infrastructural neglect, and socio-economic marginalization in the region. Its core mandate included the development of roads, bridges, electricity, water supply, health facilities, education, housing, environmental remediation, and economic empowerment initiatives. At inception, expectations were high that the Commission would transform the Niger Delta into a model of regional development. Over the years, the NDDC has indeed implemented numerous projects across the nine Niger Delta states. Roads have been constructed and rehabilitated in several communities, easing transportation challenges.

Schools have been renovated, and new classroom blocks have been provided in underserved areas. Health centres have been built or upgraded, improving access to primary healthcare services. The Commission has also awarded scholarships to students, including foreign postgraduate scholarships, empowering thousands of youths academically.Skills acquisition and youth empowerment programmes have helped many young people gain vocational competencies.Through various interventions, the NDDC has contributed to job creation and local economic stimulation.Solar-powered street lighting projects have been widely implemented in urban and semi-urban communities. These streetlights have improved visibility at night and contributed to enhanced security in some areas. Markets, highways, and public spaces illuminated by solar lights have experienced extended business hours.

For these efforts, the Commission deserves acknowledgment and commendation. However, development must always align with foundational mandates and pressing grassroots realities. A growing concern among residents is that while streets are illuminated, many homes remain in darkness. Rural electrification and household power access remain inconsistent and inadequate across large parts of the region. In riverine and remote communities, families still rely on generators, kerosene lamps, or complete darkness after sunset. The irony of brightly lit streets juxtaposed with powerless homes cannot be ignored. Electricity at the household level directly impacts education, health, and small-scale enterprise. Students cannot effectively study at night without reliable indoor lighting.Families cannot preserve food or power essential appliances without stable electricity.

Micro and small businesses struggle to grow without dependable energy access. While street lighting enhances public aesthetics and security, it does not substitute for domestic electrification. The proverb “charity begins at home” is especially relevant in this context. True community development must first empower households before beautifying public spaces. The Commission’s original mandate emphasizes integrated and sustainable development, not isolated infrastructural gestures. Balanced development requires that energy interventions prioritize homes alongside streets. Solar technology presents a unique opportunity for decentralized household electrification in off-grid communities. Extending solar solutions to individual homes would have a transformative social impact. Home-based solar systems could power lights, fans, small appliances, and communication devices.

Such interventions would reduce poverty, improve living standards, and stimulate grassroots productivity. By broadening its energy focus, the Commission would better reflect the spirit of its founding legislation. This is not a call to abandon street lighting projects, which have their merits. Rather, it is an appeal for balance, inclusivity, and alignment with core developmental objectives. Strategic planning should ensure that rural electrification and household access form a central pillar of ongoing interventions. Community engagement and needs assessments can help determine priority areas for household solar deployment. Twenty-five years after its establishment, the NDDC stands at a reflective moment in its institutional journey. The people of the Niger Delta say: thank you for the efforts so far—but not very much—because true appreciation will come when development begins at home and radiates outward, not merely when streets shine while houses remain in darkness.

By: King Onunwor