Connect with us

Opinion

On  Forex Restriction Policy

Published

on

When on June 23, 2015, the immediate past federal government, through a circular from the Central Bank of Nigeria, CBN, placed a ban on forex in the Nigerian Foreign Exchange Market for 43 items, some Nigerians raised concern on the possible effect of such restriction on the nation’s economy.
They advised that forex restriction on rice, cement, margarine, palm kernel, palm oil products, vegetable oils, meat and processed meat products, vegetables and processed vegetable products; poultry and processed poultry products; tinned fish in sauce (geisha)/sardine; toothpicks and many more could contribute to inflationary pressures as there would be limited availability of foreign exchange for these essential goods, adding that when businesses face higher costs for imports, these costs often get passed on to consumers through increased prices for locally produced goods and services.
It could be recalled that some economists appeared on interview programmes on the media, educating that forex restrictions could create instability in the foreign exchange market, as the demand for forex may exceed its supply. This they said could lead to multiple exchange rates, with a significant gap between the official exchange rate and the parallel market rate, which can deter foreign investors and distort the economy.
Some people in the manufacturing sector warned that forex restrictions could lead to shortages of imported goods, including essential commodities and critical inputs for manufacturing and that businesses might struggle to maintain production, leading to supply disruptions and affecting employment and economic growth.
They warned that the policy would impact negatively on businesses as industries that rely heavily on imported raw materials or machinery could face operational difficulties, reduced production, and increased costs, which could lead to job losses and lower economic growth
Some other citizens were worried that forex restrictions would lead to the growth of black markets, where foreign exchange is traded at unofficial rates and could create opportunities for illegal activities and capital flight; that the policy could discourage foreign investors, as they could find it challenging to repatriate their profits and may be concerned about the business environment’s unpredictability; that over time, forex restrictions can deplete a country’s foreign exchange reserves, making it more vulnerable to external shocks and economic instability.
Incidentally, the government paid a deaf ear to these warnings.  They claimed that restricting the items from accessing FX from investors and exporters (I & E) window was aimed at reducing foreign exchange demand for products that could be locally produced, improve employment generation and conserve foreign reserves as well as protecting and growing the local industries.
Today, eight years later, amidst the constant downward sliding of the nation’s currency, scarcity of forex and a collapsing economy, the forex restriction is lifted by the same apex bank that said the forex restriction policy was the ultimate and would take the nation’s economy to Eldorado.
Sometimes, it is difficult to understand the reasons behind some government’s actions and policies. Could it be for their selfish reasons, religious, political, tribal considerations or what? Is it in the interest of the nation and the citizens as they always claim? What has the general masses benefitted from the constant policy summersault other than economic hardship, increased poverty, hunger and the likes?
It is good that the House of Representatives had resolved to invite the Governor of CBN, Olayemi Cardoso, to give clarifications on the forex lifting policy and its implications on the economy. Let him go and explain to the nation how the latest policy will improve the nation’s economy and better the lots of the people. What will the increased demand for dollars, an inevitable result of the policy, do to our local economy?
What will be his answer to the fears expressed by the law makers and indeed many other Nigerians that the policy will impact negatively on the indigenous industries?  Will it put more pressure on the scare forex, impact negatively on the indigenous industries and have an adverse effect on the already poor economy generally?  Will it make it difficult for Nigeria to be competitive in the African Continental Free Trade Area because the markets will be flooded with imported finished goods as the law makers opined?
However, much as one identifies with the reason for some people’s pessimism over the lifting of the forex ban, it is imperative that we interrogate the gains of the ban while it lasted from 2015 till two weeks ago. How much changed throughout the period of banning of those items?  Did it lead to the growth of the local industries as envisaged? How much attention and financial support was given to these industries to reinvigorate them?
Yes, it could be said that the policy led to the drive to bolster the production of local rice. The commitment of Muhammadu Buhari’s administration towards ensuring self-sufficiency in rice was very visible. The partial closure of the western border with Benin to curb rice smuggling, the anchor – borrowers programme of the CBN were some of the government’s attempt to boost local production even though it did not result in rice pyramid as Buhari and former CBN Governor, Godwin Emefiele claimed.
Apparently, these interventions did not lead to the availability of rice and at affordable price. We recall the former Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, Audu Ogbeh, boasting in 2019 that the price of 50kg bag of local rice will crash from N18,000 to N13,000. That was never to be. Today, it goes for between N45,000 to 52,000 depending on the brand and your location.
The familiar problems of insecurity, high cost of energy, poor infrastructure, near nonexistent power, inadequate funding, irregular taxes, high exchange rate, unfavourable government policies and many more, made and still make the cost of production of the previously forex banned items very high. You can imagine farmers in some northern states paying bandits up to N1.7million annually as tax and harvest fees before they can have access to their farms and avoid being abducted as reported in the media.
The President of the Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN), Francis Meshioye, recently disclosed that the unrelenting increase in production costs is posing a serious threat to the existence of the manufacturing sector. He said, “Currently, the cost of manufacturing is daily rising, owing to scarce and unavailable manufacturing inputs that continue to shrink profitability and threaten the existence of the critical sector of the economy.
“More worrisome is the fact that the sector that should propel job creation, productivity, and economic growth is enmeshed with a series of challenges that constantly limit its contribution to the Gross Domestic Product.”
Therefore, the law makers should not stop at inviting the CBN governor. They should come up with good legislations that will help in tackling these challenges. They should collaborate with the executive arm of government to save the economy from collapsing.
The legislators should also demonstrate their desire to see the economy bounce back by sacrificing some of their luxuries. They should discourage the executives from obtaining foreign loans to be shared to them and to buy exquisite cars for them or to be shared to the so called 15 million families for feeding for three months.
These monies should be channelled into subsidising power, provision of infrastructure, quality health care to the poor masses and in other avenues that will boost the economy.
Someone recently said that the government does not need advice on how to revive the nation’s economy and that is true. The economy is currently being driven by renowned economic experts. They have launched the 8-point agenda of President Bola Tinubu in addition to other policy reforms and beautiful ideas on how to make the economy vibrant again. What is needed now is for them to walk the talk.

By: Calista Ezeaku

Continue Reading

Opinion

Checking Voter Apathy In Nigeria’s Electoral Process 

Published

on

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
Continue Reading

Opinion

Oil Exploration Mustn’t Cost Lives 

Published

on

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
Continue Reading

Opinion

Gift Or Will: Why Wait Until Death To Give?  

Published

on

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
Continue Reading

Trending