Opinion
Niger Delta: Between Ministry And NDDC
There is no disputing the fact that the challenges of developing the Niger Delta are enormous and perhaps intimidating. This gargantuan task, no doubt, requires the concerted efforts of all stake holders. The indications are that the Federal Government understands this, which explains why it adopted a multi-faceted strategy in tackling the challenges, realising that it is not an undertaking for only one or two development agencies. The justification, of course, is that undoing the damage wrought by decades of neglect and injustice would need team work.
Thus, the creation of the Ministry of Niger Delta Affairs tallies with the reasoning that all hands must be on deck to fast-track the development of the region that produces the oil-wealth of the nation. The ministry was supposed to lead and co-ordinate the infrastructural and environmental development as well as the youth empowerment programmes of the Federal Government in the region.
Despite this good intension, the ministry took off amidst controversies and apprehensions. Those who had reservations about the ministry feared that it would add another avoidable layer of bureaucracy to the effort at speeding up the development of the Niger Delta. However, those who supported its creation were hopeful that it would attract additional funds and expertise for the rapid development of the region.
A lot of premium was placed on the advantage of having two ministers who, as members of the Federal Executive Council would have a platform to articulate the development needs of the Niger Delta. Those who were still not convinced were told that the ministers would have easy access to Mr. President to ensure that he never loses sight of the Niger Delta question.
Today, however, the story appears to be different. The ministry which many had thought was coming to add value to the fortunes of the region is now confirming the worst fears of critics who predicted that it would slow down rather than enhance the activities of the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) that it was supposed to complement.
This is contrary to the general expectations that the ministry and the NDDC would team up to implement the Niger Delta Regional Development Master Plan. This unpleasant turn of events is, to say the least, shocking. You can be sure that political and community leaders who had justified the creation of the ministry are not amused.
Most people in the region had thought that a massive inflow of funds would follow the creation of the ministry to translate the lofty goals of the Master Plan into projects and programmes that would make significant impact on the lives of the people of the oil-bearing communities spread across the Niger Delta region. In fact, some people had suggested a Marshall Plan approach in addressing the developmental challenges in the region.
It is rather sad that this has not happened. To make matters worse, the ministry appears to be in a contest for superiority in its relationship with the NDDC. While other stake holders are looking up to them to play a leading role in coordinating the implementation of the widely applauded Master Plan, the ministry seems intent on bringing NDDC under its control. The power tussle is uncalled for and the ministry should know that it was not put in place to reinvent the wheel. Basically, it was created to add more impetus to the activities of other agencies of government that are already on ground and partnering with them for the benefit of the region.
Senator Ndoma-Egba, a strong voice in the Upper Legislative House of the National Assembly, puts it this way: “My understanding of the decision by the executive to create a ministry for the Niger-Delta was to empower it to help in the infrastructural development of the area in addition to, not as a replacement for ,what the NDDC is doing.”
Another lawmaker, representing Warri Federal constituency in the House of Representatives, Hon. Daniel Reyenieju, noted that the commission was established by an Act of Parliament. “On no account should the commission be merged with the ministry because the Niger Delta Ministry was created by an executive fiat while the commission came to life via an Act of Parliament which is far stronger than that of the ministry,” he said.
Again, the ministry should be conscious of the fact that up to this day, many people still believe that it is a superfluous political contraption. Only recently, for instance, the former Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Mallam Nasir el-Rufia said “the creation of the Niger Delta Ministry is a political gesture and unnecessary bureaucracy that will fail to solve the problems facing the troubled region.”
Unfortunately, the ministry seems to be preoccupied with annexing more powers and extending its spheres of influence, especially over other statutory agencies. The Minister of Niger Delta Affairs, Elder Godsday Orubebe, has never hidden his disdain for an autonomous NDDC. He has argued at every opportunity that the commission should be supervised by his ministry.
Here is what he said in a recent interview published in a national newspaper: “There is no correlation between the NDDC and the Niger Delta Ministry. If you go and attend a meeting anywhere in the world, people are talking to you about the NDDC, people are talking to you about development and as a minister, you have little or no information about what the NDDC is doing; does that present any meaningful reasoning? A minister of the Niger Delta should be able to tell development partners and whoever that is concerned what is being done by the NDDC. But today, there is no correlation.”
The minister is right in insisting on collaboration between his ministry and the NDDC. But who or what are the hindrances to this very necessary partnership? Before the ministry came on board, the NDDC had already set up a clearing house called the Partners for Sustainable Development (PSD) Forum. This important organ brings together representatives of federal and state governments of oil-bearing states, youth and women leaders, traditional rulers as well as the organized private sector, civil society, the mass media and international development agencies such as the UNDP and the World Bank. Its main function is to ensure that the developmental activities in the Niger Delta by all stakeholders are synchronized. This important organ is all that the ministry needs to key into the development programmes of the region.
Indeed, it is surprising that the ministry has not adopted the Master Plan facilitated by the NDDC as its own road map, since the Federal Government gave its blessings for the production of the comprehensive plan. The 15-year period of the plan must not be allowed to run out without any significant impact on the Niger Delta.
There is no need for this distractive schism in what should be a collective effort to rescue Niger Deltans from the pits of squalor and want. The Act setting up the NDDC clearly puts the supervision of the commission directly under the President. Note, not under the Presidency. This means that there are no obstructive go-between for the commission and the President to ensure expeditious implementation of decisions. The framers of the law were conscious of the fact that the interventionist agency must be freed of all the encumbrances of ministries which are usually weighed down by bureaucratic red tape.
Part II, Section 7 of the Niger Delta Development Commission (Establishment) Act 2000 states that: “The Commission shall be subject to the direction, control or supervision in the performance of its functions under this Act by the President, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”
Royal fathers in the region, under the aegis of Association of Traditional Rulers of Oil Mineral Producing Communities of Nigeria, have given their wise counsel to President Goodluck Jonathan on this matter. Their warning: “Don’t contemplate merging the commission with the ministry. Such action will be detrimental to the entire people of the area.”
The urgent task now is to secure more finds for the full implementation of the Master Plan for the region. There is enough room for both the ministry and the NDDC to operate and collaborate for the benefit of Niger Deltans.
Agbu, a seasoned journalist, writes from Port Harcourt.
Ifeatu Agbu
Opinion
Ken Saro-Wiwa’s Unfinished Struggle (I)
On November 10, 1995, the Nigerian military government of General Sani Abacha executed Ken Saro-Wiwa and eight other Ogoni leaders after a deeply controversial trial. Their deaths marked one of the darkest chapters in Nigeria’s history. At a time when fear silenced citizens and sycophancy flourished around military power, Saro-Wiwa chose to confront tyranny. Many Nigerians retreated into silence, while others praised the regime to secure favour. He knew the risks, yet refused to abandon a people whose land had been devastated by oil exploration and whose lives remained trapped in poverty. His courage arose from the conviction that public responsibility sometimes demands resistance to authority. Saro-Wiwa understood that speaking against a military government could lead to imprisonment or death.
Nonetheless, he believed the suffering of the Ogoni people demanded a courageous response. While oil was extracted from their land, they were left with polluted rivers, damaged farmland, declining livelihoods and an environment hostile to human survival. Fishing grounds and sources of livelihood were threatened, while the people struggled to secure basic amenities. The wealth beneath their soil brought neither adequate development nor a fair share of national resources. For him, silence in the face of injustice would have amounted to complicity. Through the Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP), he organised a peaceful campaign that took the Ogoni question to the international community. MOSOP gave ordinary people an organised platform through which to express their grievances and insist on recognition.
The Ogoni Bill of Rights, presented to the Federal Government in 1990, demanded political autonomy, economic justice, environmental protection and control over the people’s resources. The campaign exposed the human and ecological costs of oil operations, particularly those associated with Shell, and challenged the apparent alliance between corporate interests and an unresponsive State. The Ogoni struggle became a defining expression of minority rights and environmental justice in Nigeria and Africa. Saro-Wiwa’s writings and mobilisation drew attention to communities treated as expendable because of their limited population and political influence. He argued that numerical strength should never determine a people’s value or rights.
A minority community does not become less deserving of justice because it cannot command electoral numbers or political power. In Nigeria, every ethnic group deserves dignity, protection and a fair opportunity to benefit from the commonwealth. Rather than respond to peaceful agitation with dialogue, the Abacha regime resorted to repression. Ogoni leaders were harassed, detained and killed; others fled into exile. The crisis intensified after four Ogoni chiefs were killed in May 1994. Saro-Wiwa and other MOSOP leaders were arrested, tried by a special tribunal and executed despite international appeals for clemency and serious concerns about the trial’s fairness. The executions drew worldwide condemnation and intensified scrutiny of Nigeria’s human-rights record and oil companies in the Niger Delta.
They demonstrated the danger of using State institutions to suppress peaceful demands. The proceedings remain a reminder of the need for judicial independence and due process. Saro-Wiwa’s courage rested on the conviction that justice must be pursued despite the cost. His method combined non-violent resistance, public education and grassroots organisation. His struggle recalled the civil-rights campaign of Martin Luther King Jr. and the power of peaceful mobilisation against injustice. Saro-Wiwa linked environmental degradation to political exclusion, economic exploitation and the denial of democratic rights. Oil-producing communities, he insisted, should not remain zones from which wealth is removed to develop other parts of the country.
Their people must benefit through roads, schools, healthcare, jobs and clean water. Resource extraction carries a duty to protect host communities. His argument extended to the structure of the Nigerian federation. He challenged a revenue-allocation system that made oil-producing communities bear the environmental and social costs of extraction without commensurate benefits. Like advocates of fiscal federalism, he believed resources should be managed and shared equitably. He envisaged a society in which no community would be disadvantaged by its size, ethnicity, political affiliation, culture or religion. His vision was a country bound together by justice and equal citizenship. Saro-Wiwa was also a gifted writer, dramatist and public intellectual.
Through books, essays, plays and television, he documented Nigerian society’s contradictions and challenged abuses of power. His popular television series, Basi and Company, demonstrated his creative range, while his leadership of the Association of Nigerian Authors encouraged writers to engage national questions. He believed literature should not be detached from society’s struggles. His pen exposed environmental injustice, political repression and the dangers of silencing courageous voices. He used storytelling, satire and drama to shape public consciousness and expose social contradictions. His literary achievements gave his activism wider reach and made the Ogoni experience part of national conversation. His commitment to the Ogoni people extended beyond the oil question.
During the Civil War, he worked to protect his vulnerable community. He urged younger generations to reject subservience and complacency and pursue change through lawful, peaceful means. Citizens, he believed, must not surrender their responsibility to challenge wrong doing. An injury to one community threatens the rights and security of all. The return to democratic government in 1999 and the establishment of the Niger Delta Development Commission, the Ministry of Niger Delta Affairs and the Hydrocarbon Pollution Remediation Project (HYPREP) are among developments that have kept the region’s demands in public view. Saro-Wiwa did not create these institutions, but his movement helped expose the urgency of intervention and sustain pressure for redress.
His death made it harder to ignore the Niger Delta’s environmental and political grievances. Yet, interventionist institutions do not prove that the original demands have been met. Their effectiveness depends on competent leadership, transparent spending, measurable outcomes and community participation. Yet, thirty-one years after his execution, the central concerns of the Ogoni struggle remain unresolved. The HYPREP-led clean-up has offered hope, but many residents await meaningful improvements. Questions persist about the programme’s pace, quality and transparency, and whether its benefits reach ordinary people. A clean-up should be judged not by ceremonies or contracts, but by restored land and waterways, safe drinking water, improved livelihoods and better public health.
It must include long-term monitoring to ensure treated sites remain safe. Residents deserve information about contamination, remediation methods and completion timelines. Reports that water projects in Gwara and Ebubu Communities, in Khana and Eleme Local Government Areas respectively, failed weeks after commissioning have raised further concerns. If confirmed, the failures would indicate weaknesses in supervision, procurement and quality control.
To be continued in our next edition.
Taneh Beemene
Opinion
Reforming NYSC For Practical National Service
The National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) was established in 1973, after the Nigerian Civil War, to promote national unity, reconciliation and integration. By deploying graduates beyond their States of origin, its founders hoped to encourage understanding among Nigeria’s diverse peoples and help rebuild a divided country. However, the difficulties confronting corps members and their families now demand a comprehensive review. For many graduates, national service has become a period of uncertainty, financial pressure and exposure to risks. Parents who have spent years financing their children’s education must still find money for transportation, camp necessities, accommodation, feeding and other expenses. The monthly allowance may provide some relief, but often cannot meet the cost of living, especially where the place of primary assignment offers no accommodation or support.
Security is another serious concern. Corps members may be posted to communities affected by kidnapping, communal violence, insurgency or other threats. Government cannot eliminate every danger, but it must assess locations, provide reliable security information and avoid deployments where safety cannot reasonably be assured. National service should promote patriotism, not expose graduates to preventable harm. There is also the problem of securing meaningful places of primary assignment. A graduate trained in engineering may perform duties unrelated to engineering; a journalist may spend the year in an office with no opportunity to practise journalism. Graduates in agriculture, health, education and other specialised fields may likewise be assigned routine tasks that contribute little or nothing to their professional growth. Some depend on personal contacts or incur expenses to obtain suitable placements.
A year is significant for a young graduate entering a competitive labour market. National service should not be merely a compulsory waiting period before the search for employment begins. It should help bridge the gap between academic learning and practical work. The time has therefore come to review the structure of NYSC, not necessarily abolish it. I propose that the one-year programme should become vocational and professionally oriented. Graduates should, as far as practicable, be posted to institutions where they can gain supervised experience in their fields of study. Teachers should serve in schools; health graduates in suitable health facilities; engineers in technical organisations and public works departments; agricultural graduates in farms and extension services; and communication graduates in media and public information establishments.
NYSC should partner with ministries, state and local governments, private companies, professional bodies, universities, hospitals, schools and credible organisations to identify genuine training opportunities. Each member should have defined duties, a supervisor and clear learning objectives. At the end of the year, each should receive a record of duties performed and competencies acquired. The reform must also address remuneration and welfare. Corps members should receive fair pay that reflects the demands of their placements, while host organisations should provide reasonable support where possible. Government must establish transparent funding arrangements so that the new system does not become another burden imposed on employers or parents. Transport or accommodation assistance should be considered for difficult postings.
Graduates seeking jobs after service would have more than a discharge certificate: they would possess practical experience, workplace discipline and demonstrable skills. Employers would gain access to young people who have received supervised preparation. However, professional relevance should not erase the scheme’s founding objective of national integration. Inter-State deployment can remain, provided it is balanced with security, suitable placements and the availability of basic facilities. Where a safe and meaningful placement cannot be guaranteed outside a graduate’s State, an alternative should be considered. Orientation and community development activities can continue to promote cultural exchange, citizenship and service.
The Federal Government and NYSC management should convene consultations involving corps members, parents, universities, employers, security agencies and State Governments. Decisions should be based on evidence and the experiences of serving and former corps members. NYSC was created to help rebuild a nation divided by war. Its ideals remain important, but institutions must adapt to changing realities. Success should not be measured only by the number of graduates mobilised or certificates issued. It should also be measured by the skills acquired, the contribution made and whether young Nigerians complete their service safely and with dignity. It can better preserve the scheme’s founding ideals while meeting today’s economic and professional needs. A vocationally driven; adequately remunerated NYSC would turn national service from a costly obligation into a bridge between education, employment and national development. The purpose should not simply be to occupy graduates for twelve months, but to prepare them to work, serve and contribute meaningfully to Nigeria’s future.
Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi
Opinion
Protecting Nigeria’s Democratic Space
Quote: “Democracy is not
As the 2027 general elections
Organisers said they had
Police intervention
In Kaduna, the ADC accused
These claims require prompt
These rights apply equally to
No ambition, party or
By: Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi
-
News2 days ago
RSG Reaffirms Commitment To STEM Education, Technological Advancement
-
Business2 days ago
‘NUJ, NPA’s Partnership Would Boost Port Producrivity, Economic Growth’
-
News2 days agoIGP Warns Police Officers Against Partisanship …Directs Regular Engagement With Journalists
-
Business2 days ago
Fire Threat Interrupts Asaba Air Peace Flight
-
News2 days agoCustoms To Deploy AI, Scanners Against Snuggling
-
Business2 days ago
Fish Production Deficit, A Major Investment Opportunity – Minister
-
Business2 days ago
NCDMB, NLNG Unveil $9m For Professorial Endowment Research Chairs In Six Varsities
-
Politics2 days ago2027: INEC Begins Deployment Of Non-Sensitive Materials
