Opinion

Delay In Implementation of UNEP Report, In Whose Interest?

Published

14 years ago

August 13, 2012

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

Chief Gilbert Warinee – Community Leader

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

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

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

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

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

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

Alhaji Umaru Sornda Ewunee, an artist

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

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

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

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

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

Mr. Benedict Tambari – Environmentalist/Politician

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

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

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

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

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

Eucharia Somiari – Pepple, Lawyer

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mrs Lilian Okonkwo, a journalist

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

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

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

Mr. Godspower Nwoke, teacher.

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

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

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

Opinion

Bazia EXCO @ One: NUJ Rivers Reawakened

Published

3 hours ago

March 23, 2026

The Tide

Quote: “For the first time in years, Rivers journalists are not just hearing promises—they are seeing a union that works.”

The first year in office of the Paul Bazia-led executive of the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ), has offered something many had almost given up on—renewed confidence in union leadership. For a body as critical as the NUJ, whose responsibility goes beyond professional coordination to include the welfare, protection, and continuous development of journalists, expectations are always high. Unfortunately, past experiences had conditioned many members to expect less—less action, less visibility, and less impact.This is why the past twelve months stand out. Within a relatively short period, the Bazia-led administration has demonstrated a level of drive that distinguishes it from its predecessors. There is a noticeable shift from inertia to activity, from routine administration to purposeful leadership. Initiatives captured in the one-year report point to an executive that understands both the urgency of its mandate and the frustrations of its members.

Particularly commendable is the renewed attention to journalists’ welfare. For too long, welfare issues have lingered without meaningful resolution, leaving many practitioners feeling unsupported. The current leadership’s efforts—through engagement, structured support, and timely interventions—signal a welcome change in priorities. Equally important is the push toward professional development. In an era where journalism is rapidly evolving, capacity building is no longer optional. The administration’s commitment to training and skill enhancement reflects an understanding that a stronger union must be built on more competent and competitive professionals. There is also something to be said about visibility and voice. A vibrant NUJ must not only serve its members internally but also stand as a credible voice in the public space—defending press freedom, promoting ethical standards, and constructively engaging critical issues.

Encouragingly, the current executive appears more present and responsive, giving the union a renewed sense of relevance. Perhaps what resonates most, however, is the sense of movement. For many members, the difference between the present and the immediate past is not subtle—it is clear. Where there was once stagnation, there is now direction. Where there was doubt, there is growing belief. Beyond the visible strides recorded within this first year, what perhaps deserves even greater applause is the restoration of institutional confidence within the Nigeria Union of Journalists. For a long time, many members had grown disenchanted, viewing the union more as a ceremonial body than an active force capable of defending their interests and advancing their welfare. That narrative, however, is gradually changing. The Bazia-led executive has not only initiated programs but has also rekindled a sense of belonging among members.

Meetings appear more purposeful, engagements more intentional, and decisions more reflective of collective interest. This psychological shift—subtle as it may seem—is one of the most critical achievements of the past year, because a union that its members believe in is already halfway to effectiveness. It is also important to underscore the contrast with the immediate past, not as an exercise in criticism, but as a necessary context for measuring progress. Where previous administrations struggled to translate plans into action, the current leadership has shown a greater bias for execution. Projects that once lingered in discussion stages are now seeing tangible movement, and issues that were previously deferred are receiving attention. This difference in approach—moving from prolonged deliberation to decisive action—has helped reposition the union as a more responsive and relevant institution.

While no administration is without its shortcomings, the willingness to act, even in the face of constraints, marks a significant departure from what members were accustomed to. Looking ahead, the expectations of members—and indeed the wider public—will only grow stronger. With a solid first year behind it, the Bazia-led executive now carries the burden of consistency. Members will expect deeper welfare interventions that go beyond immediate relief to more sustainable support systems. They will look for expanded training opportunities that prepare journalists for the rapidly changing media landscape. They will also expect a firmer, more courageous voice on issues affecting press freedom and professional integrity. Above all, they will demand continuity—assurance that the progress recorded so far is not a fleeting phase but the beginning of a sustained transformation.

Meeting these expectations will not be easy, but it is precisely this challenge that defines enduring leadership. That said, this moment of applause must also serve as a moment of reflection. A strong first year inevitably raises expectations. Journalists in Rivers State will now look beyond initial achievements toward consolidation. Welfare interventions must become more structured and far-reaching. Training programs must be sustained and expanded. Advocacy must become more consistent and impactful. Most importantly, the unity of the union must be strengthened, ensuring that all members feel included and carried along. Transparency will also be key. Continued open communication about finances, decisions, and challenges will deepen trust and set a standard for accountable union leadership. The task ahead is clear: to convert early momentum into lasting institutional progress.

For the Bazia-led executive, the opportunity is significant. It has, within one year, reawakened belief in what the NUJ Rivers State Council can be. The next step is to ensure that this renewed energy does not fade, but instead becomes the foundation of a stronger, more responsive, and more respected union. For the members, the message is equally clear—expect more, demand more, and support what works because in the end, a vibrant union is not built by leadership alone, but by a collective commitment to progress. And for now, under Bazia, that progress has truly begun.

By: Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi

Opinion

As Service Chiefs Relocate To Borno

Published

3 hours ago

March 23, 2026

The Tide

Quote:”Relocation may signal urgency, but without structural reforms, it risks becoming a cycle of temporary relief and recurring crisis.”

Here we go again. We have seen this script play out before. Under the administration of Muhammadu Buhari, service chiefs were directed to relocate to security hotspots as a demonstration of urgency and resolve. Today, under Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the same approach is being repeated. Following the recent suicide bombing in Maiduguri, Borno State, which claimed scores of lives, the President ordered the immediate relocation of service chiefs to take charge of the situation. On paper, the directive appears logical and commendable. It suggests a hands-on approach aimed at enhancing coordination among security agencies, improving response time, and restoring public confidence. However, the critical question remains: has this strategy ever truly worked? Experience suggests otherwise. While such relocations often create a temporary sense of calm, the effect is usually short-lived.

The presence of high command tends to produce what may be described as “cosmetic stability”—a brief period of intensified operations and visibility. Yet, once the service chiefs return to Abuja, the underlying problems resurface. A clear example can be drawn from January 2018, when President Buhari ordered the then Inspector General of Police, Ibrahim Idris, to relocate to Benue State in response to escalating violence. At the time, the directive was widely praised. Yet years later, killings, displacement, and destruction of livelihoods persist, raising doubts about the long-term effectiveness of such measures. This recurring pattern has led many observers to describe relocation orders as political theatre—a performative gesture designed to project action rather than deliver sustainable results. While this may seem harsh, it is difficult to ignore the structural deficiencies that continue to undermine the nation’s security framework.

First is the issue of intelligence. Effective security operations depend not just on troop deployment but on timely, accurate, and actionable intelligence. Yet the nation’s intelligence-gathering mechanisms, particularly at the grassroots level, remain weak and poorly coordinated. Relocating service chiefs does little to address this fundamental gap. There is also the challenge of resources. Many security personnel on the frontlines continue to grapple with inadequate equipment, insufficient logistics, and poor welfare conditions. In such circumstances, the physical presence of top commanders cannot substitute for the systematic investment needed to strengthen operational capacity. Equally important is the issue of sustainability. Security is not achieved through sporadic interventions but through consistent, long-term strategies.

The relocation of service chiefs is, by its nature, temporary and does not build enduring institutions capable of sustained response. Beyond these concerns lies a pressing question: what criteria determine which states receive such high-level attention? While Borno has long been an epicentre of insurgency, other states such as Plateau and Benue have also experienced alarming levels of violence, including banditry and communal clashes. Why were similar measures not applied there? The truth is that the nation’s current approach to tackling insecurity is insufficient. One alternative that has gained traction is the establishment of state police. Nigeria’s policing system remains highly centralised, with command structures controlled from Abuja—a model that has proven increasingly inadequate in addressing localised security challenges.

State police would allow for more community-based policing, enabling officers familiar with local terrain and dynamics to respond more effectively. It would also improve intelligence gathering, as local officers are more likely to build trust with residents. However, the idea is not without its critics. Concerns have been raised about the potential for abuse by state governments, particularly in using the police to intimidate opponents or suppress dissent. Funding is another major challenge, as many states already struggle to meet basic financial obligations.These concerns are legitimate but not insurmountable. They can be mitigated through robust legal frameworks, effective oversight mechanisms, and a clear delineation of powers between federal and state authorities. Establishing independent State Police Service Commissions to handle recruitment, discipline, and promotions could help safeguard institutional integrity.

In addition to decentralising policing, there must be a renewed focus on intelligence reform. Investing in modern surveillance technologies, data analysis, and inter-agency coordination is essential. Security agencies must move beyond reactive strategies and adopt proactive approaches that anticipate threats. Equally important is addressing the socio-economic drivers of insecurity. Poverty, unemployment, and lack of education continue to create fertile ground for criminality and extremism. Any meaningful security strategy must therefore include efforts to improve livelihoods, expand access to education, and promote inclusive development. Furthermore, there is a need for greater accountability within the security sector. Transparent evaluation of strategies, clear performance benchmarks, and consequences for failure are necessary to ensure that policies are not just announced but effectively implemented.

Ultimately, the fight against insecurity requires more than symbolic gestures. It demands bold, innovative, and sustained reforms that address both immediate threats and their root causes. The relocation of service chiefs may offer temporary visibility, but it cannot substitute for a comprehensive national security strategy. The nation stands at a critical juncture. Continuing to rely on approaches that have yielded limited results in the past is unlikely to produce different outcomes. It is time to rethink, recalibrate, and rebuild a security architecture that is responsive, resilient, and grounded in the realities of our society.

By: Calista Ezeaku

Opinion

Beyond the Adichie Tragedy

Published

1 week ago

March 16, 2026

The Tide

Quote:: “Justice must never depend on fame, wealth, or connections. The child of a roadside trader deserves the same standard of care as the child of a globally celebrated writer. When accountability works only for the prominent, public trust in institutions quietly erodes.”

Public reaction to the suspension of doctors by the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria (MDCN) following the death of the son of celebrated Nigerian writer Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie reveals something deeper than outrage over a single tragedy. Across social media and public commentary, a recurring sentiment stands out: many Nigerians believe justice was served only because of the prominence of the family involved. Comments such as “The doctors were punished because Chimamanda is well known,” or “If it was a poor man’s child, the case would have been swept under the carpet,” capture a troubling lack of faith in the system.

Whether these perceptions are always accurate is not the most important issue. What should concern the nation is that so many citizens instinctively believe that justice in Nigeria often depends on status, wealth, or influence.The tragedy that befell the Adichie family is heartbreaking. No parent should have to bury a child, particularly under circumstances that raise questions about professional responsibility. But beyond the grief lies a larger national concern: medical negligence in Nigeria is far more widespread than the few cases that attract public attention. Across the country, families quietly lose loved ones in hospitals and clinics under troubling circumstances. Patients are sometimes misdiagnosed. Emergency cases may be delayed. Surgical procedures may be mishandled, while basic standards of care can be compromised due to negligence, poor supervision, or systemic pressure on medical staff.

In many situations, grieving families simply accept their loss and move on, believing there is little they can do. The result is what can only be described as a silent epidemic of unreported medical negligence.In more developed healthcare systems, such incidents rarely go unexamined. Independent regulatory bodies investigate complaints, enforce professional standards, and sanction erring practitioners. In the United Kingdom, for instance, the Care Quality Commission inspects hospitals, clinics, and care providers to ensure strict compliance with safety and quality standards.Nigeria does have oversight institutions, notably the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria. However, enforcement often appears inconsistent, and many cases of negligence never reach the stage where regulators can intervene. Sometimes victims are unaware of the complaint process. In other cases, fear, cost, or bureaucracy discourage families from seeking justice.

While government institutions must improve their oversight mechanisms, citizens must also confront a difficult truth: Nigerians often fail to pursue their rights when they are violated. Too frequently, when injustice occurs, people retreat into resignation. Instead of filing complaints or seeking legal remedies, many respond with the familiar phrase: “God will judge them.” Faith is important, but it should not replace civic responsibility. A society that leaves accountability solely to divine intervention risks allowing negligence and impunity to flourish. Some commentators have suggested that the Adichie family likely pursued the matter relentlessly through petitions and formal complaints before authorities acted. If that is the case, it demonstrates a path other citizens can follow. When malpractice occurs, persistence in seeking justice can make institutions respond.

If more families reported cases of medical negligence to the appropriate authorities, regulatory bodies would have stronger grounds to investigate. Public pressure would also push healthcare institutions to improve their standards. Negligence, as defined by Nigeria’s Supreme Court in Odinaka v. Moghalu, refers to the failure to do what a reasonable and prudent person would have done under similar circumstances. Within medical ethics, physicians are expected to provide competent care with compassion and respect for human dignity. These principles form the foundation of the duty of care that patients rely upon. Citizens must therefore be able to recognise signs of negligence and take appropriate steps to seek redress. Patients and families should learn to document incidents, keep medical records, ask questions about treatment decisions, and report suspicious circumstances surrounding medical care.

Where necessary, formal complaints should be lodged with regulatory authorities or pursued through the courts. Civil society organisations, advocacy groups, and the media also play a crucial role. By exposing cases of negligence and demanding accountability, they help ensure such incidents do not disappear into silence. A healthcare system shielded from scrutiny cannot improve. Nevertheless, responsibility cannot rest solely on citizens. Government must take decisive steps to strengthen healthcare regulation and reduce medical negligence. Hospitals and clinics—both public and private—should undergo regular inspections to ensure compliance with professional standards, safety protocols, and ethical guidelines. Persistent violations must attract meaningful sanctions. Legal practitioner and Senior Advocate of Nigeria Olisa Agbakoba has suggested the creation of an independent health regulatory authority and the restoration of Chief Medical Officers at federal and state levels.

In the past, these officials, alongside health inspectors, helped enforce professional standards and ensured accountability within healthcare facilities. Government must also invest more seriously in the training and continuous education of healthcare professionals. Medicine is an evolving field, and practitioners must constantly update their knowledge and skills. Mandatory professional development programmes, stricter licensing renewal requirements, and improved mentorship systems could help reduce errors arising from outdated practices or inadequate training. At the same time, systemic challenges within the healthcare system cannot be ignored. Many Nigerian doctors and nurses work under extremely difficult conditions—overcrowded hospitals, outdated equipment, staff shortages, and overwhelming patient loads. Such pressures increase the risk of mistakes and professional burnout.

Improving healthcare infrastructure, funding, and staffing is therefore not merely an administrative matter; it is a fundamental requirement for patients’ safety. Equally important is transparency when allegations of negligence arise. Investigations must be timely, credible, and accessible. Families deserve to know what happened to their loved ones and whether professional standards were breached. Regulatory bodies must ensure that findings are communicated clearly so that public confidence in the healthcare system is strengthened. The tragedy that drew national attention to medical negligence should not be treated as an isolated incident involving a prominent personality. Rather, it should serve as a wake-up call for systemic reform.

Every Nigerian life carries equal value. Justice must not depend on prominence or privilege. When citizens demand accountability and institutions respond with fairness and transparency, trust begins to grow. Nigeria’s health sector is filled with dedicated doctors, nurses, and medical workers who save lives daily despite difficult conditions. Recognising their commitment, however, should not prevent society from confronting the reality that negligence sometimes occurs—and when it does, it must be addressed firmly. If this painful moment encourages Nigerians to speak up, demand accountability, and push for stronger regulatory systems, it may yet produce meaningful reform. Citizens must refuse to accept negligence as fate, while government strengthens oversight and improves healthcare conditions. Only through this collective effort can Nigeria build a healthcare system where every patient—regardless of social status—receives safe, responsible, and dignified care.

By: Calista Ezeaku