Terrorism and National Security - My Thoughts

It is official; Nigeria has now been inducted into the US terrorism ‘hall of fame’. Oh sorry, the US terrorist ‘watch list’.


The US govt through Transportation Security Administration (TSA), announced that it would begin enhanced screening procedures on any US-bound air passenger travelling through a list of 14 nations, in which Nigeria has been included. From the US point of view, the 14 nations (Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Iraq, Iran, Somalia, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Cuba, Afghanistan, Algeria, Libya ) are believed to have links to terrorism.

So how did we become a member of the terrorism “hall of fame”? On 25 December 2009, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, son of the former First Bank Chairman, Dr AbdulMutallab, attempted to detonate plastic explosives hidden in his underwear on a Northwest Airline Flight 253, en route from Amsterdam to Detroit Michigan. And according to the US authorities, Umar claimed to have obtained explosive chemicals and a syringe that were sewn into his underwear from a bomb expert in Yemen associated with Al Qaeda. Further investigations by US authorities also revealed that Umar has been in contact with radical Islamic extremist Anwar al-Awlaki, who has been accused of being a senior al-Qaeda talent recruiter.

My thoughts

Many commentators have described the action of the US govt has been high-handed. The Minister for Information also described the action has been ‘unfair’. From the public perspective, it seems that 150million people have now been ‘criminalised’ because of the nefarious act of a single individual. However, for anyone to think that US govt reaction was just because of Umar AbdulMutallab’s terrorist expedition smacks of naiveté.

It is common knowledge that religious extremism has been on the sharp rise in Nigeria. We all know of the famous Boko Haram killings. Also, just two days after the US terrorist attempt, hundreds of lives were lost in Bauchi State to religious riots (Kalo Kato). The nation also witnessed incessant bombing of oil pipelines in the Niger Delta. The combination of religious extremism in the North and armed militancy in the Niger Delta underlines the failure of our national security.

As much as we can criticise the US for its high-handedness, it’s the US govt prerogative to determine who it allows into the country and under what terms and conditions. We need not to remind ourselves that the US is a sovereign nation.

It is convenient for our leaders to say Umar’s action was an isolated case, and not representative of behaviour of 150 million Nigerians. But there is no doubt that the US govt will be deeply concerned about the failure of the Nigerian govt in dealing with the local religious extremism. Who knows if the Boko Harams are actually al-Qaeda sympathisers? Who knows if some of the extremist organisations in Nigeria are affiliated to the al-Qaeda or Hezebollah of this world? It’s been alleged that some of the Niger Delta militants were trained in Libya (!).

Up until now, there’s not been a case of religious extremism that has been successful investigated. Almost every year, hundreds of lives and properties worth millions of naira is lost to religious riots. Instead of getting to root of the problem, our security agencies engage in judicial killing.

What the government fails to realise, is that the whole world is watching. No nation is interested in dealing with countries with failed national security. Our failed national security is a haven for home grown terrorists. While these terrorists may not be interested in blowing up US interests, there are a threat to our national existence.

What we are witnessing are the effects of failing (or failed) nation. The western world has lost faith in us. Our society is deeply corrupt. Corruption has eaten deep into the fabric of our society. Our security agencies are arguably some of the most corrupt in the world. With the level of corruption in Nigeria, I’m convinced that a suicide bomber can pay his/her into a passenger aircraft. For the right price, such a person would be offered a ‘first class’ seat. It is in Nigeria where Customs officials aid and abet importation of fake drugs. It is in Nigeria where Immigration officials knowingly issue passports to non-citizens using false identity.

There is no doubt that the new US policy would affect every Nigerian, irrespective of social status. Unfortunately, 150 million people will now pay for the sins of one stupid individual. Already a Nigerian travelling overseas is a suspected asylum seeker, suspected over stayer, suspected illegal immigrant, suspected identity fraudster, suspected drug courier, and now a suspected terrorist.

May God help us!

Niger Delta Amnesty: What Next......?

Despite ‘acceptance’ of the amnesty deal by some of the most notorious Niger Delta militants like Tom Ateke, Government Ekpomukpolo (Tompolo), Farah Dagogo, the jury is still out on the how long before these militants are back in the creeks. And now that the amnesty programme has ended, the questions now been asked are, how successful was the amnesty programme? And, will it bring lasting solution to the Niger Delta crisis?

If the success of the amnesty is to be measured by number of militants that have signed up to the deal, then President Yar’Adua cannot ask for anything more. If the success is measured by the arsenal of weapons handed in by the militants, then President Yar’’Adua and indeed all Nigerians, have every reason to jump up for joy! For me, the cache of weapons deposited by the Niger Delta militants is enough to launch guerrilla warfare and destabilise the existence of any nation.

As the region that lays the golden egg, the strategic importance of the Niger Delta to the development of Nigeria’s economy cannot be over-emphasised. As a mono-economy heavily reliant on revenue from oil proceeds, the oil wells of the Niger Delta have been the nation’s ‘cash cow’ since independence.
The effects of sustained violence in the Niger Delta have been far reaching. The sharp drop in the nation’s daily oil output, from its peak of 2.6million bpd to 500,000bpd is an example. This coupled with the dwindling oil price in the world market, resulted in the massive loss of government revenue.

It therefore became imperative for the government to find a lasting solution to the Niger Delta militancy. And it was for this reason that the President Yar’Adua announced the plan to offer the Niger Delta militant an ‘Amnesty’ earlier in the year. The government amnesty package noted to worth about N50billion includes monthly payment to militants who were willing to lay down their arms.

The amnesty plan was however met with fierce public criticism. Many commentators, including the author, believed that the solution to the Niger Delta crisis is more than just offering a salary package to militants in exchange for arms. The public also couldn’t understand how a militant that could earn hundreds of thousands of dollars from oil bunkering will lay down his/her arms in exchange for N50, 000 per month. So as far as the public was concerned, it was a gamble.

But now that most of the militants have laid down their arms, the fundamental question remains what next? Has the government gamble paid off? Apart from laying down their arms, the warlords have also been flown in Presidential Jet to Abuja to wine and dine with the President in Aso Rock. Some have also been treated to a ‘presidential photo session’.

On face value, the government’s amnesty package seems to have been a huge success. However, if current media reports are anything to go by, the success may be short lived

It was reported that the government caved into the demands of the former warlord Tompolo to engage him and his lieutenants and their boys on contract to provide security for oil pipelines. This agreement according to the government “will help provide a legitimate source of income for the warlord and their soldiers”.

For me, if this is what the government amnesty is about then it is nothing more than a “travesty”. It is like saying to homeowners, that the solution to house robbery is to engage an armed robber as your security guard! If the demand was the “condition “on which Tompolo accepted to surrender his arms, then I’m sorry it’s not an “amnesty”. Such agreement also calls into question, the integrity of the amnesty package.

By definition, an amnesty is a legislative or executive act by which a state restores those who may have been guilty of an offense against it to the positions of innocent persons. This means that for an amnesty to be offered to an individual, he/she must be deemed to have committed an offence punishable by law. Therefore, how can an offender dictate the terms under which he should be pardoned?

Also, why the need to employ ex-militants to guard oil pipelines if indeed the militants and government are genuine in find a lasting solution to the Niger Delta crisis? Prior to advent of militancy, I cannot remember any case of pipeline vandalisation. Which in other words means that pipeline vandalisation was perpetuated by the so-called militants with support of few elites, who are engaged in illegal oil bunkering.

Even if the government assumes that vandalisation of oil pipelines will still persist post-amnesty, then why can’t the nation’s security agencies perform this role. What is the point of having military, police and para-military forces, if they cannot secure and protect our key infrastructure?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that some of these ex-militants can not be involved in providing security in the Niger Delta region. My point is, this should be done properly through a rehabilitation process and not just as a condition of sham amnesty deal.

Let’s make no mistake, the agitation in the Niger Delta crisis is more than signing a deal with few militants, in order to keep them quiet. The government cannot just offer employment to a few thousand militants as security guards under fictitious amnesty deal and think all is well. What about millions of other citizens who have been impoverished for decades but have not been engaged in militancy? Is the government saying it pays to be a militant after all?

For now, the situation seems to be a win-win situation for the government and militants. Oil exploration continues without hindrance, thus increasing government revenue. The northern oligarchs also continue to feed fat from the cash cow. At the same time, the militants can continue to hold the government and oil companies to ransom by been engaged as security guards. So everyone is happy! But as the Yorubas say, “ewu nbe loko longe, longe fun rara e ewu ni”.

Petroleum industry bill 2008 - combustible but curable

Written by Bamidele Aturu Esq
Tuesday, 28 July 2009 18:02
Introduction: The Petroleum Industry Bill pending before the National Assembly has been greeted with all sorts of controversies. There have been allegations and counter allegations by vested interests on the real motives for the Bill and whether or not some persons have been commissioned to kill the Bill. We are not concerned with these controversies but rather we aim at doing a broad examination of the Bill in order to raise policy issues that may help in improving the Bill as presented.

Structure of the Bill
The Bill is a massive, ponderous text of 495 sections divided into ten parts. The Bill deals with Fundamental Objectives, Institutions, Upstream Petroleum Joint Ventures, Downstream Licensing, Downstream Products, Indigenous Oil Companies and Nigerian Content, Health, Safety and Environment, Fiscal Provisions, Repeals and Transitional Provisions and Interpretation. It is proper for a modern legislation to state clearly the objectives underpinning it as the Bill has done. It is a practice that ought to be encouraged.The decision to bring together all the institutions in the petroleum industry might have been informed by the need to have all the laws relating to the industry in one single text for accessibility. Nevertheless, the size of the text could have been considerably reduced if the administrative provisions relating to the institutions such as pension, restriction on suits, funds, power to accept gifts/or to borrow, power to sue and be sued, disqualifications, secretary, other staff, service, indemnity et cetera which are similar if not identical are not repeated for each and every one of the institutions. For example the provision on disqualification could just be in one section for all the different institutions. It could read thus: ‘No one shall be appointed as a member or head of any of the Institutions created by this Act, if….’ instead of repeating a similar provision for each and every institution created by the Bill. The Bill can benefit from some technical surgery in this regard. The processes for the different kinds of licenses also need not be repeated since they are similar.The language of the Bill is refreshingly gender sensitive. One does not get the impression that the Bill is made only for the males as the drafters use the two pronouns, ‘he’ and ‘she’ generously, although in many of the sections gender neutrality is possible and would have been preferable.

Fundamental Objectives of the Bill
The objectives generally appear well reasoned. It includes freedom to apply for grant or award of leases and licences for the exploration and production of petroleum. The Bill also states that the management of petroleum resources shall be conducted in accordance with the principles of transparency, good governance, and sustainable development of Nigeria. It makes a commitment to ensuring community development, and participation of Nigerians in the industry fundamental objectives. The government shall also ensure compliance with international standards on the protection of the environment. These objectives are doubtless laudable. However, the restatement of the sovereignty of the Nigerian state over petroleum on behalf of Nigerians is bound to generate its own controversy. Agitation for resource control has always focused on attacking provisions of this nature. As recently as 2005, the National Political Reform Conference recommended that communities should be involved in the ‘management and control of the resources in their communities by having assured places in the Federal Government mechanisms for the management of the oil and gas exploration and marketing’. The absolute sovereignty of Nigeria over pertoleum is bound to be an explosive issue during the readings of the Bill.

Multiplicity of Institutions
The long title of the Bill makes it explicit that the Bill sets out to create institutions and regulatory authorities for the Nigerian petroleum industry. The Bill proposes six or seven institutions, namely: National Petroleum Directorate (s. 12); Nigerian Petroleum Inspectorate (s.37); Petroleum Products Regulatory Authority; National Petroleum Assets Management Agency (s. 113); Nigerian Petroleum Research Centre (s.148); National Frontier Exploration Service (s.174); Petroleum Technology Development Fund (s. 223) and Petroleum Equalisation Fund (s.199).Many of these bodies are existing under various Acts. It is therefore tidier that they should all be included in just one statute for ease of reference. Here we are referring to Petroleum Equalisation Fund, Petroleum Technology Development Fund and to a limited extent the

Petroleum Products Regulatory Authority.
The question can nevertheless be asked whether some of the bodies are not a mere replica of one another or whether the functions of the institutions cannot be conveniently performed by just three institutions. With the National Petroleum Directorate (NPD) it is difficult to fathom what the Ministry of Petroleum will be doing. Indeed section 13(s) of the Bill is indicative of the overlapping functions of some of the institutions. The paragraph provides that the NPD shall ‘promote compliance with all legislation by all participants and stakeholders in the industry’. That exactly is the function of the Nigerian Petroleum Inspectorate unless one is interested in the needless hairsplitting exercise of distinguishing between enforcing and promoting compliance with the laws. The country can conveniently do without the National

Petroleum Directorate with its full complement of bureaucracy and Board.
At a time when the proposal to establish a Petroleum University is at an advanced stage, it is difficult to see the necessity for the Nigerian Petroleum Research Centre. The functions of the National Petroleum Assets Management Agency and the National Frontier Exploration Service can be undertaken, indeed should be undertaken by the Ministries of Finance and Petroleum Resources respectively. There is a need to spend some more quality time in streamlining these institutions. On a technical note the objects and functions of the institutions can also be harmonized and reduced in order to reduce the size of the Bill. Creating more bureaucracies has not proved an effective solution to our problems in this country if the truth must be told.

Funding of the Proposed Institutions
Section 28 of the Bill provides that a portion of fiscalised crude or gas shall be paid into an account of the Directorate to be shared by the proposed institutions for the purpose of their operations. This provision is likely to be misunderstood by many. In the first place, the fiscalised crude or gas proposed to be paid into the account of the Directorate is supposed to be part of the revenues accruing to the Federation which ought to be paid into the Federation Account. Thus, section 28 of the Bill may be declared unconstitutional if challenged in a court of law. Second, there is no justification for creating bodies or institutions that cannot be funded in the normal course of governance. The extra-governmental funding proposed reflects a tendency to spend money accruing from the upstream sector before any serious accounting or reflection on how to spend the money is done. It is as if these institutions are being created simply because we can get the oil companies to fund them. That is not right at all.

Restriction on Suits against the Proposed Institutions
The Bill follows in the Nigerian tradition of either creating special limitation in respect of the period within which suits can be filed against statutory bodies or of requiring that pre-action notice be given to such bodies before they can be sued. Although the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed the constitutionality of such provisions and laws, there is little doubt that they restrict rather than grant access to the courts. On this score such provisions are objectionable. The National Assembly would be rendering an invaluable service to this country if it crosses out such provisions which dot the present Bill. Section 61 of the Bill contains the two types of restrictions.

Resolution of Disputes
Some of the new institutions notably the Inspectorate and the Petroleum Products Regulatory Authority are saddled with resolving disputes between persons coming under its operations (s. 68). The Bill stipulates that disputes cannot be referred to the Inspectorate unless parties have attempted to negotiate. One can understand the desire to ensure that matters are conciliated to prevent needless recourse to courts with the attendant acrimony and delay. But the point is that these bodies are not suited for settling disputes. It would have been preferable to have a provision which makes it mandatory for parties to attempt to resolve disputes by conciliation and arbitration before having recourse to the courts. In that case the arbitration would be governed by the relevant Arbitration and Conciliation Act. There is the tendency for the bodies to lose focus if this aspect of the Bill is not tinkered with. It is also needless to state as is done in section 72of the Bill that parties aggrieved by the determination of the bodies can seek judicial review. That is a right conferred by the Constitution that needs no restating in an inferior statute.

Transparency and Openness
The Bill makes serious and noteworthy attempts at granting public access to the activities of the proposed institutions. Sections 306 and 344 are typical in this regard. Section 306 makes it clear that registers of technical licences issued under sections 301 and 302 should be made to members of the public who can also receive certified true copies of the documents upon payment of the prescribed fee.Section 259 voids confidentiality clauses in respect of royalties, bonus, taxes and any other financial matters that directly affect the revenues derived by the State from exploration and production of petroleum. This provision should enhance accountability and openness. At the present time, most production sharing agreements and Joint Venture Agreements between the NNPC and the oil companies are shrouded in baffling secrecy. The provision in section 259(3) which states that the determination of the Directorate as to whether a piece of information is proprietary and so outside the openness clause in section 259 shall be final is however likely to detract from the benefits to be derived from the clause. The Bill should attempt to lay down objective criteria for determining such an important question.

Privatisation of NNPC
Section 136 of the Bill creates the Nigeria National Petroleum Company Limited to succeed the NNPC and inherit the latter’s assets and liabilities. At inception ownership of the Company shall be vested in the Federal Government, but after two years of its incorporation government may divest its interest in the company and sell same to members of the Nigerian public through the Nigerian Stock Exchange. It appears that the privatization of the Corporation is being done outside the existing system supervised by the National Council on Privatisation and under a different statute. The reason for using this procedure is unclear, but it may raise concern as to the genuineness of the ultimate privatization of the corporation, particularly as the petroleum industry is a major sector of the economy which privatisation section 16 of the Constitution forbids.

Redundant Provisions
Provisions relating to the incorporation of Joint Ventures as Limited liability companies are largely redundant as the issues are already covered by the Companies and Allied Matters Act. We have in mind such provisions to the effect that the Board of the companies shall be accountable to shareholders, act in good faith, treat shareholders equally et cetera (s. 252). The same consideration applies to the specified functions of the Board and the rights of shareholders in sections 253 and 254 respectively. Section 408 which deals with prohibition of forced labour and child labour and also the upholding of the right to collective bargaining are matters which have been adequately dealt with in our Labour Statutes. Repeating them in the Bill may lead to the unintended result that the operators may carry on as if the other provisions in the Labour laws which are not repeated are to be disobeyed or do not carry the same weight which is not the case.

Indefensible Environmental Remediation Levy
States and Local Governments are required to pay 1% and 0.5% of their annual derivation allocation into Remediation Fund under the custody of the Inspectorate to restore the environment in cases of dames caused to the environment as a result of sabotage (s. 286). This proposal is likely to be contested by the States and the Local Governments as making them vicariously liable for the crime of sabotage. This is a fundamental negation of our criminal jurisprudence. The Bill does not make any provision for refund in any year when there is no act of sabotage. No reason was also proffered for not making the Federal Government to pay any percentage of the royalties received by it for remediation in cases of sabotage. After all, the Federal Government controls the security agencies that ought to be responsible for preventing sabotage in the first place. There is no justificato for the levy. It should be deleted from the Bill. However, the financial provision required in section 285 of licensees for remediation is justifiablesince it is more or less like a caution fee that may be returned to the licensees if not used up. It is hoped that it would make the activities of operators more environment-friendly.

The Bill, the Environment and the Communities
The proposal in section 283 that every licensee shall within three months of the coming into effect of the Bill submit an environmental programme or an environmental quality management Plan dealing with such specific matters as its environmental objectives, commitment to comply with relevant laws and regulations and also remediation of environmental degradation is clearly well motivated. It is without doubt based on an awareness of the devastating effect of untrammeled exploitation of oil and gas on the environment. Nevertheless, the provisions inexplicably and inexcusably exclude the communities which bear the brunt of environmental degradation from its purview (see also 405(3). Indeed section 284 categorically states that the Inspectorate shall ‘consult with the Federal Ministry of the Environment and the State Ministries of Environment within which the licence or lease is situated and with any other relevant bodies within which the licence or lease is situated’. Communities are conspicuously omitted. Modern global thinking in environmental protection recognizes that without the communities environmental plans tend to be shallow and protective only of the interests of a few local collaborators of business concerns. This aspect of the Bill needs to be reworked to make it align with the interest of the oil-bearing communities.The processes of awarding licenses are by competitive and open bidding process. This speaks to years of abuse and cronyism when mining and prospecting licences are given to people who lack the technical knowhow or the means to drill boreholes near the lagoons (s. 270). It is heartwarming that the Bill specifically prohibits discretionary awards (s. 270(2)).

Some Positive Features of the Bill
The Bill has some useful or rather potentially (as all depends on enforcement) useful provisions. These include, among others, consumer protection (s.386), provision of service to customers (s. 387), competition and market regulation (s.391), encouraging indigenous participation in the petroleum sector (ss398-402), Nigerian Content (ss. 403-404). Indeed the Bill sets minimum limits for Nigerian board membership and managerial and professional cadre.

Conclusion
The Bill seeks to bring together the provisions of many laws regulating the petroleum industry. That may make the legal framework more accessible if the technical issues raised above are dealt with. It is also hoped that the substantive concerns raised here will inform a reconsideration of the relevant provisions. If this is done the Bill may help address certain aspects of the industry. As may be apparent, we have left out a detailed consideration of the fiscal provisions in sections 414-432 or so as they are essentially contained in existing laws that are now more or less codified in the Bill. Ditto the provisions on licences and leases.As we noted earlier implementation has always been a problem with us. One may craft the best law but if the will to enforce it is lacking it would not be worth more than the paper on which it is written. On a technical note, we are of the opinion that if some of the drafting suggestions we made in this presentation are taken into consideration the Bill can be pruned to about half its present prolix length.

MEND, Lagos State and Atlas Cove Jetty Attack

Like most people, I have been following the public reaction to the recent bombing of Lagos Atlas Cove jetty. As we all know, this recent action is totally different from what we have experienced in the past. Since the start of the militancy, actions of groups such as MEND, NDVF have been limited to the Niger Delta region. However, the recent bombing of the Atlas Cove jetty signals a massive change in momentum. It is the strongest indication so far of the threat we are facing as a nation, if the Niger Delta crisis is allowed to escalate. Public reactions to the bombing have been very interesting, particularly from the State Governor, Mr Babatunde Fashola and the so-called “Lagos Elders”.

Following the attack, Governor Fashola was quoted in the media saying “If this (Atlas Cove Jetty bombing) was a mistake, we expect that it must never repeat itself as we will respond to this new security threat appropriately”. Also, a group of traditional rulers, politicians and community leaders in Lagos state, “warned” the Niger Delta militants against further attacks in the state. According to the Elders, “……the incident must never again be repeated as any attempt to do so would be met with serious consequences which attackers will live to regret”(!).

The impact of any form of attack on the Atlas Cove jetty cannot be over-emphasized. Especially in a country that is largely dependent on imported fuel products. Being the largest fuel import terminal, any attack will have a huge impact on fuel distribution and supply. Such attack is also threat to the security of Lagos State and it status as the nation’s business capital. However, I am still at a loss with the meaning of the statements credited to Governor Fashola and the Lagos Elders.

As the Chief Security Officer of Lagos State, I appreciate that the onus is on Gov. Fashola to ensure peace and security in the state. But the question is, does he really have the power ensure peace and security in the state? Let’s even assume the Niger Delta issue escalates and more bombing is carried out in Lagos, how does Gov. Fashola intend to responds to such threat “appropriately”? The fact remains that he neither controls the police nor the military? The Commissioner of Police receives his orders from Abuja and not from any state governor. The Commandants of the military formations in the state are only answerable to their khaki masters.

The same can also be said about the comments of the Lagos Elders. Are would they deal with the threat from MEND? Are they intending on using the OPC or what? Or perform some traditional rites on the militants? Or will they start killing all Niger Delta citizens living in Lagos?

I’m sorry to say, but comments like these encapsulate the problem of this nation. We are sometimes myopic in our thinking. People don’t really care what happens to their neighbour as long as they are not affected. The state Governors are happy to travel to Abuja at the end of every month to collect their share from proceeds of Niger Delta oil, but are not interested in the problems of Niger Delta. As the Yorubas say, “owo epo ni aye ba ni la, wo nki ba ni la owo eje”.

So what am I saying? The Niger Delta crisis should not be politicised. Although, attacks have been limited to the Niger Delta region, it is not just about Niger Delta. This is a national issue. I’m sure the militants are not interested in destroying innocent lives in Lagos or bringing Lagos to its knees.

It is okay for the Elders to say Lagos is not Niger Delta. It is okay for Lagos residents to be considered as innocent civilians in the Niger Delta crisis. However, what about innocent lives that has been lost in Niger Delta as a result of the militancy? Are we now saying that they deserve to be bombed because they live in the Niger Delta? God forbid but if the Niger Delta crisis turns into a “civil law”, will Lagos state be immune?

Whilst I’m not in support of the recent action on the Atlas Cove jetty or destruction of lives and properties in general, I don’t think it is right for anyone to trivialise the Niger Delta issue. Instead of making inflammatory comments, the whole nation should be united in condemning the ineptitude and insincerity of the Federal Government in dealing with the Niger Delta issue.

We need not to x-ray the Niger Delta crisis through a tribal microscope. It is a national issue that deserves a national solution.

Jobs! Jobs!! Jobs!!!

Jobs! Jobs!! Jobs!!!

Salary – N65, 000 ($500) per month

SELECTION CRITERIA

Essential

All applicants
· must be a registered member of Movement for Emancipation of Niger Delta (MEND) or Niger Delta Volunteer Force (NDVF)
· must have lived in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria, within the last 10 years
· must have previously engaged in militancy or guerilla warfare
· must have proven track record of human kidnapping, especially expatriates.
· must have proven track record in destruction of oil pipelines and other major oil installations
· must have proven track record in the use of AK-47 and “rocket propelled grenades”
· must have track record of driving speedboats, dingy, and canoes.

Desirable
· must understand the operation of onshore and offshore oil exploration facilities
· must understand oil bunkering techniques
· must be willing to engage in election rigging.
· must be willing to be a member of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP)

All applications must be submitted in person to

Mallam Umar Yar’Adua
The Presidency,
Aso Villa
Abuja
Nigeria
Tel: +234 9 6500000 E-mail mallam.yaradua@presidency.gov.ng

Please note that only the first 10,000 applications will be accepted. Submission of multiple applications will result in automatic disqualification.

Closing date – 60 days from the date of this advertisement

Notes for all applicants
· The government reserves the right to extend the deadline for submission of applications.
· The government reserves the right to refuse application from specified persons.
· There is no right of appeal for applications that are refused.

signed

Head of Human Resouces
Ministry of Niger Delta
Abuja
Nigeria

A Nation's Cash Cow

A ‘cash cow’ is a product or a business unit that generates unusually high profit margins: so high that it is responsible for a large amount of a company's operating profit. This profit far exceeds the amount necessary to maintain the cash cow business, and the excess is used by the business for other purposes.

Risks of a ‘cash cow’ include complacency, with management ignoring the need for change as market forces erode value; and ongoing turf wars between the management in charge of the ‘cash cow’ and other managers trying to garner support for other products.

The above definitions succinctly describe the economic situation in Nigeria with particular regards to crude oil, which has become the nation’s ‘cash cow’ over the last few decades.
It is common knowledge that Nigeria has earned phenomenal revenue from crude oil sales, which culminated in the creation of the Excess Crude Account by the Obasanjo administration in 2004. Funds were drawn from the Excess Crude Account in the past to pay for special projects and debt servicing. During Obasanjo’s administration, about $12.4bn was withdrawn from the account to offset Nigeria’s debt to the Paris Club; $17milllion for two additional days for the 2006 National Population Census; and more than $2.3billion for Niger Delta Power Plants. Whilst it’s not the reason for my comments, it is worth noting that the so-called ‘Power Projects’ is still a dog’s breakfast!

It is not surprising that Nigeria has now become so complacent, even though market forces (ie the current global economic downturn) has eroded the value of crude oil from its peak of $147 to $40 per barrel. Whilst other countries (United Arab Emirates as an example) has looking at ways of generating revenue and reduce their dependence on crude oil, economic managers in Nigeria cannot see beyond their nose. Dubai is arguably the current largest construction site in the world, with the Monarch working extremely hard to turn the City into one of the world’s favourite tourist destination. The decision to diversify was based on the advice received on the depletion of its oil reserves and hence, the need to explore alternative ways of raising revenues. Dubai is now famous for its shopping malls and upmarket fashion label shops.

A report recently released on world commodities, did show that over the last decade, Cocoa has remained the most stable commodity. In fact, the price of Cocoa is trading at its highest for 37 years. I remember vividly been taught about ‘cash crops’ (Cocoa, Rubber etc) during my primary education. I don’t think at that point I knew the meaning of ‘crude oil’. The infrastructure built in the Old Western Region by the Late Obafemi Awolowo was mainly financed through Cocoa export. Instead of our leaders think outside the box, and use the current global economic crisis to retrace their steps, they are still busy speculating on future oil prices.
The 2009 budget is based on $45, which is higher than the current oil trading price. Which means the 2009 budget might be in deficit from the word ‘go’. Members of the Senate Committee on Budget Appropriation jumped for joy last week when oil price rose from $40 - $48 as a result of the Israeli-Palestinian crisis. The Senate Committee Chairman was quoted as saying the “benchmark for the 2009 budget should be been raised higher, and he went as far as speculating that oil will be trading at $50 and rise to $100 within the next two months”. When did honourable members of the Senate become ‘oil trading experts’?

Governance in the states of the federation (probably with the exception of Lagos) goes to sleep for 29 days everyone month, only for State executives to turn up in Abuja at the end of the month to collect their share of nation ‘booty’ from the Excess Crude Account.

It is my understanding that the Federal, State and Local Government shared N106billion in December alone from the account. The highest recipients were the oil-producing states, River (N15.5billion) Akwa Ibom (N4.5billion), Delta (N3billion), Bayelsa (N1.8billion). What has been the development in these states over the last eight years apart from allegation and counter allegation of corruption and fraud. It will be interesting to see how the states’ budget stacks up against the guaranteed monthly return from the Excess Crude Account. I’m sure their budget is 100% based on future oil revenue allocation. When a State receives N15.5billion monthly, why will the Governor be interested in ‘internal generated revenue’?

Anyway, as the Yoruba says ‘igba kan ko ni lo bi orere’ meaning ‘nothing last forever’, except for the Grace of the Almighty God. However in the meantime, it is business as usual – we keep milking the ‘cash cow’.