Set Militia Leaders Against Opposition . I applied for the job in 2010 but received approval on March 4 - Dr Fasehun . ‘Previous contracts didn’t halt oil theft’
“Most of the security agencies that are saddled with the responsibility to protect the pipelines have failed,” Otunba Gani Adams, the national coordinator of the Odua People’s Congress (OPC), said last week Monday, in reaction to questions being raised about the propriety of Federal Government’s award of multi-million naira contracts for pipelines and waterways protection to militant groups in the South-West. Adams, whose militant group, a faction of the OPC had, two days earlier, won the security contract was even more forceful in defence of what many Nigerians labelled as a largesse for vote. “People are dying every day. Nigeria is losing more than N3 billion everyday [to] illegal vandals,” he said, trying frantically to pin justifications to the job. “The agitation for that contract was started by Dr Frderick Fasehun, four and a half years ago and you know the bureaucracy of the Nigerian ministry,” he said to the approval of his face-cap-wearing supporters, accompanying him on a protest to press for the removal of the chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof Attahiru Jega. Coming at a time when tongues were wagging in consternation over the project, Adams’ explanation, instead of clearing the air, further choked it and elicited more questions. Why did the government suddenly realize the need to approve a contract proposal that had been left to gather dust, just two weeks to an election? The move was largely seen as the president’s trump card to sway predicted victory in the region from his opponent, Muhammadu Buhari, to his own side. President Goodluck Jonathan, afraid of losing the presidential contest to his main challenger in the battleground South-West, had temporarily relocated from the seat of power in Abuja to Lagos, a state with over six million registered voters, the largest in the country. While there, it was rumoured that the president had presented cash gifts to various groups, including traditional rulers, across the entire region. The security contract was interpreted as part of the last ditch struggle to save Jonathan from defeat. The OPC, last week, under Adams, Monday staged a protest in Lagos, demanding the sack of Jega as INEC chairman, accusing him of bias. That the group had never criticized the electoral umpire’s handling of the polls prior to the approval of the contract, sparked allegations linking the Federal Government to the protest, with the main opposition All Progressives Congress (OPC) threatening to report President Jonathan to the International Criminal Court (ICC). OPC’s founder, Fasehun, does not see any wrong getting the contract as a payback for supporting Jonathan’s political ambition “Does anybody grant favour to his or her enemy? We don’t even need to answer that. It is the law of nature,” he quipped, unapologetically.
The controversial contract Pipelines and waterways monitoring jobs are not new to militants in the Niger Delta, where companies owned by former warlords like Government Ekpemupolo (aka Tompolo) and Mujaheed Asari Dokubo were awarded millions of dollar contracts to ensure the safety of the oil infrastructure and waterways. In 2012, for instance, a company Global West Vessel Specialist Limited, belonging to Tompolo, was given a security contract to the tune of $103 million. The American Wall Street Journal once reported that Tompolo is actually being paid $22.0 million for a contract to guard pipelines of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC). Niger Delta People’s Volunteer Force leader, Asari-Dokubo was also mentioned as getting $9 million for a similar contract, while two others, Boyloaf and Ateko Tom are receiving $3.8 million each, also for similar contracts. What is new, however, is the expansion of the beneficiaries of such lucrative contracts to many other ex-militant leaders in states South-South and, for the first time, OPC leaders in the South-West, about two weeks to the general elections. Media report listed companies like Egbe Security River One in Bayelsa, Gallery Security, Mosinmi-Ore; Close Body Protection, Edo State; Adex Energy Security, Rivers and Age Global Security, Mosinmi, Ibadan as the beneficiaries of the contracts which would come into effect from March 16, 2015. Government has always defended its policy of awarding contracts to militants with the prevalence of rampant oil theft, especially in the Niger Delta. In 2013, Minister of Finance, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, put the amount Nigeria was losing to oil thieves at N155 billion monthly. Earlier this month, the Chief of Naval Staff, Rera Admiral Usman Jibril, said the country was still losing N1.18 billon daily to oil theft.
Tension among ex-militant groups Last week, ex- militants under the aegis of Ex-Freedom Fighters in the Niger Delta, staged a protest in Yenagoa, Bayelsa State capital, over the alleged plan by the state governor, Seriake Dickson, to hijack the multi-million dollar Oil Pipeline Surveillance Contract given to the oil producing communities in the state by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, NNPC. No fewer than nine persons were seriously injured in the protest which degenerated into a fierce confrontation between the ex-militants and the police. One of the leaders of the protest, Eris Paul, popularly known as General Ogunboss, said the protest was against an alleged plot by Governor Dickson to hijack multi million dollar NNPC pipeline surveillance contracts to communities in the state. “Most of the south southern states have signed the allocation of the surveillance contract, but Dickson is insisting that the job be awarded to a self-styled company known as Izon Ibe, a security outfit that we don’t know. Dickson should concentrate on the use of state allocation and internally generated revenue to advance the good of the state rather than hijack jobs coming to communities,” alleged. However, in its reaction, the Bayelsa State government said the rationale behind the establishment of the state-owned Izon-Ibe Security Company was part of efforts to address the challenges of youth unemployment. The position, which was made known in a government statement, said the security outfit was basically set up to provide special training for youths and engage them for the purposes of security services. According to the statement, “the Izon-Ibe Security firm is a limited liability company that is a community-based security and empowerment scheme for Bayelsa youths across the communities with the active involvement of the chiefs and leaders to train youths in the surveillance of pipeline and guard duties.” It stated that the government’s attention has been drawn to some ex-militant leaders, whose activities constitute a breach of the existing peace, noting that, hitherto, they were beneficiaries of pipeline contracts which they failed to execute. The statement expressed displeasure that such ex-militants were being used by those it described as misguided politicians to embark on “senseless public demonstrations” within and outside the state capital. “The position of the government is that pipeline surveillance contracts are not for ex-militant leaders alone, most of whom hail from a particular local government area. The state-owned security company is for all persons in the state and will ensure that they are made to carry out their duties effectively. There are youths from other local government areas that must benefit from these contracts and not just Bajeros, whose promoters are only from Southern Ijaw Local Government area”, the statement noted. But reinforcing the position of the ex-militants, another group implored the governor to stop creating problems in Ijaw land. In a statement signed by the head of the group, General Aso Tambo, the ex-militants urged the governor to concentrate on the task of providing leadership to the people of Bayelsa, instead of cornering contracts they had genuinely fought for. The group also accused the governor of conniving with the outgoing president of the Ijaw Youth Council (IYC), Udengs Eradiri, who is a director in the state-owned security company to corner 50 percent of the jobs for their private interest. But countering their position, another militant under the aegis of the Mangrove Boys of Bayelsa (MBB), issued a warning to ex-militant leaders, particularly Victor Ebikabowei (alias Boyloaf), Eris Paul (Ogunboss) and Pastor Reuben against causing trouble in the state. The group said it would no longer fold its hands and watch a few individuals from the Southern Ijaw Local Government area continue to hijack and selfishly enrich themselves with what they called the commonwealth of the people “The pipeline surveillance job is not their birthright. All the militant leaders disturbing the peace of Bayelsa and trying to hijack the contract through their company, BAJERO, are just from one local government area, which is Southern Ijaw. “They do not represent the interests of all of us in the entire state. As formidable freedom fighters, we will not allow these leaders to cheat us again because the contract is meant for our rural communities,” they contended. The statement, signed by the secretary of the group, Mr. Victor Adere, said the group would resist further violent demonstrations in the state by ex-militants and their leaders. Adere added that the group is fully in support of the governor, Mr. Dickson in his efforts to ensure that the state-owned Izon Ibe Security Company executes the contract for the benefit of everybody in the state. Meanwhile, the president, Ijaw Youth Council Worldwide, Mr. Eradiri, has raised the alarm that some ex-militant leaders were plotting to kill him. He claimed that the ex-militants wanted him dead because of his position on the NNPC surveillance contract.
Anti-Jega rally causes disaffection in OPC Following last week’s rally by the Oodua Peoples Congress (OPC) in Lagos where the Gani Adams-led faction of the body called for the resignation of INEC Chairman, Professor Attahiru Jega, some members of his group have called on the National Coordinator to resign his position for joining partisan politics. The aggrieved members of the body yesterday (Saturday) described the OPC rally against Prof. Jega as a shame, not only to the Yoruba people, but the oppressed in the country that look forward to liberation through a free and fair elections. Speaking on the controversial rally, the National Welfare Officer of the body, Monsuru Akannde, said that the OPC factional leader had derailed from the aims and objectives of the organisation by becoming partisan and using the organisation as a political tool for President Goodluck Jonathan’s re-election. He alleged that the anti-Jega rally staged by OPC last week Monday in Lagos was organised by Gani Adams in his individual capacity and not supported by OPC as a body, to justify the recent contract worth several millions of naira awarded to him by the President Jonathan’s government. Akande said the majority of OPC members of Gani Adams-led faction were not in support of the use of OPC for personal motives and condemned his romance with politicians. He therefore asked Adams to disassociate himself from partisan politics or resign as OPC National Coordinator. “We are not in support of Gani Adams using OPC as political tools to campaign for any political party or politician. We advice him to put a stop to this or leave OPC and go into partisan politics. We abhor his romance with any political party, he should not kill the dreams of millions of OPC members. He should save us from being labelled Jonathan’s bulldog,” he said. Akande argued that his group’s stand against Gani Adams rally against Jega was not to create another faction of OPC saying, “All what we are saying is that he should separate OPC from politics. For organising a political rally in support of a political party or a candidate in a political election has shown the entire world that he is interested in politics. He shouldn’t continue to fool Yoruba that he is keeping their culture alive through OPC activities only for him to purse political agenda. It’s obvious he cannot protect the interest of OPC again,” Akande said. However, in a swift reaction to Akande’s group demand, APC National Publicity Secretary, Hakeem Ologunro described the new group as ‘the hawks’ that are beginning to display their desperation as the general elections draws nearer. He recalled that Akande has been suspended as the Welfare Chairman of the OPC since 2007 for shaddy deals. “As far as we’re are concern, the likes of Akande are not a reliable individual. He was expelled from the Congress for anti - party activities since 2007.
Oil theft persists What is, however, worrisome to stakeholders is that even with the security contract in the hands of the ex-militant leaders, vandals are still breaking the pipelines and stealing crude oil in the communities, most especially in Southern Ijaw local government area. This development apparently led to the establishment of the Southern Ijaw Oil and Gas Task Force by the local government chairman, Chief Remember Ogbe. The task force is made up of community members and security agents, who patrol the area to check activities of pipeline vandals and oil thieves. Even so, security sources in the state say the worst cases of illegal crude oil refining and oil theft are recorded in Gbaramatoru in Southern Ijaw. Again, with the frequent arrests of suspected oil thieves and pipeline vandals by the Joint Task Force Operation Pulo Shield, the Central Naval Command and the Nigerian Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC) in the state, observers say the ex-militants are only pocketing millions of dollars on pipeline security without achieving any result.
How to protect pipelines better The issue of contracting ex-militants to protect oil pipelines cannot be entirely dismissed as an unholy practice because of their knowledge of the terrain and the difficulty in deploying government forces to effectively perform the task, a security expert, Col Aminu Isa Kontagora, has argued. The retired military officer explained that neither the police nor the Navy can singlehandedly guarantee security to the networks of hundreds of kilometers of pipelines that run the entire length and breadth of the Niger Delta creeks. “Imagine even Delta State alone. How many pipes criss-cross the state? The same as places like Rivers, Akwa -Ibom and Bayelsa states. There are so many of them. I don’t think the police can protect every inch of those pipes and that was why it has been extremely difficult. Even the Navy cannot. How many creeks are in the Niger Delta region? Many of the oil theft are done with wooden canoe barges. There are limitations to some of the Naval ships getting into the creeks,” he said. According to him, the need to protect the assets, more than ever before, was underscored by people’s exposure to easy money that oil stealing can provide. “The issue of oil theft will keep coming up because once they have seen that it is lucrative and with little efforts to protect the pipelines, those engaging in pipe breaking will always want to continue with it,” he said. If Tompolo, for instance, would be patriotic and honest in guaranteeing sustained oil flow in the creeks, it would be to Nigeria’s advantage to hire him, he said, pointing, however, that internal competition among the ex-militants may cripple such an arrangement in the long run. “He (Tompolo) must have participated in the vandalization at one time or the other. He cannot deny that. He knows the tactics, he knows his boys in the illegal business and if he can pay them well, maybe the pipelines will be safe. But I know that with the criminality in the oil industry, at one stage his boys will betray him and continue with the stealing of the crude,” he added. “In the Middle East, particularly Saudi Arabia where pipes are in the deserts, there are observation posts manned with cameras and satellite facilities to monitor the pipelines. Here, ours are in the creeks, in the mangroves and you know they grow very fast, so we have to clear the ways and this is another task. That is why our pipelines are more vulnerable to vandals’ activities and theft than most of the countries. But I know that there is nowhere in the world where this problem does not exist,” he said. The retired colonel advocated three strategies that could permanently address the challenges of oil pipeline management in the Niger Delta. “Who owns the pipes? Can we sell the pipelines to Tompolo, instead of telling him to man them, so that he gets royalty from anybody that pumps in oil? This will reduce the theft because he will now take it as his own personal business. But if they are seen as government property, because of our mentality, the theft will continue. Secondly, government can employ the locals along the routes to protect the pipelines. Thirdly, the business of the theft of crude can be made unattractive. That means we must destroy the barges that are used for stealing crude and impound the vessels that are found with stolen crude. We must as well destroy illegal refineries so that we can reduce the incentives to steal the crude. Crude oil is wanted all over the world, as such the criminality in the oil industry is so high that we can only reduce it; we can hardly eliminate it,” Kontagora said. A maritime consultant, Rear Admiral Godwill Ortom (rtd), also toed the line of applying force to discourage oil thieves. “To reduce pipeline vandalism, you have to blow up any ship involved in this sabotage and no other ship will come near Nigeria to buy stolen and cheap oil. Whenever oil is stolen, a mother ship is positioned on the high-sea to ferry the oil, so if you blow it up no ship would come to still your oil again,” he pointed.
‘It’s wrong to reward rebellion’ However, the Chairman of the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF), Alhaji Ibrahim Coomassie, has a different opinion with regards to the propriety of awarding security contracts to ex-militants, saying the practice was wrong. Coomassie, a former police Inspector General, said it was inappropriate for government to award security contracts to people who rebelled against the country or people suspected of illegal behavior. “It is very wrong. How can you give a rebel - someone who took up arms against his country - “security contract?” He said there were qualified government agencies to handle maritime security matters, not individuals with questionable integrity. The former police boss advised the government to review the contracts in the interest of the nation, adding that such matters must be approved by the National Assembly. Also reacting, a civil society activist and executive director of the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CSLAC), Auwal Ibrahim Rafsanjani, faulted the contract on the grounds of its capacity to destroy public institutions. The legislative and anti-corruption campaigner further observed that the awards had not met basic due process requirements. “Unfortunately, it is Nigeria and Nigerians that are losing, because if he (Jonathan) bastardizes this institution by dashing out public money to militant leaders, it means he is encouraging them to do whatever they like and this is inviting violence to the country,” he said. Rafsanjani held that struggle for power and political gains must not promote illegality. “If Boko Haram is ready to support the president, does it mean it can also be given the money and the space to do what it is doing? If you look at what the sect is doing and what the militias are doing, there is little difference in them because it is about killing, disrupting public peace and terrorizing the people,” he asserted. He said the Nigerian security agencies had been undermined by Jonathan’s administration to the point that they were not being allowed to carry out their constitutional duties. “How can a government hire or award contracts to militias to protect its waterways and pipelines when the security agents are there? Despite this, the oil theft has not stopped, in fact, it is on the increase. The contract will only perpetuate the leakages, vandalization and theft in the oil industry,” he noted. He added that Nigeria records the highest rate of oil theft in the world despite the contracts awarded to the militia warlords to provide security for the oil installations. “These people do not have any track records to show that they are capable of providing the required security for our waterways and oil pipes. We have the naval personnel that are well trained, but were sidelined and replaced with militants in the name of politics. This is very unfortunate for the country because we will be encouraging militias to thrive in Nigeria. This is not a good approach to involve them in politics; it’s a way of encouraging them to carry arms against our country,” Rafsanjani cautioned.
‘Contracts will provide jobs’ However, both Fasehun and Adams, have defended the job, arguing that it would create a platform that can provide thousands of job opportunities to youths in the South-West. “This is a contract coming from a government agency, the NNPC, coming to a Nigerian company that will be making use of Nigerian people to do the job. And the company which has the award will also be making use of about 30,000 to 40,000 Nigerians, who will be executing the contract. If you consider the dent on the unemployment statistics in Nigeria, you will agree with me that the approval is worthwhile. Again if you consider the ripple effect, the number of ancillary people attached to these beneficiaries, many of whom have fathers, mothers, uncles, brothers, sisters and wives, you will agree it is worthwhile,” said Fasehun. When asked if the award was politically motivated, Fasehun retorted: “All that should concern Nigerians is that the contract was awarded, that unemployment will be reduced by over 40,000 people. It is not Dr Fasehun that will execute the contract. It is the youths of this country, many of whom are unemployed. So, if anyone is going to make a comment, it should be a positive comment…. And even if Jonathan was the one who thought of awarding the contract, God bless him. What was the cry of the Nigerian youth against him? Was it not that unemployment was going higher and higher?” Similarly, Adams said the contract would give him the opportunity to empower 15,000 youths. “We are not part of the amnesty the Niger Delta (militants) have been enjoying which runs into billions of naira. No dime was given to the OPC and we have paid our price and suffered casualties, more than the Niger Delta (militants) did. Why should it benefit only the Niger Delta and not the South-West too…. It will end hooliganism and empower youths,” he added.(Culled From Daily Trust)
 |
|
Bamanga Tukur to Be Buried Sunday in Yola
Former Governor of the old Gongola State and former National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Bamanga Tukur, will be buried in Yola, Adamawa State, on Sunday, September 13, 2026.
Tukur, a prominent elder statesman and businessman, died in Abuja on Saturday, according to a statement issued by his family.
His son, Awwal Tukur, the Secretary to the Adamawa State Government, announced the burial arrangements in a statement released in Yola on Saturday.
According to the statement, the remains of the deceased will be brought to Yola on Saturday ahead of the funeral.
The funeral prayers are scheduled to take place at the Lamido’s Palace in Yola at 10:00 a.m. on Sunday, after which the late politician will be laid to rest.
Tukur died just three days before his 91st birthday.
He was a prominent figure in Nigeria’s political and economic history, having served in several key public positions during a career spanning more than six decades.
Among other positions, he served as Chief Executive of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA), Governor of the former Gongola State and Minister of Industries. He also served as National Chairman of the PDP between 2012 and 2014.
Beyond Nigeria, Tukur played a role in promoting African economic development through organisations including the Africa Business Roundtable and the NEPAD Business Group.
The late elder statesman is survived by two wives and 18 children, including Awwal Tukur, the Secretary to the Adamawa State Government.
Northern Governors Mourn
The Northern Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NNGF) has expressed grief over the death of Tukur, describing his passing as a significant loss to the North and Nigeria as a whole.
In a condolence message issued on behalf of the forum, its Chairman and Governor of Gombe State, Muhammadu Inuwa Yahaya, described Tukur as an experienced public servant, political leader and advocate of economic development.
Yahaya said Tukur’s contributions to public administration, politics and business had left a lasting mark on the country.
He highlighted the deceased’s extensive public service record, including his tenure at the Nigerian Ports Authority, his leadership of the old Gongola State and his service as Minister of Industries.
The NNGF chairman also recognised Tukur’s involvement in continental economic initiatives and his leadership of the PDP between 2012 and 2014.
“Alhaji Bamanga Tukur lived a long and impactful life, serving Nigeria in several critical capacities and contributing significantly to the growth of our economy, institutions and political development,” Yahaya said.
He added that Tukur’s experience, wisdom and dedication to public service would be greatly missed.
Yahaya extended his condolences to the Adamawa State Government, the Tukur family, friends and associates of the deceased.
He prayed that Allah would forgive Tukur’s shortcomings, reward his contributions to humanity and grant him Aljannatul Firdaus.
News
Where & How to Buy Dangote Refinery IPO Shares
The Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE is set to offer shares to the Nigerian public, giving individuals an opportunity to become shareholders in one of Africa’s largest refineries.
The public offer is expected to open on Monday, September 14, 2026, and close on October 13, 2026, subject to the final offer documents.
The offer comprises 4.1 billion ordinary shares at ₦525 per share, with a minimum subscription of 10 shares, costing ₦5,250.
Who Can Buy Dangote Refinery Shares?
The IPO is designed to give ordinary Nigerians an opportunity to invest in the refinery. Investors can subscribe through approved banks, fintech platforms, mobile operators, and NGX Invest.
However, investors should only use channels officially approved for the offer and should avoid sending money to individuals, agents, or platforms that are not listed in the official offer documents.
Approved Channels for the Dangote Refinery IPO
Banks
Access Bank
Ecobank
FCMB
Fidelity Bank
FirstBank
Globus Bank
GTCO
Jaiz Bank
Keystone Bank
Lotus Bank
PremiumTrust Bank
Providus Bank
Stanbic IBTC
Sterling Bank
TAJ Bank
UBA
Union Bank
Wema Bank
Zenith Bank
Fintech Platforms
Bamboo
Flutterwave
InvestNaija
Ladder
Moniepoint
Paga
Payaza
PiggyVest
Vetiva Invest
we.yan
Mobile Operators
Airtel SmartCash
MTN MoMo
Nigerian Exchange
NGX Invest
How to Buy Dangote Refinery IPO Shares
Step 1: Choose an Approved Platform
Select one of the banks, fintech platforms, mobile operators, or investment platforms officially approved to process subscriptions.
If you already use one of the approved platforms, check whether the IPO application option is available through your existing account.
Step 2: Open or Activate Your Investment Account
Investors generally need an investment or brokerage account to participate in the offer.
Depending on the platform, you may be required to provide identification, your BVN and other Know-Your-Customer information.
Step 3: Set Up Your CSCS Details
Shares listed on the Nigerian Exchange are held electronically through the Central Securities Clearing System (CSCS).
Your broker or participating investment platform should guide you through the process of opening or linking the necessary CSCS account.
Step 4: Fund Your Account
At ₦525 per share, the minimum subscription is:
10 shares × ₦525 = ₦5,250
If you want to purchase more shares, calculate the total amount based on the number of shares you intend to request and check the final prospectus for the applicable subscription rules and fees.
Step 5: Apply When the Offer Opens
The public offer is expected to open on September 14, 2026.
Log into your approved platform, select the Dangote Refinery public offer, enter the number of shares you want to subscribe for, review your information and submit your application.
Step 6: Keep Your Confirmation
After submitting your application, keep your application reference, receipt or confirmation for your records.
Step 7: Wait for Allotment
Applying for shares does not necessarily mean you will receive every share requested.
If the offer is oversubscribed, investors could receive fewer shares than they applied for. Any applicable excess funds should be handled according to the terms of the final offer documents.
Step 8: Monitor Your Shares After Listing
Once the shares are listed on the Nigerian Exchange, successful investors can monitor their holdings through their broker or investment platform.
The market price may rise or fall after listing, depending on the company’s performance, investor demand, market conditions and other factors.
Important Warning for Investors
Do not pay anyone personally to “secure” Dangote Refinery shares for you.
Before sending money or providing your financial information, verify that the platform you are using appears on the official approved list and that the application process matches the final prospectus and offer documents.
Investors should also review the official prospectus carefully, particularly the offer terms, fees, allotment rules, deadlines and risk factors.
Investment involves risk. The fact that an IPO is associated with a well-known company does not guarantee that the share price will rise after listing.
Business
In The Spotlight
Editorial: PFIPC: The Scandal Is Bigger Than Gbajabiamila (2)
The first question was: Who created PFIPC? Now Nigeria must ask a more frightening one:Who allowed it to look real? That is the question the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council scandal can no longer escape.
The controversy has already produced denials, accusations, official disclaimers, investigations and criminal proceedings. The Presidency has maintained that PFIPC was fictitious and that its alleged promoter, Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew, was falsely presenting himself as a government appointee. The Office of the Chief of Staff says it alerted security agencies as far back as October 2025 over alleged forged appointment letters.
Fine.Let the courts determine the criminal allegations.Let investigators establish who forged what, who authorised what and who benefited from what. But there is now another problem that cannot be dismissed as the work of one alleged impostor. The paper trail.
Because this story became truly explosive when reports emerged that the name PFIPC, alongside the Presidential Economic Advisory Council, appeared in the 2026 federal budget with an allocation of about ₦1.3 billion. Other reports also said the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation had approved recruitment for hundreds of positions linked to the council.
If those records are authentic, then Nigerians are entitled to ask a brutally simple question:
How does a supposedly non-existent organisation get into government paperwork? That question is bigger than Gbajabiamila. Much bigger.And it is precisely why this matter must not become a convenient contest between political camps.
The easiest thing to do now is to make this a story about whether the Chief of Staff was framed, whether he was wrongly accused, or whether his denials should be believed.
Those questions matter. But they are not enough. Because even if Gbajabiamila is completely cleared, the country will still be left staring at the same institutional wreckage.Somebody, somewhere, appears to have been able to give a questionable entity the appearance of government legitimacy.That is not a small administrative mistake.That is a security problem.
It is a governance problem. It is a financial-control problem.And, potentially, it is a national credibility problem. Think about the implications. An organisation carrying the word “Presidential” can sound powerful enough to impress businessmen, foreign investors, civil servants and even government officials.
A letter carrying the right government language can appear authentic.A title can sound official. An office address can create confidence. A meeting can create legitimacy.A photograph can create legitimacy. A budget line can create legitimacy.
And once enough of these pieces come together, fiction can begin to acquire the appearance of fact.That is the frightening part.The Nigerian state cannot afford to be protected by appearances. It must be protected by verification.
If PFIPC was indeed fabricated, then the sophistication of the alleged deception deserves serious attention. The Presidency itself said the alleged organisation had been presented as a government agency and that purported appointment letters carried falsified signatures, reference numbers and seals.That is not merely somebody printing a fake business card.That is an alleged attempt to manufacture the appearance of state authority. And the state must answer accordingly.
Who checked the documents? Who checked the appointment? Who checked the organisation's legal foundation? Who checked its place in the public service structure? Who checked its bank accounts?Who checked its office?Who checked its recruitment?Who checked its budgetary status?Who checked the officials supposedly running it?And, above all:Who had the power to stop it?Those are not partisan questions.They are state questions.
They belong to every Nigerian.This is why the PFIPC affair should now be treated as an institutional stress test. The result is uncomfortable.
The Nigerian government has demonstrated that it can publicly declare an organisation non-existent while questions simultaneously arise over how that same name appeared in official-looking government records.
Whatever the eventual explanation, that contradiction demands daylight.Not spin.Not political warfare.Not another round of accusations on television.Daylight.
If the budget entry was an administrative error, explain it.If it was inserted improperly, explain how.If recruitment approval was improperly obtained, explain who authorised it.If documents were forged, prosecute those responsible after due process.
If legitimate government officials were deceived, identify where the verification system failed.If insiders assisted the operation, expose them.And if no government insider was involved at all, then demonstrate clearly how outsiders were able to penetrate the machinery of government so deeply.
Nigeria deserves that answer.Because there is a dangerous habit in public life: once a scandal becomes embarrassing, the instinct is to find one person to carry it away.
Blame the impostor.Blame the politician.Blame the civil servant.Blame the opposition.Blame the media.Then move on.
That will not do this time.A country does not become safer because one alleged fraudster is prosecuted.It becomes safer when the system that made the fraud possible is repaired.That is the real test.
The PFIPC controversy has exposed a vulnerability that cannot be buried beneath another headline.
Government authority is an asset.It must be guarded.
The presidential name is an asset.It must be protected.Official documents are an asset.They must be secured.
The national budget is an asset.It must be beyond manipulation.And public confidence is perhaps the most valuable asset of all.
Once Nigerians begin to wonder whether an organisation can be invented, dressed in presidential language and somehow find its way into official channels, the damage extends beyond the immediate scandal.It reaches the credibility of the state.It reaches Nigeria's relationship with investors. It reaches the credibility of official correspondence.It reaches the confidence of foreign missions.It reaches the reputation of the civil service.And it reaches the fundamental question of whether government records mean what they say they mean.
That is why the authorities must resist the temptation to declare victory simply because an individual has been accused, investigated or prosecuted.
The deeper victory would be institutional.Find the loophole.Close it.Find the accomplices, if any.Expose them.Find the forged documents.Trace them. Find the money.Follow it. Find the approvals.Explain them.
Find the officials who failed in their duties.Hold them accountable, where evidence and due process establish responsibility.And then build a system in which the next PFIPC cannot happen.
Because there will always be fraudsters.There will always be con artists.There will always be people willing to manufacture influence. The real question is whether the Nigerian state makes their work easy.That is what Abuja must answer.
And this is where the story moves beyond Femi Gbajabiamila.If he is innocent of the allegations against him, then say so and let the evidence stand.But do not confuse the clearing of one man with the clearing of the system.One man can be innocent while a system is still guilty of negligence.That distinction matters.
Nigeria does not need another political scapegoat.It needs an audit of its gates.Who enters?Who leaves?Who signs?Who approves?Who verifies?Who pays?Who watches?And who answers when nobody watches?Those questions are now unavoidable.
The PFIPC scandal began as a dispute over an alleged organisation.It has become a test of something much larger:whether the Nigerian state can recognise itself when someone tries to impersonate it.That is not a scandal about one man.It is not even a scandal about one organisation.It is a warning about the machinery of government itself.And warnings ignored have a way of returning as disasters.
So let the investigation continue.Let the courts do their work.Let evidence—not political loyalty—determine responsibility.
But let nobody close this file merely because one powerful name has been cleared.The name may be cleared.The questions are not.
And until Nigerians know how an allegedly non-existent presidential body could acquire the appearance, paperwork and institutional oxygen of legitimacy, the PFIPC scandal remains unfinished. The mask may have been exposed. Now Nigeria must find out who opened the door.
In The Spotlight
Rethinking Policy From The Ground (II)
Last week, this column began with a simple proposition: Nigeria’s public policy conversation is often conducted at the wrong altitude. We examined why citizens encounter the state most directly through schools, primary health centres, rural roads, markets, transport systems, environmental services and local government offices. We also argued that a policy problem must first be understood before it is solved. Today, the column continues that argument. If knowing the problem is the beginning, the next question is what happens when a carefully diagnosed problem enters the political and administrative machinery of government. This is where incentives, institutions, competing values and frontline discretion determine whether a promising policy becomes a public good or another abandoned initiative.
From Problems Towards Choices
A government rarely chooses between a good option and a bad option. It usually chooses among imperfect alternatives, each benefiting some citizens, imposing costs on others and carrying uncertainties.
That reality should make policy analysis more rigorous. William K. Bellinger’s work on economics for policy analysis provides a useful discipline: the relevant question is not simply whether government can afford an intervention, but whether its social benefits justify the resources sacrificed elsewhere. Every new road competes with a school. Every government factory competes with health spending. For state policymakers, the essential question is therefore: what else could this money achieve? A N10 billion expenditure should be evaluated against the outcomes forgone by not spending that money elsewhere. That is the difference between accounting for expenditure and analysing public value.
How Incentives Change Behaviour
This reasoning becomes sharper when we consider how citizens respond to government decisions. Lee S. Friedman’s microeconomic approach to policy reminds us that people respond to prices, rules, risks, information and incentives.
Consider local taxation. A local government that increases market levies may expect higher revenue. But if the burden becomes excessive, traders may relocate, evade payment or operate outside formal markets. The government may collect less while economic activity becomes harder to monitor. Similarly, multiple charges on farmers, transporters or small manufacturers can make formal activity less attractive.
The same logic applies to environmental regulation. If government prohibits indiscriminate dumping without providing affordable waste collection, households may continue dumping illegally because the lawful alternative is inaccessible. Enforcement alone cannot solve an incentive problem created partly by inadequate service provision. Good regulation combines rules with feasible alternatives. The objective should be to make desirable behaviour easier, not merely punish undesirable behaviour.
Why Politics Shapes Outcomes
But incentives alone do not explain policy outcomes. Deborah Stone’s work on policy paradox reminds us that public decisions are contests over values as much as calculations of efficiency. Nigerian policymakers operate where questions of distribution are inseparable from development. Who gets the road? Which community receives the hospital? Whose land is acquired? Which informal operators are displaced?
These are political questions with technical dimensions. A policy that is economically efficient may still fail if it is perceived as unfair. A reform that improves aggregate welfare may provoke resistance from groups bearing concentrated losses. Politically intelligent policy design must therefore anticipate winners, losers and the narratives through which both interpret reform.
Urban transportation illustrates the point. Formalising informal transport can improve safety and service standards, but simply removing existing operators can create hardship for drivers and passengers. Successful reform recognises the economic lives embedded in existing arrangements and provides credible transition pathways.
Institutions Carry Policy Forward
Michael Howlett, M. Ramesh and Anthony Perl of the Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy remind us that policy is not a single decision, but a process involving agenda setting, formulation, adoption, implementation and evaluation. A brilliant policy document can therefore become a poor programme because institutions lack coordination, information, authority or capacity.
Nigeria’s federal structure makes this especially difficult. Responsibilities are distributed across federal, state and local institutions, while financing and administrative capacity are uneven. A primary school may depend on one level for teachers, another for infrastructure and another for complementary interventions. A primary health centre may receive medicines through one channel, personnel through another and capital investment through a third. When outcomes are poor, each institution can point elsewhere.
The answer is not simply to redraw constitutional boundaries. For policymakers, this means resisting the temptation to treat political urgency as evidence. Urgency can justify action, but it cannot substitute for diagnosis, comparison, measurement and institutional realism and learning. It is to make responsibility visible. Citizens should know which institution is responsible for which service, what standard it must meet and where complaints should go.
Frontline Officials Make Policy
Perhaps nowhere is this more important than where policy meets the citizen. Research on street-level bureaucracy shows that frontline officials possess discretion because formal rules cannot anticipate every circumstance. Teachers decide how struggling pupils are treated. Nurses prioritise patients. Extension workers decide which farmers receive information. Environmental officers determine which violations receive attention.
Where incentives are weak and supervision poor, discretion can become rent extraction. But discretion can also enable adaptation. A teacher may develop a practical method for reaching struggling pupils. A health worker may reorganise patient flow to reduce waiting. A local official may find a simpler way to process applications. The challenge is therefore not to eliminate discretion, which is impossible, but to create conditions under which it serves public purposes.
States should pay closer attention to the working environment of frontline officials. If a policy assumes that an extension agent will visit remote farms without transport, or that a teacher will improve learning without materials, or that a health worker will provide reliable services without medicines, the policy is not ambitious. It is institutionally unrealistic.
Governments Must Learn Systematically
Nigeria has no shortage of programmes, strategies and reforms. What it lacks is a sufficiently systematic process for deciding which interventions deserve to survive. Governments often scale programmes because they are politically attractive, not because they have demonstrated results. Others abandon useful initiatives when administrations change. This produces institutional amnesia, with each government behaving as though it is starting from zero.
States should identify what they believe will happen, establish measurable indicators, test interventions, compare results and revise assumptions. Local governments should become sources of operational knowledge rather than administrative endpoints. Successful innovations should be documented and adapted before scaling. Failures should be examined rather than concealed.
A state may discover that feeder roads produce larger gains in farm incomes than subsidised inputs in one agricultural zone, while another finds that irrigation, storage or market aggregation is the binding constraint. The goal should be a common commitment to evidence, with flexibility for different solutions.
Good public policy requires more than money, political will or impressive documents. It requires an accurate understanding of reality, careful choices among alternatives, attention to incentives, sensitivity to political values, institutions capable of implementation and systems that learn from results. States and local governments are where these conditions either converge or collapse.
Next week, the conclusion of this three-part series will move from diagnosis to action. The final column will set out practical policy recommendations and ways forward for state and local government policymakers, focusing on education, primary healthcare, rural livelihoods, rural industrialisation, transportation, and ease of doing business among several others.
By Abdulrauf Aliyu