Connect with us

Nigeria

Nigeria’s Corrupt Petroleum Corporation Executives Invite Newspaper Editors To Lagos Hotel, To Bribe Them To Discredit Report About Their Incompetence, Wastefulness

Published

on

The media learnt that the planned meeting with the editors is scheduled for 1pm on Sunday at Legend Hotel, close to the Murtala Muhammed International Airport, Ikeja in Lagos.

The management of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) has invited newspaper editors to a Lagos hotel with the intention of bribing them to discredit a recent report about ineptitude, mismanagement and corruption in the state oil and gas company.

The media learnt that the planned meeting with the editors is scheduled for 1pm on Sunday at Legend Hotel, close to the Murtala Muhammed International Airport, Ikeja in Lagos.

A source privy to information regarding the emergency meeting told the media it is to bribe editors to discredit a report exposing the incompetence of NNPC executives and their wastefulness.

“They are inviting some editors to Legend Hotel in Lagos to bribe them to discredit a story published by the ICIR on Friday that really embarrassed them. The meeting is scheduled for 1pm on Sunday (today),” the source said.

The content of the text message sent out to the invited editors reads: “Meeting of selected editors scheduled for Sunday 12/9/2021 @ 1pm. Venue: Legend Hotel adjacent Murtala Muhammed International Airport.  Please confirm, attendance.”

The report highlighted data collated from audited financial statements released by the NNPC, led by its Group Managing Director, Mele Kyari, on Wednesday. The report exposed how Port Harcourt Refinery Company (PHRC), which is managed by Ahmed Dikko, an engineer, reported no income in 2020 but incurred administrative expenses of N19.215 billion, paying salaries, wages and other benefits to unproductive workers to the tune of N22.55 billion.

Despite making zero revenue, Port Harcourt refinery employed 487 new workers and paid N23 billion as salaries in 2020.

The media also learnt that the NNPC had already sponsored some groups to criticise the damaging report in an attempt to counter its implications by releasing press statements in the media.

For instance, a coalition of northern and southern groups recently released a joint statement saying the “continuous media attacks were designed to distract NNPC Group Managing Director and Port Harcourt Refinery Managing Director”.

The group said it took a stand during their second-quarter meeting in Kaduna at the weekend, “because the attack dogs of haters of the ongoing reforms at the NNPC are going beyond the boundaries of decency”.

“As Nigerian citizens, we feel duty-bound to draw public attention to a calculated, coordinated and well-funded media agenda designed to purposely distract the NNPC management, including another committed public servant – Dikko – who has been leading the reforms at the level of Port Harcourt refinery,” the group said.

The report on the 2020 financial statement of the company stated that the 487 new workers are being paid N3.93 billion annually, indicating that each of them takes an average of N8.072 million annually or N672,713 monthly.

The amount they earn monthly is about the annual salary of a normal Level 8 Federal Government worker.

Between 2019 and 2020, the refinery employed 1,162 new staff members, paying N41.163 billion in salary and wages, according to The ICIR’s calculations of the company’s wage data on its financial statements.

Also, out of the 487 staff members employed in 2020, 430 were senior and management staff members, amounting to 88.2 per cent, with huge financial implications. Only 57 were junior staff members.

Also, out of 675 staff engaged by the refinery in 2019, 656 were management and senior staff, members, representing 97 per cent of the total, with huge financial implications.

 

“It is looking like jobs for the boys at our dear refineries. And I wonder, most of these guys are earning heavy wages,” US-based Financial Consultant Ellam Ogochukwu said.

“Whoever is running that enterprise deserves to answer several questions,” she said.

Also, staff pension, gratuity and ‘long service award’ gulped N77.76 billion in 2020 as against N63.41 billion the previous year.

Surprisingly, under Dikko and his boss Kyari, the PHRC’s unproductive staff were allowed to take car loans, compassionate loans and advances valued at N1.001 billion in 2020.

The amount was N597.297 million in 2019.

In 2020, this refinery, which made no revenue, incurred a comprehensive loss of N53.179 billion.

In the previous year, the company made no revenue but incurred N50.530 billion in comprehensive loss.

Between 2017 and 2020, the company comprehensively lost N241.609 billion. Its revenue within this period was merely N6.27 billion.

“This refinery did not produce oil. What you have is that some people just iron their clothes, go to work and come back at the end of the day without adding to the productivity of the company,” Oil and Gas Analyst at Lagos-based Chapel Hill Denham Mustapha Wahab told The ICIR.

NNPC Managing Director, Kyari is the chairman of Port Harcourt refinery. He is followed by Ahmed Dikko (MD), Babatunde Sofowora (Executive Director of Services), Reginald Udeh (Executive Director, Finance and Accounts), James Ifeanyichukwu Ajibo (Executive Director, Operations), and Awaisu Muazu (late, served till July 2020).

These directors took N99.742 million as emoluments in 2020, a 67 per cent increase from N59.650 million they took in 2019.

In 2019, the Port Harcourt refinery did not record any revenue.  Yet, it reported N25.19 billion in expenses.

Six directors collected N59.65 million in fees, meaning that each of them received an average payment of N9.94 million a month in 2019.

According to the NNPC, names of the six directors in 2019 were:  Group Managing Director of NNPC, Malam Mele Kyari; Managing Director, Abba Bukar (who retired in March 2020); Executive Director of Services, Babatunde S. Sofowore; Executive Director of Operations, Ganiyu Abiodun Owolabi; another Executive Director of Operations, Engr Abel N. Imonighavwe; and Executive Director of Finance and Accounts, Mrs Aramide M. Ekundayo.

Salaries, wages, allowances, redundancy and pension costs gulped N22.195 billion. What that means is that, on average, each staff member received N32.88 million in 2019 from a company that made no revenue. This amounted, on the average, to N2.74 million each month.

Total salaries and pays received by staff members of Port Harcourt refinery between 2017 and 2019 amounted to N80.57 billion. But revenues received by the company within the period were estimated at N6.27 billion – implying that the NNPC sought N74.3 billion from outside the refinery to pay staff salaries.

Rather than privatise the refinery, the NNPC chose to pump an equivalent of 4.5 percent of Nigeria’s 2021 budget ($1.5 billion) into the refurbishment of a refinery that comprehensively lost N206.069 billion between 2017 and 2020.

Oil and Gas Analyst at Lagos-based Chapel Hill Denham, Mustapha Wahab said the investment in the refinery made no sense.

“Dangote refinery is coming on board and can process about 650,000 barrels per day of crude oil – highest in the world. NNPC has taken 20 per cent stake in Dangote.

“Why then are you resuscitating Port Harcourt refinery? We have done the analysis at Chapel Hill Denham and found that government should be spending $3billion or more to ensure efficiency of the refinery. So, it does not make investment sense because you are not going to compete with yourself,” he said.

“Two, Some countries are exiting low-carbon energy sources and migrating to clean energy. So, after rehabilitating Port Harcourt refinery, for how long will you enjoy its benefits, given that your market is not just Nigeria but also those countries exiting what you intend to sell to them?” he asked, urging the Nigerian Government to concession it for optimal benefits to the Nigerian economy.

Oil and Gas Governance Consultant, Henry Ademola Adigun also noted that the refinery was badly managed.

“The point is that the refineries are still badly managed. The faster the corporation becomes a limited liability company, the better,” Adigun said.

“You have a refinery not producing anything and not making revenues but salaries are being paid. How did the NNPC make the profit they said they made when the inefficiencies are there? The profit and loss do not show anything. They simply want to make it attractive to the stockman.”

He said there was no cost-cutting by the NNPC or the refineries, adding that there were also “no innovative efficiency, no restructuring or replanting and no cost-saving on salaries and wages.”

Former President of the Nigerian Society of Petroleum Engineers Joe Nwakwue said the only thing that the corporation could have done was to sell off the refineries.

“If you have a factory and is not producing, you will have to pay the gate man and the even the insurance company.”

The PHRC was commissioned in 1965. It was made up of two refineries: the old refinery was inaugurated in 1965 with capacity of 60,000 barrels per stream day (bpsd) and the new refinery was inaugurated in 1989 with an installed capacity of 150,000 bpsd, according to the NNPC.

It has a capacity of 210,000 bpsd with five process areas. In 2000, the then government of Nigeria shut down the refinery for turnaround maintenance. Other three refineries in the country were also expected to undergo a similar process, Oil & Gas Journal said.

As of that time, $364 million had already been spent on endless turnaround maintenance (TAM) services. About $25 billion has been spent on turnaround maintenance in the past 25 years, according to The Guardian.

The Institute for Global Energy Research, in a 2004 article, said the barrage of corruption, poor management, sabotage and lack of the mandatory turnaround maintenance (TAM) every two years had made all the refineries inefficient, making them operate at about 40 per cent of full capacity.

The NNPC said in April 2020 that it would hand over the four refineries in the country to a private firm to manage.

“We are going to get an O&M contract; NNPC won’t run it. We are going to get a firm that will guarantee that this plant would run for some time. We want to try a different model of getting this refinery to run. And we are going to apply this process for the running of the other two refineries.”

However, this has not happened. Rather, the corporation has sought money to rehabilitate the failed refineries.

It has prided itself on cost-cutting efficiency, but its refineries have incurred humongous losses.

Analysts say NNPC has no cause to hold onto the running of the refineries, having shown no capacity to manage it.

Culled from the Sahara Reporters

Texas Guardian News
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Column

From Noise to Votes: Nigerian Youth Must Turn Online Fire into Electoral Power

Published

on

Young Nigerians have shown a remarkable ability to create waves in the digital space. With a single click, they can expose a politician’s corruption, rally tens of thousands of supporters behind a single hashtag, and keep every political actor on edge from dawn until dusk. However, as the 2027 general elections draw closer, it is time to face an uncomfortable truth: loud online noise isn’t the same as real power in the political sphere. If Nigerian youth wish to get the best possible leadership from their nation’s leaders, they need to take their online activity offline (i.e., to places where actual democracy occurs) and start showing up to cast votes.

There is simply too much evidence to ignore that this needs to occur. Nigeria is a young country demographically. Together, Gen Z and Millennials comprise approximately half of the total population—50.1 percent—according to IntelPoint. Gen Z makes up 25.8 percent and Millennials account for 24.3 percent. When we consider Gen Alpha, the percentage rises to 85.7% of the population under 44. According to ActionAid Nigeria, more than 60% of Nigeria’s population is under 30. According to Afrobarometer, Nigeria has a median age of 18.1 years, and 58% of its population is aged 0-29. Therefore, Nigeria isn’t merely a young country; it is a country dominated by young people.

Based on this information, this dominant demographic should wield considerable political influence. Unfortunately, there often appears to be little correlation between these statistics and political influence. The contrast is striking. While a majority of Nigeria’s population is young, there remains a significant gap between how influential young people are politically and how influential they could be. This lack of influence is not due to a lack of ability among young people; rather, it stems from many young people stopping short of completing what is often called the “civic journey,” which involves moving from awareness to action. They consume politics, engage in political debate on social media, participate in meme politics, and express frustration with politics through social media rants; however, many young people still fail to register to vote (PVCs) or participate in elections in sufficient numbers to affect the outcome.

This disparity is important because youth dissatisfaction is far from abstract. More than 23% of Nigerian youth report being unemployed or seeking employment, according to Afrobarometer. Additionally, more than two-thirds of youth aged 18 to 35 report having some form of postsecondary or secondary-level education. Despite Nigeria ranking among the lowest in providing employment and opportunities for youth, and despite identifying high costs of living, unemployment, crime and security concerns, poverty, poor economic management practices, and insufficient access to electricity as the top five issues requiring immediate attention from government officials, youth dissatisfaction cannot be considered indifferent. Rather, youth dissatisfaction reflects citizens’ grievances and legitimate reasons to be deeply interested in who governs their country.

However, mere interest alone will not suffice. Democracy does not reward passion without participation. A young person can identify every weakness inherent in a political system; however, unless that person participates by casting a vote, they will remain a spectator to their own future. If you are mature enough to understand concepts such as inflation, insecurity, broken campaign promises, unemployment rates, and poorly managed governance systems, you are mature enough to accept responsibility for your role in creating solutions to those problems. That responsibility begins with voting.

In addition to continuing to use social media to raise awareness of voter registration, election knowledge, fact-checking mechanisms used during elections, and peaceful participation methods, social media can also serve as a vehicle for facilitating the transition from social media activism to actual civic engagement. Young Nigerians should leverage their social media presence to encourage voter registration, promote election literacy programs, provide fact-checking services to counter election misinformation, and advocate for nonviolent participation throughout the electoral cycle. They should convert their social media timelines into civic classrooms. Where can I find the information I need about voter registration processes? Where is my assigned polling station located? Where do I receive my Permanent Voter Card? How do I protect myself from spreading misinformation? How do I properly monitor election results? These are not dull topics; they represent essential tools required for surviving democracy.

Youth organizations, creators, and social media entities can also help facilitate offline civic engagement. Use your WhatsApp groups to alert others as registration deadlines approach. Use X Spaces and Instagram Live to focus on discussing relevant issues rather than hurling insults. Use TikTok to simplify the voting process. Use Facebook to motivate family members and first-time voters to participate in elections. Use whatever platforms are available to make civic obligation contagious. Nigeria’s youth have shown they can create viral content. Now they must begin to generate participation on a viral scale.

One of the most damaging myths in Nigerian politics is that “your vote doesn’t matter.” It is a self-fulfilling prophecy that only serves the interests of cynics, crooks, and machines whose success depends solely on low turnout. Yes, Nigeria’s electoral process has flaws. Yes, there have been numerous disappointments. However, the response to a flawed democracy is not abandonment; it is increased participation. By staying home on Election Day, youth essentially give their votes — and therefore control — directly to the very same groups they loathe.

Another mythological excuse for the youth’s failure to vote in Nigeria is the claim that “all politicians are alike.” No — they’re not all the same. While some politicians are inept, others are corrupt, and others exhibit both characteristics, democracy is not about seeking holy men or women; it is about making selections and enforcing accountability. An individual who refuses to make a selection for office because none of the options appear acceptable is ultimately selecting the candidate most likely to emerge victorious by default.

Nigeria’s youth already constitute the country’s largest demographic group. It is time for them to become its strongest democratic force as well. However, that will not be achieved by trending hashtags alone. Instead, it will be achieved when online energy is harnessed and directed toward political organization, civic education, voter registration, increasing voter turnout, and holding elected representatives accountable after elections.

The 2023 election saw remarkable youth participation but lacked follow-up. Therefore, the 2027 election should not produce another generation of disillusioned observers; instead, it should yield a new generation of participatory citizens. Let online flames ignite electoral power. Let debates become ballots. Let criticism evolve into participation. If Nigerian youth can dominate social media, they can also dominate democracy. The future will not be handed to them in a retweet. They must elect it into existence.

_________

♦ Chris Ulasi is on the Editorial Board of The West African Pilot News. He contributes stories about culture and tradition, elite politics, ethnicity and national integration, civil society, and social movement. He is a university professor, community builder, poet, film producer, recording the emergent Nollywood cultural history through film.

Texas Guardian News
Continue Reading

Anthony Obi Ogbo

Between Silence and Sabotage: Jonathan’s Return to Political Manipulation

Published

on

“Jonathan’s calculated and weaponized ambiguity breeds deception and weakens emerging political alliances.” —Dr. Anthony Obi Ogbo

Former Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan has once again found himself at the center of presidential speculation, floating silently above the country’s political waters while supporters aggressively market him as a possible candidate ahead of another critical election cycle. And once again, Jonathan is doing what he has mastered throughout his political career: saying nothing clearly while allowing political confusion to grow around him.

This pattern is not new. It is the same indecisive political behavior that defined some of the most consequential moments of his rise and fall. Jonathan became president in 2010 following the death of President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua. At the time, many northern political stakeholders within the then-ruling PDP believed there was an informal understanding that Jonathan would complete Yar’Adua’s term but not seek another full term in 2011, thereby preserving the party’s zoning arrangement between North and South. Instead of taking a clear and immediate position, Jonathan spent months dribbling the nation politically. He neither fully denied nor openly confirmed his intentions until the political tension had already escalated nationwide.

By the time he eventually declared his candidacy, the damage had been done. Many northern allies who initially supported him felt betrayed, politically cornered, or deceived. The PDP fractured internally, regional distrust deepened, and Jonathan’s relationship with major northern power blocs deteriorated permanently. Though he won the 2011 election, the cracks created by that indecision followed him into 2015, contributing significantly to the coalition that eventually removed him from power.

Yet Jonathan learned little from that experience. Since losing reelection in 2015, his name has repeatedly surfaced during every major electoral cycle as a potential presidential contender. Each time, his supporters strategically floated his candidacy across media platforms and political circles. Each time, Jonathan refused to decisively shut the door. Silence became his political instrument, whereas ambiguity became his strategy.

Now the country is witnessing the same playbook again. As coalition politics intensify and opposition forces attempt to consolidate around alternative political movements, Jonathan’s name has resurfaced aggressively. Reports and speculations about his presidential ambition continue to dominate political discussions, especially within camps seeking to disrupt the growing momentum surrounding Peter Obi and emerging opposition realignments.

The troubling part is not merely that Jonathan’s supporters are campaigning. The troubling part is that Jonathan fully understands the implications of his silence. He knows that his political stature carries enough weight to destabilize fragile coalition negotiations. He knows his name alone can divide campaign structures, weaken consensus-building, and inject uncertainty into opposition calculations. Yet he refuses to publicly and definitively state where he stands.

That is not statesmanship. That is calculated political ambiguity. Jonathan’s political history is filled with similarly contradictory choices. After losing power in 2015, he received widespread praise for conceding defeat peacefully. He initially framed that decision as a sacrifice made to preserve Nigerian lives and prevent violence. Later, however, different narratives emerged suggesting international pressure, particularly from the United States under President Obama. The shifting explanations weakened what could have remained one of his strongest democratic legacies.

Then came another contradiction. Despite emerging politically from the PDP, Jonathan gradually aligned himself closely with the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari, serving in diplomatic and goodwill capacities that many PDP loyalists considered politically inappropriate. This unusual closeness fueled longstanding allegations that elements within the APC establishment viewed Jonathan as a useful political instrument capable of destabilizing opposition coalitions from within. Whether those allegations are true or not, Jonathan’s conduct has consistently created room for suspicion.

His political base remains uncertain. His campaign structure is invisible.

Today, his undeclared ambition is already generating confusion among supporters, coalition organizers, and opposition strategists. His political base remains uncertain. His campaign structure is invisible. His intentions are unclear. Yet his loyalists continue mobilizing aggressively in his name while he watches silently from the shadows.

Nigeria is too politically fragile for this kind of elite gamesmanship. At critical national moments, leadership demands clarity, courage, and accountability. Jonathan cannot continue operating as a permanent “maybe” in Nigeria’s political future, thoughtlessly hovering around every election season like an unanswered question designed to manipulate negotiations and weaken emerging alliances.

At this time, Jonathan should sit in or sit out! If he wants to run, he should declare openly, defend his record, and face the democratic process directly. If he does not intend to run, he should immediately and publicly withdraw his name from the political marketplace. Anything short of that increasingly looks less like political strategy and more like calculated deception. Nigeria deserves leaders who make difficult choices openly—not politicians who weaponize silence while others gamble with national uncertainty in their name.

♦ Publisher of the Guardian News, Professor Anthony Obi Ogbo, Ph.D., is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015)  and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us

Texas Guardian News
Continue Reading

Nigeria

The Devastation of Insurgency: Nigeria Cannot Kill Its Way Out of Insecurity

Published

on

“Insecurity persists not only because armed groups are present but also because the state is often absent” —Dr. Declan Onwudiwe

Nigeria cannot kill its way out of insecurity. While military victories may win battles, only legitimacy, governance, and economic opportunity can secure lasting peace. Across the country, persistent violence, characterized by impunity and a tragic disregard for human life, has exposed the limits of a force-only approach. The time has come for a more sweeping and planned security response.

What is most troubling is the continuing victimization of innocent citizens, especially women and children. Reports of attacks on farmers, worshippers in churches and mosques, and travelers have become disturbingly routine. Kidnappings, sexual violence, and the killing of schoolchildren have weakened public confidence in the state’s ability to protect its people. These are not individual events but symptoms of a deeper structural crisis. Yet, Nigeria is not without options. A strategic and sustained plan can alter this trajectory.

Cooperation between Nigeria’s security forces and international partners is praiseworthy and necessary. However, a recurring weakness undermines these gains: areas cleared by the military are often left insufficiently secured, allowing insurgents and bandits to return. A viable strategy must go beyond clearing territory to consolidating control. Insurgent groups adapt rapidly; after defeat, they disperse, regroup, and re-emerge in areas where governance is weak. Every community reclaimed by force but left without sustained state presence risks becoming tomorrow’s battleground.

Experience from other regions underscores this point. Countries such as Colombia and Iraq that have made substantial progress against insurgency have done so by maintaining a firm and continuous government presence in liberated areas. Where state authority is visible through security, justice, and basic services, insurgents find it much harder to re-establish control. Where it is absent, violence returns. Nigeria must learn from this reality and prioritize holding territory as much as reclaiming it.

At the heart of the problem is a governance deficit. Insecurity persists not only because armed groups are present but also because the state is often absent. Recovered areas commonly lack functioning institutions, effective policing, and access to justice. Without these, citizens remain vulnerable, and security gains become temporary. A credible strategy must ensure that communities reclaimed by security forces are immediately supported with police presence, local administration, and basic services, including healthcare, education, and dispute resolution.

Equally important is the recognition that the population, not the battlefield, is the true center of gravity in counterinsurgency. Intelligence from local communities is indispensable, but it depends on trust. Where citizens feel protected and respected, they are more willing to share information. Where they feel neglected or abused, they withdraw. Strengthening this relationship between citizens and the state is essential.

Intelligence-led security operations are far more effective than broad, reactive force. Targeted precision, based on reliable information, disrupts insurgent leadership, logistics, and financing networks. But this requires the population’s cooperation. When criminals operate with impunity, and accountability is weak, citizens lose confidence and hesitate to engage. Restoring trust, therefore, requires both professionalism within the security forces and a justice system that swiftly and fairly punishes wrongdoing.

Beyond security operations, Nigeria must address the economic drivers of instability. Youth unemployment and underemployment remain major concerns. Many young people struggle to find meaningful livelihoods, keeping them vulnerable to exploitation by criminal and extremist networks. Security cannot be sustained without opportunity. Investments in agriculture, education, infrastructure, electricity, and small-scale industry are not just economic policies; they are security measures. A population rich in hope and opportunity is less susceptible to recruitment and radicalization by violent groups.

The question of self-defense has also entered public debate. While communities have a natural right to protect themselves and arm themselves, widespread and unregulated access to weapons carries serious risks. Criminological literature shows that the proliferation of arms without accountability can fuel cycles of violence and create new security challenges. The solution is not to transform communities into rival armed camps but to build structured partnerships between citizens and the state.

Community-based security initiatives can play a valuable role when properly organized, regulated, and integrated into the wider security framework. Groups such as local defense volunteers should operate under unambiguous legal authority, receive appropriate training, and remain accountable to state institutions. When managed effectively, such partnerships can enhance intelligence gathering, strengthen local resilience, and complement formal security forces.

Nigeria now remains at a crossroads. It can continue to approach insecurity primarily as a military problem and remain trapped in a cycle of temporary victories followed by renewed violence. Or it can adopt a more extensive, more strategic approach, one that acknowledges that sustainable security depends on governance, legitimacy, and opportunity as much as on force.

The way forward is clear. Nigeria must hold every liberated area through sustained security and governance. It must prioritize intelligence by building trust with local communities. It must deliver a visible and tangible state presence through schools, healthcare, and justice systems. It must formalize and regulate community-based security initiatives. And it must expand economic opportunities to reduce the appeal of violence and criminality.

Countries that have turned the tide against insurgency did so not through force alone, but by rebuilding the bond between the state and its people. Nigeria must do the same. Until that bond is strengthened, insecurity will remain not just a threat at the margins, but a challenge rooted at the core of the nation’s stability.

Only through a coordinated, long-term strategy can Nigeria move from managing insecurity to truly controlling it.

____

■ Ihekwoaba Declan Onwudiwe, Ph.D., of the School of Public Affairs, Texas Southern University, is a Professor and Director, Africa Institute for Strategic Security Studies (AISSS). He is also on the EDITORIAL BOARD of  the WAP

Texas Guardian News
Continue Reading

Trending