After playing the ostrich over palpable complaints that the
privatisation process of the country’s power sector was sacrificed on
the altar of fraud and nepotism, Nigeria’s Federal Government is now
under pressure of the United Nations (UN) to respond to the queries
raised over mismanagement allegations that trailed the exercise
acclaimed to be one of the most transparent in the world. Sunday
Business Editor, ANDY NSSIEN, reports on the latest development.
Chinedu Nebo Ngozi Okonjo-iweala
Last week, the UN alleged that Nigeria’s Federal Government
mismanaged a total of $51 billion in the power sector in the past ten
years and demanded proper accountability.
The allegation which was contained in a letter sent to President
Goodluck Jonathan by the UN was signed by the UN Special Rapporteur on
Extreme Poverty and Human Rights, Ms. Magdalena Sepúlveda Carmona, and
Special Rapporteur on Adequate Housing, Ms. Raquel Rolnik.
They demanded some answers from the Federal Government over the
alleged mismanagement of $3.5 billion annually in the power sector in
the last ten years, amounting to $35 billion.
The UN rapporteurs’ action was sequel to a petition lodged in 2013 by
a coalition of human rights activists, labour, journalists and lawyers
led by the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP).
According to the petition, the implementation of the Multi-Year
Tariff Order II (MYTO II) by the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory
Commission (NERC) was “having detrimental impact on the human rights of
those living in poverty in the country.”
That’s not all. The global watchdog also demanded explanations on
another $16 billion released to improve electricity supply in the
country, while insisting that the funds had not been properly accounted
for.
The Executive Director, SERAP, Adetokunbo Mumuni, who put the total
amount of money to be accounted for by the government at $51 billion,
explained that around $3.5 billion has been mismanaged annually over the
last ten years, and a total of $16 billion released to improve
electricity supply in the country that has not been properly accounted
for.
The rapporteurs did not spare the generating and distributing firms that bought over the assets.
“The Business Units, which have taken over from the PHCN, participate
in large-scale corruption such as graft from exorbitant consumer bills,
rejection of payment to independent third parties such as banks to keep
management of funds secret, unprecedented disconnection of consumers’
power lines, general bribery and fraud among staff (members), adding up
to over N1 billion extra charged to consumers annually.”
The UN special rapporteurs argued that “all beneficiaries of the
right to adequate housing should have sustainable access to energy for
cooking, heating and lighting. The failure of the states to provide
basic services such as electricity is a violation of the right to
health,” they said.
Consequently, the special rapporteurs wanted answers to the following
questions: are the facts alleged by SERAP and others accurate? What kind
of impact assessments were conducted to gauge the potential impact of
the electricity tariff increases on the human rights of people living in
extreme poverty in Nigeria? If so, provide details.
Other queries include: did public consultations take place, including
with potentially affected persons and especially people living in
extreme poverty, prior to the adoption of the new Multi-Year Tariff
Order II? If yes, please give details of the dates, participants and
outcomes of the consultations.
Was accessible and culturally adequate information about the measure
actively disseminated through all available channels prior to
consultation?
Also requiring explanations were: what measures have been put in
place to ensure that the human rights of people living in extreme
poverty in Nigeria will not be undermined by the increase in electricity
tariffs? In particular, what measures are in place to ensure that they
can enjoy their right to adequate housing, including sustainable access
to energy for cooking, heating and lighting, which is a component of
this right?
The rapporteurs were not done yet: what mechanisms exist to ensure
transparency, accountability and regular monitoring over the use of
tariff revenue within the government? What mechanisms are available to
address allegations of corruption, or other complaints? What mechanisms
are in place to monitor and regulate service provision by private
actors, as required under the State’s duty to protect?
They wanted to know if there is provision to ameliorate the plight of the poor.
Please describe any existing policies or measures aimed to promote
affordability of electricity provision for people living in extreme
poverty. Are any subsidies already available and implemented? What is
being done to mitigate the hardship imposed by increased tariffs,
especially for persons living in poverty?
According to the special rapporteurs, “We would be most grateful to
receive a response within 60 days, which will be made available in the
report that we will submit to the Human Rights Council for its
consideration of the matter.”
The long list of groups and individuals that endorsed the petition
included; the Gender and Constitution Reform Network, a coalition of
over 250 women’s groups (GECORN); Human and Environmental Development
Agenda (HEDA), and One Voice Nigeria, a coalition of civil society
groups.
Individuals that backed the petition included; Femi Falana, SAN;
Professor ‘Dejo Olowu of the North West University, South Africa; Victor
Oladipupo Momodu; Tope Robert; John Collins; Onyedikachi Orizu; and
Gbenro Adeoye.
Also in support of the petition were ;Wole Soyinka Centre for
Investigative Journalism (WSCIJ); Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ),
Lagos State Council; Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), Lagos State branch;
Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) Ikeja branch; National Union of Food
Beverage and Tobacco Employees (NUFBTE); and Joint Action Front (JAF).
Others were, Women Advocates Research and Documentation Center
(WARDC); Women Empowerment and Legal Aid Initiative (WELA); Partnership
for Justice (PJ); Campaign for Democratic Workers (CDWR); Democratic
Socialist Movement (DSM); Civil Society Network Against Corruption
(CSNAC), and Education Rights Campaign (ERC).
According to the coalition, “The introduction of a new electricity
tariff by the government of President Goodluck Jonathan, not only risks
violation of human rights under the International Covenant on Economic
Social and Cultural Rights but also exacerbates and perpetuates poverty
for millions of Nigerians already vulnerable and marginalized and lack
access to basic necessities.”
The petition dated September 6, 2013, had called on the UN to send an
urgent appeal to the Federal Government to delay the increased fixed
rate electricity tariff until the government is able to put in place
mechanisms to ensure regular and uninterrupted electricity supply in the
country.
The petition also demanded an impact assessment of the increase on
people living in extreme poverty, adding, “By introducing fixed rate
electricity tariff, the government is complicit in violating the human
rights of people living in poverty and undermining their personal
development and prosperity. We believe that it is premature for the
government to increase electricity tariff prior to taking effective
measures to guarantee and ensure regular and uninterrupted electricity
supply across the country.”
The coalition also requested the Special Rapporteur to visit the
country to “conduct an in-depth investigation into the effects of the
increased electricity tariff on people living in poverty,” and to urge
the government to “take all reasonable measures to protect, respect and
fulfill the rights of people living in poverty and social exclusion
across the country.”
The persistent outpour of disenchantment on the outcome of the exercise was hardly surprising.
Few months after the privatisation of power was flagged off last
year, two top government officials involved in the sale of the
government assets to the private sector were at daggers drawn over the
process , signaling fears that the exercise might not inspire the much
needed confidence to drive home the initiative.
The apple of discord was Enugu Electricity Distribution Company (disco) which was awarded to Interstate Consortium.
The Chairman, Technical Committee of the National Council on
Privatisation, Atedo Peterside, had raised an objection on the process
which led to the sale of the disco to Interstate.
His grouse was the decision of the Bureau of Public Enterprise (BPE)
to grant an extension of time to Interstate, the preferred bidder for
the Enugu Electricity Distribution Company, rather than invite the
reserve bidder, Eastern Electrics, in accordance with the set rule.
He had argued that granting an extension to Interstate that never
showed any seriousness in paying the balance of 75 per cent of the bid
price until the deadline expired was equivalent to giving the company a
discount.
Several moves to resolve the matter were said to have been hampered
by the intransigence of the BPE Director-General, Benjamin Dikki.
In a letter, the head of the Technical committee, Peterside who was
under pressure by the committee members, told the 20 members of the
committee that his attempts to convene a meeting of the technical
committee had been frustrated by Dikki.
His words: “Many of you contacted me recently to enquire why a
Technical Committee meeting has not been called to consider and
deliberate upon updates on the PHCN privatisation.
“My understanding has always been that it is the chairman of a
committee that decides when it is appropriate to call a meeting, having
considered possible agenda items and the need to dispense with them
promptly with a view to achieving the broader objectives/mission of that
committee.
“The reason we are unable to meet is because the DG of BPE, who
controls the BPE’s budget and, therefore, releases funds to pay for
hotel bills and sitting allowances, has surreptitiously vetoed all my
efforts to convene a meeting of our technical committee of recent.” he
said.
The letter continued, “His latest ploy was to copy me on a text he
purportedly sent to His Excellency, the Vice President, requesting
approval for our committee to be allowed to meet and refusing to give me
any feedback even after I gave him (the DG) 24 hours within which to
revert to me. He did not reply my e-mail and did not even bother to
explain why he did not reply.
“As you are all aware, the Technical Committee serves as an
advisory/due-process watchdog over the BPE, and we are accountable to
the NCP (National Council on Privatisation). Accordingly, I find the
DG’s surreptitious attempt to keep us in the dark objectionable in the
extreme.
The letter steered clear of insinuating exogenous interference.
“For the record, I do not believe for one second that the DG is
acting on instructions from above. His body language and enthusiastic
evasiveness suggest that he is the initiator who has pro-actively been
looking for ways to avoid having to transparently table issues/updates
before this technical committee.
“In the circumstances, there will be no meetings of the Technical
Committee until further notice. Members should please, therefore, stop
calling me to ask why a meeting has not been convened. I will revert
with additional feedback after carrying out further
investigations/consultations with the relevant higher authorities,” the
letter added.
However, after intervention to no avail by the governors of the
South-East, Eastern Electrics, the reserved bidder, headed for the
courts.
A public affairs consultant, John Ukegbu said there was need for the
Jonathan administration to respond to the issues raised in the petition
now that the allegation is before the international community.
He told
Sunday Independent that it was unacceptable for the government to foist certain policies on the masses, simply because they have no teeth to bite.
Ukegbu said the spurious bills charged by the new power investors
could not be justified when electricity supply in the country has
deteriorated especially in recent times, adding that pushing high
estimated bills to the consumers amounted to putting the cart before the
horse.
According to him, there should be marked improvement on the power
supply through out the country to justify extra cost imposed on the
consumers.
He said although the power generation and distribution is now a
private sector responsibility, government should not allow a few group
of people to take undue advantage of the policy change to exploit the
already impoverished populace.
Another analyst and commentator on international affairs, Mike Oton,
while acknowledging the intervention of the UN on the issue was worried
about the corporate image of the country, especially now that Nigeria’s
potential for becoming one of the largest economy in the world in the
near future, is generating global attention.
To him, the whole issue has arisen because corruption has pervaded
all facets of the economy to the extent that there are no human
endeavours in the country that are corruption free.
He told
Sunday Independent that for Nigeria to attain its full
potentials, concerted efforts must be made at all levels of governance
and other human endeavours to curb the menace of corruption in order to
inspire the confidence of the international community which has placed
so much hope on the future of this country.
DailyIndependent