2015: North plots Jonathan’s ouster

BY SONI DANIEL, ASSISTANT EDITOR
Abuja — There are indications that the North is working assiduously towards dumping President Goodluck Jonathan in the 2015 election for one of its own.
The action of the North, it was gathered, is not unconnected with the deep-seated anger running across the region over Jonathan’s alleged betrayal and tampering  with the political economic interest of the region.

From Left: Bauchi State Deputy Governor, Alhaji Sagir Saleh, PDP North-East Zonal Chairman, Sen. Mohammed Girgir, and PDP Bauchi State Chairman, Alhaji Abdullahi Yaro-Yaro, at the inauguration of PDP Secretariat In Bauchi State On Friday (28/9/12). NAN

Findings by Vanguard Newspaper reveal that the North is angry with Jonathan over his rejection of the zoning arrangement of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, and subsequent contest of the 2011Presidential poll, which he eventually won.

Although Jonathan has not declared his intention to run, his foot soldiers have already begun to claim that Jonathan must be allowed to complete his two terms as provided by the Nigerian Constitution.
According to findings, Jonathan is said to have appended his signature as number 37th of the 47 political leaders in the country, who met with Obasanjo in his Ota farm in 2003 to firm up arrangement for the PDP elections.
But, following the death of Alhaji Shehu Yar’Adua, the President reportedly said there was no zoning arrangement barring him from running for the nation’s top job, thereby incurring the wrath of the North.
A member of the Northern Elders’ Forum, NEF, Prof Ango Abdullahi, confirmed the anger of the region against Jonathan when contacted.
According to Abdullahi, who is the spokesman of the NEF, Jonathan had betrayed the North and would not be supported in the next election.
Abdullahi, a former Special Adviser to Chief Olusegun Obasanjo on Food Security, admitted that the North was angry with Jonathan having failed them in many respects, chief among them being manipulation of the political process to emerge as the PDP presidential candidate in 2011 and failing to provide the needed leadership for the country.

Jonathan accused of neglecting the North

The former Ahmadu Bello University Vice Chancellor, said: “We in the North cannot trust Jonathan because of his attempt to deny the zoning formula he was a signatory to in 2003.
“The North expected him to have completed Yar’Adua’s tenure and step down in 2011 for the region to complete its term but he bought over some Northern lackeys to say that he could contest the election.
“The zoning agreement effectively disqualified Jonathan from contesting the 2011 election on moral grounds.
“But surprisingly, they cleverly manipulated the primaries and other processes and enthroned Jonathan. That was possible because some Northerners sold out and connived with him to undo the area for their own selfish interest.
“I can assure you that the North will not sit back for 2011 to repeat itself. That is what I can say at this point in time, we cannot support someone who reneged on a gentleman’s agreement that disqualified him from contesting in the election on purely moral grounds.
“Again, it is left for Nigerians to judge whether the man has come close to being an effective president for Nigeria since he became president, whether acting or substantial”.
Although he did not name those bought over by Jonathan to undo the area, Abdullahi said the people of the North had taken note of the ‘traitors’ and would at the appropriate time expose them to the world.
Beyond ‘imposing’ himself on the people, Abdullahi accused the President of failing to cater for the crisis-prone areas of the North, thereby showing himself as someone who has no genuine interest in the region.
He said: “Despite all the crises and problems in many parts of the North, Mr. President has never for once visited to see the victims or provide for their needs.
“Now, show me what attributes of leadership that Jonathan has exhibited as a President of a great country.
“As far as we are concerned, he has failed in all. He continues to make all manner of statements that portray him as totally unsuitable and unqualified for national leadership that Nigeria needs at this point in history.”
Abdullahi also accused the present administration of aiding and abetting corruption and piling up debts that had been partially cleared by the previous administrations.
He added: “Jonathan should not seek office in 2015 because even those who supported him initially have come out to say that he is one of the most incompetent presidents that this country has ever produced. Incompetence is the key word.

On corruption, debts

“Corruption is at its peak under his leadership and that is why the country is reversing to the debt trap. Even Obasanjo left some substantial foreign reserves and virtually cleared the debt burden of the country before leaving office.
“But now the reserve is gone and we are back in debts. Subsidy is at the forefront of corruption. Over N2.6 trillion gone in the name of oil subsidy and it is evident that most people who fronted this scam did so to return most of the money to the electioneering campaign of 2011.”
Turning to the controversial onshore/offshore dichotomy Act of 2005, the NEF spokesman blamed top-ranking northerners in the Obasanjo government of also selling out the interest of the region to pass the bill into law.
According to him, it was wrong and against international law of the sea  for the National Assembly to pass the oil dichotomy bill, allowing oil-producing states to be paid revenue for oil taken from as far as 200 feet isobath, thereby denying other states of federal revenue.

Onshore/offshore dichotomy

He said: “Governors, ministers and lawmakers from the North were all compromised with certain things all in a desperate and selfish bid to pass the oil dichotomy bill.
“All those from the North who partook in the passage of the law are guilty of compromising the interest of the area and we have their names and will make them available to Nigerians at the right time”.
He therefore sought an urgent review of the law to make more national resources available to all Nigerians.
But the Political Adviser to the President, Alhaji Ahmed Gulak, has warned against any attempt by the North to stop Jonathan in 2015, saying it was a big joke.
Gulak told Vanguard in an interview that it was the President’s right to run for two terms and that nobody had the authority to stop him in 2015.
Vanguard

House to Probe Otedola, AMCON Debt Deal

Mr. Femi Otedola

By Onwuka Nzeshi

The House of Representatives yesterday faulted the N140.9 billion debt settlement deal between the Chairman of Zenon Oil and Gas and Forte Oil Plc, Mr. Femi Otedola, and the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON), saying the procedure was unacceptable.

Chairman, House Committee on Media and Public Affairs, Hon. Zakari Mohammed, said the transaction was suspect and that the lower chamber of the National Assembly would investigate it when it resumes from its one-week break.

In a statement made available to journalists late Monday, Mohammed said the transaction was done with “confidentiality and secrecy” regardless of the state of the Nigerian economy.

“We have observed with interest the payment of N140.9 billion, being the outstanding debt of a businessman, Mr. Femi Otedola, to AMCON. This payment was credited to AMCON's Managing Director, Mustafa Chike-Obi.

“Obi confirmed that the AMCON board met last Thursday and approved the transfer of the businessman’s assets as well as undisclosed cash to AMCON as full payment and final settlement of Otedola's liabilities.

“The 7th House of Representatives would, on return from its one-week oversight tour, constitute a committee to investigate the amount and the assets so transferred to AMCON.

“It is curious that AMCON, being a government establishment, which is under the purview of the National Assembly, could do that without the knowledge of the House.

“The National Assembly would be interested in getting full details of the transaction,” Mohammed said.

This Day

How Nigerian fraudsters scammed Kuwaitis of US$1million using Abacha’s name

Ben Ezeamalu

The Kuwaitis were ured into a shady deal with fraudsters from Nigeria who used Sani Abacha as bait.
Three Nigerians, claiming affiliation to the late Head of State, Sani Abacha, swindled US$1.375million (N204 million) out of two Kuwaiti businessmen, UK court documents obtained by PREMIUM TIMES have shown.
The multimillion naira fraud, which occurred between August 2001 and March 2002, also involved the now defunct City Express Bank although the presiding judge, Justice Treacy, largely found the bank innocent of “dishonest assistance.”
In his ruling, Mr. Treacy noted that there was nothing to show that the bank had prior knowledge of the impending scam.
The players
In May 2001, Qumar Bello, acting on behalf of Abdulkadir Abacha, alleged to be the brother of the late general, contacted Adnan Abou-Rahmah, a Kuwaiti lawyer, seeking his assistance to invest US$65million in an Arab country.
Mr. Abou-Rahmah flew out to the Republic of Benin, where the money, allegedly belonging to the Abacha family trust, was stashed; and by August, a formal agreement had been entered by both parties.
In the agreement, as a reward for Mr. Abou-Rahmah’s assistance in investing the US$65million in Kuwait’s “very buoyant” real estate, 40 percent of the trust money as well as 15 percent of the income produced would accrue to the Kuwaiti lawyer and his client, Khalid Al-Fulaij and Sons General Trading and Contracting company.
While in Benin, Mr. Abou-Rahmah also met with ‘bankers’, ‘ministers’ as well as a host of ‘public officials’, dissolving any prior suspicion of foul play.
The bait
After agreeing on the sharing formula with the Kuwaiti; the trio of Mr. Bello, Mr. Abacha, and a third colleague, Aboubakar Mohammed Maiga, claimed that a series of bureaucratic obstacles involving various payments had to be made before the trust capital could be transferred out of the country.
But the fraudsters agreed to clear the payment, only soliciting a “contribution” from Mr. Abou-Rahmah.
In August, 2001, the first part of Mr. Abou-Rahmah’s “contributions” – US$100,000 in cash wired to the fraudsters – as part of a US$450,000 they claimed had to be paid to the Ministry of Finance in Benin to secure authorisation of the trust capital.
Two months later, the Kuwaiti lawyer wired another US$450,000, part of a fee allegedly to be paid to the Benin Drug Enforcement Agency to obtain a drugs certificate needed for the release of the money.
Again, on the 9th of January, 2002, Mr. Abou-Rahmah wired US$400,000 to the fraudsters. Another US$225,000 was paid one month later. Both monies, alleged to be VAT payable on the trust capital, were paid into City Express Bank’s HSBC bank account in Poultry, London.
The funds were to be held for Trust International, the name of the client Mr. Abacha instructed the Kuwaiti lawyer to pay the money.
The bank subsequently transferred the naira equivalent sums of the money to its client’s account at Apapa, Lagos.
However, the actual name of the client was Trusty International while its principals were Yusuf Ibrahim and Nasir Saminu.
The duo cleared the money as soon as it reached the account.
The US$65million never materialised.
The fraudsters vanished.
Quest for justice
With their supposed business partners as well as their money disappearing without trace; Mr. Abou-Rahmah and his partner headed to the High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, in London, accusing City Express Bank of “dishonest assistance.”
The Kuwaitis contended that the bank’s handling of the US$625,000 which it paid to Trusty International as against Trust International amounted to fraud against them.
In his ruling, the judge held that although Dare Faronbi, the bank’s Apapa branch manager, was aware that Messrs Ibrahim and Saminu were involved in a bureau de change business usually used to launder money for Nigerian politicians, who constitute a large number of their clients; his denial of not having any specific knowing that Trusty International was aiding corrupt politicians, at the time, was accepted.
“I have come to the conclusion that at the time… Mr. Faronbi probably suspected, in a general way that Messrs Ibrahim and Saminu might be, in the course of their business from time to time, assisting corrupt politicians to launder money,” said the judge.
“There was nothing to show that Mr. Faronbi had any particularly suspicions about the transactions which were the subject of this case,” he added.
The judge also dismissed claims from City Express Bank that Mr. Abou-Rahmah was an accomplice in crime since he must have realized that the supposed trust capital to be transferred to him were associated with the Abacha family, and thus, were the proceeds of crime.
“I should say at this stage that I regard the claimed relationship to General Abacha as yet another component of the fraud perpetrated upon the claimants; I consider it extremely doubtful that any such relationship existed,” the judge noted.
Also, the judge held that even if Mr. Faronbi had noticed the discrepancy between ‘Trust’ and ‘Trusty’, the production of documents would reasonably have overridden any question as to the intended recipient of the monies.
“The failure to observe the discrepancy between ‘Trust’ and ‘Trusty’ was not a wilful or reckless closing of eyes. It represented a failure to notice; something which could not be put any higher than mere negligence,” the judge ruled
Premium Times

Is Nigeria a toilet of a country? By Femi Fani-Kayode

Fani-Kayode argues that the only way real change can come to Nigeria is by breaking up or a peoples revolution

”Nigeria is just a toilet of a country where evil reigns”- Lord Apsley.

Lord Apsley and I were colleagues at Harrow School in England approximately 36 years ago. I have never forgotten his uncharitable remarks about Nigeria, which led to a heated argument between us. At that time I found it ironic, and I still do, that this quintessential member of the English upper class not only had the nerve to say such things to me about my country but that he could say it with such confidence. My response to him was that if Nigeria was indeed a ”toilet where evil reigns” then it was a toilet that was created by his British forefathers who not only dumped the evil there by defecating in it but who also refused to wash their hands, to flush and to leave the toilet after they had finished. My point was simple and it was that Nigeria was as much their mess as it was ours. For a young man who had been born into wealth and power and who had been brought up to believe that ”Brittania” had civilised the world and had brought nothing but immense benefits to the natives of her colonies, he found my response most disconcerting. I have never forgotten what he said about my beloved country on that occasion. It was painful and regrettable.
Yet I look at what has happened to us in the last 52 years of our existence as an independent nation and what we have suffered in the last 98 years since the 1914 amalgamation of the northern and southern protectorates and I really do wonder. If the truth must be told, things have not gone too well for us. I was born in the same year as we gained our independence and as I ponder and reflect on the last 52 years, all I see is violence, bloodshed, dashed hopes, lost opportunities and shattered dreams. I see a brutal civil war in which two million people died. I see a string of violent military coups and repressive military dictatorships and I see suspicion and division between the peoples of the north and the south. I see dangerous tensions between the numerous ethnic nationalities, continuous strife and sectarian violence. I see church bombings, the slaughter of the innocents, Islamic fundamentalist rebellions, battle-ready ethnic militias and bloodthirsty local warlords. I see economic degradation, decaying infrastructures, environmental disasters and untold suffering and hardship. And finally I see poverty and unemployment, poor quality leadership and a dysfunctional semi-failed state, which is still struggling to find its true identity. If this sounds like a scene from Dante’s hell, please forgive me but this is what I see.
On October 1st every year, we make nostalgic and inspirational speeches about the ”labours of our heroes past”, pop the champagne, pat each other on the back, go to churches and mosques to give thanks to God, dance at owambe parties and congratulate one another on our independence. Yet we refuse to sit back in deep reflection, take stock of what has really been going on in our country and carry out an honest and candid appraisal of our situation. We are not ”a toilet of a country where evil reigns” but we must admit that we are in a mess. A really terrible mess. And the question is why are we in such a mess, how did we get there, why have we not been able to get out of it in 52 years and what role did our former colonial masters play, and are still playing, in creating and sustaining that mess. That is the subject of this essay.
If we want to answer these questions we must go back to the beginning. The problem is that the British established a faulty foundation for Nigeria right from the start, which they knew could not produce anything wholesome. The Nigeria they handed over to us in 1960 was nothing but an unworkable artificial state and a ”poisoned chalice”. It was destined to fail right from the outset. Worse still, they handed us that poisoned chalice with a malicious and mischievous intent and without any recourse to our people in terms of any form of a national referendum. The British did the same thing in varying degrees when they left virtually each and every one of their other ”third world” colonies. The most obvious cases however were Nigeria, the Sudan, India and the nation that was formerly known as Malaya. Every single one of these four countries had monumental problems with sustaining their unity after independence and all of them, with the exception of Nigeria, were compelled to break up into smaller entities before they could bring out the best in themselves as a people and fully exercise their human potentials. Consequently India broke up into three and became India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, the Sudan broke into two and became Southern Sudan and the Sudan and Malaya broke into two and became Malaysia and Singapore. Nigeria is yet to find the courage and fortitude to go that far and whether we will eventually break up or not remains to be seen.
Yet the truth is that when you force two incompatibles with completely different world views together into an unhappy marriage, lock the gates of the house, throw away the keys and bestow leadership upon a “poor husband” to rule over a ”rich wife” in perpetuity, you are looking for trouble. The bible says, “if the foundation be faulty what can the righteous do?” Our foundation as a nation is faulty and the consequence of that is that everything that is built on that faulty foundation is unproductive, unsustainable and unpleasant. And until that foundation is fixed the biblical ”righteous”, no matter how well intentioned, can do nothing about it. It will always be a case of one step forward and ten steps back. Some have made the point that what exists in the Nigerian space today was once a collection of confederations and that our level of integration centuries before the British came to our shores was far greater than many care to admit. This may be true but upon their arrival the British, rather than build on that and allow us to forge a united nation ourselves based on dialogue, trust and consensus, instead played up our differences, drove us further apart, set us against each other all the more and compelled us to remain in the same cage hoping that we would eventually kill each other in the process.
The result of the amalgamation was therefore predictable. It was either that Lord Lugard’s “poor husband” (the north) would fully subjugate and eventually kill the “rich wife”(the south) or the “rich wife” would fully subjugate and eventually kill the “poor husband”. And we are right in the middle of that struggle for mutual subjugation till today. In 1960 the British ensured that power was handed over to the most pliable region at the Federal level by establishing an alliance with the northern traditional institutions and political ruling elite and fixing the census figures in their favour. Consequently by 1960 we had a situation where the well-educated, enlightened, progressive and predominantly Christian south was played out through intrigue, deceit and fixed census figures and instead power was given to a fatalistic and ultra-conservative Muslim north who were prepared to do anything the British wanted them to do, who had already overwhelmed and suppressed their own ethnic and Christian minority groups and whose major preoccupation was to dominate and control the entire federation, to keep the south out of power at the centre and to “dip the Koran in the Atlantic ocean”. It did not stop there.
Even after the British left in 1960 they continued to meddle in our affairs and they encouraged, sponsored and supported a string of repressive military regimes, all of which derived their power from a northern-controlled army officers corps whose retired generals, up until today, are the ones that determine who will be what in our country. That is our story.
Some have argued that despite the ignoble intentions of the British we ought to have been able to sort out our own problems 52 years after they left us. This is a good point. It does however betray a tinge of naivety and a lack of appreciation of just how chronic those problems were right from the start and just how malevolent a hand the British dealt us. I say this because the bitter truth is that the system in Nigeria cannot be changed simply because the forces that have controlled our country since 1960 are deeply conservative and the foundation and the structure upon which she has been established has been designed in such a way that makes radical and fundamental change impossible.
Some have compared Nigeria to a badly wounded, gangrenous and diseased leg which can only be cured through restructuring or which needs to be cut off in order to save the rest of the body. The consequence of doing neither is death for the whole body. It follows that the only way real change can come is if the country is broken up into two or more independent nations or, if we insist on remaining as one, through the auspices of a peoples revolution (our very own ”Nigerian Spring”, similar to the ”Arab spring” that we witnessed in Libya, Tunisia, Yemen, Bahrain and Egypt last year and that we are witnessing in Syria today) which will sweep away the old order, convene a Sovereign National Conference, restructure the country drastically and devolve power from the centre.  If you are looking for fundamental change in Nigeria these are the only two courses of action that can produce it.
The line up in our country is therefore clear – on the one hand you have the ordinary people, who have nothing and little hope for a brighter future, and on the other you have the ruling elite, who have everything. Those that are waiting for such a change to evolve under the present system and structure will wait forever. This is because under the present system there is no hope for a peaceful, purposeful and meaningful change because justice, equity and fairness have no place. Worse still, the most courageous people with the best minds, that are prepared to speak the truth, no matter how bitter that truth is, and that have an element of vision are always destroyed, discredited or set aside. If anyone doubts this they should consider the fate of Chief Obafemi Awolowo and Chief Moshood Abiola. Those that have a clear vision about the way that Nigeria needs to go have no say and those that have a say have no vision. Our country is in the hands and grip of mediocre that just don’t care.
Unfortunately the Nigerian people do not seem to have the resilience or strength to effect either of the two options for true change anytime soon. They seem to have been so traumatised, demoralised and subjugated in the last 50 years that they have lost their will to resist inequity, tyranny and injustice, to insist on determining their own fate and to fight for their own future. And who can blame them because the state itself is extremely violent and ruthless in the way and manner in which it fights and resists change and those that advocate it. Very few good leaders can emerge at the federal level in such a system because it was not designed to produce truly progressive leaders. There are a few exceptions to the rule but generally speaking the type of leaders that the Nigerian system is designed to throw up are leaders that are not minded to bring any benefit or hope to the ordinary people but rather that are there to protect the archaic system and to maintain the nebulous and dysfunctional status quo. The relevance of the British today is that they are not only the architects of this monumental monstrosity but they are also the ones that have continued to encourage and support the ruling elite that runs and sustains it.
If they were being fair to us they would have been amongst those encouraging the idea of restructuring our country, devolving power from the centre and effecting a fundamental and radical change in our attitudes and affairs. That is precisely what they are doing in the United Kingdom itself today where power is being systematically and gradually devolved from the centre at Westminster in England to the hitherto supressed and occupied regions of Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. This is good enough for them yet our erstwhile colonial masters have never supported a similar course of action for us. Instead they have done all they can to support those that believe that power should continue to be centralised and concentrated in Abuja, to maintain the “ancient regime” and to preserve the chronically conservative system and the status quo. The idea of a properly led, prosperous, peaceful and truly united Nigeria has never been something that the British ever sought to establish. It is for this reason that we can blame Lord Apsley’s forefathers almost as much as we can blame ourselves for the mess that our country is in up until today.
May God deliver Nigeria!
 Premium Times

Deportation of Nigerian Pilgrims: The world is teaching us a lesson, Aliyu U. Tilde

Mr. Tilde says deportation of Nigerian pilgrims by Saudi authorities should teach Nigerian leaders a lesson in discipline & good leadership

Other nations will continue to teach Nigeria basic lessons in civilization and governance so long as its leaders fail to live up to their responsibilities by ensuring that rule of law in entrenched in our society.
Three things have happened of recent in this regard. After the corrupt Nigerian judicial system gave a clean bill of health to James Ibori, a former state governor, a powerful adviser to former President Yar’adua and the biggest financier of the ruling PDP in 2007, British courts found him guilty of the same corruption charges and sent him straight to jail. Our judges should burry their heads in shame. Some Niger Delta youths that were on his payroll even threatened to attack British oil interests in the Niger Delta, proving further that Nigeria is a jungle where thieves and cannibals go about free and celebrated as leaders.
South Africa refused some Nigerian passengers entry when it discovered that their claim to vaccination was false. When a Nigerian presents a yellow card at any airport in the world, the general perception is that it is false. And, truly, it is, except in few cases. Nigerians, as usual, complained. The third case is the recent deportation of 1226 Nigerian Muslim female pilgrims from Jeddah for the failure of each to comply with the requirement of the company of a mahram – a person who is prohibited for live under shariah law to marry the woman. Space is made on the visa form and card for the name of the mahram but Nigerian pilgrim officials always play “419” by writing false names on the card and presenting them to the Saudi embassy for approval. The embassy has no option but to issue the visa. When the female pilgrim arrives Jeddah, there would be nobody answering the false name she provided during her visa her.
During the lesser hajj, female pilgrims concoct what is called “mijin visa”, or visa husband, to get around the rule. This is just any man the woman picks among pilgrims in the trip. Nigerians! The Saudis have been overlooking this perfidy for years. This year they decided to put an end to the nonsense. Nigerians, again, complained. The President sent a delegation to plead with the Saudi authorities. No one cared to listen.
In spite of the appeals, the pilgrims who were detained in a cage like kangaroos under subhuman conditions were eventually deported back to the jungle. Officials of the National Hajj Commission and the state Muslim Pilgrims Welfare Boards, like our corrupt judges, should burry their heads in shame. They have brought unnecessary hardship on the female pilgrims and disgraced the nation in no small measure.
But they are not alone. They are just like numerous other Nigerian officials at various levels of government: nobody feels that it is imperative to apply rules. Their perception of office is that it is a shop for making profit. Against these officials should our anger be directed, not against the Kingdom that is simply applying its laws. This, however, I understand, is not the popular reaction of Nigerians to the crisis.
Now that we have been hurt by the deportation of Nigerian pilgrims, our officials will finally start to pay attention to the provision. But only now, after the damage is done to the pilgrims and to our image. The world has realized that the only way to get us know that laws are important in the management of any nation is to strictly apply them on us. If we have destroyed our country by turning away from rule of law, they are telling us that other nations are not that primitive. They are ready to teach us a lesson.
The question is: Are we ready to learn? No, unless it becomes necessary, like when we go on pilgrimage or visit other countries. But once in Nigeria, we are happy to lead a life of the jungle where the strong flouts every rule and go Scot-free. No wonder, our security problem continues to increase by the day. I am sorry to say that the end of our desire to live primitively is not in sight, yet. Thank God, we are not the only Homo sapiens inhabiting the planet. Other nations are ready not to allow us destroy it as we destroyed our country.
PremiumTimes

3 out of 10 Nigerian men are not the fathers of their children – DNA Expert

Is paternity testing becoming an issue in Nigeria?
We have seen that there is serious need for it because in many homes things are happening that are scary both to the lives of children and their parents. And for the general statistics that is now available, it is found that three out of every ten men are not the fathers of their babies. Similarly, three out of every ten children are not fathered by men they have seen as their biological fathers. What we have found out is that, anytime we take ten men, at least three of them eventually found that they are not the fathers of the children they call their own. And these men would have taken care of the children for all their lives.
Now, the global statistics is 100, 000 out of every 300, 000 men. But what we have found that is that the situation is higher in Nigeria than other places. For example in our laboratory here, 50 per cent of the cases comes out negative. And we also realised that majority of the first-borns are affected. You only need to be here to see big men cry like little kids and watch children weep in agony. It has been that bad. And I dare say it is becoming something every home must do and you may be quite surprised at the level of dastard revelation.
About thirty per cent of fathers are unknowingly bringing up children who are not biologically theirs. And it is suspected that this percentage may be on the increase due to sexual recklessness. According to recent trends in sexual health, especially in Nigeria, it was suggested that unprotected sex and multiple partners are comparatively common occurrences with a large proportion of conceptions still unplanned. So, more than half, that is, 50 per cent of all paternity tests carried out by our lab comes out negative and the most affected are first-borns, except in a few cases.
Do these cases happen mostly in matrimonial settings or in casual relationships?
In both matrimony and casual affiliations! I tell you, we have had series of married men come here and go back home devastated. In one instance, a man came here with his wife. Out of the five children he thought were his own, he discovered that only two belonged to him. And they are both duly married, living together as husband and wife. You see, the major problem we have in our country is that most of these cases are not duly documented. So, people don’t know we have such issues among us. In fact, some even don’t know where to go for the test to determine their child or children’s paternity. And I tell you, if you go to ten homes as we speak, you will be amazed to find that in almost all of them the children there do not belong to the men. It is that rampant.
If it is that rampant, how would you describe the three years since you started testing men?
Now, the general statistics by the American Association of Blood Banks is that globally, 100, 000 out of 300, 000 men are not the actual fathers of their presumed children. And like I said earlier, the Nigerian situation is even alarming. Also, Duess International, the condom manufacturers, once noted that Nigeria has the most reckless sexual life. So, you can then imagine what the outcome would be like if we say okay, let’s start taking statistics one-by-one.
How many families do you attend to each week?
We test about 15 to 20 families. People come here as a result of various types of controversies over the paternity of certain children. You know, families have come to us with claims that a child neither takes after the mother nor the father in looks and character. So, the man of the house would be curious to ascertain facts. And when they come here with such children, the fears of the fathers have often been affirmed. Fathers usually have the doubts; maybe he has been hearing some rumours, and you know, men are often the last to hear such things about themselves. Until many of them come here to take the test, they have nurtured other men’s children before realising it.
What does it take to do a paternity test?
Technology has made it so easy. It is just like any other deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) test. In less than two seconds, we take the sample from the man. We use the Helix Swabs like a “big cotton buds” to extract some cells from the man’s mouth. We rub the ‘Swab’ up-and-down the mouth to get some epithelial cells from around the cheek bone. In the nucleus of every cell, there is DNA. Once we collect that, we purify, extract and then multiply it and get the genetic profile which we then send to DNA laboratory abroad for testing.
What happens in situations where DNA samples do not match as we saw with some DANA victims?
So many reasons could be responsible for that. We have had a case in which a boy went to an hospital to claim the body of his deceased dad and on testing him, it was found that he was not fathered by the dead man. The genetic profile of the boy does not match with that of the man he claimed to be his father. And DNAs don’t lie. The medical experts conducting these tests have nothing personal against the people that come to them for testing. Every human being take half of the genetic profile from either parent. Therefore, it is a matter of case closed if the genetic profile of the living does not match with that of the dead man. He is simply not that father.
DailyPost

Okonjo Iweala Drops Economic Wisdom on How to Solve Nigera’s Unemployment Problem

Finance Minister, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala

The coordinating minister of the Economy and Finance Minister has labeled unemploymment as the biggest problem facing the growth of the Nigerian state.
According to a research report released by Nigeria’s leading investment bank, Renaissance Capital, and entitled Reforming the Unreformable, the former World Bank chief spells out four solutions policy makers and economists must adopt in order to surpass the challenge.
Below is an abridged excerpt from the report:
The need to create jobs is the most important problem confronting the Nigerian economy now and for years to come, especially for the increasing numbers of youths entering the job market. Studies show that as much as a quarter of Nigeria ’ s working age population aged 15 – 65 years is not in the labor force (Treichel 2010, p. 19). Fully 70 percent of Nigeria ’ s 160 million people are 30 years of age or younger, and there is evidence of rising unemployment among youth (Treichel 2010, p. 23). If Nigeria could create the needed number of jobs, it could turn this demographic dividend of a young working-age population into a development dividend.
To do this, Nigeria must build a strong economic foundation by focusing on the following four things.
Strengthening the Macroeconomic Framework Since 2007, Nigeria has been fiscally lax, sometimes running deficits in excess of 3 percent of GDP and directing most of these resources to salaries out of other ever-increasing recurrent expenditures (now 74 percent of the federal budget), with little left for capital expenditures. There is a great need to put the fiscal house in order, particularly to increase resources available for investment. In this context, the ever-rising levels of domestic debt, though not yet a threat, should be watched. In addition, in view of the continued dependence on oil, management of volatility through application of the Oil Price-based Fiscal Rule and prudent operation of the new Sovereign Wealth Fund will be important to ensuring fiscal stability and prudence. All this should be accompanied by appropriate monetary and exchange-rate policies conducive to economic diversification.
Improving the Investment Climate Nigeria ’ s rank of 133 out of 183 countries surveyed in the World Bank ’ s Doing Business report 2012 is evidence of how difficult it is to invest and to grow businesses there — the very actions that are needed to create jobs. 4 Nigeria has been slipping in the rankings, going from 120 in 2009 to 133 in the latest survey. On some of the most critical business indicators, Nigeria performs badly. It ranks 180 in registering property, 84 in dealing with construction permits, 149 in trading across borders, 138 in paying taxes, and 116 in starting a business. Nigeria badly needs to pursue reform of its investment climate in order to become more attractive to domestic and foreign investors.
Fighting Corruption Corruption in Nigeria remains a serious problem, both in perception and in reality. Progress was made during the reform program in improving transparency, in building anti-corruption institutions, and in checking impunity among the corrupt elite. The vast majority of Nigerians are honest and hard-working citizens; only a tiny minority gives the country a bad name. Fighting corruption must remain a centerpiece of efforts to grow and develop Nigeria ’ s economy. At the onset of the second Obasanjo administration, in 2003, when we began the reforms, Nigeria had one of the worst Transparency International (TI) corruption perception index scores, ranking of 132 out of 133 countries assessed. 5 By the end of the reform program, in 2007, Nigeria ranked 147 out of 179 countries assessed. In 2010, Nigeria ’ s score was 2.4, with a ranking of 134 out of 178 countries. Though there has been some improvement by this one measure, Nigeria is still in the wrong neighborhood as far as the rankings are concerned. To make further gains on the anti-corruption front, specific impediments that encourage rent-seeking behavior must be identified and dealt with.
One good way to fight corruption is to work on the investment climate. Reducing requirements for business and property registration and for trade transactions, including improving the Customs Service, will lead to reduced corruption, with measurable
effects on business development and job creation.
Improving the transparency of the oil accounts and the transparency of government finances at both federal and state levels are other areas for action. The private sector in Nigeria itself is not immune to corruption. Continued actions to clean up and strengthen the banking sector and sanitize capital markets will be crucial.
Action against impunity must continue. Cynicism about the fight against is greatest when allegations of corrupt acts on the part of the elite are not investigated with any vigor or even investigated at all. That is why it is important to bring credibility to the effort with specific actions and measurable results.
Efforts need to be intensified at the international level to recover the billions of dollars
of Nigeria ’ s stolen assets lying in the banks of developed countries. Though there has been progress since 2005, there is still a long way to go. Some developed countries continue to use unhelpful laws and legal procedures to prevent their banks from returning assets. It is unfortunate that developed countries have been aggressive in exerting pressure on perceived tax havens to return the proceeds of their citizens ’ tax evasion but are not willing to press jurisdictions harboring stolen assets to return those assets to developing countries. Nigeria must make this issue an integral part of its fight against corruption to recover these monies so they can be used to fund poverty-reducing projects, and to send a message of “ no impunity ” to those who would spirit corruptly acquired assets abroad.
Completing Structural Reforms The unfinished deregulation, liberalization, and privatization agenda for several sectors must be completed. Deregulating the downstream petroleum sector and phasing out of the huge US$13 billion in subsidies to the price of petroleum products should be top priorities. The mechanism for administering the subsidies has proven imperfect and subject to fraud and corruption. The subsidies are poorly targeted and are a burden to the treasury. They benefit the upper classes disproportionately relative to the poor.
Phase-out should be accompanied with a sound safety net program to cushion the impact on poor people and build trust with the population. Education and communication with the public on this issue is paramount. Action by government to fully phase out the subsidy in January 2012 was courageous and the right thing to do but had all the hallmarks of déjà vu in implementation. This is why the experience was particularly painful for me.
Deregulation will also serve as an incentive for private-sector investment in petroleum refining. Nigeria refines only a small fraction of the refined products that it consumes per day. The rest is imported. It is sad that citizens of a country that is a leading exporter of oil and gas often have to queue up to buy gasoline. Passage of a cogent Petroleum Industry Bill will provide the framework needed to guide the development of the industry.
Equally important is completion of ongoing work on unbundling of power-sector assets, their privatization, and liberalization of the sector. This should be accompanied by strengthening of the regulatory framework to protect consumer interests and to maintain a proper balance of interests between electric power consumers and operators.
It will also be important to complete the work on port concessions and focus on needed investments by both government and the private sector to make the ports efficient and cost effective. This should be accompanied by trade and customs reforms. The ports are rife with corruption, and Nigeria is falling behind in the competitiveness of its ports relative to those in neighboring countries. If these reforms are not completed soon, Nigeria will lose an even larger amount of its trade to neighboring countries.
Civil-service reform is another difficult unfinished agenda. More than streamlining is needed. Capacity must be built, and rules that provide no incentives to top performers or to those with specialized skills must be scrapped.
In the financial sector, ongoing work to sanitize and strengthen the banking sector and to restore confidence in capital markets must be completed. Continued attention is critical to building capacity and strengthening financial-sector regulators to enable them to perform their functions properly.
BusinessNews