Thursday, 1 August 2013

Kenyan Lawyer Takes Israel, Pontius Pilate To Hague Over Jesus’ Death


Kenyan-Lawyer-Dola Indidis
A Kenyan lawyer has filed a petition with the International Court of Justice in The Hague, suggesting that the trial and crucifixion of Jesus Christ was unlawful, and the State of Israel among others should be held responsible, Kenyan news outlet the Nairobian reported on Friday.
Dola Indidis, a lawyer and former spokesman of the Kenyan Judiciary is reportedly attempting to sue Tiberius (emperor of Rome, 42 BCE-37 CE), Pontius Pilate, a selection of Jewish elders, King Herod, the Republic of Italy and the State of Israel.
“Evidence today is on record in the Bible, and you cannot discredit the Bible,” Indidis told the Kenyan Citizen News.
Although those he suggests should have been convicted during the original trial have not been alive for more than 2,000 years, Indidis insists that the government for whom they acted can and should still be held responsible.
“I filed the case because it’s my duty to uphold the dignity of Jesus and I have gone to the ICJ to seek justice for the man from Nazareth,” Indidis told the Nairobian. “His selective and malicious prosecution violated his human rights through judicial misconduct, abuse of office bias and prejudice.”
Indidis apparently named the states of Italy and Israel in the lawsuit because upon the attainment of independence, the two states incorporated the laws of the Roman Empire, those in force at the time of the crucifixion.
He is challenging the mode of questioning used during Jesus’s trial, prosecution, hearing and sentencing; the form of punishment meted out to him while undergoing judicial proceedings and the substance of the information used to convict him.
The case was first filed in the High Court in Nairobi but was rejected. Indidis then applied to have it heard at the ICJ.
Indidis says he wants to establish what crime Jesus was charged with and prays that the court decides “that the proceedings before the Roman courts were a nullity in law, for they did not conform to the rule of law at the material time and any time thereafter.”

“Some of those present spat in his face, struck him with their fists, slapped him, taunted him, and pronounced him worthy of death,” Indidis told the Kenyan news website Standard Media (SDE).
When Jesus died, Indidis insists, he was not given an opportunity to be heard.
“I am suing as a friend,” he said.
Indidis insisted on the validity of his case, saying “I know with a matter of fact and truth we have a good case with a high probability of success and I hope it is done in my lifetime.”
When asked about the case, an official from the ICJ told legal news website Legal Cheek, “The ICJ has no jurisdiction for such a case. The ICJ settles disputes between states. It is not even theoretically possible for us to consider this case.”
DiasporaScope

‘BUHARI, ANYAOKU, RIBADU AMONG BEST QUALIFIED TO RULE’

by Musa Abdullahi Krishi

Those the group identified in a statement issued in Abuja include; Chief Emeka Anyaoku,     Donald Duke, Governor Rotimi Amaechi, General Muhammadu Buhari, former Vice President, Atiku Abubakar, General Mohammed Buba Marwa,  Malam Nuhu Ribadu, Chief Audu Ogbe and Professor Nur Alkali.
Others are Senator Nenadi Esther Usman, Gov Sule Lamido, Gov Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, Ibrahim Shekarau, Nasir El-Rufai, Senator Bukola Saraki, Malam Hassan Lawal among many others.
Thr group said it believes only individuals with credibility and sound education can rule the country effectively.
The group also included other criteria for a true Nigerian leader come 2015 to include “consistency, reasonable levels of low or lack of corruption, public sector experience, patriotism, national and international acceptability, and firmness and strength of character to implement fundamental development projects.”
A statement signed by both the group’s national coordinator and secretary, Abdulrahman Abu Hamisu and Buhari Muhammad Bello Jega, said it believes only individuals with such qualities can tackle the present level of under-development, insecurity and disunity in the country.”
“The nominees cut across different ideological orientation and political parties; they are mainly liberals, progressives and even radicals,” it said.
DailyTrust

Wednesday, 31 July 2013

INEC registers APC, issues registration certificate

All Progressives Alliance
 INEC confirmed the registration on Wednesday.
This was stated by the Secretary to INEC, Abdullahi Kaugama, in a statement on Wednesday.
The statement said: “The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has approved the application by three political parties – the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) and the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) – to merge into one, to be known as the All Progressives Congress.
“On considering the application, the Commission found that the applicant-parties have met all statutory requirements for the merger, and has accordingly granted their request.
“Consequently, the Commission has approved the withdrawal of the individual certificates of the applicant-parties, and the issuance of a single certificate to the All Progressives Congress.”
PremiumTimes

FINALLY: INEC registers APC

FINALLY: INEC registers APC
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has approved the application by three political parties – the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) and the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) – to merge into one, to be known as the All Progressives Congress.
On considering the application, the Commission found that the applicant-parties have met all statutory requirements for the merger, and has accordingly granted their request.
Consequently, the Commission has approved the withdrawal of the individual certificates of the applicant-parties, and the issuance of a single certificate to the All Progressives Congress.
INEC inec



Tuesday, 30 July 2013

FG May Dump Bayelsa, Kogi Greenfield Refinery Projects as Only Lagos Viable

080712F1.Allison-Madueke.jpg - 080712F1.Allison-Madueke.jpg

Dizeani Allison Madueke
Chika Amanze-Nwachuku
There are indications that the federal government may jettison two of its three Greenfield refinery projects, following the recommendations of the National Refineries Special Task Force (NRST).
The 22-member task force headed by former Minister of Finance, Dr. Kalu Idika Kalu, had in a report submitted on August 2, 2012 found that of the three joint venture Greenfield refineries option under consideration by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), the economics strongly favours only Lagos.
Based on its finding, the committee had advised that only the proposed 350,000 barrels per day (bpd) Lagos Greenfield refinery should be pursued vigorously as a priority project to ensure it comes on stream by 2016, while the proposed Bayelsa and Kogi refineries should be explored later.
The NNPC and China State Construction Engineering Corporation (CSCEC) in 2010 signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) for the construction of three Greenfield refineries in Lagos, Bayelsa and Kogi, as well as a gas refining/petrochemical plant.
Under the terms of the agreement, 80 per cent of the estimated cost of all four projects, put at $28.5 billion was meant to be funded with a term loan provided by China Export Credit Insurance Corporation (SINOSURE) and a consortium of Chinese banks led by the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, the world’s largest bank, while the NNPC was to foot only 20 per cent of the cost as equity contribution.
The project was envisaged to add 750,000 barrels per day of extra refining capacity to Nigeria’s current 445,000 barrel per day refining capacity as well as stem the flood of imported refined products into Nigeria.
However, the project had suffered series of setbacks, as the NNPC was said to have failed to fulfill the conditions stated in the MoU.
A source at the NNPC told THISDAY weekend that although the Final Investment Decision (FID) on the Greenfield refinery projects had been completed and soil analysis showed that the project was viable, the project might not take off soon as government was determined to implement the recommendations by the refinery task force.
He explained the construction work did not commence as planned because the NNPC was awaiting the report of the refinery task force, which, would determine the next line of action.
The source said, for now, the government was interested in revitalising the old refineries and also planned to divest its equity from them in line with the recommendations of Idika Kalu task force.
“No meaningful development has taken place as regards the Greenfield Refineries project. We are still considering the refinery committee’s report to see areas that will be fully adopted. And if the NNPC decides to follow the recommendations of the task force, it will definitely affect the Greenfield Refinery projects one way or the other”, the source said. 
He also noted that based on the recommendations, the partners may have to amend the MoU, a development, which he said will further delay the project.
The Idika Kalu committee had been mandated to among others, conduct a diagnostic review of the nation’s existing four refineries and advise on the best approach to turn them around; review as well as advise government on private refinery licensing and partnership models for Greenfield refineries.
The committee had also in its report, observed that the old refineries with combined capacities of 445,000 bpd, could meet Nigeria’s domestic needs only if the root causes of their poor performances were vigorously resolved. It also identified years of maintenance neglect as the major cause of the refineries’ poor performances.
“In the early 1990’s, Nigerian refineries produced enough petroleum products to satisfy national demand and exported the excess, but discovered the refineries have not been efficiently and safely operated and maintained for more than 15 years”, the committee noted, even as it advised that government should divest its equity from the refineries and allow private entities to manage them.
ThisDay

South Africa ripping Nigeria off


South Africa ripping Nigeria off

By: Christian Maurice

I had the misfortune of walking through a South African owned shop in Lagos recently. Mr. Price to be precise. I had just returned from a trip to Johannesburg and looking for cheap gifts i had forgotten to pick up for my hangers on when i returned. There was a piece of sweat shirt I had made a mental note to purchase at Mr. Price and decided to get it at the Nigerian store.
This was a piece of item placed at their “priced to go” racks at N1,800 (R114.74) per piece. I have a long, retentive memory and i could still recall that this same piece of sweatshirt sells for N784.24 (R49.99) in South Africa. And if you factored in my 14% tax rebates, that sweat shirt did in fact come to me at N669.34 (R42.99). That’s some 269% increase over and above the marked prices inside South Africa. 
This huge price differential is typical across board on most south african owned consumer products in Nigeria. From Shoprite to Chicken Republic to Massmart (Game), Mr. Price, Woolworth and Truworths. It is a tale of undue exploitation of Nigerians by South African Businesses.
Before i am crucified for being xenophobic, it is important to understand that the criticism of South African companies have persisted as a consequence of their approach to business in Nigeria, which has often been characterised as predatory and mercantilist. South Africa’s foreign policy towards Nigeria and indeed, towards all of Africa is not based on any Pan-Africanism or anti-imperialism; it is rather based on promoting South Africa’s expanding business interests on the continent. 
It is an expansionist agenda that South African corporations and parastatals have successfully implemented in a one-sided hegemonic relationship. As echoed by Foluso Phillips, the chairman of Lagos-based Phillips Consulting, a business consultancy of branding advisors, “There is much that South Africa can offer Nigeria, but there has been a problem of attitude and lack of trust as well as divergent objectives by both parties,… however, there must be a strong spirit of win-win, as the track record and perception makes it all look one-sided in South Africa’s favour.”
Believe me, I am a fan of South African business in Nigeria. Rightly or wrongly, the economic boosts our country has experienced in various sectors of the economy, in particular, retail and telecommunication, through the interventions of South African businesses have helped to redefine the consumer experience here. They have brought healthy competitions and quality alternatives to other product offerings. They have been open about their desire to conquer the consumer market and have in turn created employment opportunities for thousands of Nigerians. They saw the potential of the middle income groups in Nigeria and positioned themselves to tap into it.
My grouse however, is that this competitive positioning cannot and should not be exploitative in nature, which is exactly what is happening today. It shouldn’t happen in a market of 170 million people in which, 40% of the population describe themselves as middle income earners. 
This target group alone represent a market that’s still larger than the entire population of South Africa! Worse still, this should not be happening in a country that allows businesses to repatriate 100% of entire profits back to home. And it definitely shouldn’t be happening in a country that has massive disparities in incomes with it. Some comparative economic data will suffice here:
                                         Nigeria                  South Africa
Population                         170 million              52 million
Gross Domestic Product    $268.7 billion          $375.9 billion
GDP per Capita                 $1,657                    $7,257
Exports (1st Quarter, 2012) $750 million           $150 million
How does it happen that the earning power of the average south african is more than 4 times that of his Nigerian counterpart and yet, Nigerians are made to pay almost 3 times for the same quality of goods. The reality is, South African companies are making a dangerous killing in Nigeria and we are helpless to do anything about it. There is evidence that South African companies have been involved in blatant profiteering and looting in Nigeria. 
For a very long time, MTN charges in Nigeria were the highest rates in the world for cellular phone calls. And despite its massive profits, MTN has really only created about 500 permanent jobs. Most of its employees are casual or temporary workers, and just like other South African corporations, denies all of its workers the right to join a trade union. Something that would be most unheard of in their own country.
And do not be deceived by the trade surplus in Nigeria’s favour. Of the 750 million dollars worth of Nigerian exports to South Africa reported in the first three months of 2012 by The South African Revenue Service, 740 million dollars worth are made up of mineral products, mainly oil. That means, other than oil, Nigeria have absolutely no stake in South Africa’s economy. 
Compare that with MTN owning 52% of Nigeria’s mobile telecommunications market; franchises like Nandos, Chicken Republic and St. Elmos, etc owning 50% of the international fast food market worth US$2.5 million per annum; DSTV accounting for 90% of the viewers that watch satellite TV in Nigeria; SASOL playing major roles in Escravos with Chevron; and Entech and Broll managing prime estates and properties including the development of the Bar Beach (Eko Atlantic) and management of over 600 fuel stations and malls across Nigeria respectively. This can’t healthy.
There is a reason why such unequal trade relations exist between Nigeria and South Africa. The bilateral agreements signed by both governments since 1999 allows this to happen without hinderance to operations. South African companies’ investments in Nigeria are heavily protected from any interference at any level by the Nigerian government. It is a license to grow as they please without consequence. Added to this, there are substantial tax rebates for companies operating here through agreements on eradicating double taxation. 
South African companies that paid tax in Nigeria are protected from paying taxes back home and can repatriate the entire profits. Now, imagine the US$5.3 billion MTN had earned after tax in the 10 years of operation from 2001 – 2011 finding its way back to the South African economy tax free! Why wouldn’t the Rand be stronger than the Naira at any level?
When the foundations of this country was laid in the fight against imperialism, it was not envisioned to have it substituted with another form of neo-colonialism. The activities of South African businesses in Nigeria have been abrasive to Nigerians and the Nigerian economy. 
There is a siege mentality they have on this country that needs to be addressed. They have created opportunities not to develop the Nigerian economy but to exploit its resources. We experienced that with the British, endured it with the Chinese and now, it’s the South Africans that are our new colonialists. This is not the sort of relationship we should be aspiring to at this time. The sooner our government addresses these imbalances the better.
NVS

Are you better off with PDP in power?


Are you better off with PDP in power?
BY DAN ONWUKWE
THE headline of this column is like the ringing question Ronald Reagan asked American voters in 1980 when he was seeking their mandate to succeed the then incumbent President, Jimmy Carter. Carter, of the Democratic Party was elected in 1976.It was a time despair seemed to have supplanted hope in America.
The country was reeling from the Watergate scandal that consumed Richard Nixon presidency. Carter knew the enormity of the challenge when he decided to run for the presidency.
He summed up the despondency among Americans as the “malaise of the spirit”. But once he took the mantle of leadership, he lost grip, or perhaps, he was overwhelmed by the problems. Reagan, a Republican (may God bless his soul), a master communicator looked the average voter in the eye and asked a provoking question: Are you better off now than you were four years ago? American voters agreed with him that indeed their country was drifting, dangerously.
He won by a landslide. Carter was gone. Similar question is asked in every democracy when the leadership has failed to provide solutions to the manifold problems facing the country and its citizens.
That’s because disillusionment has set in. It is apt to reframe the question that Reagan asked his compatriots 33 years ago: Nigerians, are better off now 14 years since the Peoples Democratic Party(PDP) came to power at the centre? Certainly, many will answer in the affirmative, particularly those that have benefited from the policies of PDP. So also will millions of Nigerians answer in the negative, especially those who are at the receiving end of what they might call the “flip-flop policies” of the ruling party.
Expectations differ, so is perception of any government in power. But one thing is clear: politics in Nigeria can be a cruel and fun. It has a flavour of the good, the bad and the ugly. The politicians provide us with the drama that soothes our frayed and tired nerves.
PDP is the arena that provides the fun and the follies that characterize Nigerian politics. PDP without crisis is like a doughnut without a hole.
Party members are not ashamed of dancing naked at the market square. Washing dirty linens in public has become a regular occurrence .The rank -and- file of the party resembles a broken family whose members would prefer to destroy their inheritance rather than share it. Yet, the party deludes itself as “largest party in Africa” and some of its members have boasted several times that the party will remain in power for sixty years.
Does the voter matter to them?. May be, not. It is not as if opposition parties have proved to be a realistic better alternative, but often, assessment of performance is based on the party that has been given the mandate to turn things around. The truth is that PDP is fast losing grip of present realities in Nigeria. Anger is eating deep like acid among the people.
And in the face of that, the ruling party has come far short on leadership, competence and effectiveness in the handling of critical issues in the country today.
I believe, it is in that context that five northern governors, Aliyu Babangida (Niger), Rabiu Kwankwaso (Kano), Sule Lamido (Jigawa), Murtala Nyako (Adamawa) and Aliyu Wamakko (Sokoto) issued red-alert on the state of the nation, in particular, the ugly state of affairs within the PDP to which all of them belong. They are not ordinary members of the party.
They are strong voices that we should listen to, not ignored. In the past two weeks, the five governors, already labeled by the party as “renegades” have held consultations with three former heads of state, Olusegun Obasanjo, Ibrahim Babangida and Abdulsalami Abubakar. Nyako said something instructive after their visit to Minna, hometown of IBB and Abubakar: “we will continue to make efforts to save the party(PDP).
But if our efforts did not work out, we have no alternative than to fold our arms and see PDP dead and help in burying it”. The presidency has since dismissed such comments as “grandstanding”. Similar dismissive comments by the presidency followed their solidarity visit to Governor Chibuike Amaechi of Rivers State who is currently under siege by the party and members loyal to the President.
This is a party that has repeatedly shown contempt for the laws of the land and liberty of individuals. No doubt, the rot that PDP has made of itself is like a virus that has now infected many facets of the country, with the exception of a few, including members of the National Assembly. This is evident from their jumbo pay that become folders of groundbreaking wastage. It reflects how Nigeria has faired under PDP.
A recent report by The Economist magazine says it all. Quoting data from the International Monetary Fund(IMF),The Economist reports that with an annual basic salary of N30.6m,(equivalent of $189,500),a legislator at the National Assembly is the highest paid in the world, while President Jonathan could be earning much higher than the United States President. That officially makes our democracy the costliest in the world and our lawmakers perhaps the least productive, in comparison.
Some years ago, the same magazine had described our national parliament as the “filthiest arena of politics” in the world. That may be an exaggeration. But may not be far from the truth. This report could be inciting, but the fact is a bazaar of sort that we knew before The Economist hugged the headlines with it. Expectedly, spokesman for the Senate, Enyinnaya Abaribe has described the report as “misleading and incorrect”.
Nevertheless. we know that to be the case, that our lawmakers across the states and local governments are paid so much and work too little to justify the amount being lashed on them as salary and other pecks of office.
About two years ago, Governor of the Central Bank, Lamido Sanusi raised a genuine alarm over the amount spent on the federal lawmakers, which he said was taking a big chunk of the budget.
They called for his head. He was forced to adjust his comment, but not the gritty truth of what this obscene jumbo salary means to the nation’s Gross Domestic Product(GDP). For months ago, the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS)released an astonishing data showing that the Federal Government in the last 12 years spent N18trn to service national “lifestyles”. Contrastingly, within the same period,N6.6trn was spent on infrastructure.
That is one of the reasons why our roads have become death-traps. Recently, a report by French wire service, AFP quoted Euro Monitor, a financial market derivative, that the rich in Nigeria spent N9.4bn on champagne in 2012.
This amount is equivalent of 849,000 litres of champagne. Recall that the presidency allocated N2bn for “entertainment” in this year’s budget. Why is all of this happening in our country? Why are politics and politicians different in Nigeria? Is it in our genes or in our stars or both? Please, answer.
Perhaps it will do our politicians and our polity good to heed the advice of the Catholic pontiff, Pope Francis, during his visit to Brazil last week. He looked at the rich in the midst of poorest poor and said:’ Don’t let money and greed steal your soul.
Money and greed bring the illusion of being happy’. Our politics has become staid and out of touch. Something needs to be done. And urgently.
TheSun