NEWS
₦121.67trn Debt: SERAP Alleges World Bank Is Culpable
The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) is of the view that the World Bank is culpable for the staggering $91.46 billion of public debts weighing Nigeria down, in addition to its misappropriation.
To this end, the SERAP has sent a complaint to the World Bank Inspection Panel demanding a thorough probe of the “allegations of corruption in the spending of the loans and other funding facilities obtained by the Federal Government and Nigeria’s 36 state governors and to review the implementation of all Bank-funded projects by successive governments since 1999.”
The SERAP urged the Inspection Panel “to determine the extent to which Bank Management has followed or is following the World Bank’ s operational policies and procedures applicable to the design, appraisal and implementation of all Bank-financed projects in Nigeria.”
The SERAP also urged the Panel “to determine the effect of any failure by the Bank Management to effectively implement its operational policies and procedures in all Bank-funded projects in several states on the social and economic rights and well-being of millions of socially and economically vulnerable Nigerians.”
The SERAP’s complaint followed the Debt Management Office (DMO)’s report last week, that Nigeria’s total public debt stock, including external and domestic debts, increased by ₦24.33 trillion in three months alone, from ₦97.34 trillion ($108.23 billion) in December 2023 to ₦121.67 trillion ($91.46 billion) as of March 31, 2024.
The SERAP’s averments were detailed in a letter dated 22 June 2024 and signed by SERAP deputy director Kolawole Oluwadare.
It stated, “The World Bank has over the years reportedly approved 197 projects for Nigeria, totalling over $36 billion in loans and other funding facilities [that is, $36,360,415,968.81], with little or no impact on Nigerians living in poverty.”
The SERAP said, “Nigerians are rarely informed and meaningfully and effectively consulted about several of these loans, facilities and Bank-funded projects. Nigerians continue to be denied the benefits of the loans and facilities and access to basic public goods and services.”
According to the SERAP, “Despite several loans and other funding facilities provided by the World Bank over many years, millions of socially and economically vulnerable Nigerians in several states and communities continue to lack access to regular electricity supply and have denied the benefit of renewable energy solutions.”
The complaint, addressed to the Chair of the Panel, read in part, “A recent report by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) revealed that over 133 million Nigerians are living in poverty, the majority of them women and children. We would therefore be grateful if the recommended measures are taken to hold the World Bank to account.
“The apparent failure by Bank Management to diligently follow the World Bank’s operational policies and procedures in Bank-funded projects have resulted in the alleged mismanagement of the loans and facilities and exposed millions of Nigerians to extreme poverty.
“We are concerned about the negative impact of the lack of transparency and accountability in the spending of loans and facilities obtained by the Federal Government and Nigeria’s 36 state governors on the social and economic well-being of millions of Nigerians and the enjoyment of their human rights.
“We are concerned that several Nigeria’s 36 states and the FCT reportedly owe civil servants’ salaries and pensions. Several states are borrowing to pay salaries. Millions of Nigerians resident in these states and the FCT continue to be denied access to basic public goods and services.
“The Federal Government and several states are also reportedly spending public funds which may include the loans and facilities obtained from the World Bank to fund unnecessary travels, buy exotic and bulletproof cars and generally fund the lavish lifestyles of politicians.
“The ₦121.67 trillion ($91.46 billion) debt represents external and domestic loans obtained by the Federal Government, the 36 state governments and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).
“The World Bank reportedly currently has a portfolio of about $8.5 billion spread across the country. The Bank has also approved several loans and other funding facilities to the country’s 36 states including the recent $750 million credit line meant to the states to carry out reforms to attract investment and create jobs.
“The Bank recently approved a $2.25 billion loan for Nigeria ‘to shore up revenue and support economic reforms and address cost-of-living crisis in the country.’
“In September 2002, the Bank approved $129.00 million for a project titled ‘Universal Basic Education Project: P071494’ ‘to increase the capacity of states and local governments to manage and implement the UBE program effectively and efficiently.’
“In May, 2007 the Bank approved $180.00 million for a project titled ‘Nigeria Federal Science & Technical Education at Post-Basic Levels (STEPB): P074132’, ‘to produce more and better qualified science and technology (S&T) graduates’.”
In May 2000, the Bank approved $55.00 million for a project titled ‘Second Primary Education Project: P066571’, ‘to support the implementation of Universal Basic Education.’
“In December 2000, the Bank approved $86.75 million for a project titled ‘Community Based Poverty Reduction Project: P069086’, to ‘improve access of the poor to social and economic infrastructure and increase the availability and management of development resources at the community level.’
“In March 2011, the Bank approved $160.00 million for a project titled ‘Nigeria – Growth & Employment: P069086’, ‘to increase growth and employment in Nigeria.’
“In July 2020, the World Bank approved $500.00 million for a project titled ‘Adolescent Girls Initiative for Learning and Empowerment: P170664’, ‘to improve secondary education opportunities among girls in targeted areas in participating states.’
“The Bank also approved $500.00 million in June 2023 for a project titled ‘Nigeria for Women Program Scale Up Project: P179447’, ‘to promote women’s economic empowerment and enhance the economic opportunities of unbanked women.’
“In June 2020, the Bank approved $750.00 million for a project titled ‘Power Sector Recovery Performance Based Operation: P164001’, ‘to improve the reliability of electricity supply, achieve financial and fiscal sustainability, and enhance accountability.’
“In September 2022, the Bank approved $750.00 million for a project titled ‘State Action on Business Enabling Reforms (SABER) Program: P177442’, ‘to improve the efficiency and transparency of government-to-business services in participating states.’
“Many years of allegations of corruption and mismanagement of public funds including the spending of the loans and facilities obtained by the Federal Government and Nigeria’s 36 states have contributed to widespread poverty, underdevelopment and lack of access to public goods and services in the country.
“The allegations of corruption in the loans and facilities provided by the Bank calls into question the rigor with which the Bank undertook due diligence in assessing the social, economic and environmental risks of its financed-projects in the country.
“The apparent inadequacy of safeguards and accountability mechanisms for the loans, facilities and project implementation has resulted in the alleged diversion of public funds for other purposes other than those agreed with the Bank.
“The Bank has apparently failed and/or neglected to effectively apply its various operational policies and procedures to ensure the transparent and accountable spending of its 197 loans and facilities across several states in the country.
“SERAP has over the years sent several complaints to the World Bank about the lack of transparency and accountability in the loans and facilities and the projects financed by the World Bank loans but the Bank Management has consistently failed and/or neglected to take any concrete action on the complaints.
SERAP believes that we have exhausted attempts to resolve our complaints through several communications with Bank Management.
“The harms suffered by millions of socially and economically vulnerable Nigerians as a result of the alleged corruption in the spending of loans and funding facilities provided by the Bank amount to violations of human rights guaranteed under the human rights treaties to which Nigeria is a state party.
“As a UN specialized agency, the World Bank also has an obligation to promote transparency and accountability in the management of public resources and effective implementation of the World Bank and to observe the provisions of the UN Charter, as well as the UN Convention against Corruption to which Nigeria is a state party.
“The World Bank has obligations under international anticorruption and human rights law, including a responsibility to promote transparency and accountability in the management of public funds, prevent mismanagement or diversion of public funds, and redress any abuse of public trust that they may have contributed to.
“The World Bank’s board of executive directors also has an obligation to ensure that the policies and decisions of the Bank are consistent with their own statutes and governments’ transparency and accountability obligations.
“The UN ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ framework for business and human rights and the “Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights among others impose corporate responsibility on the World Bank to assess potential risks of mismanagement or diversion of their investments and to seek to prevent or mitigate those risks.
“Under Article 1 of the World Bank Articles of Agreement, the stated purposes of the Bank include ‘to assist in the reconstruction and development’. The Bank is also to ‘be guided in all its decisions by the purposes.’
“Under Article 3 section 4(vii) of the World Bank Articles of Agreement, loans made or guaranteed by the Bank ‘shall be for the purpose of specific projects of reconstruction or development.’ Also, under Article 3 section 5(b), the Bank ‘shall make arrangements to ensure that the proceeds of any loan are used only for the purposes for which the loan was granted’.”
Nigerian national Ekene Chukwuma has said he returned to Nigeria with assistance linked to Oseni Rufai rather than the Nigerians in Diaspora Commission (NiDCOM), while renewing allegations against the commission’s chairperson, Abike Dabiri-Erewa, over his travel documents.
Chukwuma made the remarks in an interview in which he explained how he returned to Nigeria after spending months at a deportation camp in India.
RELATED NEWS: Rufai Oseni Row: NiDCOM Breaks Silence on Nigerians Detained in India, Addresses Ekene’s Case
“My name is Kenneth Chukwu, from Enugu State,” he said, introducing himself before explaining how he returned to the country.
“I came back here with the assist of Osini Roufai, a good friend of him,” he said.
Chukwuma denied that NiDCOM facilitated his return, alleging that the commission had published false information about his case.
“NiDCOM made a lots of false, uh, news acquisition against me, which is still in Abike Dabiri handle in Twitter,” he said.
He also accused Dabiri-Erewa of sharing his expired international passport and a travel certificate he claimed was issued six months after he entered the detention camp.
“He also, she also posted my international passport that expired. He also, she also posted my TC that issued after 6 months,” he said.
His comments renew questions surrounding the handling of his case and the circumstances under which he obtained the documents needed to return to Nigeria.
Chukwuma’s detention in India previously sparked a public disagreement between ARISE News presenter Oseni Rufai and Dabiri-Erewa over NiDCOM’s response to reports of his situation.
Oseni raised concerns about Chukwuma’s detention and the commission’s handling of the case, while Dabiri-Erewa defended NiDCOM’s position and explained the process for submitting information to the commission.
NiDCOM subsequently issued its account of Chukwuma’s detention, stating that he had been arrested in India over a visa overstay and addressing the circumstances surrounding his travel documents.
The differing accounts prompted public debate about the commission’s response to Nigerians facing immigration difficulties abroad.
Rufai Oseni has challenged political analyst Olabode Sowunmi over the Federal Government’s 30-day petrol discount, questioning whether the intervention amounts to a return of fuel subsidy despite claims that the discount is being borne by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC).
The exchange occurred during an edition of The Morning Show on Arise News, where Oseni questioned Sowunmi about the financial implications of the petrol discount and other measures introduced to cushion the impact of fuel prices.
Oseni argued that several elements of the government’s intervention could be regarded as forms of subsidy, insisting that NNPC’s ownership structure must be considered when determining who ultimately bears the cost.
SEE MORE: ‘Another Speech to Tell Us, It Is Well’ — Oseni Rufai Reacts to Tinubu’s Address
“No matter how you try to explain it away, a subsidy is a subsidy,” Oseni said.
He challenged the argument that the discount should not be classified as a government subsidy simply because NNPC was responsible for providing it.
“We’re talking like NNPC is not owned by [the government] and heavily equity-based by the Ministry of Finance Incorporated,” he said.
Oseni identified the 30-day discount, forward sales of crude oil to domestic refineries, a proposed price ceiling, the removal of road levies and the consideration of an excess-profit tax among the measures he believed could amount to different forms of subsidy.
He argued that forward sales of crude oil to domestic refineries, with increased volumes as production grows, could help shield petrol pump prices from fluctuations in the international market.
Oseni also questioned the proposed negotiation of a price ceiling of ₦1,350 on landing and ex-country costs, arguing that government intervention to moderate prices contradicted the principle of allowing market forces to determine them.
“You are not supposed to come in to do this. Let me go back to your words: forces of market supply and demand should do this, but you have now come in to do this. That’s another form of subsidies,” he said.
He further cited the removal of road levies and cooperation with state governments under new tax laws as part of the measures requiring scrutiny.
After listing the interventions, Oseni demanded that Sowunmi explain their financial implications and identify who would ultimately pay for the petrol discount.
“But tie this with the most important question, actually, that you skipped: How much will this cost NNPC, and who pays for it? Don’t evade that question. Tell us the cost item and how much, who will pay for it,” Oseni said.
Sowunmi Defends His Position
In his response, Sowunmi argued that a government subsidy should be determined by whether the government bears the difference between the total cost of a product and its selling price.
He explained that a subsidy occurs when the government assumes the financial burden created by the gap between the cost of a product and the price at which it is sold.
“In the case of the discount that has been announced, it is borne by NNPC. So that cannot be…” Sowunmi said before Oseni interrupted.
Oseni challenged the distinction, insisting that NNPC’s ownership made it necessary to establish whether the cost could ultimately be linked to the government.
“Wait, not—who owns NNPC? Please answer. No, no, a straight question, and you can go ahead. Who owns NNPC?” Oseni asked.
Sowunmi responded that he had been invited to contribute to the discussion and should be allowed to complete his explanation.
“You asked, you asked NNPC because you believe—you asked me a question because you believe I have something to say. You cannot—you cannot tell me how to talk, so just be…” he said.
Oseni subsequently repeated his question about NNPC’s ownership, prompting Sowunmi to urge him to exercise patience.
“Basically, you need to be a bit patient and just…” Sowunmi responded.
The available transcript ends during the exchange, with no further explanation of the financial arrangements or conclusion to the discussion provided.
Human rights defender and Amnesty International volunteer, Lawrence Zongo, has been released from the custody of the Nigerian Army in Jos, Plateau State, after spending 10 days in detention.
His release comes after Amnesty International and the Take-It-Back (TIB) Movement demanded his immediate release, raising concerns over his alleged incommunicado detention at the Nigerian Army’s 3 Division headquarters in Jos.
ALSO READ: How Troops Forced Kidnappers to Abandon Abducted Army Lieutenant Colonel in Enugu
“Zongo is out,” a source privy to the information said on Thursday.
Zongo was arrested on October 5 while visiting relatives receiving treatment at a military hospital within Maxwell Khobe Cantonment, Rukuba Barracks, the headquarters of the Army’s 3 Division.
He had reportedly gone to the facility to assist family members who were attacked by gunmen in Meyango, Bassa Local Government Area of Plateau State, on Sunday night.
Sources familiar with the incident said one of Zongo’s first cousins died from injuries sustained in the attack before he arrived at the hospital late Monday morning.
Following his arrest, sources alleged that Zongo was held without charge and denied access to his lawyers and family members.
Sources also claimed that he was wearing Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses when he visited the military facility, suggesting that this might have contributed to the soldiers’ decision to detain him. However, the claim had not been independently verified.
On October 8, Amnesty International raised the alarm over what it described as the arbitrary and incommunicado detention of its member, demanding that the military either release him immediately or hand him over to the appropriate civilian authorities.
The organisation said efforts to gain access to Zongo had been unsuccessful and called on the Army to clarify the circumstances surrounding his arrest and detention.
On October 13, the Take-It-Back Movement’s Plateau State chapter also demanded his release, alleging that he remained in military custody without a clear explanation.
The movement said its members and executive committee representatives had discussed the matter during an appearance on JayFM Jos, insisting that the military should disclose the offence Zongo was suspected of committing and provide evidence justifying his continued detention.
The group also called for respect for Zongo’s fundamental rights and urged the Army to follow established legal procedures if there were allegations against him.
His release comes after days of pressure from rights advocates and activists over the circumstances surrounding his arrest and detention.
The Nigerian Army’s reasons for detaining Zongo and the circumstances surrounding his release were not immediately available.
2027 Election: ‘Your Future Is More Valuable’ — IGP Warn Youths Against Political Violence
Tinubu Charges PCC Members to Deliver Wards
Marketers Eye Portion of FG’s Petrol Discount
Tanzania Nears Completion of $42bn Equinor, Shell-Led LNG Project
IEA Puts UAE’s Oil Output at 5.3mbpd for September
Africa’s Energy Security Conversations Pull Industry Executives Together
Trump’s Family Unveils New Cryptocurrency Platform
Senate Denies Receiving Petitions Against Tinubu’s Ambassadorial Nominees
Dangote Cement Lights Up Benue Host Communities With CSR Initiatives
Reps Recommend 3-year Jail Term For Aviation minister
Tems Sets New Record On Billboard Hot 100 Chart
