Home Blog Page 352

 FG owes GenCos, DisCos N4trn amid liquidity problems

Harrison EDEH
-
0
 FG owes GenCos, DisCos N4trn amid liquidity problems

NIGERIA’s power sector is currently experiencing more liquidity problems as the federal government has confirmed its indebtedness to the electricity generation (GENCOs) and distribution companies (DisCos) to the tune of N4 trillion.

The government has also blamed the distribution companies over lack of investment in its distribution infrastructure which could have enabled it to migrate more customers to band A for increased revenue.

Minister of Power, Adebayo Adelabu, who confirmed the development said the federal government is owing electricity generation companies (GenCos) and electricity distribution companies (DisCos) over N4 trillion in electricity subsidy.

The minister disclosed this on  Thursday, February 27, in Abuja at a public presentation of the National Integrated Electricity Policy (NIEP) and Nigeria Integrated Resource Plan (NIRP).

He remarked that the debt had posed a challenge in strengthening the power sector for optimum service delivery.

While giving a breakdown, the minister said N2 trillion is owed to GenCos as legacy debt while another N1.9 trillion is owed to them as part of electricity subsidy for 2024.

The DisCos, he said are owed N450 billion for 2024 electricity subsidy.

The minister said the government would not be able to continue the model of electricity subsidy payment, adding that a new model of intervention is in the works by identifying a segment of the population in need of it.

“How do you expect the GenCos to perform optimally? How do you expect them to pay for gas, service, and maintain their turbines and other infrastructure as well as pay their staff? If a total of N4 trillion is being owed to them.

“I do not deceive myself. The government cannot afford to continue to fund the level of subsidy that our consumption pattern is throwing up, because we have seen increasing consumption of electricity,” he emphasised.

The minister observed that the key issues are the market, liquidity, and sector reforms, noting that the government will continue to focus in addressing them.

“We’ll look at the tariff again. I am not saying that we’re going to increase the tariff but to look at the tariff and see how we can improve upon our modest achievement of last year,”he explained.

Noting that the lack of investment in the distribution networks of DisCos is hampering the progress of the sector, the minister observed that the government has not seen the migration of more customers to band A, attributing it to poor investments in network by DisCos.

“They have refused to invest in this sector. Fine, it can be explained in a way, but a lot of investment is required for us to achieve an accelerated migration of lower-band customers into Band A. It is taking a lot of time,” he said.

He added that the government was considering canceling some sections of electricity consumers’ classification to make it three – bands A, B, and C.

The minister said this is to reduce the tariff difference among them to enable those in the lower bands to enjoy more hours of electricity.

The ICIR reported that the World Bank has been supporting Nigeria’s power sector through the Power Sector Recovery Programme (PSRP), which has seen about $500 million lent to support the ailing sector.

Besides, a discussion on $1.5 billion loan is ongoing between the the global bank and the Nigerian government for the sector in addressing metering access and improving power infrastructure.

FCCPC to MultiChoice: Maintain current prices pending investigation

Ehime ALEX
-
0
FCCPC to MultiChoice: Maintain current prices pending investigation

THE Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) has directed MultiChoice Nigeria to maintain the current prices of its subscription packages until the ongoing investigation into its proposed price hike is concluded.

The Commission said in a statement on Thursday, February 27 by its director of corporate affairs, Ondaje Ijagwu.

“Pursuant to this, MultiChoice is expressly instructed to maintain the existing price structure as of February 27, 2025, pending the Commission’s review and final determination on the matter.

“Maintaining the status quo on pricing is essential to prevent any potential consumer harm during this period,” Ijagwu stated.

The directive followed MultiChoice Nigeria’s request for an extension concerning its scheduled appearance before the commission which it granted.

However, the company is required to attend the rescheduled investigative hearing on March 6, 2025, along with all relevant officers and a comprehensive response.

The ICIR reported that Multichoice Nigeria, the parent company of DStv and GOtv, has revealed plans to increase the prices of its packages effective March 1, 2025.

It made the known in a message to its customers on Monday, February 24, titled ‘Price Adjustment on DStv and GOtv packages.’

The MultiChoice chief executive officer, John Ugbe, explaining the decision for the upward review in price said, “Dear Customer, please note that effective 1 March 2025, there will be a price adjustment on all DStv packages. This enables us to continue offering our customers world-class homegrown and international content, delivered through the best technology.”

The price review will hike the DStv compact bouquet from N15,700 to N19,000, the compact plus to N30,000, and the premium subscription to N44,500.

Similarly, its GOtv customers, currently paying N3,600, will now pay N3,900, while the tariff on GOtv Plus will rise from N4,850 to N5,800.

Also, the GOtv max package will now cost N8,500 while the Supa will cost 11,400 and the Supa Plus, 16,800.

The pay television claimed the price increase on the Nigerian macroeconomic conditions.

It said this includes increasing operating costs, currency depreciation, and high inflation.

However, Nigerians have expressed displeasure with the proposed price increases by MultiChoice Nigeria, prompting the FCCPC to summon the organisation’s management and threaten level sanction on the company.

This is coming a year after its major price preview, The ICIR reported.

ICPC seeks interim forfeiture of N1.37bn linked to El-Rufai’s government

Nurudeen AKEWUSHOLA
-
0
ICPC seeks interim forfeiture of N1.37bn linked to El-Rufai’s government

THE Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) has initiated legal proceedings for temporary forfeiture of N1.37 billion paid into a private account by the administration of former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai.

The commission approached a Federal High Court in Kaduna, seeking an interim forfeiture order on the fund, which it said was a proceed from a fraudulent light rail project that the administration failed to execute.

The ICPC had recovered the money into the commission’s recovery account domiciled with the Central Bank of Nigeria in the course of an ongoing investigation into the activities of the officials of the state government during the period.

The exparte motion filed by the commission before the court seeks the court’s nod for the commission to repatriate the fund to the Kaduna State Government.

The ICPC noted that the alleged diversion had deprived the people of Kaduna State of the benefits of the rail transportation system which the money was meant for.

The ICIR reports that the alleged discovery contradicts El-Rufai’s claim that not a dime was stolen under his administration. The former governor had also boasted recently when he appeared on Arise Television for an interview that he led a corruption-free government.

According to documents filed by the ICPC before the court, the Kaduna State Government, under El-Rufai, entered into a joint venture agreement in October 2016 with Indo Kaduna MRTS JV Nig. Ltd to develop a light rail transport system in the state.

At the time the contract was awarded, the company was not registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC).  Despite this, the state government proceeded to transfer over N11 billion into the company’s account at Sterling Bank through multiple transactions between December 23, 2016, and January 17, 2017.

The ICIR reports that awarding a contract to an unregistered company is a serious violation of Nigerian law.

Section 814 of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) 2020 mandates the registration of business names with the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC).

Operating a business without such registration is considered an offence under Section 821 of the same Act. Therefore, making payment into the account of such a company not registered by the CAC contravenes these provisions.

How the alleged fraud unfolded

The ICPC’s investigation revealed that rather than execute the rail project, Jitender Sachdeva, the president of Indo Kaduna MRTS JV Nig. Ltd., also the Indian representative of Skipper Nigeria Limited, allegedly instructed Sterling Bank to place the funds in a fixed deposit account.

Over time, the fixed deposit yielded an interest of N326.8 million, increasing the total sum under scrutiny to N11.37 billion.

The interest on the fixed deposit was said to have been diverted to different accounts of Skipper Nigeria Limited domiciled with Sterling Bank Nigeria Limited.

Further investigations showed that in 2019, N10 billion was refunded to the Kaduna State Government following concerns about the project’s execution.

However, the ICPC found that a balance of N1.04 billion remained unaccounted for. This remaining amount, according to the commission, was funnelled into the accounts of GTA Engineering Nigeria Ltd., a subsidiary of Skipper Nigeria Ltd., under “payment for feasibility study” for the light rail project.

The ICPC said there was no evidence that any such study was conducted.

Relying on the Proceeds of Crime (Recovery and Management) Act (2022), and the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud-Related Offences Act (2006) and Nigerian Constitution, ICPC asked the court to grant an interim forfeiture order on the funds.

The commission argued that the money represented illicit proceeds derived from a contract that was never executed and the fund should be forfeited to the Federal Government in public interest.

In addition to the forfeiture request, the ICPC also sought an order compelling the publication of the court proceedings in two national newspapers.

This would allow any interested parties such as the Kaduna State Government or companies involved in the transaction to contest the forfeiture request and provide justification for why the funds should not be permanently confiscated.

Controversial light rail project 

The Kaduna light rail project was initially presented as a major infrastructure initiative designed to modernise the state’s transport system and ease movement of residents.

However, the project was abandoned, despite the billions of naira allocated to it.

The legal battle over the N1.37 billion comes amid broader scrutiny of Kaduna State’s finances. The state is grappling with allegations of mismanagement under the former governor, particularly concerning massive debts allegedly incurred by his administration.

El-Rufai was accused by his successor, Uba Sani, of leaving Kaduna in a dire financial state with billions in liabilities.

Sani said he could not pay salaries and further lamented that El-Rufai left a “huge debt burden of $587m, N85bn, and 115 contractual liabilities” for his government.

El-Rufai’ defence 

Former members of the Kaduna State Executive Council (2015–2023) including El-Rufai, however, denied corruption allegations in the Light Rail Project and insisted that all payments made for the project followed due process.

They explained that the rail project was part of the El-Rufai administration’s infrastructural development agenda and was designed as a Public-Private Partnership (PPP), with an Indian firm, Skipper, securing the contract after a competitive bidding process.

The project was to be funded through a $600–700 million loan from the Indian EXIM Bank, with Kaduna State providing a 15 per cent equity contribution.

According to the statement they issued as their defence, the state government engaged a French consultancy firm, Systra, alongside GTA Engineering, to conduct a feasibility study, which cost $2.8 million (about N890 million). The officials said the study was necessary to secure the loan, and its findings led to an in-principle approval from the Indian EXIM Bank in 2017.

However, they claimed the project stalled after the Federal Government declined to provide a sovereign guarantee, which was a key requirement for securing the loan.

They further noted that the state had made a down payment of N12 billion as part of its equity contribution but later recalled the funds when it became clear that the project could not be executed. They argued that all refunds were made except for the N890 million feasibility study cost.

According to them, the feasibility study remains the property of the Kaduna State Government. They also said a forensic audit was conducted to verify the refunds.

They accused the ICPC of shifting its allegations “after initially claiming that N13 billion was missing.”

They further accused the commission of pressuring Sterling Bank to deposit N1.3 billion into an escrow account with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), which they said comprised the feasibility study cost and accrued interest. They posited that the forfeiture process initiated by the ICPC was unjustified and politically motivated.

Reacting to the ICPC’s claim that the funds were deposited into an unregistered company’s account, the former officials admitted there was a delay in incorporating the joint venture company but maintained that no laws were broken.

They insisted that the project was handled transparently and that the feasibility study and related documents remained state assets that could be used whenever the project is revived.

Obasa insists Meranda resigned, justifies security withdrawal

Mustapha USMAN
-
0
Obasa insists Meranda resigned, justifies security withdrawal

THE embattled Speaker Mudashiru Obasa has doubled down on his claim to the speakership of the Lagos State House of Assembly, insisting that Mojisola Meranda agreed to step down during a peace meeting with political leaders.

Obasa, who was removed in January, dismissed his ouster as invalid and declared that Meranda openly announced her resignation at a gathering attended by lawmakers and party leaders.

He said this when he appeared on Thursday’s edition of Channels Television’s Politics Today.

“There was a meeting that took place in Marina where we had in attendance all the party leaders and all the members (of Lagos Assembly) and openly Meranda herself made a statement that she had stepped down and she had resigned.” 

His remarks followed the withdrawal of security aides attached to Meranda by the Lagos State Police Command. 

Obasa justified the move, arguing that once she resigned, it was expected that her security details would be removed.

“So, when you resign from an office, you know,  the paraphernalia of the office will be taken away,” Obasa said.

However, the police later reversed the decision, announcing that Meranda’s security had been restored after what they described as a routine personnel audit.

“As I speak with you, the audit of the police personnel attached to Hon. Mojisola Meranda has been completed, and the police personnel attached to her from the Lagos State Police Command have been returned to her for her protection,” the Commissioner of Police in Lagos State, Moshood Jimoh, said during a briefing Thursday evening.

Obasa, who forcefully took over the Speaker’s office on Thursday with the backing of about four lawmakers and security operatives, continues to challenge his removal. 

His attempt to reconvene a session was widely boycotted, with 36 out of 40 lawmakers standing firm behind Meranda.

“I have never been removed. I am not against removal, but it must follow the rules of the House and the Constitution,” he said.

The ICIR reported that the majority of the legislators reaffirmed their support for Meranda, insisting that she is the legitimate Speaker.

The lawmakers condemned Obasa’s attempt to reclaim the position, describing it as a desperate move to override the will of the majority.

The chairman of the House Committee on Information, Security, and Strategy, Steven Ogundipe, dismissed Obasa’s claims..

Speaking with reporters, Ogundipe stated that they remained committed to ensuring that Obasa’s removal stands.

“He was not elected as Speaker by his constituency. We endured his master-slave leadership for nearly a decade. Now, we’ve had enough, and we’re not backing down,” he stated.

The crisis in the Lagos Assembly has been ongoing since Obasa’s dramatic removal by two-thirds of the 40-member legislative House over alleged misconduct and sundry offences on January 13. 

However, during a welcome rally at his residence in GRA, Ikeja, held on Saturday, January 25, Obasa declared that he remained the speaker despite his replacement by his deputy.

He later challenged his suspension in court.

Obasa filed a suit against the Assembly and the new speaker at the Lagos State High Court in Ikeja, arguing that his suspension was improper since the Assembly was in recess at the time.

Nigerian courts impose millions of naira as bail money, but where does it end up?

Bankole ABE
-
0
Nigerian courts impose millions of naira as bail money, but where does it end up?

MILLIONS of Naira are imposed on defendants in Nigeria by the law courts as part of bail conditions. However, people are always confused about where the bail money goes. In this explainer The ICIR EXPLAINER seeks to find out where this money ends up.

Recent court judgments granting bail in millions

On January 13, 2025, the Oyo State High Court, sitting in Ibadan, granted bail to ex-Queen Naomi Sikekunola, the owner of the Ibadan-based broadcasting station, Oriyomi Hamzat, and the principal of Islamic High School, Basorun, Abdulahib Fasasi, for their alleged involvement in the Ibadan stampede that resulted in the deaths of 35 children in December 2024.

The judge, K. B. Olawoyin, in his ruling on the bail application on Monday, January 13, admitted the suspects to bail with a bond of ₦10 million each and two sureties in like sums.

Similarly, on December 13, the Federal High Court in Abuja granted ₦500 million in bail to the immediate past Governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello.

The judge, Emeka Nwite, who presided over the court session, ordered that Bello must provide two sureties in like sum. He ruled that to secure his bail, Bello’s two sureties must provide proof of financial capability and own properties in Abuja. He added that the court would verify the properties’ title documents.

On Monday, December 9, human rights lawyer Dele Farotimi was also granted ₦50 million bail by an Ekiti State High Court.

According to a post by the African Action Congress (AAC) 2023 presidential candidate, Omoyele Sowore, on his X handle, Farotimi was granted bail of ₦50 million surety in the like sum with someone with landed property.

Similarly, the Federal High Court (FHC), sitting in Abuja on Friday, November 1, granted bail in the sum of₦10 million each to minor #EndBadGovernance protesters who were arraigned for participating in the August 2024 protest.

Where does the bail money go?

Nigeria’s justice system is often criticised for its inefficiencies, and the bail system is no exception. But what happens to the billions of naira paid in bail every year? The ICIR spoke to various lawyers.

According to Ridwan Oke, a human rights lawyer, “Bail money goes to the court.” 

According to him, if a person is released to a surety, the surety is only telling the court that when the suspect jumps bail, he is willing to pay the amount stated by the court.

“The amount is not due for payment until and unless the person jumps bail. When that happens, the money is paid to the registry of the court.”

This same line was towed by Moshood Ibrahim, a lawyer. According to him, the bail money is usually paid to the account of the court for safekeeping, as the money will later be returned after the whole case if the person didn’t jump bail.

However, in most cases, the money is not paid at all by litigants as it’s not a penalty but just a bond against the defendant so that he will not run away.

“So, when he runs away (jumps bail), the surety will be held accountable to look for him or pay the bail bond before the surety can be discharged,” he stated.

In his view, a lawyer, Victor Opatola, said when a defendant is mandated to bring a surety, and such surety makes a bail bond of, for example, ₦4 million, the ₦4 million is not paid in cash or transfer.

“The amount is what will be forfeited to the government if such surety fails to produce the defendant in court at any given time unless the surety later recuses himself or herself from the role of a surety,” he explained.

For a Kano-based lawyer, Hassan Idris, the bail money is a bond in case the accused person runs. “If the person runs, then you have to forfeit that money to the government.

“So, as a condition for his bail, the court will say, drop this amount as a condition for the bail,” he added.

According to lawyers, the primary distinction between bail and fine lies in their purpose. Photo by Tima Miroshnichenko via Pexel.com
According to lawyers, the primary distinction between bail and fine lies in their purpose. Photo by Tima Miroshnichenko via Pexel.com

Difference between bail and fine

According to lawyers, the primary distinction between bail and fine lies in their purpose.

A fine is a monetary punishment imposed by the court for an offence or conviction, whereas bail is a system designed to ensure a defendant appears in court to defend their case.

Ibrahim explained that when a fine is imposed by a court, the money is paid into the federal or state government account, depending on the court.

For instance, if it’s a state court, the money is paid into an account of the state Internal Revenue Service. If it’s a federal court, the money is paid into the federal government account.

“The money is therefore owned by the government, and they decide how to utilise it,” Ibrahim stated. He emphasised that a fine, as a monetary punishment, must be paid when pronounced, unless the judgment or ruling is appealed against.

“In a criminal matter, for example, if you fail to pay the fine imposed by the court, you will remain in prison until it is paid or set aside by a superior court,” Ibrahim explained.

Victor Opatola corroborated this view, stating that when a court imposes a fine on an individual, the money is paid into a designated court bank account. This account is later declared as revenue to the Federal Government if it is  Federal High Court, Court of Appeal, or Supreme Court.

“For the State High Court, Customary Court, Magistrate Court, and area court, the money goes into a designated court account, which is later declared as revenue to the State Government,” Opatola clarified.

Idowu Olukade, another lawyer, noted that when someone pays a fine, the money goes into the government coffers and contributes to part of the revenue generated by the judiciary.

Alleged fraud: Court grants former NHIS boss, Usman Yusuf, N5m bail

Bankole ABE
-
0
Alleged fraud: Court grants former NHIS boss, Usman Yusuf, N5m bail

A FEDERAL Capital Territory (FCT) High Court in Abuja has granted ₦5 million bail with two sureties to the former Executive Secretary of the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS), Usman Yusuf, a professor facing corruption allegations.

The trial judge, Chinyere Nwecheonwu, gave the ruling on Thursday, February 27.

Multiple charges were filed against the accused by the prosecutor – the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

The ICIR reported that Yusuf was arraigned on five counts of corruption, including embezzlement and abuse of office, on Thursday, January 30.

Operatives of the EFCC stormed his Abuja home at about 4:30 p.m. and picked him up for alleged fraud, among other infractions.

His arrest followed an ongoing investigation into allegations that he inflated the NHIA’s ICT budget from N4.975 billion to N8.7 billion and approved payments beyond his approval limit.

Following his arraignment, Yusuf was remanded in the Kuje Correctional Facility while awaiting the court’s ruling on his bail application, which was initially adjourned until February 27.

Arguing the bail, the defence counsel, O.I. Habeeb, a senior advocate, appealed for Yusuf’s release, saying the alleged offences brought against him were bailable.

On his part, the prosecution counsel, Francis Usani, informed the court that Yusuf did not comply with the terms of an administrative bail granted to him by the EFCC to report bi-weekly to its office. 

He added that the defendant had bragged about his political connections and would abscond from the trial if granted bail. 

Usani said it took the respondent’s (EFCC) officers’ discreet surveillance and high-powered intelligence to apprehend the defendant and bring him to court.

The judge, Nwecheonwu, while ruling on the bail application, declared that the two sureties must furnish the court with proof of means of livelihood and valid identification.

“The sureties must also provide valid means of identification, and their addresses are to be verified by the prosecution or court staff,” the judge stated.

Although the case was initially adjourned until April 3, the date was vacated due to the Sallah break, which falls within that period.

Despite the allegations against him, Yusuf has claimed his arrest was politically motivated.

He accused the government of using security agencies to silence him over his views on national issues.

In a statement, Yusuf described his subsequent arrest by EFCC operatives as a result of a speech at a youth summit in Bauchi, where he criticised the Tinubu administration’s economic policies and alleged marginalisation of Northern Nigeria.

He claimed that security agents trailed him after the summit and took him from his home without warning.

 He argued that the EFCC aimed to dehumanise him and tarnish his reputation.

Yusuf, a professor of hematology/oncology and bone marrow transplant, is also being held for financial mismanagement and abuse of office. He allegedly used his position for personal gains, approving contracts without following due process and awarding contracts to firms that lacked the competence to execute projects.

He was appointed as the head of the NHIS (new NHIA) on July 29, 2016. His tenure at the agency was plagued by controversies.

He had several confrontations with the former minister of health, Isaac Adewole, a professor, and the chairperson of the board of the former NHIS, Enyantu Ifenne, who jointly accused him of high-handedness, mismanagement, corruption, and other infractions.

Several petitions were submitted to former President Muhammadu Buhari and the Federal Ministry of Health, alleging misconduct and fraudulent practices against him.

Buhari eventually sacked him in July 2019, ten months after the agency’s governing council suspended him from office.

Lagos Assembly in turmoil as lawmakers reject Obasa’s re-emergence as Speaker

Mustapha USMAN
-
0
Lagos Assembly in turmoil as lawmakers reject Obasa’s re-emergence as Speaker

THE crisis rocking the Lagos State House of Assembly deepened on Thursday, February 27, as majority of the lawmakers firmly rejected Mudashiru Obasa’s claim that he remained the Speaker of the House. 

The legislators reaffirmed their support for Mojisola Meranda, insisting that she is the legitimate Speaker.

Obasa, who was removed on February 17, made a dramatic return to the Assembly complex on Thursday, accompanied by security operatives and two lawmakers – Ayinde Akinsanya (Mushin Constituency I) and Noheem Adams (Mushin Constituency II) – according to Punch newspaper. 

Despite his removal, he proceeded to preside over a plenary session with just four lawmakers present, with reports indicating that security operatives forcibly opened the chamber doors to grant him and his supporters access.

Meanwhile, over 26 lawmakers boycotted the session and gathered at the Assembly’s garden to reaffirm their confidence in Meranda’s leadership. The lawmakers condemned Obasa’s attempt to reclaim the position, describing it as a desperate move to override the will of the majority.

Chairman of the House Committee on Information, Security, and Strategy, Steven Ogundipe, dismissed Obasa’s claims and decried his situation.

Speaking with reporters, Ogundipe stated that they remained committed to ensuring that Obasa’s removal stands.

“He was not elected as Speaker by his constituency. We endured his master-slave leadership for nearly a decade. Now, we’ve had enough, and we’re not backing down,” he stated.

Amid the standoff, Obasa told the press that he had never been impeached, stating the impeachment was undemocratic.

“I have told you repeatedly, I have never been removed, there’s nothing like impeachment, I don’t know what you’re saying. Removing, impeachment or whatever was undemocratic and unconstitutional because to have achieved that you must follow due process,” he said.

Recall that on January 13, Obasa, who had served for nearly 10 years as the state speaker, from June 2015 to January 2025, was suspended by more than two-thirds of the 40-member legislative House over alleged misconduct and sundry offences.

However, during a welcome rally at his residence in GRA, Ikeja, held on Saturday, January 25, Obasa declared that he remained the speaker despite his replacement by his deputy.

He later challenged his suspension in court.

Obasa filed a suit against the Assembly and the new speaker at the Lagos State High Court in Ikeja, arguing that his suspension was improper since the Assembly was in recess at the time.

 

Unity bank financial health in question with over N62bn loss

Ehime ALEX
-
0
Unity bank financial health in question with over N62bn loss

THE financial health status of Unity bank Plc has raised some unanswered questions about the risk exposure of shareholders’ and depositors’ funds as it posted an N62.64 billion loss in its 2023 financial year, The ICIR findings revealed.

The bank reported the loss in its 2023 annual report for the year ended December 31, 2023, released to the investing public on Tuesday, February 25.

A cursory look at the report shows Unity bank reported negative performance across its profit lines.

It posted a net operating loss of N28.59 billion in 2023 relative to a net operating profit of N28.47 billion in 2022.

Its operating expenses widened to N33.75 billion from N27.09 billion, while its loss before tax to N62.64 billion from a profit before tax of N1.101 billion.

Its loss for the year settled at N62.64 billion in the review year from a N941.38 million profit in 2022.

A further analysis of the Unity bank’s annual report showed it also reported a negative financial position, widening its debt obligation.

Its total liabilities widened to N799.46 billion, exceeding its total assets of N472.58 billion, resulting in a negative equity of N326.87 billion.

Compared to 2022, its debt obligation increased by 18.89 per cent from N274.95 in 2022 as total liabilities of N785.09 billion outdo its total assets of N510.14 billion.

The ICIR earlier did an analysis on the debt trend of Unity Bank which now shows that it had been for more than five years.

Its five-year summary shows that in 2019, Unity Bank reported a negative equity of N284.37 billion as total liabilities of N495.18 billion exceeded its assets.

In 2020, it posted a debt obligation of N278.86 billion as liabilities of N571.91 billion surpassed its assets.

In 2021, it reported a negative equity of N275.41 billion after its liabilities of N767.43 billion exceeded its assets.

Unity Bank has also been reporting operating losses in the past five years.

In 2019, it posted an operating loss of N20.71 billion. It widened to N19.59 billion in 2020, N23.24 billion in 2021, N27.09 billion in 2022, and N33.75 billion in 2023.

A financial analyst had told The ICIR that the negative worth of Unity Bank was a worry for many of its investors.

Its debt liabilities and poor financial performance have continued to create concern for investors who see this level of asset deficiency as worrisome.

Some analysts believe that the bank’s negative cash flow from investing activities has been a challenge, raising warning signs and pointing in the direction of management’s inefficiency in using the bank’s assets to generate revenue.

These signs of financial distress have raised fear that the bank might default on its obligations to creditors and be headed for bankruptcy.

In August 2024, following Unity Bank’s unhealthy financial position, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) granted a lifeline to the bank to merge with Providus Bank Limited.

The apex bank anchored its action with the provisions of Section 42 (2) of the CBN Act, 2007, and said the merger was contingent upon its financial support, which was essential for the financial health and operational stability of the post-merger of the two banks.

The scheme of the merger, which has yet to be revealed to the investing public, analysts believe should be examined to understand the details.

A financial expert and capital market operator told The ICIR that shareholders of Unity Bank were pleased with the merger but expect a seamless transformative process that would be beneficial to all parties.

Another analyst who commented unanimously on Unity Banks’ financial mess said, “You can see that they have foreign currency liabilities more than foreign currency assets, so the value of those liabilities will increase more than the assets due to the devaluation of the naira.”

Shareholders said they are hoping that the bank’s merger with Providus Bank would reverse the trend of debts and poor financial performances.

As of December 31, 2023, Unity Bank’s shareholding structure reveals no shareholder held more than five per cent of the bank’s shares.

None of its board of directors except Halima Babangida held 0.33 per cent or 38,191,947 unit shares.

Its managing director/chief executive officer, Tomi Somefun, holds no single share in the bank having held the role since August 12, 2015, as the first woman appointed to that position in the history of the bank.

As of the end of the 2023 financial year, the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) has the largest substantial stake with 34.22 per cent or 4,000,130,848 units of the shares of the bank.

Amid the Unity Bank’s financial mess, shareholders anticipate that the merger deal to lead to better performance for the bank.

“To us as shareholders, it is our earnest prayer that the merger talk between the two banks will be fruitful.  It is better for us as shareholders than to see the bank go into liquidation or an unceremonious takeover by CBN.

“We look forward to much better merger talk that will remain promising, fruitful, and beneficial to us minority shareholders,” the national president of New Dimension Shareholders, Patrick Ajudua, said.

I’ve resumed office as Speaker, says Obasa as he storms Lagos Assembly

Mustapha USMAN
-
1
I’ve resumed office as Speaker, says Obasa as he storms Lagos Assembly

THE suspended speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly, Mudashiru Obasa, has declared that he had resumed office as the leader of the parliament.

Obasa made the declaration on Thursday, February 27, after making his way back into the Assembly complex for the first time since his removal on January 13, according to Punch Newspaper.

The embattled lawmaker arrived at the complex around noon, flanked by security officials, and proceeded straight to the Speaker’s office.

“I’ve resumed, and I remain the Speaker of the Assembly,” Obasa was quoted to have said.

Following his return, Segun Ajiboye, Chief Press Secretary to Mojisola Meranda, Deputy Speaker who took over when Obasa was removed, confirmed the development to Punch, alleging that Obasa and his team had forcefully entered the office.

Obasa’s supporters also gathered at the Assembly complex, holding placards and chanting songs in his favour, with viral videos capturing the scene at the entrance of the legislative building.

This development was on the heels of the withdrawal of security details attached to Speaker Meranda earlier in the day. 

According to reports, police officers assigned to her were no longer on duty as of Thursday morning. Reports further indicated that Obasa’s security details were reinstated. 

Meranda’s fate now hangs in the balance amid the unfolding political power struggle in the Lagos Assembly.

Following his removal, Meranda made history as the first female speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly after a unanimous election.

The Lagos State House of Assembly has been adjourned indefinitely since her ascension to the speakership.

The ICIR reported on January 13 that Obasa, who had served for nearly 10 years as the state speaker, from June 2015 to January 2025, was suspended by more than two-thirds of the 40-member legislative House over alleged misconduct and sundry offences.

However, during a welcome rally at his residence in GRA, Ikeja, held on Saturday, January 25, Obasa declared that he remained the speaker despite his replacement by his deputy.

He later challenged his suspension in court.

Obasa filed a suit against the Assembly and the new speaker at the Lagos State High Court in Ikeja, arguing that his suspension was improper since the Assembly was in recess at the time.

Attempts to confirm the withdrawal of security details attached to the Lagos speaker were not successful, as the Lagos Police Command spokesperson, Benjamin Hundeyin, did not pick up his call nor respond to messages sent to his phone by The ICIR.

Lagos Assembly: Meranda’s security details reportedly withdrawn amid speakership crisis

Bankole ABE
-
0
Lagos Assembly: Meranda’s security details reportedly withdrawn amid speakership crisis

SECURITY details attached to the Speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly, Mojisola Meranda, have reportedly been withdrawn.

According to reports, the security details attached to the speaker, including police officers, were withdrawn as of the morning of Thursday, February 27.

According to PUNCH, a source close to the speaker confirmed that Meranda had been without her security.

Meanwhile, there are reports that the former speaker, Mudashiru Obasa, who was removed on January 13, is set to return.

Obasa’s security details have reportedly been restored.

Meranda served as Deputy Speaker under Obasa before his removal.

Following his removal, Meranda made history as the first female speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly after a unanimous election.

Although she hasn’t officially stepped down, her tenure may be ending soon, as some All Progressives Congress (APC) leaders reportedly decided her fate over the weekend amidst the House of Assembly imbroglio.

In attendance at the meeting were notable figures such as former chairman of the APC, Bisi Akande, former governor of Ogun State, Olusegun Osoba, and former Lagos State Commissioner for Justice, Muiz Banire, alongside members of the Governance Advisory Council (GAC) and some members of the state House of Assembly.

The Lagos State House of Assembly has been adjourned indefinitely since Meranda’s ascension to the speakership.

The ICIR reported on January 13 that Obasa, who had served for nearly 10 years as the state speaker, from June 2015 to January 2025, was suspended by more than two-thirds of the 40-member legislative House over alleged misconduct and sundry offences.

However, during a welcome rally at his residence in GRA, Ikeja, held on Saturday, January 25, Obasa declared that he remained the speaker despite his replacement by his deputy.

He later challenged his suspension in court.

Obasa filed a suit against the Assembly and the new speaker at the Lagos State High Court in Ikeja, arguing that his suspension was improper since the Assembly was in recess at the time.

Attempts to confirm the withdrawal of security details attached to the Lagos speaker were not successful, as the Lagos Police Command spokesperson, Benjamin Hundeyin, did not pick up his call nor respond to messages sent to his phone by The ICIR.

1...351352353...3,440Page 352 of 3,440