A Butcher’s Judgement…Typically British, By Louis Odion, FNGE

A poor reading of the verdict by the London court slapping a historic penalty of $9b on Nigeria last Friday is viewing it as an affirmation of the law of contract. No, it is not. Rather, it is the orchestration of international politics and neo-colonial power-play at their vilest.

Indeed, let no one be deceived that objectivity is assured in the interpretation of international law by even angels, especially when the interests of multinationals are in dispute concurrently across jurisdictions. In such circumstance, pure nationalistic instinct is likely to trump fidelity to reason or the universal principle of fairplay.

For ages, the doctrine of sovereign immunity was, for instance, often invoked by powerful nations of the West to commit blue murder anywhere across the universe. But good students of history will recall that attempt later in the 70s by newly independent African nations to draw on the same principle ended ghastly. In the international court, it now became fairly convenient to invert Lord Denning’s new theory of “market place” to hand Nigeria the short end of the stick in the landmark case of Swiss-owned Trendtex versus Central Bank of Nigeria.

A similar – if not identical – conflict is what is being stoked invariably by P&ID vs Nigeria. In choosing not to view things from the prism of the U.S. court (which can justifiably be seen as unencumbered by any possible nationalist bias), there is, therefore, a compelling reason to see the London court’s Justice Christopher Butcher as bending the arch of justice to favour a home company, with a covetous eye on Nigeria’s substantial assets domiciled within the U.K.

Given the severity of the penalty awarded, it was as if Justice Butcher opted to literally act out his fearsome name by dealing savage knife blows on Nigeria’s jugular.

What then appears ludicrous back at home has been the attempt by some cynical elements to scrounge some mileage from this sad development for their petty partisan politics. Only genuine patriots would have seen the development first as more of a huge slap on the nation by foreign interests, even if our leadership failing to an extent would still be admitted.

Note, the local airwaves had barely crackled by midday with the highlight of the London judgement when the social media was drowned with the hysteria of PDP agents against President Muhammadu Buhari as the sole culprit. They claimed the fine resulted essentially from his malicious discontinuation of another of Jonathan’s visionary projects.

But when more media insights began to pour in, that spin had to be modified ingeniously. The following day, Jonathan’s salespeople decided to sweep the entire blame to the gravesides of both ex-President Umar Yar’Adua and Rilwan Lukman now incapable of defending themselves.

Now, let us concede that Jonathan was completely locked out of Aso Rock while the sneaky contract was being facilitated by “the cabal” as the then ailing president was gasping for oxygen and Lukman (the oil minister) seemed too self-absolved in hauteur to submit the details of the contract agreement to the scrutiny of Michael Aondoakaa commonly regarded then as essentially a comical Attorney General.

But nothing can absolve Jonathan of liability for the non-consummation of the contract beginning from February 2010 as acting President and three months later as the substantive following Yar’Adua’s demise. P&ID began to complain more than a year later. By the time the company eventually resorted to arbitration in 2012, Jonathan’s much beloved Diezani Allison-Madukwe had of course become entrenched as almighty oil empress.

From what we now know, she obviously was too preoccupied with either signing Nigeria’s patrimony away to her younger “admirers” like now fugitive Kola Aluko in sweetheart oil-swap deals or immersing herself in the sheer effulgence of her mammoth jewelry collection to have mustered the presence of mind to grasp the contract idea, much less contemplate what benefits might accrue therefrom to the nation.

So, it bears restating that national interest was least served by those who committed Nigeria into such contract with improbable terms to begin with. That rape of Nigeria was not helped by Jonathan’s subsequent sloppiness. Today’s sorry outcome is traceable to yesterday’s tardiness.

But by far more atrocious is the taste of British jurisprudence the nation was offered brusquely by the London court last Friday. While the dereliction of Nigerian officials is regrettable, nothing can however explain the juridical logic summoned by Justice Butcher to enter a judgment that negates morality and mocks all the principles of natural justice.

Note, to corner this windfall, nothing in the convoluted narration made in British and American courts in the last seven years suggested that P&ID engaged in much toil between 2010 and 2012 other than its officials carrying briefcases around Abuja and meeting with Nigerian officials. It never as much as cracked any soil in Calabar to erect the envisaged gas processing plant (as expressly stated in the contract pact), to which Nigeria was expected to lay hundreds of kilometre of pipes.

To generations of blacks still stuck today with the trauma inflicted by the colonial disruption of African civilizations, Justice Butcher’s latest travesty must be a sad reminder of the culture of plunder and predation for which imperial Britain was quite exceptional even among fellow European exploiters in history.

Were the verdict to be enforced to the letter, it should qualify as the single most punitively prohibitive fine ever imposed in history on a sovereign nation relative to her fiscal strength. The $9b sanction represents a whopping twenty percent the nation’s present foreign reserve and a third of the current national budget.

At the arbitration court in London in 2012, P&ID began by filing claims of $40m expenses and proceeded to add “lost earnings” in the twenty-year tenure of the agreement based on impossible operation benchmarks of more than ninety percent capacity utilization and a patently unrealistic expectation that oil never fell below $100 per barrel.

As if that was not already shylock enough, the judge opted to play Father Xmas by granting the petitioner’s additional prayer that compound interest be paid on the fine imposed on Nigeria. That explains how P&ID’s preliminary claim of $40m in 2012 mushroomed exponentially to the $9b awarded last week.

No sane person will accept such sham without a fight in the first place. Buhari could, therefore, be said to have acted most patriotically by refusing the initial hefty $800m payout proposed by a departing Jonathan in May 2015. In any case, with Nigeria technically insolvent by the time PMB was taking over having lapsed into a recession described as the worst in a generation, there practically was no way Nigeria could have paid, assuming the new administration was even willing.

Expectedly, the government soon mounted a vigorous counter-attack by filing appeal in the U.K and the U.S. against the claimant. Whereas the U.S. upheld Nigeria’s objection to the enforcement of the claim by pleading sovereignty, the British court chose to dismiss the plea as “frivolous”.

What makes the Butcher’s verdict all the more curious is a subsequent media expose suggesting a determined conspiracy to raid Nigeria’s exchequer. Ahead of the judgment, a whopping twenty-five percent stake of P&ID was snapped up in a strange deal by a hedge fund manager known as VR Capital Group in March. Since the Friday judgment, the sidetalk in global financial circles is that the hedge fund manager had all along been pulling levers of influence in the U.K. and the U.S. to make Nigeria either settle or be willing to forfeit her assets. So, it would then seem the vultures had long been hovering overhead as the nation began to wallow in the British dock.

Now the big question: did VR Capital Group read Justice Butcher’s mind ahead? Or, could his judgment be mere coincidence?

Developments like this will only reinforce long-held suspicion that the British jurisprudence is half of the times tainted and can, therefore, not be trusted to avail us justice on own accord without us standing up to the system, nor can its integrity be vouched for to protect our interest behind our back.

For instance, a survey conducted sometime ago by an anti-corruption group, Transparency International’s Global Corruption Barometer, came with the damning report that one in five people using the courts in the U.K. said they or a household member paid a bribe for favourable outcome, even as one quarter of people in the country believe the courts and judiciary are corrupt. But the supreme irony is that British leaders or officials are often the first to label us as the most dubious or “fantastically corrupt”. The enduring hypocrisy in such condescension is that their London is renowned worldwide as one of the most receptive of money stolen from relatively much poorer Third World countries and the ultimate haven of shell companies used to launder dirty cash from dingy provenance across the universe. According to Britain’s own National Crime Agency, over £100b is laundered through U.K’s financial system annually.

So, who does not know that the one who receives the stolen ware on the ground is as culpable as the one who initiated the pilfering from the rafter?

A decade ago, I had a rather funny encounter with a British “expert”. I had been invited by a Nigerian-born promoter of a start-up to sit in during a presentation by the visiting consultant. Because the service concern would be prospecting in the international market beginning with Europe, it was necessary that an high-profile office be opened in London. So, the guy’s brief was to design an international marketing roadmap.

To me, the visiting specialist had sounded authoritatively smooth with his power-point presentation with a laptop inside the dimly-lit penthouse office until he veered into the media aspect. Not knowing my media background, his proposal here was nothing short of a crafty splitting of what ordinarily should be a single activity into assorted briefs for the sole purpose of escalating the costs to justify about a million British Pounds he was demanding as fee for the London outing.

Once the presentation was over and I was invited to comment, I took out a hammer, went straight to the media section and mercilessly knocked down the castle of fraud our friend had meticulously erected. Perhaps out of over-excitement over the dramatic turn of event, our host abruptly got up and asked to be excused to use the bathroom.

In-between the moments he was away, our British friend moved over and, without shame, attempted to literally smolder me with all the charms he could conjure, while his two other white “accomplices” pretended to be conversing on the couch nearby. From complimenting me with “Oh, your baritone voice is so commanding” to praising the “fantastic embroidery” of the kaftan I wore, he let be known to me that he was open to a “one-on-one” with me thereafter if I “cooperated” when the host returned.

I disappointed him during the remainder of the sesssion. Against his high expectation, our host, obviously now seeing things differently, did the smartest thing by aborting the signing off on the deal.

Needless to say that the trio didn’t as much as utter a word to me while we flew back in a private jet to Lagos that day, nor offered me a handshake while departing at the local airport.

Till date, what I still cannot understand is how they expected me to betray a man, my own countryman, so trusting to have invited me to join the session in the first place. And the lesson I learnt is never to assume a white guy will not try to fleece me given the opportunity even while customarily affecting superior airs.

Reacting to the London judgement, the Nigerian government has pledged to not only appeal but also vigorously defend national interest to any length possible. It is the most sensible thing to do.

[easy-social-share buttons="facebook,twitter" counters=0 style="button"]

The Stark Reality APC Must Face About Atiku Challenge, By Louis Odion, FNGE

Intifada is Arab word for uprising. It perhaps best describes the emerging battle formation in Nigeria’s expanding coliseum ahead of the 2019 polls.

Indeed, today, only the utterly naive will still need an interpreter to decode the dire signal from the nation’s fraternity of restive generals.

Other than in the heyday of coup in the 70s and 80s, never have we seen a gang-up of old soldiers this massive, with the sole objective to wrestle down a comrade (President Muhammadu Buhari) from whom they now appear irreconcilably estranged.

While they would readily cite “national interest” as their only motivation, not a few Nigerians will contend that the generals’ uprising is actually fueled either by bruised egos or loss of class privileges and business concessions.

So, increasingly, the nation is left to witness the adaptation of martial tactics by vengeful old warriors for a purely civil outcome in what may signal the terminal battle within the oldest cadre of the once powerful military oligarchy.
The insurgency intensified at the weekend with former President Olusegun Obasanjo opening heavy artillery fire from faraway Indonesia on Buhari. In what would have been considered high treason under military rule, he motioned the international audience to await a new leader that would sign a pending treaty to ease global trade, not PMB whose “hands are too weak.”

It was a daring follow-up to a declaration a few days earlier in Abeokuta in which OBJ dramatically recanted his old political fatwa on Atiku Abubakar, proclaiming him “President-to-be”.

The fireworks would appear to have been ignited the previous weekend with the electoral abracadabra in the Garden City bearing the military hallmark: numbing stealth. Like the ominous owl, Aliyu Gusau suddenly materialized at the crunch hour during the PDP convention. He it was, according to reports, that whispered a coded message to the influencers of the night to tilt the scale so overwhelmingly in Atiku’s favor, so much that the votes garnered by the second runner-up was only half of his.

Dollar was no problem.

Dazed by the forceful hijack of what he probably had considered his show all along, Governor Nyesom Wike of Rivers States, the generous host who barely concealed an affinity for Aminu Tambuwal, was soon sighted retreating hastily to his lair before the votes were counted. The young turk from Obi Akpor must have realized by now that battle-hardened generals tackle differently.

Expectedly, coy Maradona of Minna is ever too timid to openly show his hands. But wherever Gusau goes, we can see his distinct shadow. Ditto the white-bearded Abdulasalami Abubakar.

Only the uninitiated would remain unmoved when, suddenly, no word is heard anymore from spectral Theophilus Danjuma, the one with a dark scowl.

While the old generals gear up for the final supremacy battle ahead, there can be no dispute that Atiku, otherwise considered a “lesser” retired officer on account of being of a paramilitary progeny, is the ultimate beneficiary. How pleasurable it must be for the man from Jada to sit back and watch his ancient foes now joining the battle to advance his interest.

Apart from the sigh of relief from OBJ suddenly agreeing to make “peace” with him, Atiku must also feel a sense of closure on IBB who could perhaps be classified as the first to teach him the true meaning of political adversity some twenty-five years ago.

Who would imagine that the man who in 1992 had mindlessly axed his political hero and mentor, Shehu Yar’Adua, when the latter appeared set to clinch the presidency on SDP platform at the height of the phony transition programme conducted by the shifty general, would today voluntarily be in his corner?

Taken together, the generals’ onslaught against PMB could only mean one thing: a boost to the Atiku momentum.
In squaring off to the new challenge, therefore, it will be fool-hardy for Buhari not to re-appraise his strategy and frame a new message that truly connects with the populace with a view to restoking flagging hope. If muck-raking or scare-mongering becomes the only agenda – as it increasingly appears, the cacophony so generated is likely to completely drown whatever positive message there might be.

Indeed, there is a growing drudgery – if not danger – of a one-plot narrative. There are few things commonsense teaches. When a vinyl is overplayed, for instance, no one needs any reminding of the inevitability of a crack, mangling the melody intended into a grating offence to the eardrums. The strategy of recycling old tales of corruption against Atiku may soon become counter-productive, especially as a seemingly resurgent PDP begins to catalogue APC’s own contradictions in the otherwise noble war against graft.

True, few ghosts are unlikely to go away in the times ahead, notably the herdsmen violence and lopsidedness in PMB’s appointments.

But it will be most unfair to say Buhari failed completely. What then has been a big puzzle is why Buhari and his people seem incapable of crowing more now about their own miracles. People readily connect with the issue of bread and butter.

While it is true hunger remains, it bears restating that the situation could have been worse today without a more scrupulous management of the nation’s earnings since 2015. And if the economy indicators now suggest the nation has navigated its way out of perhaps the worst recession in more than three decades inflicted undoubtedly by the profligacy of the preceding PDP administration, how come the people are not being reminded the more that that redemption is largely due, not to a sudden oil windfall, but Buhari’s frugality and insistence on value for money?

Again, while Boko Haram may not have fizzled out completely, let no one however distort the memory. Unlike 2015 when the murderous sect controlled no fewer than 23 councils across states in the North-East and would hoist their sepulchral flag audaciously, a more tenacious commander-in-chief has since inspired the military to recover most of the lost grounds, thereby restoring national pride.

These are verifiable facts.

But for Buhari, beyond the immediate challenge of mobilizing resources to tell his own success story more forcefully in the times ahead, what would also seem prudent now is to summon the humility to undertake a self-evaluation of sorts, resisting the temptation of complacency and being carried away by the glory of past electoral exploits.

True, over the years, the myth of a captive 12 million following in the north has been woven around Buhari on account of his showing in the 2003 and 2011 polls. (As for 2007, so mindless was the rigging inflicted by PDP under OBJ’s watch that Buhari’s ANPP was “allocated” 6,607,419 against his fellow Katsina townsman Umar Yar’Adua’ unbelievable 24,784,227.)

But let it not be forgotten that a partnership with the dominant progressive forces in the South-West was still needed to finally muster the knockout punch that PMB had so craved direly over a decade to tilt the pendulum decisively in his favor in 2015.

Against this backcloth, a counter-factual argument could then be made that the 12m-man myth of 2003 and 2011 is in the context of a Muslim Buhari of the north vying against Christian contender from the south. Today, with Atiku hailing from the North-East, the North-Central largely hurting from the herdsmen crisis, there is no denying that the fabled 12-million-man hypothesis is about to face the stiffest test yet. The PDP optimists are, therefore, wont to speculate on an entirely different outcome in 2019 in the context of Buhari running against a fellow Fulani and Muslim of Atiku’s clout.

Of course, PMB’s base remains largely the Talakawa and other courtesans of the underclass in the fanatic worship of the ascetic spirit he easily evokes, with the feudal class and other elites likely to cast their lot for luxuriant Atiku out of enlighten

[easy-social-share buttons="facebook,twitter" counters=0 style="button"]