By Engr Pascal Ubani

Amid intermittent travel advisories by Western diplomatic missions in the country to their citizens on visiting parts of the country because of the nationwide security challenges, the British High Commissioner to Nigeria, Richard Montgomery, on Tuesday, August 21, 2024, led a delegation to the $800m Aba Independent Power Project built by the Geometric Power group. Though the news media have not provided the reason for the visit, it is likely to be about Aba’s growing stature as an industrial and economic centre following the commissioning of the 188megawatt Geometric Power Plant in Aba and the embedded distribution firm, the Aba Power Electric Company. The commissioning was on Monday, February 26, 2024, by Vice President Kashim Shettima who stood in for President Bola Tinubu.

It is axiomatic that media reports about insecurity in the Southeast, especially Abia State in recent times, are sexed up, as former American President Bill Clinton would famously put it. Of course, no one can dispute that five soldiers were murdered last May 30 in Aba by non-state actors. In the same manner, none can dispute that two policemen on legitimate duties were later killed in the same city. However, it has not been gloom and doom, at least on the economic front. Multinationals are thriving in Aba, but no one talks about them because, as the saying goes, bad news travels fast and stays long.

Geometric Power is reviving hope in Aba’s economy, thanks to the considerable support it has been receiving from the Abia State government under Dr Alex Otti’s leadership. There are, however, reports that uninterrupted power supply in Aba has not yet been attained on account of inadequate natural gas supply to the Geometric Power Plant which built a 27-kilometre gas pipeline from Owaza in Ukwa West Local Government Area to the Osisioma Industrial Estate in Aba where Geometric Power is located. According to authoritative reports published in Businessday and other respectable media in the last 10 years, Geometric Power, founded by erstwhile Power Minister Bart Nnaji, signed the gas supply agreement with the Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC) for the supply of 40 million standard cubic feet of gas (MSCF) for its four turbines built by General Electric (GE) of the United States, the world’s oldest and greatest electricity equipment manufacturing firm.

Aba Power, a conglomerate of Geometric Power Group

Each GE turbine used by Geometric Power can generate 47MW, and each needs 10MSCF to fire. Three have been installed, meaning that 30MSCF is required for their operation. Aba and its environs currently do not need more than 100MW, suggesting that Geometric Power does not require more than 20MSCF to fire two turbines to produce 94MW. Yet, it signed in 2009 for 40MSCF. Why? According to Dike Ejike, a mechanical engineer who is an Abuja-based business and engineering consultant, the third turbine is meant to assist the rest of the country by delivering some 47MW to the national grid. A fourth turbine will be installed when the need arises, bringing the total natural gas requirement for the 188MW to 40MSCF.

 Shell, like some other international oil companies (IOCs) such as ExxonMobil, has abandoned onshore and shallow offshore operations in the country due to oil theft, attacks by militants, and community issues. In other words, Shell which was operating Oil Mining Licences (OMLs) 11 and 17 where gas is supplied to the 188MW Geometric Power Plant, has since sold its interests to local operators. The OML 17 local operator is, unfortunately, having challenges affecting its ability to provide gas to the electricity-generating plant.

Engr Ejike has disclosed that the operator has not been able to provide more than 10MSCF to Geometric Power. The consequence is that Geometric Power has been augmenting the electricity it has been generating and supplying to the Aba people by importing power from the Niger Delta Power Holding Company (NDPHC) so as not to disappoint its customers. According to Ejike, the NDPHC presents a bill of at least two billion naira (N2b) every month to the plant!

There is, however, light at the end of the tunnel for the Aba people and their businesses. Cliff Eneh, a former senior manager with the defunct National Electric Power Authority (NEPA) who used to work with the Texas Power and Light in Dallas in the United States, has explained that both the Federal Government and the Abia State government are working tirelessly and closely with Geometric Power and the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) to get a reputable multinational firm to provide sufficient gas to the Geometric Power Plant before the end of September. Once the gas supply issue which, is resolved, Aba will finally achieve the status of the first city in the nation to have constant, quality, and affordable electricity.

This attainment will have significant socioeconomic implications for the whole of Nigeria. The British government, through such Nigeria’s development partners as the Department for International Development (DFID), has been working hard over the years for the resolution of Nigeria’s perennial power problem. It is, therefore, understandable why His Excellency, High Commissioner Montgomery, the British High Commission to Nigeria, led a delegation to the Geometric Power group on Tuesday, August 21. There is still hope for Nigeria. Geometric Power and Abia State are showing the light, and the Nigerian people will ultimately find the way.

Engr Ubani, an indigene of Abia State, sent in this article from Lagos.

Like, comment and share. Gmtnewsng

By Olisemeka Sunday Obi

As the 1st of August 2024 looms, signaling the date for a planned nationwide protest, I find it prudent to declare my stance: neither I nor my family plan to participate. My rationale is simple—I did not vote for this government. Disappointment in Tinubu’s administration falls to those who cast their ballots for him. I anticipated failure, thus, the current state of affairs does not surprise or disappoint me. As the saying goes, “You can’t disappoint me if you never appointed me.”

Nevertheless, I staunchly believe in the fundamental right of individuals to protest. My earnest hope is that these protests remain peaceful and do not devolve into the destruction of government or private property. Destroying infrastructure only provides an opportunity for government officials to siphon more resources under the guise of reconstruction. Additionally, I urge the police and security forces to exercise restraint and civility in their duties to prevent any human casualties.

Reflecting on past protests, I advocate for a model akin to the 2012 daily gatherings at specific locations. Clear organization and visibility of protest leaders are crucial. The anonymity of the EndSARS movement proved a significant drawback. Setting clear, achievable objectives is essential for assessing progress. During the EndSARS protests, shifting demands after initial concessions led to confusion and undermined the movement’s effectiveness.

Despite my lack of support for this administration, I oppose protests branded as “EndBadGovernment,” which risk descending into anarchy. Should the government fall, what comes next? Though our electoral system has flaws, it remains possible to elect credible leaders if enough people participate in elections. In a democracy, elections are the most sensible means of effecting governmental change.

As a Public Relations practitioner, I believe the government can preempt this proposed protest through effective PR strategies, not merely communication. The current approach of silencing dissent through propaganda and misinformation is counterproductive. The government needs to genuinely engage with the populace, bridging the glaring disconnect.

Over a year into office, it is disheartening to see presidential spokespersons still blaming the opposition for public discontent. Their role should be to manage perceptions, transforming hostility into sympathy and prejudice into acceptance. An informed public, aware of the government’s plans, can shift from apathy to positive action through effective communication.

I advocate for the President to directly address the nation, outlining clear plans to tackle food insecurity, rising inflation, and the cost of living. Focusing on imaginary adversaries is futile. True leadership influences positively; if opposition voices sway public opinion, it signals the government’s loss of popularity and effectiveness.

Moreover, the President’s words must be matched by actions. It is incongruous to urge citizens to tighten their belts while government officials indulge in frivolous spending. From the executive to the legislature, and even the judiciary, ostentatious expenditures erode public trust. A father cannot claim poverty to his children while continually acquiring personal luxuries and expect their belief and trust.

There is undeniable hunger in the land. The populace needs to see the government’s action plans and feel a connection with their leaders. Enough with sending aggressive spokespersons to attack citizens crying out for basic necessities.

Additionally, the government must show empathy and transparency in its dealings. Regular updates on policy decisions and progress can foster a sense of inclusion and trust among the people. Open forums and town hall meetings where citizens can voice their concerns directly to government officials will bridge the communication gap and mitigate frustrations.

Economic reforms should also be at the forefront of the government’s agenda. Policies that directly address unemployment, stimulate local industries, and provide social safety nets will alleviate the economic pressures driving the protests. A clear, actionable plan for economic recovery, communicated effectively, can restore hope and reduce the impetus for public dissent.

Lastly, collaboration with civil society organizations and grassroots movements can provide valuable insights into the needs and aspirations of the populace. By working together, the government and these groups can develop sustainable solutions that resonate with the people. This inclusive approach can transform potential protests into constructive dialogue and national progress.

To the protesters, if you must take to the streets, please do so peacefully and avoid destroying public or private properties. Protest to live, not to cause harm.

Olisemeka Sunday Obi is a Public Affairs Analyst based in Lagos.

By Abraham Ogbodo

I have known Dr. Reuben Abati almost from the cradle. We were not only in the same university but the same department. When he was leaving University of Calabar in 1985, he had in his bag, all the prime prizes. The best graduating student of the University which meant he was also best in the Department of Theatre Arts and the Faculty of Arts. I can therefore say without fear of being contradicted that he is not pretentious. He is brilliant; intellectually loaded to the brim. He left two years ahead of me which does not in any way suggest he is older. He was apparently faster and more brilliant. His law degree at the Lagos State University was a latter day addition after he had earned his PhD from the University of Ibadan and in fact already on the Editorial Board of The Guardian Newspaper.

  Of late however, Dr Abati has been projecting rather too forcefully his legal background on the Morning Show programme on Arise TV which he co-anchors with two others. He gets tutorial and even magisterial as he pushes through all the fine points of law when occasion calls for it. He was at his best last Friday following the Supreme Court’s affirmation of the election of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu in the February 25 presidential election and dismissal of the appeals of the PDP and LP candidates, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar and Mr. Peter Obi the day before.

  Altogether, Abati sounded as if law is not also common sense. As if procedural law is sacrosanct and no matter the weight of evidence, a procedure cannot be overtaken to lay substantive claims or facts. He was a kind of saying the law is independent of truth and even if justice is not served in the process but the law is duly followed, the outcome should be applauded to high heavens. This is taking the Realist School of Jurisprudence too far. The school that says law does not have to go on an endless excursion for meaning beyond what the court says. It is best captured in the words of American jurist, Oliver Wendell Holmes that: “The prophesies of what the courts will do and nothing more pretentious are what I mean by the law.”

  It amounts to open acceptance of the tyranny of the court, however, on the fundamental assumption that the operating and human agent in the court system is rational and far from being a tyrant. That way, the court for instance, will not say crime, without punishment, should be statue-barred or vitiated by the mere passage of time and a very short time for that matter. Such is the consolation and indeed the intention of the realist school. It was not propounded to lead the court into a web of legalese and reverse its very essence as the temple of justice.

  If I may ask, what is law if it does not serve the purpose of justice or the hopes of the people? No jurisprudence aspires higher than the aspirations of the people or subordinates justice and morality to law. Law itself fails woefully if it only massages the intellect and ceases to be an instrument for social justice. The Supreme Court in any legal system is beyond reproach. It can only fine tune itself. Beyond it, no legal arguments stand. Its role in jurisprudence is enormous and it does not include the convenience of hiding behind procedural infractions to obfuscate substantive law and justice. On the contrary, the Supreme Court is remarked for its boldness to rise up to the exigency of changing the position of the law to serve justice and the hopes of society.

  The strongest reference point in jurisprudence today, Lord Alfred Thompson Denning, did not ascend that height by just running with extant codes. Real jurists are defined by their audacity to push the frontiers of substantive law and morality to enrich Jurisprudence. They do not mark time forever upholding the law even when the law has become anachronistic and a clear affliction to society. Needless to say that the majesty of law is its inherent dynamism to translate to justice. For, in truth and as noted by Lord Denning; “law is not an end in itself but a means to achieving a fair and harmonious society.” It is also not some technical game to be manipulated for personal advantages by experts but a “force to be applied with wisdom and compassion” by the sitting judge to serve society.  

  I also heard Dr. Abati saying public opinion does not matter in law. Really? The thing about law is that it is 110 per cent intellectual intimidation and posturing. Whoever holds the high end in sheer sophistry and pedantry also stands on a high ground in real advocacy. Whereas the law may have just an intention, what makes it an interesting practice is the near infinite capacity of its practitioners to create intentions and intrigues to detract from the real intention.  From where does common law, including written and codified law, derive if law is so insulated from its human setting.

The truth is that such legal maxims can only stand firm if other things remain equal. If in any context the ratio decidendi , that is, the reason for the judgment, repudiates facts and common sense and instead celebrates methodology or even mediocrity, public opinion will rise irrepressibly like the morning sun whether you like it or not. The position is that public opinion matters and there had been reviews of case laws on the strength of public opinions alone. For instance, the M’Naghten Rule which set the test for the defence of insanity in criminal responsibility, especially in a murder charge, was forced by public opinion.

  The views of Dr. Abati were to receive huge validation by Chief Robert Clarke (SAN) who was on the Arise TV Morning Show programme last Frday to specifically discuss the Supreme Court’s decision of the previous day. Abati must have felt within himself like the first and only winner of the Nobel Prize in Jurisprudence as Papa Clarke loaded him with encomiums for a job well done. The only additional point made by the old lawyer was the call for the reordering of the statutory frame work so that elections can be decided by the electorate in the polling booths and not in court rooms by judges. Excellent point I must say.

  As God would have it, while Abati and the old lawyer were in the television studio engaged in a rigorous post-ruling advocacy to dress up the Supreme Court, an old Judge, Justice Musa Dattijo Muhammad who retired after 36 years on the bench, 11 of which were spent in the Supreme Court, was reading his valedictory speech to dress down the Supreme. Details of the speech are too heavy to fit into this purpose. It is important to note that Justice Dattijo is more than just an eye witness. He was an active participant. He was the second longest serving Justice of the Apex court and next to the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Olukayode Ariwoola. The balance of probabilities tilt heavily in his favour.

  It was like the Supreme Court was put on trial in the court of public opinion and while Abati and the old lawyer appeared for the Supreme Court (I will resist using ‘defendant’), old judge appeared for aggrieved Nigerians. The thesis and antithesis are in search for a synthesis. The verdict lies both in history and posterity. GMTNews

_Abraham Ogbodo started his journalism career in 1989 in The Guardian Newspaper. Retired in 2019 as the Editor of the paper after 30 years of reporting across subject matters. He has been in private business since retirement. He is member of the Governing Board of Cecilia and Michael Ibru University, Agbarha-Otor_.