Connect with us

Business

Abuja court ruling opens fresh battle on Fuel import, read details

Published

on

The Federal High Court in Abuja’s order directing the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority to continue granting and renewing petroleum products import licences has opened a fresh battle over fuel imports as domestic refining capacity expands.

The ruling has put the court’s decision in Abuja alongside a pending suit by Dangote Petroleum Refinery at the Federal High Court in Lagos, where the refinery is challenging the continued issuance and renewal of petroleum product import licences.

While petroleum marketers have welcomed the Abuja judgment and called for continued access to import licences, the development has also renewed debate over whether domestic refineries should be protected from import competition and whether the Petroleum Industry Act provides an adequate framework for the changing market.

The marketers, under the Petroleum Products Retail Outlets Owners Association of Nigeria and the Independent Petroleum Marketers Association of Nigeria, said competition between local refiners and importers could improve petrol availability and affordability for Nigerians.

This follows the issuance of import licences that have allowed the importation of an average of 95.7 million litres of petrol per day, translating to a total of 23.2 billion litres between January and August 2026.

Abuja ruling

The PUNCH reports that a Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Inyang Ekwo, ordered the NMDPRA to continue granting, issuing, extending, renewing or reissuing petroleum products import licences to Matrix Energy, A.A. Rano Nigeria Limited and AYM Shafa Limited.

Justice Ekwo, in his judgment, held that the regulator’s refusal to issue or renew the import licences of the three oil marketers was in “direct non-compliance” with the Petroleum Industry Act, 2021.

The judge held that the NMDPRA had acted beyond the provisions of the law in its handling of the companies’ applications for import licences. He said the consequence of non-compliance with the PIA and other relevant laws was that any exercise by the regulator in respect of the import licences would be “null and void.”

The three oil marketers had approached the court seeking declarations that the PIA did not prohibit the importation of petroleum products into Nigeria or prevent the NMDPRA from granting or renewing licences for eligible importers.

They also argued that the regulator was required to promote competition in the midstream and downstream petroleum sectors.

Justice Ekwo agreed with the plaintiffs, holding that relevant provisions of the PIA, read together with Section 72 of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, imposed an obligation on the NMDPRA to promote a competitive market and prevent abuse of dominant positions and restrictive business practices.

The judge declared that the three companies were entitled to the issuance, extension or renewal of petroleum products import licences upon fulfilling the conditions stipulated by the NMDPRA.

Specifically, the court ordered the regulator to “continue to grant, issue, extend, renew, or reissue” licences, permits and authorisations for midstream and downstream petroleum operations, particularly those relating to the importation of petroleum products.

The order, however, was subject to the companies fulfilling all applicable statutory and regulatory preconditions. The plaintiffs’ case was based on the alleged refusal of the NMDPRA to regularly issue or renew their petroleum products import licences.

In an affidavit, the Executive Director of A.A. Rano Nigeria Limited, Sabiu Saidu Mahuta, alleged that since July 2025, the regulator had granted or renewed the companies’ import licences only sporadically.

He argued that the situation was contributing to market dominance and monopolisation of the downstream petroleum sector by local refineries. The companies also told the court that they had collectively invested more than $20bn in infrastructure, logistics and retail networks for their petroleum products businesses.

Their counsel, Raji Ahmed, SAN, argued that allowing both imports and local production would promote competition, check monopoly and price-fixing, and improve the midstream and downstream petroleum sector.

The Abuja ruling is coming even as the Dangote refinery has a pending suit praying the court to stop the NMDPRA from issuing import licences to the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited and other marketers.

Dangote’s pending suit

The Federal High Court in Lagos had in June fixed October 7 to hear a suit filed by the Dangote refinery challenging the Federal Government’s issuance of fuel import licences to NNPC and several petroleum marketers.

The Dangote refinery, in suit No. FHC/L/CS/857/2026, is requesting the court to nullify import licences allegedly issued or renewed around May 6, 2026, in favour of the NNPC and marketers, including NIPCO, AA Rano, Matrix, Shafa, Pinnacle, and Bono.

See also  Google pledges N3bn to boost Nigeria’s AI capacity

The plaintiff further argued that the licences were granted in violation of an earlier court order made on 29 April 2026, which directed all parties to maintain the status quo pending the suit’s resolution.

With both cases before courts of coordinate jurisdiction, the Abuja ruling could complicate the refinery’s legal challenge, particularly as it was not a respondent in the Abuja suit and may therefore be unable to appeal the judgment directly.

The regulator recently approved 830,000 metric tonnes of petrol imports for the fourth quarter of 2026, with Matrix Energy, A.A. Rano and AYM Shafa among six companies issued permits.

Oil marketers speak

Reacting to the Abuja judgment, the National President of PETROAN, Billy Gillis-Harry, described it as a victory for Nigerians, arguing that diversifying supply sources would help address concerns over the availability and cost of petrol.

“The court ruling means a lot. It means victory for the Nigerian people. Once every stakeholder in the industry is focused on ensuring that there is availability of petroleum products, then affordability issues will become something that will be addressed,” he said.

He added, “So it is a victory for the Nigerian people, not just retail outlet owners or marketers. So we congratulate all those who have stood firm to face the tyranny of monopoly and get answers.”

Gillis-Harry also commended the petroleum regulator, saying the judgment reinforced its responsibility to serve consumers and maintain a competitive market. “We salute NMDPRA. It tells us that they are not ready to take sides with anybody. They are there to serve Nigerians, and we look forward to greater days ahead,” he said.

However, the PETROAN president called for the continued issuance of import licences to be extended beyond the three companies involved in the case.

He said, “However, the licensees should not be limited to only the three companies. It should be available to every company that has the capacity to import products and supply Nigerians at an affordable price and available to everyone.”

“In our opinion, supply diversification will guarantee affordability of petroleum products,” he added.

Similarly, the National Publicity Secretary of IPMAN, Chinedu Ukadike, said the judgment should be respected, adding that marketers would continue to purchase products from suppliers offering competitive prices.

“Well, the court is a court of justice, and I know that they have looked at the pros and cons. They also looked at the document submitted before it, and they reviewed the Petroleum Industry Act,” Ukadike said.

He added, “While the refinery can meet up with domestic demand, as I said before, it is a court ruling that must be obeyed.” Ukadike described the judgment as a win-win for marketers, saying their purchasing decisions would depend on the prices offered by domestic refineries and importers.

“If Dangote is producing and it’s cheap, we will look at it and buy from them as marketers. On the other hand, if products from importers are cheaper, we would also buy from them,” he said. “Our business is to ensure that we continue to service and buy products at the cheapest rate and sell to our numerous consumers.”

Different rulings

Speaking with our correspondent, a major marketer, who pleaded for anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter, expressed concerns over the manner in which operators in the midstream and downstream sectors resorted to courts of coordinate jurisdiction to settle their disputes.

According to the operator, it is sad that the courts are being used as weapons to fight battles in an industry that is supposed to be peaceful. He stated that the marketers appeared to have proved a point that Nigeria belongs to everybody.

“It is sad that we found ourselves in this situation. We now have different courts giving rulings in favour of different groups. It is sad that a court in Lagos ruled that a company in a free zone is not under the regulator. How is that possible?

“It is also sad that a court in Abuja ruled in favour of these marketers without listening to other parties. I think the marketers just wanted to prove that nobody has a monopoly on the courts. But the issue is that Dangote still has a case challenging importation in court. Let’s see how it goes,” the operator said.

However, the Vice President of IPMAN, Hammed Fashola, maintained that the cases were necessary to test the position of the PIA in court.

Fashola advised all operating partners and regulatory bodies within the oil and gas downstream sector to resolve ongoing legal disputes without jeopardising the steady availability and distribution of petroleum products across the country.

See also  Nigeria, Russia Meet On Livestock, Vaccine Collaboration

Speaking over parallel court cases involving major sector operators regarding petroleum importation regulations under the PIA, IPMAN Vice President, Fashola, emphasised that testing legal frameworks in court remains a legitimate avenue for clarifying ambiguous statutory provisions.

“First of all, if there is any dispute, I think the right place to go is the court. Don’t forget that we have the PIA, and if there is any issue that is controversial, the best place is to approach the court for interpretation,” Fashola said, adding that stakeholders should await judicial outcomes or pursue an amicable round-table dialogue to align market operations.

Fashola maintained that litigation should not spark alarm or trigger product scarcity, expressing confidence that higher courts remain accessible to resolve any conflicting judicial interpretations that may arise during initial proceedings.

“They are in the high courts now. I think the Appeal Court is still there and the Supreme Court is also there. So, they will explore all the legal avenues that are available. So, I think the case will be resolved,” he stated.

He urged all parties to prioritise consumer supply and maintain current distribution stability while legal and regulatory clarifications are finalised.

“Dangote, the importers, and every stakeholder—we should just appeal to them that we should not do anything that will interrupt the peace that we are enjoying now, especially the availability of products in the country,” he urged.

“It’s good they subject the PIA to a test. I think that’s what they are doing. At the end of the day, they will still come back to the round table and resolve it. And if they cannot do that, I think the court will resolve everything, and everybody will know how the game should be played as far as oil and gas is concerned and in relationship with the PIA,” Fashola submitted.

Experts react

Reacting, an energy sector expert, Mr Dan Kunle, called for an immediate amendment of the PIA, warning that its current provisions regarding petroleum product importation are outdated and economically unviable for the country.

Kunle noted that while recent judicial interpretations upholding import permissions may align strictly with the written letter of the PIA, the law itself no longer reflects Nigeria’s prevailing economic reality.

According to him, the PIA was enacted at a time when the country relied solely on inefficient, state-owned refineries, long before mega private refining infrastructure such as the Dangote refinery became operational.

“If you go by the provisions of the Petroleum Industry Act, the court is just trying to align with the law. But at the time the PIA was passed, lawmakers did not foresee that a refinery of this magnitude would come on stream to meet all our domestic needs. The law is no longer current; it is completely out of tune,” Kunle stated.

He argued that legal provisions must align with economic rationality, stressing that continuing to allow unchecked importation of refined products when domestic refining capacity exists undermines national interest and state protection.

Kunle advised the Federal Government and regulatory bodies, including the NMDPRA, to transmit an executive bill to the National Assembly to review the Act.

He proposed that under an amended PIA, the power to permit fuel imports should be discretionary and strictly tied to national strategic needs, such as mitigating supply shortages, rather than serving as a default market mechanism.

“At times, certain actions are legal by law, but they are not economically rational. You cannot justify importing inferior products when you have superior local production capacity, simply under the guise of preventing a monopoly. The state must protect its economy against foreign importation while retaining a strictly regulated window for contingency imports,” he added.

Gradual end to imports

The Crude Oil Refinery-Owners Association of Nigeria has called for a gradual end to petrol imports, lamenting that some domestic refineries are struggling to obtain crude oil on commercially viable terms despite the country’s abundant resources.

The Chairman of CORAN, Momoh Oyarekhua, made the call on Monday at the third Nigeria Oil Refining Summit organised by the association in Lagos.

Oyarekhua said the difficulties faced by some local refineries in securing crude had contributed to the continued importation of petroleum products, despite the availability of domestic refining capacity.

He said, “We acknowledge the remarkable progress made in domestic refining. Local refining is increasingly transforming Nigeria’s fuel supply landscape, demonstrating what is possible when investment, policy, and industry align.

See also  Lagos Reopens Ferry Terminal After Clearing Water Hyacinth

“However, significant challenges remain. Despite our abundant crude resources, some domestic refineries continue to face difficulties accessing crude oil on commercially viable terms. At the same time, fuel imports persist while local refining capacity remains underutilised.”

To address the challenges, the CORAN chairman called for the full institutionalisation of the naira-for-crude policy, with transparent access for qualifying domestic refineries, including modular plants.

He also urged the Federal Government to strengthen enforcement of the Domestic Crude Supply Obligation under Section 109 of the Petroleum Industry Act, while preserving commercial arrangements between crude producers and refiners.

Oyarekhua proposed a domestic crude pricing framework that would reflect crude quality, delivery points, international logistics costs avoided, and actual domestic transportation expenses.

He also advocated crude swaps and proximity-based supply arrangements to enable oil-producing assets close to refineries to supply them without transporting crude through distant export terminals.

On petroleum product imports, he called for a progressive reduction, with imports restricted to objectively determined domestic supply shortfalls and strategic stock requirements.

“Refining for value means more than producing fuel. It means retaining foreign exchange, creating jobs, developing local expertise, supporting petrochemicals and manufacturing, and capturing greater economic value within Nigeria,” he said.

The chairman said the continued importation of petroleum products despite available local refining capacity represented a major challenge to Nigeria’s efforts to derive greater economic value from its crude resources.

Oyarekhua said, “Nigeria should not continue exporting crude, exporting jobs and importing the same petroleum products at considerable economic cost.”

The CORAN chairman also called for a dedicated financing framework to support the construction of new refineries and the expansion of existing facilities.

He said the proposed framework should provide long-term financing, guarantees and refinancing mechanisms to address the funding challenges facing refinery operators.

Meanwhile, economist Mustafa Chike-Obi has argued that domestic refineries should not receive indefinite protection from import competition.

Speaking on the Policy without Politics podcast with development economist Dr Ken Ikpe, the former Chairman of Fidelity Bank Nigeria said, “I am an opponent of refineries having an unlimited period of time while their products are banned from competition.

“For protection, I think there should be a time. But once you are insisting on protection, it just tells me that you don’t think you can compete with imports. Now what it will tell you is that the quality is not the same.

“Look, when we’re importing fuel, no Nigerians are going to complain about the quality. We’re not interested in higher quality for sure. We just want petrol that can work.”

On the continued rehabilitation of the government-owned refineries in Port Harcourt, Warri and Kaduna, the former banker questioned the rationale for committing more public funds to facilities he described as old and inefficient.

“Talking about this turnaround stuff, I find this very curious. Should the Federal Government, which owns refineries in Port Harcourt, Warri and Kaduna, deserve another round of turnaround? They should not be involved in that business at all.

“So they shouldn’t go there. If we go there, it’s a runaround; it’s not a turnaround. It may be more than a runaround. It may be a runaround with devious intentions.”

Asked what he meant by “devious intentions,” Obi replied, “Diversion of funds. Because it’s a good way to divert funds.

“You say you’re turning it around, and then the money disappears and nothing happens. We’ve seen this many, many times. And this is not an attack on this government, but we’ve seen it through successive governments.”

He said the government should instead acknowledge that the refineries had become technologically outdated and redirect investment towards more efficient facilities and industries.

“It’s going to work next week. There’s fire in Port Harcourt. So I think the whole idea of the emotional investment is that those refineries are old.

“They are old technology. They will never be as efficient as the Dangote refinery. They will certainly not be as efficient as the foreign equivalent.

“And it’s just a waste of time, and it’s an emotional thing. And so we should stay away from those kinds of things and focus on industries and refineries that are efficient. And these ones will never be efficient.

“So yes, I subscribe to the theory that it’s a runaround, and that’s the best you can say about it. It could be worse than that.”

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Business

FG disputes World Bank’s N7.7tn interest payments, read details

Published

on

The Federal Government has faulted the World Bank’s assessment of Nigeria’s debt position, dismissing concerns that interest payments of N7.7tn in the first half of 2026 threaten the country’s debt sustainability.

The Federal Ministry of Finance described reports that interest payments amounted to 124 per cent of Federal Government revenue during the period as misleading, arguing that the calculation relied on incomplete revenue figures and included debt obligations serviced on behalf of state governments.

The ministry stated its position in a statement issued on Sunday and shared on X by the Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Taiwo Oyedele.

According to the ministry, Nigeria’s fiscal position had improved, with revenue growing faster than interest payments.

It said, “The Federal Ministry of Finance has noted recent analysis and public commentary which, citing the World Bank’s October 2026 Nigeria Development Update, claims that Federal Government interest payments reached 124 per cent of revenue in the first half of 2026. This conclusion is misleading, for three reasons.”

The response followed reports based on the World Bank’s October 2026 Nigeria Development Update, which put Federal Government revenue at N6.2tn and interest payments at N7.7tn in the first half of the year.

An analysis of the published figures by The PUNCH showed that interest payments represented approximately 124.2 per cent of revenue, exceeding revenue by N1.5tn. The ratio was calculated from the figures published by the World Bank and was not expressly stated in the report.

However, the ministry argued that the calculation compared obligations covering multiple tiers of government with revenue attributed solely to the Federal Government.

“The interest figure includes debt the Federal Government services on behalf of other tiers of government, including external loans to states. Measuring this against federal revenue alone overstates the ratio, which is only meaningful when debt and revenue cover the same level of government,” it said.

The ministry also argued that the revenue figure excluded income earned by government agencies and enterprises but not yet remitted to the Treasury.

It added that statutory payment schedules meant some taxes were collected predominantly in the second half of the year, making first-half revenue an incomplete basis for assessing annual debt obligations.

According to the ministry, the interest-to-revenue ratio stood at 156 per cent in the first half of 2025, compared with approximately 124 per cent in the corresponding period of 2026.

It said the full-year debt-service-to-revenue ratio had fallen below 60 per cent, compared with 97 per cent before the current administration’s reforms, describing the reduction as evidence of improved fiscal management.

The ministry further stated that Federal Government revenue rose by 72 per cent, from N3.6tn in the first half of 2025 to N6.2tn in the corresponding period of 2026, while interest payments increased by 38 per cent, from N5.6tn to N7.7tn.

See also  Google pledges N3bn to boost Nigeria’s AI capacity

Consequently, it said, the interest-to-revenue ratio declined by about 32 percentage points, while the gap between interest payments and revenue narrowed from N2tn to N1.5tn.

“This is the result of reforms working, not a sign of fiscal distress,” the ministry declared.

It also rejected the use of a six-month fiscal snapshot as a definitive measure of debt sustainability, arguing that full-year projections provided a more appropriate assessment.

“The same World Bank report projects Nigeria’s full-year 2026 debt service, covering both interest and principal, at 46 per cent of revenue. This is the appropriate benchmark, and a guide to avoid the invalid conclusions being drawn,” the statement read.

The ministry also defended the Federal Government’s borrowing programme, insisting that all loans obtained by the current administration were lawful and duly approved.

It maintained that every naira borrowed fell within the limits authorised by the National Assembly under the 2026 Appropriation Act and the approved borrowing plan.

According to the statement, government borrowing complied with the Fiscal Responsibility Act 2007 and the Debt Management Office (Establishment) Act 2003, while details of the country’s debt obligations were regularly published by the Debt Management Office.

However, despite challenging the World Bank’s assessment and questioning the basis of the interest-to-revenue calculation, the ministry did not provide revised revenue and interest-payment figures or an alternative ratio to substantiate its position.

W’Bank’s $1.25bn loan

Meanwhile, the Federal Government will begin repaying the principal on a $1.25bn World Bank loan in December 2031, with the final instalment on one of the facilities due in June 2060, according to financing agreements reviewed by The PUNCH.

The facility, secured under the Nigeria Actions for Investment and Jobs Acceleration Development Policy Financing programme, is intended to support reforms aimed at expanding access to credit, improving electricity supply, strengthening trade competitiveness and increasing government revenue.

The PUNCH reported in July 2026 that the World Bank had approved the $1.25bn facility amid public concerns over Nigeria’s rising debt burden and calls for the Federal Government to reduce external borrowing.

In an earlier statement, the Washington-based bank said it had approved the Nigeria Actions for Investment and Jobs Acceleration Development Policy Financing operation to support Nigeria’s transition towards a more inclusive growth model that would stimulate growth and create jobs.

The bank said the operation would support reforms to strengthen the foundations for growth and competitiveness.

“These include deepening capital markets, modernising the regulatory framework for the digital economy and e-governance, advancing power sector reforms to accelerate electrification, lowering trade barriers in line with Nigeria’s ECOWAS and AfCFTA commitments to help ease price pressures, improving access to quality agricultural seeds, and strengthening domestic revenue mobilisation,” the statement added.

The loan was the second-largest single World Bank facility secured by Nigeria under President Bola Tinubu, after the $1.5bn Reforms for Economic Stabilisation to Enable Transformation Development Policy Financing approved in June 2024.

See also  Oil earnings fall short by N16.2tn

Documents reviewed by The PUNCH showed that the $1.25bn financing comprises a $750m concessional credit from the International Development Association and a $500m loan from the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, both institutions of the World Bank Group.

Differing repayment periods

Principal repayments on both facilities will begin on December 15, 2031, but their maturity dates differ. The IDA credit is scheduled to be fully repaid by June 2051, while the IBRD loan runs until June 2060.

The IDA provides concessional financing to low-income countries on more favourable terms, while the IBRD lends primarily to middle-income and creditworthy lower-income countries on market-linked terms.

The agreements were signed on behalf of Nigeria by the Minister of Finance, Taiwo Oyedele, on October 6, 2026, while the World Bank’s Country Director, Mathew Verghis, signed on June 30, 2026.

According to Schedule 2 of the IDA financing agreement, Nigeria will repay 2.5 per cent of the $750m credit every six months, beginning on December 15, 2031, and ending on June 15, 2051.

This amounts to $18.75m in principal repayments every six months, or $37.5m annually during full repayment years, excluding interest and other applicable charges.

For the $500m IBRD facility, the repayment schedule provides for semi-annual principal instalments of 1.72 per cent from December 15, 2031, through December 15, 2059, followed by a final instalment of 1.96 per cent on June 15, 2060.

The regular instalments amount to approximately $8.6m every six months, while the final principal payment is about $9.8m.

Combined, the facilities will require principal repayments of approximately $27.35m every six months between December 2031 and June 2051, equivalent to $54.7m annually during full repayment years.

The repayment obligations will extend across several administrations, with the final principal payment on the IBRD facility falling due nearly 34 years after the agreements were signed.

The schedules cover principal repayments only and do not represent the total cost of borrowing, which will also include interest and applicable charges.

Under the IBRD agreement, the interest rate is determined by the reference rate plus a variable spread. The IDA credit carries an interest charge calculated using the reference rate plus a variable spread, less 250 basis points.

The IDA agreement states, “The Interest Charge is the Reference Rate plus the Variable Spread minus 250 basis points,” subject to applicable rate limits and possible conversions.

The IBRD loan also attracts a front-end fee of 0.25 per cent, equivalent to $1.25m, as well as an annual commitment charge of 0.25 per cent on the undisbursed balance.

For the IDA credit, the agreement provides for a maximum annual commitment charge of 0.5 per cent on the undisbursed financing balance.

The documents do not specify a fixed dollar amount for total interest payments over the repayment period. The eventual borrowing cost will therefore depend on the applicable rates and other contractual provisions.

See also  Defected Rivers lawmakers free to leave PDP, says Wike

The $750m IDA credit is structured for disbursement in a single tranche, subject to the World Bank’s assessment of Nigeria’s economic policies and implementation of the agreed reforms.

The $500m IBRD facility is divided into two withdrawal tranches of $249.375m each, with the remaining $1.25m allocated to the front-end fee.

Release of the second tranche depends on satisfactory progress in implementing the programme, maintaining an adequate macroeconomic framework and completing agreed policy actions.

Under the IBRD agreement, if the government fails to take satisfactory corrective measures within 90 days of receiving notice from the bank, the lender may cancel part or all of the undisbursed balance.

Both agreements have a closing date of December 31, 2027.

Areas of reforms

The agreements identify two broad areas of reform: improving access to financial credit, digital services and electricity, and strengthening competitiveness through trade, taxation and agricultural reforms.

Among the measures recognised are the Investment and Securities Act 2025, the National Integrated Electricity Policy, electricity metering reforms and regulations facilitating private investment in interconnected mini-grids.

The government also committed to implementing trade reforms under the African Continental Free Trade Area, including the gradual liberalisation of 90 per cent of tariffs on goods from African countries over 10 years.

Other measures include removing import bans on specified essential food products and inputs, reducing import adjustment taxes on selected commodities by at least 25 per cent in 2026, and progressively eliminating applicable adjustment taxes between 2027 and 2036.

On taxation, the agreements recognise the introduction of mandatory electronic invoicing for Value Added Tax, a 15 per cent minimum effective tax rate for large companies and multinational enterprises, and an increase in the maximum personal income tax rate from 24 to 25 per cent.

The financing arrangements also impose reporting and accountability requirements on the government.

Nigeria is required to maintain dedicated dollar accounts for receiving the proceeds and ensure that equivalent amounts are reflected in its budget management system.

The Federal Ministry of Finance must report the amounts received, relevant account details and records of transactions to the World Bank within 30 days of each withdrawal

The agreements also require the accounts to be audited by auditors of the Central Bank of Nigeria acceptable to the World Bank. Certified audit reports must be submitted within four months of withdrawal and made publicly available.

The financing is intended to support Nigeria’s economic reform programme, with disbursement conditional on satisfactory implementation of the agreed measures and maintenance of an adequate macroeconomic policy framework.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

WHATSAPP CHANNEL

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Business

Why I’m Always Afraid When Funke Akindele Calls Me For Job – Jide Kosoko

Published

on

Veteran Nollywood actor, Jide Kosoko, has spoken about the intense work ethic of actress and filmmaker, Funke Akindele.

It was reports that Kosoko made this known during an interview on the African A-List podcast.

The veteran actor explained that working with Akindele can be demanding because she pays close attention to details and is willing to repeat scenes several times until she is satisfied with the outcome.

According to Kosoko, the filmmaker can shoot a particular scene as many as 15 times, a process that requires actors to remain patient and prepared to perform repeatedly.

He described Akindele as an exceptionally hardworking person whose energy is difficult to match, even for a man.

He also mentioned that she is left-handed while discussing some of the things he has observed about her.

He said during the interview: “Funke is very hardworking, even if you are a man you can’t match her energy. She is left-handed. Whenever Funke calls me for a job I am always scared, you can shoot a scene 15 times. And She may come the following day thinking of shooting another scene, but then she will say “We have to shoot those scenes again because of the plates they brought.”

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

See also  NLC plans protest over the following reasons...
Continue Reading

Business

WHY DO WE VALUE FOREIGN PRODUCTS MORE THAN OUR OWN? THE MINDSET HOLDING AFRICA BACK

Published

on

Africa is rich in natural resources, creativity, culture, and entrepreneurial talent. Yet one uncomfortable question continues to deserve our attention: **Why do we sometimes trust products made abroad more than products made by our own people?**

Consider this scenario: a Nigerian entrepreneur produces shoes, clothing, cosmetics, food, or household products locally. Some consumers immediately question the quality. But when a similar product carries a foreign label, those same consumers may suddenly see it as more fashionable, prestigious, or desirable.

Is the foreign product necessarily better, or have we developed a mindset that automatically associates foreign with quality and local with inferiority?

## The Psychology of Foreign Products

In many African markets, foreign brands are associated with prestige, social status, and international recognition. For some consumers, owning imported products is not merely about functionality; it is also about how those products make them appear in the eyes of others.

This creates a difficult environment for local entrepreneurs. They must compete not only on price and quality but sometimes also against perceptions that are deeply rooted in consumer behaviour.

However, it would be unfair to claim that all foreign products are better or that all locally made products meet acceptable standards. Consumers have legitimate reasons to demand durability, safety, reliability, attractive packaging, and value for money.

The real challenge is to ensure that local manufacturers can compete on a fair playing field.

## How This Mindset Can Affect African Economies

When locally produced goods struggle to attract consumers, businesses may find it harder to expand, invest in modern equipment, hire workers, and develop new products.

See also  NLC plans protest over the following reasons...

Strong local industries can create employment, develop technical skills, support farmers and suppliers, and keep more economic activity within a country. Countries that successfully build globally competitive industries generally combine investment, innovation, infrastructure, quality control, and consumer confidence.

Africa cannot build a stronger manufacturing base through slogans alone. It requires practical action from governments, businesses, financial institutions, and consumers.

## Local Manufacturers Must Also Take Responsibility

Supporting African businesses should not mean accepting poor-quality products simply because they are locally made.

Manufacturers must take responsibility for improving their standards, customer service, packaging, product safety, and innovation. Governments must tackle barriers such as unreliable electricity, expensive financing, inadequate infrastructure, and unfair competition.

Consumers, meanwhile, should judge products by their actual quality and value rather than automatically dismissing them because of their country of origin.

**Patriotism should encourage excellence, not protect mediocrity.**

## Can Africa Change This Mindset?

The answer begins with education, investment, accountability, and a willingness to give good local products a fair chance.

African entrepreneurs need opportunities to prove themselves. Consumers need reliable products they can trust. Governments need policies that make local production more competitive.

The goal should not be to reject everything foreign. International trade brings technology, ideas, competition, and useful products. The goal should be to build African industries strong enough to compete with the best in the world.

## The Big Question for Our Readers

Why do some consumers proudly display foreign brands but hesitate to support products made in their own countries?

Is it a genuine concern about quality, a desire for social status, a lack of trust in local manufacturers, or a combination of these factors?

See also  Read how power struggles threaten Ondo APC’s unity ahead of primaries

**Newsbreak365 wants to hear your opinion.**

Would you choose a quality Nigerian-made product over an imported alternative if both offered similar quality and value for money?

Join the discussion in the comments. Your perspective matters.

*Newsbreak365 — Real News. Real People. Real Issues.*

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Trending