Connect with us

News and Report

ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT EYITAYO JEGEDE’S VICTORY

Published

on

The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja has declared Mr. Eyitayo Jegede, SAN, as the rightful candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, for the Ondo governorship election billed for Saturday. In an unanimous judgment, the Justice Ibrahim Saulawa led three-man Special Panel of the appellate court, vacated the June 29 judgement of Justice Okon Abang of the Federal High Court in Abuja, which directed the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, to recognise Mr. Jimoh Ibrahim as PDP gubernatorial candidate for the poll. Jegede had approached the appellate court to challenge the high court verdict which ordered INEC to only relate with the Ali Modu-Sheriff faction of the PDP. Justice Abang had on October 14, also re-affirmed his decision, even as he warned the electoral body against accepting any candidate nominated by the Senator Ahmed Markafi-led National Caretaker Committee of the PDP. Acting on the strength of the order, INEC, promptly removed Jegede’s name from the list of candidates for the Ondo gubernatorial poll, and replaced it with Mr. Ibrahim. It will be recalled that whereas Jegede emerged from primary election that was sanctioned by the Markarfi-led NWC of the PDP, Ibrahim on the other hand, secured his ticket from the Modu-Sheriff faction of the party. Meanwhile, in its verdict on Wednesday, the appellate court, held that Justice Abang’s refusal of to grant fair hearing to Jegede, “rendered the entire proceedings before his court a nullity”. According to Justice Saulawu, “Indeed it is obvious from the records that the appellant’s name had been duly published as the governorship candidate of the 11th respondent (PDP) for the November 26 Ondo governorship election” Eyitayo Jegede and Jimoh Ibrahim It held that the lower court was in grievous error when it ordered the publication of Ibrahim’s name. It said the decision of the high court was in total breach of the provision of section 36 of the 1999 constitution, which it said forbade any court from denying fair hearing to a party likely to be affected by final decision of the court. Justice Saulawa, said the action of the court violated the legal doctrine of audi altarem partem. “The tenets of natural Justice entails that a party ought to be heard prior to determination of case against them”. The appellate court also noted that Justice Abang ordered INEC to “immediately” recognise Mr. Ibrahim who was never a party in the suit that culminated to both the June 29 and October 14 judgments. “The Court below had no jurisdictional competence to make such order. I have no restriction in the circumstance in resolving the second issue equally in favour of the appellant”. It said that Justice Abang “unilaterally”, raised issues that were not included by the plaintiffs, an action it said amounted to “a violent attitudinal disposition to the rule of law”. Besides, the court said the primary election that was conducted by the State Chapter of the PDP loyal to Modu-Sheriff, which produced Mr. Ibrahim, was a nullity. It said the law was very clear on which organ of a party should conduct governorship primary elections. “It is worth reiterating at this point that any primary election by state chapter of a party, be it the PDP or any other party, is undoubtedly, in the eye of the law, an illegal contraption that carries with it no legal or equitable right at all. It is in its entirety a nullity”, the appellate court held. Prior to delivery of the judgement, Justice Saulawa, said the panel was at a time, “subjected to a very intimidating and brow-beating treatment by counsel the Respondents”. “Most regrettably, the Respondents have deemed it expedient to shoot themselves on the foot. Instead of adhering to the wise counsel of the Court to file brief within the time limit, even the extra day that was granted to them, they refused to do so. “The consequences of the Respondents failing to file their brief by virtue of Order 18 of the Court of Appeal Rules is very obvious and we have made it clear in our judgment”. Justice Saulawa noted that instead of filing their brief of argument, the Respondents insisted that the appellate court had lost its jurisdiction to entertain Jegede’s suit by virtue of the appeal they lodged at the Supreme Court. “I have most critically appraised the preliminary objection by Nwufor, SAN, and I found that it is most grossly lacking in merit and it is accordingly dismissed. “Having effectively dealt with the preliminary objection, I now proceed to determine the appeal on its merit”. The court noted that Jegede filed his appeal on November 11, which raised seven issues for determination. The issues included whether it was proper for the high court to order INEC to jettison Jegede’s name after he had already been nominated by the PDP and his name published. Olanipekun argued that the high court lacked jurisdiction to determine who should be the candidate of a political party. Relying on decided case-law in Lado vs CPC, Olanipekun, stressed that the issue of nomination of candidates for an election is a domestic affair of a political party which no court has the jurisdiction to meddle into. He said Justice Abang was wrong when he held that he had the requisite jurisdiction to determine the matter. The appellate court, in arriving at its decision, said it was necessary that it determined whether or not the appellant was denied fair hearing by the lower court. It consequently resolved all the seven issues in Jegede’s favour. “There is no gain saying that this appeal is grossly meritorious and is hereby allowed”. An initial three-man panel that was headed by Justice Jummai Hanatu-Sankey earlier recused itself from resolving the dispute, following allegation that it collected N350million bribe from Governors Olusegun Mimiko and Nyesom Wike of Ondo and Rivers States, respectively.

 

The allegation was contained in a petition that PDP Chairman in Ondo state, Prince Biyi Poroye wrote against the panel wherein he insisted that they were compromised. Sequel to withdrawal of the Justice Hannatu-Sankey-led panel, the PCA, constituted the fresh panel which Poroye and five other PDP Chieftains from the South West loyal to Modu-Sheriff, also wanted the Supreme Court to disband. In their application that was refused by the apex court on Tuesday, Poroye’s group, contended that the new panel was set up in breach of their right to fair hearing guaranteed under Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution. They prayed for an order, returning “case files relating to the appeals and the application for leave to appeal as an interested party (against the decision of the Federal High Court of 14th October 2016 in suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/395/2016) – filed by Eyitayo Jegede (factional PDP candidate of the Ondo PDP), to the Registry of the Court of Appeal to take its normal course and turn in the docket of the court.” The appeals that would have been affected by their motion were CA/A/551/2016 filed by Ahmed Makarfi and Ben Obi against Biyi Poroye and 10 others, CA/A/551A/2016 filed by Clement Faboyede and another against 10 others; CA/A551B/2016 filed by the PDP against Biyi Poroye and 9 others and CA/A/551C/2016 filed by Eyitayo Jegede against Prince Biyi Poroye and 10 others. They argued that not only did the PCA acted without hearing from them, they said the case, being a pre-election matter, did not warrant any urgency to require the constitution of a special panel. They added that those who filed the appeals against the June 29 and October 14 decisions of Justice Abang, including Jegede and Markafi, were not joined as parties at the trial court. It was equally their argument that no orders were made against any of those behind the appeals, and that they (the applicants), who were plaintiffs in the suits, were not informed when the PCA acted solely on the request by the appellants to constitute the panel on the grounds of urgency. However, the Supreme Court, on Tuesday, cleared the coast for the appellate court to deliver the verdict which it suspended on November 18. The apex court, in a unanimous ruling by a five-man panel of Justices led by the Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Walter Onnoghen, declined to disband the Special Panel constituted by President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Zainab Bulkachuwa, to resolve the Ondo PDP dispute. Aside dismissing motions to stay proceedings of the appellate court, filed by the six PDP Chieftains, the Supreme Court, awarded a cumulative cost of N3million to each of the three Justices of the appellate court. Poroye and his group had joined the three appellate court Justices, Saulawa, Igwe Aguba and George Mbaba, as 5th to 7th Respondents in the appeal before the apex court. The Acting CJN, Justice Onnoghen who delivered the lead ruling, ordered that counsel to the appellants, Chief Beluolisa Nwufor, SAN, should personally pay the cost from his pocket. The apex court further ordered the appellants to pay N500, 000 cost to the four other Respondents in the matter among whom included Jegede. Justice Onnoghen held that it was wrong for Poroye and his group to drag the appellate court Justices into the matter knowing that they were only carrying out a judicial duty that was duly assigned to them. “The 6th to 7th Respondents who are Justices of the Court of Appeal were constituted by appropriate authority to hear and determine the case were not parties before the lower court and whatever they did was in their official capacity as judicial officers. “Judicial officers enjoy immunity in the performance of their duties and are not liable to be subjected to this kind of intimidation”, Justice Onnoghen held. He stressed that joining them as Respondents in the matter “was not only an attempt to intimidate and scandalise the judiciary, but to put it in a mild way, an action in bad faith”.

Justice Onnoghen also noted that the appellants (Poroye and his group), had also petitioned a previous panel of Justices of the appellate court that handled the case. “If the applicants are allowed to continue with this prank, there will be no end in sight and it will not augur well. In the circumstance, there is no merit in this appeal and it is hereby dismissed”. While concurring with the lead ruling, another member of the apex court panel, Justice Kumai Akaahs, held that action of the appellants was “capable of bringing anarchy”. Nevertheless, the apex court panel fixed Thursday to hear the substantive suit challenging leave that was granted to Jegede to appeal the high court judgement that recognised Mr Ibrahim as PDP flag-bearer for the election. The Appellants had lodged 14 different appeals before the Supreme Court. Their counsel, Chief Nwufor, SAN, on Tuesday, withdrew 10 motions that forced the appeal court panel to suspend further proceedings on the Ondo PDP crisis. Nwufor said his decision to withdraw the applications was to enable the apex court to hear the substantive suit challenging the competence of entire appeals before the Justice Saulawa led Special Panel. In its ruling dismissing motions for stay of proceedings at the appellate court, the Supreme Court awarded N250,000 against the applicants in each of the 10 withdrawn motions. The applicants were directed to pay a cumulative N2.5m to the respondents. The six PDP chieftains had among other things, urged the apex court to determine whether the President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Bulkachuwa, was right when she constituted a special panel to hear cases filed against Justice Abang’s judgement, by Jegede, Senators Markarfi and Obi. Poroye and his group contended that the panel had in a ruling it delivered on November 16, okayed Jegede’s appeal, despite being aware that the Supreme Court was already seized of the facts in dispute. The Justice Saulawa-led panel had on November 18, adjourned sine-die (indefinitely), further hearing on the matter. The panel handed-off the dispute, barely 48 hours after it reserved judgment on Jegede’s appeal. Justice Saulawa said the panel took the decision after it was served with a motion from the Supreme Court for the proceeding at the appellate court to be suspended. “We were served a motion in suit No CA/A/551b/2016, which was filed in the Supreme Court on November 17”, he stated. He said the motion had among other things, prayed the apex court to invoke its disciplinary powers against the appellate court panel. The Poroye led group, who are Respondents in Jegede’s appeal, further prayed the apex court to not only set aside proceedings of the appellate court, but to also restrain the special panel from further adjudicating on the dispute. Besides, they equally applied for an order disqualifying/recusing all members of the special panel on the ground that they betrayed there Oath of Office by their refusal to be bound by laid down judicial principle of staris-decisis. Determined to stop the appellate court from delivering its verdict, the group asked the Supreme Court to halt further proceeding at the lower court. While dismissing the motions after they were withdrawn, Justice Onnoghen directed the appellate court panel “to continue its proceedings forthwith”. The appellate court panel had initially refused to hands-off the Ondo PDP dispute, even as it allowed Jegede’s lead counsel, Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, to adopt his processes in the appeal to enable it to deliver judgment on the matter. Olanipekun had argued that the court had a constitutional responsibility to do justice in the case, saying the appellate court would be abdicating its duties should it allow itself to be stampeded into handing-off the matter. The panel had on September 8, suspended hearing on two other cases relating to the Ondo governorship crisis, following appeals also pending before the Supreme Court. The two cases were filed by members of the PDP, Benson Akingboye and Ehiozuwa Agbonayiwa. Nwufor, SAN, had insisted that allowing the appellate court panel to hear either Jegede or Markafi’s appeals would amount to an act of “judicial rascality” since the matter was already before the apex court. He argued that in line with the legal principle of lis-pendis, the appellate court ought to hands-off the case to avoid a situation where it would conduct a parallel proceeding with the Supreme Court on the same subject matter. “In view of the unchallenged facts brought to the notice of this court that an appeal against the ruling granting leave to the appellant to appeal the high court judgment, which this court made on November 10, is already before the Supreme Court and has been entered. “It is therefore our position that this court has lost its jurisdiction to continue with this matter. By order 5 Rule 11 of the Supreme Court Rules 1985, as amended, the Supreme Court is now seized of the whole of this proceeding as between the parties herein. “It is also an undisputed fact that a motion on notice for staying of all further proceedings and further hearing in this appeal is pending at the Supreme Court and has been drawn to the notice of this court. “We thus maintain that this panel cannot entertain further proceedings until that motion is decided by the apex court, one way or the other. “Proceeding to hear this appeal will amount to an effort in futility. It will amount to judicial rascality and judicial impertinence. “I submit that this court should not conduct parallel proceeding with the Supreme Court regarding the same case, but should allow the apex court, in line with the dictates of the hierarchy of courts established by the constitution, which places the Supreme Court above this court, to take a decision regarding the pending motion for stay of proceedings already before it. “I urge you to follow your own earlier rulings in CA/A/402/2016 and CA/A/402a/ 2016, delivered on September 8, concerning this same Ondo PDP crisis”, Nwufor submitted.

 

 

BY: AKOGUN LANREWAJU COLE

Continue Reading
Advertisement

News and Report

How Walter and Winifred Akpani spread Christmas cheer at Augustine University – Toni Kan

Published

on

By

 

Since my brother passed and I became surrogate to the children he left behind, they have alternated between calling me Dad or Uncle depending, usually, on how happy they are with me.

I have never really minded because my own biological children sometimes call me Toni Kan as the spirit moves them.

So, I was a bit apprehensive when I got a Whatsapp message from one of them, an undergraduate at Augustine University, Ilara-Epe, Lagos.

“Uncle, please call me!”

“Are you alright?” I asked when I finally dredged up courage to call.

“Some people from your village came to our school today.”

“Which village?” I asked.

“Ibusa,” came the answer.

“You are from Ibusa too and it is not a village,” I tried to explain as I have done a hundred times.

The “people from my village” were Sir Walter and Dame Winifred Akpani who it turns out had attended the dedication of the Chapel they built, furnished and donated to Augustine University under the Lagos Archdiocese.

It must have been a moment of pride for a child who has always claimed Lagos as home and perpetuated the city and village binary.

Described as “something out of this world” by the priest who anchored the event, the chapel of Mary Mother of the Church which can seat 1,200 people was dedicated on Monday December 16, 2024 on the campus of Augustine University, Ilara-Epe.

The dedication offered an opportunity for a comingling of Archbishops and faithful’s drawn from the Lagos, Abuja and Ijebu-ode dioceses.

According to the University’s website, “The dedication was presided over by the Archbishop of the Metropolitan See of Lagos and Proprietor of Augustine University, His Grace, Most Rev. Dr. Alfred Adewale Martins, who delivered a profound homily. He was supported by the Archbishop of Abuja Catholic Archdiocese, His Grace Most. Rev. Dr. Ignatius Ayau Kaigama and the Bishop of Ijebu-Ode Catholic Diocese, Most Rev. Dr. Francis Obafemi Adesina.”

They were joined by the Visioner of Augustine University and Archbishop Emeritus of Lagos, His Eminence Anthony Cardinal Okogie and over 100 priests in the celebration of the Holy Mass followed by the “sacred anointing of the altar and walls of the church, as well as the decoration and incensation of the altar and the entire chapel, symbolizing the consecration of the space as a place of worship and reflection.”

The foundation of the chapel was laid in 2019. It was created by Teresa Mallamaci, an acclaimed Italian architect based in Rome and has been realised as “a harmonious blend of Christological and Mariological motif” with the resulting edifice seamlessly melding “aesthetic elegance with spiritual symbolism.”

 

The brand new Chapel of Mary Mother of the Church features two distinct side Chapels; one dedicated to Eucharistic Adoration with a sacred space for prayers and meditation and another which will be used for celebrating weekday masses or for smaller congregations.

Rev. Fr. Andrew Toye was unveiled as the new Chaplain of the Chapel and he takes over from Rev. Dr. Emmanuel Ogundele, who had served with dedication in an acting capacity.

The Chaplain has a purpose built home contiguous to the chapel and both facilities have been provided with generators to ensure round-the-clock power,

Sir Walter Akpani who holds a Master of Science degree in Finance from the University of Strathclyde, Scotland is the Managing Director / CEO of wave-making Providus Bank which inked a celebrated merger with Unity Bank in mid-2024.

With over 30 years of financial experience, Walter Akpani was a pioneer staff of ICON Stockbrokers, before joining the restructuring team at Commercial Trust Bank, becoming a pioneer staff at Standard Trust Bank Plc now United Bank for Africa (UBA) as well as at Platinum Bank Ltd which he left as Vice President, Institutional Banking, to set up United Mortgage Bank Limited, which has now metamorphosed into Providus Bank. He is a respected Treasurer in the Nigerian banking industry and a committed change agent.

A devout Catholic, Walter Akpani was invested as a Knight of St. Sylvester in September 2024 when he received papal honours from Pope Francis alongside others – Lady Christine Doja Otedola, Mr. Julius Olufunsho Britto, Mr. Peter Amangbo and Mr. Peter Nwanze – in recognition of “their dedication and exceptional service to the Church in different Apostolates.”

Dame Winifred Akpani, a Member of the Governing Council, Augustine University and past chairman of Depot and Petroleum Products Marketers Association of Nigeria (DAPPMAN) is a graduate of Mathematics from the University of Benin. Driven, diligent and resilient, she is the founder and CEO of Northwest Petroleum & Gas Ltd, Rosarium Lubricants, Northwest Energy Ltd, Millennium Oil & Gas Ltd with interests in the upstream and downstream sectors of the Nigerian oil and gas industry. Northwest Petroleum & Gas Ltd is one of Nigeria’s biggest downstream players and owns two tank farms, 200 distribution trucks and over 100 petrol stations spread across the country.

Those are the people from my village who went to spread Christmas cheer at St Augustine University.

 

***Toni Kan Onwordi is a PR expert and financial analyst.

Continue Reading

News and Report

FALSE CLAIMS STEMMING FROM MISINTERPRETED BOARDING VIDEO POST

Published

on

By

 

Our attention has been drawn to a video circulating online and on social media on the boarding of Air Peace passengers on flight P47123 from Abuja to Lagos on December 20, 2024. This report is false, mischievous and misleading.

The false video post was designed by some faceless individuals with the intent of misleading the flying public to cause confusion and distraction for management of Air Peace and its stakeholders including the regulators.

On the day in question, there were flight delays because of poor weather conditions, specifically harmattan-induced haze and fog, which is common at this time of the year, and which significantly limits visibility and impacts flight operations nationwide.

To ensure that passengers continued their journeys with minimum disruptions, Air Peace deployed three aircraft to Abuja to evacuate all the passengers. While processing them for their flights at the boarding gate, passengers overwhelmed both the FAAN and boarding officers and rushed to the airside. Duty managers and ramp officials then had to mount barricades in front of the motorized step to differentiate passengers on flights.

While we empathize with you, our loyal customer, we condemn in very strong terms the misinformation, insults and deliberate falsehood disseminated in the video post. Such representations are not reflective of our values or operations.

There is no truth in the allegation, and we urge the public to disregard the report in all its entirety.

We appreciate your understanding and patience during this period and sincerely regret any inconvenience these delays may have caused you. The safety of our passengers and crew is our utmost priority.

At Air Peace, safety is not just a priority but a fundamental precondition for all our activities. We remain committed to maintaining safe and timely operations.

For further assistance or inquiries, please contact us via callcenter@flyairpeace.com.

 

 

SIGNED

Dr. Ejike Ndiulo

Head, Corporate Communications

Continue Reading

News and Report

Christmas, Cash Scarcity and Attacks against CBN’s Proactive Stance – Toni Kan

Published

on

By

 

Let us look at a few figures……..

Nigeria’s population is put at a little over 200 million people while the UK population is about 68 million. This means that the Nigerian population is about three (3) times that of the UK.

As at June 2023, the UK banking system had about 49,421 Automatic Teller Machines and almost 2.3 million Point of Sales Terminals.

By contrast, the Nigerian banking system had a little over 22,600 ATMS according to TechCabal and is projected to reach 29,000 by 2029 according to Statista. Conversely, Nigeria boasted 1,665,664 POS terminals as at December 2022. Meanwhile, figures attributed to Inlaks, which is described as Nigeria’s biggest ATM operator, suggest that Nigeria needs at least 60,000 ATM machines to serve its population of over 200 million.

Where is all this going? Well to borrow a phrase from the comedian, Jeff Foxworthy; hold my beer, sir!

Those who know me well know what my favourite Igbo proverb is. It goes something like this in translation – “the disease that gives you warning, does not kill you!” It is a proverb that underlines the imperative of proactivity, what the Igbo people might call igba mbo.

So, I was really pleased when I read that the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) was taking a proactive step to ensure that there is no cash scarcity this Christmas.

Nigerians love cash and that love can become obsessive and reach fever pitch at festive periods. Have you been to Abeokuta during Ojude Oba? Or to Kano during the Durbar? Or Onitsha during Ofala? Those are regional festivities. So, you can imagine what happens at Christmas!

All efforts at driving a cashless policy and economy seem to collapse when festivities come around the corner and this year, the CBN was quick to take proactive action weeks before the festivities reach fever pitch. But the apex bank’s interventions seem to be having unintended consequences even though as at the time of writing this, the apex bank had put out three (3) different circulars and one press release around the issue.

First, is a not-so-surprising pushback from the banks and then a seeming lack of understanding by the general public no thanks to rampant mis-information.

The issue of cash scarcity around the Christmas period worsened under the sway of Godwin Emefiele at the CBN. The fall-out from the disastrous naira redesign he superintended over at the apex bank continues to haunt our banking vaults but Olayemi Cardoso and team are focused on making sure we turn that dark corner.

Let us begin with the first circular dated November 29, 2024: “Cash Availability Over the Counter in Deposit Money Banks (DMBs) and Automated Teller Machines (ATMs).” The circular had two sections: DMBs were directed to ensure efficient cash disbursement to customers Over the Counter (OTC) with the CBN insisting that it will enforce the directive and ensure compliance.

Secondly, members of the general public were encouraged to report instances where they are unable to get cash Over the Counter or through ATMs. The CBN ended with a list of 37 email addresses and phone numbers across the 36 states and FCT for reporting issues.

On paper, it looked like Nigerians and the cash worries were all sorted this Christmas but it didn’t take time for the expected pushback to occur. News reports began to circulate of long queues at banks and of ATMs struggling to dispense more than N10,000. “NAN reports that long queues have emerged at ATM stands around the city as residents struggle to have access to cash…Meanwhile POS operators are currently taking advantage of the situation to demand exorbitant charges on transactions.”

While Nigerians were still trying to make sense of the reason behind the long queues, another report had an official of the Association of Senior Staff of Banks, Insurance, and Financial Institutions (ASBIFI) pointing fingers. According to the report, “ASSBIFI President, Olusoji Oluwole, told the Punch that “Banks have only two sources of cash: the CBN and retailers. The CBN has not met banks’ demands, and retailers often sell cash for profit, making it harder for banks to access funds.”

As if in response to the charge, the apex bank responded “with their full chest” as we say on social media with a December 13, 2024 circular – Updated Penalty on Inappropriate Cash Disbursement Practices by Deposit Money Banks (DMBs) in which it condemned the “illicit flow of mint banknotes to currency hawkers and other unscrupulous economic agents that commodify naira bank notes thus impeding efficient and effective cash distribution to banks’ customers and general public.”

Giving bite to the circular the CBN said any bank found culpable of “facilitating, aiding or abetting, by direct actions or inactions, illicit flow of mint banknotes” would be fined N150m and then hit with the full weight of the relevant provisions of BOFIA 2020.

This time no pointing fingers were seen but the CBN was not done. Eager to completely squelch rumours around “the validity or lack thereof of the old ₦1000, ₦500, and ₦200 banknotes” the refusal of which was contributing to the long queues, the CBN issued a press release shutting it down: “The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has observed the misinformation regarding the validity of the old ₦1000, ₦500, and ₦200 banknotes currently in circulation….the CBN wishes to reiterate that the subsisting Supreme Court ruling granted on November 29, 2023, permits the concurrent circulation of all versions of the ₦1000, ₦500, and ₦200 denominations of the Naira indefinitely.”

The third circular from the CBN which it said was in line with its “ongoing efforts to advance a cash-less economy” seems to have hit a raw nerve among Nigerians who, as we have already noted, love their cash even though it is now an offence to spray the naira.

News outlets also seemed to also get it wrong. The CBN circular of December 17, 2024 did not put a limit on how much cash you and I can withdraw from banks. The limits imposed in the circular titled – CIRCULAR ON CASH-OUT LIMITS FOR AGENT BANKING TRANSACTIONS – are “for agency banking operations” and as reported by TheCable is among interventions intended to address “identified challenges, combat fraud and establish uniform operational standards across the industry.”

Now, can I have my beer back as I attempt to outline how easily well-intentioned policies are rubbished by that euphemistically named malady known as the “Nigerian factor”.

The ASBIFI official was quick to point fingers even though simple logic can show that Over the Counter cash scarcity and at ATMs has little to do with the CBN or its cash distribution operations but with our Nigerian any-how-ness.

Let’s consider this. How is it that banks cannot fill up 22,600 ATMS, most of which are within or in close proximity to their branches but can afford to give cash to 1.6m PS operators? Doesn’t this seem to suggest that someone is out to make sure that the ATMs don’t have cash while the PoS operators continue to make a killing?

And why does it seem right that Nigerians should continue to pay between N250 and N400 per N10,000 withdrawals to PoS operators when ATM charges are far lower at N35 and only after you have made multiple withdrawals from other bank ATMs?

Oh, bankers have said ATMs are difficult to maintain on account of several factors and this takes us back to the figures we shared from the UK. Of the 49,421 ATMs in the UK, “78% were free to use” during the period under reference. So, why do we always talk about maintenance when it comes to Nigeria? Imagine if we paid N10 per ATM transaction, wouldn’t that be better than paying N250 to a PoS operator for every N10,000 withdrawn?

And for context, in 2014, data on various e-payment channels indicated that Automated Teller Machines (ATMs) remained the most patronised payment mode in Nigeria accounting for 89.7% of all electronic transactions with PoS transactions accounting for just 4.58 per cent. Today, the reverse is the case and the question to ask remains; what changed? The answer has something to do with financial inclusion but that is a topic for another day.

As you ponder that poser, ask yourself why is it always difficult to get mint bank notes over the counter in the banks meanwhile, step into any event center and you will see some hawker waving bright new notes in your face. Surely, they don’t get those notes from the CBN.

When the CBN referenced the Supreme Court ruling granted on November 29, 2023 to the effect that the old notes are still legal tender, their X Formerly Twitter page was filled with bile. But what many are failing to contend with is that the current leadership is only trying to make sure the mess they inherited doesn’t get worse.

As we prepare for Christmas and the New Year the advice is simple; go to your bank and ask for your money or withdraw from the ATMs and if you suspect any funny business, email or call the hotlines provided by the CBN.

Say no to any-how-ness this yuletide.

 

Toni Kan is a PR expret and financial analyst.

 

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending