The Need for a “Civil Asset Forfeiture Law”

According to the FBI - The Federal Bureau of Investigation: "Many criminals are motivated by greed and the acquisition of material goods. Therefore, the ability of the government to forfeit property connected with criminal activity can be an effective law enforcement tool by reducing the incentive for illegal conduct. Asset forfeiture "takes the profit out of crime" by helping to eliminate the ability of the offender to command resources necessary to continue illegal activities." 

A "Civil Asset Forfeiture Law" (CAFL) takes your property or bank account, without actually sending you to jail or even filing a case against you. It targets only the fruits of crime. In other words, it goes after everything that you have acquired through fraud or corrupt practices. The process is good because it saves time - it eliminates the laborious proof beyond reasonable doubt requirement of criminal prosecution. Above all, there is a lot of money to be saved from hiring a behemoth of SANs and other litigation related expenses. The United States has it. Great Britain has it. Australia has it and some other developing countries too. Why not Nigeria? That is the argument below.

President Goodluck Jonathan should as a matter of urgency and national interest, send a bill to the National Assembly designed to dilute or lessen the burden of proof required to secure a forfeiture in the prosecution of fraudsters, rogue bankers, corrupt politicians, and millionaire civil servants. The standard is very clear: once a probable cause has been established by the Prosecutor, the burden of proof of not guilty of the offense charged shifts to the accused or the owner of the Bank Accounts or Properties seized. In other words, in cases of frauds or embezzlement perpetrated by individual or group of individuals against other people, or against public or private institutions, the burden of proof should be a preponderance of the evidence and not proof beyond reasonable doubt standard. In such cases, we shift the burden of proof - the source or sources of funds for the property or Bank Accounts - to the accused. Thus, relieving the Prosecutor or EFCC to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. 

All that is required of the ICPC or EFCC is to show probable cause for the underlying fraud or scam. Once the Prosecutor or EFCC has established a prima facie case for fraud, scam, or embezzlement, proof of innocence - I did not steal or assist others to steal, or I am innocent and I am not guilty - should shift to the accused or the owner of the Bank Accounts or landed Properties. If they cannot establish an ascertainable source or sources of their new wealth or Bank Accounts, then such wealth and Bank Accounts and Properties should, as a matter of law, be forfeited automatically to the state (Nigeria).

Now, let’s take a pause and reflect and ask ourselves this simple question: of what use wasting tax payers’ money and time prosecuting a civil servant or a serving or retired politician who accumulated multi-million Dollar worth of landed properties and Bank Accounts at home and abroad that ordinarily, he cannot afford or acquire through his regular salary? That is the essence of "Civil Asset Forfeiture Law" - the thief or the accused must prove that he or she did not commit fraud against the state or did not take part or collude or influence the commission of frauds by others against the state, either by his action or inaction. It is certainly not a criminal proceeding.

I do not want to dwell on the legal history or constitutionality of Civil Asset Forfeiture Law, suffice it to say that given the egregious nature of the scams perpetrated by the oil subsidy fraudsters as well as other corrupt practices perfected by Nigerians at an ongoing basis, a "Civil Asset Forfeiture Law", is our best bet.

At this juncture, I would like to remind Nigerians that “Civil Asset Forfeiture Law” cases are in rem proceedings - the focus is on the Bank Accounts, Assets, or Properties of the thieves or fraudsters, and not the individual or fraudsters who perpetrate the crime. It is solely after the fruits of crime and not the person or the criminals who perpetrate the crime. In that case, it can be easily deployed without the usual procedural mumbo jumbo prevalent in criminal prosecution.

Also,  we shouldn't be unmindful of the exorbitant legal fee charged by celebrity lawyers and Senior Advocates in fraud related cases. The thieve or the fraudster has nothing to lose; he did not sweat to acquire the money he is willing to spend to hire the best lawyers in town.  The case of the rogue Banker is still very fresh in our memory. In a decent society, that is a national scandal. How could one justify hiring and paying five Senior Advocates of Nigeria just in one case, and at the end, the presiding Judge declined to continue with the case after lambasting the SANs for incompetent prosecution? According to the Judge, “I hereby dismiss the charges amended or otherwise on the grounds of incompetence. I discharge the accused person accordingly.’’ “They are a drain on the public purse.’’ “They” as used in the last sentence, refers to the five Senior Advocates of Nigerians who handled the case form EFCC. That is a huge financial loss to us as a country. First, the accused stole our money, then we paid lazy lawyers to do a futile job. 

In a nutshell, "A Civil Asset Forfeiture Law" expedite seizures of private funds and landed properties illegally acquired by bogus contractors and dubious billionaire civil servants. For instance, petroleum marketers who scammed our petroleum subsidy funds should be made to show proof of their supply and concrete evidence of overseas dealers and how and where they deliver their petroleum products in Nigeria. Right now and as it has always been, EFCC, the Justice Department are under stress, and trial courts are overwhelmed with fraud and scam related cases. A shift in the burden of proof from the Prosecutor to the accused, will no doubt, expedite trial and lessen the work load drastically.

In conclusion, "Civil Asset Forfeiture Law" is designed to eliminate the usual, but unprofessional recalcitrance of the SANs and celebrity lawyers (who most often represent the thieves) that EFCC has to deal with on regular basis. Above all, it will curtail the unpardonable mumbo jumbo and cumulative time wasting procedural legalese from defense lawyers that most often obscure substantive evidence. You and I know that most of these cases are often frustrated or thrown out through procedural technicalities, without reaching a final verdict. We can do better. 

We can change all that if we are willing. Believe me, Nigeria is easy to govern. It's all about audacity and a willingness on the part of the President, EFCC, ICPC and the Attorney General and Minister of Justice to embrace and implement changes in the war against corruption, no matter the likely impacts on political friends and allies. The Presidency and the National Assembly should, as a matter of urgency, help EFCC to help itself, by passing into law a “Civil Asset Forfeiture Law” as soon as possible, if we must succeed in our war against rogue Bankers, Billionaire Civil Servants, Greedy and Insane Governors, Oil Marketers as well as the shameless and graft prone Members of the National Assembly. 

As an addendum: I want to make it abundantly clear that I am not against capitalism or private ownership or private acquisition of wealth; however, I am unequivocally against over-leveraged capitalism and the prevailing culture of impunity and blatant abuse of political office by those vested with such power. To continue to enrich yourself with money, cars, and property that you and your immediate family members cannot utilize under normal circumstances, borders on insanity and stupidity. It is not fair. It is not right. And it is morally repugnant. It must stop. 

Where are the President’s Men? The Challenges President Jonathan of Nigeria Cannot Ignore.

President George Bush ruled America for eight years, in spite of the much-satirized communication deficiencies. President Bush had the ultra-partisan Vice President (Dick Cheney), a man full of bile and venom and a team of White House operatives who do not have problem slamming members of the opposition and the news media below the belt. And of course, the unconditional support of FOX News Network - the mouth piece of the conservatives and by extension, the Republican Party. They succeeded in convincing the America people and Congress that Millionaires deserve tax break even when America was fighting two wars. And they made Senator John Kerry - a man who fought for his country and was awarded Purple Heart - to defend his patriotism when he ran unsuccessfully against President Bush in the 2004 Presidential election.

President Clinton had Paul Begala, George Stephanopoulos, Rahm Emanuel, John Podesta, Erskine Bowles, Dee Dee Myers, James Carville, just to name a few. These guys were not Ministers, PhDs or Professors while serving under President Clinton. They were highly dedicated Technocrats and policy wonks who - as die hard supporters of the President - spit fire and brimstone at political opponents systematically and with devastating precision. They had a firm grasp of how President Clinton’s mind works, his vision for American people and where he is going. They know the issues, they have the facts, and they were on top of the game. In the height of President Clinton impeachment trial, Mr. James Carville came out on TV to declare war on Kenneth Star - the callous Independent Counsel who shamelessly turned White Water investigation into a sex scandal.

Granted President Jonathan cannot be President Clinton, but his administration certainly needs a mature voice – not press releases or rejoinders – but a policy wonk who has a firm grasp of what PDP wants to accomplish and where President Jonathan is taking the country.  I want to read Vice President Sambo's view and position on specific issues. I want to read from the Economic Adviser. I want to see the face of the President's Energy Czar on TV, explaining before the nation how the scams that depleted the subsidy regime funds was so easy to execute and how the President and his administration want to fix the problems. Nigerians are tired of Press Releases by the Media Adviser to the President. They want to see action.

The Chief Press Secretary or Media Adviser to the President is what it says it is – he is not a politician or a policy person, he is the voice and spokesperson of the President on developing issues. He is not the economic adviser, and certainly not the energy adviser or energy czar of the administration.

The Director of Communication is the politician, the policy guru – who knows the nitty-gritty of governance and the position of the party on specific issues. He or she manages the flow of information, the talking points within and outside of Aso Rock. Mr. Abati is doing a good job as a media adviser. He is a news analyst – a writer; he is not your Odia Ofeinmu, Duro Onabule, Chinweizu, Stanley Macebuh, Paul Begala, James Carville, or Ari Fleischer.   He is certainly not your Chuba Okadigbo or Uba Ahmed. You don’t have to like these two guys, but they served President Shehu Shagari very well in dealing with members of the opposition. So, where are President Jonathan's men?

I remember in 1993 when President Bill Clinton had to send his Vice President, Al Gore to CNN Larry King Live to debate the garrulous Ross Perot. I remember the debate vividly. I was a student in Nigeria. As an unrepentant admirer and supporter of President Bill Clinton, I didn't want to miss any bit of the debate - I went home to watch the debate live because there was no Satellite Cable Receiver in our dormitory at Igbosere, Lagos. I was apprehensive. I honestly thought that President Clinton was committing a political suicide for allowing Al Gore to debate Mr. Perot, given what Mr. Perot did to President George Bush Sr in the 1992 Presidential 3-way debates. I remember staying awake until 3 a. m. Nigeria Time to be able to watch the debate live in our living room in Lagos, Nigeria, along with American East Coast audience at 9 p.m. Eastern Time the USA.

As calculated by President Clinton and his new administration, the debate was the best thing that happened to them in their first year in office. Al Gore decimated Ross Perot beyond redemption. At the end of the debate, I concluded that Mr. Perot is done for good in American politics. As predicted, Mr. Perot disappeared, not only from American politics but from the news media as well.  Not surprising, President Clinton and his administration had a fulfilled first term in office.

I am not asking for President Jonathan's men or any President to descend on their political opponents and decimate them, but to raise public awareness of what the administration is doing and where it is going on specific issues that matter to Nigerians the most. Enough of Press Releases. It shows naiveté in public affairs commentary.

Follower-ship is about trust. People must believe in you. Without that, no amount of paid adverts or press releases would buy public sympathy and acceptance. Even in far away Nigeria and in the very first year of President Bill Clinton in the US, I could feel his passion for real leadership, and his genuine commitment to doing good for the people. Nigerians must feel that you care. In 1992, not wanting to be left out of the Clinton phenomenon, I had to risk my School Fees to buy a Satellite Cable Receiver at Alaba Market and had it installed in my elder brother's house in Lagos. In that case, whenever I am home on weekend or during the holiday, I always have President Clinton on top of my hand.  Call it fanaticism, if you want, but I call it loyalty.

Growing up, I had to buy every book, magazine, article, journal, etc., written by Chief Obafemi Awolowo as well as those written  by other people about him in order to have an independent knowledge of him besides his accomplishments and public service credentials as told by my Mother - a huge fan and supporter of the sage. I became an admirer of Awo in no time - not letting any opportunity slip by without standing for him, defending him, or setting the record straight, or injecting stories of his accomplishments into discussions, with a convincing pride. It is not fanaticism; it is trust in the man and trust in his leadership.

Governance is a fiduciary responsibility – it connotes a duty of care - an utmost good faith on the part of the elected representatives and their paid special advisers. The President should look inward and ask his men the simple question: are we living up to our promise, and are we serving the Presidency and the people as expected of a prudent fiduciary? Of what political merit is retaining a Special Adviser if his or her counsel is of little or no relevance in your decision-making process?

This administration has communication problem and that to a significant degree is responsible for the unguided utterances often credited to the President. Adding to that, President Jonathan does not command the sort of media respect and support that President Obama has. Therefore, it is left to him and his administration to find their voice and find it fast in the crazy cacophony occasioned by Rep Lawan's report on the petroleum subsidy scam.

Granted it is not humanly possible to guide against gaffe at impromptu press briefings, but only the President, by himself, and himself only, can develop the craftsmanship of President Bill Clinton and the eloquence and audacity of President Barack Obama. It requires constant reading. And it is about knowledge. The New York Times is a must read for every American President first thing in the morning.

President Jonathan can elevate his game and relevance by skimming, at least three Nigerian national newspapers every morning before proceeding to work. Adding to that, a copy of The Economist magazine must always be by his bedside. Not just to keep abreast of the latest development in the business World at home and abroad, but for an overall philosophical and intellectual enrichment.  The President can also arrange for mock debates, at least once every two months, with his closest confidants on both domestic and international issues as if he is preparing to debate President Barack Obama or planning a tete-a-tete with his number one nemesis - Mr. Sonala Olumhense. I am not being sarcastic; the President should endeavor to embrace the concept of content management and transcribe it into politics and governance; enmesh himself in philosophical reawakening, focusing on the nitty-gritty of political economy and public affairs.

When the President's men are missing, only the President can up his game. There is no short cut to vision. Right now, something isn't right in Nigeria. And the people are yearning for a change, looking for a great leader to lead and restore hope in a dispirited populace.

It’s all about knowing little about most things; how to communicate, improve on what you know and how to express yourself in simple, yet mature syntax. It's all about awareness of what great leaders do and what they read. Ask President Bill Clinton. President Jonathan has the resources and men and women to transform himself and mission of his administration and do for Nigeria what President Bill Clinton did for American people and what Awo did for Western Region of Nigeria. It's all about the reading because it makes the man.

NB

I also do believe that President Obama's men are missing in action. This is the time to stand out and stand partisan. This is the time to put a lie to all the Republican lies and mudslinging. This is the time to talk about Governor Romney's performance or lack of it, while he was the Governor of the great Commonwealth of Massachusetts.  

A Misguided Judgment: How President Jonathan and His Advisers Squandered a Golden Opportunity

Introduction

Over the years, in spite the skepticism or suspended judgment that I have in the petroleum subsidy scheme in Nigeria, I have always resisted the temptation to engage myself in the arithmetic of the funding methodology for an obvious reason: I hate Mathematics. Nevertheless, I am quite familiar with the basic principles of economics and strategic management. In a similar vein, I have a good understanding of the fundamentals of subsidy as they relate to pricing and competitive markets.  Thus, it is reasonable to assume that when government intervenes in the market and help to defray the cost of production or part of it, it makes the final product less expensive for the final consumers to buy than it would have been without the intervention or the subsidy. In the area of export, it enhances competitive edge in relation to similar products by other suppliers in the same market - foreign or domestic - because the subsidized products are cheaper to buy.

Sadly, those assumptions do not hold water in our (Nigerian) domestic petroleum market in terms of availability and pricing. The more funding our government injects into the petroleum subsidy scheme, the more scared petroleum products remain and the more expensive the final prices are at the gas pump. In hindsight, what I take away from the petroleum subsidy scam in Nigeria is that before we condemn the usual suspect - international financial institutions that we love to hate for. in our reckoning, always recommending deadly economic pills as panacea for our sluggish economic growth - we must first ask ourselves whether the patients (African countries) administer the drugs as prescribed by Doctors (the international financial institutions).

During the sit-in-protest that heralded the reported removal of petroleum subsidy by President Goodluck Jonathan in January this year, my concern was the long term implications of the removal. I supported the removal during the "Occupy Nigeria" protest, believing in my mind that something is inherently wrong somewhere in the subsidy regime that is preventing us from reaping the reward of the intended subsidy. The inability of the administration and those before it, to eliminate the loopholes in the regulatory framework, makes continuation of the subsidy economically imprudent. No one knows where the money is going. Not even the President.

On that ground, I took a stand in favor of removal and made my position public via my comments on social media. My position was (1), if subsidy must exit, it should be handled by a separate and independent government institution and not private companies as presently the case, and (2) that, economically speaking, it is unwise and unsustainable for the Federal government to continue to subsidize importation of fuel on behalf of private companies, while they reap millions of dollars in profit. Finally, I made a reference to the current trends in the disbursement of student loans in the US, introduced by President Obama - an initiative that has saved the administration billions of dollars in student loans since its inception. Please see my comments at the end of this piece, reproduced courtesy of Sahara Reporters.

Missed Opportunity

In hindsight, if President Jonathan has a firm grasp of his energy policy and governance in general, April 2012, would have been the finest moment in his short, but an eventful political career. The recent revelation by the House of Representatives Ad-Hoc Committee on Fuel Subsidy Regime, detailing the large scale frauds in the management of the petroleum subsidy funds by Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) and Petroleum Product Price and Regulatory Agency (PPPRA), apparently, is a vindication of President Jonathan. Surprisingly or may be, naively, the President and his Advisers didn't buy into Representative Farouk Lawan's report. They saw friction, instead of triumphant and vindication.

The same administration that argued vigorously in January that funding petroleum subsidy is no longer sustainable because of the existence of a cabal scamming the subsidy regime of available funds, couldn't fathom a nexus between their proposition and the report of the House of Rep. 

A month after the release of the report by the Speaker of the House, the President, and his Advisers were still searching for what to make of the report. They (Attorney General and the President) told the world that the report is a 'fact finding’ and ‘we will react appropriately a soon as the investigation is concluded.’

It remains very troubling that the administration couldn't link their “unproven cabal in the subsidy regime” to the subsequent discovery "of massive frauds in the regulatory bodies" by the House of Representative to justify their January argument and convince the Nigerian people that they were right while the demonstrators were wrong. I feel like crying for the inept bunch.

If the administration had taken that stand, Nigerians wouldn't have had problem connecting the dots, to wit, that the frauds that the President referred to, actually do exist. Thus, making continuation of the funding inadvisable. They didn't make that argument! Rather, they want to punch holes on the House report with a view to discrediting Farouk and discarding the report.

That is not unusual in Nigeria.  The only difference this time is that Nigerians are not buying the silence. Unless President Jonathan and his Advisers have a good understanding of the subsidy, the scams, and the frauds that the rest of us do not have; I want to conclude that given what we know so far, the President is not getting the right counsel and certainly not making the right judgment.

Analysis: Blinded Judgment or Shielding the Cabal?

The Farouk Lawan’s report, objectively speaking, vindicates President Jonathan on the issue of cabal scamming the Subsidy regime. Why the administration did not take advantage of the report is beyond my understanding. From all indications, it is either the attempted removal scheme was haphazardly assembled and no one close to the President comprehends the general import and the underlying economic philosophy, or simply put, the administration lacks depth in communication management. Otherwise, they would have been able to see the nexus between "unsustainable" argument they made in January and report of "endemic, sleaze, incompetence, entrenched inefficiency and scam" in the regulatory regime as revealed by the House Committee.

To a reasonable administration, the report, no doubt, presents reasonable grounds for reasonable talking points for the Presidency to create a superior public policy mindset that is presently a challenge for Mr. President. And then, leverage that to develop a coherent narrative for eventual removal of the subsidy in future, if ever the need arises. They never did.

Twice, the President and his Advisers failed in the petroleum subsidy debate.

First, they couldn't frame plausible arguments for the removal, and second, when the outcome of an investigation of the House of Rep that they were not a party to and did not approve of, seemingly lend weight to their position, they developed cold feet and backed away. Unbelievable.

Without missing words, it is politically and strategically naive, and patently timid on the part of the President’s men not to dwell on the removal debacle and the "Occupy Nigeria" crusade that took place in January as well as the subsequent discovery of frauds in the regulatory regime to elevate the credibility of the Presidency at home and abroad. Unless the President is telling the whole World that he never really had a genuine reason to gamble with the subsidy removal as he did in January 2012.

According to the AGF, the report of the House of Rep is simply a ‘fact finding’ investigation and therefore, not conclusive of any criminal conduct on the part of marketers to warrant expedited response from the Presidency. Calling the House report a fact finding exercise is a systematic calculation to trivialize it for eventual rejection.  Why do we have a court system in the country? Why do we have separation of powers? The AGF and EFCC on the one hand and the Executive (the Presidency) on the other do not need to wait for the Senate to act or conclude its investigation before initiating its own investigation or making an arrest.

If AGF cannot see anything of value in the House report, then it is reasonable to conclude that the President and his negotiation team lied to the country when they claimed in January that there is a cabal frustrating the subsidy initiative. On the other hand, if the seeming rejection is to protect the same "cabal" that the President vilified in January, then, this administration wasted a golden opportunity to shine.

The credibility of the President is at stake. And whatever energy left in the President's commitment to the war against corruption, has been dissipated. As events unfold as predicted - failing to indict the thieves - the administration should brace for an outrage from Nigerians at home and abroad.

Furthermore, failing to make an arrest, or at least, suspend some of the top personnel at NNPC and PPPRA, given the magnitude of the scam and the egregious nature of the profligacy in the two departments, is an indictment on the part of the Presidency. And It manifests complicity. The burden of proof is now on the President to convince Nigerians that he or his administration is not part of the scam.

Conclusion:

The importance of subsidy cannot be overemphasized. The economic and social benefits are enormous if the funds are judiciously managed. Prices of petroleum and related products are always on the rise because the funds meant to stabilize the market and lower prices at the gas pump are either stolen or diverted to spurious use by the management and staffs of NNPC and PPPRA in collaboration with bogus petroleum marketers. Therefore, it is incumbent on the part of this administration to arrest and prosecute those who made the realization of the intent and purposes of petroleum subsidy in Nigeria, unreachable.

The argument by AGF that they do not want a repeat of what happened in the trial of some rogue Bankers is indirectly an indictment of EFCC, the Police, and ICPC. Because the report of the House of Rep is well-detailed, thorough and conclusive of malfeasance.

Mr. President, orientation is over and it’s time to govern. Your Presidency says something is wrong with the management of petroleum subsidy funds, yet EFCC, Justice Department, SSS, Ministry of Petroleum and Finance, didn't consider it prudence to initiate investigation since January. 

The truth is that, if the House of Representatives had not intervened, the Presidency would not have considered investigating the cabal a political priority. That is the Nigerian story since the Second Republic and throughout the successive military regimes. The outcome of the ongoing investigation of the subsidy scam is what will make or mar President Jonathan's Presidency. The President must choose the part of righteousness, the part of glory; stay on the side of the people and cooperate with EFCC to rid NNPC/PPPRA of corruption and shenanigans. The President has nothing to lose by following the part of righteousness. Let the revolution be televised. If the Presidency does that, the entire Armed Forces, the Police, the Security agencies, and the Nigerian people will stand by it. It is a choice between good and evil.

Addendum:

My posts on SAHARA REPORTERS during the Subsidy Protest.

In a news report by SaharaReporters.com, titled “Sorry Nigerians, But The Fuel Price Increase Has Come To Stay – Government” Published, January 4, 2012 - 21:40, I posted this comment.

Submitted by Hamiltonatlarge.blogspot.com (not verified) on January 5, 2012 - 16:12.

“Hitherto, in the US Uncle Sam used to provide grants and loans to university students through the banks – they guarantee the loan, while the banks reap the interest accruing from the loans. That is no longer the case, the Department of Education, through the Financial Aid Offices in all the universities, now prepare the loans and grants and disburse them directly to students. If Uncle Sam and the Department of Education are to bear the cost and forbearance of the loans or in the case of default by borrowing students, they should as well take advantage of the interest being paid on the loans by students.” “It is economically stupid for the Federal government to continue to subsidize importation of fuel for people in the private sectors, while they reap millions of dollars in profit.”

The following day, I posted a similar message on Saharareporters discussion board, titled, ‘There is Sense in the Removal.” In it, I urged President Jonathan to emulate President Obama’s new regulation in the disbursement and management of student loans in the US, adding that it is uneconomical for our government to continue the subsidy funding while private companies are in charge.

Few minutes later, another blogger responded to my post and questioned the effectiveness of special advisers to the President in the subsidy debate. Below, you will find just the title of the article originally written by Dr. Reuben Abati for the Guardian Newspaper, when he was not in government, reproduced by Sahara Reporters to lampoon him, as well as, my post and that of the blogger mentioned earlier.

“We Shall Start Stoning The Economists In Official Corridors.” – By Reuben Abati In 2009 Posted: January 5, 2012 - 01:34 by Sahara Reporters

See Part I and Part 11 of my post, below:

"There is sense in the Removal" - Part 1

Submitted by Hamiltonatlarge.blogspot.com (not verified) on January 5, 2012 - 16:07.

"Hitherto, in the US Uncle Sam used to provide grants and loans to university students through the banks – they guarantee the loan, while the banks reap the interest accruing from the loans. That is no longer the case, the Department of Education, through the Financial Aid Offices in all the universities, now prepare the loans and grants and disburse them directly to students. If Uncle Sam and the Department of Education are to bear the cost and forbearance of the loans or in the case of default by borrowing students, they should as well take advantage of the interest being paid on the loans by students. Our Federal Government has problems with communication - we speak complex English in Nigeria, even when we are sending a message to a wider audience, It is economically stupid for the Federal government to continue to subsidize importation of fuel for the people in the private sectors, while they reap millions of dollars in profit."

"There is sense in the Removal" - Part 2

Submitted by Hamiltonatlarge.blogspot.com (not verified) on January 5, 2012 - 16:06.

"What the Fed must do, therefore, is to transfer the importation to NNPC or government agencies, so that the profit going to the private oil importers, as published by Senate last year,  would go to the government. The money saved should be reinvested into the sector. That is the only way that the Nigeria people will benefit from the removal. Removing the subsidy and leaving the importation in the hands of the same private sectors, is economically disastrous."

A few minutes later, another blogger sent this feedback, reacting to my post above.

Re: "There is sense in the removal."

Submitted by dere (not verified) on January 5, 2012 - 19:13.

“Your piece makes sense but what beats me is whether our so-called advisers don't drill deep to consider all options with a view to proffering the best option for the people and the nation! Why do we have special advisers who are not specialists in their field? May the Lord help us indeed!” - dere

There is no doubt; subsidy regime is economically beneficial, if well managed. Because this government has not shown (1) the gravitas and rectitude to ensure transparency in the management of the subsidy funding, and (2) the legal muscle to prosecute the marketers   who perpetrate scam and the staffs of NNPC and PPPRA who facilitated the scam as revealed by the House of Representative, continuing the subsidy regime would constitute further drain on our lean financial resources.

 Mr. Alex Aidaghese