By Israel Adebiyi

The impasse between the Nigeria Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG) and the Dangote Refinery has at last been calmed, thanks to the intervention of the Federal Government. For days, the matter stirred debates in homes, offices, and market squares, with Nigerians asking where the truth lay. At first glance, it seemed to be a straightforward struggle for workers’ rights, but beneath the chants of solidarity and the stern defenses of corporate efficiency lies a bigger question about where our national interest truly resides.

The constitutional foundation is clear. Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) provides that “every person shall be entitled to assemble freely and associate with other persons, and in particular he may form or belong to any political party, trade union or any other association for the protection of his interests.” On the surface, therefore, NUPENG’s position that workers in the Dangote Refinery should have the right to unionize appears unassailable. Rights, however, do not operate in isolation; they must be exercised with responsibility and with due regard for broader societal implications.

Dangote, on his part, argued from the perspective of efficiency, discipline, and streamlined management. His position reflects the concern of many private investors in Nigeria who see unions not always as partners in progress but as instruments of disruption. The fear is not theoretical. The country has endured decades of industrial actions that cripple essential services, often at great cost to the very citizens unions claim to protect. In this light, Dangote’s resistance may not be a desire to trample on rights, but rather an attempt to avoid the familiar cycle of strikes and standoffs that have strangled other vital sectors.

MORE FROM THE AUTHOR:OPINION: 200k – The Shameful Prize For Academic Excellence

This tension raises an important question about the role of unions in Nigeria today. Historically, unions have been the moral compass of industrial society. They emerged to fight exploitation, to ensure fair wages, and to secure humane conditions of service. In many parts of the world, they remain engines of progress and defenders of justice. But the Nigerian experience has too often revealed another picture. For decades, our government-owned refineries remained in comatose state, swallowing billions of dollars in endless turnaround maintenance exercises without yielding a single barrel of refined product. Salaries were still paid, union offices remained open, but the voice of labour was curiously faint. There were no nationwide pickets demanding accountability, no strikes to compel government action, no campaigns to rescue the sector from ruin. Silence prevailed. The unions were alive, but they appeared comfortable in a system that rewarded failure.

Contrast that with the arrival of a private giant, a refinery built with vision, audacity, and sheer resilience against Nigeria’s hostile investment climate. Suddenly, the unions rediscovered their voice. They sang solidarity songs and raised placards, anchoring their grievance not on unpaid salaries or unsafe conditions, but on the right to membership. It is here that many Nigerians began to sense hypocrisy. Where was this passion when government after government wrecked our refineries and denied Nigerians the dignity of energy sufficiency? Why does the urgency to act appear strongest only when a private-sector initiative threatens the comfort zones of labour cartels? As the adage goes, “It is not every shout of fire that comes from a burning house; sometimes it comes from a kitchen disturbed.”

The problem with this form of unionism is that it begins to mirror the same oppression it claims to fight. In many Nigerian markets, traders’ unions act as cartels, fixing prices, intimidating dissenters, and distorting the natural balance of willing seller and willing buyer. Instead of protecting livelihoods, they suffocate them. This is not unlike the present standoff in the oil and gas sector, where the noble idea of protecting workers’ rights appears entangled with the less noble ambition of protecting turf and revenue through membership dues. The ordinary Nigerian is left wondering: who union help? The buyer who cannot afford inflated prices? The worker whose voice is often drowned in the politics of union executives? Or the society that pays the price when productivity is disrupted?

MORE FROM THE AUTHOR:OPINION: Ezekwesili, The NBA, And The Mirror Of Truth

None of this suggests that Dangote should be sanctified or given a blank cheque. Investors, no matter how ambitious or patriotic, are not immune to the temptations of overreach. It is possible to seek efficiency at the expense of fairness, or to pursue discipline at the cost of liberty. The Constitution must be respected, and the rights of workers must not be undermined in the name of corporate ambition. But balance is essential. Rights must coexist with responsibility, and unions must rediscover their higher calling.

The bigger picture is what should concern us most. Nigeria stands at a crossroads. A working refinery capable of reducing our import bills, creating jobs, stabilizing the naira, and boosting our pride is a national priority. Any action, whether from unions or from corporate actors, that frustrates this goal is ultimately against the interest of the people. The adage says, “When two elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers.” In this case, the elephants are NUPENG and Dangote, and the grass is the Nigerian people, weary from years of fuel scarcity, inflation, and economic hardship.

What is needed is not confrontation but cooperation. Strong unions can and should coexist with strong companies. Around the world, the most competitive firms are often those that engage constructively with organized labour, ensuring that productivity and fairness walk hand in hand. Nigerian unions must learn to wield their power not as a bludgeon but as a lever for progress. They must fight for safety, equity, inclusiveness, and opportunity, not merely for compulsory membership. Investors, in turn, must recognize that respecting rights and upholding dignity is not a burden but a foundation for long-term stability.

In the end, the test is simple: which path best serves Nigerians? Not the preservation of union dues, not the preservation of corporate control, but the preservation of national interest. If unions can return to their nobility and investors can temper ambition with fairness, then the people win. And that, in the final analysis, is the only victory that matters.

•••We Are Not Owning Fees In Any Institution

The Presidential Amnesty Programme has said that it is not owing school fees of 5000 students of Itsekiri extraction in Novena University, Ogume, Delta State.

The PAP, in a statement issued on Tuesday by Mr Igoniko Oduma,
Special Assistant on Media to the Administrator, Presidential Amnesty Programme, stated that the agency is not owing fees in Novena or any institution within or outside the country.

The agency was reacting to claims by the so-called Office of the Sole Representative of His Royal Majesty Ogiame Atuwatse III, the Olu of Warri to NNPCL, that the Amnesty Programme is “indebted” to Novena University concerning “all Itsekiri students” who graduated from the institution purportedly under the programme’s scholarship scheme.

The monarch’s agent, Collins Oritsetimeyin Edema, made a curious claim in a statement that the alleged liability made the Olu’s palace to announce an intervention to settle the “outstanding tuition and clearance fees” of all the affected Itsekiri graduates of Novena.

READ ALSO:PAP Slots To Itsekiri Privilege Not Right, Group Insists

But PAP said that there were no records in Novena University and the Amnesty Office concerning award of scholarship to the 5000 Itsekiri students of the institution.

PAP explained in the statement that the report of an inquiry into the issue by previous heads of the agency revealed that the 5000 Itsekiri indigenes were sent to the management of Novena university by the Itsekiri National Youth Council (INYC) in 2017 without the involvement of the agency.

It added that it was not conceivable for the PAP to take responsibility for the students who were not deployed by the agency.

The statement reads, “The management of PAP wishes to state unequivocally that it is not owing Novena university any tuition fees on account of the said Itsekiri graduates and any claim to the contrary is totally false, baseless, and represents an attempt to stand truth on its head.

READ ALSO:Otuaro Cautions Against Payment Of Money For PAP Scholarship

“PAP wishes to say also that it is not owing tuition fees in any institution within or outside the country.

“To set the records straight, it is necessary to inform the public that the affected Itsekiri graduates were a subject of a formal investigation launched by a previous PAP leadership into allegations of scholarship admission racketeering under the programme’s formal education at Novena. Three other partnering universities were also investigated.

“The report of the inquiry showed that the affected Itsekiri graduates constituted a list of 5000 Itsekiri indigenes that was sent to the management of Novena university by the Itsekiri National Youth Council (INYC) in 2017 purporting them to be PAP scholarship beneficiaries.

“The investigation revealed that the list in question did not emanate from the PAP, and did not also have any authorization or approval of the Amnesty Programme office. Therefore, the affected Itsekiri indigenes could not have been deemed to be beneficiaries of the PAP scholarship scheme.

READ ALSO:Otuaro Lauds Tinubu For Backing PAP’s Peacebuilding Process In Niger Delta

“Additionally, the inquiry also revealed that there was no correspondence between the PAP and Novena university indicating that the PAP approved the purported list of 5000 Itsekiri students to be deployed to the institution.

“The investigative committee, during its work, met with the INYC president and the secretary, as well as principal officers of Novena university led by its Vice-Chancellor who could not produce any documentation between the PAP and the institution on the affected Itsekiri graduates.

“At the end of the exercise, the PAP duly informed the management of Novena university that the Amnesty Programme office would not bear any liability for the affected students. Doing so would have amounted to encouraging sharp practices.

“Therefore, the PAP could not have accepted responsibility and obligation where it had none. The affected Itsekiri graduates of Novena university that the Olu’s palace is intervening for, were never beneficiaries of the amnesty programme’s scholarship.

READ ALSO:PAP Boss Felicitates Oborevwori @62

“All the PAP administrations that preceded the current one headed by the Administrator, Dr Dennis Otuaro, had seen the official report of the investigation and they respected the incontrovertible truth so established.

“Thankfully, Dr Otuaro has expanded the PAP scholarship scheme in order to create more access to higher education for ex-agitators and beneficiaries, and aggressively bridge the human capital development gap in the Niger Delta.

“His noble reforms and initiatives to ensure that the PAP renders efficient service to the people of the Niger Delta have been applauded in official quarters, as well as by all well-meaning individuals and organisations.

“Dr Otuaro remains unwaveringly committed to deepening the implementation of the programme’s mandate, especially through his policy of inclusivity, to complement the Renewed Hope Agenda of President Bola Tinubu, GCFR, for the Niger Delta.”

Edo State Government has denied allegations that it has five percent shares in Ossiomo Power, an indigenous electricity generation and distribution firm.

The government, while stating that Ossiomo Power was a private firm, clarified that it was one of its customers just like any other individuals.

Ossiomo Power had been shut down since September 1st due to ownership tussle between the Nigeria partners and the Jiangsu Communication Clean Energy Technology (CCETC).

It generates 95MW of electricity which it supplied to government buildings, Edo government house, Edo NUJ secretariat, private organisations, streetlights amongst others.

READ ALSO: Five Years After, Edo Govt Reconnects To BEDC As Ossiomo Shut Down

Already, 115 subscribers of Ossiomo Power have indicated interest to switch back to Benin Electricity Distribution Company (BEDC).

Speaking at a stakeholders meeting with Ossiomo Power subscribers, Director General of the Edo State Electrification Agency, Saturday Omozokpea Egbadon, said available records showed the state has no shares in Ossiomo Power.

Egbadon said 80 percent of state government facilities have been migrated to a dedicated line provided by the BEDC.

He said management of Ossiomo Power was yet to officially inform the state government about troubles in the firm.

READ ALSO: Edo Deputy Gov Orders Restoration Of Water Supply To Health Facility

Egbadon insisted that the state government provided the 11kva lines Ossiomo subscribers were connected to.

According to him, “We cannot keep the state like that. We have to act quickly. Ossiomo did not consult the state government. We did not play any role in their crisis. We are just their customers. We were told the state government has shares in Ossiomo but records showed that we are their customers. We don’t have any five percent shares. They are using our facility. We pay over N2m monthly to vend.

“Before this crisis, we have given Ossiomo licence to operate in Edo Central. It is between him and the Chinese partners.”