News

FG Proposes Ban On ‘Ponmo,’ Consumers Kick

Published

4 years ago

September 24, 2022

Editor

Some Nigerians have kicked against the proposed plan by the Federal Government to ban the consumption of cooked cow skin, popularly known as ponmo.

Recall that the Director General of the Nigerian Institute of Leather and Science Technology, Zaria, Prof. Muhammad Yakubu, recently said the institute and other stakeholders would be approaching the National Assembly and state governments to establish a legislation to ban the consumption of the cow skin.

According to him, the decision is aimed at reviving the moribund tanneries and leather industry in the country.

He said it had no nutritional value and should be proscribed to save the industry and boost the nation’s economy.

However, some consumers, traders and experts who spoke to our correspondent in separate interviews, said banning ponmo would further increase economic hardship on the poor masses.

A consumer, Rukayat Ishola said she was substituting beef and fish with ponmo as a result of the high cost of the protein.

She said, “Personally, I like ponmo. It’s something many of us eat now since meat and fish are costly. It’s also good for elderly people. If you have N200, you will buy ponmo which can serve five people whereas the least you can get is beef that will be N1,000 and it’s just five pieces or less.

“If the government decides to ban it, they want to inflict hunger on the people because the person that does not have money for meat will buy ponmo. I buy in large quantities, fry and keep it for cooking later, and sometimes, my children take it to school.”

Another consumer based in Ibadan, Titilayo Oyinlola, also said, “I will advise them not to ban it because a lot of us can’t do without eating it, not only because we enjoy it but because it saves money.

“For example, I came to this market to buy things, my initial plan was to buy N2,000 fish, but when I saw the size of fish they offered me, I had to change my mind. So, I decided to buy two Titus fish at N700 each then and one ponmo at N300, making a total of N1,700. My brother, things are tough and one needs to work with budget.”

A caterer and Chief Executive Officer of Bimras Catering Services, Rasaq Balikis, said when planning for events, it was advisable to mix ponmo with meat or fish in order to save cost.

“Most occasions, if you don’t garnish vegetables with ponmo and dried fish, people don’t like it. People want to feel a different taste when eating vegetables and this is what ponmo and dried fish does.

“It also helps with cost reduction when planning for events because instead of serving two meats, you can serve one ponmo, one meat or fish.

“Assuming you are having a party and you bought a meat of N100,000, if you realise that it’s not enough, you can buy one bag of ponmo which is around 60 pieces to substitute it and it will be okay. So, banning it will affect Nigerians a lot,” she added.

Another caterer, Fatimah Sulaiman, stressed that eating cow skin was mostly required by the elderly people, adding that medical doctors would always recommend it for the elderly people who were at risk of eating beef.

She maintained that such banning would leave such people with no alternative.

On his part, Kabiru Agbon, a cow skin trader, said banning the consumption of ponmo would mean taking away his livelihood.

“Ponmo, as far as I know, is for eating; there is the white one they call bokoto. Why will the government want to ban this now? Don’t you know banning it is an attempt to cause problems and taking away the source of income of many of us? It’s just not possible.”

In the same vein, the Chairman, Butcher and Meat Sellers Association, Bola Ige International Market, Ibadan, Ishola Olalekan, stated that any attempt to ban the consumption of cow skin would not only affect the consumers, but also take away jobs from some Nigerians.

“In olden days, cow skin was mainly used by our fathers for praying mats and some other leather forms. No one ate it before but when civilization set in, people began to process it for consumption. Now that lots of Nigerians are eating it and it has become a daily job for many, banning it will have an effect on a lot of people.

“There are people that depend on the processing and another set in charge of the sales before you now talk about those consuming it. What will they be doing after the ban,” Olalekan queried.

An expert and dietician at Diadem Nutrition and Dietic Consult, Queen Orji, said banning ponmo to revitalise the leather industry is not justifiable, stressing that though it did not contain protein, it served many Nigerians as food.

According to her, the ban of the food item, which is used by people from the eastern and western part of the country, is an attempt to deny the majority of poor people the opportunity of having the cheap cow skin.

“Ponmo is cheap and affordable, and for many, eating it with food is more like they have taken beef. Though it doesn’t add any protein or fat to the consumers, people enjoy it. I’m sure if they ban it, many people will not be happy,” Orji said.
PUNCH

News

Xenophobic Attacks: Oshiomhole Tells FG To Retaliate Against South African Companies In Nigeria

Published

9 hours ago

May 5, 2026

Editor

Senator Adams Oshiomhole has called on the Federal Government to retaliate against South African businesses operating in Nigeria following the recent attacks on Nigerians in South Africa.

Speaking during plenary on Tuesday, Oshiomhole said the Federal Government should consider revoking the working license of South African owned companies such as MTN and DSTV.

He argued that Nigeria must respond firmly to what he described as persistent hostility against its citizens.

“I am not going to shed tears. If you hit me, I hit you. I think it is appropriate in diplomacy. It is an economic struggle,” Oshiomhole said.

He argued that while some South Africans accuse Nigerians of taking their jobs, Nigerians should return home and take over employment opportunities created by major South African companies operating in the country, including MTN and DSTV.

“When we hit back, the President of South Africa will not only talk but will also go on his knees to recognise that Nigeria cannot be intimidated.

“We will not condone any life being lost. If a crime has been committed under the South African law they have the right to bring any such person to justice, but to kill our people as if we are helpless, we will not allow that,” Oshiomhole added.

DAILY POST reports that several Nigerians in South Africa have reportedly been attacked, and their businesses destroyed, in ongoing xenophobic attacks in the country.

News

IGP Orders Officers Display Name Tag On Uniform, Gives Update On State Police

Published

9 hours ago

May 5, 2026

Editor

The Inspector General of Police, IGP, Tunji Disu, has ordered all police personnel to always have their name tags on their uniforms for easy identification.

Disu disclosed that only police personnel who are undercover are exempted from displaying their name tags.

Speaking on Tuesday, Disu said: “All police officers should have their name tags. All of us on the high table have our names apart from the undercover among us so if you look at all the Commissioners of Police we have our name tags, so it’s not our standard.

News

Court Orders SERAP To Pay DSS Operatives N100m For Defamation

Published

14 hours ago

May 5, 2026

Editor

The High Court of the Federal Capital Territory has ordered a non-governmental organization, the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, SERAP, to pay N100 million as damaged to two operatives of the Department of the State Services, DSS, for unjustly defaming them in some publications.

The court also ordered SERAP to tender public apologies to the defamed officers,
Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele, in two national newspapers, two television stations and its website.

Besides, the organization was also ordered to pay the two operatives N1 million as cost of litigation and 10 percent post-judgment interest annually on the judgment sum until it’s fully liquidated.

Justice Yusuf Halilu of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory gave the order on Tuesday while delivering judgment in a N5.5 billion defamation suit instituted against SERAP by the DSS operatives.

The judge found SERAP liable for unjustly defaming the two DSS operatives with allegations that they unlawfully invaded its Abuja office, harassed and intimidated its staff, in September 2024.

In the offending publication on its website and Twitter handle, SERAP alleged that the two operatives unlawfully invaded and occupied its office with sinister motives.

The judge held that the publication was in bad taste especially from an organization established to promote transparency and accountability, as nothing in the publication was found to be truthful.

The DSS staff had listed SERAP as 1st defendant in the suit marked CV/4547/2024. SERAP’s Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, was listed as the 2nd defendant.

In the suit, the claimants – Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele – accused the two defendants of making false claims that they invaded SERAP’s Abuja office on September 9, 2024..

Counsel to the DSS, Oluwagbemileke Samuel Kehinde, had while adopting his final address in the mater urged the judge to grant all the reliefs sought by his client in the interest of justice.

He admitted that although the names of the two claimants were not mentioned in the defamation materials, they had however established substantial circumstances that they are the ones referred to in the published defamation article by SERAP on its website.

The counsel submitted that all ingredients of defamation have been clearly established and the offending publication referred to the two officials of the secret police.

However, SERAP, through its counsel, Victoria Bassey from Tayo Oyetibo, SAN, law firm, asked the court to dismiss the suit on the ground that the two claimants did not establish that they were the ones referred to in the alleged defamation materials.

She said that SERAP used “DSS officials” in the alleged offending publication, adding that the two claimants must establish that they are the ones referred to before their case can succeed.

Similar arguments were canvassed by Oluwatosin Adefioye who stood for the second defendant, adding that there was no dispute in the September 9, 2024 operation of DSS in SERAP’s office.

He said that since SERAP in the publication did not name any particular person, the claimants must plead special circumstances that they were the ones referred to as the DSS officials.

Besides, he said that there is no organization by name Department of State Services in law, hence, DSS cannot claim being defamed adding that the only entity known to law is National Security Agency.

The claimants had in the suit stated that the alleged false claim by SERAP has negatively impacted on their reputation.

The DSS also stated, in the statement of claim, that, in line with the agency’s practice of engaging with officials of non-governmental organisations operating in the FCT to establish a relationship with their new leadership, it directed the two officials – John and Ogunleye – to visit SERAP’s office and invite them for a familiarization meeting.

The claimants added that in carrying out the directive, John and Ogunleye paid a friendly visit to SERAP’s office at 18 Bamako Street, Wuse Zone 1, Abuja on September 9 and met with one Ruth, who upon being informed about the purpose of the visit, claimed that none of SERAP’s management staff was in the country and advised that a formal letter of invitation be written by the DSS.

John and Ogundele, who claimed that their interactions with Ruth were recorded, said before they immediately exited SERAP’s office, Ruth promised to inform her organisation’s management about the visit and volunteered a phone number – 08160537202.

They said it was surprising that, shortly after their visit, SERAP posted on its X (Twitter) handle – @SERAPNigeria – that officers of the DSS are presently unlawfully occupying its office.

The claimant added, “On the same day, the defendants also published a statement on SERAP’s website, which was widely reported by several media outfits, falsely alleging that some officers from the DSS, described as “a tall, large, dark-skinned woman” and “a slim, dark skinned man,” invaded their Abuja office and interrogated the staff of the first defendant (SERAP).

John and Ogundele stated that “due to the false statements published by the defendants, the DSS has been ridiculed and criticised by international agencies such as the Amnesty International and prominent members of the Nigerian society, such as Femi Falana (SAN)”.

“Due to the false statements published by the defendants, members of the public and the international community formed the opinion that the Federal Government is using the DSS to harass the defendants.”

They added that the defendants’ statements caused harm to their reputation because the staff and management of the DSS have formed the opinion that the claimants did not follow orders and carried out an unsanctioned operation and are therefore, incompetent and unprofessional.

The claimants therefore prayed the court for the following reliefs: “An order directing the defendants to tender an apology to the claimants via the first defendant’s (SERAP’s) website, X (twitter) handle, two national daily newspapers (Punch and Vanguard) and two national news television stations (Arise Television and Channels Television) for falsely accusing the claimants of unlawfully invading the first defendant’s office and interrogating the first defendant’s staff.

“An order directing the defendants to pay the claimants the sum of N5 billion as damages for the libellous statements published about the claimants.

“Interest on the sum of N5b at the rate of 10 percent per annum from the date of judgment until the judgment sum is realised or liquidated.

“An order directing the defendants to pay the claimants the sum of N50 million as costs of this action.”