News

Reps Grill Amaechi, BPE Officials Over $214m Deep Blue Contract

Published

4 years ago

March 16, 2022

Editor

The Bureau of Public Procurement has told the House of Representatives’ Committee on Navy that it does not possess the documents presented by the HSL International Limited, which the Federal Government awarded the ‘Deep Blue Project’ contract, before the firm was issued a Certificate of No Objection.

According to the BPP, the documents on HSL International Limited were returned to the Ministry of Transportation after the certificate was issued to the company.

The President, Major General Muhammadu Buhari (retd.), had on June 11, 2021, inaugurated the Integrated National Security and Waterways Protection Infrastructure in Nigeria, also known as the Deep Blue Project, at the ENL Terminal, Apapa Port, Lagos State.

The contract is said to be worth $214,830,000, including $195,300,000 for the actual contract and an additional $19,530,000 NIMASA agreed to pay to HSL for ‘Management Training Consideration.’

The committee, on Tuesday, grilled the Minister of Transport, Rotimi Amaechi; and the leadership of the BPP led by the Director-General, Mamman Ahmadu.

The Corporate Affairs Commission had at the last investigative hearing by the committee on March 9, 2022, told the lawmakers that HSL International Limited was not registered with it.

The Chairman of the committee, Yusuf Gagdi, had stated that the lawmakers were shocked when the CAC said it did not have HSL on its records, asking the Minister of Transportation, Rotimi Amaechi; and the Director-General, Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency, Bashir Jamoh, to come forward and provide details of the company.

However, the committee did not raise the issue during Amaechi’s presentation on Tuesday but grilled the BPP officials on the firm instead.

The lawmakers stated that for the BPP to issue Certificate of No Objection, the conditions set by Section 16 of the Public Procurement Act must have been met, especially by a contractor.

Gagdi stated that part of the terms of reference of the committee was to look at the contract agreement and the legitimacy of the contract.

The Director, Agriculture and Water Resources, BPP, Isaiah Yesufu, who the DG said was the officer that reviewed the procurement processes leading to the issuance of the certificate on the project, recalled that the request got to the bureau through the Ministry of Transport in 2017.

Yesufu said the request was for HSL International Limited to carry out the provision of some security equipment for the coastlines. He also disclosed that the request was for direct procurement due to the security nature of the project, stressing that the law permits single sourcing for such projects.

He said, “Under the law, there is a section that permits the use of direct procurement under the security related issues and this procurement had a letter from the Office of the National Security Adviser and Office of the President indicating the security nature of the project. Under that, we approved the use of direct procurement.

“We went through the processes; we looked at the request that the ministry made, we looked at documents that were submitted. We were satisfied with them and we issued the Certificate of No Objection. We submitted the review report which contains the details of our findings.”

Gagdi also stated that part of the mandate is the legitimacy of the contract. “We expect the BPP to tell us reasons why Certificate of No Objection was issued in respect of this contract,” he said.

The chairman went on to read CAC’s letter to the committee denying knowledge of HSL International Limited. “They did not say no but said they did not have the records. You will give us what the ministry sent to you. Give us the summary in one minute. We investigated the status of this company; maybe we are the ones that are committing the errors. Give us those things,” he partly said.

Responding, Yesufu stated, “The issue of a company being on CAC register; if it is an international company, the law does not exclude them from participating in procurement in Nigeria. There is what we call international bidding; it is not only Nigerian companies, the law permits international companies to participate in our procurement, it does not forbid them. If they are not on the CAC register, it is not an offence; it is just that they are an international company.”

The BPP director noted that the company met all the conditions prescribed by Section 16(6) of the PPA.

The lawmakers then asked why the BPP failed to forward evidence that HSL had the financial capacity and met the other requirements listed in Section 16(6) of the Act, based on which the bureau issued the certificate.

Yesufu said, “First of all, the documents that were brought, which was the basis for our review, were brought in 2017. And when we conclude our reviews, we don’t keep them; we have returned them back to the Ministry of Transportation. What we are going to do is (that) we are going to write to them to bring those documents back. We will not try to retrieve them…”

Several members of the committee were miffed by the comment, asking why the BPP did not keep copies of the document.

The Chairman of the committee, in his ruling, asked the BPP to produce the documents next week.

Earlier in his presentation, Amaechi stated that the project followed due process while all conditions prescribed by the various laws were met. He said after the publication of ‘Request for Proposal’, the BPP was approached which issued an approval for Certificate of No Objection.

The minister also said the project was taken to the Federal Executive Council and it was approved. “Subsequently, we have been going through the cabinet approval in implementing this. And we have implemented it by saying that everything that was to be bought was bought, cleared, installed and handed over to about three or four agencies,” he added.

He further said, “What I don’t know is about payment because as minister, my responsibility is just to approve up to the cabinet level. After that, NIMASA is responsible for implementing it. As the supervising minister, I have the special interest in making sure that the contracts are delivered, because my interest is to ensure that there is security on the waters.

“So far, there is security as it pertains to merchant ships. At least, we have reduced the number of attacks that we used to have on the waters. That is what the situation is now.”

PUNCH.

News

[OPINION] Rivers: The Futility Of Power And The Illusion Of Victory

Published

2 hours ago

September 24, 2025

Editor

By Israel Adebiyi

Power is a strange thing. To some, it is a crown that dazzles; to others, it is a sword that conquers. Yet history, both ancient and modern, is replete with reminders that power is fleeting, fragile, and often fatal to those who cling to it without wisdom. Nigeria’s Rivers State has, in recent months, provided a theatre where this truth has played out in its rawest form, a play in which the actors ranged from elected governors to godfathers in high places, from lawmakers turned pawns to a weary citizenry who bore the bruises of political combat.

As you may have learnt, the democratically elected Governor Siminalayi Fubara is back in the saddle. What a traumatising six months it must have been for the man who thought being the Chief Security Officer of his state truly makes him the man in charge. What a tormenting time it must have been for the legislature, those who, entrusted with making laws, would rather sink the ship of state than allow Fubara to sail. And what excruciating experience it must have been for the people of Rivers themselves: to have their choice nearly swapped for a civilian in khaki, to watch their lives held hostage by political gladiators in a power struggle that never had their welfare at heart.

At the centre of this drama stood the godfather, one who straddles Abuja and Port Harcourt, ministering to the Federal Capital Territory while seeking to lord it over Rivers, unchallenged. His triumphs and setbacks are well-documented, but the bigger question remains: what has the political elite learnt from all this? From potential godsons, to godfathers, to supporters, to the rest of us, the truth is painfully clear, no one wins in a state of anarchy, not even the chest-beating King Kong.

The Rivers imbroglio reinforces a timeless principle: governance does not happen in chaos. The seat of power may be occupied, but when the instruments of state are weaponised against one another, the business of the people suffers. Schools do not function, hospitals languish, investments are scared away, and trust in government crumbles. A peaceful atmosphere is the precondition for governance, for no policy, no matter how well-crafted, can thrive in the soil of instability.

In this sense, what happened in Rivers is not new. History shows us that the vanity of power games leaves behind a trail of ruins. Rome, mighty and invincible, crumbled not because its armies lost their strength but because its leaders indulged in intrigues, conspiracies, and betrayal, weakening the republic from within. In Africa, the ghosts of Liberia’s civil war and Sierra Leone’s dark decade still whisper lessons of how political egos, once unchecked, descend into rivers of blood where the people are the ultimate casualties.

Even in more stable democracies, we see shades of this futility. Recall the Watergate scandal in the United States: an overreach of power that forced President Nixon’s resignation, not because America lacked laws, but because one man believed his political survival was above the rule of law. In Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe’s prolonged hold on power may have begun with promises of liberation but ended with economic collapse and national despair. In all these, the lesson is the same: unchecked power, exercised without restraint, consumes itself.

The real victims of Rivers’ crisis are not the gladiators in high office; they will always find soft landings. The true casualties are the people, the market woman in Port Harcourt whose business was disrupted by endless protests and palpable fears, the civil servant whose progress and commitment are beclouded by uncertainties, the student whose classroom leaks under the rain because the funds for renovation are trapped in political crossfire.

What is often forgotten in the heat of power play is that governance is not an abstract exercise; it is the daily bread of the people. When leaders quarrel, roads go untarred, hospitals go unequipped, and children go unfed. To reduce governance to a chessboard of egos is to mortgage the people’s welfare for vanity. This, tragically, is the recurring story in Nigeria’s democratic experiment.

Philosophers have long wrestled with the meaning of power. Shakespeare, in Macbeth, captured it as “a walking shadow, a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more.” The story of Rivers is a fresh Nigerian adaptation of this drama. For months, power appeared to belong to one, then another, and then another still. Yet in the end, it was revealed that no one truly wielded power in its purest sense, because power without legitimacy, without the consent of the governed, and without the peace to implement vision, is no power at all.

The futility of the Rivers crisis holds lessons for Nigeria as a whole. Across our federation, godfatherism continues to haunt governance. From Lagos to Kano, from Anambra to Oyo, the tussle between political benefactors and their protégés has become a recurring decimal. Rarely do these battles end in progress for the people; more often than not, they end in paralysis.

The comparison need not be far-fetched. Look at Kenya, where post-election violence in 2007 consumed more than 1,000 lives and displaced hundreds of thousands. The fault line was political ego, the refusal to let the people’s will stand unchallenged. It took the Kofi Annan-led mediation to restore peace. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, decades of instability trace back to leaders who personalised power, treating the state as property and the people as pawns.

Rivers may not have descended into outright war, but the undertones of instability remind us that democracy is not guaranteed; it must be guarded. When politicians play roulette with the rule of law, they court a descent into chaos that ultimately swallows everyone.

The Rivers episode should compel us to reflect on the foundations of Nigeria’s democracy. For too long, politics has been driven not by institutions but by personalities. Our allegiance is more to godfathers than to constitutions, more to individuals than to principles. Yet sustainable governance is only possible when the rule of law, not the whims of men, governs the game.

What does this mean in practice? It means state assemblies must not be reduced to errand boys of powerful interests. It means governors must respect their oaths of office, governing for all, not just for loyalists. It means party structures must operate with transparency, giving room for dissent without retribution. Above all, it means citizens must rise in defence of their democracy, insisting that their mandate cannot be traded on the altar of ego.

The Rivers drama may be easing, but the scars remain. It was a sobering reminder that power, when divorced from service, becomes poison. That democracy, when stripped of rule of law, becomes anarchy. That in the final analysis, no one truly wins when the people lose.

From the godfathers to the godsons, from the lawmakers to the electorate, we must all acknowledge a shared truth: we are losers when power games eclipse governance. The real triumph is not in who sits in Government House, but in whether that House delivers schools, hospitals, jobs, and peace.

Let Rivers be a lesson to Nigeria: that power is not an end in itself, but a means to service. That peace is not weakness, but strength. And that the greatest legacy any leader can leave is not monuments of ego, but institutions that outlast them.

For if Rivers has taught us anything, it is that governance cannot happen in a state of anarchy, and the futility of power is revealed when its pursuit leaves the people broken. Let us, therefore, rise to build a democracy where power serves the people, not the other way round.

News

NYSC Deploys 1,900 Corps Members To Bauchi State

Published

11 hours ago

September 23, 2025

Editor

The National Youth Service Corps (NYSC), has deployed 1,900 corps members to Bauchi State for the 2025 Batch ‘B’ Stream II orientation exercise.

Mr Kufre Umoren, NYSC State Coordinator, told journalists on Tuesday in Bauchi, that registration would be conducted from Sept. 24 to Sept. 26, at the NYSC Permanent Orientation Camp, Wailo in Ganjuwa Local Government Area of the state.

He said the swearing-in ceremony of the corps members is billed for Sept. 26, and the orientation exercise would end on Oct. 14.

Umoren said each of the corps members would be allowed into the camp after being adequately certified to be genuine graduates.

He said discreet screening of the corps members would be conducted to guard against intrusion or impersonation.

“Registration dates have been announced to the corps members, and they are advised to adhere strictly to all camp rules and regulations.

“Defaulters will be sanctioned in accordance with the scheme’s extant rules,” he said, warning the scheme frowned at late-night journeys and urged corps members to avoid it for their own safety.

While urging them to be punctual, diligent, and comply with dress code, Umoren warned that defaulting corps members would be sanctioned.

News

Ife Not Origin Of Yoruba Race, Says Oluwo

Published

11 hours ago

September 23, 2025

Editor

The Oluwo of Iwo in Osun State, Oba Abdulrosheed Akanbi, has disputed the claim that Ile-Ife is the origin of the Yoruba race.

The royal father said the culture of the race is not in the ancient town of Ife, long noted as the origin of the Yoruba people.

Oluwo, who made this known in a video shared on his Facebook page on Tuesday, spoke in his palace while bestowing a chieftaincy title on one of his subjects.

Flanked by his Chiefs, Oluwo said Ife was not the origin of the Yoruba race, adding that people were living in the town before Oduduwa conquered the city and became its ruler.

He said the language spoken in ancient Ife was not the same as the common Yoruba language, restating his readiness to bring back the correct historical accounts of the Yoruba race.

“Ife is not the origin of the Yoruba race. Those people don’t speak our language. Their language is different. They refer to God as Eledumare, and there is nothing like Eledumare in the Yoruba language. What we have is Olodumare.

“Ife people will always say Olofin, and if you ask them what the meaning is, they will tell you it means the owner of the palace, and what that means in Yoruba is ‘Alaafin’. Ile-Ife has no Yoruba culture.

“I am the ‘Arole Olodumare because I am here to tell you the true history. Iwo is where you can get the real history that was not even documented.

“Whatever I am telling you now, you must keep it because death can come anytime. I am not scared of death because it is inevitable,” Oluwo said in the Yoruba language.

The origin of the word ‘Yoruba’ often leads to controversy. The most recent one being the face-off involving the Ooni of Ife, Oba Adeyeye Ogunwusi and Alaafin of Oyo, Oba Akeem Owoade, over a Chieftaincy title of Okanlomo of Yorubaland, allegedly bestowed on Ibadan-based businessman, Chief Dotun Sanusi by Ooni.

The PUNCH reports in August that the Ooni had bestowed the title on Sanusi during the unveiling of 2geda, an indigenous social media and business networking platform, at Ilaji Hotel, Ibadan.

But in a statement signed by his media aide, Bode Durojaiye, the Alaafin declared that no traditional ruler other than him has the authority to confer a title covering the entire Yorubaland. He issued a 48-hour ultimatum to the Ooni to revoke the title or “face the consequences.”

Reacting to Alaafin’s ultimatum, the Ooni’s spokesperson, Moses Olafare, said the monarch had directed him to ignore the Alaafin’s outburst and leave the matter “in the court of public opinion.”

“We can not dignify the ‘undignifyable’ with an official response. We leave the matter to be handled in the public court of opinion, as it is already being treated.

“Let’s rather focus on narratives that unite us rather than the ones capable of dividing us. No press release, please. 48 hours my foot!” he wrote on his Facebook page.
(PUNCH)