Members of the Federal House of Representatives have commenced the amendment of the Nigerian constitution with far-reaching decisions that they expect would deepen the country's democracy and accelerate its development.
The review of the constitution had commenced with the participation of Nigerians with the general decision collated by the Special Ad-hoc Committee on the Review of the Constitution led by Deputy Speaker, Emeka Ihedioha.
At plenary on Thursday, Ihedioha presented the report, aimed at creating financial autonomy for Local Government Areas in other to reduce the overwhelming influences of the respective State governors.
In this case, as stated in the report, the joint accounts operated by the states and local councils would be stopped, so that the latter would begin to receive their statutory allocation directly from the Federation Account.
The report also cancels the existence of the State Independent Electoral Commission (SIEC), thus giving the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) the power to conduct local council elections henceforth. This is aimed at frustrating the influence of politicians the choice of persons elected into positions at the grassroots.
The report, which suggests a four-year term for political officers elected into Local Government councils, also suggests the establishment of an Independent Electoral Offences Commission to handle election matters and stipulates that anybody found guilty of electoral offences by any court in the country would be barred from contesting elections at both the State and Federal levels.
The amendment is to be debated in the form of 25 bills, and also disapproves the creation of more states in addition to giving traditional rulers representation in the National Council of State.
The committee moved items including railways, devolution of powers, health, housing and electricity from the exclusive to the concurrent list.Portions of the report contained:
•A Bill for an Act to alter Sections 7 and 162 of the Constitution to provide for independence and financial autonomy of local councils in Nigeria, and for related matters; 2011 (H.B 122);
•A Bill for an Act to alter the Constitution of Nigeria to provide a definite date for the President to present an Appropriation Bill for the next financial year to the National Assembly, 2011 (H.B114);
•A Bill for an Act to alter the provisions of Part II of the First Schedule of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, by deleting the word “Plateau” in line 14 and inserting instead thereof the word “Nasarawa”, 2011, (H.B 102);
•A Bill for an Act to alter sections 89 and 129 to direct the Attorney-General of the Federation to prosecute any person or authority found wanting by the Senate or the House of Representatives; and for connected matters, 2011, (H.B 177);
•A Bill for an Act to amend the Electric Power Sector Reform Act, Cap 7, LFN, 2004 and other matters connected therewith, 2012, (H.B 190);
•A Bill for an Act to alter the Constitution to remove the word, “Force” from the name of the Nigeria Police Force in order that it becomes the “Nigeria Police”; and for related matters, 2012, (H.B. 135);
•A Bill for an Act to amend the Treaties (Making Procedure, etc.) Act Cap. T20, LFN, 2004, to make consultations with relevant committees of the National Assembly a mandatory Treaty- making Procedure to all Treaties entered into between the Federation and any other country and for matters connected therewith, 2012, (H.B. 189);
•A Bill for an Act to alter Section 58 of the Constitution to make the Resolutions of the National Assembly have force of law; and for connected matters, 2012, (H.B 115);
•A Bill for an Act to alter Section 315 of the Constitution to remove the power of the President or Governor to amend an existing law, 2012, (H.B 151);
•A Bill for an Act to alter Section 7 of the Constitution to ensure efficient operations of the Local Councils in Nigeria for social, economic and political development; and for other matters connected therewith, 2012, (H.B 176);
•A Bill for an Act to alter the provision of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, to vest appellate jurisdiction on the Sharia and Customary Courts of Appeal in respect of all matters emanating from Sharia, District and Area Customary Courts; and for other matters connected therewith; 2013, (H.B 406);
•A Bill for an Act to alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, to amend the definition of a citizen contained therein to include all persons indigenous to communities now forming part of Nigeria; and for related matters; 2013, (H.B 414);
•A Bill for an Act to further alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to make provisions for the enforcement of certain provisions of the fundamental objectives and directive principles of state policy as contained in the Constitution; and for matters connected therewith, 2013, (H.B 123);
•A Bill for an Act to alter the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 to criminalise contempt of the House of Representatives, 2013, (H.B 430);
•A Bill for an Act to alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, by providing immunity for members of the Legislature in respect of words spoken or written at the plenary session or at committee proceedings, to guarantee that freedom of speech, debate and proceedings in Legislative Houses are not impeached or questioned in any court or place outside of Parliament; and for related matters (H.B432) and a Bill for an Act to alter the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of the Nigeria to guarantee freedom of speech and Legislative actions for members of the National Assembly, (H.B 457);
•A Bill for an Act to alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to place the Office of the Auditor-General of the Federation on the first line charge of the Consolidated Revenue Fund and to empower the Auditor-General of the Federation and the Auditor-General of State Governments to audit the accounts of statutory corporations, commissions, authorities and agencies in Nigeria; and related matters, 2013, (H.B 442);•A Bill for an Act to alter the provisions of Section 143 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, to remove ambiguities in the process of removal of the President and the Vice President from office on an allegation of gross misconduct and to provide for a more transparent and democratic procedure for impeachment; and for other matters connected therewith, 2013, (H.B 498);
•A Bill for an Act to alter the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 and for other matters connected therewith;
•A Bill for an Act to amend sections 315 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended);
•A Bill for an Act to alter the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 and for related matters;
•A Bill for an Act to alter Section 285 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (Second Alteration) Act. No. 2 of 2010; and for matters connected thereto, 2012, (H.B 247);
•A Bill for an Act to alter the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, to separate the office of the Attorney-General from that of the Minister of Justice and to provide for an independence office of the Attorney-General; and for matters connected thereto, 2012, (H.B 262);
•A Bill for an Act to alter the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 and for other matters connected therewith;
•A Bill for an Act to alter provisions of the First Schedule, Part 1 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, to allow for the change of “Egbado North” and “Egbado South” to “Yewa North” and “Yewa South”; and for matters connected therewith, 2012, (H.B 373);
•A Bill for an Act to alter the provisions of Section 7 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to make it mandatory for election to the offices of the chairman and councillors of local councils in Nigeria to be held on a date to be appointed, and on the conditions prescribed by Laws made by the State Houses of Assembly; and for other matters connected thereto, 2012, (HB 259);
•A Bill for an Act to alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 in section 162 (2) to provide for the Revenue Mobilisation, Allocation and Fiscal Commission to table directly before the National Assembly the commission’s proposals for revenue allocation; and for matters connected thereto, 2012 (HB 343); and
•A Bill for an Act to alter the provisions of item No. 1, Part III, Third Schedule of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 to allow for additional Membership of the Federal Capital Territory Judiciary Service Committee, include the Customary Court to the list of Courts in the Federal Capital Territory; and other matters connected therewith, 2012 (HB 352).
Some of the other areas examined by the report included:
Section 12 where the committee altered the provisions concerning Nigeria’s international treaty obligations, to provide for National Assembly’s ratification and enactment, Section 25 where the committee redefined citizenship to take away the question of who is an indigene or settler in the community, meaning that a person who has lived in a community for a specified period is entitled to the same rights and privileges as citizens of that community and Section 42 where the committee altered its provision to specifically prohibit discrimination against persons living with disability.
The committee also added new sections 45A-D where it made a significant proposal by making enforceable certain socio-economic rights as fundamental rights and incorporating them into Chapter IV, the justiciable part of the Constitution, thus creating as justiciable, the rights to education, right to favorable environment, right to free primary and maternal health care services, and the right to basic housing; and Section 65 where the committee agreed to allow for independent candidacy in elections in Nigeria but that this would, however, be subject to conditions stipulated under the Electoral Act.
Others include:
•Section 66: To give seriousness to the issue of electoral offence, the committee provides grounds for disqualification of a candidate from contesting elections where he has been found guilty of an offence. This is also applicable at the state level.
In order to entrench the independence of the offices of the Attorney-General of the Federation, the Accountant-General of the Federation and the Auditor-General of the Federation, and insulate them from political control, the committee put these offices on the first line change of the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Federation.
•Section 80: The committee strengthened the provisions of Section 80 of the constitution to plug leakages from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Federation and public funds of Nigeria to ensure that no expenditure is made by any organ of government without appropriation by the legislature.•Sections 81 and 82: To ensure timely passage of the national budget, and discipline in expenditure, the committee stipulated that budgets be submitted by the executive for approval no later than 90 days before the expiration of the fiscal year.
•Sections 84A-C: The committee included a new section in the constitution creating a new office of the Accountant-General of the Federation and Accountant-General of the Federal Government to ensure that persons are appointed into these two separate offices for professional management of resources.
•Section 150:To give effect to the results of the Peoples’ Public Session which voted to separate the office of the Minister of Justice from that of the Attorney-General of the Federation, the committee made amendments to reflect this and insulates an independent office of the Attorney-General of the Federation from partisanship and to be managed by a professional lawyer. This is also applicable at the state level.
•Section 153: The committee felt that the issue of electoral offences is of such importance as to warrant the creation of an independent electoral offences commission to handle it.
•Section 162: The committee also altered the constitution to abrogate state joint local government accounts and empower each local government to maintain its own special account to be called “Local Council Allocation Account” into which shall be paid directly allocations made to the local government by the Federal Government from the Federation Account and from the government of the state.
•Section 197: The committee felt that it was important to protect the integrity of the electoral process at local government level and respond to the complaints of partisanship of SIEC. Accordingly, it removed SIECs and vested the power to conduct local government councils across the federation in INEC.
•Section 201 and 3rd Schedule, Part I: Role for Traditional Rulers: The committee in response to the results of the Peoples’ Public Sessions created a role for traditional rulers at the federal and state levels providing for representation of traditional rulers in the National Council of State and the creation of a State Council of Chiefs at the state level.
•Section 214: The committee in this section and across the entirety of the constitution deleted the word “Force” from the name of the Nigeria Police providing for the name of the Police to now be “Nigerian Police” rather than “Nigeria Police Force.”
•Section 241: The committee reviewed memoranda submitted on the judiciary and agreed to address concerns over delay in the courts by limiting the use of interlocutory appeals to stay proceedings in court.
•Section 308: In line with the results from the Peoples’ Public Sessions, the committee also removed the immunity from prosecution from criminal offences for persons occupying the position of president, vice president, governor and deputy governor, and to stem impunity levels.
•Section 315: The committee also altered this section of the constitution as approved by the Peoples’ Public Session removing the powers of the president and governor of the state to modify existing laws.
The Speaker of the House, Aminu Waziri Tambuwal said he would consult with other principal officers and members for the consideration of the report before they embark on recess which is two week awa
 |
|
The Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Ola Olukoyede, has offered whistleblowers between 2.5 per cent and 5 per cent of recovered stolen Nigerian assets held abroad for information that leads to their recovery.
Olukoyede disclosed this on Wednesday while delivering a lecture at the Cambridge International Symposium on Economic Crime in the United Kingdom.
According to him, the ability of EFCC operatives to trace assets, cooperation from the judiciary and access to credible intelligence have played important roles in the commission’s success in securing non-conviction-based forfeiture orders.
He also described the EFCC as having some of the best investigators in the world and stressed the importance of protecting and encouraging whistleblowers.
He said anyone with credible information about stolen Nigerian assets taken or hidden anywhere in the world could receive between 2.5 per cent and 5 per cent of the recovered assets as an incentive, with payment made after the recovery.
Olukoyede further revealed that the EFCC had forfeited cash and assets worth more than $500 million to the Federal Government within the past three years.
He cited several cases involving the recovery and forfeiture of assets, including cases linked to a former Chairman of the Central Bank of Nigeria and a former Attorney-General of the Federation.
The EFCC chairman explained that the commission is legally empowered to seek the forfeiture of suspected proceeds of crime by applying to the High Court for an order. He said the process is similar to procedures used in countries such as Australia and Canada.
Olukoyede also recalled a case involving an aircraft allegedly acquired by an individual who was accused of receiving about $30 million in bribes in connection with a power project. He said the aircraft was forfeited about three months ago and had subsequently been added to the presidential air fleet.
He also referred to a property containing about 753 housing units that was forfeited from a former CBN governor, against whom the EFCC has filed criminal charges in three courts.
Speaking about the immediate past Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, Olukoyede said the EFCC opened an investigation following allegations of abuse of office. He claimed that investigators traced about 57 properties to Malami and that approximately 48 of them had been forfeited.
The EFCC chairman further mentioned the forfeiture of a private university allegedly linked to a director in the Federal Ministry of Health. According to him, the official voluntarily surrendered the property following the commission’s investigation.
Olukoyede said the measures demonstrate the importance of asset tracing, international cooperation, credible intelligence and whistleblower protection in the fight against financial crime and the recovery of stolen public assets.
The Dangote Petroleum Refinery has raised concerns over the growing volume of imported petrol entering Nigeria, warning that it could be forced to export more of its own production if the trend continues.
The refinery said imported Premium Motor Spirit (PMS) made up roughly 43 per cent of the petrol supplied to the Nigerian market in July. It argued that the development was creating serious difficulties for a domestic refinery with the capacity to produce enough fuel for the country.
Dangote Refinery explained that it has maintained sizeable petrol reserves since commencing operations to ensure that consumers across Nigeria have access to a reliable supply. Keeping those reserves, it noted, requires substantial expenditure on storage, transportation and working capital.
However, the refinery said the continued granting of import licences without adequate information about expected import volumes has made it increasingly difficult to determine how much petrol should be produced and stored for the local market.
The company said holding large quantities of petrol becomes financially burdensome when there is no certainty about how much imported fuel will compete for the same market. It therefore considers exporting surplus stocks a more commercially viable option than allowing them to remain in storage indefinitely.
According to the refinery, increased exports in recent months should not be interpreted as evidence that Nigeria lacks sufficient refining capacity. Instead, the exports are being driven by excess stock resulting from unpredictable import volumes.
Dangote Refinery maintained that it remains fully committed to supplying the Nigerian market and has the capacity to meet or surpass the country's petrol requirements. It said its decision to export surplus products was aimed at managing inventory efficiently and avoiding unnecessary storage and financing expenses.
The refinery also warned that market disruptions caused by excessive imports could make it harder for domestic refiners to accurately predict demand. Any resulting supply problems, it said, should not automatically be blamed on local refineries.
It urged regulators and other industry stakeholders to improve transparency around petrol imports and strengthen coordination within the downstream petroleum market.
The company argued that policies that give greater support to domestic refining would help Nigeria reduce its dependence on imported fuel, conserve foreign exchange, strengthen energy security and maximise the economic benefits of investments in local refining infrastructure.
Dangote Refinery said it remains prepared to supply the country but stressed that a more predictable and transparent market environment is necessary for efficient production and inventory management.
Business
In The Spotlight
A group of heartless carpetbaggers have captured the Nigerian state, and it appears that they, their biological and political descendants, will hold the levers of government and access to Nigeria’s commonwealth for a long time to come.
When you consider news reports of how previous and current state actors steal public funds, buy choice properties in the toniest districts of Nigeria’s major cities, acquire private jets, and even establish private universities, you wonder if some people have more than two heads, to adopt a Yoruba phrase.
Either because of an inability to deliver the greatest good to the greatest number of Nigerian citizens, or by intention, the political elite have kept the people poor, causing them to depend on the largeness of heart of the same elite to meet their existential needs.
That explains why poor, downtrodden, and unconnected Nigerians eagerly collect crumbs of measly N5,000, rice, gari and whatever else the politicians offer to obtain their election votes or acquiescence after rigging the elections.
When watching an economically disadvantaged individual tell a politician who is seeking to become a legislator the good news that his wife just had a new baby, and he needed to prepare for the naming ceremony, it felt like the oppressed poor were enabling his oppressor to further oppress him.
It was like the classic case of Stockholm syndrome, of victims collaborating with their “captors” to cement the oppressive stranglehold that they already had over the state and the commonwealth of the nation, thus unwittingly arresting their own future development.
A running mate to a former governorship candidate in a Southwestern state hilariously regaled Nigerians with the story of how constituents would have raided all the alcoholic drinks in his refrigerator in the early hours of the morning, even before he woke from the hectic campaign tour of the previous day.
The political elite have practically cornered the Nigerian state for themselves, children, tribesmen and acolytes, and have devised a way to admit only those that they have found to be loyal, or pliable, into their rank of oppressors.
The oppression of the citizens of Nigeria is easily accomplished because of the high illiteracy level amongst the poor masses. The use of the weapon of illiteracy is more evident in Northern Nigeria, whose political leaders somehow turn a blind eye to the illiteracy and underdevelopment of their people.
In 2024, UNICEF revealed that out of Nigeria’s 18.3 million out-of-school children, about 12.1 million, or 66 per cent, were resident in the Northwest and Northeast regions. Yet, instead of expanding educational facilities and opportunities, some Northern governors are arranging mass weddings for children who are hardly out of their teen years.
And this is not to deny the weaponisation of illiteracy even in Obafemi Awolowo’s Western Region, which is regarded as the Athens of Nigeria, after its pre-Independence head start of free, universal and compulsory primary school education.
As if he had a premonition that Nigeria’s so-called democrats would eventually compromise education, to the detriment of the lowest and marginalised masses, that Karl Marx described as the “lumpen proletariat”, French political thinker Montesquieu argued a long time ago that “It is in a republican government that the whole power of education is required.”
Western Nigeria’s free education scheme was gradually abandoned from the days of the Second Republic when some Yoruba members of President Shehu Shagari’s political party knocked it off its bottom with the argument that “qualitative” education was better than “free” education.
It is more than a shame that a free, universal and compulsory primary school education scheme was abandoned under President Shagari, who not only was a trained teacher, but had a career as a teacher before his political career.
Awolowo had warned Nigeria’s political elite with the following quip: “The children of the poor that you failed to educate will not let your children sleep peacefully.” The insecurity that currently occurs in nearly every part of Nigeria only drives Awolowo’s point home.
Probably the realm of the Nigerian republic that has been most complicit with the carpetbagger political elite is the media, whose members either serve the elites as press secretaries who kill media brushfires, or editors who either run planted stories, or spike stories that the politicians do not want published.
The media is so compromised that it can hardly perform those responsibilities assigned to it by Section 22 of the Nigerian Constitution, which are to “be free to uphold the fundamental objectives contained in (Chapter II of the Constitution) and uphold the responsibility and accountability of the Government to the people.”
Some apologists have argued on behalf of the media that the political elite have so run the economy aground that the media, which can only thrive as commercial enterprises within Nigeria’s quasi-capitalist economy, cannot stay afloat, especially with the devastating inroads that the digital media are making into their audience, advertising revenue and profit.
The absence of regional economies, the argument goes, prevents the emergence of regional newspapers that can thrive on advertising revenues from regional companies, the way it obtains in the economies of North America and Western Europe. Many Nigerian newspapers, that are essentially regional, often pretend to be national to receive advertising revenue from companies whose market is national.
Two other collaborators of the political elite are the election management agencies and the judiciary at both the national and sub-national levels of government. The conspiracy between these agencies and the political elite is almost like that of Siamese twins conjoined by the belly button.
After the election management agencies may have deliberately bungled (especially) governorship and legislative house elections, and declared false reports, the losers, who felt that they won the election, would then approach the temple of justice, with significant financial inducement to ask for justice(?).
From that point on, the justice that both contestants hope to corruptly obtain could swing according to the heft of the naira in the Ghana-must-go bag that they will be hauling into the chambers of the denizens of the corrupted judiciary.
Thus, the “award” of electoral justice is “a matter of cash”, to quote Basi, the protagonist of “Basi & Co”, the television sitcom produced by environmental activist Ken Saro-Wiwa, who himself was denied justice from the judiciary that served the regime of General Sani Abacha, Nigeria’s most notorious military dictator.
In Nigeria, the lines of separation of powers that demarcate the duties of the three arms of government –the legislative, executive and judiciary– and the checks and balances that empower each arm to check the others have become almost irredeemably blurred.
As legislators use constituency projects as a ploy to carry out the functions of the executive, the president issues executive orders that are essentially legislative in nature. Though the judiciary does not perform the duties of the other arms, it fails to check them as it indulgently winks at their excesses.
If those who are regarded as Nigeria’s political elite really know what is in their enlightened self-interest and would like to protect the future of their descendants from what Thomas Hobbes described as a short, brutish and nasty existence, they will use their current privilege to correct the evil they have done to Nigerians.
They must urgently redeem the future before it delivers violence against their children.
By Lekan Sote
In The Spotlight
Lagos alone is worth more than Botswana, Namibia, Rwanda and Mauritius combined.
Let that sink in.
With an economy of N41.17tn — about $102bn in 2021 — Lagos State dwarfed the entire gross domestic products of four countries. Rivers, Akwa Ibom, Delta and Bayelsa sit on oil wealth that funds nations. Ogun, Anambra and Imo churn out goods, services and commerce that would make small economies jealous.
By the numbers, Nigeria’s states are giants.
But walk the streets of Lagos, and you will still find mothers cooking with firewood. Drive through Port Harcourt, and you will see communities drinking water polluted by the same oil that makes the state’s GDP glow. Visit Umuahia, Abeokuta, or Minna and ask the average trader what “trillion-naira economy” means to her dinner table.
The answer is: nothing.
That viral video telling you “10 Nigerian states are richer than countries” is both true and a lie. True, because the 2021 BudgIT figures don’t lie — Lagos at N41.17trn, Rivers at N7.96trn, and so on. A lie, because those numbers are GDP, not prosperity. They measure how much economic activity happens _in_ a place, not how much of it reaches the people who live there.
A country with $7,778 GDP per capita, like Botswana, will still feed its citizens better than a state with $102bn in total output but $2,058 per capita, like Nigeria. A state can host a port, an oil rig, and a tech hub, yet fail to build a hospital that works.
So, the real question isn’t “Which state is bigger than which country?”
The real question, and the one our governors should lose sleep over, is this: When your economy is bigger than a nation, why are your people still living like they have nothing?
In this edition of The Bottomline, we follow the money from GDP to the gutter — and ask why Nigeria’s trillion-naira states have not become trillion-naira lives.
The viral numbers are not new. They were lifted straight from BudgIT’s 2022 State of States report and reflected 2021 estimates: Lagos at N41.17tn, followed by Rivers at N7.96tn, Akwa Ibom at N7.77tn, Imo at N7.68tn, Delta at N6.19tn, Anambra at N5.14tn, Ondo at N5.10tn, Ogun at N5.03tn, Bayelsa at N4.63tn and Niger at N4.58tn.
The trick is in the timing. To pitch those 2021 figures against 2025 country GDPs is statistical fraud. Nigeria has since rebased. The NBS moved the base year from 2010 to 2019, and the whole map shifted. Lagos itself has moved on: its 2025 _Lagos Economic Development Update_ puts the state at N43.06tn in 2023, with forecasts of N54.77tn for 2024 and N66.47tn for 2025. Those are projections, not fresh NBS post-rebasing observations, but they tell you the direction: up.
There is no debate that Lagos is Nigeria’s economic engine. From a colonial port to federal capital until 1991, it never lost momentum. Today, trade, manufacturing, ports, telecoms, tech, entertainment, real estate and finance all cluster in just 3,345 square kilometres. Compare that footprint to Botswana’s 581,730 sq km, Namibia’s 825,615 sq km, Rwanda’s 26,338 sq km, and Mauritius’ 2,040 sq km. Yet in 2021, Lagos’ $102 billion economy was several times larger than Botswana’s $19.9bn, Namibia’s $15.1bn, Rwanda’s $16.4bn, and Mauritius’ $16.2bn, according to 2025 World Bank figures.
That comparison is legitimate. The conclusion people draw from it is not.
GDP tells you how much value was produced in a territory. It does not tell you who owns it, who earns it, or whether the roads work, the lights stay on, or the hospital has drugs.
A state can run a trillion-naira economy and still have mothers boiling water on firewood. A country can have a smaller GDP and deliver a better life. Look at the per capita numbers: Botswana at $7,778, Namibia at $5,309, Mauritius at $11,819. Nigeria sits at about $2,058. Even Rwanda, at just $773 per capita, has pushed its $3-a-day poverty rate down to 38.6 per cent — proof that size is not destiny.
The oil states expose the fraud most brutally. Rivers, Akwa Ibom, Delta and Bayelsa rank high because petroleum inflates their GDP. But oil wealth does not flow into state coffers in equal measure, and it certainly does not flow into household wallets. BudgIT’s own fiscal sustainability index proves this. In 2022, Rivers topped overall fiscal performance despite Lagos having the biggest economy. A big economy without revenue discipline, jobs, and services is just a billboard.
Nigeria does not have a GDP problem. We have a translation problem.
We have pockets of enormous economic power. Lagos. Rivers. Akwa Ibom. Ogun. Anambra. Delta. The output is real. What is missing is the bridge between that output and ordinary life.
Until economic activity creates real jobs, until IGR rises and addiction to federal allocation falls, until infrastructure supports production instead of strangling it, those trillion-naira figures will remain a cruel joke.
So let the video go viral. Let Lagos be “bigger than Botswana”.
But governors, commissioners, and citizens should ask only one question:
If my state can outproduce a country, why can’t it out-deliver a decent life for the people who call it home?
Until we answer that, we are not rich. We are just big.
By Raphael Mbamalu