Connect with us

Opinion

 Why Owe ASUU?

Published

on

The dimension of the ongoing strike action by members of the Academic Staff Union of Federal Universities (ASUU) that is worth a second look is the Government policy of “no work, no pay”. The negotiating party on the Government side is insisting on taking advantage of this policy to deny the striking workforce (ASUU) the right to their salaries for the period of the work to rule action embarked upon by ASUU, since the 14th of February, 2022. On its face value, the government may appear justified in its attempt to deprive the striking workers the salary due to them, on the ground that they did not do the work they were engaged to perform in the first place. To state it more clearly, the lecturers did not go to class to teach students enrolled by the Federal Government into the various institutions of higher learning for the purpose of acquiring knowledge, which is the statutory responsibility of the lecturers. The lecturers did not teach the students for the period in contention, so how come they are demanding to be paid for a job not done? This is a simple logic: “no work, no pay!” On what ground could anyone fault the Government position here? In the first place, the primary responsibility of the aggrieved lecturers is to impart knowledge to the students placed under their custody by the Federal Ministry of Education. If the Federal Government can be seen as the defector employer of the “erring” lecturers, how would anyone expect the Government to pay salaries for work not performed? Are the lecturers contending this point? If so, on what grounds?
The logic in the Government’s  position on this subject matter is clear: ASUU is an employee of the Federal Government, assigned the sole responsibility of imparting knowledge to students placed under its tutelage. From the beginning of the strike action to date, the lecturers have not performed this contractual obligation, recognised by law. On the contrary, the students have been sent home to their parents and guardians. In search of what next to occupy themselves with, these hopeless victims of the strike action are daily roaming the streets of our cities. Some of them have reportedly, resorted to criminal activities; while the more responsible ones among them  have constituted additional burdens to their parents and the society at large. The presence of these idle students at home for this length of time (seven months, and still counting) does not in any way endear the rest of society to sympathise with the “noble” objectives of the striking lecturers, no matter what! Among the stated objectives of the striking workers is the quest to improve the lot of the students, in terms of the environment under which learning is imparted in the various public universities; ASUU also is seeking to improve the quality of education, through proper funding for research and other deliverables. These indeed, are commendable efforts which have, to a large extent, gained the support of the student population for the leadership role ASUU is playing in this direction.
On the other hand, the protracted nature of the strike action tends to dampen the hopes of the students; how long would it take to graduate from the university? What is the economic cost of overstaying one’s welcome in the various faculties to which these students have been enrolled? What happens to the academic calendar of the Nigerian universities? Higher education in Nigeria has become increasingly elusive, since a course of study originally billed to last for three academic years can now drag on to periods exceeding four to five years, due to incessant strike actions. Who pays the price for all these discrepancies in our university system? It is the common man who cannot afford to send his child to study abroad. It is the unfortunate student whose parent is not economically buoyant enough to send him abroad for higher education. It is the entire society that bears the brunt, when nothing is done to stop the elitist class from exploiting the nation’s wealth to train their children and wards in foreign institutions of higher learning, at the expense of the masses. What can be done to create a level playing ground for the education of our children in tertiary institutions? It is for government to legislate against the practice of sending our children to foreign universities for the purpose of tertiary education; especially to obtain the first degree certificate. Any child that graduates from the secondary school must be made to compulsorily take his/her first degree courses in a Nigeria institution of higher learning. Thereafter, parents who can afford it can send their children out  for higher degrees beyond the borders of Nigeria.
It is frequently argued that those in government and public service in Nigeria who, ordinarily, ought to ensure that our university system works, are in the habit of sending their children and wards to foreign countries to pursue their post-secondary school education. Hence, they don’t really care what happens to our university system in Nigeria.  As a fall out of this ASUU strike, the National Assembly must see it as its statutory responsibility to investigate this trend, and put up an appropriate legislative constraint against this unpatriotic development. Now, does the demand of ASUU that Government pays all arrears of salaries denied its members for the period of the strike, as a condition for calling off the current strike action,  actually make  sense? If so, how? Yes, I see ASUU making a legitimate and sensible demand here. In the first place, they did not just wake up one day to embark on strike. And based on the numerous demands put forward by ASUU, no reasonable observer would dismiss their action as frivolous. The reasons postulated for their action have been overwhelmingly  upheld by various parties, and interest groups, in both the public and private sectors of the nation’s economy. Most significant is the warning strike executed in support of ASUU strike by the Nigeria Labour Congress, less than a month ago. The NLC did not mince words as to the legitimacy of the strike action embarked by ASUU, and has  gone a step further to threaten that it is ready to give full backing to the demands of ASUU, should the Government fail to do the needful within a reasonable time frame. Government officials dragging the strike have not come out with any concrete evidence of any falsehood or breach of trust committed by the leadership of ASUU in the course of prosecuting its  grievances. The argument proffered by the Government in insisting on the policy of “no work, no pay” is, to say the least, untenable.  Those orchestrating the Government’s position in this regard have not come out with any tangible reason for denying the striking lecturers their earned salaries. The position of the Government in this regard can best be described as frivolous.
In any trade dispute, there are procedures to be followed by the parties in conflict. Is there any critical procedure ASUU failed to observe in the course of prosecuting its grievances that would disqualify it to its entitlement to earn the salaries of its members? Could ASUU be single handedly held liable for the prolongation of the strike action? Did ASUU give adequate notice of its intension to go on strike?  Did it first embark on what is popularly termed “warning strike”? Did ASUU seek and follow through the prescribed arbitration process and procedures? If indeed ASUU followed due process in pursuing its legitimate grievances against the Government in the course of its strike action, then there is no basis for Government to refuse to pay the striking lecturers their earned salaries. The salaries indeed were earned; and the government’s  decision to stop their pay, in the first instance, was wrong and punitive in intent. If ASUU was not focused on its main objectives for the strike, one would have expected the leadership of the academic union to take the Federal Government and its agent to court over the protracted demand for the payment of members’ salaries withheld by the Government.
Nothing in the books would have stopped it from seeking legal redress against Government’s unilateral action in stopping the salaries of its members, in the course of their legitimate action. That ASUU is not considering this option is, indeed a demonstration of the highest level of patriotism by members of the academic union in the face of unprovoked aggression by the Government.  If salary stoppage was not aimed at primarily threatening the lecturers to abandon their legitimate demands, the best option left for government was to embark on mass retrenchment of the “rebellious” workforce. This should have been the appropriate way of letting the “erring” employees come to grip with the realities of their “ill-informed” action. The other alternative was for the Government to take the leadership of ASUU to court. I am sure that there is room for industrial court arbitration in disputes of this magnitude. Luckily, the FG has decided to toe the line at last. By experience, no genuine problem, in the public domain, ever gets solved through the committee system of conflict resolution. This is more so, if such a committee is the brain child of Government. It is an indirect way of allowing Government to arbitrate in a case preferred against it. In the light of all the factors ex-rayed in this write up, it may be safe to conclude that Government has an obligation to pay the striking lecturers their earned salaries.

By: Pius Obute
Obute is an Abuja-based writer.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Nigeria’s Electricity Sector: Need For Restructuring

Published

on

In mid October, 2024, our national electricity grid suffered three collapses just within a week, throwing many states of Nigeria in total blackouts. Right from independence, Nigeria has always set agendas for attaining steady electricity, but ends up failing to achieve that noble objective. The perennial challenge of providing reliable electricity across Nigeria is however no puzzle beyond humans, yet the sector remains backward, notwithstanding series of reforms and public expenditures. But at the centre of the failures from all past reforms, is a common factor – the reluctance by government, whether deliberate or inadvertent, to extricate itself from the operational lines of the business. The presence of Nigerian government in any business process, especially where it monopolistically occupies vital operational linkage, has proven to create bottlenecks that stifle efficiencies, and defeat the overall objectives.
This was evident in the telecommunications sector, as it is in the petroleum and power sectors. Take for instance, the current policy framework that overshadowes electricity business across Nigeria, where in the name of privatisation, government deliberately butchered off, and separately sold vital organs of the national electricity industry, in an arrangement where the generating companies (GenCos) do not have licences to transmit and distribute generated power, and distribution companies (DisCos) have no licences to produce the sole commodity they sell, while the federal government through the Transmission Company of Nigeria (TCN), monopolistically retains transmission trades between GenCos and DisCos.The insertion of TCN between the private businesses of power generation and distribution, destroys benefits derivable from privatising electricity productions in Nigeria.
With the GenCos and DisCos answerable to the separate managements while the TCN reports to the Federal Ministry of Power, Works and Housing, it is obvious that the unbreakable chain of commands needed for seamless business operations was designed for disarray. Besides, government also solely holds the stakes in gas supplies needed for much of Nigeria’s 16,384 MegaWatts installed capacity. Due to inadequacy of gas supplies, the GenCos produce about 8,415MW, out of which, due to TCN’s inefficiency, only about 4,000MW get to DisCos. However, among the three loosely bound entities in Nigeria’s unholy marriage of electricity production, the GenCos appear more upbeat at investing for increased capacity but are dragged by delivery challenges from the TCN on the one hand, and poor revenue returns from the DisCos, on the other.
The failure of TCN to deploy modern surveillance and field data acquisition technologies to maintain network reliability, has left its facilities prone to vandalism. It does not encourage GenCos who take the major production risks that they can not deal directly with consumers. In the prevailing situation in which DisCos, being closest to power consumers harvest the collective revenue, the opaque nature of that crucial assignment as currently being conducted, gives room for under-reporting.The electricity business like any other, should project transparent prospects of profits to inspire undertakings in investment risks, and it is only operational frameworks that assure investors of end-to-end process integrity that can encourage the deployment of total commitments. Discos’ obvious reluctance at metering, nor upgrading distribution facilities for efficiency, gives no incentives to GenCos to increase investments in power generation.
It does not also help that TCN’s Market Operations (MO) department passes revenue trickles from DisCos, unto GenCos without enforcing collection transparency on the former. Most of Nigeria’s electricity transmission network infrastructure were installed more than 50 years ago. Since inheriting the transmission assets in the 2005 privatisation, and further restructuring in 2013, TCN’s Transmission Service Provider (TSP) department which is responsible for grid construction and maintenance has not done much to expand network capacity in readiness for increased generation. Neither has its System Operations (SO) department, responsible for stabilising operations, upgraded its frequency management and switching capabilities, but still relies on manual switching instead of investing in Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems that respond swiftly to changing grid frequencies.
It was not surprising therefore that a usual process fluctuation that came from uploading increased power generation into the national grid had overwhelmed SO’s manual switching capability, leading to the grid collapse of October, although Minster of Power alluded to the fact that the inability of TCN’s aged infrastructure to absorb extra power caused explosions at Jebba sub-station, leading to instabilities that collapsed the grid. Which ever be the case, the buck stops at the TCN, and by extension at government. One may then question the benefits derivable from contracts signed by the Buhari administration with Siemens of Germany in 2019. System automation is undeniably the core expertise of Siemens, and the deployment of the company’s switches would have handled grid fluctuations to prevent any collapse. Despite the huge budget allocations that go into the ministry of power, it is obvious that government processes – encumbered by bureaucracy, politics, paucity of funds and lack of business savvy – is entangling TCN’s abilities at keeping pace with its private partners.
So why should government create such a clog in the wheels of progress? Moreso, it has never been known that government declared financial profits from its years of investments in the power sector, nor are the social benefits apparent. Rather than hold unto an asset that continuously drains scarce finances at no benefits, while creating bottlenecks to processes, government should completely hands-off the industry, focus on its regulatory roles, and draw tax accruals. According to estimates by the World Bank, the failure of reliable power supplies in Nigeria costs yearly losses of $29 billion to companies who had to produce their own power, and is a major reason most companies close down in the country, or have migrated elsewhere, despite our human resource potentials and Nigeria being a huge market. The current Nigeria Electricity Supply Industry (NESI) structure, in which government-owned TCN is sandwiched between disunited GenCos and DisCos, is causing conflict of interests, unsustainable and ensures a tie of stagnation.
The electricity production framework should be restructured, even if it means partitioning the national grid, into a form that gives power companies combined and seamless abilities to generate, transmit and distribute power directly to their consumers, as being experimented by the Geometric Group in Aba.

Joseph Nwankwor

Continue Reading

Opinion

“Ye Are Gods”: A Contemporary Review

Published

on

The phrase “Ye are gods”,as contained in Psalm (82:6) and reiterated by Jesus in John (10:34), has been a major source of controversy in humanity. Taken alongside the biblical assertion “God created man in his own image and likeness” (Genesis 1:26) it sums up to Rev STK Appah’s posit that “what is in the original is in the creation”. Over the years, divergent  views have been adduced on this contentious issue, which violently tugs at the roots of our belief system. Come, share my thoughts. In a one-man live-in protest over a discriminatory housing policy at Murray State University, Murray, Kentucky, USA, I occupied the six-floor Hart Hall (men’s hostel) during Thanksgiving Holiday of 1974. At the end of that effort, I wrote a poem titled “Why can’t we live together” and an article and submitted both to Murray State News, the university newspaper. The article, which vociferously decried the policy, was published with the title “Student Speaks Out” on December 6, 1974, but the poem was not. The essence of the poem said: “Some Beings are watching us to see how we get on/Let’s pull forces together and live in oneness”.
My take on the rejection of the poem was the fact that, irrespective of President Eisenhower’s triple liaison with aliens in New Mexico in 1954 and  the strange crash on July 7, 1947 at Roswell, New Mexico, Americans were living in denial of an advanced civilization in the cosmos. Sadly, humanity still lives in that denial. In 2006, I wrote “In His Image and Likeness: Pondering Over Creation and the Divine Essence”. Drawing from the scriptures, I contended that “man is of equi-potentiality with his Creator who is not the multi-Omni Spirit Being…[and that] in the endlessness of eternity, man will also create in his image and likeness”.  At the heels of the article, which was published by MELINTAS—Journal of Philosophy and Religion at Parahyangan Catholic University of Indonesia, I received fifty-eight hate mails and twenty-nine support mails. The hate mails pronounced the equivalent of fatwa on me; one of the support mails commended my “liberated mind”.
Today, Geoffrey Hinton, the acclaimed Godfather of artificial intelligence (AI), has quit his job at Google and has warned humanity of the dangers of AI. Asked if humanity knows what it is doing with AI, Hinton offered a definitive “No” and added that “We may have created something more intelligent than us”.  Hinton furthers that AI can understand, has intelligence and experience and can make decisions on its own based on those experiences “in the same sense as humans do.”. The scary part is that Hinton thinks that, in time, AI will become conscious of its existence, rewire its circuits and become more intelligent than man; then, humans will become the second most intelligent beings on earth. Meanwhile, Elon Musk says that his “Citigirl”, an AI with the capacity of incubating and delivering a baby, will hit the marketplace in 2026. These are godly feats.
The above is reminiscent of the allegory of Tower of Babel. The Creator in the Babelian episode was surprised and sufficiently threatened by man’s exploits hence the infliction of the scourge of linguistic plurality on the human brain.  Notedly, this fear-induced act of self preservation by the Creator, introduced conflict amongst the hitherto monolingual Babelian workforce that worked harmoniously towards building “a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens” (Gen 11:4).  The truth remains that, in the universal context, we are dealing with a hierarchy of Gods and there are millions of inhabited planets in the Cosmos; Jesus alluded to this thus:  “In my father’s house there are many mansions” (John 14:2). Planet earth is just a tiny little speck of sand on the sprawling beach of creation. The fear of the capacity of AI and the regret expressed by Geoffrey Hinton are reminiscent of the Creator’s expressed regrets for creating man (Genesis 6:6) and palpable fears at Babel (Genesis 11:1-9).
It is also a reminder of Dr. Frankenstein’s experience with the monster he created. So, it is asked: Is humanity at the verge of an encore of the Babelian exploit? If so, is the Creator likely to intervene? AGAIN?! Man is certainly at the threshold of a profound experience. All  said, man has reached a major milestone in his quest to “dominate his environment”. However, he has toed the path of perdition. Here, Thomas Paine’s philosophy of “doing good” as a religion and “the world” as his country is the required mindset for humanity. Taken alongside  the Humanist school of thought and the objectives of Universal State of Earth (USE), perhaps man will find global harmony and depart from his self-destruct trajectory. The Creator of man is not the multi-Omni Being . Man’s Creator is the plurality that created in their image and likeness at Eden; they may be the same ones that were surprised and scared at Babel and the Lords of Ezekiel’s encounters.
The larger picture is that we are gods and can also create in our image and likeness. Man is much more than he realises. Given the elasticity and rewireability of the brain, man is yet to achieve the godly potential of his God-given brain. So, “Let’s get forces together and live in oneness” by putting our lights on and training our children to leave their lights on. That way, we would transcend matter, heal the world and take our proper place in the universal hierarchy of gods.

Jason Osai
Osai wrote in from Port Harcourt.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Child Rape: A Global Menace

Published

on

Child rape is a profound human right violation that inflicts lasting physical, emotional, and psychological scars on its victims. Among the most vulnerable groups, the girl-child  faces  a disproportionate amount of sexual abuse globally, reflecting deep-rooted societal, cultural, and systemic failures. Despite international laws and local measures aimed at protecting children, rape and sexual violence against girl-child remain a pervasive problem in many parts of the world, as it  is alarmingly prevalent worldwide.  According to data from the World Health Organisation (WHO), one in four girls experiences some form of sexual abuse before the age of 18. This abuse occurs across all socio-economic, cultural, and geographical divides. The underreporting of sexual violence against children, fueled by fear, stigma, and victim-blaming, makes it difficult to grasp the true scale of the problem.
Reports from organisations like UNICEF and Human Rights Watch highlight that in some regions, girl-children are specifically targeted due to the belief that they are “pure” or “virgin,” making them more vulnerable to cultural myths that suggest intercourse with a virgin can cure diseases like HIV/AIDS. These deeply harmful beliefs exacerbate the risk for young girls, particularly in countries where educational and legal protections are weak.A range of factors contributes to the high incidence of rape against girl-children, many of which are embedded in patriarchal and misogynistic beliefs. In some cultures, girls are viewed as inferior or subservient to males, making them easy targets for exploitation. The normalisation of gender-based violence in some communities means that abuse often goes unnoticed, unreported, or unpunished. Child marriage, which remains prevalent in some parts of Africa, Asia, and the Middle East, is another contributing factor.
When girls are married off as children, they are often exposed to sexual violence under the guise of marital relations. These young brides, who are typically powerless in these situations, often endure repeated sexual abuse from their significantly older husbands.Additionally, in conflict zones, girl-children are disproportionately affected by sexual violence, used as tools of war by armed groups to terrorise communities. Such exploitation results in severe trauma and long-lasting consequences for victims. Rape and sexual abuse leave devastating effects on a girl-child, both physically and mentally. Physically, young girls are not developed enough to handle sexual intercourse, leading to severe injuries, infections, and even death in extreme cases. Many victims also face long-term reproductive health issues, including infertility, sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and complications in future pregnancies.
The psychological toll is equally profound. Victims often suffer from depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and other mental health conditions. The stigma associated with sexual violence further isolates them from their families and communities, leaving them vulnerable to further exploitation or abuse. The educational consequences are also significant. Many victims drop out of school due to the trauma, fear of facing their abusers, or the stigma attached to rape. This creates a cycle of poverty and dependence, further reducing their life chances. Access to justice for child rape victims is often fraught with challenges. In many countries, laws around sexual violence are outdated, under-enforced, or not well understood. Law enforcement agencies frequently lack the training or resources to handle cases of child sexual abuse appropriately, leading to further victimisation during investigations.
In some cases, cultural practices such as “settling” rape cases between families, or forcing victims to marry their rapists, prevent victims from receiving the justice they deserve. This, not only robs the victim of justice but perpetuates a culture of impunity where perpetrators feel empowered to commit further acts of violence. Additionally, the social stigma surrounding rape prevents many girl-children from coming forward. Fear of blame, retaliation, or being ostracised by their communities often keeps victims silent, allowing abusers to continue their crimes unchecked. Internationally, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) both call for an end to all forms of violence against children, including sexual abuse. Organisations such as UNICEF, Plan International, and Save the Children, have been instrumental in raising awareness, supporting survivors, and lobbying for stronger laws and protections.
On a national level, many countries have taken steps to strengthen legal frameworks to protect children from sexual violence. Child protection laws, survivor-centred legal reforms, and harsher penalties for offenders have been introduced in several countries. However, effective implementation remains a challenge in many places due to corruption, weak legal systems, and deep-seated cultural barriers. To truly address the epidemic of child rape, a multi-faceted approach is needed that tackles the root causes of the problem.  Education and Empowerment of girl-children can go a long way in preventing rape cases in the society. Educating girls about their rights, providing them with life skills, and empowering them to speak out against violence are crucial steps in preventing abuse. Equally important is educating boys and men about consent, respect, and gender equality to shift harmful patriarchal norms.
Girls and women need stronger legal protection to escape some of the rape cases that occur regularly. Governments must prioritise the implementation of robust child protection laws, ensuring that law enforcement agents are well-trained and sensitised to handle cases of child rape. Special courts for handling cases involving children, victim support services, and protective measures should be readily available to survivors. If we have to curb child rape menace, community engagement must be included in the process. Engaging communities to change attitudes toward girl-children and dismantling harmful gender norms is essential. Community leaders, religious figures, and educators can play a pivotal role in shifting mindsets and promoting zero tolerance for violence against children.
Furthermore, there is the need for support for survivours of rape. Comprehensive support systems for survivors are critical for the rest of their lives. These include access to psychological counselling, medical care, legal aid, and safe spaces where victims can heal and rebuild their lives. Schools should also provide supportive environments to help victims continue their education without fear of stigma or discrimination. Global Advocacy and Accountability from World Health Organisation (WHO), UNICEF, and other relevant agencies should as a matter of fact continue to create more awareness and sensitisation on the need to save the girl-child. International organisations and governments must continue to advocate for the protection of children’s rights, ensuring that perpetrators are held accountable. Monitoring mechanisms, transparency in legal proceedings, and collaboration between countries are key to fighting transnational issues like child trafficking for sexual exploitation.
It is worrisome to note in the 21st century, as the world is a global village, fully digitalised, when the girl-children should be allowed to showcase their potentials, instead they are trafficked to do jobs that will harm their lives.  Parents particularly, should have the number of children they can cater for. They should also pay attention to the ones they have.  Moreso, the boy-children and the men should be sensitised on the need to stop the menace. Rape and sexual violence against girl-children are some of the gravest injustices of our time, robbing millions of their childhoods and futures. While progress has been made, there is still much work to be done to protect the most vulnerable among us. It is only through collective action, from governments, communities, families, and international organisations, that we can create a world where girl- children are safe, empowered, and free from violence.
By: Perpetual Izuegbunam

Continue Reading

Trending