Abuja FileAgricultureAll The NewsCover StoryEconomyIssueNewsPolitics

Splinter Herdsmen’s Group Out To Destabilize Buhari – Ortom

4 Mins read

 

… Says Anti-Open Grazing Law Enforcement Has Come to Stay

 

…Vows To Uncover Cabal Responsible For High Wage Bill

 

 

By Abraham Uwuasom

 

Following a call by the Cattle breeders association under the aegis of Miyetti Allah Kautal Hore kicking against anti-open grazing legislation enacted by the Benue State government, as the group argued that they were original inhabitants of Benue valley in the State, thus the lingering crisis was a struggle for the state’s natural resources.

 

The National Secretary, Miyetti Allah Kautal Hore, Engr. Saleh Alhassan had said during a world press conference in Abuja that it was inappropriate to treat members of the association as outcasts, he added that the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) protocol allowed the Fulani community free movement into and across the country.

 

 

The Benue State Governor, Samuel Ortom, yesterday maintained that Miyetti Allah Kautal Hore was a splinter group of herdsmen-politicians out to destabilize the administration of President  Muhammadu Buhari.

 

Governor Ortom made this position known Tuesday on a Special edition of Issues of the Moment, Radio Benue current affairs phone-in-programme.

 

Responding to a question on the threats issued by the Miyetti Allah Kautal Hore over the implementation of the law, the Governor said nobody from outside the State can dictate to the government on the issue.

 

The Governor pointed out that the Miyetti Allah Kautal Hore is a splinter group from the main Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association of Nigeria and that its members are politicians out to destabilize the Buhari government.

Ortom said the law against open-grazing was the product of due legal process and that his assenting to it was his legitimate responsibility saying he would follow the counsel of his people who elected him.

 

He disclosed that already, he had reported the leadership of Miyetti Allah Kautal Hore to the President, the National Security Adviser and Security agencies to have them arrested and expressed hope that the desired response would be achieved.

 

“No amount of intimidation or threats can stop the Benue State Government from implementing the prohibition of Open Grazing and Ranches Establishment Law beginning from Wednesday next week,” he stated.

 

Reiterated his led government’s commitment to deliver on his promises to the good people of Benue State, Governor Ortom said, “All legal processes and logistics arrangements had been concluded for the enforcement of the law from the 1st of November. He said the Anti-Open Grazing law has come to stay in Benue and there is no going back. He promised.

 

The Governor further explained that the law did not seek to witch hunt herdsmen as misconstrued in some quarters but to regulate their activities, open up job opportunities for the youth through localization of industries to leverage on ranches that would be established as well as encourage dry season farming.

 

He added that the law was part of the commitment of his administration to its primary responsibility to secure lives and property, promote peaceful co-existence of diverse groups and create conducive environment for foreign investment to thrive in the state.

 

The Governor said his administration was working with relevant stakeholders including Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association of Nigeria whose National leadership visited the state and appreciated the provisions of the law and attested to its friendly nature as a panacea for incessant farmers-herdsmen clashes in the State.

 

Ortom said in view of the law, the Federal Ministry of Agriculture had approved the establishment of pilot ranches in the State while government was to make land available for ranches on lease basis in the three senatorial districts in the state during the implementation.

 

He said Benue State with a projected population of about eight million people, has no land for open grazing and that if appropriate measures were not taken on time efforts for dry season farming and diversification through agriculture would be a mirage.

 

He however vowed to uncover the cabal responsible for the unrealistic high wage bill of Benue State for punishment.

 

Governor said this while on the same Radio saying that there was no justification for the state’s  high wage bill of N7.8 billion monthly when other state like Plateau, Nasarawa and Taraba which share similar political features have monthly wage bills far lower.

 

He appealed to the people of the State to support his administration to scale down the wage bill saying already measures had been put in place to address the problem before the end of the year.

 

The Governor said in spite of current financial difficulties, his administration had honoured its agreement with the organized labour to pay two months salaries across the board assuring that the arrears of medical allowances for Polytechnics and Colleges of Education were also being worked out for payment.

 

He explained that the visit of the leadership of the organized labour in Benue State during the strike to interface with government was a blessing in disguise, stating that the meeting provided the union the platform to go through records, and appreciate the challenges of the State.

 

The Governor revealed that the next tranche of the London and Paris Refund would be used to offset the overdraft it secured from the bank to make up for the payment of two months salaries across board.

 

He assured the people that once the wage bill was brought down to a realistic level, and the current allocation from the Federation Account subsisted, salaries would then be paid as and when due while arrangements are being made to clear the arrears.

 

Governor Ortom commended the people of the State for their show of understanding and appealed to them to keep faith with his administration.

 

Also speaking, the Secretary to the State Government Professor Anthony Ijohor, SAN, described Miyetti Allah Kautal Hore’s claim to the original ownership of the Benue Valley as wild and not backed by any historical fact, adding that the Association could not twist history.

 

Professor Ijohor said the Prohibition of Open Grazing and Ranches Establishment Law is the peoples’ law having followed due process and elicited the overwhelming acceptance of the people of Benue.

 

He pointed out that since it is a Benue law, all residents within the State have no alternative to obeying it.

 

 

In his contribution, Commissioner for Education, Science and Technology and chairman State Economic Team, Professor Dennis Ityavyar said the law was a clear indication that the Governor was providing good governance for the economy to grow, assuring the people that it would stabilize and increase economic activities.

 

He therefore called on the people to rise in support of the government for the successful implementation of the law.

 

 

 

   

About author
Time Nigeria is a modern and general interest Magazine with its Headquarters in Abuja. The Magazine has a remarkable difference in editorial philosophy and goals, it adheres strictly to the ethics of Journalism by using the finest ethos of the profession to promote peace among citizens; identifying and harnessing the nation’s vast resources; celebrating achievements of government agencies, individuals, groups and corporate organizations and above all, repositioning Nigeria for the needed growth and development. Time Nigeria gives emphasis to places and issues that have not been given adequate attention by others. The Magazine is national in outlook and is currently being read and patronized both in print and on our vibrant and active online platform (www.timenigeria.com).
Articles
Related posts
Abuja FileDevelopmentEconomyEnergyFinanceInside LagosOpinionPerspective

The Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: Why Capital Still Fails to Become Infrastructure

6 Mins read
  By Chidi Nwafor  In October 2023, a Gulf sovereign wealth fund quietly closed a $2 billion allocation to global infrastructure, earmarked in part for emerging-market energy and transport assets. The announcement drew the usual applause: another sign, commentators said, that institutional capital was finally waking up to the infrastructure opportunity in the Global South. Eighteen months later, less than a tenth of that allocation had actually left the fund’s balance sheet. Not because the mandate had changed. Not because the fund had lost appetite. According to two people familiar with the portfolio, the constraint was simpler and more uncomfortable: there were not enough investable projects to put the money into. This is not a story about a reluctant investor. It is a story about capital that wants to move, cannot find enough places willing and able to receive it in a form it can underwrite, and quietly waits instead. Multiply that fund by the hundreds of pension schemes, sovereign wealth vehicles, commercial banks and infrastructure funds now carrying dedicated allocations for emerging-market infrastructure, and a pattern emerges that rarely makes it into a headline: the world is not short of capital for infrastructure. It has capital in historic abundance, sitting adjacent to a historic infrastructure gap, unable to cross the distance between the two. The Comfortable Explanation  The explanation on offer at every major infrastructure summit is a familiar one. Global infrastructure investment needs run into the tens of trillions of dollars over the coming decade; committed capital falls well short; therefore, the problem is one of insufficient funding, and the solution is more of it: more pledges, more blended-finance facilities, more climate funds, more multilateral capital increases. It is a comfortable explanation because it assigns responsibility clearly to governments who under-fund, institutions who under-commit, and it offers a clean remedy: raise more. It is also, on close inspection, not what the evidence shows. Pension funds globally hold trillions in assets under management with explicit infrastructure allocations that remain structurally underweight, not because trustees have rejected the asset class but because deal flow meeting their risk and governance thresholds has not materialised at the pace their mandates assume. Sovereign wealth funds report the same pattern. Commercial banks with dedicated project finance desks describe pipelines that look full at the term-sheet stage and thin dramatically by financial close. Development finance institutions, whose entire purpose is to absorb risk that commercial capital will not, routinely report that their binding constraint is not capital adequacy but the volume of bankable transactions their teams can originate and structure in a given year. None of this fits the scarcity narrative. All of it fits a different one. Availability Is Not Deployability  Capital availability and capital deployability are not the same condition, and the conflation of the two is doing real damage to how the world thinks about the infrastructure gap. Availability asks whether money exists somewhere with a mandate that could, in principle, be pointed at infrastructure. Deployability asks something much narrower and much harder: whether a specific project, at a specific moment, has been engineered, structured, documented and de-risked to the point where an investment committee can approve it without exception. The first condition is met, overwhelmingly, across nearly every category of capital that matters to infrastructure. The second is met by only a small fraction of the projects competing for it. The result is a market that looks, from the outside, like a financing gap, and functions, from the inside, like a conversion problem: an abundance of capital on one side, an abundance of infrastructure need on the other, and an underbuilt set of mechanisms in between capable of turning one into the other at any meaningful scale. Where the Conversion Breaks  The break does not happen at the ends of the process. It happens in the middle, in the unglamorous sequence of work that turns a plausible concept into an instrument a fiduciary can sign. A promising transmission project needs a feasibility study rigorous enough to survive institutional scrutiny rather than optimistic enough to attract early interest. It needs offtake arrangements that hold up under real counterparty and currency risk, not the counterparty risk assumed in a base case. It needs environmental and social documentation calibrated to the standards of the institutions being asked to fund it, not the standards of the jurisdiction hosting it. It needs a legal and commercial structure that allocates risk in ways a commercial lender, not only a development financier, will accept. It needs a sponsor capable of executing what has been proposed, not merely capable of proposing it. Each of these is ordinary project finance discipline. None of it is exotic, and in mature infrastructure markets it happens as a matter of course, absorbed into systems built over decades: specialist advisers, standard-form contracts, established procurement norms, deep pools of transaction expertise. What is missing in the markets where the infrastructure gap is largest is not the standard itself but the machinery that meets it. Projects arrive at investment committees with ambition intact and preparation incomplete, and that gap is treated, again and again, as an individual project’s failure rather than what it actually is: a structural absence in the systems responsible for producing investable transactions at scale. The Missing Middle  This is the Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: the institutional architecture that sits between capital that wants to move and infrastructure that needs building, and whose incompleteness explains far more of the global infrastructure gap than any shortfall in committed funds. It consists of project preparation facilities able to fund feasibility and structuring work before commercial viability has been proven. Transaction advisers capable of building deals that satisfy development mandates and commercial return thresholds at once, rather than treating the two as separate constituencies to be managed sequentially. Risk-sharing and guarantee instruments that convert political, regulatory and currency risk into something a commercial balance sheet can underwrite. Aggregation platforms that bundle smaller, individually sub-scale projects into portfolios large enough to justify institutional transaction costs. Standardised documentation that reduces the bespoke legal cost of every new deal. And coordination across ministries, regulators and financiers robust enough that a technically sound project does not die in bureaucratic sequencing after the money has already been found. None of these are new ideas in isolation. What is missing is their assembly into a coherent system, deliberately funded and institutionally accountable, rather than scattered across donor-funded pilots that end when the grant does. The African Dimension  Africa makes this dynamic unusually visible, and consequently offers an unusually clear opportunity to correct it. The continent’s infrastructure financing need, by any measure, is vast. Less understood is that the shortfall is disproportionately one of preparation rather than capital. Nigerian gas-to-power, off-grid solar and mini-grid developers have each demonstrated that individual projects can clear the bankability bar; what has not emerged is systemic pipeline scale, a steady stream of comparably prepared projects large enough to absorb the capital already circling the sector. The pattern repeats, with local variation, from grid infrastructure in East Africa to transport corridors in West Africa. Interested capital is rarely the scarce input. Investment-ready projects are. The Global Comparison  Mature markets solved this problem gradually and mostly invisibly, through decades of institution-building that predates the current infrastructure conversation: specialist project finance units inside banks, standardised PPP frameworks, established regulatory playbooks, deep benches of transaction lawyers and engineers who move between deals rather than between one-off assignments. Emerging and frontier markets are not being asked to meet a lower standard. They are being asked to meet the same standard without having built the same machinery, and then being told, when deals fail to close, that the problem is insufficient funding….
Cover StoryNewsSports

Union Bank, AIICO Multishield, Checkers Custard, Others Back 5th Cycling Lagos

2 Mins read
Union Bank of Nigeria Plc, AIICO Multishield, Checkers Custard and other corporate organisations have thrown their weight behind the 5th Cycling Lagos,…
Abuja FileAll The NewsCover StoryEducationEntrepreneurshipFeaturesNews

2026/2027 Admission Begins @ AAT University: Where Modern Facilities, Academic Excellence and Global Citizenship Meet

7 Mins read
Why Abdulrasaq Abubakar Toyin University is emerging as a compelling destination for the next generation of Nigerian undergraduates By Abdulrahman Aliagan For…
Stay on the loop!

Subscribe to our latest news.

Leave a Reply

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com