OpinionPerspective

NADECO: Where Are You? (2)

3 Mins read

Last of all, that Tinubu is said to be doing well shows that the _‘Jagaban of Borgu Kingdom’_ believes in the NADECO cause. But it mustn’t end there. A watchdog is needed, whether it is NADECO or not, because social institutions are never to be trusted. They must be constantly under watch

By abiodun KOMOLAFE

Wait a minute, how many of the original NADECO members are still alive and what’s their current attitudinal disposition and worldview to the democracy that we claim to be enjoying? We need to interrogate this premise so that we can appropriately gauge if what we have in place is worth what they have put into the struggle. Otherwise, we will only be deluding ourselves with the notion that NADECO lives, whereas it is long gone and lives only in the abstract. For example, Nigerians remember the name, NADECO, and what it stood for, but in concrete terms, does it remain the same as of today, September 23, 2023? The tragic truth is that we have pushed crass euphemism to its most extreme bound and allowed unholy accommodation to its bottomless pit.

In any case, this is what can raise the Coalition from its moribund posture – to make the people to begin to think, because those who actually did not even understand democracy, and did not work for it have now come to eat where they have not sown; and they are everywhere. The nauseating thing about this struggle is that they are now the ones who have a voice. The real soldiers have been relegated to the margins. Some of those who never knew the meaning of the struggle, let alone partake of it now call the shots.

But who will hear the grievances of the original labourers in the vineyard? In Nigeria’s democratic setting, the powerful ones get by only for the ordinary folks to wonder their fate. And, to whom do they appeal? Yet, we talk about democracy. At best, that’s doctored democracy, that is, democracy as defined. It is remodelled to accommodate or exclude some irritants. You are lucky if your aims and objectives are included but you will forever keep complaining if yours are thrown out.

Right now, the challenge is not to reawaken NADECO for the sake of NADECO. What do I mean? Sometimes, people create slogans without knowing how to deliver the lyrics. They shout a slogan so that it can be everywhere in the air. But to address what?

To some people, the word, NADECO, is no longer necessary, because the military has gone back to the barracks, and we are running a democracy. End of story! However, how democratic is our democracy when the police arm of the government is not democratically responsible to the governor of a state? Is a situation where a Governor Ademola Adeleke decides not to pay government’s authentic workers their salaries and emoluments as Osun State has done and everybody keeps pretending as if the fall of a yellow leaf is no longer a warning to the green ones the democracy NADECO fought for?

Chukwuemeka Ezeife, Akin Aduwo, Abubakar Umar, Anya O. Anya, Ade Ojo, Sola Soile, Niyi Akintola and Vincent Nwizugbo, Nigerians remember your immeasurable contributions to the institutionalization of democracy in Nigeria. But will this be the end? If not, how will you mentor others and build capacity for the future? Why can’t you move in to assist our president now that doing so has honour?

Jumoke Ogunkeyede (JMK), Frank Ovie-Kokori, Femi Falana, Ayo Opadokun, Empire Kanu, Nick Dazzang, Siraj Hamza, Alex Ayatolla and Uma Eleazu! Those who may be thinking that they are already in their comfort zones should have a rethink so that their labour won’t be in vain. Therefore, this is not the time to behave like Donald Trump. It is not the time to lament our losses or betray the deepest values of democracy.

To Wole Soyinka, Matthew Kukah, George Ehusani, Olisa Agbakoba, Peter Akinola and other allies of NADECO, we plead: _‘eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.’_

MKO Abiola, Kudirat Abiola, Suliat Adedeji, Babatunde Elegbede, Bagauda Kaltho, Chris Abachi, Shola Omoshola, Abdul-Ganiyu Fawehinmi, Alao Aka-Basorun, Beko Ransome-Kuti, Tunji Braithwaite, C. C. Onoh, Moses Adasu, Wahab Dosumu, Chima Ubani, Olaniwun Ajayi, Olabiyi Durojaye, Ayo Fasanmi, Yinka Odumakin and Sunday Mbang! These and many others have fought a good fight of faith and have gone to meet their Maker. So, how do we want them to be remembered? Is this the vision that made them stake their lives to save the country? Isn’t this the right time for the implementation of the fine ideals that the Coalition has over the years been preaching? NADECO, where are you? Where is your university, where those ideals can be taught? It is pathetic that some of your chieftains have held offices in the past but left the people worse than they met them. Immediately they had power, they stopped picking calls.

Last of all, that Tinubu is said to be doing well shows that the _‘Jagaban of Borgu Kingdom’_ believes in the NADECO cause. But it mustn’t end there. A watchdog is needed, whether it is NADECO or not, because social institutions are never to be trusted. They must be constantly under watch.

May the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, grant us peace in Nigeria!

KOMOLAFE wrote in from Ijebu-Jesa, Osun State, Nigeria (ijebujesa@yahoo.co.uk; 08098614418 – SMS only)

   

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
Cover StoryDevelopmentOpinion

Pedestrian Bridges: Rising Symbols of Renewed Hope in Abuja

2 Mins read
  By Ogefila Bayo Adewale Every morning, parents watch their children leave for school along Abuja highways, their hearts race each time…
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….
Abuja FileCover StoryOpinionPerspectivePolitics

Tinubu’s Reforms Deserve Continuity, Second Term Crucial — Onuigbo

4 Mins read
The President of Globe Legislators International, Rt. Hon. Sir Sam Onuigbo, has called on members and stakeholders of the All Progressives Congress…
Stay on the loop!

Subscribe to our latest news.

Leave a Reply

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com