OpinionPerspective

Okomu Oil, Gbelebu Community, and What Big Corporations Can Do

4 Mins read

While I served as state correspondent of The Punch in Edo, one environmental group alerted me to an oil spill around the Ethiope River on the Edo/Delta State border. I called a colleague from Vanguard, Austin Ogwuda, who hails from Delta State and we headed for the location. After interviewing the locals, men and women, whose fishing nets had been destroyed by the massive oil spill that left dead fishes floating in their thousands on the surface of the water, we made to see the chief of the village, at least for some authoritative corroboration of the stories we had gathered.

By Taiwo Adisa

Sometime in the year 2000, as a state correspondent in Edo, I was handling a story for my newspaper that took me into the interiors of Edo South Senatorial District. I had to visit Udo, Igobazuwa in Ovia South West Local Government after visiting Okada and Usen and other communities in the Northern part of Ovia River. At Udo, I took a detour to Gbelebu Village to pay a brief visit to Pa Aaron Ponuwei Ebelo, father of my colleague and friend, Goodluck Ilajufi Ebelo

It was a smooth journey that never gave me the inking I was visiting a village. From the Gbelebu village back to Benin City, the trip took just over an hour. There was a tarred road, which I was told had been in place since the days of the defunct Western Region.

Twenty-three years later, when I had to make another trip to that village early in December 2023, for the funeral rites of Pa Ebelo, who in his lifetime had been installed the Okito of Gbaraun Kingdom, a title that classified him a High Chief across the Ijaw nation, the story has changed. The journey from Benin City to Gbelebu village took three hours and more. But the spatial location of Gbelebu in the atmosphere never moved an inch. What made the difference was also not the state of the road but the decision of the big corporation operating in the area, Okomu Oil Palm Company PLC to block the people’s access to the public road.

The tarred road that leads to Gbelebu, Okomu, and environs passes through the plantations of Okomu Oil Palm Company PLC. Now, the corporation has slammed a perpetual injunction on the people, barring them from making use of that access road. We were told that Okomu Oil simply imposed the injunction to stop thieves from stealing its palm fruits. It also took practical steps to enforce its injunction by digging trenches across the road to sternly drive the message home.

By digging trenches on the public road, the management of Okomu Oil is not only seeking to punish the guilty, but they are also visiting sins on the innocent as well. And by so doing, the people of Gbelebu and other villages are condemned to make do with the abandoned earth road, which was probably last used during the Second World War.

Whenever big corporations get located within a community, the people usually receive their officials with open arms. The chiefs and the commoners do everything to create easy access to their community and facilitate their version of ease of doing business.

Such enthusiasm is not and should not be misplaced. Good jobs mean a good life for many in the community. But notwithstanding the pomp and ceremony that heralds the entry of a corporation, the love story with the hosts never really lasts. The host communities soon begin to bleed from the excesses of the big corporation, and gradually, anger and agony replace the smiles, dance, and ceremony that ushered in the corporation.

Stories with the above coloration litter the surface of Nigeria’s Niger Delta, where crude oil flows in millions of barrels daily. Big corporations can manipulate the leaders against the led. They assume awesome powers that can be difficult to challenge, even legally. In some instances, they assume the power of life and death over their hosts. They exploit the weaknesses in our systems, Labour laws, and governance process to wreak havoc on the citizens. They make lives miserable, turning their sweet into sour grapes.

While I served as state correspondent of The Punch in Edo, one environmental group alerted me to an oil spill around the Ethiope River on the Edo/Delta State border. I called a colleague from Vanguard, Austin Ogwuda, who hails from Delta State and we headed for the location. After interviewing the locals, men and women, whose fishing nets had been destroyed by the massive oil spill that left dead fishes floating in their thousands on the surface of the water, we made to see the chief of the village, at least for some authoritative corroboration of the stories we had gathered.

On hearing of the presence of the journalists, the chief simply took his car key and made to drive off. Our sharp eyes caught him as he made to escape through the other door. We rushed to greet, but he was not enthusiastic about a response. He had a shining key holder that bore the insignia of the multinational oil company that operates in the area. The man only referred us to the Flow Station. Some three-hour drive inside the forest. After flatly declining comment, he drove off in his Benz 200 car.

Sadly, the sweet story of oil find in a community or the location of a big corporation soon turns the other phase in a short distance. It is the same for the Gbelebu Community in Ovia South West Local Government of Edo State, where Okomu Oil Palm Company PLC has been drilling palm oil and produce since 1976.

Though Okomu Oil prides itself as a champion in “responsible tropical agriculture” which through its activities, implements “key initiatives that ensure long-term economic performance, social welfare, health, security, and natural resource management, resulting in a positive impact on all,” its activities in and around the Ovia South West Local government especially with the effects on Okomu, Gbelebu and environs cannot be said to depict such projections.

If thieves are stealing produce from the Okomu Oil plantation, which is just like the occupational hazard such a big firm should expect, it is incumbent on the management to devise tight security means to burst the thieving gang. The company should not seek to flex its muscles by punishing the innocents.

It is equally sad that the powers that be in Edo have yet to make any positive impact on Okomu Oil. The people deserve action from Governor Godwin Obaseki, the Rep member representing the area, the Senator representing Edo South, and even the local government Chairman of Ovia South West local government. If these officials continue to keep mute, there is only one verdict-they are playing the ostrich. And ostrich dance, in this case is a naked dance in the marketplace.

   

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