Abuja FileAll The NewsCover StoryNews

OCDI Condemns Acts of Corruption Perpetrated by Betta Edu

By
3 Mins read
0
Share

 

  • Calls for the Suspension of Minister of Interior, Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo
  • Pushes for Abike Dabiri as Humanitarian Chief

The Omoluabi Center for Development Initiative (OCDI) has joined well meaning Nigerians home and abroad to unequivocally condemns the acts of corruption allegedly perpetrated by the suspended Minister of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Alleviation , Betta Edu, the minister of Interior, Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo and the appointment of the permanent Secretary of the said ministry to take charge of the ministry.

OCDI dropped this in a statement issued, signed on Saturday by its Executive Director, Olanrewaju Oretoluwa and made available to newsmen in Abuja.

According to the statement, “We view these allegations with grave concern and demand a thorough investigation into the matter, as well as justice for the Nigerian people.

“The OCDI firmly believes that corruption in any form severely hampers the socio-economic progress of our nation and undermines the trust of the citizens in the government. The allegations against the suspended minister are deeply troubling and warrant immediate attention. We call upon the relevant authorities to conduct a comprehensive and fair investigation, ensuring that justice is served without any prejudice or compromise.

“Additionally, we express our deep disappointment in the involvement of a company owned by the Minister of Interior, Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo, which is contrary to the extant laws governing the conduct of any public officer in Nigeria. It is our firm belief that public officers should always act in the best interest of the people they serve, and any conflicts of interest must be addressed promptly and transparently. Therefore, OCDI demands the suspension of the Minister of Interior to ensure justice and fairness prevail.”

Furthermore, OCDI wishes to also express its concern regarding the appointment of the Permanent Secretary of the Humanitarian Ministry to assume leadership in the ministry following these corruption allegations. Such a magnitude of corruption happening under the watch of a chief accounting officer of the ministry leaves much to be doubted. It is imperative that a thorough review of the ministry’s leadership structure is undertaken to restore transparency, accountability, and public trust.

The Omoluabi Center for Development Initiative calls for the appointment of an individual with a clean bill of reputation and a track record of integrity to assume the leadership of the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Alleviation. Only through the appointment of someone genuinely committed to the welfare and development of the Nigerian people can we regain confidence in the ministry’s ability to fulfill its mandate effectively.

As an organization dedicated to promoting good governance, accountability, and development, OCDI remains committed to working closely with relevant stakeholders to ensure that corruption is eradicated from our public institutions. We urge the government and law enforcement agencies to expedite the investigation process and hold all guilty parties accountable.

The OCDI will continue to advocate for transparency and integrity in public service, as we firmly believe that a prosperous Nigeria can only be built on a foundation of ethical leadership and accountable governance.

In the same vein, the Center is proudly announces its full endorsement of Hon. Abike Dabiri-Erewa, the present Chairperson of the Nigerians in Diaspora Commission, for the position of Minister of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Alleviation. We firmly believe that her unparalleled track records of competency, integrity, and technical know-how make her the ideal candidate for this crucial role.

Hon. Abike Dabiri-Erewa has long demonstrated her competence and effectiveness in public service. Over the years, she has proven herself to be a passionate leader, patriotic, and a woman of repute. She has consistently shown unwavering dedication to the welfare and upliftment of the Nigerian people, particularly those in vulnerable and marginalized communities.

Her tenure right from the Nigerian Television Authority, to the House of Representative up till date as Chairperson of the Nigerian in Diaspora Commission has showcased her outstanding leadership qualities and her ability to effectively tackle complex issues. Under her guidance, the commission has achieved significant milestones in its mission to engage and mobilize the Nigerian diaspora community towards contributing to the nation’s development. Her expertise and experience in managing humanitarian initiatives have been clearly evident throughout her career.

Appointing Hon. Abike Dabiri-Erewa as Minister of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Alleviation will be akin to fitting a round peg in a round hole. Her proven leadership abilities and commitment to public service make her the perfect fit for this important role. She possesses the necessary knowledge and understanding of the challenges faced by vulnerable and impoverished communities and has consistently advocated for their rights and wellbeing.

OCDI recognizes that effective leadership is a cornerstone in successfully addressing poverty, inequality, and other social challenges. Hon. Abike Dabiri-Erewa’s visionary approach, coupled with her deep understanding of the issues at hand, positions her as an outstanding choice to lead the Ministry towards achieving tangible results.

We urge President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the relevant authorities and decision-makers to consider the sterling qualities and accomplishments of Hon. Abike Dabiri-Erewa when making crucial appointments. The Nigerian people deserve a leader who is competent, passionate, and genuinely committed to their welfare, and we firmly believe that Hon. Abike Dabiri-Erewa embodies these qualities and more.

The Omoluabi Center for Development Initiative is confident that appointing Hon. Abike Dabiri-Erewa as Minister of Humanitarian Affairs and  Poverty Alleviation will bring about positive change and transformation in the lives of the Nigerian people. We pledge our support to her, and we will continue to advocate for transparency, accountability, and good governance in all sectors of our nation.

   

0
Share

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
All The NewsCover StoryNewsPolitics

Musa Tsoken Congratulates Kalu on Daily Times’ Lawmaker of the Year Award

By
1 Mins read
The National Coordinator of the Asiwaju Again Renewed Hope Support Initiative 2027 and National President of the APC Initiative for Good Governance…
Abuja FileDevelopmentEconomyEnergyFinanceInside LagosOpinionPerspective

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

By
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

By
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,…
Stay on the loop!

Subscribe to our latest news.

Leave a Reply

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com