Gunmen have beheaded Okechuckwu Okoye, the lawmaker representing Governor Charles Soludo’s community in Anambra House of Assembly, Nigeria’s Southeast.

Okoye, who represents Aguata 2 Constituency in Anambra State, was abducted alongside his aide, Cyril Chiegboka, last Sunday, along Aguluzigbo road, Anaocha Local Government Area of the state.

His head was said to have been dumped at Chisco park in Amichi, a community in Nnewi South Local Government Area of the state on Saturday, six days after he was abducted.

Police spokesperson in the state, Tochukwu Ikenga, confirmed this in a statement on Saturday night.

He said the lawmaker’s headless body was later found along Ideani road, Nnobi community, Idemili South Local Government Area of the state.

“(With) further information and confirmation, (we) identified the corpse as (that of) Okechukwu Okoye,” Ikenga said.

He was, however, silent on the fate of the lawmaker’s aide, Cyril Chiegboka.

But there are indications the aide may have also been killed.

The police spokesperson said the Commissioner of Police in the state, Echeng Echeng, described the lawmaker’s murder as “barbaric and act of cowardice.”

Echeng also commiserated with the family and friends of the lawmaker and assured that the police will track down the killers.

A video clip which captured the head dumped at the park has gone viral on various social media.

In the clip, two warning notes, believed to have been written by the gunmen, were dropped on the road.

“We give the politicians 48 hours to withdraw all the soldiers in Biafraland or face our wrath or the consequences,” the gunmen said in one of the notes.

In the second note, which was blurred, the gunmen appeared to be threatening politicians “colluding” with law enforcement officers.

“We will attack you one by one because soldiers and police (officers) are no longer our problem,” the second note said.

The abducted lawmaker, a representative of Soludo’s constituency, hails from Isuofia in Aguata Local Government Area, where the governor also comes from.

Worsening situation

Security in Nigeria’s Southeast has deteriorated in recent times with attacks by armed persons reported almost on a daily basis across the region.

Anambra State has witnessed some of the worst attacks in the region. The attacks often target security agencies, government officials, and facilities.

Soludo recently visited Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the outlawed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) in detention.

The governor said the visit to the IPOB leader was part of his “wider consultations with critical stakeholders” to ensure lasting peace and security in the South-east.

During his inauguration as the state governor, Soludo had called for dialogue with the IPOB group and other gunmen behind insecurity in the state and region.

The governor, thereafter, announced an amnesty programme for the gunmen and declared an end to the sit-at-home order in the state. But residents have continued to obey the Monday sit-at-home order in the state and across the region, mostly out of fear.

The attacks by the gunmen increased in the state shortly after Soludo’s inauguration and announcement of an end to the sit-at-home order in the state.

The federal government has accused IPOB of being responsible for the deadly attacks in the region. But the group has repeatedly denied their involvement in the attacks.

The separatist group is leading agitation for an independent state of Biafra to be carved out from the Southeast and some parts of the Southsouth Nigeria.

The leader of the secessionist group, Nnamdi Kanu, is currently being detained in Abuja where he is facing trial for terrorism.

Kanu appeared in court on May 18 in continuation of his trial.

He is billed to appear in court again on May 26.

 

 

 

 

 

The All Progressives Congress, APC in the United Kingdom has debunked the purported report suggesting that the Chapter is backing Dapo Abiodun’s re-election as Ogun State Governor, amidst the controversy surrounding his returning to the office. 

The APC UK on its official twitter page had tagged the news report as ‘fake News’ indicating that the interview granted the spokesperson of G20, Prince Dele Tinuosho and Hon. Sunday Olalekan Oyesanya, who are both members of the APC UK by the Daily Crucible was not in conformity with the stand of the Chapter.

The Nigerian Newstrack had reported that the All Progressives Congress(APC) and G20 UK have endorsed the second term ambition of governor Dapo Abiodun, saying he deserves re-election for another round of four years come 2023, following his even development of the state and inclusive governance style, according to the daily crucible. 

The UK APC and G20 group, UK, also described as an exercise in futility attempts by some failed politicians to deploy smear campaign and petitions to make governor Abiodun ineligible to participate in the 2023 governorship race on the platform of APC.

It would be recalled that the All Progressives Congress (APC) leadership recently received a petition written by one Ayodele Oludiran which seeks to disqualify Governor Abiodun from participating in the forthcoming governorship primaries.

The petition alleges that there are discrepancies in his Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) forms CF001 submitted in 2015 and 2019.

The April 12 petition also alleges that the governor was convicted for an offence in 1986, adding that he bears Shawn Michael Davis in addition to Dapo Abiodun.

But the governor, in a letter to the APC National Chairman, Abdullahi Adamu, through his lawyers Afe Babalola & Co, urged the party to disregard a petition.

The law firm, in an April 19 letter to Adamu, described the petition as full of spurious and unfounded allegations to mislead the party into disqualifying the governor from participating in the 2023 gubernatorial poll.

However, Prince Dele Tinuosho, spokesperson for G20 UK chapter and Hon Sunday Olalekan Oyesanya - both members of APC UK, said sponsors of smear campaign and petitions seeking the disqualification of Abiodun by the APC National Working Committee (NWC)  would fail just as they failed woefully to stop him in the build up to the 2019 governorship election.

The two United Kingdom based APC chieftains pledged full support of the foreign chapter for the governor ahead of the party primaries and 2023 general elections.

They urged the National body of APC to disregard the petition and petitioner while also calling on the good people of Ogun State to rally round the governor and ensure he returns in 2023 to enable him continue his further developmental agenda for the state.

The UK chapter of the APC on its verified Twitter page debunked supporting the Governor and condemning the petitioner, stating that it would only support candidates after the primaries.

“ We wish all @officialAPCNg aspirants the best of luck. APC UK will support @officialAPCNg candidates after the gubernatorial primaries. Thank you” the UK APC tweeted.

 

 

 

 

In the middle of July 2020, Roland Michelitsch slipped out of his home in Ivory Coast, taking almost nothing with him. He quietly got into an armoured Land Rover and drove to a boatyard where he abandoned the vehicle. And then he disappeared. Michelitsch was not a spy or criminal mastermind. He was a banker of the least glamorous sort—the independent evaluator general of the African Development Bank (afdb). Yet he had !ed the country fearing for his life.

The afdb is the most important African development institution in a region with about 70% of the world’s extremely poor people. The World Bank is far larger, but the afdb, with its headquarters in Abidjan, the commercial capital of Ivory Coast, focuses exclusively on the continent. It has a strong record of spending on things that African governments prioritise. It has assets of about $60bn and before covid-19 committed about $10bn a year in lending, much of it in line with the ambitious goals set by Akinwumi Adesina, its president since 2015. Because of its focus, rich countries have given billions to its concessional fund for the poorest countries. They also, in effect, lend their top-notch credit ratings to the bank, which allows it to borrow cheaply and lend at low rates. At its annual meetings next week, the bank’s governors and board are expected to discuss plans to ask donors for as much as $24bn.

This makes it all the more important that the afdb is run well. Yet a number of incidents over the past two years raise troubling questions about how it is managed and whether its internal watchdogs have su#cient oversight of the afdb’s executives. Importantly, they also throw into question whether the bank retains the full con$dence of the creditors, donors and shareholders who fund it and whose support it needs to prevent African economies from being dragged down by mounting debt, surging international food and energy prices and the lingering effects of the pandemic. The bank says it is well managed, is able to raise funds and is commended by its African members.

Michelitsch’s departure is one of these worrisome incidents. The evaluator general’s o#ce assesses whether the billions the bank commits are helping poor people. It is bound to report if bank projects are failing. To safeguard its independence, the evaluator reports directly to the board of directors and is supposed to be free from management in!uence. Yet these safeguards appear to have failed in the case of Michelitsch, who had been appointed just ten months earlier after a long career at the World Bank Group.

The events leading to his !ight began with a seemingly trivial disagreement over the bank’s policy that sta" had to remain in Abidjan, even while working from home during the pandemic. Mr Michelitsch, who strongly disagreed with this, told his team that he would be !exible in cases of hardship or maternity leave. Days later Adesina wrote to the board accusing Michelitsch of “gross misconduct and aggravated disregard, and disrespect for the authority and person of the President” and said that he would “not accept” Michelitsch continuing in his role.

The bank’s evaluation policies are clear: only the board has the power to be the evaluator. Yet soon after the letter was written, Michelitsch reported being the target of harassment by senior executives. He also complained to others that he believed his home was being watched and that he had received warnings from several people. This prompted him to !ee, according to documents seen by The Economist. Two months after he left, the bank fired him without the board’s approval, arguing that he had abandoned his post and that his role was therefore deemed terminated under general staff rules. A delegation of board members went to Adesina to complain. But it gave up the fight after Adesina, who was re-elected in August 2020 to a second term, refused to back down. The bank says the evaluator’s employment was terminated “in accordance with the rules of the Bank, and in consultation with the Board of Directors”.

Outsiders saw this incident as having a chilling effect on accountability. A letter signed by nine independent evaluators of multilateral institutions, including those of the World Bank and IMF, said the firing “cuts directly to a fundamental and long-standing principle of independent evaluation”. Michelitsch, who declined to comment for this story, has since taken his case to a tribunal established by the bank, but which operates independently. The afdb failed to have it dismissed on a procedural technicality and it is still under way.

Other employees tasked with scrutinising management have also quit after facing pressure, seemingly for doing their jobs. The bank’s integrity and anti-corruption office prevents corruption and investigates allegations of it. Yet in one incident a senior investigator in this office was probing allegations of graft against senior officials. As the investigator was preparing to finalise the case before leaving to take another job, offcials in the human-resources department began intimidating the investigator through aggressive questioning. The investigator quit early to avoid an ugly dispute. It is understood that the investigations were never finished. The afdb says details of investigations are known only by the department responsible, which reports to the board in order to protect investigators and the department from “any form of interference of the type alleged”.

A third case involved the bank’s auditor general (AG), who is meant to check that the bank is not wasting money or exposed to excessive risks. He also keeps an eye out for corruption. The AG is meant to have total independence and the board must be consulted over his appointment and removal. Yet these safeguards also appear to have failed. In mid-2020 Chukwuma Okonkwo, who had been AG since 2015, surprised the board by saying he would be leaving within a few weeks at the expiry of his five-year term. When asked about this by the board, Adesina said Okonkwo was nearing retirement age and was simply retiring, according to people familiar with the discussions. Yet Okonkwo later told directors that he had been informed by the head of human resources that the president did not intend to renew his contract. In this case the board dug in its heels and kept him on for another 11 months. When he reached his actual retirement age Adesina put in place an acting AG for almost a year. The bank says that it could not renew Okonkwo’s five-year contract because that would have exceeded its mandatory retirement age. It says it offered to allow him to leave with a package and then respected his wish to keep working. “The allegation that the President removed the Auditor General is false,” it said.

Whistle in the wind

The tussle over the AG came at a tumultuous time: Adesina, a former agriculture minister in Nigeria, was already battling allegations of corruption and embroiled in a spat with America, the bank’s largest non-African shareholder. Just months earlier whistleblowers had accused Adesina of overpaying friends and allies in breach of bank rules and of using the bank’s resources for self-promotion and private gain. He denied any wrongdoing and said the allegations were an attempt to smear him. Adesina was cleared by an internal preliminary examination by the board’s ethics committee, which ruled that the accusations were unsubstantiated. But these findings were challenged by Steven Mnuchin, then America’s treasury secretary, who demanded an independent inquiry. An external panel whose members included Mary Robinson, a former Irish president, was subsequently asked to review the internal probe. The panel approved its findings, though with an unusual caveat that left some board members astonished: it noted that an “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” and that it “does not necessarily follow from the dismissal of a complaint that there are not matters worthy of investigation”. The panel explicitly said that this comment did not apply to the complaints against Adesina. The afdb says that Adesina’s re-election was a “clear demonstration of the exceptional level of confidence” in him.

The AG’s replacement highlights two wider issues. The first appears to be a general disregard for the role of the AG. For instance, some 400 recommendations from the bank’s internal auditors were still outstanding last year. The bank says that it “consistently responds to and addresses” recommendations by the AG.

The second is that many of the bank’s key oversight roles have typically been filled by people in acting positions. At several points over the past two years, about a quarter of the bank’s senior management staff were in acting roles or temporarily in charge. Among them were the evaluator general, the head of anti- corruption, the chief risk officer (who safeguards the bank’s creditworthiness), the general counsel (who gives legal advice to the board and management), and the director of human resources (a powerful figure in hiring and firing whose role has not been permanently filled for more than two years). This creates a risk of undermining the independence of the bank’s watchdogs because those leading them may be wary of challenging senior executives who determine their career prospects. It also risks undermining the independence of the AG, who is barred from working for the bank after his or her term ends. Yet Mouhamed Ba, who had been appointed as acting AG last June, returned to his position this month as a manager within the audit team. The bank says that it appoints “capable members of staff, who are fully empowered” when positions become vacant.

Some appointments have raised eyebrows. One member of staff was appointed to a senior oversight role requiring integrity and deep trust from staff. Yet a few years earlier the same member of staff signed a statement to the bank’s ombudsman admitting to having made a false allegation of sexual harassment. The allegation was withdrawn and the member of staff blamed stress. The bank says that the individual in question did not file a complaint for sexual harassment and it “does not have any record of any such complaint”.

Turnover in senior jobs is also high. Adesina is onto his fourth senior vice- president and fourth general counsel since 2015. Not all staff go quietly. Judgments by the bank’s independent tribunal have more than tripled since Adesina took o#ce. Among the cases were employment disputes filed against the bank by three vice-presidents. The bank says the increased activity of the tribunal is a clear sign of its “commitment to transparency, equity, and fairness to all, through a recourse mechanism that is fully independent”.

Does your watchdog bite?

A weakening of the bank’s watchdogs raises questions over the quality of information reaching the board. Reports about financial risks, for instance, do not go directly to the board but are sent via senior executives. In several instances these executives have demanded changes, according to a former senior o#cial. “There is an awful lot of sanitising and massaging information that gets presented formally as board papers,” the official says. In one instance this contributed to the board approving a pandemic response fund that could have harmed the bank’s credit rating had it been fully implemented. Yet rather than taking the near-miss as a lesson on the need for transparency, the bank’s executives are understood to have given themselves greater control over the !ow of information, including requiring risk reports to be cleared by the president. The bank says it “does not withhold data or ‘massage’ information in its formal reports to the Board of Directors” and it “rejects any suggestion of a lack of probity in the conduct of risk management”.

The wider consequence of the rumblings within the afdb has been an erosion of trust in it, and thus of its ability to fund development. After Adesina’s appointment lending by the bank shot up, with the value of outstanding loans increasing by 41% between 2015 and 2017. But this was at the cost of eroding the bank’s capital cushions. A report to governors in March 2018 warned that the bank had “no protection today against significant shocks”. Yet Adesina played down warnings that the bank could face problems caused by a capital squeeze, according to a former official. The bank says this is false and that Adesina and managers had “persistently raised the need for a timely capital increase with the Bank’s shareholders”. Yet in 2018 and 2019 the bank was forced to slow disbursements to avoid breaching limits that could have led to a downgrade by Fitch, a rating agency. By mid-2020 its balance-sheet had run out of lending capacity. In 2021 some rich countries rescued it with a temporary pledge to provide “callable capital” to avert the danger of it losing its triple-a credit rating. The bank says the capital was needed because of exogenous factors such as the credit downgrades of its shareholders.

Yet this was against a backdrop of shareholders and donors appearing to cool on the bank. In 2019 they approved a smaller percentage increase in capital than in the previous round (though larger in absolute terms) and a much smaller increase than Adesina had requested, according to a person with knowledge of the talks. Some capital trickled in slowly, in part because some countries seemed to delay their contributions amid the corruption allegations. As a result, when Covid- 19 hit Africa’s economies, the bank had little dry powder. Development banks elsewhere sharply increased lending. Yet the afdb’s new lending fell by 51% between 2019 and 2020, with approvals from its concessional arm, the African Development Fund, slumping by 24%. The bank says some shareholders paid in early and that the drop in new commitments was because it focused on the rapid disbursement of existing loans rather than on new ones.

Donor countries appear to prefer to direct much of their aid through the World Bank. In 2018, before the pandemic, the afdb distributed about $1.5bn a year in grants and concessional loans. By contrast the International Development Association (ida), the World Bank’s concessional arm, was distributing about $15bn a year in the region, in part because shareholders have enough confidence in it to allow it to borrow in private markets to supplement donor funds. When the pandemic hit, donors pushed money into an early replenishment of the ida, 70% of which goes to sub-Saharan Africa. The afdb got no such treatment. “ida was really the preferred instrument of shareholders,” says Clemence Landers of the Centre for Global Development (cgd), a think-tank in Washington and London. The afdb says this is not the case and that it has strong donor support.

At a recent meeting to discuss the concessional window Adesina demanded an unprecedented increase and told donors six times that no could not be an answer. He then accused the representative of the Italian government of colonialism after it pushed back on the bank’s borrowing plans. The afdb says this should be seen in the context of “unprecedented urgency to avert a catastrophe” and that the exchange happened “on the back of sometimes robust and heated discussions”.

At the afdb’s annual meeting next week, governors and the board are expected to discuss an external report into the bank’s governance. But it ought to go further, by looking into its own structure. In almost all other development banks a majority of shareholders’ votes are wielded by creditor countries. At the afdb about 60% of the votes belong to borrowing countries. This may make it more responsive to the needs of African governments. But it may also be having an impact on the bank’s ability to raise finance cheaply. A paper published in 2018 by Nancy Birdsall, an economist at the cgd, argued that the afdb’s voting structure makes it less competitive than its peers in sustaining donor confidence and raising capital or concessional finance. The bank argues that this view reflects “ignorance of the intrinsic character of the Bank and seems to perpetuate old stereotypes about and against Africa”.

When viewed in isolation, some of the failings may not seem too worrying. But when taken as a whole they paint a picture of an organisation in need of reform. Its shareholders may have many reasons for not demanding change. Borrowing countries may worry that speaking up could result in fewer loans. Non-African donors, some of which are former colonial powers, may worry they will be seen as meddlers.

Yet the bank’s mission of funding development is much too important for it to be allowed to underperform. The pandemic and the war in Ukraine are in!icting huge shocks on Africa. Absolute poverty is expected to rise sharply, making it all the more essential that the afdb is able to raise money from donors and markets— and use it well—to support struggling economies. Unless the bank’s directors and governors grapple with the bank’s problems, they will be failing Africa’s poor.

 

 

 

 

PRESS RELEASE

1.A Meeting of the Southern and Middle Belt Leaders' Forum (SMBLF) was held on Thursday, 19th May 2022, in Abuja under the Chairmanship of the Leader and Elder Statesman, Edwin K. Clark.

2.  Delegations of the constituent Organisations of SMBLF were respectively led by Ayo Adebanjo, Leader of Afenifere (Southwest); George Obiozor, President-General, Ohanaeze Ndigbo Worldwide (Southeast); Dan Suleiman; Pogu Bitrus, President, Middle Belt Forum (Middle Belt); as well as Emmanuel Ibok Essien, National Chairman, Pan Niger Delta Forum, PANDEF (Southsouth).

3.  The Meeting was also attended by former Governors, Ministers, Federal and State legislators, top politicians and professionals from the Southern and Middle Belt regions, including Cornelius Adebayo, Chukwuemeka Ezeife, Oladipo Olaitan - Deputy Leader Afenifere, Potter L. Dabup, John Nnia Nwodo, former Minister of Information & former PG Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Ihechukwu Madubuike, former Minister of Education and Health, Anya O. Anya, Gary Igwariwey, former PG Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Okey Emuchay, Secretary-General Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Cletus Iluomanya, Simon Okeke, former Chairman of Police Service Commission, G. G. Darah, Inatimi Rufus-Spiff, Solomon Asemota, Mike Ozekhome, Ozo Nwobu, Supo Shonibare, Edozie Ezeugwa, Ibe Nwosu, Nze Ozichukwu Chukwu, Charles Nwekeaku, Olivia Agbajoh, Alex Ogbonnia, Jare Ajayi, Keftin Amuga, Iorbes Ihagh, Esther Mango, Beatrice Eze, National Treasurer Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Elizabeth A. Jibrin, Chika Ibeneme, Elder Mac Emakpore, Douyi Douglas-Naingba, Ominimini Obiuwevbi, Gboyega Adejumo, Ben Akaakar, Dele Farotimi, Katch Ononuju, Debrah Ogazuwa, Olutola Mobolurin, Christopher Aba, Audu Samuel Riko, Jonathan Tsaku, Joshua Bawa, Akwa Jeremiah and Ken Robinson, among others.

4.  The Meeting deliberated extensively on the State of Nation, particularly the worsening insecurity; the 2023 General Elections; and recent troubling developments in the polity.

5. Arising therefrom, the Forum:

i. Firmly reiterates its stance on the Principle of Zoning and Power Rotation between the North and the South, as the basis on which the Nigerian Federation has, since Independence, been premised.

ii. States, unequivocally, that the Zoning and Rotation of the Presidency of Nigeria are fundamental to the future existence of the Country.

iii.  Accordingly, condemns, in strongest terms, obvious schemes by the two main political parties, the PDP and APC, ahead of their Presidential Primaries, to jettison the time-honoured principle of Rotation, which has traditionally served as the glue holding the Federal Republic of Nigeria together.

iv. Warns that the reported permutations by the main political parties to foist Northern Presidential Candidates on the nation would be a grave misadventure, with grim consequences on national concord and harmony.

v. Therefore, calls on all delegates of all political parties, and true lovers of democracy, as a sacred obligation, to reject Presidential Aspirants, or Candidates, from the North, and only vote for those from the South in the Party Primaries.

vi. Calls on all politicians and professionals from the South not to accept, on any account, the position of Vice President, as that would amount to a shameful committal of present and future generations of Southern Nigeria to senseless political vassalage.

vii. Further insists that, in observance of the principles of justice, equity, fairness and political inclusiveness, the South, and particularly, the South East Zone, being the third leg on which Nigeria’s political trajectory had revolved, should produce the next President of the Country in 2023. Insists that this would bring the Igbo quest for full reintegration and reconciliation, since the end of the Civil War in 1970, to full realisation.

viii.  SMBLF commends a number of northern governors who have demonstrated great patriotism by their public support for the rotation of the presidency to the South; to name a few, Nasir El-Rufai of Kaduna State, Aminu Bello Masari of Katsina State, Babagana Umara Zulum of Borno State, and Abdullahi Umar Ganduje of Kano State. While equally urging other well-meaning northern leaders, who believe in the oneness of Nigeria, to support this cause, because therein lies the unity and progress of Nigeria.

ix. On the worsening state of insecurity and rampaging violence across the country, Forum warns that Nigeria is plummeting into a state of total disorder and lawlessness, with attacks on innocent people resulting in kidnapping, loss of lives and destruction of properties happening in different parts of the country almost daily.

Sadly, the Federal Government and its Security Agencies are not doing enough to arrest the situation, whereby people can no longer travel safely either by road, rail or even by air to Kaduna State in particular.

It is not only frightening but unimaginable that despite the heavy presence of military commands and installations in the State there could be such security challenges.

Cites the bombing of the Kaduna-Abuja bound train over 60 days ago as well as the brazen attack on motorists on the Abuja-Kaduna Road about two days ago. On both occasions, innocent lives were lost while several people were wounded with many abducted. Undesirably, most of those who were kidnapped are still in the terrorists’ captivity after 60 days.

x. Forum condemns, in unmistakable terms, the killing of Miss Deborah Samuel Yakubu, a student of the College of Education, Sokoto, by her Muslim schoolmates and the wild spread of violence that engulfed the state, following the arrest of two of her killers. Denounces the worrisome disregard for the inviolability of human life by terrorists, criminals and religious extremists in the country.

xi. Likewise, strongly condemns the recent burning to death of a young man, a Sound Engineer, by commercial motorcyclists in Lagos, as well as the spree of killings and wanton destruction of properties and businesses owned by Southerners, particularly the occurrence, few days, at Dei Dei Market in Abuja.

xii. Decries the unabating killings and destruction of livelihoods in the Middle Belt Region, especially in Southern Kaduna, Southern Borno, Southern Gombe, Benue, Taraba, etc, and the inaction of the Federal Government to live up to its Constitutional responsibility of safeguarding the lives and properties of its citizens.

xiii. Classifies these killings and pervasive acts of aggression on the indigenous people, being perpetrated by elements of Islamic Extremism and Terrorists, as cultural genocide and ethnic cleansing. The Meeting cautions that these bellicosities and deliberate programs to exterminate the indigenous populations of the Middle Belt are, by implication, acts of aggression against the rest of Nigeria, and would not be tolerated any further.

xiv. Deplores the inhuman plight of the 1,700 indigenous people of Southern Kaduna driven out of their homes and have now become Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) for over five years as well as several other Internally Displaced Persons in different parts of the country, left to live in conditions that impinge on their human rights as citizens of this Country. Hence, calls on the Federal Government to, without delay, facilitate the return and reintegration of these Nigerians into their Communities.   

5. The Meeting resolved to resist, through all legitimate means, the barefaced attempts by religious fundamentalists to impose on the rest of us, a Nigeria of “one country, different laws”.

6. The Meeting reaffirmed the commitment of the people of Southern Nigeria and the Middle Belt to the RESTRUCTURING of the Country, in tandem with the Principles of True Federalism, as was established by the Founding Fathers of Nigeria.

7. Done in Abuja, this 19th day of May, 022.

Signed:

1. Edwin Kiagbodo Clark, Leader PANDEF

2.Ayo Adebanjo

Leader Afenifere

3.Pogu Bitrus

President-General, Middle Belt Forum

4.George Obiozor

President-General, Ohaneze Ndigbo Worldwide

5.Emmanuel Ibok Essien,

National Chairman, PANDEF