By: A G Abubakar

The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and its rate of growth are two basic economic tools used in the measurement of the size and performance of an economy. While the former represents the total market value of the economy’s aggregate output, the latter deals with the incremental movement or otherwise, of the said value, over a given period of time. The growth could be real, if inflation is discounted or nominal without the discount. The higher the figures, the healthier the economy, and that’s why governments are too eager to influence them for political reasons. This is despite the fact that the rates could mask some underlying deficiencies.

Various tools are employed to achieve this illusion of economic growth. They include rebasing the economy, bringing down inflation through unorthodox means such as massive food import, and tax reform to mop up economic deadweights. The Nigerian government had so far tinkered with the three. Whatever figure(s) arrived at in such circumstances are accrued from adjustment rather than through a general rise in national productivity. It’s like discovering some money in the pocket. It isn’t an indication of an additional income stream or a rise in earning power.

It is against this backdrop that the Nigerian GDP and growth rate have been assessed. The size of the economy bloated by 40% after being rebased, and the growth rate for the second quarter of 2025 rose to around 4%. Both impressive figures were achieved outside the real productive sectors of the economy, namely agriculture, industry, manufacturing, and physical infrastructure development. The nexus of economy rebasing, taxation, and GDP growth could be a complex one. It’s, however, in order to take a critical look at the central plank in the government’s interventions – the rebasing of the economy and its inherent implications.

In general terms, the acclaimed “expansion” of a re-based economy is more of a political paperwork than a measure of the economy’s performance. It’s a statistical/accounting exercise done to bring hitherto left out parameters/elements for not being crucial into an economic equation. This is in addition to the traditional stock of goods and services. Re-basing is mostly done by governments facing serious economic challenges, but at the same time looking for validation. As an economic tool, it is used sparingly because its fluidity may not portray the economy’s true health.

In the case of Nigeria, the re-basing exercise used 2019 as a base year. According to the Nigeria Bureau of Statistics (nbs), the initiative jerked the GDP to $243.7 billion (2024), from less than $200 billion the previous year, 2023. The floating/devaluation of the Naira, weakened its value by more than 70%. The move actually depressed the GDP to about $200 billion which may have been a source of discomfort to the government, that was in the heat of settling down. Something got to be done. That something happened to be to rebase the economy!

The rebasing computation brought into play aspects of the informal sector, diaspora remittances, the creative industry, the digital economy, returns from illicit activities, etc, just to beef up the GDP figure. Nothing got changed/transformed in the productive base of the economy. Agriculture continues to struggle. Industry and manufacturing have remained comatose. Stock of physical infrastructure like roads, power, institutions, etc are in deplorable condition.

A rebased GDP and consequent GDP growth in the circumstances remain hollow. Their impacts hardly get translated into improved public wellbeing. The amorphous parameters used, too, are never resilient enough to provide a sustainable thrust for future growth. It remains an economic patch work.

The “encouraging” figures from both rebased GDP and its attendant growth have been described variously as

paradox of accounting surplus but economic loss (net),
jobless growth,
motion without movement,
artificial growth,
growth without inclusion, etc.
Expectedly, re-based GDP growth tends to exist side by side with growing poverty (139 million by World Bank’s latest report), mass disillusionment, and social convulsions, as currently obtained in parts of Nigeria

For a government struggling with economic reform, a re-based GDP figure, though exergerated, tends to have a soothing effect. The initiative also lowers the economy’s debt-to-GDP ratio, which provides the government the feeling of having under-borrowed. And, that more debts are still sustainable, thereby triggering a borrowing spree, as currently being experienced.

Before rebasing the economy, Nigeria’s debt-to-GDP ratio was around 52% and decreased to about 39% after the exercise. The global average is over 230%! That seems to have given the government an illusion of sustainable debt level, forgetting that its current GDP, on which the ratio was derived, was “artificial.” The economic structure equally remains devoid of value addition as industry and manufacturing have all but gone. Not when the quantum of power available to the nation of over 230 million people graples with about 5000mw of electricity, less than what cities like Beijing, Tokyo, and Delhi consume. Even primary production in agriculture – the mainstay of the economy – remains rudimentary and at the mercy of the vagaries of weather conditions.

The government needs to be more cautious to avoid getting into a debt trap and throw the nation into a vicious circle of poverty and instability. At that point, the IMF/World Bank would have simply turned their back on the country to sort the crisis they collectively created. Ask Greece, Sudan, Mexico, Argentina, or Sri Lanka for experience. Alternatively, they will take over and lock the economy into a perpetual consumer mode of the exploitative global neoliberal economy.

Few countries have wriggled out of such stranglehold in one piece – particularly those operating a compromised and/or fragile version of democratic government as Nigeria does. A padded GDP rate is the usual take-off point into this economic flight to abyss.
A.G.Abubakar
agbarewa@gmail.com

By: A G Abubakar

The book, Scars: Nigeria’s Journey and the Boko Haram Conundrum, written by General Leo Irabor, rtd, was launched recently. The occasion was graced by a galaxy of who is who is in Nigeria’s contemporary leadership. The General pulled it off by having two former heads of state in attendance: Olusegun Obasanjo and Goodluck Jonathan. The serving one Bola Tinubu was represented by his Minister of Defence, Badaru. Former President Olusegun Obasanjo, who wrote the book’s Forward, was also the Chairman of the occasion.

The clergy wasn’t left out. The author was able to bring His Eminence, the Sultan of Sokoto, and His Royal Highness, the Etsu Nupe, to the occasion, too. The Catholic Bishop of Sokoto, Mathew Hassan Kukah, the book reviewer, was a strategic compliment to the royal fathers; a conclave of the secular and the spiritual

A former National Security Adviser, General B.M.Monguno, was tasked with the keynote remarks, tilted ” Reflections on National Security,” with messages from the Chief of Defence Staff, CDS, the National Security Adviser (NSA), and a host of other serving and retired security-related stakeholders. Why give this roll call? The answer is, since the subject matter of the book was security and how it has become elusive over the last one and a half decades, there is no better dramatis personae than the collection at the book launch. One would expect that at the end of the occasion, a glimpse of the roadmap for solutions would have been more discernible. A holy grail would have been discovered, so to say! And, this optimism could not be a misplaced one either. Yours faithfully, was privileged to be part of the occasion on account of the author’s personal invitation.

Under Their Command And Watch

Obasanjo was at the helm of the nation’s affairs twice. One as a military head of state in the late 70s. His second coming was in agbada/farar hula (civilian) in 1999. The Boko Haram (Jama’at Ahl al-Sunna li Al-Da’wa wal Jihad) struck about the same time in Kanamma the headquarters of Yunusari LGA, of Yobe Yobe, in the year 2000. He was there until 2007 when ‘Yar Adua took over and susequently Goodluck Jonathan, who took over in 2009, after the death of his boss. He had his baptism of fire by Boko Haram in 2014, following the abduction of over 250 secondary school girls in Chibok town, a local government area in Borno State.

President Buhari rode on the back of the insecurity, among others, to win power but could only do much in 2015. The trend of abductions continued with Buni Yadi students and Dapchi girls. The Boko Haram became more sophisticated and more potent. Its mutant outfit Islamic State in West Africa Province (ISWAP), became more formidable. The duo, though mutually antagonistic to each other due to differences on ideological inclination, were able to expand their operations beyond the North East region of Nigeria by the year 2020. They were able to establish cells in both the Central and North Western zones, where they worked in alliance with other insurgency groups like the Ansar, Lakurawa, Mahmuda etc in such states as Niger, Kaduna, Kogi, Kebbi and lately Kwara.

General Monguno, who was the NSA throughout Buhari’s eight years, is a “son of the soil” (indigene) of Borno State, where Boko Haram insurgency started. The author, whose recollection and assessment of the crisis via the book that was launched, served as President Muhammadu Buhari’s (PMB)Chief of Defence Staff (CDS). He worked closely with the National Security Adviser (NSA), Monguno. Ordinarily, there was no single group in Nigeria’s history that should have a greater depth of the nation’s problems than those present at the book launch.

The author tried very much in dissecting the raisons d’etre of Boko Haram and its modus operandi. He also proffered workable solutions based on his field and personal experience. But that’s where the discourse stopped. One by one, the men that are being looked up to for clearer vision came across as almost banal. Though the occasion may not be appropriate for war room ideas, the ideological interrogation of the historical manifestation of the Boko Haram insurgency or any other could hqve bene of great help.

Still Dwelling On The Usual Suspects

The recognition and appreciation of this fact could go a long way in finding a sustainable solution to the ugly phenomenon. Unfortunately, most eminent speakers dwelled on the usual suspects; poverty, politics, porous borders, and ignorance. As relevant as these factors are, they remain as symptoms and not causes. They are enablers that can reduce the foothold of insurgency but not keep it at bay sustainably. Islamic insurgency is an ideological movement with a long history, which should be of essence when it comes searching for solutions. Wisdom says that “it is easier to fight an invasion army more successfully than that of a belief system.”

Obasanjo spoke of “better life” for the youth. Kukah dwelled on ethno-religious schism, the nation’s challenged security architecture and the likes. The Sultan, as retired General of the Nigerian army tried to distance the Muslim ummah (faithfuls) from the insurgency, including the wrong notion being widely held regarding the Islamic context of Jihad. According to him, Jihad generally means “to strive” to “struggle” for good, in both personal and social realms. Monguno took his listeners down the lane of Nigeria’s history and security challenges since independence in 1960 and blamed some of the crises on attitudes and bad governance.

Jonathan, in his brief remarks, saw the Boko Haram phenomenon from the political prism, even though he recognised the millions of out-of-school kids as part of the enablers. That’s why his Administration introduced the Al’majiri school that couldn’t get traction after he left office. In the final analysis was the collective call on all sundry to turn a new leaf also for the governments to be guided by justice. Unfortunately, these elements are not given. They are usually cultivated, especially by leadership. But here we were, before three or more generations of political leadership, which people looked up to for solutions, ironically pontificating on “change” and “justice.”

The takeaways from the esteemed interventions are two-fold. One, leadership in Nigeria is yet to contextualise the phenomenon of religious insurgency and easily gets preoccupied by fighting the symptoms basically. Secondly, and drawing from the first drawback, the successive governments seemed “trapped” when it comes to appropriating appropriate strategies for dealing with the historical phenomenon of faith-based insurgency.

Governments can build all the schools, improve the people’s well-being, create job opportunities that are needed, but they may still go only as far, with insurgents. Such interventions needed to be taken in tandem with encouraging a shift in the acquisition of religious knowledge, from the extremist perspective to the mainstream. This should be done right from the primary school level, with a view of producing der-adicalised future generations. By necessity, therefore, the content of learning and the needed power (quantity and quality) should be developed, especially across the Muslim majority states.

The learning system should be able to expose learners to the evolution of sects and sectarianism in Islam. To interrogate the various experiences and their implications for individuals and society. Nations that were able to do so have become less prone to insurgencies that could pose existential threats. Such countries include Malaysia, Indonesia, Morocco, Turkey, Kazakhstan, UAE etc.They succeeded partly because they were able to come to navigate the nuanced complexity of Islamic and modern day political systems as relates to both the adherents and other non Muslims in a given setting.

Shari’a Is Islamic But Not The Violence

The challenge in the search for a faith-based political system in Islam dates back to few decades after the death of the Prophet of Islam, Muhammad in the year 632 AD. The choice of a successor after the first three, gave rise to what has come to be known as Shi’a sect, now dominant in Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen and few others. They have over a dozen sub-sects. Shia’a vests political leadership in a supreme/spiritual leader, the Imam, and the system is thus generally referred to as, Imamate. The Imams are believed to be descendants of the Prophet of Islam, allegedly.

The Sunni went on to device a political system that was based on Islam’s Holy Book, the Qur’an and the Hadith (sayings and way of life) of the Prophet. The prominent clerics in this endeavour included Al’Mawardi (972-1058), Al’Ghazali (1058-1111), Ibn Taymiyya (1263-1328), Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406), among others. Their works among other developments at the time gave rise to two branches of the Sunni – those hanging onto the ideals and ideas of the forerunners who shared the prophetic era and those that were philosophically inclined. The former is today referred to as Sunni-Salafi, and the latter known as the Sufi. Both groups have subgroups.

The Sufi Sunni, loosely called Ɗariƙa, has such sub sects as the Tijjaniyah, Ahmadiyah, Qadriyyah etc, so named after their spiritual founders or prominent leaders. The Sufi are generally more laid back and accommodating.

The Jihadists In The Midst

The Sunni-Salafi may be divided into three or more formations, largely driven by the works of Ibn Taymiyyah, an theocratic purist of the first order. The Sheik is alleged to never believe in a secular leadership system. He believes that the Muslim world should be ruled by Muslims using the Shari’a law. His strong aversion of external sources of law outside Islam was rooted in the tyrannical era of the Mongols (Mouguls) who ruled his part of the world that time. It seems he used the pulpit in energising his compatriots against the “invaders.” A liberation theology of sorts.

Ibn Taymiyya influenced later Islamic clerics like the Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahab (1703-1792) of Saudi Arabia, who is still being revered as the father of Wahabism (theocratism). He in turn influenced the late Grand Muftis of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, such as Abd al-Aziz ibn Baz (1910-1999), Muhammad ibn Uthaymeen and many others. In Egypt, Hassan al Banna, and Sayyid Qutb used the Wahabism philosophy to found the Muslim Brotherhood (1928) to fight against British colonial rule and the subsequent constitutional administrations in Egypt.

Within the ranks of the Salafi movement there are moderates, modernists, and the firebrand (jihadist). They all draw inspirations from Ibn Taymiyya, Wahabism and the Muslim Brotherhood in varying degrees and appreciation. Ibn Taymiyyah’s notable works included Al-Siyasah al-Shar’iyyah and Al-Hisbah fi al-Islam. The former is a touchstone in Islamic governance, principles and rules for Shari’a-based state) while the latter deals with the role of the state in promoting good and forbidding evil.

Many Sunni-Salafi in Nigeria have participated in government. They include Abubakar Gumi snr, the Grand Khadi of defunct Northern Nigeria, Prof/Sheik Pantami, a Minister in Buhari’s government, to mention but a few. Others who subscribe to harmless aspects of modernisation and use the religion to promote same, include individuals like Professors/Sheikhs, Rijiyar Lemo, Mansur Sokoto, and Jabir Mai Hula. These gentlemen are lecturers in conventional universities. Yet there was Sheikh Ja’s afar, a gifted intellectual who preached balance between Islam and western education.

Then came the extremist branch of the Sunni-Salafi; the Jihadist. They come in with various names and platforms such as al-Qaida, Taliban, Al’shabab, ISWAP, Ansar, Mahmuda, Lakurawa, Abu Sayab, Jama’a Islamiyy, etc. They are united by one vision; a Shari’a State anywhere Muslims are in majority. To them, democracy is an aberration. Muhammad Yusuf and his co-travellers in the Boko Haram are the promoters of this visiona; a vision they are prepared to enforce at all cost, including violence. As Sunni-Salafi Jihadist movements, they arguably rely on aspects of ibn Taymiyya’s works from where they continue to draw inspiration. The demolished centre/mosque of the Sect in Maiduguri was actually named after the great Sunni cleric ibn Taymiyya as a mark of honour and reverence.

Insulating The Next Generation,Young

From the above rundown on the Jihadist movement, it is evident that the combined number of subscribers to their brand of Islam is very negligible . Unfortunately, they seem to define Islam with its over 2 billion faithfuls, just behind Christianity, which has 2.5 billion followers. The fact that Jihadists communicate with violence, make them grab the headlines faster. A case of “the head that bleeds gets the headlines or better still if it bleeds, it leads.” Maybe it’s with this in mind that insurgents android made carnage and disregard for the sanctity of life wrapped up in religion, as their stock in trade. Notwithstanding, the fact that the Holy Qur’an is against such a practice, where it unequivocally says in Surah Al-Ma’idah (5:32) that “whoever kills a soul, unless for a soul or for corruption in the land, it is as if he had slain mankind entirely.” Insurgents care less about such divine injunctions.

To keep them at bay, two-pronged approaches should be adopted. The here and now is to degrade them while putting in place holistic educational systems that can equip and insulate future generations from being vulnerable to religious extremism. Governments in Muslim majority states should start growing the next generation of Gumi, Pantami, Maqari, Dahiru Bauchi, Sanusi Lamiɗo Sanusi, Rijiyar Lemo, Aliyu, Umar, Mansur, Adam Al-Ilori, Alfa Oranaike, Ja’afar, etc now. This shall, however, call for paradigm shift away from bogus projects to the development of quality education and innovation with a view to evolving a humane and just society.

General Irabor rtd, CFR, and former CDS, has cast the first stone or better still a “projectile” with his seminal book, “Scars.” It’s left for governments at all levels working together with major stakeholders in the society to increase the “propulsion and range” by redoubling efforts in rolling back the Boko Haram and indeed any other form of terrororist acts. The immediate task before the army is to degrade them, while governments at all levels reform and prime the educational system to secure society in the future.

In the short run, the rule of law should be decisively exercised to check the mind-boggling corruption in the system – a national scourge that partly fuels inequality and deprivation in the society. The government, along with relevant stakeholders, should also act in a similar vein to check the excesses of charlatans that hide under religion to spew hatred and sow discord among the people.

It’s only in Nigeria and maybe parts of the sub saharan region that individuals are free to erect a place of worship, equip same with public address system and commence preaching or start conducting religious classes without the necessary pre-qualification by relevant body of experts/councils. Society can never be stable and reforms sustainable in an environment of lawlessness. Law and order should be brought to bear effectively on the affairs of society, especially a traumatised one like Nigeria. The appreciation of this challenge should, however, be backed with a robust social safety net that works, including easy access to both secular and less divisive forms of religious education/knowledge. These have the potential to make society less vulnerable and also insulate the young from religious extremism.

History indicates that outside the Middle East, Christianity received traction across the world through education (chalk, blackboard, books, the Bible) and not through the Crusaders or Knights Templar on horseback So is mainstream Islam. A well-rounded educational system can be the silver bullet. Through the instrumentality of education, religious harmony has made enormous contributions in leveraging development in such Muslim majority nations like Indonesia, Malaysia, the UAE, Turkey, etc. Insurgency shouldn’t be allowed to do the opposite in Nigeria. It should be denied a permanent foothold.

Nigerians have suffered enough from the vagaries of terrorism that has lasted for about one and a half decades. The nasty experiences shouldn’t become a way of life. However, getting out of the cuagmire would entail looking deeper into the ideological roots of the phenomenon of faith-based insurgency. Therefore, the search for solutions should be more encompassing and deep rooted, beyond the obvious symptoms and enablers.
A.G.Abubakar agbarewa@gmail.com

By Emmanuel Ukera, Esq

The enactment of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (CFRN),1999 (Fifth Alteration) (No.17) Act,2023 and the Electricity Act, 2023 which paved way for full devolution of intra-state electricity regulatory powers to state governments have stirred up a lot of contestations amongst stakeholders than ever imagined.

The bone of contention appears rooted in the misconception amongst stakeholders regarding the extent of the regulatory powers available to state governments under the current multitier regulatory regime recognized by the CFRN (Fifth Alteration) (No.17) Act,2023 and the EA,2023. One of such misconceptions which has gained traction in the media is that the recent constitutional alteration and the consequent enactment of the EA, 2023 have for the first time devolved electricity regulatory powers to sub-nationals to the extent that the newly established State Electricity Regulatory Commissions (SERCs) can now regulate ( in all its ramifications), electricity generation, transmission and distribution activities within state boundaries to the exclusion of the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission ( NERC), which hitherto regulated electricity activities nationwide.

Relatedly, there are those who are of the strong opinion that under the current legal regime, power plants located within state boundaries should fall under the overriding regulatory powers of SERCs including full takeover and control of the eight (8) power plants now operated by the eight successor generating companies (GENCOs) that emerged after the conclusion of privatization in 2013.

It has also been argued that the EA,2023, is an iniquitous and needless piece of legislation which has abolished cross-subsidization and provided the framework for promotion of energy inequalities especially considering the disproportionate distribution of electricity infrastructure between the northern and southern states of Nigeria.

The instant intervention seeks to disambiguate the jurisdictional boundaries of the SERCs and NERC under the current legal regime and shed light on recent debates.

To fully understand the jurisdictional confines of the two levels of governments regarding electricity regulation in Nigeria, it must be stated that the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as altered) and the Electricity Act, 2023 constitute the primary sources of electricity law in Nigeria currently. Furthermore, there are other federal enactments that must be taken into consideration when discussing the regulatory powers of the two levels of government.

These include the Standard Organization of Nigeria (Establishment)Act which is the general legislation on national technical standards; Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission Act which is the general legislation on competition, consumer protection, and anti-trust; Climate Change Act ,2021 which deals with climate change mitigation and adaptation bearing in mind Nigeria’s international commitment to climate change; Water Resources Act, CAP W2, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria (LFN) ,2004 which regulates the planning, development and use of water resources that affects more than one state; National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (Establishment) Act; and the Environmental Impact Assessment Act, CAP.E12, LFN,2004 which are relevant in the area of environmental impact of electricity projects or related activities in the power sector. Additionally, licensed electricity entities operating under the regulatory purview of state regulators are expected to comply with extant federal enactments on company income tax, personal income tax and value added tax etc .

The above, amongst others constitute the gamut of laws that are critical in disambiguating the legislative and regulatory competences of the two levels of government in Nigeria on the issue of electricity and should be well understood by key players in the power sector.

With respect to the powers of the two levels of government under the Constitution, one must recall that prior to 1999, the business of electricity generation, transmission and distribution was for decades under the sole control of the defunct National Electric Power Authority (NEPA) as a vertically integrated monopoly.

The defunct NEPA operated a redial national grid system comprising of on-grid power plants, high voltage transmission lines and distribution lines through which electricity albeit epileptically was supplied to Nigerian nationwide without regard to geographic boundaries of state governments.

This integrated high voltage system of interconnected generation plants, transmission lines, substations and related facilities crisscrossing states of the Federation and beyond that was operated by NEPA as a unified network is what is essentially referred to as the national grid system.

However, following the promulgation of the CFRN,1999, electric power was included as an item on the concurrent list. In this regard, item F, paragraphs 13,14, and 15, Part II, Second Schedule to the CFRN,1999 (“the Constitution”) defined the legislative competence of the respective levels of government regarding electricity.

The implication of the aforementioned constitutional provisions is that, since 1999, state governments were at liberty to invest in electricity within their domains including the power to set up of state grids and regulate intra-state electricity where they possess the wherewithal. No state government took advantage of this constitutional provision either due to lack of the political will or some other inexplicable reasons.

It is, however, important to note that prior to constitutional alteration in 2023, the powers of State Houses of Assembly to legislate on intra-state electricity generation, transmission and distribution activities was greatly impeded by the restriction under paragraph 14 (b), Part II, Second Schedule to the Constitution “to areas not covered by the national grid system within that State”.

It was this restrictive phrase “to areas not covered by the national grid system within that State” that was essentially deleted through the enactment of the CFRN,1999 (Fifth Alteration) (No.17) Act,2023. According to the long title to the CFRN,1999 (Fifth Alteration) (No,17) Act,2023, the constitutional alteration was intended to “allow states to generate, transmit and distribute electricity in areas covered by the national grid”…. What is apparent from the foregoing is that it is not correct to say that the CFRN,1999, (Fifth Alteration) Act (No.17) Act,2023 for the first time transferred “electric power” from the exclusive list to the concurrent list as it is often reported in some sections of the media. Electric power was an item in the concurrent list to the CFRN 1999 and remains so even after the said constitutional alteration of 2023.

What the CFRN,1999 (Fifth Alteration) (No.17) Act,2023 did is to simply delete the inhibitive words “to areas not covered by the national grid system within that State” to allow state governments legislate on and regulate intra-state electricity activities and most fundamentally “generate, transmit and distribute electricity in areas covered by the national grid” as expressly stated in the long title.

In other words, the constitutional alteration was not aimed at empowering state governments to embark on far reaching regulatory measures that would conflict or undermine the regulatory powers of the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) such as taking over NERC licensed on-grid power plants, setting tariffs or slashing tariffs for electricity procured through the National Wholesale Electricity Market(NWEN) or regulation of other activities on the national grid .

The constitutional alteration was primarily intended to promote investments within state boundaries without being inhibited by the presence of the national grid or component of it within such state boundaries.

In simple terms, by virtue of this constitutional alteration, state governments can now embark on embedded generation, mini-grids, licensing and regulation of independent electricity distribution networks (IEDNs) and independent electricity distribution network operators (IEDNOs), and even set up state grid even if such activities have bearing on the national grid.

Unfortunately, most state governments have since focused on issuing controversial regulatory measures that will throw the Nigerian Electricity Supply Industry (NESI) in disarray and put the state regulators at cross-purposes with NERC instead of taking initiatives that will boost investments and ultimately improve electricity access to their citizens, the latter being the primary intendment of the constitutional alteration.

Furthermore, the powers of state governments to legislate on and regulate intra-state electricity activities without being inhibited by the presence of the national grid as recognized by the CFRN (Fifth Alteration) (No.17) Act,2023 must be understood against the preeminence powers of the federal government to ” make laws for the Federation or any part thereof with respect to — electricity and establishment of electric power stations, generation and transmission, damming of water for electricity generation, cross-border electricity trading and distribution, promotion and establishment of the national grid system, regulation of right of any person to use, work, operate any plant, apparatus, equipment or work designed for the supply or use of electrical energy as provided under paragraph 13 (a)(b)(c)(d)(e)and(f) part II, Second Schedule to the Constitution all of which remains unaffected by the recent constitutional alteration.

The implication is that it will amount to constitutional infraction for any state government to set or approve parallel technical standards and operational codes or set up an agency for enforcement of technical standards under the guise exercising intra-state electricity regulatory powers.

Similarly, while state governments are at liberty to invest around the national grid presence within their state boundaries, in deference to the powers of the federal Government to regulate the national grid system as indicated above, any investment around the national grid including activities, transactions and services that have bearing on the national grid system will still require the authorization (not license) of NERC before such can legally take place. Such activities, transactions and services that will require NERC authorization may include : interconnection to, injection into, wheeling of electricity over, withdrawal of electricity from the national grid; sale and purchase of electricity, the delivery of which requires the use of the national grid; provision and receipt of ancillary services to or from the national grid; use of metering, control, dispatch and other systems required by the Grid Code for interconnection and wheeling services etc.

The law is trite, the apex court has held in the case of **AG. Ogun State v.Aberuagba &Ors (1985)LPELR-3164** that the powers of state governments to legislate on matters in the concurrent list to the Constitution is limited by the constitutional doctrines inconsistency and covering the field.

One other issue that requires clarification here is the claim in some quarters that the EA,2023, is an iniquitous and needless piece of legislation which has abolished cross-subsidization and provided the framework for promotion of energy inequalities. This is an erroneous impression borne out of lack proper understanding of the objectives, principles and rigorous processes that culminated into the enactment of the EA,2023.

To begin with, the issue of cross-subsidization was introduced through the Power Consumer Assistance Fund (PCAF) and first given statutory recognition under the Electric Power Sector Reform Act,2005 (now repealed) but retained under part XV of the EA,2023.

However, with the full decentralization of electricity including policy matters, the framework for subsidy administration in the NESI is currently undergoing review in the National Assembly bearing in mind the need to allow for the two levels of government to take independent policy decisions on matters of electricity subsidy and also determine fairly, which categories of electricity consumers should bear the brunt of cross subsidization under the current multitier electricity industry.

It must also be added that the Electricity Act,2023 is not a framework for promotion of energy inequalities but was introduced following a rigorous stakeholder engagement including the Nigerian Governors Forum (NGF) to replace the EPSRA,2005, the latter being a reform legislation that became unsuitable for the next phase of the electricity market after conclusion of the privatization exercise in 2013.One of the key features of the EA,2023 as a compelling framework for addressing energy inequalities is the provision of Section 110 which imposes an obligation on NERC to ensure fair spread of transmission and other electricity infrastructure across the country. Similarly, the EA,2023 for the first time made provision for integrated resource planning and leveraging on this provision the Federal Executive Council recently approved the National Integrated Electricity Policy and Implementation Plan,2024 which takes into consideration the peculiar strengths and weaknesses of the various state governments. It is expected that state governments will take advantage of this paradigm shift that recognizes a robust role for wind,biomas, solar and other renewable sources of energy in addressing perceived or existing energy inequalities.

From the foregoing, it can be safely concluded that the current legal regime for regulation electricity in Nigeria as articulated above leaves no room for confusion or controversy. With about 14 states already enjoying regulatory autonomy within their respective state boundaries, NERC should focus on regulation of the NWEN and activities on the national grid system while states should focus on retail activities within their respective boundaries without encroaching on the jurisdiction of NERC.

The primary focus of state governments at this stage of the market should be to adopt state integrated electricity policies and plans that will among other things leverage on potentials for generation and consumption of electricity from renewable sources such as wind, solar and biomass and as a priority integrate a large number of big self-generation consumers into the emerging state markets. A robust plan for integration of self-generation consumers into the nascent state electricity markets can in the short and medium terms be achieved through embedded generation, issuance of licenses for IEDNs/IEDNOs and mini-grids etc.

The Federal Government through the Ministry of power should equally fast track and streamline ongoing transmission and distribution upgrades under the auspices of FGN Power to allow for efficient evacuation of generated power across state boundaries where such states are in position to execute bilaterals that recognize NERC tariffs. State governments should avoid toying with the idea of unstructured tariffs which has left the National Wholesale Electricity Market in crippling debts.

The weakest links in the Nigerian power value chain today remains the transmission and distribution segments and with concerted efforts being made by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu,GCFR to settle legacy debts owed GENCOs, radical actions need to be taken to conclude ongoing upgrade of the transmission and distribution assets for operational and financial synergy along the national grid.

Barrister Ukera, Esq can be reached on emmauks@yahoo.com