By Festus Adedayo

The question of whether the law of defamation is a hindrance to freedom of speech and a curtailment to democratic process confronted the Burkinabe, a few years ago. Lohe Issa Konaté was Burkina Faso, that landlocked West African country’s own Dele Farotimi. He was a journalist with the newspaper, L’Ouragan (The Hurricane). Like a tempestuous hurricane, on August 1, 2012, Konaté published a series of articles in the weekly newspaper attacking the conduct of a local prosecutor in a money counterfeiting matter. A week later, Konaté doubled down on this same allegation against the judicial system of Burkina Faso by writing a stinging piece on another matter instituted by the same prosecutor.

Like Farotimi, Konaté shot bullets of expletives, which included “rogue officer,” against the prosecutor while alleging corruption in the country’s judiciary. Angered by this against-method manner of publicly shaming the judicial system, the prosecutor promptly filed a complaint against Konaté through a defamation suit. In it, he alleged public insult and contempt of court against the journalist. Alongside these, the state also filed criminal charges against Konaté and sought damages. In October, 2012, Konaté was found guilty by an Ouagadougou High Court. He was then sentenced to one year imprisonment, fined US $3000, and a US $9000 damages to be paid by him to the prosecutor. The court was not done yet. It suspended the L’Ouragan newspaper which published the articles for a period of six months. At the Ouagadougou Court of Appeal, the court upheld the judgment.

However, in June, 2013, an application was filed by the Media Legal Defense Initiative (MLDI), an NGO with special bias for providing legal defense to independent media, journalists, and bloggers under threat for their publications. It was filed at the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Right (ACHPR). MLDI alleged that the penalties imposed by the Ouagadougou courts on Konaté were excessive and violated his freedom of expression rights as guaranteed by Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. On December 5, 2014, the court, in delivering this landmark judgment, which was its first case regarding freedom of the press, overruled the conviction of Konaté. It stated that the conviction was a disproportionate interference in the applicant’s guaranteed rights to freedom of expression. It noted that public figures in Burkina Faso must develop tolerance for criticisms. It then ordered the Burkina Faso government to amend its legislation on defamation so as to make it compliant with international standards. It also ordered a repeal of Burkina Faso’s custodial sentences for defamation.

Dr. Kayode Fayemi, former governor of Ekiti State, last Thursday, in Ibadan, the capital of Oyo State, delivered a thought-provoking lecture to mark the 80th birthday of journalism colossus and Nigeria’s former ambassador to the Philippines, Dr. Yemi Farounbi. In the lecture, entitled “The future and the challenges of the Nigerian State”, Fayemi invoked the spirit of that ever-engaging locus-classicus book on Nigeria, The Famished Road, authored by Ben Okri. In it, Okri looks at the concept of nation-building as a generation-to-generation effort. Each generation possesses its own predilections, with which it confronts nationhood, he says. The generation that will take over from us is an impatient generation. It is the generation called the Gen Z. It was the generation whose impatience for excuses of previous generations goaded into trooping to the streets in what has now been known as the #EndSARS and #EndBadGovernance protests. It is fearless. It suffered yet-to-be-properly-enumerated casualties in the process. It is a defiant generation, what Yoruba call the esin-ò-ko’kú (the fly fears no death) generation.

In the lecture, Fayemi compares that generation to post-Apartheid generation of South Africa called the “Born free” generation. The generation literally carries no baggage and holds no captive. It is a generation that the Greek philosopher, Heraclitus was probably referring to when he said you cannot step into the same river twice. Everything happens for and to it at supersonic speed – inventions, technology etc. In Nigeria, that generation didn’t witness the orgy of military rule and a roulette of coups. It didn’t live to see the wickedness of rulers and servile, even if complicit following. One feature that hallmarks this generation is impatience with norms, long-held views, traditions, practices and orthodoxies.

Look at the Farotimi and Afe Babalola legal duel which is the main issue of discourse in Nigeria today. Take a look also at the huge swath of public opinion behind Farotimi. Not that Farotimi himself is a youth, properly defined, but he carries its anger, its venom and dis-alignment with the ruinous Nigerian status-quo. You will locate impatience with orthodoxy in this horde of youthful supporters egging Farotimi on, in spite of his alleged violation of legal orthodoxy. The youth is not interested in the obsessive fascination of the generations before it with norms, whether legal, social or political.

While legal orthodoxy tells us about the ancient rules of defamation, even criminal defamation, and the boundaries that must not be crossed, the youth cares less. It asks brash, carelessly confounding, even if seismic questions. It asks, for instance, how those rules can help in fighting endemic corruption which, with its twin, bad rule, has conspired to under-develop Nigeria.

The Nigerian youth is aware that the judiciary is complicit in and has been known to be the imperial castle where corruption resides in Nigeria today. The youth doesn’t care if Farotimi’s allegations against Babalola are unfounded in law. It doesn’t care that Afe, a legal colossus, has the right to defend himself against this autumn tsunami which threatens to drown decades of his contributions to law and statesmanship. It doesn’t care that Afe is one of Nigeria’s greatest private investors in education. It just doesn’t care. Generations before this generation are the enemies of the youth, the Gen Z generation says.

If public opinion is the barometer for measuring guilt or innocence of action, check the social media: Afe Babalola is guilty as charged. I am not surprised that Babalola’s counsel, on Friday, chose to address a press conference on the matter, in disregard for the upbraid of Nigerian lawyers, especially senior lawyers’ penchant for discussing cases pending in the court, by Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Justice Kuburat Kekere-Ekun. The CJN upbraided them during her screening in the senate in September. There, she decried senior lawyers’ declarative or authoritative pronouncements that border on the subjudice.

In the Konaté case in Burkina Faso, the ACHPR did not seem to have provided answers to burning questions. One of the beliefs by those against legal orthodoxy is that the law of defamation is anti-democratic and has served as bulwark against the fight against corruption. Enshrined in Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the purpose of the defamation law is to protect reputation from arbitrary mudslinging, abuse and damage. The same Nigerian Constitution, under section 45, limits the exercise of individual freedom for the purpose of ensuring that this right is exercised with caution. Under sections 60, 373-380 of the Criminal Code, provision is made that, where the effect of defamatory words seems to cause a breach of peace, the Police or the Attorney General may prosecute the defendant for offence of criminal libel. Taken in its totality however, the defamation law has been held to constitute an impediment to the guarantee of rights to freedom of expression and a major shield against promotion of democratic virtues.

Among the major cancerous afflictions that Nigeria suffers today is corruption. Judicial corruption is its handmaiden. Corruption’s audacity and permeating influence are terrifying. It is almost an impossibility to get anything done in Nigeria without corrupting officials. All over the world, the renown of Nigerian institutions as beehive of corruption precedes any interface with them. Globally, Nigeria wears its maggots-laced badge as the place where the umbilical cord of corruption was buried. A pervasive stench culture of corruption and impunity reigns here. This culture is almost unanimously accepted as native to us, though it hinders effective governance and erodes public trust. The culture also kills enterprise, industry, talent and excellence, replacing them with mediocrities and reign of the adder-brained in public service.

Since the advent of colonial rule, so much fuss had been made about how ingrained corruption is in the heart of Africa. Some claim it is genetic since, even pre-colonial rule, African relations were watered by kleptocracy. We have some wise-sayings that are enablers of and symptoms of corruption which we were born into. Only a few of our mores and lore frown against corruption. Africa, like Shakespeare’s Othello, however, espouses a good name. “Good name in man and woman…is the immediate jewel of their souls…he that filches from me my good name robs me of that which not enriches him, And makes me poor indeed,” Shakespeare says.

It becomes difficult to reconcile this same Africa, which espouses the virtues of a good name, with the fact that it, in another breath, also encourages corruption. Take for example an ancient pithy saying in Yorubaland which says, only the one who pre-waters the ground walks on wet ground, or the Igbo saying that it is the person who holds palm-frond that the goat saunters towards. Or the Yoruba saying that, “If you are unlucky not to have a representative in the judicial council, even if you are innocent, you can be found guilty – “B’éèyàn ò l’éni ní’gbìmò, bó ro’jó àre, èbi ló mí a je.” All these affirm unmistakably that corruption and favouritism predate colonialism in Africa. Either in the isms – nepotism, favouritism, cronyism – or even financial subversions, Nigeria has had its share of the vermin of kleptocrats in high and low places, right from the establishment of official structures of public service.

Judicial corruption is king here. Though many attempts have been made to dress it in borrowed robes of euphemisms, judicial corruption is growing in leaps and bounds in Nigeria. In its bother about corruption in the house of justice, Transparency International affirms that all sectors of society rely on the courts to sanction corrupt officials, politicians, citizens and businesspeople, who steal resources and weaken integrity in public and private life. It maintains that, when the judicial system is corrupt, justice cannot be done and the whole society is done for. It was in recognition of this that Justice Kuburat Kekere-Ekun, at her screening in the Senate, literally swore to tackle corruption.

As if bitten by the metaphysical bug the Yoruba call “sìse-sìse” – inexplicable constant errors – in June last year, Nigerian senator, Adamu Bulkachuwa, whose wife, Zainab, was judge and President of the Court of Appeal, publicly confessed to influencing his wife’s judicial decisions. He had said: “My wife, whose freedom and independence I encroached upon while (she) was in office, and she has been very tolerant and accepted my encroachment and extended her help to my colleagues.” Bulkachuwa, now 84 years old, and a stalwart of the APC, who represented Bauchi North senatorial district in the 9th Senate, made this revelation at a valedictory session of the senate. The video of this revelation instantly went viral.

Miscarriage of justice by judicial officers and judicial corruption are not a new phenomenon in Nigeria. Hubert Ogunde’s famous play, Yòrùbá Ronú – Yoruba, think! – performed in 1964, though aimed as an attack on S. L. Akintola, Premier of the Western Region, was a damming review of intra-Yoruba relations where probity was becoming an anathema. Ogunde excoriated a phenomenon where the guilty are set free and the innocent are adjudged guilty “wón á gbé’bi f’áláre, wón á gb’áre f’élébi”. Earlier, in the 1962-published book, The Incorruptible Judge, written by D. Olu Adegoke, the concept of corruption was brought to the fore and how the judiciary can help tame it through its impartiality. The virus of compromise of court decisions has become cancerous today as it is generally believed to be a recurrent happening. That was why when Bulkachuwa confessed to the crime in the Nigerian parliament, without prodding, many Nigerians saw it as Karma fighting for the common man. But, what has happened ever since?

There are many real but unsubstantiated allegations of cahoots between judges and senior lawyers in perpetration of judicial corruption. You must be against-method and possessing the wild spirit of the Gen Z generation to say this openly and pin names and faces to it. Corruption in the judiciary is however not an openly advertized bazaar. It is operated under cultic darkness by the parties. While lawyers know among themselves who and who are corrupt elements, lawyers also know pliable judges who can be bought for a price. It is to this set of people that they go when there is the need for mortgaging of conscience for a fee.

Both Farotimi and Afe Babalola, as lawyers, are aware that the vermin of corruption is destroying the judicial institution in Nigeria. However, if Farotimi does not have evidence that irresistibly points at the facts before making all those weighty allegations in his book, it will be the height of recklessness by any worshipper ever in the temple of justice. If he has evidence, it will be good for the sanity of the legal system and the expansion of democratic frontiers in Nigeria, especially in combating the demon of judicial corruption.

But, come to think of it, which institution in Nigeria is corruption-free? Are judges and lawyers not part of the corruption whole that is sucking the blood of Nigeria like a leech? Is journalism corruption-free? The other day, the EFCC said it seized 753 duplexes, its highest ever recovery since its inception. The political class swims in sewage, bankers do and Nigeria in totality is one huge stinking sewer.

Legal orthodoxy does not support Farotimi. That is why many lawyers feel scandalized and horrified at the claims in his book, Nigeria and its criminal justice system. However, Farotimi represents the growing impatience with legal norms that are incapable of taming the shrew of rot and underdevelopment. The reality of corruption in the judiciary is one that many Nigerians know, are aware of the destruction it daily wreaks but are consigned into silence because of judicial orthodoxy. After all, two people cannot suffer the calamity of lie-telling; if the one being told does not know he is being told a lie, the one telling it will certainly be aware he is telling a lie. If bystanders to courts do not know that bribery takes place between litigants, lawyers and judges, the lawyers will know, the giver knows and judges who receive the bribe know. Judicial orthodoxy spells out silence if the one who alleges does not have irrebutable evidence to buttress their claim. What Farotimi did with that book of his was to peer torch into the eyes of the leopard in the dark (gbé’ná wo’jú olóólá, ekùn). What he did, even if a mountainous animal like the elephant does it, the animal will get his horns twisted (ìwo è á ló!). Farotimi has figuratively entered a mythic forest called Forest of the Wicked, the “Igbó Òdájú.” It is a forest that can be likened to D. O. Fagunwa’s Igbo Olodumare – the Forest of God. In this forest, there are ghommids which included Esu-kekere-ode, a two-foot-tall ghommid which lives in an anthill and prevents travelers from entering Igbó Olódùmarè. There is also what Fagunwa calls the Anjonnu-Iberu, a ghommid that guards the entrance to Igbó Olódùmarè and a furry-bearded-One, a part-human, part-ghommid creature that lives on a rock.

While entering Igbó Òdájú, elders warn the faint-hearted not to dare come near them. The ones whose mothers have not weaned from suckling are exempted. Mothers are also warned to hold their children with a leash, lest they stray into the forest. It is a forest where flesh-eating animals inhabit – the leopards, lions, jackals, ghommids and the Queen of fishes – Àrògìdìgbà. Farotimi’s matter is made worse because the judges who he alleged as recipients of the alleged bribe will sit in judgment over his matter. Again, apprehending him like a common criminal, and keeping him in jail for this long, for a bail-able offence, are too punitive and a reflection of the vengeful nature of those who wanted him to suffer for standing up to a legal shark in Nigeria’s reckless river. But if Farotimi survives in this task of breaking the coconut pod on his own head – and I pray he does – he may have begun a major revolution against corruption

By Bola Tinubu and Emmanuel Macron


In the present era, international relations are often framed as if there were only two possible outcomes for States: to dominate, or to be dominated; to vassalize, or to be vassalized.

Nations are supposed to make a choice in favour of this or that hegemon, this or that bloc. The lesson we are learning from our experience as Heads of State of two countries whose bilateral relationship has been deepening over the last twenty-five years is quite different.

From our shared perspectives, we can very confidently say that we see our relationship as a partnership between equals. Indeed, there are moments in history when countries find themselves driven by shared interests that are well understood and recognized by all. France and Nigeria find themselves at such a pivotal moment.

When we have mutual interests, we work together. It is in our mutual interest to encourage private sector investment between our two countries.

It is in our mutual interest to develop thriving creative and cultural industries that will generate jobs for Nigerian and French young people.

It is in our mutual interest to make sure that the Gulf of Guinea is safe for all economic activities.

It is in our mutual interest to strengthen our food systems so that they are stable, secure and not over-reliant on imports.

We are glad that Nigeria and France are trusted partners, to each other and to many countries all over the world. This trust is invaluable. This trust rules out constraint or pressure.

It rules out systematic alignment.

It rules out over-reliance. It leads us to respect the vision that our two countries have of their respective strategic autonomy.

We define strategic autonomy as the ability for States to pursue their own interests without over-reliance on another State, particularly with regard to their national security and foreign policy; to choose a future for itself without foreign interference.

Although the term is fairly recent, the principle of strategic autonomy is deeply rooted in the history of France and Nigeria.

It is also a principle that is widely supported by the citizens of both our countries.
Today, we want to reiterate our firm commitment to promoting this principle of strategic autonomy, not only for our two countries, but also within the framework of the strategic vision that we are putting forward, as Nigeria, for Africa, and as France, for Europe.

We will not meet the challenges of today’s world by building blocs.

We will meet these challenges by reforming and renewing global governance, by adapting existing frameworks so that they enable us to work together more effectively, to reach consensus and to focus resources on solving the crucial challenges that we face.

To achieve this, we need global governance to be more inclusive and participatory. Even though progress has been made, more needs to be done to ensure that the entire world population, and particularly the African continent, feels truly represented in all fora.

We need this renewed and reformed global governance to protect the achievements of previous generations such as the body of international humanitarian law that exists today and should be implemented in the same way, whether in Gaza, in Sudan or in Ukraine.

We need it to step up our efforts to establish stronger health systems, education for all, sustainable and legal migration pathways.

We need it to strengthen our resilience to climate change and to better protect biodiversity beyond national jurisdictions.

Nigeria and France are proud to reaffirm today their commitment to work together in order to achieve these objectives, and to help bring together all stakeholders, fully aware of our shared interests and horizons.


-President Tinubu and President Macron in joint OpeD ahead of President Tinubu’s State Visit to France from November 28-29, 2024

The Independent Media and Policy Initiative (IMPI) has said that contrary to suggestions in a section of the media, the economic reforms of the President Bola Tinubu administration are based on a clear plan to steer the country away from the tragic path of another oil-rich country, Venezuela.

This according to the policy think- tank in a statement by its Chairman Dr Niyi Akinsiju is because years of populist macro-economic policies have sunk the country to a level that the country had to change course or be doomed.

“We have observed with interest the criticisms that continue to trail the reforms implemented by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration. Of particular interest are two opinions that gained some traction.

“One of the critics finds the reforms to be a: “wreckage of the past 15 months, from which the country is reeling.” The other viewpoint, an editorial, brands the “government as insensitive and strategy-deficient. It also sees the government as “incompetent to perform its primary duty of delivering welfare and security to the people.”

“These attacks on the ongoing reforms are natural if viewed from the relatively narrow and subjective context of the steep change in the country’s cost of living. Yet, the reality of the nation’s macroeconomic situation is that where we are on the economic curve is a consequence of where we came from. When the premise and predicates of the nation’s economic trajectory are reviewed and aggregated, the apparent conclusion will be that we are where we are because this affliction of economic malaise at this point is predetermined.

“Though the mainstream media and thought leaders unconsciously felt that the country’s economic management has always had a problematic stigma, they refused to give critical attention to the possible consequences of the national economic peregrination since we first struck oil in commercial quantity in the 1960s. Where we have found ourselves is a function of where we came from.

“Since 1972, the Nigerian economy has been characterised by an unpredictable circle of bust and boom. In layperson’s terms, it means that one moment, we are deemed rich and able to buy whatever catches our fancy, and everybody, including the media, is happy. The next, we are flat broke. We lament the difficulties encountered in sating our basic needs, whining and criticising the government in power as the source of our decimated existence.

“But truth be told, the situation report is that we have arrived at the junction of our economic comeuppance where we must pay for decades of abuse and wrongdoing. It’s that simple.

“Typically coming from an underdevelopment mindset, Nigeria heavily borrowed from the preferred economic practices of the then-emerging economies of South America. Among countries in this region, Nigeria shares many similarities with Venezuela, particularly in the nature and character of their adopted economic model, which economists describe as “macroeconomic populism,”it explained.

IMPI also cited similarities between the two oil-producing countries to drive home its position.

It said: “Like Venezuela, oil has taken Nigeria on an exhilarating but dangerous boom-and-bust ride. Again, like Nigeria, decades of poor governance have driven what was once one of Latin America’s most prosperous countries to economic and political ruin. In 2008, crude oil production in Venezuela was the tenth-highest in the world at 2,394,020 barrels per day, and the country was also the eighth-largest net oil exporter in the world.

“We also find a similarity in the leadership style prevailing in Nigeria between 1999 and 2015, as well as in Presidents Hugo Chavez (1999-2013) and Nicolas Maduro (2013- present) of Venezuela. The Venezuelan leaders implemented the wrong macroeconomic policy during the 2000s and early 2010s when Venezuela’s economy, like that of Nigeria, was booming due to the global commodity ‘supercycle’ – a prolonged period of high and rising grain, metal, oil and gas prices.

“Between 2000 and 2015, government spending in Nigeria, like Venezuela, was deeply pro-cyclical. Instead of saving at least some money for bad times during the good times—as Norway, Saudi Arabia, and virtually all other oil exporters have done—Nigeria established the Excess Crude Account (ECA) by fiat in 2004 without legislative backing.

“In May 2007, the ECA had up to $20 billion. Still, like the Venezuelan government, which ran double-digit fiscal deficits as the economy boomed, spending far outpaced income from taxes and other revenues. Both countries were on record for raising their external debts sixfold to finance these unnecessary shortfalls.

“While Venezuela saddled the state-owned oil company with over $100 billion in obligations, the Nigerian government depleted the ECA by more than 80 per cent, from $20 billion to $2.4 billion. It had ratcheted foreign debt by over 200 per cent to $10 billion in 2015. By 2015, the Nigerian economy was effectively underwater.

“Like Nigeria, whose petroleum price per litre was perhaps the cheapest in Sub-Saharan Africa, Venezuela’s petrol was not just the most affordable globally but often virtually free. This led to an estimated 100,000 barrels of petrol worth over $10 billion per year being smuggled across the border to Brazil and Colombia each day, where it could be resold at a profit, a close resemblance of what obtained on Nigeria’s borders with its West African neighbours.

“Like Nigeria, electricity subsidies were also vast, leading to losses and underinvestment. In total, subsidies are estimated to have cost over 10% of GDP in some years, accounting for over half of Venezuela’s fiscal deficits.

“Just as Nigeria had historically preferred capital control in addition to operating multiple foreign exchange windows in 2003, Venezuela also imposed capital controls and a byzantine system for foreign currency purchases.

“For the two countries, there were one or more official exchange rates where the governments subsidised dollar purchases and demand vastly outstripped supply, as well as a black market with its free-floating exchange rate determined by market forces.

“The system for the two countries needed to be more coherent. An entire industry of non-productive ghost companies cropped up to the lobby for subsidised dollars (to resell them on the black market for an immediate profit). At the same time, legitimate value-adding businesses needed more reliable access to the foreign currency required to operate. Many genuine businesses also specialised away from productive activities towards securing cheap dollars.

“According to the World Bank, like Venezuela, which lost $300 billion to corruption through its foreign currency system, Nigeria incurred a significant loss of N13.2 trillion in forgone revenue as a direct consequence of implementing its foreign exchange subsidy policy between 2021 and 2023 alone. This could have been saved for periods of lower oil prices.”

The policy group noted that it was against this backdrop that the Tinubu administration introduced reforms that were targeted at preventing the country from going the path of Venezuela.

“The Venezuelan economic crisis scenario remains a possible reality for Nigeria if the Tinubu administration had adopted the Maduro option in 2023. Our estimation of his decision to scrap the populism macroeconomic template is that the President has salvaged Nigeria’s national economy from a whirlwind of economic turbulence and total collapse.

“As expected, the trailing effects of the stoppage of fuel subsidy and harmonisation of the multiple foreign exchange windows, being the principal reforms orchestrated by the administration, are upending the ways of life and threatening the basis of the sustenance of Nigerians.

“However, as the World Bank notes, though fiscal reforms are painful, they are needed to save the country from imminent collapse. Given the comparative analysis we have conducted in this Policy Statement, we fully adopt the World Bank submission and subscribe to the fact that the Tinubu reforms have started yielding results.

“However, what we consider bewildering is the accusation against President Tinubu from critics, suggesting that he was not prepared for the regime of macroeconomic reforms he engendered right from the day he assumed office. With the plethora of referenceable evidence in the public space, this submission is curious and intentionally dismissive of the policy concepts and deployments as principal and auxiliary to reform undertakings of the Tinubu administration.

“Fact must be told, it does not serve good public conscience to accuse the president of being unprepared to reform the Nigerian economy. The concern should not be about the president’s preparedness but whether we are witnessing possible positive outlooks for the nation’s economic outturns as the reforms are underway. Again, we assert a yes to this. We are, indeed, seeing how the structure of the Nigerian economy is changing and conforming to targeted reforms, as the case may be.

“Even now, the federal government’s revenue from Value Added Tax (VAT) and Company Income Tax (CIT) is rising in leaps and bounds, notwithstanding the increased cost environment. Both CIT and VAT rose by 85 per cent year-on-year to N6.44 trillion in the first half of 2024 compared to N3.48 trillion in the same period of 2023. Coming on the back of this impressive performance, the Chartered Institute of Taxation of Nigeria in Abuja noted that tax revenue is currently the highest income source for the country; this signals a significant shift in the nation’s revenue generation template.

“Besides, there has also been a resurgence in foreign exchange inflows through International Money Transfer Operators (IMTOs). This grew by 47 per cent to $2.33 billion in the first six months of 2024 from $1.58 billion in 2023. We also observed that manufacturing companies are adapting to the high-interest environment by reducing their debt burden by N1.62 trillion between February and June 2024.

“This drop, representing a 14.85% decline in manufacturing loans, comes amid rising interest rates that have increased borrowing costs across the economy. It indicates resilience and the ability to adjust for growth operationally. This adjustment for growth is reflected in companies’ financial performances in the period under review.

“Transcorp Hotels, for instance, grew its profit before tax in the first nine months of 2024 by up to 191.1 per cent from N5.63 billion in the same period of 2023 to N16.43 billion in the current year. In addition, in a show of faith in the economy, Flour Mills of Nigeria Plc, the nation’s largest miller, has announced its plans to spend as much as $1 billion over the next four years to expand its facilities and restructure after its majority shareholder offered to take it private. This is an extention of the N427billion new investments manufacturing companies have committed to invest in the economy, a reflection of their confidence in the economy.

“Overall, the response of macroeconomic indices to the ongoing reforms indicates the propensity of an economy on an upward trajectory and the imminence of an expanding economy with the capacity to produce jobs and concomitant wealth creation”, IMPI added.