i.        The major adverse effect of the Act is its penchant for being inconsistent with pre-existing laws. For instance, while S. 36 of the 1999 Constitution generally makes everybody subject to the law, S. 23 (1) of the Act precludes officers and employees from legal proceedings. This is pure conflict with the aged doctrine of the Rule of Law. 

Again Sections 6 & 7 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act gives both parties to an arbitration an equal hand in appointing arbitrators, while S. 27 (4) of the Act provides that only the Council shall appoint all the five arbitrators to seat in an Arbitral Panel on a matter involving the Council itself. These and some other provisions in the Act only guarantee the unsettling of our legal system.

ii.     Privatization and Commercialization will lead to further Capitalism of the bourgeoisie at the expense of the already hungry proletariat. Experience has shown us that shares of privatizes companies are sold at prices that only the rich can afford if this trend is not watched, we shall find that the program and its whole essence will be incapable of bettering the lot of the poor.

Past Nigerian Presidents with the likes of Ibrahim Badamosi Babangida (IBB) and Obasanjo passed the ownership and control of Nigeria’s state owned enterprises to their friends, family, relations and themselves in the name of Privatization. For example, some of the most celebrated Nigeria’s privatized public assets during Obasanjo’s tenure (1999-2007) includes; Ajaokuta Steel Mill, Delta Steel Complex, Jos Steel Rolling Mill, Oshogbo Machine Tools and Itakpe Iron Ore Company. Others include Nigeria Airways; Nigerian Telecommunication Company (NITEL) and its Mobile Phone subsidiary company – MTEL; NICON Hilton Hotel (Transcorp Hilton Hotel); African petroleum Limited (AP); National Oil and Petrol Chemical Company; National Fertilizer Company (NAFCON); Cement companies; Oil blocks and Banks, just to mention a few. The way and manner in which these assets changed hands and the selection of who owns what and at what price are still generating many unanswered questions and concerns in Nigeria. These concerns and questions were some of the challenges former President Yar’adua confronted.
Some of the reasons why the Nigerian public is not happy with Obasanjo’s Privatization policy and programs are largely that they were done in bad faith and were out of tune with the principles of transparency, accountability and due process. Moreover, they widened the existing gap between the “haves” and “have-nots”. In addition, the much taunted expected improvements of service and product delivery did not happen. The scheme created lasting sense of injustice, parochialism and nepotism in the polity. Furthermore, it discredited the anti-corruption stance of the administration.
The political economy implications of the affair are many. For example, the scheme created a new crop of oligarchies in the mould of Transcorp and other similar outfits with concentrated economic and political powers which are dangerous to the sustainability of democracy, institutions, rule of law and good governance in Nigeria. Privatization also serve as a money laundering instrument to a great extent, in order to legalize illegally accumulated wealth, such as income from international drug trafficking.
Despite the fact that Privatization and Commercialization have their bad effects, these are out weighted by their good effects. I believe we are still at the experimental stage of this program. In time we shall find a way of eliminating these adverse effects or at least make sure the good effect predominate them.

Share on Google Plus


The publications and/or documents on this website are provided for general information purposes only. Your use of any of these sample documents is subjected to your own decision NB: Join our Social Media Network on Google Plus | Facebook | Twitter | Linkedin