Connect with us

E-Financial

Banks’ Funding Failure: The Shocking Rot In Nigeria’s Intervention Programmes

Published

on

Kindly share this post

By Blaise Udunze

For over a decade, the Nigerian government and its financial institutions have launched a flurry of intervention funds, all with the promise to empower industries, revive the manufacturing sector, and lift millions of micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) out of financial drought. From agriculture to aviation, from creative industries to export promotion, these funds were designed as catalysts for inclusive growth and job creation.

But today, the story reads like a tragic irony. Trillions of naira later, there is little impact to show. Factories remain underutilized, MSMEs struggle to survive, and unemployment continues to soar. The rot runs deeply entrenched corruption, politicization, poor monitoring, and widespread loan defaults have turned what should have been Nigeria’s economic lifeline into a cautionary tale of mismanagement and missed opportunities.

The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the Bank of Industry (BOI) have, over the years, spearheaded multiple intervention programmes. In 2013, the N220 billion MSME Development Fund (MSMEDF) was launched to empower small businesses, with a special 60 percent allocation for women. Yet, more than a decade later, thousands of genuine entrepreneurs say they never accessed the fund, while others question the transparency of disbursement. The Anchor Borrowers’ Programme (ABP), launched in 2015, aimed to link smallholder farmers to processors and was hailed as a masterstroke for agricultural self-sufficiency. Over N1 trillion reportedly flowed into the scheme. But the dream soon dimmed with ghost beneficiaries, political interference, and poor loan recovery exposed a programme riddled with abuse.

Similarly, the Agri-Business/Small and Medium Enterprises Investment Scheme (AGSMEIS), a CBN-backed initiative pooling five percent of banks’ profit after tax, began as a noble effort to stimulate SMEs. However, its later years were marred by disbursement bottlenecks and allegations of insider favoritism. Commercial banks and some designated financial institutions, instead of acting as facilitators, became gatekeepers of corruption. Bribes, favoritism, and endless paperwork became the norm. Funds meant for productive ventures were sometimes redirected to political allies or misapplied by the very institutions entrusted with disbursement.

Rather than empowering Nigeria’s real economy, intervention loans too often empowered a network of insiders who saw the programmes as avenues for rent-seeking. The impenetrability of these schemes made them convenient channels for political reward and institutional looting. Once the funds leave government coffers, tracking them becomes an exercise in futility. There are no reliable public databases showing who got what, how much was repaid, or what impact was achieved.

The rot is not confined to agriculture. The Creative Industry Financing Initiative (CIFI), launched in 2019 to nurture Nigeria’s entertainment and digital sectors, became mired in controversy over opaque selection and limited reach. The Real Sector Support Facility (RSSF) and the Textile Sector Intervention Fund, meant to boost manufacturing and revive the textile industry, also suffered from weak monitoring and low repayment discipline. During the pandemic, the N400 billion COVID-19 Targeted Credit Facility (TCF) was touted as a lifeline for households and small firms. Administered by NIRSAL Microfinance Bank, it sparked hope among struggling entrepreneurs, but soon, the familiar patterns emerged as connected elites got the funds, while genuine applicants were locked out.

Official data reveals that the CBN has disbursed over N10.3 trillion across various interventions in less than a decade with an unprecedented scale of funding. When combined with BOI-managed programmes such as the Government Enterprise and Empowerment Programme (GEEP) and the Export Expansion Facility Programme (EEFP), total earmarked intervention funds likely exceed N12 trillion. Yet, Nigeria’s industrial contribution to GDP remains below 10 percent, and MSMEs with the supposed beneficiaries continue to struggle with high costs, poor infrastructure, and limited credit access.

Over the years, numerous intervention funds have been launched to support industries and MSMEs from the N220 billion MSME Development Fund and N300 billion Real Sector Support Facility to the N200 billion SME Restructuring and Refinancing Fund. However, poor administration, corruption, and diversion have undermined these initiatives. A 2023 report by the Auditor-General revealed that billions of naira from these schemes were either unaccounted for or misapplied, with funds channeled through commercial banks that prioritized profit over impact.

For instance, the CBN’s N220 billion MSME Development Fund has only seen about N83 billion disbursed over seven years. The Survival Fund, though lauded in principle, has delivered roughly N67.5 billion to over 1.25 million beneficiaries, including cases where mobilisation fees were collected but goods or services never followed. An N5 billion SME loan fund through SMEDAN and Sterling Bank saw only N250 million actually reach business owners. Even in interventions like BOI’s N75 billion Manufacturing Sector Fund, less than a third had been disbursed to manufacturers, with many applications still awaiting approval. These examples speak not to scarcity of funds, but to failures in administration, accountability, and access.

The cost of Nigeria’s failed intervention programmes goes beyond wasted billions; it has crippled the very sectors they were designed to rescue. Thousands of promising small businesses are left stranded without access to affordable credit, while manufacturers continue to struggle with obsolete equipment, erratic power supply, and prohibitive interest rates. Instead of catalyzing growth, these funds have deepened dependency, encouraged corruption, and distorted the credit market.

The result is a stunted industrial base, where innovation and expansion are sacrificed on the altar of bureaucracy and greed. Many entrepreneurs who could have scaled production or entered export markets have shut down under the weight of unmet promises. Jobs that could have been created remain mere statistics in policy documents, while Nigeria’s ambition to diversify its economy beyond oil continues to falter.

In the ongoing investigation into the Central Bank of Nigeria’s activities, news reports have uncovered that scrutiny may extend to Chief Executive Officers and senior management personnel of various banks. The investigation seeks to examine potential discrepancies related to the management of intervention funds by deposit money banks. This revelation follows reports that the CBN might be compelled to withdraw its released audited annual financial reports after investigators uncovered irregularities and inconsistencies.

This unfolding probe, led by Special Investigator Jim Obazee, who was appointed by President Bola Tinubu in July 2023 as this mark one of the most comprehensive financial examinations in Nigeria’s history. Obazee’s mandate extends beyond the CBN to include other Government Business Entities (GBEs), with the goal of plugging financial leaks and holding corrupt individuals accountable. According to the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, George Akume, the forthcoming audit report will shed light on governance failures that have long crippled Nigeria’s financial system.

One key revelation involves intervention funds totaling N1.27 trillion reportedly held in the accounts of five major banks: Access Bank, Fidelity Bank, Guaranty Trust Bank, United Bank for Africa, and Zenith Bank. These funds cover various CBN lending schemes, including the Commercial Agriculture Credit Scheme, Real Sector Support Facility, and state bailouts. Access Bank alone held about N530 billion in intervention funds, while Fidelity Bank retained roughly N310 billion.

Several banks have also been found to hold undisbursed funds from the CBN earmarked for programmes like the Anchor Borrowers’ Scheme and the Commercial Agriculture Credit Scheme. As of June 2023, Guaranty Trust Holding Company, Wema Bank, and Sterling Financial Holdings collectively held N114 billion in Anchor Borrowers’ funds, while seven banks, including UBA, Access, Zenith, and Fidelity, retained N94 billion from the agriculture credit scheme.

As the investigation progresses, bank executives were expected to be summoned for questioning. The revelations underscore the depth of systemic dysfunction, where funds meant for development sit idle or are diverted, while small businesses gasp for credit.

Amid the turbulence, the newly appointed CBN Governor Olayemi Cardoso called for a radical shift in the bank’s role. During his Senate screening, he emphasized the need to refocus the CBN on its core mandate of monetary stability rather than direct development finance. Cardoso warned that the CBN’s historical foray into fiscal interventions had blurred institutional boundaries and undermined credibility. His plan is to transition the bank toward a more limited advisory role, one that supports economic growth without entangling itself in politically driven lending.

This reorientation is timely. As of October 2022, nearly 10 trillion had already been disbursed as intervention funds, much of it tied to agriculture and small business support. Yet controversies over beneficiary selection, repayment defaults, and limited impact persist. Experts have urged a full-scale audit and restructuring of these programmes, recommending that future interventions be channeled through relevant ministries and agencies, not the CBN to ensure proper oversight and impact measurement.

Before the next bailout or recovery initiative is launched, both the CBN and BOI must clean house. This means full public disclosure of all beneficiaries, proper audits of past disbursements, and the recovery of misapplied or stolen funds. The impenetrability that has shielded corruption for years must give way to transparency, backed by digital tracking systems and citizen oversight.

Beyond cleansing their books, these institutions must also rethink their approach. Development finance should no longer be routed through rent-seeking commercial banks that profit without producing impact. Instead, direct digital lending platforms, strict eligibility verification, and measurable impact tracking should define the new model.

Nigeria’s intervention programmes must undergo radical reform anchored on transparency, technology, and traceability. Every fund should have a publicly accessible portal listing disbursements, beneficiaries, and repayment status. Periodic audits that are independently verified must be mandatory, not optional. Beyond financial engineering, Nigeria must fix the enabling environment for consistent power supply, logistics, security, and regulatory stability that makes business growth possible.

The shocking rot in Nigeria’s intervention programmes is not just a financial scandal; it is a betrayal of national trust. Trillions have been poured into schemes that promised jobs and prosperity, yet delivered little beyond paperwork and propaganda. Unless Nigeria cleans up the system, enforcing accountability and rewarding genuine productivity, its intervention funds will continue to fund failure, not progress.

Blaise, a journalist and PR professional writes from Lagos, can be reached via: [email protected]


Kindly share this post

Ugo Onwuaso is an ICT enthusiast. He believes technology should be used for general good. He holds a Master of Public Administration (MPA) degree from the Lagos state University. Dear Reader, Your support matters. But we believe that technology makes life more exciting and helps improve the lives of people around Nigeria and indeed the world. That is why, we have devoted our energy to independent reportage of technology and finance and how they affect lives. Our incisive and analytical view of how technology news affects the daily life help individuals and organizations make up their minds. Quality journalism costs money. Today, we're asking that you support us to do more. Kindly support our effort to deliver technology and finance journalism to everyone in the world. Donate as little as N1,000. Bank transfers can be made to: UBA Plc 1017156876 Communication Week Media Ltd

E-Financial

Tax Reform or Financial Exclusion? The Trouble with Mandatory TINs

Published

on

Kindly share this post

By Blaise Udunze

It is not only questionable but an aberration that a nation where over 38million Nigerians remain financially excluded, where trust in institutions is fragile, and where citizens are pressured under the weight of rising living costs, the use of Tax Identification Number (TIN) has been specified as the only option for their bank accounts operation from January 1, 2026 by the Federal Government of Nigeria.

Tax Reform or Financial Exclusion? The Trouble with Mandatory TINs

Tax Reform

In practice, the policy spearheaded by Taiwo Oyedele, Chairman of the Presidential Committee on Fiscal Policy and Tax Reforms, is rooted in the Nigerian Tax Administration Act (NTAA), and the intention can be understood in the areas of improving tax compliance, widening the tax net, and formalizing economic activities. But in practice, the directive risks becoming yet another well-meaning reform that punishes the wrong people, disrupts financial inclusiveness, and potentially destabilises an already stressed economy.

Yes, Nigeria needs tax reforms. Yes, the country must broaden its tax base. And yes, public revenues must increase to address fiscal pressures.

But compelling citizens to obtain TINs as a condition for operating bank accounts is the wrong tool for the right objective.

Below are five core arguments against the directive, and sustainable alternatives that actually strengthen tax compliance without endangering banking access or punishing informal earners.

The Directive Risks Deepening Financial Exclusion

Nigeria still struggles with financial inclusion. According to several official assessments, over 38 million adults remain outside the formal financial system. Many of them operate small, irregular businesses, survive through subsistence earnings, or depend on cash-based livelihoods.

The Federal Government’s compulsory TIN-for-bank-accounts policy is built on the assumption that every banked Nigerian is structured, organised, and tax-ready. This is false.

For instance, the rural market woman with N30,000 in rotating savings, the okada rider who deposits cash once a week, the petty trader using a mobile POS agent account, the retiring pensioner managing a small monthly income, and the migrant worker sends small remittances to their family. These are not tax evaders; they are survivalists.

Most operate bank accounts not because they run formal businesses, but because those accounts are essential to modern financial life: receiving transfers, accessing loans, participating in digital commerce, saving against emergencies, and avoiding the risks of moving cash in insecure environments.

By creating an additional bureaucratic barrier, the directive risks pushing millions back into a cash-dominant shadow economy, precisely the opposite outcome of what Nigeria’s financial-sector reforms are trying to achieve.

Bank Accounts Are Not Proof of Taxable Income

The NTAA clarifies that the TIN requirement applies only to taxable persons, individuals engaged in trade, employment, or income-generating activities.

But herein lies the problem: banks cannot determine who is “taxable” and who is not. Banks only see deposits and withdrawals. They do not audit the source or consistency of income. They are not tax authorities.

A student may run a small online clothing resale gig. A retiree may occasionally rent out farmland.

A dependent may receive cash support from a relative abroad. A job seeker may get intermittent gifts from family.

Who decides which of these scenarios qualifies as taxable? Banks? FIRS? Or will citizens be expected to self-declare under threat of account restrictions?

The result will be confusion, over-compliance, and mass panic with banks indiscriminately demanding TINs from everyone to avoid regulatory penalties.

This not only contradicts the spirit of the law but also exposes ordinary Nigerians to harassment and arbitrary compliance requirements.

The Policy Could Trigger Disruption, Panic Withdrawals, and Cash Hoarding

Whenever Nigerians perceive threats to their access to funds, the natural reaction is withdrawal and hoarding. We saw it during:

–       the 2023 Naira redesign crisis,

–       the 2016 TSA-bank consolidation tightening, and multiple periods of financial instability.

Telling citizens that bank accounts may face “operational restrictions” if they do not obtain a TIN creates a predictable behavioural response: people will rush to withdraw money.

This would be disastrous for a banking system already pressured by:

–       high interest rates,

–       inflation eroding deposits,

–       rising loan defaults, and

–       declining public trust.

Any government policy that unintentionally creates an incentive for citizens to flee the formal banking system is counterproductive.

The TIN Requirement Will Become a Bureaucratic Nightmare

Even if millions of Nigerians want to comply, the system is not ready. Nigeria’s administrative infrastructure does not have the capacity to process tens of millions of TIN registrations within months without:

–       long queues,

–       delays,

–       data mismatches,

–       duplicate records, and

–       systemic errors.

The National Identity Number (NIN)-SIM registration experience is a painful reminder of what happens when ambitious policy meets weak execution capacity.

–       Citizens spent months in overcrowded enrolment centres.

–       Millions were blocked from services.

–       Data inconsistencies persisted.

–       The economy suffered productivity losses.

If Nigeria could not seamlessly synchronise NIN and SIM data, how will it synchronise NIN, BVN, and TIN at a national scale without dislocation?

Forcing TIN Adoption Ignores the Real Problem: Nigeria’s Broken Tax Culture

The Federal Government’s real challenge is not that citizens lack TINs, but that they lack trust in how taxes are used.

A government cannot widen the tax net when:

–       tax leakages remain widespread,

–       citizens feel services do not match taxation,

–       corruption perceptions are high,

–       government spending lacks transparency, and

–       taxpayers do not feel seen, heard, or valued.

Coercion does not build a tax culture. Engagement does. Policy does not create legitimacy. Accountability does.

If the Federal Government wants Nigerians to freely participate in the tax system, it must earn legitimacy first, not mandate compliance through financial restrictions.

What the Government Should Do Instead: A Smarter Path to Tax Reform

Instead of enforcing a policy that may backfire economically and socially, the Federal Government can adopt four smarter, people-centred alternatives.

–       Automatic TIN Issuance Linked to NIN and BVN

Rather than forcing Nigerians to apply manually, the government should:

·       auto-generate TINs for all existing BVN/NIN holders,

·       send the TINs via SMS, email, and bank alerts,

·       allow self-activation only when needed for tax obligations.

This eliminates queues, delays, and confusion.

–       Build a Voluntary Tax Compliance Culture Through Transparency and Incentives

Tax morale improves when citizens see value. Government should:

·       publish annual audited reports of tax revenue use,

·       incentivise compliant taxpayers with benefits (priority access to government grants, credit scoring, etc.),

·       simplify tax filings for small businesses.

People comply more when they feel respected, not coerced.

–       Target High-Value Tax Evaders, Not Low-Income Account Holders

Nigeria’s real tax leakages come from:

·       large corporations shifting profits,

·       politically exposed persons,

·       illicit financial flows,

·       multinational tax avoidance strategies,

·       the informal “big money” class operating outside the banking system.

Instead of threatening small depositors, the government should strengthen:

·       FIRS intelligence and investigation units,

·       inter-agency data integration (CAC, Customs, Immigration),

·       beneficial ownership transparency enforcement.

The fight against tax evasion should focus on those hiding billions, not those depositing thousands.

–       Strengthen Digital Tax Platforms for Easy Self-Registration and Compliance

If tax registration becomes as easy as opening a social media account, compliance will rise naturally. The government should build:

·       a mobile-first tax app,

·       simplified online TIN retrieval,

·       one-click tax filing for gig workers and small traders.

Digital convenience can achieve what regulatory coercion cannot.

Reform Should Not Punish the Public

No doubt, tax reforms are needed urgently, but they must come with a human face, an intelligent, equitable, and aligned with the realities of ordinary Nigerians.

The TIN-for-bank-accounts policy, while well-intentioned, risks undermining financial inclusion, triggering economic instability, and imposing unnecessary burdens on millions who are not tax evaders but survival-based earners.

Good tax policy is built on trust, not fear. On transparency, not threats. On civic legitimacy, not administrative compulsion.

If the Federal Government truly wants to modernise Nigeria’s tax system, it must focus not on restricting citizens’ access to their own money, but on:

·       repairing tax trust,

·       digitising compliance,

·       targeting the real evaders, and

·       making participation easier, not harder.

Financial inclusion took Nigeria decades to build. We cannot afford a policy that carelessly reverses these gains.

A better tax system is possible, but it must start with the people, not with their bank accounts.

Blaise, a journalist and PR professional, writes from Lagos, can be reached via: [email protected]


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

E-Financial

Union Bank Clinches Top Workplace Practice Honour at Sustainability Awards

Published

on

Kindly share this post

Union Bank of Nigeria has been named Best Company in Workplace Practice at the 2025 Sustainability, Enterprise and Responsibility Awards (SERAS), held at the Grand Ballroom, Oriental Hotel, Victoria Island, Lagos.

Union Bank Clinches Top Workplace Practice Honour at Sustainability Awards

Union Bank

The award followed a rigorous assessment by SERAS’ multinational panel of judges, who evaluated corporate social responsibility and sustainability initiatives across multiple sectors.

Union Bank received nominations in four categories – Education Intervention of the Year, Best Company in Workplace Practice, Best in Gender Equity and Women Empowerment, and Best Company in Reporting and Transparency.

It emerged first runner-up in the Gender Equity and Women Empowerment and Education Intervention categories.

The Bank’s workplace practices, anchored on a people-first philosophy, were recognised for creating an inclusive, rewarding and high-performing environment.

Key initiatives include five months fully paid maternity leave, an onsite crèche at its head office, a 40 per cent salary increase, and the highest promotion rate in a decade, with 24 per cent of employees advancing across departments.

Judges commended Union Bank for advancing gender equality through comprehensive maternity benefits aligned with Sustainable Development Goal 5, as well as wellness programmes featuring mental health support and flexible working arrangements.

Commenting on the award, Olufunmilola Aluko, Chief Brand and Marketing Officer, said: “Our workplace initiatives are firmly anchored in our triple pillar model of Citizenship, Sustainability and Innovation…

The measurable outcomes, including enhanced employee satisfaction, increased productivity and significant progress in gender inclusion, demonstrate the strength and adaptability of our approach.”

Now in its nineteenth year, SERAS continues to set the benchmark for corporate social responsibility and sustainability excellence.

The 2025 edition, themed “Sustainability 2.0: Innovating for Impact and Inclusive Growth”, celebrated organisations driving measurable community and industry impact.


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

E-Financial

Preventing Financial Crimes Amid Mounting Insecurity: Why Following the Money is Now a Survival Imperative

Published

on

Kindly share this post

By Blaise Udunze

Nigeria today faces a sobering dual reality: a deepening security crisis and an entrenched financial-crime ecosystem that quietly feeds, sustains, and normalises that crisis. Across the North, Middle Belt, and parts of the South, kidnappers, bandits, insurgent cells, political actors, compromised security agents, and a complex chain of financial facilitators operate within a shadow economy of violence, one that generates billions, claims thousands of lives, and steadily erodes the authority of the state.

Preventing Financial Crimes Amid Mounting Insecurity: Why Following the Money is Now a Survival Imperative

Financial Crimes

For over a decade, security experts and Nigeria’s international partners have warned that no meaningful progress will be made against insecurity unless the financial oxygen sustaining violence is cut off. Yet the country continues to prosecute its anti-terrorism efforts largely through military responses, as though the conflict could be resolved solely on the battlefield. What remains missing is a decisive, transparent, and politically courageous confrontation with the economic networks that make insecurity profitable.

This war is not only about guns and bullets. It is about money.

Money moves fighters.

Money buys weapons.

Money fuels political desperation.

Money underwrites chaos.

Until Nigeria addresses the financial pipelines behind its insecurity, the crisis will continue to reproduce itself.

Kidnapping: The Lucrative ‘War Fund’ Sustaining Insurgency

The rise in mass kidnappings is neither accidental nor spontaneous. It has evolved into a rational, structured, revenue-generating enterprise.

Appearing on Channels TV’s Politics Today in October 2025, Yusuf Datti Baba-Ahmed warned that insurgent and bandit groups now treat ransom payments as reliable “war funds.” The data support his claim.

A 2024 survey by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) found that Nigerians paid N2.2 trillion in ransom between May 2023 and April 2024. This astonishing sum does not account for unreported payments made through informal negotiators, mobile transfers, or unregulated community channels.

Kidnapping has matured into a fully formed economy with well-defined roles: negotiators, informants, logistics providers, cash couriers, and security collaborators. Proceeds are reinvested in weapons, motorcycles, communication devices, safe houses, and even land acquisitions.

In the words of a security analyst, “Every successful kidnapping is a fundraiser.”

Sabotage from Within: Keffi’s Explosive Memo and a System Built to Fail

If Nigeria’s external security threats are troubling, the internal compromises are even more alarming.

A leaked memo by Major General Mohammed Ali Keffi accused senior government and military officials of diverting billions of naira earmarked for arms procurement under former Chief of Army Staff, Lt. Gen. Tukur Buratai. Keffi’s allegations included:

–       Weapons paid for but never delivered

–       Falsified battlefield reports

–       Civilian casualties mislabelled to justify inflated expenditures

–       Political interference obstructing investigations into terror financing

His claims echoed the earlier warning by Gen. T.Y. Danjuma, who accused sections of the military of working in concert with armed groups and abandoning vulnerable communities.

Keffi’s memo became even more consequential following the 2025 detention of former Attorney General Abubakar Malami by the EFCC over allegations of money laundering, terrorism financing and suspicious financial activity linked to 46 bank accounts.

Together, these revelations paint a disturbing picture: even as Nigerians endure mass abductions, elements within the political and security elite appear to be enabling or shielding the financial networks behind the violence.

Why the Crisis Persists: A Financial Crime Lens

Nigeria’s insecurity cannot be divorced from the environment in which illicit finance thrives. Key enablers include:

1. Informal Economies and Unregulated Cash Flows

With over 70 percent of rural transactions still cash-based, terror groups exploit:

–       Hawala networks

–       POS and mobile-money agents

–       Cattle markets and mining sites

–       Barter systems centred on livestock and grains

These channels operate beyond the reach of AML/CFT systems.

2. Identity Fraud and Weak KYC Enforcement

–       Criminal networks routinely open accounts with:

–       Fake NINs

–       Compromised SIM cards

–       Recycled BVNs

–       Mule identities

3. Collusion within Financial Institutions

The EFCC estimates that up to 70 percent of financial crimes involve bank personnel, primarily through:

–       Unauthorised cash withdrawals

–       Suppressed Suspicious Transaction Reports (STRs)

–       Manipulated internal alerts

4. Weak Prosecution and Political Interference

Cases drag on for years, and many evaporate entirely before reaching court often due to political considerations.

5. Ungoverned Spaces

Large territories across the North serve as hubs for:

–       Arms trafficking

–       Illegal mining

–       Kidnap-for-ransom camps

–       Cross-border smuggling

Public Patience Thins: NLC Moves to the Streets

Public frustration is reaching a boiling point. On December 10, the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) announced a nationwide protest scheduled for December 17, citing the “degenerating security situation” and the rise in mass abductions.

The NLC condemned the November 17 abduction of female students in Kebbi, noting that security personnel had been withdrawn from the school shortly before the attack. The union called the act “dastardly and criminal” and directed all affiliates and civil-society partners to fully mobilise for the protest.

This marks a significant shift. For the first time in years, Nigeria’s most influential labour body is placing insecurity at the centre of national mobilization, further underscoring the argument that the current crisis is not simply a security failure but a systemic breakdown of governance, accountability, and financial integrity.

The Financial Engine of Terror: The 23 Suspects Who Moved Billions

A Sahara Reporters investigation uncovered a network of 20 Nigerians and three foreign nationals allegedly linked to the financing of Boko Haram and ISWAP. Their transactions, running into hundreds of billions, were quietly channeled through personal and corporate accounts.

Among those named:

–       Alhaji Saidu Ahmed, Zaria businessman: N4.8bn inflows

–       Usaini Adamu, Kano trader with 111 accounts: N43bn inflows, N50bn outflows

–       Muhammad Sani Adam, forex and precious stones dealer: N54bn across 41 accounts

–       Yusuf Ghazali, a forex trader linked to UAE-convicted terrorists, operated 385 accounts

–       Ladan Ibrahim, a Sokoto official, is accused of diverting public funds

–       Foreign actors included the late Tribert Ayabatwa (N67bn inflows) and Nigerien arms dealer Aboubacar Hima, who moved over $1.19 million.

Strikingly, several of the suspects arrested in 2021 were quietly released without trial, continuing a pattern of impervious investigations and political bottlenecks.

This network confirms a painful truth: Nigeria’s insecurity is not driven solely by men wielding rifles in the bush. It is sustained by individuals in cities, businesses, and bureaucracies, people with access, influence, and remarkable financial mobility.

The Political Dimension: Irabor’s Revelation and the Unnamed Sponsors

The political undertone of Nigeria’s insecurity was reinforced by the former Chief of Defence Staff, Gen. Lucky Irabor (rtd), who admitted that politicians were among those financing terror groups. According to him, some trials were conducted “away from public consumption.”

His statement revived key questions:

–       Why is the state shielding the identities of terror sponsors?

–       Who benefits from the secrecy?

–       What political consequences are being avoided?

Security sources told TruthNigeria that Nigeria’s published list of 19 terror financiers in 2024 represented only a fraction of the full network.

Baba-Ahmed’s accusation that former Kaduna Governor Nasir El-Rufai was part of the political forces that aggravated Northern insecurity, an accusation the former governor has previously denied, adds further urgency to demands for transparency.

The Human Cost: Expanding Killing Fields

Despite repeated assurances, violence continues to spread:

–       303 students and 12 teachers abducted in Niger State

–       38 worshippers kidnapped in Kwara

–       Simultaneous raids across Plateau, Kaduna, Benue, and Niger

–       Whole communities uprooted by weekly attacks

As Amnesty International observed, “In many rural communities, only the graveyards are expanding.”

SBM Intelligence now describes large portions of the North as “open killing fields,” areas where the state’s influence has collapsed, and community vigilantes have become the default security providers.

Expert Voices: Why Nigeria Must Finally Follow the Money

Security experts converge on a single message: Nigeria cannot defeat terrorism without dismantling its financial infrastructure. Dr. Friday Agbo, a security researcher, disclosed, “Terror groups survive because their financial lifelines remain untouched.”

Jonathan Asake, analyst and former SOKAPU president, said, “Publish the full Dubai list. Without transparency, impunity will remain the norm.”

Gen. Irabor (rtd.) revealed, “There are politicians involved. The conflict is multi-layered: ideology, criminality, and political manipulation.”

These assessments underscore one reality: ideology is secondary. Money is primary. It is the oxygen of Nigeria’s terror landscape.

What Must Change

Nigeria must elevate financial crime to the level of a national-security emergency. Key reforms include:

–       Integrating BVN-NIN-SIM identity databases and upgrading real-time monitoring

–       Targeting illicit markets: illegal mining hubs, cattle markets, unregulated border posts

–       Deploying AI-driven analytics to detect layered transactions, mule networks, and ransom flows

–       Strengthening bank compliance units and protecting whistleblowers

–       Improving inter-agency intelligence sharing (EFCC, NFIU, DSS, NDLEA, Police, CBN)

–       Criminalising unexplained wealth, especially in conflict zones

–       Investing in safe-school infrastructure, rural policing, and local reporting channels

Choosing Truth Over Convenience

Nigeria’s two-front war is neither mysterious nor new. It is a well-documented, financially engineered crisis protected by silence, vested interests, and institutional decay. The NLC’s mobilisation signals a turning point; citizens are unwilling to accept official evasions while insecurity intensifies. To end this crisis, Nigeria must:

–       Expose and prosecute terror financiers

–       Purge corrupt insiders in the security system

–       Dismantle ransom economies

–       Strengthen financial intelligence

–       End political protection for criminal networks

Until these reforms are pursued with integrity, billions will continue to move, weapons will continue to flow, and Nigeria will continue to bleed.

Blaise, a journalist and PR professional, writes from Lagos, can be reached via: [email protected]


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

Trending