General News
Corporate Blackmailers as Tinubu’s Enemies

By Aliyu Gaya
Corporate blackmail is fast becoming the fancy of some netizens, corporate bodies, individuals, especially fly-by-night persons who target the rich and their businesses for diverse reasons. It’s not restricted to Nigeria, though.

The likes of Aliko Dangote, Mike Adenuga, Leo Stan Ekeh, Segun Agbaje, Tony Elumelu, and corporates like GTCO (Guaranty Trust Holding Company), Zenith Bank, Zinox, Globacom, among others, have at one time or another faced a blizzard of blackmail. The blackmailers’ intents are multifarious: to make easy money (ransom), damage the reputation of their target, ruin an enterprise, or inflict emotional trauma on their victims.
In the past few years, several multinationals have left the country. On paper, some of the multinationals claim forex crunch, rising cost of doing business and in some cases, their inability to remit their profits out of the country to service loans in their home countries or elsewhere as reasons for exiting Nigeria, Africa’s largest market for all products and services.
But those who ever cared to investigate the cause of the unprecedented exodus of these multinationals would easily point to blackmail as the chief reason for the mass exit of these mega corporates as well as a major reason why other foreign investors were frustrated from investing in Nigeria. The Nigerian bureaucracy can blackmail you out of business by denying you all necessary niceties, documents and requirements that would enable you set forth or grow your enterprise.
How about this? In September 2023, when President Bola Tinubu attended the G20 Summit in India, one of his first assignments was a meeting with Mr. Prakash Hinduja, Chairman and CEO of the Hinduja Group of companies, a conglomerate with a total asset portfolio exceeding $100 billion. The Indian billionaire lauded Tinubu and pledged to invest in Nigeria only because of his confidence in the Nigerian president. But he did not fail to remind President Tinubu how he was frustrated years back when he attempted to invest in Nigeria.
His exact words: ”I have had paperwork stalled in Nigerian bureaucracy for over one year, especially in FCT. But I knew that you would be purpose-driven in this endeavour and God will help you to turn Nigeria’s rich promise into rich reality for all of its citizens.”
Any discerning mind would notice the rebirth of hope in an investor who had been frustrated out of Nigeria by Abuja bureaucracy. In case you don’t get it, Mr Hinduja was referring to another type of common blackmail in Nigeria. “If you don’t see us, you won’t get the support you need.” Plain bribery and corruption which runs in the civil service.
In the United States, a country with unapologetic capitalist culture, blackmail is considered a serious crime under federal law and every state law. Culprits can be jailed and/or punished with huge fines in some cases. The same applies in Europe and Asia where the blackmailer is neither spared nor pampered.
Nigeria has a panoply of laws including the Cybercrime Act to deal with corporate blackmailers. However, the laws are made weak because, in some cases, the legal processes are convoluted and drag leisurely, making the suspects exploit loopholes within the system to dodge conviction. The blackmailers are like the cunning fox. They know that reputational damage is a high risk for their victim; hence, they often drag the case in a court of law to keep it perpetually on the front burner of public discourse in the media.
But truth be told, these blackmailers are the real enemies of Nigeria and President Tinubu. For while Tinubu is making genuine efforts to woo investors to Nigeria, blackmailers are busy rubbishing existing investors and especially indigenous investors. If we don’t treat our indigenous investors well, how do we expect a foreigner to invest in our economy? This is the paradox and the real reason Tinubu should come hard on corporate blackmailers.
A few instances of corporate blackmail and embarrassment. Nigeria’s highly successful business honcho, Mike Adenuga, had his office brusquely raided in 2006 by operatives of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). The raid and ‘arrest’ of Adenuga were widely exposed in the media. At the end, it turned out that Adenuga had nothing sleazy in his closet that the accusers could use to nail him in the court of law. But he was sufficiently terrified and blackmailed such that he had to go on temporary exile from Nigeria to Ghana to the UK.
Another Nigerian business success story, Aliko Dangote, has been in and out of blackmail, sometimes from competitors, career blackmailers who want a chunk of his money, or even public institutions who, rather than help his business empire to thrive and keep thriving, prefer to bring him down. The most recent of such serial blackmail is the running campaign to discredit his $20 billion refinery. First, they claimed it was non-existent, and that failed. They switched to, it can never take off, which also failed. They tried the fib that the refinery was producing low-quality products; this also failed. Then, there was that disingenuous yarn that he had no approval, no licence for the project, yet the same Federal Government acquired 7.5% of an unlicensed company shares with public fund? This, again, failed to fly. There were many more, but they all crashed, as does every lie.
Then, there was the failed but long-drawn corporate blackmail against Leo Stan Ekeh, the listless and gifted founder of the Zinox Group, a global conglomerate spanning ICT, e-commerce, real estate, pharmaceuticals, entertainment, and more. His case is such that pools tears in the eyes. A case of a fry threatening to swallow a barracuda. Several studies have identified envy, money (ransom), extreme competitiveness, desire to tarnish a reputation, a knack to hurt an enterprise and inflict emotional pain on the business owners as some of the drivers of corporate blackmail. In some cases, it may just be one of the factors named above. But in the case of Ekeh, it’s a combination of envy, extortion, and reputational damage.
The case of Ekeh is one that tasks your state of sanity. It got me thinking about how much premium Nigerians, nay Africans, place on their brightest and best, especially those who by sheer dint of hard work, tenacity, and courage to dare the odds, burrowed their way from the lowest nadir of their enterprise to the zenith of it.
Nigerian entrepreneurs like Ekeh and many others across the country built their businesses from scratch. They deserve praise for their industry and deserve to be protected from blackmail hawks. The various but failed attempts to link Ekeh and any of the companies associated with his name to unhealthy corporate governance smacks of desperation and a primitive show of disrespect for a man whose collateral is integrity. Any African who plays big in the Africa ICT marketplace knows that without integrity, you cannot have as much as a handshake with over 31 global brands like Microsoft, Apple, HP, Samsung, IBM, Cisco, Starlink, among others. Zinox Group does.
Every Nigerian government at national and sub-national level claims they are wooing foreign investors. But they forget that how Nigeria treats her indigenous investors will influence how foreign investors perceive the Nigerian market. You cannot expose your home-grown investors to the vagaries of blackmail and treachery and expect foreign investors to trust you. This is the task before Tinubu. He must cleanse the corporate ecosystem of both systemic and individual blackmailers.
Gaya, a Public Policy Analyst, writes from Kano
General News
CRMI Warns of Risks, Sees Gains in UAE Exit from OPEC

Chartered Risk Management Institute of Nigeria (CRMI) has highlighted potential benefits for Nigeria such as increased production flexibility, expanded market share, and improved revenue prospects following the United Arab Emirates’ decision to exit the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC).

However, the Institute cautioned that these opportunities come with significant risks, including exposure to price volatility, reduced protection from coordinated supply management, intensified competition, and mounting fiscal pressures.
In a statement signed by Victor Olannye, registrar/chief executive officer, described the development as a major shift in global oil governance, with far-reaching implications for market stability and international energy dynamics.
Olannye noted that the move could trigger increased oil price volatility, heightened geopolitical tensions, and disruptions across global energy supply chains.
He urged corporate organisations, public institutions, financial bodies, and risk professionals to reassess their risk frameworks and strengthen resilience in response to evolving global realities.
He identified key risks to include a potential weakening of OPEC cohesion, oil price instability, geopolitical uncertainty, supply chain disruptions, macroeconomic volatility, and the possibility of further exits by member states.
In line with its mandate to promote sound risk management and support national development, the Institute advised corporate organisations to implement robust risk management frameworks, adopt dynamic hedging strategies, and diversify their business portfolios.
Financial institutions and investors were also urged to reassess energy-related risks, strengthen portfolio diversification, and enhance risk disclosure practices.
CRMI further called on government and policymakers to reinforce fiscal buffers, accelerate economic diversification, and promote the transition to renewable energy.
Individual risk professionals were encouraged to upskill in geopolitical risk analysis and energy economics while developing expertise in scenario planning and predictive analytics.
The Institute emphasised the need for stakeholders to reposition proactively to navigate the evolving geo-economic landscape. It also projected possible scenarios, including fragmentation of global oil governance structures, increased reliance on market-driven pricing mechanisms, and an acceleration of global energy transition efforts.
General News
UK Cracks Down on Russia’s Exploitation of Vulnerable Migrants and Deadly Drone Capability

The UK has announced a raft of new sanctions to curb production of Russian drones and the nefarious networks that are exploiting vulnerable migrants from across the globe to support Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine. The latest action hits 35 individuals and entities, including those responsible for human trafficking networks, funnelling exploited migrants into Russia’s war machine.

Networks sanctioned by the UK have been deceptively recruiting foreign migrants in search of a better life and either sending them to the front line as cannon fodder or putting them to work in weapons factories. This includes through schemes like Russia’s Alabuga Start programme for drone production at a UK-sanctioned entity.
Russia continues to terrorise Ukraine by indiscriminately using drones, killing, and injuring innocent civilians and damaging critical infrastructure. Russia fired the equivalent of over 200 drones per day into Ukraine in March 2026, the highest ever monthly total. Russia is likely to exceed this grim record for a second consecutive month in April.
These attacks rely on domestic manufacturers and third country suppliers providing key components and technical support. This new action is designed to disrupt these supply chains and hold those responsible to account by targeting the businessmen and companies fuelling Russia’s drone manufacturing capabilities.
Sanctions Minister Stephen Doughty said: “The practice of exploiting vulnerable people to prop up Russia’s failing and illegal war in Ukraine is barbaric.
“These sanctions expose and disrupt the operations of those trafficking migrants as cannon fodder and feeding Putin’s drone factories with illicit components to target innocent civilians and vital infrastructure.
“The UK continues to lead international efforts to disrupt Russia’s war machine, ramping up pressure on its economy and confronting its hybrid threats. We stand shoulder to shoulder with Ukraine in defence of European security and our shared values.”
Sanctioned targets also include individuals and entities based in third countries, including Thailand and China, responsible for supplying drone components and other critical military goods to Russia.
Among those sanctioned is Pavel Nikitin, whose company develops Russia’s VT-40 drone – a cheap, mass-produced attack drone which has been used extensively by Russia in its attacks on Ukraine.
Also sanctioned are three individuals with links to the Russian state involved in recruiting individuals to travel to Ukraine to fight for Russia.
This includes Polina Alexandrovna Azarnykh, who, backed by the Russian state, has been facilitating the travel of individuals from countries including Egypt, Iraq, Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Morocco, Syria and Yemen through Russia to Ukraine, where they are deployed with minimal training and under dire conditions to the frontline to sustain Russia’s illegal war of aggression.
The UK remains unwavering in its support for Ukraine and will continue to use the full force of its sanctions powers to disrupt Russia’s hybrid threats and squeeze the Kremlin’s war machine. These measures underline our determination to hold Russia and its enablers to account, defend European security and support Ukraine’s fight for freedom.
Charge d’Affaires and British Deputy High Commissioner in Abuja, Mrs. Gill Lever, said: “Today, the UK sanctioned Russian-linked networks and individuals involved in the deceptive recruitment of vulnerable Nigerian men and women, who were misled into joining Russia’s frontline in its war against Ukraine.
“These sanctions shine a light on those who seek to exploit vulnerable Nigerians to sustain Russia’s illegal war, including through schemes such as the Alabuga Start Programme.
“Such practices knowingly place innocent civilians in grave danger, showing a complete disregard for their safety and wellbeing. Tragically, some have already lost their lives as a result.
“In February, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs advised citizens to exercise caution and avoid these schemes. We intend that today’s sanctions will further reduce the risk of harm and help protect others from similar exploitation.”
General News
FirstCap Closes N4.46Bn LAPO MFB SPV Series 1 Bond, Deepens Access to Long Term Capital

FirstCap, an investment banking firm and subsidiary of FirstHoldCo Plc., has successfully closed the ₦4.46 billion Series 1 Bond Issuance by LAPO MFB SPV Plc, reinforcing its strong leadership in Nigeria’s debt capital markets and deepening access to long term funding for high impact sectors.

Acting as Lead Issuing House, FirstCap structured the fund raising on behalf of LAPO MFB SPV Plc (a company sponsored by LAPO Microfinance Bank Limited to mobilise institutional capital targeted at SME financing, renewable energy expansion, and digital financial services, three critical drivers of inclusive and sustainable economic growth in Nigeria.
The transaction is underpinned by a compelling impact thesis, with proceeds strategically deployed to support small businesses and clean energy initiatives. The microfinance sector continues to demonstrate resilience and strong fundamentals positioning the issuance at the intersection of growth, sustainability, and financial inclusion.
Commenting on the transaction, Ukandu E. Ukandu, Managing Director, FirstCap Limited, said: “This successful issuance underscores our strategic commitment to directing capital where it delivers measurable economic impact. At FirstCap, we partner with institutions that have the scale, discipline, and vision to transform markets, and LAPO exemplifies these qualities.
The ₦4.46 billion bond is positioned to be a catalyst for SME growth, expanded energy access, and broader financial inclusion. We remain committed to structuring transactions that are not only bankable, but impactful and aligned with Nigeria’s long term economic trajectory.”
FirstCap Limited remains committed to leading from the forefront of Nigeria’s capital markets, structuring transactions that are bankable, impactful, and investable, while supporting the future trajectory of Nigeria’s economic development.”
General News3 days agoWhy 9 African Countries Are Looking to Nigeria for Data Protection Lessons
E-Business3 days agoFirm Spots Rising Scam Activity Around the 2026 World Cup, from Bogus Tickets to $500,000 “grant” Emails
E-Financial3 days agoCBN to Raise N700Bn in First Treasury Bills Auction this May
Telecom3 days agoTelcos Recover N2 Trillion following Crackdown on Indebted Subscribers
Telecom3 days agoOrganized Criminals Plunder Telecom Infrastructure across Nigeria, Cause Service Disruptions
Telecom3 days agoMTN Nigeria Remits N878.7Bn Taxes, Levies in 2025
E-Financial3 days agoWhy African Crypto Brands must Communicate like Banks, Not Startups
E-Business2 days agoKled AI, US Data Firm Blocks Nigeria over High ‘Fraudulent Activity’


















