Connect with us

E-Financial

Judiciary, Banks Chase Shadows as another Banking Crisis Looms

Published

on

Kindly share this post

Nearly ten years ago the Central Bank of Nigeria conducted a deep assessment of the country’s banks.

 

The 2009 exercise exposed large-scale fraud committed by a number of CEOs.

 

To save the banking system from collapse, the Central Bank (CBN) took over a number of institutions and spent billions saving others.

 

According to Quartz, in addition, criminal charges were laid against five CEOs for offences which included fraud, market manipulation, concealment and grant of credit facilities without adequate security.

 

Only one case has been prosecuted successfully. The others appear to be stuck in an unending cycle of dismissals, appeals and re-trials.

 

The bank saga and the failure to bring the bank executives to justice underscore the fact that the Nigerian justice system isn’t working.

 

Quartz, said that the problems – the subject of a great deal of discussion – range from judicial corruption to a lack of judicial independence to delays in the justice system.

 

The cases of the bank executives provide a useful case study through which to examine the weaknesses of the Nigerian judicial system.

 

These include the capability of prosecutors and the ability of the court system, including judges, to actually bring cases to fruition. This is particularly true in corporate cases which are often difficult to prosecute under the criminal law.

Judicial Corruption

 

According to Quartz, the fact that Nigeria has a number of corrupt judges is common knowledge in the country. Over the years, there have been various allegations of corruption in the judiciary.

 

In 2013, two High Court judges were suspended and recommended for retirement by the National Judicial Council for misconduct bordering on corruption.

 

Similarly, in 2016, a raid carried out by the Department of State Services revealed that cash worth USD$800,000 had been found in the homes of senior judges suspected of corruption.

 

Judicial corruption reduces public confidence in the country’s justice system. This means that suspected incidents of directors’ misconducts are less likely to be reported given the prevailing belief that justice is unlikely to be served.

 

Similarly, it can affect the attitude of investigators and prosecutors who might have less incentive to investigate and prosecute cases diligently.

 

While it would clearly be an exaggeration to accuse all judges in Nigeria of corruption, it is reasonable to conclude that corruption remains a problem. But since none of the judges involved in the trial of the bank executives have been accused of corruption, it’s necessary to look to other causes for the failure to bring the bank executives to book.

Judicial delays

 

One of the main problems in the bank executive cases has been endless delays in the judicial process. The trials’ time line tells the story.

Godwin Emefiele, CBN Gov

Criminal proceedings started in 2009. About six years later, in 2015, the Court of Appeal struck down the case against two of the executives on the basis of lack of jurisdiction of the trial court.

 

A declaration of lack of jurisdiction means that the court lacks the power to try the particular case. In itself this isn’t a bad development. After all, compliance with relevant rules on jurisdiction is essential to ensuring justice is done. But the fact that it took six years for this decision to be reached highlights severe delays in Nigeria’s court system.

 

Following the Court of Appeal’s decision, the High Court, in deference to the superior court, dismissed the pending case against the third bank executive.

 

In another turn of events, a year later, in 2016, the Supreme Court overturned the Court of Appeal’s decision and ordered a re-trial of the bank executives. This meant that, nearly 10 years after the initial trial, a fresh trial was started, and with it room for further appeals.

 

There is currently no end in view. While appeals and cross appeals are inevitable parts of litigation, the lengthy time spent on them is not.

 

This delay has been attributed to several factors. Initially, the trials suffered from several unwarranted adjournments at the request of the defence lawyers.

 

Another weak spot has been the prosecuting authority. The unit responsible for prosecuting these kinds of cases, The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, has been severely criticised for its inefficiencies.

 

To worsen the problem, the trial judges were changed several times. One judge was elevated to the Court of Appeal while a few others were transferred to different divisions of the court leading to a fresh trial each time.

 

These issues significantly delayed trial proceedings.

Potential inequality

 

Another question to consider is whether the failure to successfully prosecute the directors is a reflection of the difference in the treatment of high-profile offenders versus ordinary Nigerians.

 

Cecilia Ibru, the only bank executive who was convicted, was sentenced to just six months in prison and required to forfeit shares and other assets worth over USD$1.2 billion.

 

Compare this with the case of David Olugboyega, an armed thief, who was sentenced to death after being found guilty of a £50 robbery.

 

Granted that armed robbery carries the death penalty, however, it seems that carting away millions of money should attract a stiffer penalty.

 

In addition, rich offenders can afford well skilled lawyers who can devise different strategies to delay, or prevent, successful prosecution. Poor offenders don’t have this benefit.

 

The ConversationThe recently introduced Administration of Criminal Justice Act of 2015, which aims to promote speedy dispensation of justice, promises to improve the situation. Time will tell.


Kindly share this post

Nigeria CommunicationsWeek believes that technology makes life more exciting and helps improve the lives of people around Nigeria and indeed the world. So since 2007, we have devoted our energy to independent reportage of technology and how they affect lives.

E-Financial

CBN Licenses Unified Payments as Second Provider for PTSA Services for Nigeria

Published

on

Kindly share this post

Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has awarded the country’s second Payment Terminal Service Aggregator (PTSA) license to Unified Payments, Nigeria’s premier financial technology company, following a rigorous and transparent process,

CBN Licenses Unified Payments as Second Provider for PTSA Services for Nigeria

The move is targeted at enforcing existing requirement that all transactions from point-of-sale channels in Nigeria must go through a licensed Payment Terminal Service Aggregator (PTSA).

The CBN is enforcing the laws to clamp down on financial crimes and other market misconducts and it aligns with the CBN’s objectives to fully track all electronic transactions in Nigeria, given the propensity of using such transactions to fund insecurity, violent crimes, banditry, kidnapping as well as other vices.

According to one analyst, “By awarding a second PTSA license, the apex bank has proactively responded to industry operators who had expressed serious concerns about channelling all transactions through a single aggregator, the Nigeria Interbank Settlement System PLC (NIBBS), as has been the case for some years.

“With the new policy direction, payments service providers would henceforth route all transactions through either of the two licensed Companies.”

Other financial analysts and industry players have commended the Central Bank, affirming that “the move can be a massive step in the right direction. They also commended the open, transparent, and inclusive manner via which the selection process was managed, and the license awarded.

“The selection process, which lasted for months, began with an invitation for qualified organisations within the payment industry to submit an Expression of Interest document, alongside other requisite documentation and additional capital requirement of N1 billion.”

 

The new management of CBN decided not to give the license out without going through an open process – and for the first time in licensing a payment service provider – the apex bank went through a public bid process outlined in its publication of Friday, January 5, 2024, in different national newspapers. At the end of the process, Unified Payments emerged as the most preferred service provider.

Unified Payment Services Limited, also called Unified Payments or UP, is a shared service provider within Nigeria’s financial technology sector owned by a consortium of Nigerian banks. For over 26 years, the firm has provided payment technology to banks and other industry operators. The first and only non-bank entity that is a principal member and licensed acquirer of all of American Express, Mastercard, Visa, UnionPay and Payattitude. Unified Payments facilitates both local and international transactions.

Formerly known as ValuCard Nigeria Plc, Unified Payments led the way to introduce POS payments in Nigeria under its card scheme known as ValuCard which is the first payment card to be issued in Nigeria. The company later transformed into a scheme-neutral and option-neutral service provider enabling transactions under different schemes.

The company has continued to provide leading payment technologies and services, enabling different operators to leverage its capabilities and licenses, enabling prompt and seamless transactions.

Among the shareholders of Unified Payments are First Bank, Access Bank, United Bank for Africa (UBA), Guaranty Trust Bank Plc, Zenith Bank and Fidelity Bank. Other shareholders are Citibank Nigeria Limited, Ecobank of Nigeria Plc, First City Monument Bank Plc, Keystone Bank Ltd, Polaris Bank Ltd, Stanbic IBTC Bank Plc, Sterling Bank Plc and Wema Bank Plc.


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

E-Financial

CIBN says Recapitalization will Empower Banks to Lend more to Economy

Published

on

Kindly share this post

Chartered Institute of Bankers of Nigeria, CIBN, has expressed support for the ongoing banking recapitalization exercise saying it will empower banks to lend more to the economy.

CIBN President, Dr. Ken Opara stated this yesterday while speaking at the annual lecture of the institute in Lagos, with the theme “Improving Availability of Credit in the Nigerian Real Economy: The Critical Importance of Liquidity.”

Okpara noted that the volume of credit to the real sector activities namely agriculture, manufacturing and services is low compared to their critical role in driving economic growth.

Consequently, he called for more credit to the real sector, saying, “I   propose that we consider offering more credit to these key sectors and particularly the agriculture sector. It is for this reason that the Recapitalization exercise is a welcome development.

“The recently announced upward review of the Minimum Capital Requirements of Nigeria by the Central Bank of Nigeria would further empower banks to extend more credit to the economy’s productive sectors.”

To address these factors impeding credit to the real sector, Okpara suggested that, “The government needs to improve further the ease of doing business and infrastructural development, such as power, roads, rail networks, etc.

“Setting up industrial centres where these companies can co-habit and share common infrastructure. Harmonize and reduce the various taxes and levies, including locating them in a single hub.

“Banks need to be deliberate in de-risking these companies via Capacity building programmes, and Advisory services.

Specialised Financial Institutions can be created in addition to the Bank of Industry (BOI), especially credit guarantee agencies and risk-sharing institutions, to further facilitate the deepening of credit as practiced in countries such as China which significantly transformed its economy.


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

E-Financial

New Report Reveals 20% of Nigerians Use Bitcoin to Transact Daily

Published

on

Kindly share this post

A new report claims that 20 per cent of Nigerians are using Bitcoin to carry out financial transactions every day.

According to the open-source blockchain website, Elastos, the research was compiled from online interviews conducted with 1,407 self-defined ‘tech savvy’ respondents in Brazil, Germany, Nigeria, South Korea, UAE, the UK, and the US.

The interviews were completed by a third party, a registered market research company and completed between 30 March and 04 April ’24.

The report further revealed that 67 per cent of Nigerians would have more trust in Bitcoin to put their life savings than banks and local governments.

The report reads; “The inaugural BIT Index (Bitcoin; Innovation & Trust) – compiled from over 1,400 self-defined ‘tech savvy’ respondents from 7 countries across the globe – sheds light on the actual perception and use of Bitcoin in people’s daily lives, irrespective of its current valuation. Elastos’ BIT Index is part of ongoing research to better track the ‘real world’ use of Bitcoin together with users’ motivations, expectations and barriers around the same.

“In particular, the data reveals the role being played by emerging markets in terms of understanding, usage and confidence around Bitcoin. Nigerian respondents’ levels of usage and trust compare starkly with those expressed from so-called ‘established’ markets such as Germany and the UK and Germany where daily usage levels are just 8% (for German respondents) and (9% for their UK counterparts).

“In terms of the trust – in addition to Nigeria – significant proportions of respondents from Brazil (35 per cent) and the UAE (32 per cent) would have more confidence in Bitcoin-based services to protect their life savings compared to those from markets such as the UK (20 per cent) and Germany (22 per cent).

“When it comes to ensuring the integrity of online transactions, emerging market respondents also revealed their relative confidence in Bitcoin, compared to alternatives. According to the data, 66 per cent of Nigerian respondents and 35 per cent from Brazil have more confidence in Bitcoin-based systems than alternatives such as banks, or national Governments, compared to figures of just 16 per cent (Germany) and 21 per cent (UK) who feel the same.


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

Trending