Featured

Nigeria, the Franchise by Dr. G.M Gillis-West FCAI

Keywords: Franchise, Constitution, contradictions, political, office, public, environment, governance

Abstract
Nigeria is yet to achieve nationhood; it is rather a collection of individuals under the shades of tribe, ethnic, religious and linguistic advantages desiring power and control over national and State matters for their personal gains and further strives to hold onto political power or authority by whatever means imaginable, Nigeria is still not owned by its citizens and is not even trusted by those who are privileged to lead it and this is in contrast to other nations with comparable historical roots, like Singapore, the United Arab Emirates and even Eritrea. The established political ‘franchise’ controls all the governmental institutions including the subtlety of the electoral body and simply arrogates and allocates at will the economic resources and political positions to whomever it pleases. And with no clear economic system, the country has become more capitalist and religiously fervent than the United States of America, Iran and Israel respectively. The ‘franchise’ obviously does not believe in the country and the “federating” States and it is a truism that no one defends what he or she does not believe in, the major reason we lack and suffer from what we have in abundance. Nigeria needs a new Constitution that will recognize devolution of political powers and re-structuring of the political system and also guarantee resource ownership and control, federalism and referendum concept of decision making. Otherwise, Nigeria will continue to progress in reverse with its dual identity and deliberate manipulative constitution, religious banditry, and hostile economic/working environment that creates mass poverty.

Introduction
The political franchise in this discourse is a politician, public office holder, or representative of any organization —political or ethno-religious— given, under deliberate instructions and guidelines, the opportunity to aspirate to and occupy any political or public office on how to conduct the affairs of that office in favour of the persons or group that are instrumental to the candidate’s ascension, In this context, the carrier of the “franchise” is given the chance to direct and implant previously developed templates that largely serves the interests of the “franchise” owners. It may be formidable and foolproof, particularly if we take into account some of its characteristics, such as alignment with the franchise’s owners, subtle control of the electoral process at all levels, dedication to stated goals, shared interest to create a single purpose for occupying the office. Directional communications, delegation of accountability and responsibility to the franchise’s purported carrier or representative who is always present. In Nigeria, this style of rule and governance is apparent.Nigerians, like other nationals, began as settlers and engaged in trade as early as 1100 BC with the Middle East, Africa, and Asia. The Trans-Atlantic slave trade which developed in the 15th century, and the British invasion of Lagos in 1851 marked the beginning of colonial rule in Nigeria.
In summary, historians believe that the year 1100 BC marked the consolidation of numerous kingdoms, empires, and movements into their various geographic locations and settlements in modern-day Nigeria, and this demographic makeup of the tribes/ethnic groups and settlers in the various regions were significantly impacted. The British who founded it, as well as the people who lived there, questioned the stability of the union because it happened so suddenly and consisted of such varied groupings of people with disparate situations and life ideals. The three major tribes/ethnic and linguistic groups (Igbo, Hausa, and Yoruba) dominate Nigeria’s socio-economic and political scene to the detriment of the other minority and linguistic groups, which further widen the diversity. This, again, is evident in the exacerbating identity crises and “nepotistic” tendencies among several ethnic and linguistic groups in their quest for political authority..

The pre- and post – independence era of 1960 -1966 especially during the regionalism administration in Nigeria, the three major regions of Northern, Western and Eastern parts were independently administered and even had ambassadors to Nigeria, in short like the two other regions, the Northern region had its own flag and coat of arms, customs, foreign relations, and even security structures, a constitutional monarchy that was still in effect, a bicameral legislature (the Senate and House of Chiefs) and a House of Representatives as its Lower House, a thriving economy, and a wealth of natural resources (groundnut, tin, steel, uranium, cement, leather, plating) It is both amazing and absurd to have access to such an abundance of economically potent resources, both renewable and nonrenewable, some of which have not yet been fully utilized, such as solar energy, meanwhile, the majority of people in the three (3) regions live in squalor, while an insignificant number of persons enjoy excess wealth. Surprisingly, many developed countries in Europe and Asia could not boast of even a fraction of what a single region has.

THE CONTRADICTIONS

Constitutional Contradictions
The creation of a modern country was the goal of the several colonial constitutions, including Clifford (1922), Richard (1946), Macpherson (1951), and Lyttleton (1954). In short, they selected regionalism as an alternative to administrative and political union from Richard’s 1946 through Lyttleton’s 1954 constitutions respectively recognized the diversity and economic independence of the forming ethnicities and tribal nations for the objective of fostering political and economic development. Even the Independence and Republican Constitutions of 1960 and 1963, respectively, continued the recognition of the need for continuing the path of regional development and a single country with one belief. This was evidenced in the historic, now figurative groundnut pyramids of the North, cocoa towers of the West, and coal mines of the East. If this path was followed probably Nigeria would have been one of the most economically and democratically advanced country in the world. But the 1979 ‘supposed’ federal Constitution became our albatross, ironically introduced a unitary/centrist ethno-religious and linguistic struggle for dominance among the three major ethnic groups, as self-serving political leaders in authority took advantage of its provisions, This centrist federal control was strengthened in the exclusive legislative powers of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and further gave Nigeria a dual identity status, introduced a deliberate interpretative conundrum that turned the country into a political “franchise” governed by a small number of oligarchs under the clout of ethno-religious and linguistic advantage.

The political leaders in authority regularly use these numerous deliberate contradictions to map courses that are negatively widening the country’s diversity due to the several purposefully conflicting provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
In the northern part of Nigeria about eleven (11) states still counting have adopted sharia law as their official religion and are administering Islamic jurisprudence alongside their traditional courts, with the Sharia Court of Appeal led by a Grand Khadi whose only superior is the Supreme Court at the federal level. In contrast, same constitution still forbids any level of government from establishing any religion as its official religion, In short Section 35 countered itself by also guaranteeing that everyone in Nigeria has the right to “freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, including freedom to change his or her religious beliefs.” These provisions are further strengthened in Sections 10, 240, 244, 260, and 264. They make it illegal for federal, state, and local governments to adopt any religion as the official or state religion on the one hand and in another breath any State can choose whatever religion it deems fit and summarily divided the ‘jurisprudic’ nature of the country to be penal code for the north (Muslims) and criminal code for the south (Christians and others). The sad fact is that Nigeria’s foundation was purposefully built at various points in time by the political leaders in authority not to succeed as a country for the benefit of all because even countries with more extreme religious beliefs like Afghanistan and Iran have single-purpose constitutions, written by all and devoid of contradictions.

Ethno-Religious Contradictions
The character of Nigeria’s existence since independence is orientated less toward nationalism and more toward ethno-religious supremacy in politics, economy, and socio-cultural concerns. Nigeria is home to over 250 distinct ethnic groups each residing in a region that it regards as being its own due to first-move-first-served and inherited rights. People who have lived and worked in a dominant group’s region for many years without being a member of the group are nonetheless regarded as foreigners till date. Even though many people have moved from one ethnic territory to another in pursuit of farmland and fishing ports, such foreigners frequently do not obtain outright title to land in rural areas. And just three of these sizable groups—Hausa, Yoruba, and Igbo—are listed as majorities. Further, political power in real terms favour these ethno-religious and linguistic groups – Igbo, Hausa, and Yoruba, which has severally led to mistrust and making governance at the federal government level centrist and selfish. The over listing of the exclusive legislative powers of the federal government was deliberate to enrich and keep in control the political “franchise” who determines and redistributes at will economic resources and political opportunities to whomever it pleases, as demonstrated by the pattern of our general elections from 1999 to date of who becomes president or governor with its subtlety in the control of the electoral process.

Nigeria’s constitution is tribal and ethno – religiously focused, and has negatively impacted on all we do. This is further acknowledged in the definitions of governance and economic concepts put in place. In short, the phrase “economic diversification” has been used frequently over the past fifty years, but the country has never adopted any widely accepted policy towards diversification or transformation that will benefit the generality of the people, instead introduced misleading “stipendiary” programmes like “Operation Feed the Nation (OFN),” “Green Revolution,” “Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP),” “Economic Sustainability Programme,” “N Power,” and several which became “conduit pipes” to divert public funds to themselves and instead introduced poverty and lack into the system. The Saudi Arabian oil company that is about 98.5% government owned is currently the largest, most valuable, and most coveted company in the world by market capitalization contributing at least 80% of Saudi Arabia’s total development since its independence and in comparative analysis the Nigeria’s Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation now NNPC Ltd. which has been in existence for over forty (40) years has not posted any significant people-focused progress instead turned itself into a private company displaying the desperate quest of the political ‘franchise’ to perfect its hold on the Nigerian economy

The political leaders in authority purposefully make unclear the economic system or strategy Nigeria it’s operating on rather chose the Reactive Economic Framework (REF) which makes economic accountability fizzle as decisions are made on the spot to handle or resolve (quick fix) any economic problem that comes up during administration and this pattern cannot be referenced as it is built on nothing. Information on financial and other programmes that will benefit the populace are shrouded in secrecy, research is never promoted, and even when Nigerians independently come up with great ideas—whether experimental or hypothetical — are ridiculed and discouraged by the same government, the list goes on and on.

Leadership Contradictions
Nigeria has the potential to be a great country, both politically and economically, but its foundation is built on dishonesty, incompetence, and self-denial of our tribal, ethnic, religious and linguistic diversities. Past and present political leaders in authority purposefully allowed this foundational error to continue because it ensures their survival and that of the “franchise” owners, who promotes poverty, exploitation, religious and ethnic intolerance, and ‘nepotistic’ use of violence to gain control and distribute benefits to whoever they desire. This will continue until we re-structure our relationships and identify who we are and why we are where we are by re-identifying our genealogy. Is it not perplexing to observe that sincere and diligent Nigerians prosper outside the shores of Nigeria and even assist in managing some other countries’ economies yet comparable abilities and skills are ineffective here when invited to do same. In other words, the political leaders in authority intentionally create a hostile and stifling economic atmosphere so that sincere and hardworking Nigerians cannot prosper and must instead continue to rely on the “franchise” owners for their daily needs.

Items like social insurance, public health, public education, public services, labour laws, and market regulations to ensure equitable wealth distribution and equal opportunities are not addressed. The “franchise” has established a political leadership system that is anti-masses, the major reason why we have not made any significant masses focused economic advancements in comparison with some countries with similar colonial histories like Singapore, Ghana, Malaysia, even Eritrea, we were even referred to as the ‘poverty capital’ of the world with over 60% of Nigerians living in abject penury, the country still paradoxically produced the richest man and woman in Africa. It goes to show that the economies of war-torn countries like Rwanda, Eritrea, Somalia, Liberia, Libya, Namibia, and even Egypt, are more masses enriching than ours. In short Rwanda, with its gory wartime experiences and Malaysia’s importing of its first oil palm nuts from Nigeria in the 1960s to jump-start their oil palm industry are mind blowing instances. It further highlights the leadership pattern of the “franchise” that empowers few individuals rather than the masses; displaying the nebulous irony of our existence and purpose.

The political leaders in authority avoid providing correct information on anything that would easily be beneficial to the general public from population figures to economic status, instead what trends in government policy patterns are approximations and assumptions, again purposefully created to enrich the “franchise”, who are acting as mercenaries escalating the general populace’s economic distress. The achievements made thus far by nations with which Nigeria shares similarities, such as Ghana, the United Arab Emirates, Botswana, Namibia, Rwanda, Malaysia, Singapore, India, Angola, and even the Bahamas, ought to have prompted us to adopt a different perspective, as the nationalists of these countries after achieving independence from their various colonial powers, re-restructured their political systems by recognizing their pre-colonial existence, characteristics and ideologies and improved on them for the benefit of all.

Moreso, these nationalists knew that the various ethno-religious and linguistic nations have the right and freedom to independently decide for themselves how to be led, they re-established their union; some even changed the names of their countries and even agreed as a people to be “one” under a “single-purpose” constitution and applied the rule of law through a judicial system that is not hoodwinked by the political leaders in authority, which gave them equal ownership and leadership of their countries. The United Arab Emirates (UAE) especially in its post-independence era recognized their diversity, instantly came together, and made the most of it by giving each sheikhdom some degree of operating autonomy through its investments with their meager reserve assets as oil income rose in the 1960s, causing a diversification in real estate, healthcare, hospitality, and other sectors that have transformed all of their cities into contemporary global communities. This was easily accomplished as they enabled their country men and women possess and use their land, which gives them a compulsion to appropriately defend same. If agreed in Nigeria, the various ethnic and tribal groups and nations will create a fruitful atmosphere for development with more economic and political freedom, as all governmental institutions will become effective and functional. An owner cannot steal from himself or herself and with this mind set, corruption, in whatever form and term, will inevitably cease to exist in the form it is now.

Educational Contradictions
Focused countries give their educational systems careful consideration and intentional planning because they recognize how crucial it is to their long-term success. For Nigerians who can afford it, Ghana is still the preferred destination for their tertiary education. Shamefully, the political leaders in authority attend the graduation ceremonies of their children and wards in Europe, the Americas and Asia but fail to provide funding for the country’s public education, once more purposefully preventing the emergence of self and community consciousness. One ridiculous instance had the Chairman of the Nigeria Universities Commission sometimes ago attended his son’s graduation overseas while teachers at the public universities that he oversees were simultaneously on strike. In fact, the political leaders in authority do not have much faith in the country they have the privilege of governing.

According to a World Bank report in 2022, it stated that eleven million children were out of school in 2020, Nigeria has the largest percentage of out-of-school children worldwide. Between the ages of six (6) and fifteen (15), there were 15 million non-schooling children in Nigeria in 2003; they made up 1 in every 12 non-schooling children worldwide and 22% of all Nigerian children in this age range. This anomaly can be fixed with a simple Executive Order from the country’s president or governor mandating public officials whether elected or appointed and officials of civil service to educate their children and wards in government-established educational institutions from pre-kindergarten through post-graduate levels. This will make these issues go away. However, it is true that in Nigeria, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eyes of a needle that for its president, state governor, local government chairman, or senior public officials to educate their children and wards in public educational institutions It is therefore, understandable why it has to take the United Nations to remind the political leaders in authority of the importance of providing our people with quality public education, portable, drinkable water, health care, shelter, and other services, especially spending at least 20% of our annual budgets on education which sounds abominable as the country has never spent up to 5% since 1960 or in any single year. The report further posited that over 60% of Nigerians are illiterate, and another 20% are poorly educated resulting in over ten million Nigerian children missing school and roaming the streets. These are applicable in several other sectors that have direct bearing with the populace.

It was never stated or rumoured that Nigeria participated in the search and research of finding a cure of the COVID 19 outbreak. This exposed the fecklessness of the Nigerian political leadership system as the country has not attempted to improve or scale up its capability for medication manufacture to meet international standards. Existing medication manufacturing facilities struggle to operate in accordance with general manufacturing practice regulations which further limit the country’s ability to entice top manufacturing deals. Health experts have criticized the government for constantly preferring to rely on other countries rather than develop local capability. As what the medical officials in Nigeria are good at is showing the number of fatalities and infected persons on national media and which State is leading the rankings of infection. This is not surprising as the political leaders in authority do not believe in the country they are privileged to lead. While, countries within the Nigerian status like Senegal, Madagascar, Egypt, and even South Africa have made and are still making inroads, especially in their health research, science, and technology, especially as it relates to the COVID 19 scourge. In short it was on record that Senegal manufactured its own self-styled ventilators and test kits, while Egypt, South Africa, and even Kenya has begun manufacturing COVID-19 pills after proving their production, regulatory compliance, and ability to fulfill global standards for quality-assured medications.

Elitist Contradictions
The elitist nature of Nigeria’s political leadership is even more worrisome, as it makes it difficult and expensive for the less fortunate Nigerians to access basic necessities like electricity (power), cooking gas kerosene, diesel, gasoline popularly called fuel, shelter, and access to high-quality public education, healthcare, and transportation. It is accurate to say that we are more capitalist and religiously zealous than the majority of capitalist and religious nations. Making the ends justify the means principle work, leading to the creation of a disillusioned populace that is no longer interested in the actions of the political leaders in authority but rather created for them a catchphrase to maintain their hopes: “Just survive any way you can and wait for your turn.” This is because you cannot defend something you do not believe in.Since they have the power to render any government dysfunctional if they choose to. The elites have organized themselves into that “franchise,” sought to avoid interfering in their businesses, and established a “muster point” where all their conflicts are resolved. In order to obscure the fact that Nigerians are made up of distinct and disparate autonomous tribal and ethnic nations and micro-nations compelled into the 1914 amalgamation, the elitist nationalists chose not to restructure and address the existentialities after attaining independence. This article therefore, questions their motivations for making this choice. Whereas nationalists in countries like India, Pakistan, Singapore, and the United Arab Emirates had similar aggregation and assimilation after being coerced into political unions, as soon as independence was achieved, they restructured and recognized their distinctive differences and granted them some degree of autonomy, which they then used to their advantage.

The forced union of various independent tribal, ethnic, and micro-nations was supported by Nigerian nationalists as a means of promoting their own fortunes and fame. In other words, it turned into a political “franchise” for the benefit of the elites because, despite our best efforts, we are still regressing as the “franchise” gives “public office”—whether it be the presidency or the governorship—to whoever it pleases in order to keep up its subtle accumulation of public resources for private gain. Furthermore, these elites have transformed Nigeria’s political party system into “disco halls,” and if you do not like the music, switch “parties.” Elections are now more about individuals than political parties, because political parties no longer represent any ideology and instead serve as platforms for personal political actualization. The desire is thus to control or be accepted by the established “franchise,” which has encouraged political desperation among politicians, as it may or may not guarantee the ostensible “safe house” and relevance in the political and socioeconomic scheme of things.

Conclusion
Nigeria has great potential but with little motivation to advance in any of the areas that are of relevance. Nigeria was not listed in a recent report from the OECD Data (2022) of the top 100 countries in research and development, but South Africa, the UAE, Pakistan, and other nations with comparable characteristics were. This strongly suggests that the political leaders in authority historically and currently have no interest in the country’s economic advancement and are only concerned with advancing that of their own and their immediate families’. The majority of developed nations in Europe, Asia, and the Americas “actually” started out in the 1960s like Nigeria, according to an unconfirmed fact. However, these nations adhered to the rule of law and social justice, whereas we have never done so. They also chose a clear political and economic system of government and implemented it exactly, as opposed to us, who have never done either. In other words, because of the system we selected, we are more oligarchic and unitary than democratic and federal, and we never imitate the methods by which developed nations attained their status rather laughably imitating their developmental outcomes.However, after carefully examining the Nigerian political leadership system since its independence in 1960, shows evidence that the country has not achieved nationhood instead a collection of individuals seeking to exercise political authority and control over the affairs of the people for their own personal advancement, comfort, and wealth, and further strives to hold onto political authority or power by any means necessary. This again, is contrary to the earlier listed nations with comparable historical backgrounds, particularly Singapore and the UAE, Nigeria is not owned by its citizens and is not even trusted by those in authority, instead political leaders in authority and public office holders turned it into a “franchise” to raise their own economic standing which supports the claim that Nigeria’s political leaders in authority, historically and currently, are economically and mentally poorer than the “supposed” poor masses. This is a key rationale why the political leaders in authority at various times and now continue to and get richer-off of the country’s and the “federating” States’ financial resources. Only the mentally and financially disadvantaged will take what is not theirs because they are afraid of going back into poverty. While mentally and financially successful political leaders in authority do not embezzle money from their countries they are privileged to lead rather help their country men and women achieve the greatest quality of life. There are many instances of countries with comparable circumstances with Nigeria that have attained and continue to attain these heights, but my beloved country is rather progressing in reverse, oligarchic and unitary for the advantage of the “franchise” owners.

Recommendations
Countries that have experienced sustainable development have achieved nationhood or statehood, which Nigeria lack. We are still “inhabitants,” not “citizens,” and the political leaders in authority have never considered it important to address it. As previously stated, properly constituted countries have a single, not dual purpose, operational constitution, accurate information on all of their activities, open administration, social justice, the rule of law, periodic referenda to involve direct citizens’ participation in decision making, and other actions that respect the dignity of labour and operate specific and directional economic systems. Nigeria’s governance system struggle to uphold the good life after establishing an unjust, dual-identity, and manipulative constitution, implementing a selective criminal justice system and rule of law, weak public institutions, a sole administrator style of leadership/governance, lacking a distinct economic system, and absent theoretical framework for how governance should be carried out.

These apparent contradictions can be resolved if Nigeria recognizes that its 1914 amalgamation of various tribal and ethnic nations and micro-nations by the British monarchy was abrupt and not popular as these tribal and ethnic nations and micro-nations had relative autonomy in all spheres of their existence and a strong economy too. Our weakness has been the nationalists’ refusal to reverse that trend after attaining independence in 1960, this was in sharp contrast with the nationalists of other nations with a similar historical background, like the United Arab Emirates, Malaysia, India, Singapore, Ghana and other countries that promptly addressed their diversities and turned it to an advantage instead.

Furthermore, given that Nigeria is a multi-tribal, ethnic, religious, and linguistic country with diverse and disparate groups that were autonomous, political, and economically independent prior to colonial rule and is presently expressed in the thirty-six (36) “federating” States and beyond, this article recommends the following:

  1. There should be the devolution of political power and re-structuring of the country. More specifically, re-write the federal constitution and re-list the overstuffed exclusive legislative powers of the federal government to only include national security, currency, the military, international relations, and national elections while all other matters be moved to the concurrent and residual lists so that the federating States and local government councils can pass legislations.
  2. The political leaders in authority should put the principles of federalism into practice because the country has one of the most diverse populations in the world spread along ethnic, religious, tribal and linguistic lines. Additionally, the country should promote citizen participation in major political and socioeconomic issues through referendum, meaning it should be a major decision making factor.
  3. The “federating” States should be given the freedom to establish their own Constitutions and legal codes that will only be subject to the Supreme Court as it is practiced in other federal republics. Doing so will further ensure social justice and freedom to practice any religion they choose without contradictions.
  4. The “federating” States’ ability to control and own natural and man-made resources will allow them to become economically viable and lift the country out of poverty. This will further instill a sense of belonging and participation in overall governance of the people, as is done in the UAE, Qatar, and even Saudi Arabia. Correspondingly, the federal government’s revenue allocation or sharing to the “federating” States should be halted. This scenario is the polar opposite of how Nigeria’s regions supported the central government through taxes using their natural resources—coal, groundnut, and cocoa in the east, north, and west, respectively—between 1960 and 1966.

Reference

  1. Aisha Salaudeen, CNN This $1 made-in-Africa Covid-19 test kit could revolutionize testing on the continent: Updated 0434 GMT (1234 HKT) November 11, 2020
  2. Ajaegbo D.I (1986) First Development Decade, 1960 – 1970: The United Nations And The Economic Development Of Africa: Transafrican Journal of History Vol. 15 (1986), pp. 1-17 (17 pages) Published By: Gideon Were Publications
  3. Akinola, Anthony A. Party Coalitions in Nigeria: History, Trends and Prospects (Safari Books Ltd., 2014).
  4. Bey, Frauke (1996). From Trucial States to United Arab Emirates. Longman. UK. pp. 127–128.  ISBN978-0582277281
  5. Biodun Busari2022: Nigeria has 11 million of out-of-school children, highest in world – World Bank: Vanguard Newspapers June
  6. Chioma, Unini (2020-02-01). “When I Remember Nigeria, I Remember Democracy! By Hameed Ajibola Jimoh Esq”. The Nigeria Lawyer. Retrieved 2020-05-27.
  7. Gabriele Koehler (2015) Seven Decades of ‘Development’, and now What? Journal of International Development J. Int. Dev. 27, 733–751 Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/jid.3108: Munich, Germany.
  8. Godsgift Onyedinefu & Temitayo Ayetoto-Oladehinde (2022) “Nigeria Development Update (June 2020): The Continuing Urgency of Business Unusual.”. Business Day Jan 21, 2022:
  9. Ibrahim Abed; Peter Hellyer (2001). United Arab Emirates, a New Perspective. Trident Ltd. pp. 83–84.  ISBN 978-1-900724-47
  10. 0.Igwenagu Emmanuel (2022): List of Natural Resources in Nigeria. Nigerian Informer
  11. Köhler G. 1996. Development intervention: a parade of paradigms. In Questioning Development. Essays in the Theory, Policies and Practice of Development Interventions, Köhler G, Gore C, Reich UP, Ziesemer T (eds). Metropolis: Marburg; 21–44
  12. Manuel Manrique Gil, “1960–2010: 50 years of ‘African independences'”, On Africa, 4 January 2010.
  13. Obaro, Ikime (1980). Groundwork of Nigerian History.Heinemann educational Books.
  14. Phyllis T. African Freedom: How Africa Responded to Independence. Cambridge University Press, 2018.
  15. Piketty T. 2014. Capital in the Twenty-first Century. Harvard University Press: Boston.
  16. Sara Jerving,  Jenny Lei Ravelo 2022 Prospects for local manufacturing of COVID-19 vaccines in Africa 06 January 2022
  17. Senegal develops COVID-19 test kits for African countries AgencyMay 12, 2020
  18. Singhal, D.P. A History of the Indian People (1983)
  19. Smith A. W. M., Jeppesen C. Britain, France and the Decolonization of Africa: Future Imperfect. UCL Press, 2017.
  20. Sprnger Nature Limited : 2022: The Top Ten Countries for Scientific Research in 2018.
  21. Stewart, Dona J. (2013). The Middle East Today: Political, Geographical and Cultural Perspectives. London and New York: Routledge. p. 155. ISBN 978-0415782432
  22. The OECD. Retrieved 2022-08-10.: “Research and development (R&D) – Gross domestic spending on R&D – OECD Data”
  23. The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as Amended) Exclusive Legislative List, Second Schedule, Part 1, Item 68
  24. Thompson, Edward, and G.T. Garratt. Rise and Fulfilment of British Rule in India (1934) 690 pages; scholarly survey, 1599–1933
  25. Timeline of the United Arab Emirates History from Bronze Age to present dayUnited Arab Emirates profile from the BBC News.
  26. U.S. Energy Information Administration:  “Production of Crude Oil including Lease Condensate 2016” (CVS) downloadRetrieved 27 May 2017.
  27. William Brown, “Debating the Year of Africa”, Review of African Political Economy 
  28. World Bank Summary Trade Statistics United Arab Emirates

Stay informed and ahead of the curve! Follow Africa Update Newspaper on WhatsApp for real-time updates, breaking news, and exclusive content. Don't miss a headline – join now!