Connect with us

Analysis

How far can Okonjo Iweala go with managing Nigeria domestic debt?

Published

on

By Omoh Gabriel, Business Editor

The Coordinating Minister for the Economy and Minister of Finance, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo Iweala, yesterday as expected unveiled the priority sectors with which to drive the economy. In her maiden pres briefing, in Abuja, she identified job creation, building critical infrastructure especially electric power and roads/ rails, anti corruption, agriculture, manufacturing, fiscal discipline, investment climate reforms, housing, entertainment, as well as, oil & gas as sectors to focus on to drive the economic transformation agenda of the government. All of these are good intentions. But they have to be financed. The nation need huge resources it does have at the moment to implement and bring this policy framework to fruition. Well will the financial resources come from. Debt financing or massive borrowing? Dr Okonjo Iweala is already averse to domestic borrowing.

She said yesterday that Nigeria Awould critically review the borrowing processes with a view to reducing the rate, especially of domestic debt. One of the things we would do is to pay attention to the debt situation. I know that many Nigerians are looking at it with concern, and you know my stand on debts. AWe have about N5.2 trillion in domestic debts and about $5.3 billion in external debts. Bringing total debt figures to $39.7 billion which is about 20 per cent of GDP, Gross Domestic Product@. Nigeria borrows to finance recurrent expenditure. Will the finance minister cut the recurrent allocation to Ministries, Department and Agencies of Government as well as the National Assembly? Where is she going to start the cut from, the Presidency in order to stem the rising borrowing?

The minister noted that the total debt figure as a percentage of GDP was not worrisome, as according to her, debt/GDP ratio could become of concern if it hits the 60 per cent threshold, in line with international norm. She said the external debt was Aextremely low@ and all concessionary but that the domestic debts mainly in Federal Government Bonds and Treasury Bills would be brought down through a systematic approach.

The Minister has chosen a path that if followed carefully will lead to economic recovery. The nation has for long neglected infrastructure and Nigeria trade and commercial policy have lagged behind. A review that will ensure sanctity of contract has become imperative. Sovereign debts in recent months have become a global problem raising serious concern on the health of the international economy. The United States of America had almost a political crisis as a result of the debt ceiling the congress refused to allow. In Europe Greece, Italy, Spain and others are facing economic crisis at home because of huge debt which they can not service leading to the need for bail out.
Many may argue that the state has ability to borrow. But there is always a limit to which the resources available to a country can permit it to continue to borrow. As recent experience has shown, no country can continue to borrow ad infinitum as interest has to be paid on such debt and the principal also must be paid. When a country gets to the level that the internally generated revenue can not service domestic and external debt, the country is broke and has to look for a bailout.

Looking back at Nigeria debt profile and services in the last five years for which data are available, a total of $2.335billion was spent by the federal government to service both internal and external debt in 2009. This amounted to about 50 per cent drop in the amount used for debt service in the previous year 2008 which amount stood at $4.055billion. Before the debt relief of 2006, Nigeria spent $8.0429 billion to service debt in 2006 and $10.1072 billion in 2005. Figures released by the Debt Management showed that in 2005 Nigeria used $8.940 billion to service its external debt paying only $1.1662 billion to residents in Nigeria as domestic debt service. Nigeria=s obligation to foreign creditors in terms of debt service dropped slightly in 2006 to $6.729 billion while what it used to settle due domestic debt and interest on outstanding loans inched up to $1.3137 billion.

With debt relief in 2006 its obligations to foreign creditors in terms of debt service nose dived south ward paying only $1.022 as external debt service and $2.1629 billion as domestic debt service. From the Debt Management official data the external debt obligations of the country further went south with a payment of $464.63 million but the domestic figure shot up to $3.590 billion in 2008. In 2009 for which complete records are available external debt service obligations of the federal and state governments stood at $428 million while domestic debts service stood at $1.907 billion.

A break down of the debt service payment showed that the Paris club was paid $8.070 billion in 2005; non Paris club members received $11.39 million while multilateral institutions were paid $471.67 million thus adding up to $8.553 billion. London club made up mainly of oil warrants were paid $169.86 million, promissory notes $213.55 million and others including non Paris Commercials were serviced with $3.67 million thus giving a total debt service figure of $8.940 billion in 2005.

According to the Debt Management Office figures in 2006 while the sum of $4.51987 billion was paid to the Paris club of creditors as debt service, $25.56 million was paid to non Paris club creditors, $426.62 to multilateral institutions, $1.5845 billion to London club, $170.84 to redeem promissory notes and $1.60 million to non Paris commercials thus giving debt service figure of $6.729 billion in 2006.

In 2007 debt management office data suggest that northing was paid to the Paris club of creditors as Nigeria had successfully exited the clutches of the club but the sum of $27.48 million was used to service debt owed non Paris club of creditors. Multilateral were paid $392.77 million as debt service, London club of creditors members in 2007 were paid from the federal government coffer the sum of $102.59 million as debt service while payment to redeem promissory notes stood at $476.6 million and others were paid $22.6 million thus giving a total debt service obligation to $1.022 billion.

For the fiscal year 2008, Paris club had no single amount paid to it, non Paris club members of sovereign debts were paid $6.63 million, $380.63 million to multilateral, while London club of creditors were paid the sum of $41.72 million, $35.65 million was paid to other creditors thus making up the $464.63 million that was used to service external debt in 2008.

The trend for 2009 was not too different from that of 2008 and 2007 as northing was paid to the Paris club of creditors while the sum of $12.66 million was used to service non Paris members; Multilateral institutions were paid from the nation=s coffer $260.52 million, London club $41.72 million and others $113.13 million bring the total debt service paid out in 2009 to $428.04 million.

Nigeria debt management Office Director General says Nigeria is not any where near the 40 per cent threshold of allowable debt to gross domestic product ratio. But the federal government in 2008 used a total of N238.753 billion to service its domestic debts. This rose to N281.540 billion in 2009.

A breakdown of the debt service showed that N149.2 billion was paid as interest on FGN bond and N193.787 billion for the same in 2009. In 2008 the government paid N916.72 million as call premium on local contractor=s debts. Interest paid on treasury bills in 2008 amounted to N43.555 billion but dropped to N38.788 billion in 2009. Government in 2008 paid interest of N39.22 billion on treasury bonds and N38.711 billion for the same in 2009. Principal payment of Treasury bond was N5.670 billion in 2008 and N10.187 billion in 2009. Interest paid on Federal Government Development stocks in 2008 was N69.88 million as against the N65 million paid in 2009. Principal payment for the development stock in 2008 was N100 million.

As at 2009 the ratio of external debt service to total debt stock was 18.33 per cent as against domestic debt which was 81 per cent of debt service payment. In real terms for every one naira the government spent on debt service 18.33 kobo went out of the country while 81.67 kobo was used to pay local debt that fell due and the interest on such facilities.

The Minister=s concern is that there has been a steady rise in domestic debt stock from 2005 to date, except for 2008 when a marginal decrease was recorded. The domestic debt in 2005 was $11.83 billion, 2006 $13.81 billion, 2007 $18.58 billion, 2008 $17.69 billion and $ 21.87 billion in 2009, $32.5 billion 2010 and N5.4 trillion in 2011. The figures for the external debt stocks, however, showed that $20.48 billion was recorded in 2005, $3.54 billion in 2006, $3.65 billion in 2007, $3.72 billion in 2008, while $3.95 billion was recorded as external debt in 2009. A cursory look at Nigeria debt stock showed that while in 2005 the total debt stock was $32.306 billion, it dropped to $17.349 billion in 2006, $22.229 billion in 2007, $21.398 billion in 2008 and $25.817 billion in 2009.

Dr. Ngozi Okonjo Iweala, while at the World Bank had warned that the rate at which domestic debt is rising will hurt the nation=s economy if not arrested. In her view AThe problem we have is with domestic debt. We have accumulated, I do not want to quote the figure, I believe it is up to $26 billion equivalent in domestic debt. That is debt we are taking within the country. That is what we need to focus on. Any time we talk about debt in Nigeria people start shouting about external debt. The external debt is very low. Nigeria has to pay attention to domestic debt and stop accumulating that.

AThey think because it is domestic it cannot come and harm the economy that is not true, if you accumulate lots of domestic debt, you start clouding out the private sector, when the public sector enters in all the time. I think the level we are now if we can sort of level off there, that is okay. Nigeria should not accumulate any more domestic debt because it is going to lead to the some ills we came out from.

It is not only external debt that leads to choking off economic growth and clouding out the private sector. We have exited the debt trap; we owed $30 billion to the Paris club at that time that has been taken care of okay, so we have exited those who are saying that external debt is the problem that is not the case. Internal debt is the problem@.
But Dr. Ibrahim Nwankwo Director General Debt Management office thinks differently. He asserts that the federal government has vowed to keep the debt stock at 25 per cent of the Gross Domestic product and not more. He argued that countries in the same league with Nigeria can leverage on 40 per cent debt GDP ratio.

Total debt to GDP ratio was 28.6 per cent in 2005. When Nigeria got the famous debt relief from the Paris club of creditors the ratio dropped significantly to 12.39 per cent in 2006. It was 11.67 per cent in 2007, 11.77 peer cent in 2008 and 13.88 per cent in 2009. Nwankwo says it is 16.8 per cent in 2010.

Nwankwo admits that Nigerians must and should be concerned about the profile of public debt and should raise questions and seek clarification at all times. However the total public debt of the federal government, comprising both external and securitised domestic debt, rose by $6.7 billion (about N1.005 trillion) in the last ten months, from $25.82 billion as at end of December, 2009 to $32.5 billion as at end of September 2010.

Dr. Abraham Nwankwo, who stated this at a media chat in Lagos, also disclosed that two book runners have been short listed for appointment next week, for Nigeria’s planned sale of $500 million Eurobond before the end of the year. Nwankwo noted that the domestic debt stock constitutes the bulk of the total public debt at $28 billion, accounting for about 86 percent of the total while the remaining $4.5 billion is for external debt.

Nwankwo also debunked the insinuation that the interest rates on Nigeria’s external borrowing are as high as 20 per cent. He asserted that interest rates on external debts are just about 1.25 per cent, adding that the Debt/GDP ratio for the country at the moment is 16.8 per cent whereas the prevailing ratio among countries of similar economy to Nigeria is 40 per cent.

On the move by the federal government to raise Euro bond from the international capital market, Nwankwo stated: “Two firms have been short listed as book runners, and they will also serve as the issuing houses.
Now that Dr okonjo Iweala is back on the saddle she has given a clear direction government can not continue to borrow from the domestic market on regular basis. Can this be sustained, given the situation in the international oil market? If Libya returns its oil supply to the international market, if the US economy and that of Europe go into recession, the prices of crude will come down, and if care is not taken collapse. What will Okonjo Iweala do then?

Continue Reading

Analysis

As EU plans Russian Gas exit, Ministers to convene in Paris to chart Africa’s export potential

Published

on

In the wake of seismic shifts in the European energy landscape, the Invest in African Energy (IAE) 2026 Forum in Paris will host a Ministerial Dialogue on “Unlocking Africa’s Gas Supply for Global Energy Security.” This strategic session will examine how Africa can turn its untapped gas reserves into a reliable and sustainable source of supply. With Europe seeking to diversify away from Russian gas, the dialogue highlights both the continent’s growing role in global energy markets and the opportunity for African producers to attract long-term investment. Recent developments underscore the urgency of Africa’s role in global energy security. Last month, EU countries agreed to phase out their remaining Russian gas imports, with existing contracts benefiting from a transition period: short-term contracts can continue until June 2026, while long-term contracts will run until January 2028. In parallel, the European Commission is pushing to end Russian LNG imports by January 2027 under a broader sanctions package aimed at limiting Moscow’s energy revenues.

Africa’s role in this rebalancing is already gaining momentum. Algeria recently renewed its gas supply agreement with ČEZ Group, ensuring continued deliveries to the Czech Republic. In Libya, the National Oil Corporation (NOC) has approved new compressors at the Bahr Essalam field to boost output and reinforce flows via the Greenstream pipeline to Italy. These developments complement the Structures A&E offshore project – led by Eni and the NOC – which is expected to bring two platforms online by 2026 and produce up to 750 million cubic feet per day, supporting both domestic and European demand. West Africa is pursuing ambitious export routes as well.

Nigeria, Algeria and Niger have revived the Trans-Saharan Gas Pipeline (TSGP), with engineering firm Penspen commissioned earlier this year to revalidate its feasibility. The proposed $25 billion Nigeria–Morocco pipeline is also advancing as a long-term corridor linking West African gas to European markets. Meanwhile, the Greater Tortue Ahmeyim (GTA) project off Mauritania and Senegal came online earlier this year, with its first phase targeting 2.3 million tons of LNG annually. In June, the project delivered its third cargo to Belgium’s Zeebrugge terminal, marking the first African LNG shipment from GTA to Europe. Together, these milestones underscore a strategic convergence: African producers are accelerating efforts to scale up exports just as Europe intensifies its search for reliable alternatives to Russian gas.

Yet, as the ministerial session will explore, unlocking Africa’s gas supply demands sustained investment, regulatory alignment, environmental management and community engagement. For Europe, diversification of supply is a strategic necessity; for African producers, it is an opportunity to accelerate development, build infrastructure and secure long-term capital. At IAE 2026, these shifts will be examined by the officials and stakeholders driving them. The Ministerial Dialogue brings African energy leaders together with European policymakers, industry players and investors in a setting that supports practical, solution-focused discussion on supply, export strategies and future cooperation. As Europe adapts its gas strategy and African producers progress major projects, the Forum provides a direct platform for ministers to outline priorities and for investors to engage with key decision-makers.

Continue Reading

Analysis

Authorities must respond as digital tools used by organized criminals accelerate financial crime—IMF

Published

on

International Monetary Fund IMF, has said that criminals are outpacing enforcement by adapting ever faster ways to carry out digital fraud. The INF in a Blog post said the Department of Justice in June announced the largest-ever US crypto seizure: $225 million from crypto scams known as pig butchering, in which organized criminals, often across borders, use advanced technology and social engineering such as romance or investment schemes to manipulate victims. This typically involves using AI-generated profiles, encrypted messaging, and obscured blockchain transactions to hide and move stolen funds. It was a big win. Federal agents collaborated across jurisdictions and used blockchain analysis and machine learning to track thousands of wallets used to scam more than 400 victims. Yet it was also a rare victory that underscored how authorities often must play catch-up in a fast-changing digital world. And the scammers are still out there. They pick the best tools for their schemes, from laundering money through crypto and AI-enabled impersonation to producing deepfake content, encrypted apps, and decentralized exchanges. Authorities confronting anonymous, borderless threats are held back by jurisdiction, process, and legacy systems.
Annual illicit crypto activity growth has averaged about 25 percent in recent years and may have surpassed $51 billion last year, according to Chainalysis, a New York–based blockchain analysis firm specializing in helping criminal investigators trace transactions. Bad actors still depend on cash and traditional finance, and money laundering specifically relies on banks, informal money changers, and cash couriers. But the old ways are being reinforced or supercharged by technologies to thwart detection and disruption.
Encrypted messaging apps help cartels coordinate cross-border transactions. Stablecoins and lightly regulated virtual asset platforms can hide bribes and embezzled funds. Cybercriminals use AI-generated identities and bots to deceive banks and evade outdated controls. Tracking proceeds generated by organized crime is nearly impossible for underresourced agencies. AI lowers barriers to entry. Fraudsters with voice-cloning and fake-document generators bypass the verification protocols many banks and regulators still use. Their innovation is growing as compliance systems lag. Governments recognize the threats, but responses are fragmented and uneven—including in regulation of crypto exchanges. And there are delays implementing the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF’s) “travel rule” to better identify those sending and receiving money across borders, which most digital proceeds cross.
Meanwhile, international financial flows are increasingly complicated by instant transfers on decentralized platforms and anonymity-enhancing tools. Most payments still go through multiple intermediaries, often layering cross-border transactions through antiquated correspondent banks that obscure and delay transactions while raising costs. This helps criminals exploit oversight gaps, jurisdictional coordination, and technological capacity to operate across borders, often undetected.
Regulators and fintechs should be partners, and sustained multilateral engagement should foster fast, cheap, transparent, and traceable cross-border payments. There’s a parallel narrative. Criminals exploit innovation for secrecy and speed while companies and governments test coordination to reduce vulnerabilities and modernize cross-border infrastructure. At the same time, technological implications remain underexplored with respect to anti–money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism, or AML/CFT. Singapore’s and Thailand’s linked fast payment systems, for example, enable real-time retail transfers using mobile numbers; Indonesia and Malaysia have connected QR codes for cross-border payments. Such innovations offer efficiency and inclusion yet raise new issues regarding identity verification, transaction monitoring, and regulatory coordination.
In India, the Unified payments interface enables seamless transfers across apps and platforms, highlighting the power of interoperable design. More than 18 billion monthly transactions, many across competing platforms, show how openness and standardization drive scale and inclusion. Digital payments in India grew faster when interoperability improved, especially in fragmented markets where switching was costly, IMF research shows These regional innovations and global initiatives reflect a growing understanding that fighting crime and fostering inclusion are interlinked priorities—especially as criminals speed ahead. The FATF echoed this concern, urging countries to design AML/CFT controls that support inclusion and innovation. Moreover, an FATF June recommendation marks a major advance: Requiring originator and beneficiary information for cross-border wire transfers—including those involving virtual assets—will enhance traceability across the fast-evolving digital financial ecosystem.
Efforts like these are important examples of how technology enables criminal advantage, but technology must also be part of the regulatory response.
Modernizing cross-border payment systems and reducing unintended AML/CFT barriers increasingly means focusing on transparency, interoperability, and risk-based regulation. The IMF’s work on “safe payment corridors” supports this by helping countries build trusted, secure channels for legitimate financial flows without undermining new technology. A pilot with Samoa —where de-risking has disrupted remittances—showed how targeted safeguards and collaboration with regulated providers can preserve access while maintaining financial integrity without disrupting the use of new payment platforms.
Several countries, with IMF guidance, are investing in machine learning to detect anomalies in cross-border financial flows, and others are tightening regulation of virtual asset service providers. Governments are investing in their own capacity to trace crypto transfers, and blockchain analytics firms are often employed to do that. IMF analysis of cross-border flows and the updated FATF rules are mutually reinforcing. If implemented cohesively, they can help digital efficiency coexist with financial integrity. For that to happen, legal frameworks must adapt to enable timely access to digital evidence while preserving due process. Supervisory models need to evolve to oversee both banks and nonbank financial institutions offering cross-border services. Regulators and fintechs should be partners, and sustained multilateral engagement should foster fast, cheap, transparent, and traceable cross-border payments—anchored interoperable standards that also respect privacy.
Governments must keep up. That means investing in regulatory technology, such as AI-powered transaction monitoring and blockchain analysis, and giving agencies tools and expertise to detect complex crypto schemes and synthetic identity fraud. Institutions must keep pace with criminals by hiring and retaining expert data scientists and financial crime specialists. Virtual assets must be brought under AML/CFT regulation, public-private partnerships should codevelop tools to spot emerging risks, and global standards from the FATF and the Financial Stability Board must be backed by national investments in effective AML/CFT frameworks.
Consistent and coordinated implementation is important. Fragmented efforts leave openings for criminals. Their growing technological advantage over governments threatens to undermine financial integrity, destabilize economies, weaken already fragile institutions, and erode public trust in systems meant to ensure safety and fairness. As crime rings adopt and adapt emerging technologies to outpace enforcement, the cost is not only fiscal—it is structural and systemic. Governments can’t wait. The criminals won’t.

Continue Reading

Analysis

Multilateral development banks reaffirm commitment to climate finance, pledge innovative funding for adaptation

Published

on

Multilateral development banks have reaffirmed their commitment to climate finance, pledging to scale up innovative funding to boost climate adaptation and resilience. “Financing climate resilience is not a cost, but an investment.” This was the key message from senior MDB officials at the end of a side event organised by the Climate Investment Funds (CIF) on the opening day of the 30th United Nations Climate Conference (COP30) in Belém, Brazil.

The conference runs from 10 to 21 November. During a panel discussion titled “Accelerating large-scale climate change adaptation,” MDB representatives, including the African Development Bank Group, outlined how their institutions are fulfilling Paris Agreement commitments by mobilising substantial and innovative resources for climate adaptation and mitigation. Ilan Goldfajn, President of the Inter-American Development Bank Group, emphasised that “resilience is more than a concern for the future: it is also essential for development today.” He announced that MDBs are tripling their financing for resilience over the next decade, targeting $42 billion by 2030.

“At the Inter-American Development Bank, we are turning preparedness into protection and resilience into opportunity,” Goldfajn added. Tanja Faller, Director of Technical Evaluation and Monitoring at the Council of Europe Development Bank, stressed that climate change “not only creates new threats, but also amplifies existing inequalities. The most socially vulnerable people are the hardest hit and the last to recover. This is how a climate crisis also becomes a social crisis.” Representatives from the Islamic Development Bank, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the World Bank Group, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development,  the European Investment Bank, the New Development Bank and IDB Invest (the private sector arm of the Inter-American Development Bank Group) also shared concrete examples of successful adaptation investments and strategies for mobilising new resources.

Kevin Kariuki, Vice President of the African Development Bank Group in charge of Power, Energy, Climate and Green Growth, presented the Bank’s leadership in advancing climate adaptation and mitigation. “At the African Development Bank, we understand the priorities of our countries: adaptation and mitigation are at the heart of our climate interventions.” He highlighted the creation of the Climate Action Window, a new financing mechanism under the African Development Fund, the Bank Group’s concessional window for low-income countries.

“The African Development Bank is the only multilateral development bank with a portfolio of adaptation projects ready for investment through the Climate Action Window,” Kariuki noted, adding that Germany, the United Kingdom and Switzerland are among key co-financing partners. Kariuki also showcased the Bank’s YouthADAPT programme, which has invested $5.4 million in 41 youth-led enterprises across 20 African countries, generating more than 10,000 jobs — 61 percent of which are led by women, and mobilising an additional $7 million in private and donor funding.

Representatives from Zambia, Mozambique and Jamaica also shared local perspectives on the financing needs of communities most exposed to climate risk. The panel followed the official opening of COP30, marked by a passionate appeal from Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva for greater climate investment to prevent a “tragedy for humanity.”

“Without the Paris Agreement, we would see a 4–5°C increase in global temperatures,” Lula warned. “Our call to action is based on three pillars: honouring commitments; accelerating public action with a roadmap enabling humanity to move away from fossil fuels and deforestation; and placing humanity at the heart of the climate action programme: thousands of people are living in poverty and deprivation as a result of climate change. The climate emergency is a crisis of inequality,” he continued.

“We must build a future that is not doomed to tragedy. We must ensure that we live in a world where we can still dream.” Outgoing COP President Mukhtar Babayevn, Azerbaijan’s Minister of Ecology, urged developed nations to fulfil their promises made at the Baku Conference, including commitments to mobilise $300 billion in climate finance. He called for stronger political will and multilateral cooperation, before handing over the COP presidency to Brazilian diplomat André Corrêa do Lago, who now leads the negotiations.

Continue Reading

Trending