Sunday, July 9, 2017

SV: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Re: From the Archives: That £20 pounds policy

My dear Nigerian brothers and sisters,

All along the world has been told that millions of Igbo who had bank accounts in Nigeria had balances in their account books reduced to £20 regardless of the higher amounts in the accounts. Against that claim I have submitted that most Igbo, like most Nigerians, never had bank accounts in 1967 when the war broke out and that many Nigerians of that time had their savings under their pillows. The case of Chief J.J. Enweozor against the Central Bank of Nigeria supports my contention. It is said that in response to the directives of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Chief Enweozor on the 7th of April 1970, paid the sum of £26, 659 in old Nigerian currency notes to the bank. It has not been established that the directives given to Chief Enweozor contained a promise to exchange the old Nigerian currency for legal one in circulation. However, he challenged non-issue of new currency to him in exchange for his old ones up to the Supreme Court where it was established that "The exchange of the old Nigeria currency for new one in the East Central State of Nigeria was never authorized by law." We must remember that when the Midwest was invaded, August 9 - September 20, 1967, the vault of Central Bank of Nigeria in Benin was plundered by the Biafrans and the source of Chief Enwezor's Nigerian old pounds could not have been unconnected. 

The questions I want answered are : (i) Did Decree No. 11 of 1968 state that people trapped in the East central State as a result of the war, could exchange their old Nigerian pounds after the civil war? (ii) If not, why were Biafrans demanding that their old Nigerian pounds be exchanged for new ones two years after the expiration of the time allowed by law for the exchange of the old Nigerian currency for the new one? (iii) Which law did Chief Enweozor follow in keeping his old Nigerian currencies in Biafra when Biafran authority, under which he was governed, announced its own currency (Biafran Pound) on 28 January 1968 and ordered all Biafrans to exchange their Nigerian Pounds for Biafran Pounds immediately? and (iv) Is it not mandatory in law that the Central Bank of Nigeria or any law enforcing agency in Nigeria to seize or confiscate old Nigerian Pounds anywhere they might be found within the country?


I am of the opinion that the old Nigerian Pounds had no value after the exchange exercise for the new one had been completed in 1968. If Chief Enweozor and other Biafrans had any grievances at all against the loss of their Nigerian held currency while in Biafra, they ought to have sued Ojukwu and others for unlawfully preventing them from being in Nigeria to exchange their money within specified time allowed for the exercise.  

S. Kadiri

 


 




Från: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com <usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com> för Olayinka Agbetuyi <yagbetuyi@hotmail.com>
Skickat: den 9 juli 2017 09:05
Till: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com; africanworldforum@googlegroups.com; naijaintellects; OmoOdua; nigerianid@yahoogroups.com; OlaKassimMD@aol.com; NaijaPolitics e-Group; USAAfrica Dialogue
Kopia: Olayinka Agbetuyi
Ämne: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Re: From the Archives: That £20 pounds policy
 
If there was a Resettlement Fund put in place why were some Biafranists unfavourably comparing Nigeria to Americas Marshall Plan as if Nigeria never did anything similar?

 Again why do ex-Biafrans want peace time Nigeria to pay for actions of a war time Nigerian dictator who did not get to power through Nigeria's electoral will.

When will Nigeria ask the East for reparations for destruction done to other Nigerians property and Nigerian lives lost by Biafras unilateral invasion of Nigerias territory outside Biafras enclave?

Finally how justifiable is it to call the Biafran enclave a Republic and and on what grounds can such a fictional republic be resusucirated?  That is how many elections did Ojukwu win as leader in the enclave, or was he not just a military dictator like Gowon?



Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.


-------- Original message --------
From: Mobolaji Aluko <alukome@gmail.com>
Date: 09/07/2017 06:47 (GMT+00:00)
To: africanworldforum@googlegroups.com, naijaintellects <naijaintellects@googlegroups.com>, OmoOdua <OmoOdua@yahoogroups.com>, "nigerianid@yahoogroups.com" <nigerianID@yahoogroups.com>, OlaKassimMD@aol.com, NaijaPolitics e-Group <NaijaPolitics@yahoogroups.com>, USAAfrica Dialogue <USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com>
Subject: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Re: From the Archives: That £20 pounds policy

Boxbe This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (alukome@gmail.com) Add cleanup rule | More info

Ola:

Please, please read the account CLEARLY:  these were not deposits made and left in banks on the Nigerian side BEFORE the war.  Those had no problems whatsoever, provided you could prove account ownership. The monies in contention  were deposits of Old Nigerian currency that were asked to be deposited by returnees AFTER the war ended. 

Here is the sequence of events:

(1)  May 30:  Biafra secedes, but Nigerian notes are still legal tender in Biafra.  Some Igbo leave some money in Nigerian banks (hoping to return some day) ,  cash some of their money and take it to Biafra, putting some of that exported miney in banks in Biafra, while keeping some as cash.   In fact,  Nigerian money trapped in Biafra is gets used to buy arms all over the world. 

(2)  Towards the end of 1967, Nigeria announces that Nigeria will change its currency,  and gives a teo-week period for all who wish to change their money.   Those within Biafra now have two choices:  sneak back to Nigeria,  or stay back in Biafra.  Most choose to remain. 

(3)  Biafra announces its own currency immediately - the Biafran pound,  with a one-to-one exchange with the Nigerian pound.   Those monies in banks in Biafra (which were already deposited as old Nigerian pounds) are now in Biafran pounds.   Some Biafrans exchange the old Nigerian pounds notes for Biafran pounds notes,  while some still keep their old Nigerian pounds.... Just in case. 

(4)  When the War ended,  one of the first tasks was to find out what to do with those who had old Nigerian notes and Biafran notes. Would old notes be exchanged one-to-one, and at what exchange rate should new Nigerian pound to Biafran notes?   So they ask returning Biafrans to deposit their old Nigerian notes and Biafran notes to the CBN to find out how much money we were really talking about .   The amount is conceivably so much that there was no way the country could survive... So no value is assigned to old Nigerian notes or Biafran notes,  and a 20 pound ex-gratia payment is determined which,  if given to every depositor,  would be about 60 percent of that year's budget. 

Do you get it now? 

So before you say that a policy is "grossly unfair", you have to propose an alternative, noting that there was a full country to run following an unplanned war.

You must also understand that there was a multi million pounds Resettlement Fund  made available to returning individuals which had nothing to do with deposits.   Most returning Biafran returnees,  with or without deposits,  took advantage of that - but it is more funky to talk about the 20 pounds. 

And there you have it. 


Bolaji Aluko


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ola Kassim <olakassimmd@aol.com>
Date: Saturday, July 8, 2017
Subject: [africanworldforum] From the Archives: That £20 pounds policy
To: Mobolaji Aluko <alukome@gmail.com>
Cc: "africanworldforum@googlegroups.com" <africanworldforum@googlegroups.com>, Politics Naija <naijapolitics@yahoogroups.com>, yahoogroups <NIgerianWorldForum@yahoogroups.com>, Agbor Ike <ikeagbor@yahoo.com>, "rotfash@yahoo.com" <rotfash@yahoo.com>, Ishola Williams <isholawilliams@gmail.com>, TalkNaija <TalkNigeria@yahoogroups.com>, Ra'ayi Riga <Raayiriga@yahoogroups.com>, "vincentotuonye@msn.com" <vincentotuonye@msn.com>, Omo Oodua <OmoOdua@yahoogroups.com>, Okonkwonetworks <okonkwonetworks@googlegroups.com>, Truth As My Weapon <igboworldforum@yahoogroups.com>, "Yahoo! Inc." <YanArewa@yahoogroups.com>, Naijaobserver <NaijaObserver@yahoogroups.com>, Mgbajala Eziokwu <NigerianID@yahoogroups.com>, "ebohon@dmu.ac.uk" <ebohon@dmu.ac.uk>, Michael Adeniyi <mgadeniyi@aol.com>, Abba <abba2007@gmail.com>, "NaijaEvent@googlegroups.com" <naijaevent@googlegroups.com>, "nebukadineze@aol.com" <Nebukadineze@aol.com>, USAAfrica Dialogue <USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com>


Bolaji:

I think we have to give credit to this eminent lawyer for delving more deeply into the issue of £20.00 compensation in exchange for deposits made to banks in the once legitimate old Nigerian currency- no matter how much the client had in his or her bank account before the war.

I have always considered this policy to be grossly unfair.

I have no such consideration for any one who was trying to exchange Biafran currency for the Nigerian notes considering the former was never considered legal tender in Nigeria.

One interesting omission probably deliberate in this account is any mention of Chief Obafemi Awolowo's culpability on this issue.

The Supreme Court settled this thorny issue decades ago on the basis that those who had the full discretion on the matter declined to exercise such discretion.

Whether or not this refusal to exercise their discretionary power was dictated by the prevailing political cum military power of the day remains to be settled.


 Bye,

Ola

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 8, 2017, at 14:56, Mobolaji Aluko <alukome@gmail.com> wrote:


Joe Attueyi:

Thanks mightily for this posting by the eminent - if somewhat quite emotional - lawyer.

I did not know that this issue of non-exchange of old Nigerian and Biafran notes for new Nigerian notes was a Supreme-Court settled matter.   So what have we been arguing about?   If the most eminent lawyer of that era - Chief. FRA Williams, a Yoruba man for that matter - could not successfully argue that case, no one could.  If the then CBN governor, Dr. Clement Isong - an Ibibio of former Biafra territory - could not use his discretion, I wonder who would.

Clearly, the 20 pounds was not considered an exchange at all, but an ex-gratia payment for any returning ex-depositor.  I think that the Nigerian government was in a real bind as to what to do with all the money that would have to be paid out, so soon after an unplanned and debilitating war effort.

Once again, thanks for the posting!  Ozoemenna!   Never again!   Ise!  Amen!


Bolaji Aluko

On Saturday, July 8, 2017, 'Joe Attueyi' via AfricanWorldForum <africanworldforum@googlegroups.com> wrote:

NIGERIA AND HER MORAL BURDEN:
THE CASE OF ENWEZOR V. CBN REVISITED.

"I write with reference to your letter (Ref – FRAW/AO/CB/11/71 of 8th October, 1971 to inform you that your client's entitlement as a depositor was £20 ex gratia award authorized by the Federal Government"

Signed by E. N. ISONG
Governor of Central Bank of Nigeria

As applied by the Supreme Court of Nigeria in the celebrated case of CHIEF J. J. ENWEOZOR V. CENTRAL BANK OF NIGERIA (1976)1 ALL NLR PAGE 252 AT PAGE 256.

This letter, dated the 18th day of October, 1971, signed by E. N. ISONG, the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, addressed to Chief F. R. A. Williams, an eminent Nigerian Lawyer, is a reply to Chief F. R. A. Williams enquiry from the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria why his Client, Chief J. J. Enweozor, described as a Nigeria citizen ordinarily resident in Onitsha, who in response to the CBN's directive "on the 7th of April, 1970, paid to your bank the sum of £26,659 (Twenty Six Thousand, Six Hundred and Fifty Nine pounds) as per receipt no ESOO5055 dated 7/4/70 in old Nigerian currency notes" is yet to be paid his money in the new currency.

The shameful story is a stressed fact in Nigerian History. Yet it always compels repetition. The fact is that after Chief J. J. Enweozor and his Biafran folks, having been mercilessly massacred in all parts of Nigeria, particularly, the North, a savage and barbaric genocide unleashed on them, 'shooting of everything that moves', applied as a doctrine against them, starvation employed to annihilate the unborn and the children, Gowon, the Nigeria head of State, the architect of their woes, was so kind and so zealous in reconciling with, and rehabilitating them that he gratuitously offered them from the milk of his Gowon – Nigerian heart, a gratuitous £20 (Twenty) pounds in exchange of any amount whatsoever they had ever earned within the Nigeria context.

Of course, neither Chief Enweozor nor his coun

sel, Chief FRA Williams of blessed memory was impressed by this Nigerian-brand of benevolence. Consequently they sought remedy from the court, the supposed last hope for the common man.

The fact of this case is mutual between the parties. It behooves emphasis even at the risk of repetition. As told by Mr. Sule Okponubi, the sole witness of the Central Bank of Nigeria:

"The Federal Government requested the people from the East central State to exchange their currencies, both Biafran and Nigerian. We sent out teams to accept the deposits. This was in 1969/70. After all the deposits had been accepted, the Government directed that the Defendant should make an ex gratia payment of £20 each to all of them. As a result of this direction, the Defendant was not able to exchange the deposited amounts, whether Biafran or Nigerian".

The case was dismissed by Savage J. of the Lagos High Court who, after considering the Decrees and subsidiary legislation governing exchange or conversion of old currency note to new ones, held that  "the action was misconceived because the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria had not exercised certain discretionary powers vested in him under the law".

Up to the Nigeria Supreme Court went Chief Enweozor in desperate quest for justice. On hearing the case, the Supreme Court was supremely confounded by the obnoxious provisions of Decree No 11 of 1968, a draconian legislation that surpass the worst in the annals of jurisprudence.

Consequently, the Nigeria Supreme Court in sync with its Nigerian gusto found that the law applicable in this case, the Currency Conversion (South-Eastern and other states) Decree No. 11 of 1968, at all times material to this case is not applicable to the East Central States of Nigeria – The Biafran enclave. The Supreme Court placed reliance on section2 of the Decree which provides inter alia that the Decrees:-

"shall apply to all States of the Federation, so however that nothing in this Decree shall extend its application to …….East Central State……..until a direction of the Head of the Federal Military Government given in such a manner as he may think fit, and in the discretion of the Governor of Central Bank of Nigeria published in the Gazette at any time any such discretion is given, or at any time thereafter.

In the characteristic Nigeria swagger, the Supreme Court held that:

"there was no evidence that a discretion had either been given under section 2 or that it had been given and published in the gazette. We must therefore conclude that it has not been established by evidence that Decree No. 11 of 1968 was applicable to the …….East Central State".

Not yet done in curtailing the effrontery of Chief Enweozor in taking Nigeria to court, the Supreme Court, although it acknowledged that it was not necessary for the determination of the appeal before it, waved a sword of Damocles from the Decree in an obvious threat against any similar effrontery by the ilk of Chief Enweozor. Accordingly, the Supreme Court reminded all of the "mischief" aimed at by the stringent provisions of the Decree. The Supreme Court emphasized that the exchange of the Nigerian old currency for new ones can take place "only where so authorized by law" as provided by section 1B of the Decree which created offences in relation to the exchange of currency. Of much significance is sub-section D which made it an offence for any person.

"by any means to move or cause to be moved from a part of Nigeria where the time or extended time for conversion of former currency under this Decree has elapsed, into any part of Nigeria where former currency has not been converted, or as the case may be, action to convert has not commenced or if commenced, has not been completed under this Decree".

The exchange of the old Nigeria currency for new one in the East Central State of Nigeria, as the Supreme Court found, was never "authorized by law".

Accordingly Chief Enweozor and his counsel Chief FRA Williams of the blessed memory came to the rude awakening that in Nigeria, courts are anything but the last hope for the oppressed.

The articulated sadism of this Decree must not be lost on any one. This provision made it impossible for the Biafrans, even in the so called liberated areas, to exchange their old Nigeria currency with the new one or in any way touch or transact with it. Accordingly, another alternative means to genocide was legitimized by the Nigerian law. Those that survive the bullet must perish by starvation. It should also not be forgotten that Gowon at the time of this Decree had put in place an "administrator" for the East Central State of Nigeria. Yet, no positive function of the alleged East Central State Administrator or government was allowed. The only utility of the administrator is in shielding horrendous acts of genocide determinedly carried out by the Nigerian Army.

As St Augustine of Hippo bewailed, "justice being denied, then, what are Kingdoms but great robberies"! In fairness to the Supreme Court Judges, they relied on the prevailing law to reach their judgment.  But what cannot be denied is that this judgment firmly acknowledged, if not established, as unchallengeable, the right to the Nigerian State to rob people of their hard earned monies. Show me the laws of a state and I will show you their ethos. With such laws in our code up till today, is it any difficult to see where the Nigerians penchant for greed and corruption comes from? If the state can so unscrupulously grab, rob and extort, then, why can't  the citizens do the same? Is it not pitiable that the State can pretend to be armoured against same graft? Is it any wonder, that the cardinal goal of office holders in Nigeria  is to loot, extort and rob the citizens in any conceivable way? Chief Enwezor had endured the robbery of his £26,659 (Twenty Six Thousand, Six Hundred and Fifty Nine pounds) by the Nigerian State. My own parents equally endured the same robbery of their over £7,000 (Seven Thousand Pounds) by the Nigerian State. And so do other Biafrans.

But it never ended there! In the present day Nigeria   any time I (like all others) use my ATM, the Nigeria State pilfers N50.00 from me. But everybody has embraced State theft as proper ethos that no one complains! Even, oil, which God intends to be a blessing to the nation has been converted to a veritable tool for extorting from the citizens.

The saddest story about Nigeria is that both the State and her citizens have lost the ability to be ashamed of anything at all! And accordingly, it is the law when electoral officers forgo the counting or computations of votes and fill up their Return Forms to declare abysmal losers as ultimate winners; It is the law when Nigerian Custom men lay siege on Easterners journeying home for Christmas celebrations and rob them of their cars on the ground that cars registered in Lagos, and had been in use for years in Lagos, are uncustomed goods. And, of course, in the Nigerian brand of benevolence, they will grant bail to the victim,  his wife and Children, after extorting all the money they have. It is the law! After all, the man should be grateful for not spending eternity in the custom cell or as awaiting trial detainee  in any of the many dungeons in Nigeria termed prisons.

Yes, It is the law when the Nigerian Army declares Operation Python Dance, and make a career of molesting and extorting civilians. It is the law when Nigerian soldiers devoid of any sense of honour mow down defenceless civilians - men women and Children- because they are what GOD created them to be.
It is the law when the state through the EFCC tag any person as corrupt and embark on immediate despoliation of the individual; It is the law when Lai Mohammed in a characteristic Nigerian solemnity announce to the Nation that their patriotic President in his sick bed in far away London hospital is only taking made in Nigeria medications. Nigerian patriotism is indeed spectacular!

It is the law, when Judges who give judgments that offend the whims of the power holders are raided in the dead of the Night, spirited out and subjected to mock trial. It is the law!

The list is endless.

In fact, In Nigeria anything can be the law, once the government has the power to enforce it. The unscrupulousness to enforce it is always assured.

The compelling truth is that Nigeria is a dire jungle. The sooner everybody that bears the burden of its citizenship is liberated, the better.

BY:  JOSEPH EKENE NDIBUAGU (ESQ.)
ATTORNEY-AT-LAW
PRINCIPAL PARTNER
EKENE NDIBUAGU & CO.
EMAIL:- ekenendibuagu@yahoo.com
08023093570;  07062374067.

Sent from my iPhone

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AfricanWorldForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to africanworldforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to africanworldforum@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/africanworldforum.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/africanworldforum/97ADC4EB-8808-44BE-98CE-5FD4F94E886C%40yahoo.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

No comments:

Post a Comment

 
Vida de bombeiro Recipes Informatica Humor Jokes Mensagens Curiosity Saude Video Games Car Blog Animals Diario das Mensagens Eletronica Rei Jesus News Noticias da TV Artesanato Esportes Noticias Atuais Games Pets Career Religion Recreation Business Education Autos Academics Style Television Programming Motosport Humor News The Games Home Downs World News Internet Car Design Entertaimment Celebrities 1001 Games Doctor Pets Net Downs World Enter Jesus Variedade Mensagensr Android Rub Letras Dialogue cosmetics Genexus Car net Só Humor Curiosity Gifs Medical Female American Health Madeira Designer PPS Divertidas Estate Travel Estate Writing Computer Matilde Ocultos Matilde futebolcomnoticias girassol lettheworldturn topdigitalnet Bem amado enjohnny produceideas foodasticos cronicasdoimaginario downloadsdegraca compactandoletras newcuriosidades blogdoarmario arrozinhoii sonasol halfbakedtaters make-it-plain amatha