“Commercial banks in Nigeria closed 2.021 million bank accounts in the first quarter of 2024, Q1’24, to clean their books of questionable accounts and comply with regulatory orders on the linkage of bank accounts to the National Identity Number, NIN.

“This is contained in a report by the Nigerian Interbank Settlement System, NIBSS, which also indicated that the number of inactive bank accounts grew month-on-month, MoM, by four million or 2.0 per cent to 19.7 million in March 2024 from 19.3 million in the previous month, February. A bank account is classified inactive when it records zero transactions including deposits, withdrawals, transfers or point-of-sale transactions for six months” – Vanguard wrote

On the closure due to lack of NIN and BVN, what happens to the balances in these accounts? Are banks expected to convert them to profits? No one has explained to me what is going on here? On closure due to inactivity after 6 months, that is unfortunate. So, you close it, do you contact the person or the next of kin, or does that become part of the bank’s treasury?

I have an account in a bank with a balance of N200k but no NIN/BVN is connected to it. Since it is possibly closed now, what happens to that N200k?

Nigeria needs to update the Bank Account Closure regulation if there is anything like that. There needs to be a clause which indicates that if the bank cannot track the owner or next of kin, the funds must be returned to the Nigerian treasury. My personal email has not changed since I opened this account; the bank has not emailed.

In the United States, they used to allow gift cards to expire anyhow. But one day, the US Congress added a small clause, stipulating that once the card expires, send the value to the US Treasury. Magically, only a few cards expire these days.

Good People, that someone has been unable to add NIN or BVN to an bank account does not mean the bank does not have an obligation to use available contacts to reach him or her to return the money even as the account is being closed. Sure, before you close, what efforts have you made to track the owner?

We must not allow these regulations to become an avenue to disenfranchise vulnerable citizens. State Attorney Generals can mobilize and write banks, asking for assets belonging to their citizens, since the Federal Government is not interested in this matter. At least, that “State of Origin” will serve a useful purpose in the bank database. “Bank, if you cannot find this person, the money belongs to the state”… how does it sound?

In the wake of the demolition of segments of Landmark Beach on Victoria Island to make way for the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway project, Landmark Beach management has taken proactive measures to address the situation and accommodate its valued patrons.

The organization issued a statement acknowledging the unfortunate demolition and outlining measures to mitigate any inconvenience experienced by customers, particularly those with remaining funds in their app wallets designated for beach-related activities.

“We understand that some of you may still have funds remaining in your app wallets designated for beach-related activities. The App has been disabled for now to prevent bookings, however, we want to assure you that your satisfaction and convenience remain our top priorities, despite this unforeseen circumstance,” the statement reads.

Landmark Beach management presented two options for individuals with existing subscriptions or funds in their app wallets:

1. Alternative Utilization: Customers are offered the flexibility to repurpose their remaining funds for various other offerings within the vibrant ecosystem of Landmark Beach. Whether attending boulevard events, indulging in a ‘staycation’ at the hotel, or exploring other exciting amenities, funds can be seamlessly transferred to enhance experiences in different ways.

2. Refund Process: Alternatively, customers who prefer a refund of their remaining balance can avail themselves of this option. By providing account details, the dedicated team will promptly initiate the refund procedure to ensure a smooth and efficient transaction, ensuring transparency and customer satisfaction.

“We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience caused by the unforeseen circumstances surrounding the beach demolition. Rest assured, we remain fully committed to accommodating your needs and ensuring your continued satisfaction within our dynamic ecosystem,” the statement concludes.

This development follows the demolition of segments of Landmark’s Africa property for the controversial Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway project. In a statement shared on social media platforms on Tuesday, the company expressed dissatisfaction with the Federal Government’s decision while extending gratitude for public support.

The demolition took place on Monday, affecting a section of Landmark Beach on Victoria Island, Lagos, to accommodate the construction of the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway, deemed Nigeria’s most significant public infrastructure undertaking to date. Landmark said six years‘ worth of investment was destroyed within a mere six hours. 

Despite concerns regarding potential job losses and adverse effects on livelihoods, the demolition proceeded as scheduled. 

The construction of the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway has ignited intense debates surrounding its cost, feasibility, and the ramifications of property and business demolitions along its Right-of-Way. Criticisms from Nigerians, led by prominent figures such as the presidential candidate of the Labour Party, Peter Obi, and former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar have continued to trail the project.

Earlier, Atiku had described the over N15 trillion project as ‘wasteful and a highway to fraud’, questioning the cost without accompanying rail lines.

On Tuesday, in a statement titled; ‘Lagos-Calabar Highway: FG adamant on a Misplaced Priority’, Obi lamented the adverse effects of the project on people’s means of livelihood. He said the sight of ‘this insensitive demolition is heart-wrenching.’

Obi, who had earlier advised the federal government to abort the project and instead focus on existing roads that need rehabilitation, said the demolition will result in the loss of scarce jobs.

‘‘Thousands of jobs are about to be lost, with investments above $200 million at risk. Over 100,000 jobs in the leisure and hospitality sector face imminent extinction, along with 80 small businesses and their 4000 mostly youth employees.

‘‘At a time of rampant unemployment, the government is embarking on a job-losing project,’’ Obi said, adding that the timing of this and similar projects, when the nation is in its worst economic state in history, with poverty and hunger spreading, is questionable.

The former Anambra State governor questioned the rationale behind the project, at a time when the economy is struggling, and the nation’s health institutions are ill-equipped. 

‘‘Why embark on an expensive new highway project when there are close to 50 abandoned federal highway projects across the country?’’ he asked.

President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda delivered a formidable critique of global leaders’ approach to African development during his keynote address at the World Bank’s International Development Association summit for African Heads of state in Nairobi, Kenya. 

His remarks echoed a resounding call for a reevaluation of long-standing paradigms and a shift towards a more holistic and transformative strategy for Africa’s progress.

“The crisis which is in Africa today is because of philosophical, ideological, and strategic economic mistakes which we have been talking about since the 1960s. It is not an accident when you see the crisis in many African countries, the collapse of States. We predicted this in the 1960s – philosophical, ideological, and strategic mistakes. I don’t have time to amplify each one but I was very happy to hear the president of the World Bank talking about prosperity instead of profiteering,’’ Museveni stated, drawing attention to the historical underpinnings of Africa’s contemporary challenges.

Central to Museveni’s critique was the prevailing focus on aid from the World Bank and other Western institutions, which he contended was often driven by motives of profiteering rather than genuine development. 

“Aid has been for profiteering, this has been the problem. Now, the World Bank people and other groups have been talking about sustainable development. Even in your documents, I have seen those words there, sustainable development”, he said.

In a bold departure from conventional wisdom, Museveni urged a recalibration of the development narrative, asserting, “Africa does not need what you could call sustainable development. Africa needs social and economic transformation.” This call for a shift in emphasis from sustainability to transformative change resonated with his vision for a more dynamic and inclusive development agenda.

“I would ask you to change those words in your documents… The main reason why there’s no growth is because the growth factors are not funded, they are not even understood. What are the growth factors, we now talk of private sector growth. Yes, but for the private sector to grow what does it need? It needs a low cost of production”, he said.

Identifying critical areas for intervention, Museveni emphasized the imperative of low-cost funding for pivotal sectors such as transportation, power, and agriculture. He underscored the pivotal role of infrastructure, particularly railways, in driving down production costs and stimulating economic growth, citing successful examples of railway projects in Africa funded by China.

“Wonderful people, IMF, where will low-cost operations come from if you don’t have a railway? If you don’t fund the railway, how would you get low transport costs? I have been here for the last 64 years, I have been watching as a student leader, as a freedom fighter, and now as the leader of a country. How many railways have been constructed or funded in Africa? The few that have been was by China, the Tanzanian railway to Zambia, and recently, another one here in Kenya. Tanzania on its own is building a railway line. So if you’re talking of developing Africa, fund the railway. If you fund the railway, you will have a low cost of transport and you can produce cheap products which can be bought all over the world.

“The second cost pusher is electricity. If you don’t fund electricity and you talk about sustainable development, what are you then talking about? We must have low-cost electricity not exceeding 5 cents per kilowatts, per hour. That is what I insist on in Uganda. I am tired of all these stories, I have put my foot down saying I don’t want to hear those stories. Uganda is a developing country and it will continue to develop because I don’t entertain nonsense anymore,” he said.

Furthermore, Museveni lamented the bureaucratic hurdles hindering access to funding for vital projects such as the establishment of the Uganda Development Bank and irrigation initiatives. He criticized the prioritization of frivolous expenditures over critical infrastructure projects, decrying the disconnect between funding priorities and developmental imperatives.

In a poignant rebuke, Museveni highlighted the incongruity of certain funding allocations, deriding the notion of “capacity building” seminars held by the World Bank, the IMF, and other Western organizations in luxurious hotels, as a misplaced investment of resources. 

However, his statement has not been well-received by Africans, given that it attempts to exonerate the leadership failure in the continent. Museveni has ruled Uganda for 40 years, with little development to show for it. Like in many other African countries, leadership in Uganda is mired in corruption and incompetence – significantly stymieing development.

Critics say that African leaders have developed a fondness for blaming their failure on the West while doing little or nothing to address their nations’ challenges. In most cases, they note, the challenges were created by leadership gaps. 

Against this backdrop, critics say Museveni’s address at the summit encapsulated a potent call to action for African leaders. While they acknowledge that his critique of existing development models and advocacy for social and economic transformation resonated with a growing sentiment for change within the continent’s development discourse, critics believe that genuine progress and prosperity in the continent depend on the leaders.