DD
MM
YYYY

PAGES

DD
MM
YYYY

spot_img

PAGES

Home Blog Page 5058

Crude Oil Theft In Nigeria Is An Organized Crime

0

There is no discussing the fact that crude oil theft in Nigeria has been going on for a long time, without any strict measures put in place by the government to curb the dastardly act carried out by some unscrupulous people.

A report released last month reveals that between January 2021 and February 2022, Nigeria lost $3.2bn to crude oil theft which is crippling the economy. The CEO of Chevron Nigeria Richard Kennedy, recently disclosed that crude oil theft in Nigeria is an organized crime and should be differentiated completely from host community issues.

He made this remark when he was asked to comment on the host community provision of the petroleum industry act. He further emphasized the need not to confuse the agitations of host communities of oil-producing areas with the spate of crude oil theft being carried out in the area.

In his words, “From my experience, the issue with crude oil theft should not be confused with host community issues. It is much bigger than that. It is completely different from host community issues. Quite frankly it is an organized crime. The volume of crude oil that is being stolen is well beyond comprehension”.

It is disheartening to note that the high level of crude oil theft in Nigeria, is costing the nation millions of dollars daily, which is lost in revenue that could have been used to help solve the nation’s fiscal challenges.

It has been disclosed that the nation loses about 100,000 barrels per day at $100 per barrel, which is equivalent to $10 million per day that is being stolen. Nigeria has been experiencing this menace for a long time with millions of dollars lost daily.

There have been several agitations made by individuals, companies and communities to the government on the need to secure the pipelines, to secure it from constant vandalism, yet to no avail. This crude oil theft has made the country unable to meet its OPEC production quota of 1.8 million barrels per day, yet the government seems unperturbed by these declining impacts.

Earlier I published an article where the Nigeria security and civil service defense corps, NSCDC, disclosed that some high-profile individuals are behind the crude oil theft and pipeline vandalism in Nigeria.

It is appalling to discover that some high-profile individuals continue to sabotage the growth of the Nation’s economy with constant crude oil theft. It is painful that one major national resource (crude oil) that the nation capitalizes on, is being vandalized with reckless abandon.

Nigeria as an oil-producing state ought to be enjoying the dividends of crude oil due to the rise in price in the international market, due to the Russian-Ukraine war, yet the oil theft in the country has sabotaged that.

Previous and past administrations seem to lack the political will to put this incessant oil theft to a halt. The recent disclosure by the CEO of Chevron stating that oil theft in Nigeria is an organized crime further validates the fact that some high-profile individuals are behind it.

Crude oil theft is not something that is done by a single person, but rather by some group of people. No ordinary person can muster the courage to carry out such an act, rather it is done by high-profile individuals who have the backing of some political leaders and security personnel.

As vandals continue to destroy pipelines, the nation’s account continues to bleed. To combat crude oil theft in Nigeria, all hands must be on deck. The government should collaborate with security agencies, host companies, and oil companies operating in the area with the deployment of the right technologies to curtail the act.

Some stakeholders have also suggested that there should be the installation of LACT units, installation of check meters with flow rate and pressure measures capabilities, and competent entities for pipeline surveillance.

There is also the need for these high profile individuals behind this menace of oil theft and pipe vandalism, to be publicly punished by the government, to serve as a deterrent to all those involved. If the government lacks the will to do that, then it is unfortunate that the illegal act of oil theft will not be put to a halt.

For Techpreneurs: The Nigerian Data Protection Regulations 2019 – What You Should Know

0

One of the reasons for the astronomic rise of the Tech Industry in Nigeria and worldwide is the monetization/mining of information otherwise known as Data, it also means that Tech companies, especially those in the Social Media subsector, wield some of the greatest forms of influence in modern history, having access to almost everything private about us in a way unfathomable by governments of the world. 

It is as a result of this that the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA), the overall agency in charge of the Regulatory Framework governing the Nigerian Tech Sector, in pursuance to the NITDA Act, created and issued the Nigerian Data Protection Regulations 2019(hereinafter referred to as ‘The Regulations’) which must be adhered to by every digital service provider dealing directly or indirectly with the receipt and processing of end-user data. 

These regulations are a loose conceptual adoption of the European General Data Regulations (GDPR) and will form the focus of this article which aims to provide you with : 

– A clear understanding of what the Regulations considers Data and its core focus, personal data. 

– The compulsory compliance demands of the Regulations on every Digital Platform service provider dealing with end-user data. 

– The penalties to which defaulters of its provisions can and/or will be liable under the Regulations. 

What isDataunder the Regulations? 

The regulations define Data as “Characters, symbols & binary which operations are performed by a computer which may be stored by transmission in the form of electronic signals stored in any format or device”. 

It goes further to define personal data as “Information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person (referred to under the regulations as a “Data Subject”) being one who can be identified directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location,data, an online identifier to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that person and can be anything from a name, address, a photograph, email address, bank details, Social Media posts, Medical information and other unique identifier such as but not limited to MAC address, IP address, IMEI number, IMSI number, SIM information, Personal Identification information and others”. 

Who are the regulations applicable to? 

The regulations apply to natural persons and legal persons(companies and organizations) in Nigeria and Nigerian citizens or Diaspora residents with Nigerian Ancestry. 

What exactly are the demands of the regulations regarding data? 

The Regulations have provisions for the following requirements:- 

Data Safety/Security/Protection 

– Anyone involved in the activity of processing data or Data control is required by the regulations to have in place set up and continuously improved sufficient security measures including Anti-hacking safety measures, Firewall set-up, Data encryption, reinforced storage with zero access probability to unauthorized persons, as well as continuous competence and capacity upskill training for all staff involved in Data receipt, processing, storage &  protection. 

3rd Party Processor engagement by a Primary Data Processor. 

– Any outsourcing by a primary Data receiver to a 3rd party involved in Data processing MUST be governed by a written contract between the 3rd party and the primary Data receiving party (known as the Data controller) in line with the provisions of the regulations. 

End-user/Data Subject Consent 

– The consent of the end-user (data subject) MUST be obtained AFTER informing him/her of the purpose/reason for the data collection. 

– The Regulations place a legal duty on the data controller to ensure that there’s no presence of a misrepresentation/fraud or force used in acquiring the consent of a data subject. 

– Consent shall not be given, asked for or accepted where there’s a possibility of digital or online promotion of hate through speech and hate action encouragement, human or child rights violations, crimes or anti-user community conduct. 

– Data subjects must be made aware of their right/legal option to withdraw their consent even though the legality of data receipt, processing and storage of their data based on previously acquired consent will not be questioned. 

– 3rd party transfer of the data subject’s data by the primary Data controller must happen only after legally obtaining the data subject’s consent. 

This is a must especially regarding Fintech companies that deal with a lot of end-user personal data and which leverage a lot of 3rd party partnerships with banks and other financial institutions e.g Digital Lending, Digital International Remittance transfers, Digital Savings Platforms, E-commerce platforms, etc. 

Privacy Policy Requirements 

– Data collection & processing methods and privacy policies must be disclosed via display in an easily discernible form to the data subject. 

– The Privacy Policy must include the following pieces of information : 

a). A clear definition of what makes up the consent of the Data subject. 

b). What constitutes receivable Personal Information of the Data subject. 

c). A stated purpose of the end-user’s personal data collection. 

d). Information on the technologies used in the collection and storage of personal info, cookie policies, etc. 

e). Notification to the data subject for the purpose of obtaining prior consent in the event of 3rd party access to his personal information. 

f). A set of agreed Dispute Resolution/Remedy mechanisms in the event of the Data subject’s privacy. 

Liability for Data Privacy Breach by the 3rd Party. 

This was not explicitly mentioned in the regulations but by virtue of the principle of vicarious liability the primary Data controller will be liable in the event of a breach of the Data Subject’s Data Privacy arising out of the deliberate actions or negligence of the 3rd party Data Processor. 

Are there any rights guaranteed by the regulations? 

Yes, there are. The regulations grants to the end-user/data subject the following rights:- 

– The right to delete personal data. 

– The right to object to personal data processing for the purpose of marketing or commercial promotions. 

– The right of a data subject to withdraw consent to the use of his personal data. 

– The right of an end-user to be notified in the event of a privacy breach. 

– The right to limit personal data processing and the right to transfer personal data to another controller (the latter right is of a two-way application, subject to the data subject’s consent in the case of the data controller’s right to transfer personal data to a 3rd party). 

– The right of rectification regarding personal information. 

What do the regulations say about the Transfer of Personal Information (Data Subject information) to a foreign country or International organization? 

This is under the Regulatory governance of NITDA  which as a government agency is statutorily empowered to give directions in collaboration with the supervisory role of the Attorney-General of The Federation (AGF) regarding the determination of which countries/organizations have adequate Regulatory Frameworks set up regarding the issue of End-user/Data Subject Privacy Protection. 

Where there are no directives in the manner described above, the primary data controller can go ahead with the transfer of the Data subject’s transfer where: 

a).The consent of the transfer was obtained legally from the Data subject after clearly informing him of the likely risks of breach involved therein. 

b). The performance of a contractual obligation between the data subject and primary data controller depends on the transfer . 

c). The necessary execution of pre-contractual measures upon the end-user’s demand. 

d). There’s overriding Public Interest. 

e). There’s the need for proving a legal claim. 

f). The subject is physically or legally incapable of giving consent on health grounds or legal incapability .e.g. Unlawful detention. 

What are the further compliance requirements of the regulations on Private & Public organizations? 

Under the Regulations, all organizations involved in Data collection, processing and storage are expected to :- 

– Make public their Data protection policies; 

– Appoint a Data Protection Compliance Officer( or DCPO) for the purpose of carrying out compliance with the Regulations as well as carrying out data protection instructions of the Data controller. A DCPO can be an outsourced firm or individual; 

– Carry out continuous upskill capacity building for its Data receipt, protection and processing staff; 

– Carry out a detailed audit of its Data Protection practices stating important information that includes: 

a). Collected Personal information of their employees and its Data subjects. 

b). The purposes of its Data collections. 

c). 3rd party access to data subject personal information where applicable. 

d). The presence of consent where an data subject’s personal information is collected, processed, stored, and transferred along with the disclosed method of obtaining consent. 

  1. e) . The Privacy and Data Protection policies of an organization.

f). The measures of an organization used in the monitoring and reporting of Privacy & Data Protection Policy violation. 

g). The organization’s means of assessing the impact of current and emerging technologies on its Data Privacy/Security policies. 

– An audit soft copy containing the relevant information must be remitted to NITDA where a Data controller processes the data of more than 1,000 data subjects in a period of 6 months. 

– Send every year on a date not later than the 15th of March, a Data protection audit to NITDA where a Data controller processes the personal data of more than 2,000 data subjects within a 12-month period. 

Who or what exactly is eligible to be a DPCO? 

A DPCO Data Protection Compliance Organization/Officer can be an outsourced IT service provider, outsourced Lawyer/Law firm, or Audit firm. A DPCO is licenced by NITDA to provide the following services – 

– Data Regulations /Privacy Policy/3rd Party Access contract documentation. 

– Data Protection Compliance & Advisory services. 

– Data Compliance audit preparation. 

– Data Protection & Privacy Due Diligence Investigation. 

– Data Privacy Breach Remediation and Dispute Resolution. 

What are the penalties for being in default of the regulations and do i have the right to seek further redress? 

A Data Controller dealing with or having more than 10, 000 data subjects will in the event of a default be liable to a fine of whichever is greater in value between 2% of its preceding year annual gross revenue or a fine of Ten Million Naira. 

In the case of a Data controller with less than 10,000 data subjects, a default of the regulations will earn a fine of whichever is greater in value between 1% of its preceding year annual gross revenue or a fine of Two million Naira. 

These fines are payable to NITDA and yes, as a data subject you have the right to seek further redress via damages for Privacy and other consequent breaches against a Data controller in Civil law as well as a Criminal law by virtue of the Cybercrime Act. 

As a Primary Data Controller, you have a right to seek legal redress against a 3rd party outsourced by your company to process data transferred by you in the event of losses arising breaches of your data subject’s privacy due to a deliberate act or negligence of the 3rd party. 

Conclusion :- The Regulations are just an aspect of the Regulatory Framework governing ICT and the Tech Sector in Nigeria, a Regulatory Framework that is constantly evolving due to the dynamic nature of Tech from communications to E-commerce to Fintech to Social Interactions. It is thus wise to ensure your up-to-date compliance with this Regulatory Framework constantly to avoid possible unplanned losses, especially of the type constantly experienced by ICT and Fintech subsectors such as Mobile Communications and Digital Moneylending by having close by diligent Data Protection Compliance professionals going forward.

Twitter and Elon Musk Are Ready for A Long Legal Showdown

0

Twitter and Elon Musk are gearing up for a long legal battle following the decision of the Tesla CEO to back out his $44 billion acquisition deal of the social media company.

Bloomberg reports, citing sources, that Twitter has hired popular legal firm, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz LLP to sue Elon Musk over his move to terminate the deal. Musk has also hired Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, another high-profile law firm that successfully won a defamation trial for the billionaire back in 2019.

The law firm representing Twitter specializes in merger litigation and is said to have connections to the Delaware court system, where the case will be tried. Twitter plans to file a lawsuit against the Tesla CEO early this week, the sources told Bloomberg.

The acquisition deal, which started in April, has dragged along many hurdles, including initial attempt by Twitter board to stop it from going through.

On Friday, Musk notified Twitter of his intention to back out of the deal on the excuse that platform thrives on fake accounts. He had earlier requested that the social media platform provide proof to back up its claim that bot or spam accounts make up less than 5% of users.

Though Twitter provided Musk with “firehose”, a repository of raw data on hundreds of millions of daily tweets, Musk was unsatisfied with the result and announced that he is not proceeding with the deal.

Twitter’s board reiterated, in a statement on Friday, its commitment to see the deal through and vowed that it will meet Musk in court.

“The Twitter Board is committed to closing the transaction on the price and terms agreed upon with Mr. Musk and plans to pursue legal action to enforce the merger agreement,” tweeted Twitter’s chairman, Bret Taylor. “We are confident we will prevail in the Delaware Court of Chancery.

The legal tussle will be centered on the $1 billion breakup fee that Musk is required to pay under the deal, unless he finds genuine reasons to halt the acquisition.

In a letter to Twitter’s Chief Legal Officer Vijaya Gadde, Musk’s lawyers argue that his decision not to look at the numbers before signing the merger agreement did not waive his right to inspect this information. They said in addition that Musk’s analysis so far shows a volume of spam accounts that is “wildly higher than 5%”, which contradicts Twitter’s claim in its financial reports.

There are speculations that Musk is retreating from the deal to save Tesla from the dips that have characterized the electric vehicle company since the deal was announced in April. And it may be a strategy for him to get a lower deal. Musk offered $54.20 per share in cash for the acquisition.

Legal experts said the two parties will be heading into a long legal showdown that may cost Musk billions of dollars.

The Innovation Orchestra at Tekedia Mini-MBA

0

Symphonic Innovation is innovation that is not domain-specific, but is anchored on a unified and harmonious approach in the deployment of technology components, to accelerate productivity gains and cushion competitiveness. With Symphonic Innovation, you do not deploy and launch for blockchain, only to be tripped by AI or big data; you launch with a mindset that these technologies are like extended musical compositions which must be carefully organized to make the orchestra an unforgettable experience.

Register for the next edition of Tekedia Mini-MBA and understand innovation, growth and business operations. We’re a temple for the mastery of entrepreneurial capitalism. Register here 

Got that 2018 Call “Wrong” on APC Ticket – Apologies

1

Good People,  I want to apologize for a blown prediction now that Senator Tinubu has picked a VP partner for the presidency. On Oct 1, 2018, I wrote here that APC will nominate Tinubu in 2022. In that piece, I also noted that Buhari will win in 2019. And in the same piece, I also wrote that Ebonyi State governor, Engr David Umahi, will win his re-election in 2019 with PDP and after some months will decamp to APC. Those things have since happened.

But I got something wrong: I said that Tinubu will pick David Umahi as his running mate. With BAT picking Senator Kashim Shettima of Borno today, the implication is that my call there was wrong. Sure – there is no reason to explain what happened. The simple thing is that I got it wrong. We will keep improving.

You can read that old piece here 

APC’s Bola Tinubu Picks Kashim Shettima of Borno

Comment on LinkedIn, FB Feed

Comment 1: If you said that as a prediction, you got it terribly wrong. Predicting that Buhari and Umahi would win did not require empirical analysis, or any serious analysis at all, by hook or by crook, it would naturally happen given the level of our political maturity and fledgling democracy. If you had added “through free, fair and credible election” as a plausible caveat, your prediction would probably not happen.

Now on the issue of your prediction on Tinubu picking Dave Umahi as his running mate, that’s the most immature political prediction I have ever heard. It shows a belief not consistent with the most basic elements of our social and political dynamics. On what basis would anyone predict that such would happen in the present day Nigeria? On the basis of efficient political strategy for victory or the new found, albeit illusionary, southern solidarity? It would not make any political sense at all.

 My Response: You did all NOT to acknowledge the political sagacity that a PDP Vice Chair (Umahi) will win in his party and decamp to another party more than a year before it happened.  That BAT would win the APC primary more than 3.5 years before it happened. You avoided those to focus on my easy “predictions” or one I got wrong. There is no need to explain a bad call. But 3 things which I expected to have happened did not come through. One in PDP and two in APC. Had those happened, the “CAN’T” would have become CAN.