Before choosing a name for your business, company, NGO or foundations and building a brand around the name, there’s every need for you to carry out some due diligence search and make sure that the name you chose or you want to name your organization has not already been taken or already in use by another fellow.

This was the mistake Mark Zuckerberg and his team made while changing the name of his company ‘Facebook’ to ‘Meta’ and this mistake is costing him about $20 million as there’s a start up company that already named their company ‘Meta. So the company is demanding $20million from Facebook to let them use the name Meta.

Background of the story

On the 28th of October, 2021 Facebook announced the name of its company from Facebook which it was previously known as Meta. The name ‘Meta’ refers to the metaverse that its founder, Mark Zuckerberg, wants to build, ‘a network with avatars, accessed by augmented reality devices, that mixes the physical and virtual worlds’.

An American company called Meta PCs, which are into the production of computers and related devices, claimed that they already trademarked the name ‘Meta’  as they applied for the name to be registered in August.

They are agreeing to sell the name to Facebook  only if Facebook agrees to pay the sum of twenty million dollars for the name.

This is why you need a lawyer to help you carry out the due diligence search, Business and company registration, incorporation, brand registration and trademark registration, patent rights acquisition etc.

On 27^th October 2021, the Nigeria’s Federal Executive Council (FEC) in its not unusual weekly meeting, approved the sum of N621.23 billion for reconstruction of 21 roads covering a total distance of 1,804.6 kilometres across the six geo-political zones in Nigeria.

It’s noteworthy that the proposed projects are to be undertaken by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) through the deployment of its own tax liabilities.

The development was graciously disclosed by the Minister of Works and Housing, Mr. Babatunde Fashola while briefing the State House correspondents at the end of the FEC meeting held in Abuja.

According to the Minister, who stated that there would be no more financing problems regarding the execution of road projects across the federation, nine among the 21 roads are in North Central, particularly Niger state. The reason is that Niger State is a major storage centre for the NNPC. He said “NNPC is doing this to facilitate the total distribution of its products across the country.”

He further gave an assurance that in the South-West, the Lagos-Badagry Expressway, the Agabara Junction, Ibadan to Ilorin (Oyo-Ogbomoso section) would be fixed.

Three other roads are reportedly located in the North-East, two in the North-West, and two others in the South-East. The Odukpani-Itu-Ikot/Ekpene road, the minister said, had now been fully covered to resolve the problem of financing.

He stated that in the South-East and South-South, there are Aba–Ikot Ekpene in Abia and Akwa Ibom States. Then the Umuahia-Ikwuamo-Ikot Ekpene road and so on. Similarly, in the North-West, it is Gada Zaima-Zuru-Gamji road, and also Zaria-Funtau-Gusau-Sokoto road. In the North-East, it is Cham, Bali Serti and Gombe-Biu roads.

It could be recalled that in July this year, the FEC approved the award of a contract to Dangote Industries for the construction of five roads totalling 274.9 kilometres at the cost of N309.9 billion, reportedly advanced by the company as tax credit.

In any given clime across the global community, capital projects are invariably what well-meaning citizens clamour for whenever a call to usher in good governance is raised in the public sphere.

This is so, because, it is only by establishment of such projects as good road network, creation of portable water, sound health and education systems, that the governed could feel the impact of the government.

This is the sole reason the ratio between the capital and recurrent expenditures of the annual budget of a particular nation for a certain fiscal year often tends to favour the former to the detriment of the latter. It suffices to enthuse that it has become unarguable that capital expenditures usually benefit virtually the entire occupants of the concerned clime compared to recurrent expenditures that’s targeted to favour only a few.

In view of these facts, successive governments all over the world that truly mean well for the governed have overtime made frantic and genuine efforts to initiate capital projects that would stand the test of time. Those who actualize this quest invariably succeed in writing their names in bold and gold.

In this part of the world, particularly Nigeria, issues pertaining to governance seem to be given a different attention and interpretation by the relevant authorities. We have hitherto observed a prevalent situation whereby a certain prospective government would rigorously embark on election campaigns with the mantra to treat capital projects as priority, but would abruptly sound differently the moment it assumed duty.

This uncalled nonchalant attitude of governments at all levels has continued unabated under our nose as if the people are a set of imbeciles. Sometimes when asked for clarification by the affected citizens, the enquiry would be regarded as unimportant by the failing government.

Lest we forget; on Thursday, 10^th January 2019, the Federal Government (FG) led by President Muhammadu Buhari approved the sum of N100 billion for the Federal Ministry of Works, out of the proceeds of the Sovereign Sukuk fund, to finance critical road infrastructure across the country. The fund was for the construction and rehabilitation of 28 key economic road networks as captured in the 2018 budget.

The FG disclosed that the road projects were located in the six geo-political zones of the country with each zone having a total allocation of N16.67bn. This signifies that the capital projects were evenly distributed among the entire regions.

Speaking at the presentation of symbolic cheque to the concerned ministry, the Minister of Finance, Mrs. Zainab Ahmed noted that “the funds will be released to the Federal Ministry of Power, Works and Housing based on the framework agreed with the Trustees in order to ensure transparency and accountability in the use of proceeds.”

She added that “the Sukuk funding option is part of the initiatives of the government to diversify government funding sources, while also deepening the Nigerian capital market, mobilizing more savings and promoting financial inclusion.” The roads to be funded “will ease commuting, spur economic activities across the country and further close our infrastructural gap.”

In his response, the Minister of Power, Works and Housing (now Ministry of Works and Housing), Mr. Babatunde Fashola stated thus, “roads are coming, those are assets that would enable business that would enable transport, movement of goods and services and assets that will last 25, 30 to 40 years. This is a good investment to make. So, for those who asked why are we borrowing, we are borrowing to build at today’s prices assets that will last us for another 30 years.”

He further said “it will be more expensive to build but more importantly, where is the money going. As soon as I collect this cheque, I am going to give it to the contractors. But even, they can’t keep it; they have to give it to their suppliers because they need aggregates, they need materials and labourers but they first need suppliers.”

The Minister went further to assure that the Buhari-led administration “Is committed to follow the part of greatness, build the foundation for tomorrow by investing in infrastructure. It means that for example, we have to raise money and I am very happy to learn that over 1,876 investors are already doing business because Buhari government decides to build. That is how to build an economy.”

Two years down the line, the ‘28 key roads’ as mentioned in the said contract are still reportedly undergoing rehabilitation in spite of all the assurances tendered therein. One may then begin to wonder the kind of country called Nigeria we found ourselves.

In view of this omen, which has unabated been a recurring decimal in the Nigerian polity, the governed may have lost their trust in any government in power, or its allies. This is the reason the NNPC must take into cognizance that initiating a certain project is quite different from completing it, hence must consider the key steps needed to be followed towards ensuring the proposed projects are duly executed as planned.

The contracts are required to be awarded to corporate bodies of proven background and antecedents. Thus, no compromise should be reached for whatever reason. The contracts ought to be implemented in line with the country’s Public Procurement Act, thus a levelling playing ground is expected to be provided among the prospective construction firms.

In this regard, the memo for the proposed contracts should be made public to enable any interested firm apply for the job and due process ought to be followed afterwards in awarding the project to the deserving entities. Also, the contracts are meant to be awarded to only indigenous firms towards boosting our local content. So, the Executive Order 5 implemented by President Buhari must be adhered to.

When eventually awarded, the benefitting residents or communities should be properly made to comprehend the profile of the firms handling the respective projects with a view to making them able to alert/contact the relevant agencies whenever they observe any prank or foul play. It suffices to say that the beneficiaries must be a stakeholder in the overall implementation of the projects.

As regards adequate monitoring, viable mobile teams comprising reliable personnel ought to be constituted by the concerned authority. This would enable a regular supervision as the work progresses. In the same vein, the contractors must be mandated to complete the projects within a given time frame, else, should be made to face sanctions.

We are meant to acknowledge that initiating a capital project by the government is invariably the wish of the governed, but ensuring their completion remains their greatest desire.

On Wednesday, the senate approved $16,230,077,718 and €1,020,000,000 loans requests made by Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari, broadening the country’s debt profile that has riled up criticism recently.

The upper legislative chamber also approved grant components of $125 million.

Nigeria’s debt profile has accelerated following the decline in oil revenue, the country’s main source of GDP (gross domestic products). Buhari’s administration has relied largely on loans to fund budgets as the government’s purse depletes.

The recent loan request is captured in the 2018-2020 borrowing plan that the government said is geared toward infrastructural and economic development.

The chairman of the senate committee on local and foreign debts, Clifford Ordia, said on Wednesday, that the ongoing projects contained in the loan request, are covered in the 2018-2020 borrowing plan and will result in infrastructural development as well as poverty alleviation.

“The projects will stimulate a rebirth of commercial and engineering activities and the consequent tax revenues payable to Government as a result of these productive activities will increase.

“It will be recalled that the senate at plenary in July 2021 approved financing for projects as recommended by the Committee above whilst the Committee continued further legislative action and consideration of the outstanding request.

“Subsequently, on the 15th of September 2021, the President of the Senate of the federal republic of Nigeria read another Communication from the President and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, Containing an addendum to the 2018-2020 External Borrowing (Rolling) Plan in the sum of $4,054,476,863, €710,000,000 and Grant Component of $125,000,000 for various projects and same was also referred to the committee for further legislative action.

“The committee notes that a good number of the projects in respect of which financing is being requested under the 2018-2020 external borrowing (rolling) plan are mostly ongoing projects and programmes in respect of which external borrowed funds have been spent in the past, including loans and grants.

“The committee found as a fact that out of a sum of over $22.8billion approved by the national assembly under the 2016-2018 external borrowing rolling plan, only $2.8billion, that is 10% has been disbursed to Nigeria.

“The committee observes that these projects, some of which require additional financing, will have a great multiplier effect on stimulating economic growth through infrastructure development, job creation, poverty alleviation, health care and improve our security architecture,” he said.

The external and domestic borrowing requests have been approved by the senate in addendum to the 2018-2020 borrowing plan. In July, the national assembly approved the sums of $8.3 billion and €490 million loans as initial requests from the plan.

The lenders have been the World Bank, African Development Bank, the French Development Agency (AFD), Islamic Development Bank, China-Exim Bank among others.

While Buhari and the Senate have justified the loans, saying they would stimulate the economic growth and create jobs, experts are concerned that the rising debt profile may mortgage the future of young Nigerians.

As of June 30, Nigeria’s public debt stock was at N35.465, trillion, (about $90 billion), according to data from Debt Management Office. This means, each Nigerian owes more than N157,907 or [using official rate] around $400, which is considered unsustainable in a country where over 40% of the people live on less than $2 daily.

The budget implementation report presented by Minister of Finance, Budget & National Planning, Mrs Zainab Ahmed in July, noted that the federal government spent 98% (N1.8 trillion) of the total revenue generated in the first five months of 2021 on debt servicing.

Against this backdrop, concerns are heightening that things could deteriorate. Critics say the economic and infrastructural development powered by the loans are not measuring up to the negative impact it is yielding.