Connect with us

Government

Kaduna Airport, Disaster Waiting to Happen, Say Reps

Published

on

Kaduna International Airport
  • Kaduna Airport, Disaster Waiting to Happen, Say Reps

Members of the House of Representatives on Thursday condemned aviation operations at the Kaduna International Airport, thereby making a dramatic U-turn from their earlier position.

They said the airport fell short of the safety standards for both domestic and international flight operations.

The Kaduna airport is serving as a temporary alternative to the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, Abuja, whose runway is undergoing reconstruction.

The closure of the Abuja airport is into its third week and the repairs will last for another three weeks, according to the original work plan of the Federal Government.

Four weeks ago, the same lawmakers had passed a resolution supporting the closure of the airport and giving the nod to the Kaduna airport to serve as an alternative.

But, on Thursday, after flying into Kaduna, the lawmakers changed their stance and began condemning the airport.

“God forbid that an aircraft should drop from the skies due to our own errors. This is what we should not pray to happen. As we speak, we have aircraft flying in the air. It can happen to anybody. Safety standards are not being adhered to at the airport,” the Chairman, House Committee on Loans, Aids and Debt Management, Mr. Adeyinka Ajayi, told his colleagues.

Ajayi had moved a motion on the need for the aviation authorities to review and ensure that the Kaduna International Airport complied with operational and safety requirements as promised prior to the closure of the Abuja airport.

He cited a personal experience of witnessing aviation fuel being discharged from haulage trucks into aircraft at the airport without purifying the fuel.

Ajayi also said ramp marking rules were abused at the airport as they were “violated by unauthorised users, who go right through the ramp marks.”

He added, “Aircraft manoeuvring and parking space is inadequate to accommodate the high number of aircraft now operating in and out of the airport.

“Further disturbed that some aviation fuel marketers have been allegedly transferring Jet A-1 from bulk road tankers directly into bowers right on the tarmac and discharging same into aircraft; this poses a lot of danger to passengers and aircraft safety.”

The Chairman, House Committee on Foreign Relations, Ms. Nnenna Ukeje, stated that the lives of passengers and aircraft were exposed to danger at the Kaduna airport.

She noted that the space provided for passengers and parking for aircraft was inadequate and could easily lead to accidents.

Ukeje recalled how she spent close to two hours after landing at the airport, struggling to get her luggage and exit the environment.

“The Kaduna airport experiment has obviously failed,” she stated.

Another member, Mr. Hassan Saleh, told the House that he had been to the airport and that all he could see was total disappointment.

Saleh noted, “It is a disaster waiting to happen. Security measures at that airport have collapsed. You could see that the security personnel are overwhelmed by the crowd.

“They no longer conduct full security checks because of the huge crowd.”

Both the Majority Leader of the House, Mr. Femi Gbajabiamila; and the Minority Leader, Mr. Leo Ogor, stated that the state of affairs at the airport might have vindicated the decision of most foreign airlines not to use the Kaduna airport.

They argued that considering the fact that Nigerian routes were among the most lucrative in the world, it was instructive that the airlines would opt to lose money rather than fly into Kaduna.

Gbajabiamila said, “If all the foreign airlines but one said they would not use Kaduna, was there something they knew that we did not know?

“If the airlines have chosen to lose money than fly into Kaduna, then there is a problem that we should be concerned about.”

On his part, Ogor urged the House to intervene urgently by calling on the aviation authorities to adhere to international best practices in the industry.

He stated, “When I flew into Kaduna, what I saw there for me is a construction site. It is very dangerous for our safety. Why did we rush to go to Kaduna?

“Nigerian routes are the most lucrative. For the foreign airlines to reject Kaduna means that we should do something.”

However, some lawmakers, mainly from Kaduna State, opposed the motion on the ground that it was still part of the sentiments held against the airport.

A former House Deputy Whip, Mr. Mohammed Garba-Dhatti, claimed that operations at the airport had been smooth in the last three weeks.

“There have been sentiments expressed against this airport right from the beginning. That is what is still happening. Which of the airlines has made complaints that it has any problems at the airport?” Garba-Dhatti asked.

Another member from Kaduna, Mr. Simon Arabo, supported the position of Garba-Dhatti.

“There has been no report of any accident in Kaduna. It is also very unfair for anyone to come here and describe the airport as a construction site,” he said.

Is the CEO/Founder of Investors King Limited. A proven foreign exchange research analyst and a published author on Yahoo Finance, Businessinsider, Nasdaq, Entrepreneur.com, Investorplace, and many more. He has over two decades of experience in global financial markets.

Continue Reading
Comments

Government

Netanyahu Stands Firm as US Halts Bomb Shipment Over Rafah Invasion Warning

Published

on

Netanyahu

Amidst escalating tensions between Israel and the United States, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has adopted a defiant stance following the US decision to halt a shipment of bombs and warned against Israel’s potential invasion of the southern Gaza city of Rafah.

In a bold statement, Netanyahu declared, “If we have to stand alone, we will stand alone,” emphasizing Israel’s resolve to pursue its objectives despite opposition.

The Prime Minister’s comments, delivered via social media and a subsequent interview with American talk show host Dr. Phil, underscore Israel’s determination to address security threats posed by the Gaza Strip, particularly by Hamas militants operating in Rafah.

Netanyahu reiterated the necessity of military action in Rafah to eliminate the remaining Hamas battalions, condemned Hamas’s history of violence and reiterated Israel’s commitment to achieving victory and ensuring the safety of its citizens.

The US administration, led by President Joe Biden, expressed concerns over the potential humanitarian impact of an Israeli invasion of Rafah, prompting the decision to withhold additional offensive weapons shipments to Israel.

Biden’s statement echoed broader international apprehensions about the escalation of violence and civilian casualties in the conflict-stricken region.

However, Netanyahu remained resolute in Israel’s approach, asserting the country’s right to defend itself against security threats. He emphasized Israel’s efforts to minimize civilian casualties and facilitate the evacuation of civilians from Rafah before any military action.

Despite the US’s decision to pause the bomb shipment, Netanyahu affirmed Israel’s commitment to its longstanding alliance with the US. He acknowledged past disagreements between the two nations but expressed optimism about resolving current tensions through dialogue and cooperation.

In response, White House officials reiterated the US’s support for Israel’s security while urging restraint and emphasizing the need to avoid actions that could exacerbate the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

The administration clarified that the decision to halt the bomb shipment was aimed at preventing potential civilian casualties in Rafah.

The confrontation between Israel and the US underscores the complexity of navigating regional conflicts and balancing strategic interests. As tensions persist, both nations face the challenge of reconciling their respective security imperatives with broader humanitarian concerns, seeking to avert further escalation while addressing the root causes of the conflict in the Middle East.

Continue Reading

Government

EFCC Declares Former Kogi Governor, Yahaya Bello, Wanted Over N80.2 Billion Money Laundering Allegations

Published

on

Yahaya Bello

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has escalated its pursuit of justice by declaring former Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello, wanted over alleged money laundering amounting to N80.2 billion.

In a first-of-its-kind action, the EFCC announced Bello’s wanted status in connection with the alleged embezzlement of funds during his tenure as governor.

The commission, armed with a 19-count criminal charge, accused Bello and his cohorts of conspiring to launder the hefty sum, which was purportedly diverted from state coffers for personal gain.

The declaration of Bello as a wanted fugitive came after a series of failed attempts by the EFCC to effect his arrest.

Despite an ex-parte order from Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court, Abuja, mandating the EFCC to apprehend and produce Bello in court for arraignment, the former governor managed to evade capture with the reported assistance of his successor, Governor Usman Ododo.

This latest development shows the challenges faced by law enforcement agencies in holding powerful individuals accountable for their actions.

However, it also demonstrates the unwavering commitment of the EFCC to uphold the rule of law and ensure that justice is served, irrespective of the status or influence of the accused.

In response to the EFCC’s declaration, the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, issued a stern warning to Bello, stating that fleeing from the law would not resolve the allegations against him.

Fagbemi urged Bello to honor the EFCC’s invitation and cooperate with the investigation process, saying it is important to uphold the rule of law and respect the authority of law enforcement agencies.

The EFCC’s pursuit of Bello underscores the agency’s mandate to combat corruption and financial crimes, sending a strong message that individuals implicated in corrupt practices will be held accountable for their actions.

Continue Reading

Government

Concerns Mount Over Security as National Identity Card Issuance Shifts to Banks

Published

on

NIMC enrolment

Amidst the National Identity Management Commission’s (NIMC) recent announcement that the issuance of the proposed new national identity card will be facilitated through applicants’ respective banks, concerns are escalating regarding the security implications of involving financial institutions in the distribution process.

The federal government, in collaboration with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the Nigeria Inter-bank Settlement System (NIBSS), introduced a new identity card with payment functionality, aimed at streamlining access to social and financial services.

However, the decision to utilize banks as distribution channels has sparked apprehension among industry stakeholders.

Mr. Kayode Adegoke, Head of Corporate Communications at NIMC, clarified that applicants would request the card by providing their National Identification Number (NIN) through various channels, including online portals, NIMC offices, or their respective banks.

Adegoke emphasized that the new National ID Card would serve as a single, multipurpose card, encompassing payment functionality, government services, and travel documentation.

Despite NIMC’s assurances, concerns have been raised regarding the necessity and security implications of introducing a new identity card system when an operational one already exists.

Chief Deolu Ogunbanjo, President of the National Association of Telecoms Subscribers, questioned the rationale behind the new General Multipurpose Card (GMPC), citing NIMC’s existing mandate to issue such cards under Act No. 23 of 2007.

Ogunbanjo highlighted the successful implementation of MobileID by NIMC, which has provided identity verification for over 15 million individuals.

He expressed apprehension about integrating the new ID card with existing MobileID systems and raised concerns about data privacy and unauthorized duplication of ID cards.

Moreover, stakeholders are seeking clarification on the responsibilities for card blocking, replacement, and delivery in case of loss or theft, given the involvement of multiple parties, including banks, in the issuance process.

The shift towards utilizing banks for identity card issuance raises fundamental questions about data security, privacy, and the integrity of the identification process.

With financial institutions playing a pivotal role in distributing sensitive government documents, there are valid concerns about potential vulnerabilities and risks associated with this approach.

As the debate surrounding the security implications of the new national identity card continues to intensify, stakeholders are calling for greater transparency, accountability, and collaboration between government agencies and financial institutions to address these concerns effectively.

The paramount importance of safeguarding citizens’ personal information and ensuring the integrity of the identity verification process cannot be overstated, especially in an era of increasing digital interconnectedness and heightened cybersecurity threats.

Continue Reading
Advertisement




Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending