Nigeria's Buhari Signals Four More Years Like The Last

Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari waves at the crowd during a celebration ceremony marking Democracy Day in Abuja, Nigeria June 12, 2019. REUTERS/Afolabi Sotunde

BY PAUL CARSTEN

ABUJA (REUTERS) - Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari promised on Wednesday to repeat in his second term successes from his first four years including an improved economy and new infrastructure.

His administration has hailed Nigeria’s exit from recession, successes against Boko Haram militants including the return of the kidnapped Chibok schoolgirls, road and railways construction, and loans for farmers, as highlights of the first term.

“The principal interest of this administration is to consolidate on the achievements of the last four years,” the 76-year-old former military leader said in his first major public speech since his re-inauguration last month.

But critics have often found fault with Buhari’s first term, when he was absent for long periods for health reasons, and economic improvement was largely down to improved oil prices.

Still, he won re-election in February with 56% of the vote, though turnout was just 36%.

“In the last four years, we have made solid progress,” Buhari told an audience of government, military and traditional figures and foreign dignitaries during a celebration of the return to democracy in 1999.

“We can lift 100 million Nigerians out of poverty in 10 years,” he promised.

Buhari said Nigeria’s economy would grow 2.7% this year - but that was below the central bank’s 3% forecast in March.

Economists have lamented Nigeria’s sluggish growth since it climbed out of recession in 2017, with the population getting poorer as birth rates outpace economic expansion.

Buhari also signalled policy stability when he re-appointed as central bank governor Godwin Emefiele, a controversial figure for his first-term foreign exchange machinations to shore up the naira currency.

Meanwhile, violence has spread and is thriving across wide swathes of Nigeria’s northwest, northeast and central states, often in places that were less troubled before Buhari’s rule.

The only corruption being tackled, anti-graft activists and opposition politicians say, is that of Buhari’s political enemies, while allegations against his allies are rarely followed through to prosecution.

Buhari said he would continue to build roads, fix the electricity grid and improve other infrastructure.

He also reiterated his support for agriculture.

“When economic inequality rises, insecurity rises. But when we actively reduce inequality through investments in social and hard infrastructure, insecurity reduces,” he said.

“We are not daunted by the enormity of the task ahead.”

Reporting by Paul Carsten; Editing by Catherine Evans and Andrew Cawthorne

20 Years Of Democracy: Has Nigeria Changed For The Better?

Nigeria's economy has grown six-fold since the return of democracy in 1999 [Dan Kitwood/Getty]

BY HAMZA MOHAMED
Two decades ago, in a colourful ceremony held in the capital, Abuja, Nigeria's military handed over power to an elected civilian leader.

Generals had ruled the oil-rich West African country for the previous 15 years.

The ceremony was attended by more than 40 heads of state and representatives from foreign countries.

The mood was upbeat and the new leader promised prosperity to the thousands of his countrymen who were in the stadium. Millions of others watched the ceremony on television. Others listened to newly elected president Olusegun Obasanjo's speech on radio.

But after 20 years of democracy and four presidents, where is Nigeria today?

Economic malaise

The country's economy has seen a boom since the return of civilian rule. Nigeria's GDP has grown six-fold since 1999, according to World Bank data.

In 1999, despite its vast oil wealth, Nigeria's GDP was a mere $59bn. That figure skyrocketed to $375bn by the end of 2017.

"The economy is doing much better now because there is a greater level of trust in our economic institutions. There is also more foreign investments now compared to the military era," Aliyu Audu, an Abuja-based economist, told Al Jazeera.

Nigeria, the continent's most populous country, is still heavily reliant on oil. Petroleum represents more than 80 percent of total export revenue, according to the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC).

When the global oil price crashed in 2016, Nigeria's economy was not spared. The country went into a recession, its first in 25 years.

The economy, the biggest on the continent ahead of South Africa, has not fully recovered. Unemployment stands at 23 percent and inflation at 11 percent, according to official figures.

"Nigeria’s economy needs to diversify. We need to tap into the agricultural sector where the country can put millions of the unemployed to work. Investment in infrastructure will also put many young people to work and reduce double-digit inflation," Audu said.

According to the National Bureau of Statistics figures, 43 percent of the country’s 190 million population is either unemployed or underemployed.

Despite the recent economic boom, extreme poverty is common. Some 87 million Nigerians live in dire poverty, according to Washington-based Brookings Institution.

Nigeria overtook India, a country of 1.3 billion people, last year as the country that is home to the most extremely impoverished people in the world, it said.
Vast corruption

Nigeria still remains one of the most corrupt nations on the planet. Transparency International ranked the country 144 out 180 in its 2018 corruption perceptions index.

If corruption is not dealt with immediately it could cost Nigeria up to 37 percent of its GDP by 2030, according to PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), a global auditing firm.

This cost equates to nearly $2,000 per Nigerian resident by 2030, PwC said.

President Muhammadu Buhari launched an anti-corruption drive after taking office in May 2015.

"Corruption is still a huge problem, but it is not like what it was before. That is because the people have the choice to get rid of a leader if he is corrupt. That was not possible under the military generals. There are also whistleblowers now," Audu noted.
Security issues

Since 2009, northeastern Nigeria has been hit by security challenges. Boko Haram, a group that wants to establish an Islamic state following a strict interpretation of Islamic law, has waged a deadly insurgency.

The violence has killed thousands of people and forced more than two million from their homes.

The United Nations and human rights activists accused both Boko Haram and security forces fighting it of putting civilians, including many children, in harm's way.

The violence has spread to neighbouring Niger, Chad and Cameroon, prompting a regional military coalition against the armed group.

In recent weeks, the coalition forces have pounded Boko Haram hideouts in the Lake Chad area with air strikes as well as launching ground assaults.

Boko Haram fighters kidnapped at least 276 girls from a secondary school in Chibok town. Five years after the attack, more than 112 girls are still missing.

A total of 107 girls have been found or released as part of a deal between the Nigerian government and the armed group.

Boko Haram allegedly operates its largest camp in the vast Sambisa forest in Nigeria's northeast.

The forest stretches for about 60,000 square kilometres in the southern part of the northeastern state of Borno, which has borne the brunt of Boko Haram's violence.

"More needs to be done to protect and preserve basic human rights in parts of the northeast. People live in fear from Boko Haram," Eze Onyekpere, a human rights activist, told Al Jazeera.

"Apart from the areas facing Boko Haram insurgency, rights of citizens have improved significantly since the return of civilian rule. Arbitrary arrests and torture are not common. We also have a constitution that safeguards the rights of all citizens," Onyekpere added.
Press freedom

Under the military, press freedom was severely restricted. Whistleblowers faced detention and possibly torture in custody.

Twenty years later, Nigeria has a vibrant media with the country also hosting bureaus for some of the world’s major media groups.

Reporters Without Borders ranks Nigeria 120 out of 180 in its 2019 press freedom index.

"Nigeria has come a long way, but it still has a long way to go. We could have been far ahead of where are currently," Onyekpere said.

SOURCE: AL JAZEERA

Nigeria Celebrates Its Democracy But Millions Remain In Poverty

Nigeria's population continues to outpace its economic growth [Nyancho NwaNri/Reuters]

BY DAWN KISSI

AL JAZEERA

On Monday, Nigeria's President Muhammadu Buhari officially made June 12 a public holiday. The day celebrates 20 years of democracy in a country that was under military rule for decades after winning its independence from Britain in 1960. However, as the West African nation celebrates, worries about its fragile economy persist.

While Nigeria's economy has recovered since falling into a recession in 2016, that growth has been slower than expected.

"Unfortunately, growth in the country has remained relatively stagnant following their recovery out of recession in 2017," Christopher Dielmann, director of macroeconomic and sovereign research with Tellimer, told Al Jazeera. Estimates by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank suggests that Nigeria's growth in 2019 and 2020 will register at 2.1 percent and 2.2 percent, respectively.

Today, Nigeria's oil-driven economy is less susceptible to any outside shocks such as falling oil prices, but disruption in domestic oil output remains a risk for Africa's largest economy.
Oil production risks

According to OPEC, Nigeria's oil and gas sector accounts for 65 percent of its government income.

"Oil production [in Nigeria] is on a long-term downwards trajectory," said Ed Hobey-Hamsher, a senior Africa analyst with global risk consultancy Verisk Maplecroft. He explained that without the passage of the Petroleum Industry Governance Bill, which is meant to improve transparency and attract investment in Nigeria's oil and gas sector, its oil output would suffer. "Oil production is projected to peak next year before steadily declining throughout the 2020s."

Hobey-Hamsher says that lower oil output will translate into less government revenue for Nigeria, meaning less money for the government to pay its bills.

This will delay spending on government projects that are needed to grow the economy.

Those projects are "required to address the most significant bottlenecks to sustained and sustainable economic growth, namely the infrastructure deficit and unemployment," he said.
Not enough jobs

Unemployment remains high. According to Nigeria's National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), in the working-age group (15-64 years of age) unemployment has hit 23.1 percent. This is a five percent increase from 2017, when it was at 18.1 percent.

According to Dielmann, the biggest risk facing Nigeria is the lack of economic growth, rapid population increases, and increasing levels of unemployment.

his month, World Poverty Clock, a project of the World Data Lab which tracks income levels for individuals around the world, showed that more than 90 million Nigerians are now living in poverty. This is the second year in a row Nigeria has landed in the top spot of the World Poverty Clock. In May 2018 the country overtook India with the most people living in poverty.

World Poverty Clock defines poverty as living on less than $1.90 per day.

"Ultimately, the combination of these factors place a tremendous amount of social strain on the country's population that are not sustainable in the long term," Dielmann said.

"I think the GDP should be growing at least double the population growth rate in order for the country to lift its people out of poverty," Ayodele Akinwunmi, head of research with FSDH Merchant Bank Limited in Nigeria said. "So I expect a GDP growth rate range of 5-6 percent. This growth rate is achievable if the country can fix the identified constraints. Nigeria has achieved higher growth rates before."

5-Year-Old Dies Of Ebola As Outbreak Crosses Congo Border

This photo released by the International Rescue Committee (IRC) shows hospital staff and others being briefed on how to keep themselves safe, at Bwera hospital where the confirmed and suspected cases of Ebola are being treated Wednesday, June 12, 2019 in Kasese District, western Uganda, near the border with Congo. A 5-year-old boy vomiting blood has become the first cross-border case of Ebola in the current deadly outbreak and now authorities are trying to determine how his family, exposed to the virus, managed to cross from Congo into neighboring Uganda. (Ben Wise/International Rescue Committee via AP)

BY RODNEY MUHUMUZA, AL-HADJI KUDRA MALIRO

KASINDI, CONGO (AP) — A 5-year-old boy vomiting blood became the first cross-border victim of Ebola in the current outbreak on Wednesday, while two more people in Uganda tested positive for the highly contagious disease that has killed nearly 1,400 in Congo.

The boy, part of a Congolese family who crossed into Uganda earlier in the week, died overnight, the World Health Organization said. Ugandan authorities said the two new cases are his 3-year-old brother and 50-year-old grandmother, who have been isolated at a hospital near the border. Uganda now has three confirmed Ebola cases.

Authorities tried to determine how the family, exposed to the virus via a sick relative in Congo, managed to cross a border where health officials have been screening millions of travelers for months.

This has become the second-deadliest Ebola outbreak in history since the first cases were declared in August. A WHO expert committee has been alerted for a possible meeting on whether to declare a global health emergency now that the outbreak has crossed the border, a spokesman said.

Experts have long feared Ebola could spread to neighboring countries because of rebel attacks and community resistance hampering virus containment work in eastern Congo, one of the world’s most turbulent regions. The virus can spread quickly via close contact with bodily fluids of those infected and can be fatal in up to 90% of cases.

Congo’s health ministry said a dozen members of the boy’s family had showed symptoms of Ebola. They were not placed in isolation and instead were told to remain where they were staying until transport was found to an Ebola treatment unit in Beni, Dr. Dominique Kabongo, coordinator of Ebola response teams in Kasindi, told The Associated Press.

Instead half of the family quietly crossed into Uganda, while five of those who remained have tested positive for Ebola since being taken to Beni, the health ministry said.

“Many people are evading (border) customs and using small footpaths and it is difficult for us to follow the contacts,” Kabongo said.

In Uganda, where authorities had been alerted by Congolese colleagues, the boy received treatment while relatives were isolated and tested. The boy’s uncle is now among seven suspected Ebola cases in Uganda, Health Minister Jane Aceng said, adding that authorities on both sides of the border would do their best to close unauthorized crossings.

Ugandan health teams “are not panicking,” Henry Mwebesa, the national director of health services, told the AP. He cited the East African nation’s experience battling previous outbreaks of Ebola and other hemorrhagic fevers.

“We have all the contingencies to contain this case,” Mwebesa said. “It is not going to go beyond” the boy’s family. The child’s mother, who is married to a Ugandan, knew where to cross the border unofficially, he added.

In the border area where the family is thought to have crossed, surveillance teams patrolled the Ugandan side on Wednesday. Some footpaths, however, remained unguarded. Some people wade across the shallow Lubiriha River instead of using a bridge to avoid being stopped by officials.

The “stubbornness of Congolese here” is a challenge in screening, a Ugandan Red Cross official, Francis Tumwine, told the AP at one border crossing last week. “They have failed to understand that Ebola is there, they think that it is witchcraft which is killing them.”

A Congolese trader, Muhindo Kaongezekela, added: “We are not sure if there’s Ebola in Congo. In Congo, if they find you with a headache, they take you to the hospital and later say they died of Ebola.”

This is the first time this restive part of vast Congo, veteran of several Ebola outbreaks, has experienced the virus.

Uganda is more stable than eastern Congo, and for the first time an experimental but effective Ebola vaccine is being widely used, with more than 130,000 doses distributed. Uganda has vaccinated nearly 4,700 health workers, and WHO is shipping another 3,500 doses this week for health workers and contacts of those infected.

But Ebola has been especially feared in Uganda, where multiple outbreaks have occurred over the years. An outbreak in the north in 2000 infected 425 people and killed more than half of them.

The WHO expert committee has twice decided that the current outbreak, while of “deep concern,” is not yet a global health emergency . But international spread is one of the major criteria the United Nations agency considers before making a declaration. WHO has advised against travel restrictions.

The first cross-border case is “tragic but unfortunately not surprising,” said Dr. Jeremy Farrar with the Wellcome Trust, which funds Ebola vaccine research.

While Uganda is well-prepared, he added, “we can expect and should plan for more cases in (Congo) and neighboring countries. This epidemic is in a truly frightening phase and shows no sign of stopping anytime soon.”

Muhumuza reported from Kampala, Uganda. Associated Press writer Maria Cheng in London contributed.

Follow Africa news at https://twitter.com/AP_Africa

The Long Road: Hong Kong's Democratic Struggles Since 1997

In this file photo taken Wednesday, June 12, 2019, protestors gather near the Legislative Council in Hong Kong. Hong Kong's leader Carrie Lam is pushing forward amendments to extradition laws which would allow people to be sent to mainland China to face charges. The proposed legislation has triggered in recent days the largest protests in Hong Kong in more than a decade, as some residents fear this will be their last chance to speak out publicly without threat of arrest at mainland authorities' request. (AP Photo/Vincent Yu, File)

BY YANANG WANG

BEIJING (AP) — On July 1, 1997, Tung Chee-Hwa, the first chief executive of Hong Kong, declared, “For the first time in history, we, the people of Hong Kong, will be master of our own destiny.”

It was the moment that Hong Kong, previously a British colony, was returned to China under the framework of “one country, two systems.” The “Basic Law” constitution guaranteed to protect, for the next 50 years, the democratic institutions that make Hong Kong distinct from Communist Party-ruled mainland China.

Despite that promise, Hong Kong’s agency has been tested, reinforced and challenged again in the succeeding years, most recently this week, which witnessed what may have been the largest protest since Hong Kong became Chinese territory again.

Here’s a look at key events in Hong Kong people’s fight to determine their future:

2003: NATIONAL SECURITY

The first major ripple came when Hong Kong’s leaders introduced legislation that would forbid acts of treason and subversion against the Chinese government. The bill resembled laws used to charge dissidents on the mainland, and also banned foreign political entities from conducting political activities and establishing relationships with political groups in Hong Kong.

It sparked one of the three largest protests of the post-1997 era. Organizers estimated that half a million people turned out against the bill, which they saw as an affront to Hong Kong’s autonomy and rule of law. As a result of the backlash, a member of the chief executive’s council resigned in protest and further action on the proposal was halted.

2010: DIRECT ELECTIONS

The Basic Law states that the ultimate aim is for Hong Kong voters to achieve a complete democracy, but 10 years after the handover, China decided in 2007 that universal suffrage in elections of the chief executive could not be implemented until 2017. Some lawmakers are chosen by business and trade groups, while others are elected by vote.

In a bid to accelerate a decision on universal suffrage, five lawmakers resigned. But this act was followed by the adoption of Beijing-backed electoral changes which expanded the chief executive’s selection committee and added more seats for lawmakers elected by direct vote. The legislation divided Hong Kong’s pro-democracy camp, as some supported the reforms while others said it would only delay full democracy while reinforcing a structure that favors Beijing. It nevertheless marked the first changes to the electoral system since the handover.


2014: UMBRELLA REVOLUTION

Harking back to its promise to allow Hong Kong residents to vote for their leader in 2017, the Chinese government introduced a bill allowing that, but with one major caveat: the candidates must be approved by Beijing. “The Chief Executive shall be a person who loves the country (China) and loves Hong Kong,” read the decision by China’s National People’s Congress.

Pro-democracy lawmakers were incensed by the bill, which they called an example of “fake universal suffrage” and “fake democracy.”

The move triggered a massive protest of a different kind as crowds occupied some of Hong Kong’s most crowded districts for 70 days. The movement’s organizers called it “Occupy Central with Love and Peace,” but it came to be known around the world as the “Umbrella Revolution” for the yellow umbrellas that protesters used as shields against police pepper spray.

In June 2015, Hong Kong legislators formally rejected the bill, and electoral reform has been stalled since then. The current chief executive, Carrie Lam, widely seen as the Chinese Communist Party’s favored candidate, was hand-picked in 2017 by a 1,200-person committee dominated by pro-Beijing elites.

2019: THE EXTRADITION BILLS

Lam is pushing forward amendments to extradition laws that would allow people to be sent to mainland China to face charges. The proposed legislation triggered a huge protest on Sunday, with organizers putting the turnout at 1 million, and a standoff Wednesday that forced the legislature to postpone debate on the bills.

Unease has been growing following a series of events which pointed to Beijing’s growing influence on the region, and some residents say this may be their last chance to speak out publicly without threat of arrest at the request of mainland authorities.

Last year, a Hong Kong-based bookseller who had been released from prison in China was seized by Chinese agents while traveling on a train in January with Swedish diplomats. Gui Minhai, a Swedish citizen, sold gossipy books about Chinese leaders and was one of five Hong Kong booksellers who wound up in Chinese custody in 2015.

Then in September, Hong Kong banned the Hong Kong National Party, which advocates independence for the territory, on national security grounds. Shortly after, it denied a visa renewal for Hong Kong-based Financial Times editor Victor Mallet, who had introduced the leader of the party at a Foreign Correspondents’ Club event in August.

Lam says the bill will include safeguards to protect human rights, but opponents have decried its potential to erode Hong Kong’s rule of law and judicial independence.

Hong Kong Police Fire Tear Gas, Rubber Bullets At Protesters

Protestors gather near the Legislative Council in Hong Kong, Wednesday, June 12, 2019. Thousands of protesters blocked entry to Hong Kong's government headquarters Wednesday, delaying a legislative session on a proposed extradition bill that has heightened fears over greater Chinese control and erosion of civil liberties in the semiautonomous territory. (AP Photo/Kin Cheung)

BY CHRISTOPHER BODEEN

HONG KONG (AP) — Hong Kong police fired tear gas and rubber bullets at protesters who had massed outside government headquarters Wednesday in opposition to a proposed extradition bill that has become a lightning rod for concerns over greater Chinese control and erosion of civil liberties in the territory.

The afternoon violence marked a major escalation in the semi-autonomous Chinese city’s biggest political crisis in years. It came after protesters earlier in the day forced the delay of a legislative debate over the bill, which would allow criminal suspects in Hong Kong to be sent for trial in mainland China.

The overwhelmingly young crowd had overflowed onto a major downtown road as they overturned barriers and tussled with police outside the government building. But when some appeared to have breached the police cordon around the building, the police launched their response, which also included firing pepper spray and water hoses.

Earlier, a curt government statement said the legislative session scheduled to begin at 11 a.m. would be “changed to a later time.” Officials gave no indication of when that would be and Hong Kong leader Carrie Lam canceled a scheduled news briefing.

The delay appeared to have been at least a temporary victory for the bill’s opponents, whose protests are the largest since pro-democracy demonstrations closed down parts of the Asian financial center for more than three months in 2014. Some businesses closed for the day, and labor strikes and class boycotts were called.

The protests are a challenge to China’s ruling Communist Party and President Xi Jinping, who has in the past said he would not tolerate Hong Kong being used as a base to challenge the party’s authority. But they are also giving vent to young Hong Kongers alienated by a political process dominated by the territory’s economic elite.

At a brief news conference held as the chaos swirled just outside, Police Commissioner Stephen Lo Wai-chung called the demonstration a riot. That could mean long jail terms for anyone arrested, adding to concerns that Hong Kong’s government is using public disturbance laws to intimidate political protesters.

“We condemn such irresponsible behavior,” Lo said. “There’s no need to hurt innocent people to express your opinions,” he said, adding that people should not “do anything they will regret for the rest of their lives.”

Protesters were seen throwing rocks, bottles, metal barricades and other projectiles at police. Police spokesman Gong Weng Chun defended the decision to use tear gas and other non-lethal weapons, saying officers wouldn’t have had to do so if they weren’t facing a serious threat that could seriously injure or even kill them.

The state of the legislative process remained unclear following the violence, which had largely ended by about 5 p.m. after police herded demonstrators across a pedestrian bridge. Traffic in one of the busiest parts of the city remained blocked, however, and several hundred protesters seemed in no hurry to leave.

Earlier in the day, protesters said they hoped the blockade would persuade Lam’s administration to shelve the proposed amendments.

“We want the government to just set the legislation aside and not bring it back,” said a protester who gave only his first name, Marco, to avoid possible repercussions from authorities.

Another protester, who gave her name only as King, also out of fear of repercussions, said the protest was a watershed moment for Hong Kong’s young generation.

“We have to stand up for our rights or they will be taken away,” she said.

Dressed in black T-shirts and jeans, many protesters appeared undaunted by demands to disperse from police. The demonstrators also appeared mindful of Beijing’s growing use of electronic surveillance such as facial recognition technology to build dossiers on those it considers politically unreliable, with many donning surgical masks to hide their features, as well as to safeguard against tear gas.

Such protests are never tolerated in mainland China, and Hong Kong residents can face travel bans and other repercussions if they cross the border.

“Most of these protesters don’t expect the government to compromise. They just want to express their own opinions,” said Joseph Cheng, a long-time observer of Chinese and Hong Kong politics now retired from the City University of Hong Kong.

“The anger is still there and the anger will burst again at the next opportunity,” Cheng said.

Under its “one country, two systems” framework, Hong Kong was supposed to be guaranteed the right to retain its own social, legal and political systems for 50 years following its handover from British rule in 1997. However, China’s ruling Communist Party has been seen as increasingly reneging on that agreement by forcing through unpopular legal changes.

The government pushed ahead with plans to present the amendments to the legislature on Wednesday despite a weekend protest by hundreds of thousands of people that was the territory’s largest political demonstration in more than a decade.

Lam has consistently defended the legislation as necessary to close legal loopholes with other countries and territories. A vote is scheduled on June 20.

At regular briefing Wednesday, China’s Foreign Ministry repeated its support for the bill. Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang also denied Beijing has been interfering in the city’s affairs in a way that violates agreements made when Hong Kong was handed back to China.

“Hong Kong people’s rights and freedoms have been fully guaranteed in accordance with law,” he said.

The protests are widely seen as reflecting growing apprehension about relations with the Communist Party-ruled mainland, where Xi has said he has zero tolerance for those demanding greater self-rule for Hong Kong.

Critics believe the extradition legislation would put Hong Kong residents at risk of being entrapped in China’s judicial system, in which opponents of Communist Party rule have been charged with economic crimes or ill-defined national security offenses, and would not be guaranteed free trials.

Lam said the government has considered concerns from the private sector and altered the bill to improve human rights safeguards. She said without the changes, Hong Kong would risk becoming a haven for fugitives. She emphasized that extradition cases would be decided by Hong Kong courts.

Opponents of the proposed extradition amendments say the changes would significantly compromise Hong Kong’s legal independence, long viewed as one of the crucial differences between the territory and mainland China.

Hong Kong currently limits extraditions to jurisdictions with which it has existing agreements and to others on an individual basis. China has been excluded from those agreements because of concerns over its judicial independence and human rights record.

Associated Press journalists Raf Wober and Alice Fung in Hong Kong, Johnson Lai in Taipei, Taiwan and Sally Ho in Seattle contributed to this report.

The Holy Grail Of Soccer Jerseys Is Restocking

BY CAM WOLF

When it comes to flaming-hot streetwear, the best gear is always fleeting. The sneakers you prepped and strategized to buy are gone before you can even take a sip from your possibly counterfeit Supreme Nalgene bottle. The much-hyped Nigeria 2018 World Cup jersey seemed to fall into that same pattern: after accruing an amount of hype typically reserved for new Jordan retros last year, it sold out immediately and trickled onto the secondary market at sky-high prices. But, in a rare act of generosity from the streetwear gods, Nike is restocking the grail-level soccer jersey.

Up until about 36 hours before the writing of this blog, the only way to get a 2018 Nigeria jersey was to tread into the choppy water of the secondary market. While prices have dipped from their high point last summer, users on resale site Grailed are still trying to flip the jerseys for anywhere between $120 and $162. But soccer retailer Pro: Direct announced on Twitter that it is restocking jerseys and kits from Nigeria’s 2018 World Cup collection.

Here is a miracle we should just simply not question. Not only is the much-loved Nigeria jersey with the swooping, Acronym-like arrows restocking but also the Naija logo kit, and the warm-up kit twisting with vines and blooming with early-spring-green flowers. This is no doubt some savvy marketing by the powers at be who are taking advantage of renewed global soccer fever with the start of the Women’s World Cup. Nigeria’s team, by the way, lost by a score of 3-0 against Norway on Saturday and plays France Wednesday.

It’s pretty unusual for an item of this stature to restock, but the Nigeria World Cup was always an outlier. A soccer jersey that churned through the hype machine like it was a Supreme collaboration. After it was unveiled in February of last year, reports started leaking that three million pre-orders rolled in. That figure was rightfully questioned because it was reported before the jersey even went up for sale, but the myth-making was already done. The extremely stylish Skepta was photographed in the jersey.

Of course, when it finally did go on sale, the jersey sold out immediately. A jersey meant to be worn by fans of the Super Eagles team adopted by a team-agnostic collection of hype-crazed dudes. Now, the jerseys are available for purchase or pre-order all over again. If last year is any indication, that won’t be true for very long. Remember: you miss 100 percent of the jawns you don’t cop.

SOURCE: GQ

Nigeria's Central Bank Signals Weaker Official Naira

Image: Tom Saater/Bloomberg

BY EMELE ONU

ABUJA (BLOOMBERG) -- The Central Bank of Nigeria signaled it will allow the naira to weaken past its official rate as it gradually unwinds its regime of multiple exchange rates, data on its website shows.

The Abuja-based central bank stopped publishing the fixed naira exchange rate on its website and it now says that the rate will be “market-determined.’’ The central bank used to have an official rate as strong as 305 naira per dollar. That rate was used to ensure that some traders including, fuel importers, got cheap dollars.

A move toward a market-determined exchange rate will be welcomed by investors, who have long accused the government of some level of capital controls and bemoaned the system of multiple exchange rates. The central bank is in talks with other agencies to move to a single rate for the nation’s currency, Yewande Sadiku, the head of the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission, said last month.

“Putting that on the website means the central bank is gradually moving towards a single exchange-rate window,” Kunle Ezun, a currency analyst at Ecobank Transnational Inc in Lagos, said by phone. “It is making the exchange rate more liquid to attract more inflows.”

Nigerian Customs Service told importers yesterday to pay for duties at a weaker rate of 326 naira per dollar from 306 naira citing a directive from central bank, according to Jonathan Nicol, President of Shippers Association of Lagos State. Calls to central bank spokesman Isaac Okorafor didn’t connect and there was no reply to text messages.

The interbank rate was 0.2% weaker at 360.43 naira per dollar as of 6p.m. in Lagos.

Justice Dept. To Congress: Back Off Contempt Process, Or Barr Will Ask Trump To Shield Census Documents

U.S. Attorney General William Barr speaks at the FBI National Academy Graduation Ceremony in Quantico, Va. Image: Tom Brenner/Reuters

BY MATT ZAPOTOSKY

WASHINGTON (WASHINGTON POST) -- Attorney General William P. Barr will ask President Trump to assert executive privilege to shield documents from the administration’s decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 Census if Democratic lawmakers on the House Oversight Committee proceed toward holding Barr in contempt, the Justice Department revealed in a letter Tuesday.

The revelation came on the eve of an expected Oversight Committee vote to hold Barr and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross in contempt for failing to turn over documents that lawmakers had subpoenaed, as well as stopping a witness from testifying without a Justice Department lawyer. Assistant Attorney General Stephen E. Boyd wrote that the decision to schedule the vote was “premature” and accused lawmakers of refusing to negotiate with the department to get at least some of what they wanted.

“In the face of this threatened contempt vote, the Attorney General is now compelled to request that the President invoke executive privilege with respect to the materials subject to the subpoena to the Attorney General and the subpoena to the Secretary of the Department of Commerce,” Boyd wrote. “I hereby request that the Committee hold the subpoenas in abeyance and delay any vote on whether to recommend a citation of contempt for noncompliance with the subpoenas, pending the President’s determination of this question.”

Boyd added that if the committee rejected the request, the department would “be forced to reevaluate its current production efforts in ongoing matters.” He requested that the committee respond by 5 p.m. Tuesday and noted that the president had not yet asserted executive privilege to protect the documents from disclosure.

Later Tuesday, Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.) responded in a letter that because the department had made “no commitments to provide any portion of the critical documents required by the subpoena,” he would not postpone the contempt vote.

“The Committee cannot accept these terms,” Cummings wrote, adding that he was still willing to delay if the department turned over certain materials. “The Committee has a responsibility under the Constitution to conduct rigorous oversight of the Census, and we will not delay our efforts due to your ongoing obstruction.”

If lawmakers and the committee do not reach a deal, the Justice Department’s latest posture puts it on a collision course almost identical to that which it faced last month with the House Judiciary Committee.

In that instance, the department had resisted a Judiciary Committee subpoena for access to the unredacted report from special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation, as well as its underlying materials. At Barr’s request — soon before a contempt vote — Trump asserted executive privilege to protect the documents from disclosure. The committee then voted to hold the attorney general in contempt, though recently, it declared the effort on hold after reaching a deal with the Justice Department to get at least some materials.

In the census case, lawmakers are seeking to understand the administration’s decision to add a citizenship question — which they allege could scare immigrants away from responding to the survey.

The results of the census are used in congressional redistricting and calculating the number of representatives each state gets in Congress. Depressed immigrant response rates could be important and potentially give an advantage to white and Republican voters. States, cities and civil rights groups have sued over the added question, and federal judges have ruled against it — though the dispute is now with the Supreme Court.

Cummings has accused the administration of not complying with a subpoena for documents about the matter, as well as blocking Justice Department official John Gore from testifying. Committee Democrats wrote on Twitter on Tuesday that there was “a broad, coordinated campaign to stonewall investigations across the board — and it is being directed from the top.”

Boyd wrote that the committee had already turned over 17,000 pages and that some of what lawmakers wanted was protected by attorney-client privilege or because it involves internal executive branch deliberations. He also wrote that Gore was only blocked from testifying because lawmakers would not let him do so with the aid of a Justice Department lawyer.

Boyd attached to his letter a recently authored opinion from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel declaring that Congress may not prohibit government employees from appearing with a lawyer. The opinion noted that any subpoenas requiring employees do so would be “legally invalid” and “not subject to civil or criminal enforcement.”

The opinion, along with a potential executive privilege assertion, are meant to undercut the legitimacy of a contempt finding. Such a finding already would be largely symbolic. Those found in criminal contempt are normally referred to the Justice Department for prosecution; in this instance, the Justice Department would not prosecute itself.

The finding, though, can also be one step in a process that allows lawmakers to go to court and sue for the materials they want. The House voted Tuesday to authorize seeking court enforcement of subpoenas for Barr and former White House counsel Donald McGahn, if necessary.

The committee’s hearing on contempt is scheduled for 10 a.m. Wednesday.

matt.zapotosky@washpost.com

Russian Journalist Freed After Police Abruptly Drop Charges

Prominent Russian investigative journalist Ivan Golunov, greets colleagues and his supporters as he leaves a Investigative Committee building in Moscow, Russia, Tuesday, June 11, 2019. In a surprising turnaround, Russia's police chief on Tuesday dropped all charges against a prominent investigative reporter whose detention sparked public outrage and promised to go after the police officers who tried to frame the journalist as a drug-dealer. (AP Photo/Alexander Zemlianichenko)

BY NATALIYA VASILYEVA, FRANCESCA EBEL

MOSCOW (AP) — In a stunning turnaround, Russian authorities Tuesday abruptly dropped all charges against a prominent investigative reporter after a public and media outcry over his arrest, and they promised to go after the police who allegedly tried to frame him as a drug dealer.

The release of Ivan Golunov marked an extremely rare case of security officials admitting a mistake. It also highlighted the difficulties that Russian journalists routinely face when reporting on sensitive topics like graft, corruption and President Vladimir Putin’s personal life.

The 36-year-old Golunov was stopped Thursday by police on a Moscow street and taken into custody, where his defense team said he was beaten and denied a lawyer for more than 12 hours. The journalist, who works for the independent website Meduza, had been facing drug charges that could put him in prison for up to 20 years.

Supporters mounted a nationwide campaign on his behalf, with journalists and others picketing Moscow police headquarters for five days. More than 20,000 people signed an online pledge to march in the capital on Wednesday, a public holiday, to protest Golunov’s arrest.

But Interior Minister Vladimir Kolokoltsev surprised the nation when he announced that all charges against Golunov were dropped after police found “no proof of his part in a crime.”

“I believe that the rights of any citizen, whatever his professional affiliation, ought to be protected,” the minister said, adding that he will ask Putin to dismiss two police generals, including the drug chief of the Moscow police, and suspend the officers who detained Golunov.

Speaking outside police headquarters, a shy and shocked-looking Golunov said he still couldn’t believe he was cleared so quickly.

“I will keep doing investigations to justify the trust of all those who supported me,” he said.

He added that he hopes the police will stop trying to frame innocent people, adding: “I hope it will not happen to anyone else in our country.”

In an unusual broadcast, his release was shown live on a state-controlled 24-hour news channel.

Judicial statistics indicate that the chances for criminal charges to be dropped or an acquittal once a person is in custody are extremely slim. When it does happen, authorities tend to avoid taking any blame.

“When the authorities admit their mistakes, admit the mistakes of the law enforcement officials and correct them, that’s very good because it shows that the government is reasonable,” Alexei Venediktov, editor-in-chief of the influential Ekho Moskvy radio station, told the Interfax news agency.

It is not yet clear if the police reversal represented a turning point for the many Russian journalists who are routinely attacked or face government pressure for their work. Many of them say they don’t feel safe to operate and report freely.

“We have put the pressure on the system and it worked this time,” said Pavel Kanygin, investigative reporter at Novaya Gazeta. “But it really is impossible to work in this environment.”

The circumstances of Golunov’s detention alarmed others in the media. In an apparent attempt to portray him as a professional drug dealer, police on Friday released several photos, reportedly from his home, of what appeared to be a drug lab. They later retracted the statement, saying that the photos were taken elsewhere.

In a separate statement later, the police said they found cocaine at Golunov’s home. A judge put him under house arrest Saturday following a public outcry of support, including from high-profile journalists working for state-owned media.

Many Russian journalists have to tread carefully in their work, especially when reporting about Putin and his family. But since Golunov’s work mostly focused on Moscow City Hall and the city’s crime-ridden funeral industry, the case raised questions about a possible shift in where the red lines are drawn in Russian journalism.

Award-winning journalist Roman Badanin was ousted from three major editorial positions between 2011 and 2016 after the media outlets under his leadership touched on topics believed to be too sensitive for the Kremlin.

Three top editors at the business newspaper RBC, including Badanin, were ousted in 2016 after reporting on Putin’s inner circle, including an investigative piece about an oyster farm near a mansion that a whistleblower has described as “Putin’s palace.”

To Badanin, the crackdown on Golunov stands out because it lower-level decision-makers, rather than the Kremlin or government-connected tycoons, were likely behind it.

“Ivan’s case tells us that now violence or unlawful actions against journalists can be applied at a lower level, not just by the Kremlin,” he told The Associated Press.

In act of journalistic solidarity not seen for at least 15 years, RBC and two other major papers, Kommersant and Vedomosti, published identical front pages on Monday with the headline “I am/We are Ivan Golunov,” and called for a transparent investigation of his case. The newspapers all had first-hand experience of government pressure and indirect censorship.

The solidarity surprisingly extended to tightly controlled state TV channels, with some commentators referring to Golunov as “a colleague” and questioning the police evidence.

Rights activists have long complained of police abusing their powers and planting drugs on innocent people. About 130,000, or nearly a third of the country’s prison population, were convicted on drug-related charges.

Golunov’s release prompted several prominent officials, including close Putin ally Alexei Kudrin, to call for a review of how drug charges are used and abused.

In a joint statement, the CEO and editor in chief of Meduza, along with Golunov’s lawyer and two other prominent journalists, pledged to investigate the police officials responsible for the arrest.

“The group of journalists we have gathered together in recent days will continue working, and now, they will be working together with Ivan himself,” the statement said. “This is only the beginning. We have a lot of hard work ahead of us if we are to ensure that what happened here will never happen again to anybody.”

Pelosi-Nadler Alliance Strained By Impeachment Divide

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (left) and Speaker Nancy Pelosi are at loggerheads over the intensity and speed with which Democrats investigate President Donald Trump. Image: Drew Angerer/Getty

BY ANDREW DESIDERIO, HEATHER CAYGLE & JOHN BRESNAHAN

WASHINGTON (POLITICO) -- Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, two longtime allies, are clashing over whether to begin an impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump — a sign of how toxic the split over Trump has become for House Democrats.

Nadler has twice urged Pelosi in private to open a formal impeachment inquiry, but the speaker, backed by the majority of her leadership team and her caucus, has maintained that impeaching the president would backfire on Democrats without meaningful Republican support. And there is no sign that Trump’s GOP firewall is cracking.

Pelosi and Nadler, two veterans of the impeachment drama surrounding President Bill Clinton 20 years ago, appear to be drawing opposite lessons from that experience. And the divide between the two lawmakers is illustrative of what all Democrats are grappling with as they respond to Trump’s efforts to stonewall congressional investigations into his personal conduct, finances and policy moves.

“I think they are articulating the different impulses within the caucus, and also within each of us,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) said of Pelosi and Nadler. “It’s not entirely clear what to do.”

“Put yourself in the position of somebody in the House of Representatives today,” added Raskin, a Judiciary Committee member who wants to launch an impeachment inquiry. “There are a million factors to deal with. And we’re dealing with the most lawless, corrupt presidency of our lifetime. So what is the right time to respond? It’s not entirely clear.”

Tuesday, though, will feature a key step that all Democrats can agree on: The full House will vote on empowering committee chairs to enforce subpoenas issued to top current and former Trump administration officials, including Attorney General William Barr and former White House counsel Don McGahn.

The resolution will, in part, allow the Judiciary Committee to sue Barr and McGahn in federal court to secure former special counsel Robert Mueller’s unredacted report and underlying evidence from his Russia investigation, as well as McGahn’s public testimony.

But a majority of Democratic members of Nadler’s committee favor impeaching Trump, which puts intense pressure on the chairman for more drastic action.

Pelosi and other top Democrats argue that most in their party don’t support such a move, especially with no significant GOP support. Even if the Democratic-controlled House voted to impeach Trump, the Republican-run Senate would probably acquit him, they argue, meaning that Trump would not only remain in office but that the move could potentially embolden the GOP base and result in the president’s reelection.

Nadler and Pelosi sparred over the issue during a private meeting last week. Nadler again pushed the speaker to support an impeachment inquiry, but she refused, saying she’d rather see Trump “in prison.”

Some Judiciary Committee members are hinting at a more serious divide between the two lawmakers. But senior Democratic aides consistently downplay any tension between them.

“I think Chairman Nadler has done a very good job, particularly considering the parameters under which he has to work,” said Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), one of the caucus’s most fervent supporters of impeachment. “There are quite a few.”

Tuesday’s vote — the first enforcement mechanism to hit the House floor since Mueller’s report was released nearly two months ago — is unlikely to calm tensions, even as House Democrats continue to secure key victories in federal court and in their negotiations with the Justice Department over access to Mueller’s files.

That’s in part because Pelosi’s allies are using those wins as evidence that their current strategy is working — and that impeachment isn’t necessary yet.

“We’re winning as it relates to the strategy that we’re pursuing, and the fact that the Department of Justice has agreed to provide documents and allow inspection of a more unredacted version of the report means we should stay the course,” said House Democratic Caucus Chairman Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), a member of the Judiciary panel. He was referring to a deal the committee struck with the Justice Department over access to some of Mueller’s “key” underlying evidence about possible obstruction of justice by the president.

At the core of the conflict is a sharp disagreement between Pelosi and Nadler over the intensity and speed with which Democrats investigate Trump and how that decision will reverberate in next year’s election.

Pelosi speaks frequently about how she empowers her committee chairmen — allowing them to make decisions about what legislation they pursue and how they run their respective panels.

With Nadler’s panel, however, she has been much more personally involved in the committee’s decision-making process, according to multiple sources, even compared with panels such as Oversight and Intelligence, which are also pursuing potentially explosive investigations targeting Trump.

The speaker’s allies, though, assert that Pelosi has been hands-off with the Judiciary Committee except when it comes to her disagreement with Nadler over impeachment. Opening an impeachment inquiry, as Nadler has advocated privately to Pelosi, would be the equivalent of “jumping off a cliff,” according to a source close to the speaker.

The squabble has put a strain on what has generally been a cordial and respectful relationship.

They have served together in the House for nearly 30 years. Nadler, a New Yorker, backed Pelosi, who is from California, when she challenged Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), now the No. 2 Democrat, in their bitter battle to become House minority whip in 2001, a critical moment in her rise to the speaker’s chair. The alliances forged then still resonate today and creep into nearly all internal caucus politics.

Pelosi, in turn, stayed out of the race between Nadler and Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), a close ally of the speaker, to become the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee in 2017. Pelosi’s silence was interpreted as a gift to Nadler and a blessing for him to take over the gavel after the resignation of Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) amid a sexual harassment scandal.

In the seven weeks since Mueller’s findings were made public, House Democrats have been focused almost exclusively on battling the Trump administration over how much of the Mueller report lawmakers can view; when and whether Mueller testifies; the conditions of Barr’s testimony; and other process-related fights.

Those protracted legal battles were out of Nadler’s control, due in large part to the Trump administration's unwillingness to comply with congressional subpoenas. Nadler addressed the administration’s recalcitrance during Monday’s hearing with Nixon White House counsel John Dean and former federal prosecutors.

“It is true that fact witnesses have been ordered by the White House not to appear before this committee,” Nadler said. “But we’ll get them.”

Still, Democrats on the committee have privately complained that the process battles do little to educate the public, and even Monday’s hearing with Dean barely made a splash. Instead, most news networks carried coverage of a fatal helicopter crash in New York City on Monday.

“Obviously that’s not going to be effective if they didn’t see that,” acknowledged Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), a Judiciary Committee and leadership member who supports opening an impeachment inquiry.

“I’ve expressed my personal opinions to the speaker,” Lieu said. “It will be a decision that the speaker and the caucus makes. And I respect that decision. In the meantime, I’m going to hold these hearings [and] educate the American people about the report.”

Judiciary Committee Democrats largely remain united behind Nadler, saying privately that they recognize he is in an impossible position — caught between a majority of the panel’s Democratic members supporting an impeachment inquiry and the speaker remaining steadfastly opposed.

“To some extent they’re on the same page,” Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-La.), a Judiciary member and Pelosi ally, said of the disagreement between the speaker and Nadler. “But the American people have to get there. And as of now, as Democrats, the White House has been able to distract and hide from the Mueller report because we have a president and an attorney general who are co-conspirators in depriving the American people of the real facts.”

Kyle Cheney contributed to this report.