|
1.
INTRODUCTION
On Thursday, 5th August 2010, the
Director General of the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC), Ms. Arunma
Oteh, and some of her senior staff,
leading about 150 heavily armed security
personnel (members of Mobile Police
Unit of The Nigeria Police Force and the
State Security Services {SSS}), invaded
the premises of The Nigerian Stock
Exchange in military Commando fashion
and
through brute force usurped the powers
of the Council and Management of The
Exchange. As we speak, there is still a
detachment of these security agencies
stationed inside the offices of The
Exchange.
According to SEC, this unprecedented and
unlawful intervention in the Council
and Management of The Nigerian Stock
Exchange (private sector institution)
was
in response to alleged and unfounded
issues such as:
-
“Inadequate oversight of The
Exchange”
-
“Ongoing litigation”
-
“Allegations of financial
mismanagement”
-
“Governance challenges”, and
-
“Inordinate delays in the
implementation of management succession”
We shall look at these issues in some
detail later, as I intend to proceed to
the immediate reason for calling this
press conference.
2.
SELECTIVE AND PERNICIOUS
DISENGAGEMENT OF STAFF
The intervention of the SEC in the
governance of The Stock Exchange has had
dire
impact on persons and institutions
involved in the operations of The
Exchange
and its market. As to be expected in the
current governance miasma at The
Exchange, on 26th August 2010, the Sole
Administrator, Mr. Emmanuel Ikhazobor,
without due process, sacked 32.5% of the
workforce of The Exchange in an
exercise he described as “rightsizing”
of the workforce, but which in fact was
an exercise in witch-hunting and an
initiative to forestall possible
opposition
to a grand design by a ‘cabal’ to take
over the ownership and management of The
Exchange for personal gains, as opposed
to all the pretence about ‘serving
public interest’.
The so-called right-sizing was without
any consideration and approval by the
Finance and General Purpose Committee of
Council, which has responsibility for
all staff matters. Significantly, even
the Council that was purportedly
reconstituted by SEC that was said to
have approved the proposal to right-size
the workforce at its meeting of 25th
August 2010 did not have any appreciable
insight into what was proposed, as no
names, functions or files of the
affected
staff were provided to the Council
members who were cowed into granting the
so-called approval by the presence of
heavily armed mobile policemen by the
door
of the Council/Board room.
It is pertinent to note that in the
October 2009 SEC inspection report, the
point was made that there was an
“inadequacy of staff to effectively
discharge
all functions of The Exchange”.
Therefore, should The Exchange be
“right-sizing” its workforce at this
point in time? These are highly trained
technical and skilled officers, and I
wonder where The Exchange will get the
replacement for such personnel. I wonder
because there is only one Stock
Exchange in Nigeria where people can
acquire skill and experience in running
a
stock exchange, unlike in banking where
a highly skilled banker can readily be
sourced and moved from one bank to
another without further training. So, I
highly consider this action of the Sole
Administrator as a disservice to the
capital market and the economy as a
whole.
A high number of these aggrieved staff
are my clients and I have their
instruction to file a class action suit
in order to protect their rights and
jobs, and to prevent further damage to
their reputation and psyche.
From my understanding, The NSE is a 100%
private organization. I wonder what it
has done to warrant a complete takeover
of the organization by SEC as we are
currently witnessing. This is a company
Limited by Guarantee that is not into
deposit-taking from the public. I need
to be educated on this development. Does
the mere declaration of an organization
a “public interest entity” predispose it
to the kind of takeover that has been
demonstrated at The Exchange? I believe
that this has grave implications for
Nigerian businesses.
Stakeholders of The Nigerian Stock
Exchange should also be concerned about
the
fallen staff morale at the organization,
as there is uncertainty among the
remaining workforce of The Exchange as
to their future in the organisation,
given sustained hints of further
reduction of workforce and the sustained
presence of armed policemen inside and
around the offices of The Exchange. The
sole administrator has continued to hire
staff through the back door after the
so called rightsizing exercise designed
and conceived to victimize the original
members of staff.
With the active backing of security
agencies who may not know the limit of
their
duties, arbitrariness, intimidation and
blackmail have become the order of the
day at The Exchange as staff are sacked
and dismissed without consideration for
due process. Staff have been made to
sign letters of resignation under
duress,
with threat of termination of employment
and personal embarrassment from armed
mobile policemen that have become a
feature of The Exchange. Staff are now
searched as they arrive and leave the
office. They have been directed to leave
their computers, files/file cabinets and
drawers open and to leave the office by
5 pm daily, leaving the so-called
forensic and hostile auditors and
lawyers to
rummage through these records. Can these
records not be tampered to the
advantage of the so-called
investigators? Ordinarily, should these
records not
be inspected in the presence of the
affected officers?
My brief is that the role of Alhaji
Aliko Dangote in all of these is that
having
failed to hijack the 51 % equity of the
Nigerian Stock Exchange which the sacked
management kicked against, he has
positioned himself to do so through the
help
of SEC and his associates. He has been
the second vice president, first vice
president and later president of Council
of Nigerian Exchange from 2006 - 2010.
At no time did he raise issue(s) with
the accounts of the Exchange. He infact
was the President/Chairman before he was
sacked by the Federal High Court.
Because he failed to have the support of
the sacked management in his desperate
moves to thwart and frustrate the
implementation of two separate court
judgments
ordering him to vacate the office of the
president of council of NSE. Curiously,
Aliko Dangote who still has Bench
Warrant dangling like a sword of
Damocles over
his neck moves freely around the country
and have conveniently agreed to respect
the status quo ordered by the courts
over 7 months ago and now informed the
SEC
appointed President and Interim
Administrator that he is still the first
vice
president. WHAT A COUNTRY!!! Dangote
through his wealth and political
affluence
now chooses when and how to obey the
ORDERS OF OUR HALLOWED COURTS!!!. In his
letter dated August 9, 2010 addressed to
the interim president and copied to the
sole administrator, which I shall make
available to you all, Dangote advised
that ‘The NSE is now saddled with a
bloated workforce whose output quality
is
quite suspect’. The Public should know
that N.S.E has only 297 staff while SEC
has 700. The sole administrator and the
interim president obviously took a cue
from Dangote’s letter and sacked these
Nigerians from the NSE. It is obvious
that Dangote now controls the NSE.
I
reiterate that in the recent sacking of
staff of The Exchange, the Finance
and General Purpose Committee of the
Council was bypassed. Contrary to the
observation of the SEC inspectors and
the Accenture-facilitated Enterprise
Transformation Programme of The
Exchange, staff were sacked when in fact
more
hands are needed to drive the business
to the next level. The Interim
Management
of The Exchange played on the
intelligence of Nigerians when it said
the
exercise was “rightsizing” instead of
correctly calling it witch-hunting and
an
action taken to facilitate total control
of the ownership and management of The
Exchange by some shadowy self-serving
cabal.
In considering the extant governance
regime at The Exchange, Nigerians must
begin to ask questions at the time they
matter most:
o
What qualifies Mr. Ikhazobor for
his current job at The Nigerian Stock
Exchange?
o
What is the job description of a
“Sole Administrator”? How does this
contrast with his professional
experience? Does the job description
include
functioning as a Receiver Manager? Has
the office of the DG/CEO of The Exchange
suddenly become a job that just anybody
could do, even if on an interim basis?
Is this not the same Ikhazobor that was
Managing Partner of Akintola Williams
Deloitte when the firm was indicted by
SEC over the Cadbury accounting
scandal?Does simple respect for decency
not disqualify Ikhazobor from his
current duties at The Exchange? More so
because his Firm AUDITED the same
Accounts of The Stock Exchange from 2006
– 2009 while he was the managing
partner and Akintola Williams Delloite
has been External Auditors to the Stock
Exchange from 1960 till today and has
Never Qualified any accounts of NSE.
3.
THE NIGERIAN STOCK EXCHANGE IS
DYING A SLOW DEATH
Current inept management of The Nigerian
Stock Exchange following the usurpation
of the powers of the Council and
Management of The Exchange by a band of
puppets
and puppeteers has created a leadership
vacuum that is beginning to undermine
the workings of The Exchange and the
capital market, with adverse
implications
for the larger economy.
These days companies are
suspended for breaching the
rules of The Exchange and at the same
time others are granted “waivers” that
enable them to subvert the same rules of
The Exchange. Should a responsible,
honest market leadership be seen as
approbating and reprobating on the same
issue? Why grant a waiver to Dangote
Cement plc on the minimum free-float
requirement of the Exchange at the same
time that companies that have failed in
their financial reporting obligations to
the market are being suspended? Both
conditions impact adversely on the
pricing efficiency of the stock market
and
neither should be made to look like a
lesser evil. Certainly, double standard
cannot help the growth and development
of the stock market. With the speed that
attended the approval of the proposed
BCC/Dangote Cement Plc merger by SEC and
the “Interim Administration” of The NSE,
it is now becoming clear why SEC had to
subvert its own rule to forcefully
intervene in the management of The
Exchange.
Apparently, this was one deal that SEC
and the so-called Interim Administration
at The Exchange believed must go through
inspite of obvious defects in the
transaction. How much did Dangote Cement
Plc pay to The NSE in Application
Processing Fee for the proposed listing
of combined business? How much did Benue
Cement Company Plc and Dangote Cement
Plc pay to The Exchange in Application
Processing Fee for the proposed merger?
Why has The Exchange allowed an unlisted
company to takeover its listed company,
contrary to its policy aimed at
encouraging public quotation? Why is it
that only one stockbroker (Afrinvest)
seemed to be acting for both companies
involved in the merger? Why should SEC
and NSE approve that an unlisted company
pick a very high price over and above
that of a listed company it intends to
merge with? Is it not the market that
shall determine which price any
company’s stock should have? It appears
Alhaji
Dangote now wants to have one third of
the entire market capitalization. The
entire market will finally be his by the
time NSE is demutualised, a process
conceived by the sacked management which
Dangote failed to hijack then. Now is
the GOLDEN opportunity for the scheme of
ONE MAN to grab the heart and soul of
the Nigerian economy by having majority
OWNERSHIP of the Stock Exchange.
4.
RENEWED LOSS OF VALUE IN THE
STOCK MARKET
The Nigerian stock market was beginning
to recover until the SEC inordinate
intervention dampened investor
confidence. Earlier in the year, The
Exchange’s
All-Share Index had rallied by 24% to
become one of the 10 best performers
among
93 indexes tracked by Bloomberg
globally. In fact, as recent as July
2010, which
was the month preceding the SEC’s
intervention in the management of The
Stock
Exchange, there was significant growth
in major market performance indicators.
However, in August 2010, following SEC
unlawful intrusion, equity value fell by
N37 billion and All-Share Index lost
6.1%, while turnover value fell from
N58.8
billion in July to N46.91 billion in
August.
From published pronouncements, the SEC
anchored its ill-conceived action on the
“protection of public interest”,
stressing at every opportunity that The
Exchange is a “public interest”
organization. There is a lot of
subjectivity in
the definition of “public interest” as
applied by SEC. The pursuance of Public
Interest should shore up investor
confidence and stem falling share prices
on
The Exchange, but this has not happened,
as share prices have been falling since
the SEC intervention in the management
of The Exchange. Please see ThisDay of
Monday 13th September 2010, page 33
(“Equities maintain 3-week downward
trend”).
5.
DEMUTUALISATION OF THE NIGERIAN
STOCK EXCHANGE
The Interim Administration was appointed
on 5th August 2010 and by 26th August
2010 had sacked 32.5% of the workforce.
For outsiders in the business, they
certainly could not have in the short
time understood the organization and its
business as a basis for this drastic
action. The interim administration can
only
be acting a script:
i.
Personal interest, as opposed to
national interest, informs
the current siege on The Nigerian Stock
Exchange. New issue/listing approvals
have been given in questionable
circumstances and demutualisation has
become the
new mantra. Demutualisation is about the
reincorporation of The Exchange as a
for-profit organization and the sale of
its shares, in this instance, to certain
interest groups. Nigerians should begin
to ask who these interest groups
represent. We have seen the application
of the Core Investor concept in the
Privatisation programme and know that it
could be abused.
ii.
I have it on good authority that
the original proposal by the
previous Management of The Exchange on
the allocation of the shares of a
demutualised NSE as thus: 30% for
Dealing Member firms; 10% for the 19
Settlement Banks; 9% for Institutional
Investors (PFAs {3%}, CSCS {3%}, and
Insurance Companies {3%}), and 51% for
the generality of Nigerians, with no
single investor (individual or company)
expected to get more than 1%. This
promises to offer the desired spread and
should be supported. People like us who
believe that The Exchange is for all
Nigerians must insist on a
demutualisation
model that is seen to benefit all
Nigerians instead of allowing The
Exchange to
be hijacked by a cabal.
iii.
It should also concern Nigerians
that there is an active
interest in the demutualisation of The
NSE when there is active disinformation
that The Exchange is “near-bankrupt”. If
the intention of demutualisation is to
sell The Exchange to the generality of
Nigerians, why would SEC be interested
in
selling a so-called financial wreck to
the Nigerian public? Obviously, there is
more to this than meets the eyes.
iv.
Contrary to what has been
demonstrated in the recent past in
the Nigerian capital market, investor
protection is not merely about
protecting
the interest of the big investors in the
stock market; in all responsible
jurisdictions, the thrust of investor
protection is in favour of
minority/small
shareholders. Unfortunately, small
investors have continued to lose value
in the
market as a result of SEC’s extant
regulatory misadventure that is aimed at
serving vested interests masquerading as
‘whistleblowers’ and reformers – men
that should actually be at the receiving
end of the regulatory cane and who I
will soon proceed against for their
various economic crimes and blatant
disrespect for the judiciary in Nigeria.
6.
FLAWS IN THE ACTIONS OF SEC
We have identified numerous flaws in
recent actions on SEC that led to our
action to challenge the unlawful
disengagement of the sacked staff of The
Nigerian Stock Exchange through a class
action suit. As a background to our
case, we invite Nigerians to note some
of the flaws in the actions of SEC:
i.
SEC deployed an unorthodox and
violent method in forcing the exit
of the Director General of The Nigerian
Stock Exchange from office. It should be
clearly noted that Professor Okereke –
Onyiuke is NOT one of my clients and is
not included in this Class Action Suit.
The Investment & Securities Act (ISA)
provides fully for the process of
removing the CEO of a securities
exchange from
office by its Council/Board of
Directors. However (and curiously), SEC
trampled
upon the law in its highly questionable
move against the management of The
Nigerian Stock Exchange led by Professor
Okereke-Onyiuke. Nigerians should worry
about the implications of this for our
civil liberty, where the administrator
of
an Act wantonly disregards the
provisions of the law it administers,
especially
in a democratic government that we now
proudly have in Nigeria.
Incidentally, by a letter dated 4th
August 2010 to the Council of The
Nigerian
Stock Exchange SEC unwittingly admitted
to being aware of a procedure for
removing the Chief Executive Officer of
a Registered Securities Exchange (in
this instance, The Nigerian Stock
Exchange) but subverted the process
midstream
for an expediency that is now beginning
to manifest as response to the desires
of a vested interest. Apparently, the
Commission came to a sudden realization
that the objective of removing Professor
Okereke-Onyiuke from office must be
done expeditiously, by hook or crook.
For the avoidance of doubt, we know for
a
fact that the DG/CEO of The Nigerian
Stock Exchange is appointed and removed,
when necessary, by the Council. There is
nothing under the SEC rules, Investment
& Securities Act and the Memorandum and
Articles of Association of The Exchange
for an Interim Administrator or the
removal of the DG and appointment of
Interim
Administrator for The Exchange by SEC.
Also, this is the context in which
Nigerians must see the SEC letter of 4th
August 2010 directing Council to remove
the DG/CEO (albeit without indicating a
timeframe as required by law) or
indicating her offence). That letter, at
least, was anchored on due process,
which, ironically, the SEC subverted by
issuing another letter to Professor
Okereke-Onyiuke on 5th August 2010
notifying her of her removal from office
without recourse to the Council/Board of
The Exchange despite the fact that the
D.G had given Notice of Voluntary
Retirement as far back as April 2008,
January
2009, January 2010 and June 2010 to the
Council and this has been in the Press
and Punch carried her Retirement Leave
Date of Sept. 5, 2010.
ii.
On the issue of “ongoing
litigation”, have our democratic ideals
become so bastardised and Nigeria has
degenerated to the extent that the
legitimate prosecution of a matter in
the court of law has become an offence
and
a basis for unceremonious termination of
a person’s career, more so when the
person being punished was not involved
in the litigation? The litigation under
reference was between the aggrieved
shareholders of African Petroleum Plc
and
Aliko Dangote, Not Okereke-Onyiuke and
Josephine Igbinosun (NSE company
secretary).
iii.
Also, should SEC be relying on
the unsubstantiated allegation of
Aliko Dangote to punish the Management
and staff of The Exchange as has
happened
since 5th August 2010? It must be noted
that Aliko Dangote was at the time of
the alleged financial mismanagement a
member of the Council (board) of The
Exchange. He had never at any time
expressed any reservations with
financial
management at The Exchange. In fact, the
Council of The Exchange is not aware of
the allegations by Aliko Dangote on
which basis SEC intervened in the
management
and Council of the organization.
Dangote’s conduct in this instance is
self-indicting and should be condemned
for the instability it has brought to
the
stock market.
Also, SEC has not been sufficiently
circumspect in its handling of the
allegation, given that the accounts
under consideration were not Management
Accounts but Audited Accounts of The
Exchange that went through all the
required
levels of approval without any
qualification. For the avoidance of
doubt, the
accounts in question were prepared by
the Council of which Dangote was a
member,
vice president and briefly, the
president until the Court removed him.
(show the
accounts).
Incidentally, I know that these accounts
had been subjected to special audit by
SEC working with external consultants.
In an October 2009 report of this
extra-ordinary inspection, SEC
inspectors remarked that “the auditors
of The
Exchange gave unqualified reports for
the three years ended 2006, 2007, and
2008”. Furthermore, the SEC report noted
that The Exchange had no external
liabilities between 2006 and 2008,
adding, among others, that the functions
of
the Finance & Accounts Section were
“distributed to staff in such a way as
to
facilitate internal checks and
controls”. By the published statement of
the SEC,
the Commission has commenced
investigation into the allegation of
financial
mismanagement at The Exchange in order
to confirm the veracity of the
allegation. This is putting the cart
before the horse because Professor
Okereke-Onyiuke and the rest of the
management of The Exchange have already
been
subjected to a severe punishment by SEC,
including international malignment of
their Integrity, even though the
Commission cannot as we speak accuse
them of
any offence. In the circumstance, it
does not take a genius to know that the
said SEC investigation is contrived,
hostile, imbued with a hidden agenda,
and
has a pre-determined outcome – that is,
the investigation can only work towards
an answer with a view to justifying the
unjust and condemnable actions of the
SEC.
The question should be asked: What
manner of investigation is done in a
major
institution without talking to its
Directors, erstwhile Chief Executive
Officer,
erstwhile Chief Accountant (who was the
Assistant Director General), and other
Management Staff? Instead, questions are
being hauled at middle level managers
and very junior staff who did not make
decisions. They are being intimidated to
answer questions on issues discussed at
Council (board) meetings to which they
were not privy. What business does SEC
and the Sole Administrator have in
directing retired executives of The NSE
, including a long-retired DG, to return
cars that they were entitled to, but
which may no longer be functioning? Is
that
part of corporate governance? What
business does SEC have to want to take
over
the construction of The NSE’s office
building in Port Harcourt? Is this also
corporate governance?
Why is SEC/Sole Administrator of The NSE
sending letters to retired Council
members of The NSE to refund monies paid
to them as Council members to go on
industrial trips to other stock
exchanges and thereby strengthen their
role as
directors of The NSE? When did director
education become an offence in Nigeria?
The so-called forensic auditors have
labeled such legitimate payments as
“productivity bonus” instead of money
paid as travelling expenses for
industrial
visit to other stock exchanges.
Nigerians should not be deceived by the
deliberately leaked false findings of
the much-touted forensic auditors. I
know
for one that the real Council members of
The Exchange have vowed to challenge
the findings in court. Even though the
“whistle blower” himself (Aliko Dangote)
has acknowledged that he intends to
return the N80 million he collected and
spent as travelling expenses between
2007 and 2008, he has not denied ever
collecting money and utilization of it
for Traveling Expenses or Productivity
Bonus.
The media should know that it is common
knowledge that certain persons in the
Council of The Stock Exchange always
destroyed whatever they could not
control.
Unfortunately, Nigerians are folding
their hands and watching this
monopolistic
tendencies being played out at The NSE
with the active connivance of the
Government Regulator.
iv.
SEC alleged “inordinate delays”
in the implementation of The
Exchange’s management succession
programme. But what is unknown to the
public is
that SEC was a major part of the
problem. There is evidence that The
Exchange
was committed to the implementation of a
management succession programme and the
process had progressed smoothly until
SEC, prodded by some vested interests,
intruded into the process under the
guise that The Exchange was a “public
interest organization”. Suddenly, the
Commission came up with a draft Rule 115
in April 2010, which even though it has
not gone through the known process of
Rule Making by the Commission, is now
held as the standard that must guide The
Exchange in its proposed appointment of
DG/CEO and Executive Directors.
v.
It is worthy of note that the
illegal interim administration at
The Exchange and SEC are now vacillating
on the timeline for the appointment of
a new DG and EDs for The Exchange. It is
now being said that a new CEO would not
resume at The Exchange until “early
2011”. Nigerians should ask SEC how much
time is required to perform this “simple
task”, especially in view of the fact
that the stock market is today suffering
as a result of the management vacuum
elicited by the ill-advised actions of
SEC.
Also, in considering this matter, I
believe that the time has come for an
exhaustive examination of the role of
Accenture in the unfortunate drama that
is
threatening the future of the Nigerian
capital market. I recall that at the
height of the media campaign that set
the stage for the SEC’s intervention in
the management of The Exchange,
Accenture was prominently reported as
not being
party to the Executive Recruitment
exercise at The Exchange. Against
rational
expectations, Accenture chose not to
respond to this falsehood and in doing
so
reinforced the disinformation that the
Executive Recruitment was without
independent professional input. But,
curiously, soon after the management of
The
Exchange was taken over by SEC,
Accenture availed SEC with statistics of
responses to the advertisements it
placed in respect of the executive
recruitment programme of The Exchange.
The question is: Who is Accenture
working
for? Who is paying Accenture? Answers to
these questions will manifest in due
course.
vi.
Finally, on the allegation of
“governance challenges” against The
Exchange, I can only describe it as
obtuse and lacking in substance, seeing
that
every organization, including SEC, is
constantly dealing with some form of
governance challenge. If anything, it is
now, following the intervention of SEC,
that The Exchange is facing the worst
kind of governance challenge imaginable
–
which is to be expected, as the
Commission, in spite of the many flaws
attendant
to its actions (and the premise of the
actions), has since 5th August 2010
proceeded to alter the governance
framework of The Exchange by installing
a
“Sole Administrator”, an “Interim
President” and a Mobile Police Force for
The
Exchange when SEC itself is NOT a
“Member” of the Exchange. Does it mean
that
Stock Exchange is now a parastatal of
SEC? Obviously, SEC is now a Regulator
as
well as a Day – to – Day OPERATOR of the
Capital Market!!!!
Definitely, no foreign investor will
invest in a market where a Regulator can
“INVADE” the Capital Market in a
military coup – style and take over the
functions of a Registered Exchange! No
where in the world has this happened;
not
even during the military Governments in
Nigeria!
7.
CONCLUSION
Current developments at The Nigerian
Stock Exchange have blighted the future
of
The Exchange, which had always been
positive and assured, and threaten the
socio-economic development of our dear
nation.
i.
Already, as widely reported in
the Press last week, officials of Ghana
Stock Exchange, are worried that the
developments in the governance of The
NSE
and its market would not augur well for
the proposed integration of the stock
markets of West Africa. Mr. Ekow Afedzie
of the Ghana Stock Exchange had warned
that The NSE officials were at the fore
front of the integration and doubts that
envisaged integration would be achieved
in the absence of these officials. The
tragedy is that Nigeria would have been
a major beneficiary of the proposed
integration, given the size of our
market in the sub region.
ii.
International investors have
adopted a wait-and-see attitude to these
developments, especially in the light of
the poor picture they paint of Nigeria
as a country whose regulators are
disrespectful of the laws, rules and
regulations of the capital market. This
attitude explains in part the renewed
and sustained drop in stock prices
following the SEC’s martial intervention
in
the market processes.
iii.
In contemplating the current
situation in the Nigerian capital
market, we
must remember that the Federal
Government’s Financial System Strategy (
FSS )
Vision 2020 programme is in large part
focused on the capital market as a
vehicle for achieving Nigeria’s
aspiration of becoming one of the Top 20
global
economies by 2020. Arbitrariness and
lawlessness, as demonstrated by SEC (and
its collaborators) and the activities of
an Interim Management and Council
(Board) at The Nigerian Stock Exchange
undermine the workings of the capital
market and should be condemned by all.
Thank you.
FESTUS KEYAMO, ESQ.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010.
|
