 Zonin causes internal wranglings within the Nigerian Governor's Forum and major political parties. Is the South's turn in 2023 or will the presidency and other positions be thrown open? And Facebook and its other social media sites, WhatsApp and Instagram suffer a global shutdown lasting more than six hours. Also this morning, resident doctors call off strike and sets to go back to work tomorrow. Good morning and welcome to the breakfast on PLOS TV Africa. I am Osaugie Ogboa. Beautiful Tuesday morning. Thank you very much for joining us. And we hope that we're going to have a very, very interesting round of discussions this morning, talking from Zonin, of course. And then also discussing about the resident doctors who have eventually called off their strike. Doctors are meant to be back to work tomorrow. And of course that means more life in the health sector will be discussing with someone from that space this morning. So try to understand exactly what's going on and if it's likely that the strike might be called back on. But before that, let's share with you a couple of things that have been trending in the last 24 to 48 hours. One of the biggest discussions on social media today is the Nazco for terrorism controversy. And it was, of course, it came into light two days ago when investigative journalist David Undain put out a report that had been compiled over time. You know, basically detailing how certain persons of interest have basically been found wanting to either be supporting or funding terrorism for the last couple of decades. It goes back to as far back as 1955, even before Nigeria's independence, and starts a story of how certain personalities met with each other and eventually got support from the Saudi Arabian government and from there began to fund what was then called some level of Islamic terrorism or from the metallism here in Nigeria. And of course, that's eventually snowballed or led to the birth of what we today know as Boko Haram a couple of years later. It basically names certain people and one of them, of course, that's where the headline Nazco for terrorism comes from, a person called Ahmed Idris Nasreddin who basically was the founder of the Nazco company and a couple of other companies under his watch. He eventually passed on at the age of 96 and handed over to his son who currently now controls the business. But from details from WikiLeaks, from what David Undain was able to find out, and of course, this is, I believe, information that are out there on the Internet. Ahmed Idris Nasreddin had been fingered by the United States government as far back as 2001 or 2002 to be responsible to, you know, somehow, some way have helped with money laundering for terrorists and helped finance some of these terrorist groups from the Middle East to Algeria and, you know, some parts of Africa here. The birth of certain groups that had, of course, you know, led to the training of the people who eventually became terrorists in Nigeria, who eventually became responsible for some of the bombings that we saw in, you know, late 2009 and further down, you know, here in Nigeria. That was the origin. But it doesn't just name Ahmed Idris Nasreddin, it also speaks about people called, a man called Yakubu Katsina, as it's popularly known, another person called Shahruah Haruna, who are both members of what is called the Jibwis or Izala movement, which currently exists here in Nigeria. One of them is a deputy president and the other one both are founding fathers, founding members of the Izala movement here in Nigeria. Not long ago, I remember on social media, I had seen a picture of a boss that became viral and it was a boss for Jibwis, which was basically, you know, to kill innovation and promote Sunnah. That was what the ministry was set up for, the agency was set up for, and they had bosses. They had staff, I believe. They had people who were running those things here in Nigeria. But not a lot of people knew what those things were for, but from David Oondane's investigative report, it shows that some of all those things have given birth and have supported the birth of, you know, certain ideas of Islamic extremism in northern Nigeria, and that of course includes the birth of Boko Haram. The last two names that I mentioned, according to the report, and that is the Yakubu Katsina and Shahua Haruna, were accused of abiding Nigerian government as early as 2005. Actually, this started maybe, you know, in 2002, but eventually we are arrested in 2005 and accused of trying to set up Taliban and other terrorist camps here in Nigeria. The Abassinger government took action back then in 2005 and, you know, got them arrested. Fonds were seized from them. They had, of course, just returned from a particular camp here in Africa where, you know, that camp, of course, had, you know, been responsible for training terrorists. And they were arrested by the Abassinger government and eventually released a couple of weeks later. And, you know, of course went back into their business, I believe, and of course currently now are founding members and part of the Isaiah movement here in Nigeria. And that's where the controversy is. So, aside Amir Idris Nasreddin, these are the two persons of interest. Amir Idris Nasreddin also was named by the Nigerian government and assets were also frozen here in Nigeria long ago. But after all of that happened, the bone of contention here is that these three persons of interest, and of course the story goes back all the way to Sheikh Ahmad Gumi's father. His name Ababakar Mamoud Gumi way back then. That's when it starts actually in 1955. But these three persons of interest basically have over time, you know, continued to run their business here in Nigeria inclusive. And of course, according to the reports, allegedly, you know, have led to the birth of what eventually became Boko Haram. Without being questioned, without being arrested, without some of these details being exposed. And that's what the investigative report is basically saying. And it also, of course, puts pictures of these persons, you know, with the president, Muhammad Abu Ari, and of course Issa Pantami, who of course was, you know, popular name a couple of months ago because of controversial things that he had said rather a while ago concerning terrorism and Boko Haram. And so that's where, you know, the bone of contention is that if these persons had been arrested, had been, you know, mentioned to very likely be found in terrorism for many, many years, why are they still walking free in Nigeria? And why do they have, you know, some relationship with the current administration? Why are they taking pictures with the president? Because if the president should, you know, have all these details, if he knows, you know, the background of these persons, then there really shouldn't be any relationship. That's really where the bone of contention is. And why have they not been arrested? If you also remember not long ago, the CBN governor, Governor Mefiel, had, you know, made mention that they were setting bearded charge operators that were accused of funding terrorism in Nigeria and, you know, being a platform with which terrorists loaned their money and, you know, spread money across themselves. One of these persons apparently runs a BDC in Nigeria. And so that's also one of the things that was mentioned. That how did a person who was, maybe mentioned, was arrested, you know, for his links to terrorism, for funding terrorism, supporting terrorist groups as early as 2001, 2002, and eventually was arrested sometime in 2005. How did that person eventually now be able to own a bureau d'Orchage here in Nigeria? And very likely is one of the reasons the CBN governor had to, you know, put a blockade on certain BDCs trading here in Nigeria. So there's many of these, you know, issues here and there. And once again, you know, I've always mentioned body language and what it looks like for the current administration and certain things that it just should not be found to be doing. And it's not just the current administration. Over time, how much investigation have we been able to carry out with regards to certain persons of interest and what steps have been taken, you know, with regards to those persons that may have helped us with our fighting against terrorism. Today we're talking about 400 people or more who have been accused of funding terrorism in Nigeria and the current administration has still failed to expose these persons or let us know who they are. Are there any high ranking members of the current government? Are there any politicians? Are there any businessmen that Nigerian people should be wary of? Nobody knows. And so that's, you know, some of the things that should be mentioned here. And of course, where Saudi Arabia also comes in you know, the parts that it also played many, many years, decades ago to bring forth, you know, what is called Wahhabism and, you know, that level of Islamic extremism. But you can find the report, I think, it's everywhere online. You can search for it and read more and understand what exactly the Nazco for terrorism controversy is. Nasreddin apparently is the owner of the Nazco conflicts that we all grew up with. And that's where that name comes from. Away from terrorism and its funding, let's look to other things that have trended and now we're talking money. From a governor of Anambra State, Peter Obi, also came into the limelight in the last 48 hours and there are certain reasons why I'll share with you. He's not the only one. A new report that I just saw this morning also names a current political leader here in Nigeria who was a huge part of the Bacha government back then. He's accused of laundering certain billions of dollars for Sania Bacha back then. But of course that only dropped this morning. We'll figure out more about it. But the Peter Obi one basically detailed, you know, certain things concerning shell companies in the Bahamas and then, you know, the British Virgin Islands and certain places that are known across the world to be tax havens, to be places where people open up shell companies so that they can avoid tax in their countries. I'll quickly mention that controversy here concerning Peter Obi is not necessarily tax evasion, which is a crime, but tax avoidance, which really isn't illegal. The richest people in the world, the Jeff Bezos and the rest of them all pretty much carry out these same things. They, you know, set up shell companies in certain places across the world that don't, you know, tax your business and that way you don't have to pay taxes wherever it is that your business is. So it's a thing that a lot of rich people do. But the challenge is there are certain people that do it because of London funds, basically. There are certain people that also use those same tax havens to save money that have stolen from government or stolen somehow, some way, or maybe have even used for funding terrorism or very, very dubious activities. But of course, that's not what Peter Obi has been, you know, a finger at four here. The Primim Times report, which of course is a project that saw about 600 journalists across 150 news organizations across the world eventually looking through 11.9 million confidential files. It was part of a global international consortium for investigative journalists-led project called Pandora Papers. And if you look at your favorite podcast across the world today, The Daily, The Washington Post, The New York Times, every single one of them currently is having discussions on Pandora Papers. And I can't wait for the show this morning to end so I can dive deep in and listen to every bit of information concerned in Pandora Papers. But of course, here in Nigeria, Peter Obi is the first one that was named as someone who has shell companies in the British Virgin Islands and other places where very likely he, you know, of course, opened up those companies so to avoid tax payment. The bone of contention on this story is tax avoidance. And if he should have declared these things to the Code of Conduct Bureau when he was a governor or when he was running as a vice presidential candidate on the, you know, with Artik Wababaka in 2019, Emma also quickly mentioned that premium times did contact Peter Obi with written questions and had an in-person interview with him weeks ahead of this publication. He admitted that he did not declare these companies and the funds and properties they hold in his asset declaration filings with the Code of Conduct Bureau. He said he was unaware that the law expected him to declare assets or companies he jointly owns with his family members or anyone else. And so that's where, you know, it might be a little tricky here and there. The premium times report doesn't in any way, in 1904, you know, where these funds came from, if they were taken while he was in government, if they were funds stolen from Manambara State, it doesn't in any way say anything like that. He says that he has shell companies where, you know, he, you know, sets up business names that mirror the businesses here in Nigeria and that way he doesn't necessarily have, he doesn't pay, you know, certain taxes, which obviously, once again, is not necessarily a crime. And even the premium times, you know, reporters or people who posted a story repeatedly said that he hasn't been accused of anything. He hasn't necessarily committed any crime. It would be maybe a little more juicy if there's more details about this that show that some of these funds came maybe from the Manambara State government or anything like that. But, you know, nothing like that says it. So it's really just a conversation, you know, between tax evasion versus tax avoidance. And should he have declared all these things while he was running for as vice presidential candidate. In 2019, to the Code of Conduct Bureau, should he have and is there ways around it that he maybe didn't need to, certain conversations that need to be had and that's why his name is in the news this morning. I'll just quickly mention that the latest one that has been released that I saw this morning, I hope I can quickly find it. Maybe not. Okay, yes, I can quickly find it. It's talking about Governor Bagudu. Yes, that's the name that has been released this morning. And so we'll look further into it and see what it details and, of course, share with you very likely tomorrow morning on the show. Our final top trending story this morning. Of course, everyone is aware that yesterday, Facebook, one of the biggest social media sites in the world, along with Instagram and WhatsApp, which Facebook both owns, shot down yesterday and put a lot of people in chaos. Apparently, they had made some mistakes or there were some errors, you know, at the Facebook office. I really don't know how to explain this, but there were some errors in the Facebook office that led to the Facebook site eventually crashing and that led to all the chaos across the world yesterday. None of these apps worked for more than six hours. It was sometime just before midnight that some of them began working again. Instagram festival started and then WhatsApp started and then, I believe, Facebook, of course, was fully functional again. And so, yes, it did create a lot of controversy. Those who do not have Twitter, mostly here in Nigeria, because of the ban, were completely caught off social media and the only thing that was available was maybe iMessage or regular messaging and, of course, emails and the Bible app. Just to quickly mention that your Bible app was working yesterday when the other apps were working. So you had enough time, six straight hours to read as much of the Bible as you could instead of being frustrated that your Instagram wasn't working. But the important part here was really to discuss how much this affects us in the world today. In 2021, how reliant are people on social media? How reliant are businesses on Instagram and Twitter and Facebook and, of course, WhatsApp? And if these apps are taken away from us for the next two months, maybe for a six-month period, how many businesses will suffer and how much loss will be incurred by businesses across the world, including here in Nigeria? One of the things that I've noticed in the last few years is that many, many people have been able to survive off businesses on social media. They've been able to post and channel most of their content on social media, on Instagram, mostly, and on Twitter. They've been able to set up small businesses over there where they make sales every single day. Due deliveries, it could be food, it could be footwear, it could be clothing, anything. But they have a large clientele base on those platforms, including makeup artists, I remember now. But what happens if these platforms are taken away? Will businesses here in Nigeria be able to survive? How many people will be affected if these platforms are completely taken away? And it's a great time for everyone to realize the importance of spreading your business platforms beyond Facebook because, of course, Facebook owns Instagram and WhatsApp. And so if Facebook faints tomorrow, two of them are all three are going. So it's an important time for everyone to realize the importance of moving their businesses to other platforms, being able to have an email list of all your clients and some of all of that. Get on YouTube, basically. Welcome once again to The Breakfast. Chris Wanda joins us next for Off the Press, where we talk about the major stories making headlines this morning. Welcome.