ADVERT

13 March 2017

THE WESTERN INFLUENCE ON CORRUPTION IN AFRICA

Often when you read newspapers, listen to the radio and watch television in the West you will are bombarded with how poor and corrupt Africans are. However, you will never watch, read or hear anything in these media outlets on the role play by : Western banking institutions; property development and estate companies; technology corporations; oil and mining cartels; defense and engineering companies; and western political and business elite in promoting corruption in Africa.
When it comes to Africa and the developing world, the Western media pretend to be doing a good job only when there is an embarrassing story or a scandal that undermines their own credibility as the watchdog of the state. It is not uncommon to see poverty stricken Africans being shown in documentaries, movies, and television screens in the West but these same documentaries fail to show the involvement of Western capitalist institutions in fanning the poverty. Although corruption involves a giver and recipient, it is always the taker who is reported in the media. In many instances bribes are offered in order to secure contracts, secure official favour or to induce officials in order to influence the out come of a government decision. In other instances people become corrupt because of the existence of favouring conditions as can be seen in most western countries with their banking secrecy laws.
Why does the media in the West ignore the role of western institutions in corrupt deals? The media in the west tend to ignore the role of western institutions for many reasons. They would rather show the poverty level in Africa but refuse to show the role play by western institutions for fear of loosing revenue through adverts. Most media outlets survive through advertisements from mega businesses and the multinational corporations so for fear of loosing revenues the media turn a blind eye to their activities such bribing politicians, public officials and polluting the environment. Again the editors, programme directors and the other big wigs in the media are thelselves shareholders in the companies in question so why would they want to jeopardise the source of their own wealth?
The enthusiasm with which CNN, BBC, ABC, CBS, ITN, SKYNEWS, television producers portray Africa as poor, backward, least developed and corrupt is not displayed when they report on the role play by Western institutions in perpetuating the aforementioned. They fail to tell the world that the looted funds that make Africans poor are sitting in Europe, America, Australia, New Zealand and other offshore Islands controlled by the West. They fail to tell the world that Africa would be a different place if all the stolen monies are returned from Switzerland, Britain, America, France, Luxembourg, Austria and Liechtenstein. After years of foot draggings Swiss authorities decided to repatriate monies stolen by the Abacha regime. So I asked myself where was the western media when Swiss and British Banks were receiving the looted funds? The fact still remains that until recently and with the exception of the BBC none of the western media establishment had permanent reporters based in Africa with reason only best known to themselves. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3577032.stm
Corruption is rife in Africa because banking institutions in Europe especially Switzerland, France, Jersey Island, Britain, Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, Austria and US among others accept money from African leaders without questioning its source. According to the UN and the AU around $148 billion is stolen from the continent annually by political leaders, multinational corporations, the business elite and civil servants with complicity of banking and property industries in Europe and North America.
Even though western banks act as safe havens for looted funds, very little attention is received from the western media to expose them. No effort has been made by the political elite in Europe and America to force the banks to return these stolen monies because they are often the shareholders and beneficiaries of profits made by these banks. They have no agenda to combact corruption as that would mean no fat dividends for them and no cheap credits for their citizens.
Within five years of his reign (1993-98) Sani Abacha of Nigeria according to official sources was able to stash four billion dollars and between 12 and 16 billion dollars according to unofficial sources. After his death in 1998, investigators in Nigeria, Europe and America stumbled on over 130 bank accounts in Australia, New Zealand, London, New York, France and Switzerland among other countries where some of the money stolen was kept.
According to France24, a French police investigation has established that Bongo and his family own at least 33 luxury properties in France, including a villa located at Rue de la Baume, near the Elysée Palace, in Paris bought in 2007 for 18.8 million Euros. The French President Nicolas Sarkozy was spotted greeting Bongo in this villa bought with funds looted from Gabon. http://www.france24.com/en/20090226-french-court-seizes-gabonese-presidents-accounts-omar-bongo-bank. Other investigations have uncovered that he and his family have at least 59 properties, several bonds and stocks in France alone.
French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner was embarrassed when it was revealed that Bongo’s government paid his consultancy firm a staggering 2.64 million Euros for advice on health policy drawn up by Kouchner before he took office. Source: Timesonline February 5, 2009. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article5661746.ece.Kouchener is not the only person in France, Europe and America to have benfited from the shady and corrupt dealing of Africa's political and business establishments. It has recently come to light that Omar Bongo secretly financed Jacques Chirac and Francois Mitterand election campaigns using money he had stolen from his country.The question is who assisted him to steal and hide his ill-gotten wealth in France I mean the 70 banks accounts stashed with hundreds of millions of euros and the 33 luxury mansions that he bought? Is it not those he helped to become presidents, prime ministers and foreign ministers? The fact is that Bongo was able to steal, mismanage and poorly run his country because of the support he received from those he helped win elections in France.
Araminta Wordsworth of Nationalpost.com says:"The French media are operating under no constraints in commenting on Africa’s longest-ruling despot, a man successive French presidents played a huge role in keeping in power and vice-versa. Bongo contributed to the election campaigns of François Mitterrand and Jacques Chirac; Nicolas Sarkozy’s first act as president-elect was to call the Gabonese president and thank him for his advice. Bongo also worked for the French secret service. But oil was key to his power, as Laurent d’Ersu notes in La Croix". Source: National Post, June 9, 2009
The disgraced Elf-Aquataine executives said they paid Bongo between 30 to 50 million dollars through secrete bank accounts in Switzerland but no attempt has been made to expose and prosecute these banks.
On February 26, 2009 a French court had Omar Bongo’s nine bank accounts containing several millions of Euros frozen. In confirming the court’s decision, lawyer Jean-Philippe Le Bail said, “This concerns Crédit Lyonnais, in which the president of Gabon has two current accounts, two savings accounts and a share account, and BNP, in which he has two checking accounts, a savings account and a share account”. These are the banks whose shady deals with the political and business elite impoverish African countries but which for profits sake the media refuse to tell the world about. The banks know these corrupt leaders have stolen the money yet they pretend not to know until there is a scandal before they begin to act as if they are responsible institutions. How and why Bongo was able to open so many bank accounts in France is only known to the banks and the political establishment in France but it is an undisputable fact that the media in France did notdo enougth to expose the rot in involving Bongo and the institutions in that country.
Most foreign banks have been implicated for receiving billions of dollars of looted funds from the late Mobutu of Zaire; Lansana Conte of Guinea; Eyadema of Togo; and a number of tyrants such as Omar Bongo of Gabon; Obiang Nguema of Equatorial Guinea; Dos Santos of Angola; Denis Sassou Nguesso of Congo; Paul Biya of Cameroon; Arap Moi of Kenya; Jerry Rawlings of Ghana; Ibrahim Babadjinda of Nigeria and a number of sitting and ex-presidents in Africa yet western media is silent about where the funds are being kept.
The banks in Europe and America that aided, abetted and provided sanctuary for Abacha´s $4 billion stolen funds are: Australia and New Zealand Banking Group, ANZ, London Branch; Bank Len, Zurich; Bankers Trust Company, London; Bankers Trust Company, Frankfurt; Bankers Trust Company, New York; Banque Barring Brothers, Geneva; Bank in Liechtenstein A. G. Vaduz; Barclays Bank, New York; Barclays Bank, London; Banque Edouard Constant, General; Banque Nationale De Paris, Geneva; Banque Nationale De Paris, London; Banque Nationale De Paris, Basle; Citibank N. A. London; Citibank N. A. New York; Citibank N. A. Luxembourg; Citibank Zurich; Credit Lyonnais , New York; Credit Suisse , New York; Credit Suisse, General; Credit Suisse, Zurich; Deutche Morgan Grenfell, Jersey; FIBI Bank (Schweiz) A. G. Zurich; First Bank of Boston , London; Goldman Sachs and Company, Zurich; Gothard Bank, Geneva; LGT Liechtenstein Bank, Vaduz; Liechtenstein Landesbank, Vaduz; M. M. Warburg and Company, Luxembourg; M. M. Warburg and Company,Zurich; M. M. Warburg and Company, Hamburg; Merrill Lynch Bank, New York; Merrill Lynch Bank, Geneva; Midland Bank, London; National Westminister Bank, London; Paribus, London; Paribus, Geneva; Royal Bank of Scotland , Leeds; Standard Bank London Limited, London; UBS AG, Zurich; UBS AG, Geneva; Union Bancaire Privee, Geneva; Union Bancaire Privee, London; London Branch; Verwaltungs Und Private Bank A. G., Vaduz; and ANZ, New York; ANZ, Frankfurt. Source: Tell Magazine, October 7, 2002. Only heaven knows how much of Abacha´s loot still remain in these banks. We did not hear anything about these banks in the Western media and how they were helping Abacha to loot Nigeria's resources until his death in the until his death in 1998.
According to a 110 page report prepared by international risk consultancy firm Kroll, Arap Moi and his family have banked £1 billion in 28 countries including Britain but the media in the west will not expose the banks involved.The Guardian, Friday 31 August 2007. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/aug/31/kenya.topstories3
Apart from the banking sector, the property sector in Europe, America and Australia have also connived with the political and business elite in Africa to impoverish the people. Several African leaders have bought properties in Europe and America using monies stolen from their poor countries. It is on record that Mobutu of DRC (Zaire) bought several villas in France, Switzerland, Belgium and many European Countries. Yet again the companies selling the villas have been kept secret by the media. Why ?
It has recently come to light that Arap Moi of Kenya and his family bought several multimillion pound properties in London, New York, South Africa including 10,000-hectare ranch in Australia and bank accounts containing hundreds of millions of pounds. While majority of Kenyans live in slums and in rural areas, with little roofing on their heads and lacking water and other basic necessities of life, Moi’s family live in a £4m home in Surrey and £2m flat in Knightsbridge yet the media will not expose the estate companies involved. The Guardian, Friday 31 August 200, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/aug/31/kenya.topstories3
It is common for western companies looking for lucrative contracts to pay bribes and kickbacks to induce officials into awarding them contracts. For example on 17th September 2002, a Canadian firm called Acres International was convicted by a High Court in Lesotho for paying $260,000 bribe to secure an $8 billion dam contract. Source: Probe International.http://www.eprf.ca/pi/index.cfm?DSP=content&ContentID=5484
In 2002, Halliburton, a company once controlled by Dick Cheney (former US Vice President) was accused of establishing $180m fund and used it to bribe Nigerian officials in order to secure a $10 billion Liquefied Gas Plant contract in Nigeria. Source: Royal Dutch Shell plc .com http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2008/09/04/halliburton-paid-180-million-in-bribes-to-senior-nigerian-government-officials/
Achair Partners (a Swiss company) and Progresso (an Italian company) have been accused of bribing Somalia’s Transition Government officials in order to secure contracts to deposit highly toxic industrial waste in the waters of Somalia. Such corrupt practices by western companies seeking contracts in Africa are one of the reasons why poverty and diseases are rife in the continent.
The catastrophic environmental damage being caused by Oil, mining and timber companies such as Shell, BP, Total, Elf, Texaco, Mittal, Anglo-America Corporation in Nigeria, Ghana, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Angola, Congo, DR. Congo, South Africa, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Senegal do not make the news in the West. How often do we hear about the huge environmental price Africans are paying to satisfy the west’s insatiable appetite for energy and technology? Apart from the huge profits being made by these conglomerates which we often hear in the news, do we hear also their complete disregard for environmental rules; the pollution of rivers, lakes, streams, wells, and the environment? On June 30, 2009 a report by Amnesty International entitled "OIL INDUSTRY HAS BROUGHT POVERTY AND POLLUTION TO NIGER DELTA" catalogues list of environmental destruction and damage that the Oil Cartel is causing in the region. http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/news/oil-industry-has-brought-poverty-and-pollution-to-niger-delta-20090630http://www.democracynow.org/features/shell_on_trial.
In October 2002, after a three year investigation a UN Panel of Experts implicated Cabot Corporation (Boston), Eagle Wings Resources International, and George Forrest’s OM Group (Ohio) for arming rebel groups and collaborating with them to traffic from DR. Congo gold, diamond, timber and most importantly coltan (columbo-tantalite)-a precious ore essential to Sony playstations, laptop computers, and cell phones. Coltan is often spirited out of DRC to U.S., Swiss, Belgian, and German clients by Uganda and Rwanda army officers, rebel groups and through a network of criminal syndicates. In all 85 companies were implicated by the report.http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4999http://globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/181/33592.html
Except the wars and the stranded faces of hungry refugees, do these illegal activities by the corporations make the news in the Western media? Definitely not. Even when local journalists and writers document this for broadcast in the west, it is not published as it does not serve their interests. The media only publish stories after NGOs and civil society organisations have fought to expose corruption and shady deals involving western corporations, business and political leaders.
This is the hypocrisy and double standard of the western media. They want the world to know how poor Africans are but fail to tell the world that Africans are poor because Western banking institutions, property development companies, defence companies and defence contractors, oil and mining corporations are major stakeholders in promoting Africa’s poverty and underdevelopment. Corruption and bribery in Africa and indeed the developing world could be reduced tremendously if the media for once put aside the pick and choose journalism and attached the same importance to show the degree of involvement by western capitalist institutions Europe, America and Japan and their role in keeping Africans poor.
  • The author is a political activist and anti-corruption campaigner.https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Hiding_Africa%27s_Looted_Funds:_The_Silence_of_Western_Media

29 June 2016

KENYA BITES EUROPIAN UNION



Nairobi - Kenya says it supports Britain's exit from the European Union and that it expects no major harm to its economy in the wake of fears of recession following the vote.
Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta said in a statement on Sunday that the vote was the democratic right of the British people and that he respected the decision of the country.
According to The Star, Kenyatta insisted that all would be well, despite well documented reports of trouble looming for some of Britain's biggest beneficiaries, such as Kenya.
He said that the immediate repercussions for Kenya were limited, but that there would be a need for Kenya and the East African community to negotiate separate trade agreements with the United Kingdom.
As reported by Citizen TV, financial experts believed that there would be need for Kenya to prepare well to deal with any aftershocks that might result from the exit last week of Britain from the EU.
A historic referendum vote in the UK last week saw Prime Minister David Cameron being forced to resign in the wake of his failure to convince British people to remain in the EU.
Kenya's Central Bank had last week stated that there would be no effect on the economy and that any loopholes in that regard had been sealed.
In the wake of the British vote, there has been a petition to call for a second referendum which has so far garnered close to 1 million votes, in a bid to return to the polls and reverse the earlier decision.
The Washington Post reported that days after the exit from the EU, British people, according to search engine Google, had prominently asked for the meaning of the European Union, showing the gravity of the vote on most.http://www.news24.com/Africa/News/watch-kenya-supports-british-exit-from-eu-expects-no-major-harm-20160627-2

12 March 2016

U. S. WARNS THE GOVERNMENT OF UGANDA ON ITS HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS

KAMPALA , March 12 (NYUMBANI ) - Uganda has persistently violated the rights of its citizens and media in the aftermath of last month's election which saw President Yoweri Museveni retain his hold on power, the United States said. The comments are the latest sign of deteriorating relations between Western powers and Uganda, an ally in the fight against Islamists in the region. U.S. State Department spokesman John Kirby said in a statement on Friday that Uganda's repeated detention of opposition figures and harassment of their supporters, and the government's interference in a challenge of the poll results are "unacceptable activities in a free and democratic society". "The United States and Uganda have a long standing and strong partnership that has contributed to the stability and prosperity of the region," the statement said. "We are concerned that the Ugandan government's recent actions could endanger the economic and political progress that has enabled our relationship to grow." Uganda's electoral commission declared Museveni, 71 and in power since 1986, the winner of the Feb. 18 election with 60 percent of the vote. Kizza Besigye, who came in second with 35 percent and has rejected the results as fraudulent, has been under virtual house arrest for weeks. A second challenger, former prime minister Amama Mbabazi, has filed an official challenge to the results. Mbabazi said his lawyers' offices were raided soon after filing the challenge. The government has denied any involvement. Museveni has endeared himself to the West by contributing thousands of troops to a peacekeeping mission in Somalia. He has also been credited with bringing relative peace and economic growth to Uganda, a prospective oil producer. But critics say Museveni has not done enough to raise more Ugandans out of poverty or address widespread corruption. Monitors from the European Union (EU) have criticized Uganda for creating an "intimidating atmosphere" around the vote and have said the electoral body lacked transparency and independence. NYUMBANI NEWS REPORT.

11 March 2016

THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION TO DISCLOSE THE BIO METRIC DATA ""MBABAZI'S PETITION"

THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION TO DISCLOSE THE BIOMETRIC DATA "MBABAZI'S PETITION"



THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION TO DISCLOSE THE DATA FROM THE BIO METRIC
VERIFICATION SYSTEM USED AT THE VOTING POLLING STATIONS.

In the amended petition, Mbabazi wants the Electoral Commission to disclose the image clone of the Biometric Voter Verification System [BVVS], database, electronic results transmission and dissemination system.
He claims that it's important to produce such information in order to "add up and tally the number of votes cast for each candidate as recorded in the DR forms for ascertainment of the final result in comparison with that announced and declared by the second respondent [Electoral Commission]."
Mbabazi also seeks the disclosure of the date on the BVVK [Biometric voter verification kit] for each polling station and the BVV database on the national basis to prove that the number of voters declared by the Electoral Commission was materially different from the number of voters recorded on BVV database.
"The number of voters declared by the second respondent included numbers of pre-ticked ballot papers stuffed at various polling stations and post-ticked and stuffed ballot papers in favor of the first respondent in Kiruhura, Sembabule, Bundibugyo, Kasese, Gulu, Lira, Kisoro, Arua, Apac, Moroto, Mpigi, Ntungamo, Pallisa, Rukungiri, Nakasongola, Kamwenge, Sironko, Isingiro, Kanungu, Rakai, Kaabong, Nakaseke, Amuru, Gomba, Kyankwanzi, Butambala, Rakai, Soroti , Luweero, Mubende and Serere, interalia," the petition notes.
Mbabazi contends that the BVVK and BVVS working for nine hours and allocating two minutes per voter could verify approximately 270 voters per polling station and yield approximately 7,562,700 voters nationally.
"In effect, the 10,329,131 voter the second respondent [Electoral Commission] declared as having voted could not have voted on polling day," Mbabazi says.
We have been informed that Mbabazi will use experts to illustrate how the biometric machines work. On February 20, 2016, the day the final results were declared, Mbabazi says that approximately 1,800,000 registered voters had not yet been counted although the number of polling stations declared were 26,223 out of the total 28,010 polling stations.
It's Mbabazi's contention that the results announced by the Electoral Commission in which they declared Museveni as the winner were manifestly different from the results announced at the various polling stations.

"At many polling stations where the petitioner won and or got higher votes than the first respondent [Museveni], the second respondent [Electoral Commission] declared zero results.
In other instances where the petitioners' votes were higher than the first respondent's, they were switched and given to the first respondent," Mbabazi claims.
TALLY CENTER
Unlike in the first petition, with the amendment, Mbabazi questions the process of counting and consolidating of the results through tallying and transmission of results from each polling station to the district tally center, and finally the national tally center saying that it lacked transparency.
According to Mbabazi's lawyers such a practice was contrary to article 1(4) of the constitution since it was shrouded in mystery coupled by concealment of announcing the results and declaring the winner.
"Clearly, the second respondent had no tally center as mandated by the law; instead the chairman [Badru Kiggundu] of the second respondent [Electoral Commission] was receiving forged figures from an illegal tally center run and operated by security agencies at inter alia Naguru," the petition alleges.
Mbabazi argues that at the national tally centre, the candidates' agents were merely listening posts without any input since Kiggundu and the Electoral Commission commissioners would receive results purportedly transmitted from the returning officers.
Mbabazi claims that the Electoral Commission officials would process and fix results and there-after show to agents what they called results.
"From the above process, there was room for switching results when purportedly tallying and doing all malpractices of rigging to alter the final results," the petition notes.
REGISTER
Mbabazi, in the amended petition, says that the Electoral Commission abdicated its constitutional and statutory duty of properly compiling and securely maintaining the national voters register.
Instead, the commission illegally and irregularly retired the duly-compiled voters register and relied on data compiled by the ministry of Internal Affairs for purposes of issuing national identity cards.
"On polling day, voters were identified using the national identity card issued by the national identification and registration authority instead of a voter's card issued by the second respondent contrary to sections 30(4) and 35 of the PEA," Mbabazi said.
As a result, Mbabazi says, many eligible voters who did not register for the national identity card were disenfranchised while ineligible voters who registered for the national identity card were verified as eligible voters

10 March 2016

OPPOSITION LAWYERS' OFFICES BURGLED"MAIN SUSPECT,UGANDA POLICE"

Uganda polls: Opposition lawyers' offices burgled"main suspect,Uganda police"

Yoweri Museveni, Amama Mbabazi
KAMPALA, Uganda (AP) — An opposition group that launched a court case against the re-election of Uganda's long-time president accused the police of breaking into a lawyer's office and seizing crucial evidence.
Men in police uniform jumped over a wall fence and broke into the office of lawyers representing former presidential candidate Amama Mbabazi, the Go Forward group said Wednesday.
The incident took place Tuesday night in the Ugandan capital, Kampala, after guards assigned to protect the property were beaten, said Medard Sseggona, a spokesman for Go Forward.
"They were specifically looking for info relating to the petition," he said. "'It was a well-orchestrated move."
Mbabazi, who was the Go Forward Candidate in presidential elections last month, pressed a lawsuit at the Supreme Court challenging the re-election of President Yoweri Museveni. Mbabazi's legal team has described the elections as a "sham," echoing similar comments by Kizza Besigye, the main opposition leader.
Police spokesman Fred Enanga denied police were involved in the alleged burglary and accused the opposition of "playing games" aimed at discrediting the police. The police are investigating the incident, he said.
International election observers cited may irregularities with Uganda's elections, which were marred by late delivery of polling materials in opposition strongholds, some incidents of violence, and a government shutdown of social media.
In the lawsuit before Uganda's highest court, Mbabazi's lawyers argue that the elections were tainted by widespread illegalities and are seeking a vote recount in disputed districts such as Museveni's home area, where official results showed him winning with 100 percent support.
Museveni, in power since 1986, won about 60 percent of the votes and his nearest rival, Besigye, got about 35 percent, according to final tally. Museveni denied the allegations of vote fraud.
Offices of lawyers challenging Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni's victory in last month's election have been broken into.
Lead counsel Mohamed Mbabazi said laptops, computers and documents were taken from his office.
The lawyers are representing Uganda's former Prime Minister Amama Mbabazi who wants the election results annulled.
Local and international observers criticised the election process which saw Mr Museveni win 60% of the vote.
.
Museveni v Mbabazi
Amama Mbabazi, 67, used to be an ally to President Museveni. He started his professional life as a lawyer and went on to hold a variety of ministerial roles under Mr Museveni including security, defence, justice minister. He has also been the attorney general and was prime minister for three years before he was sacked. He went on to challenge his old ally in February's election.
He hinted at an election rally that the two had fallen out over Mr Museveni breaking a promise that he would step down.
Yoweri Museveni, 71, has been in power since winning a five-year guerrilla war in 1986 and he is one of Africa's longest-serving leaders. His final term was meant to end in 2006, but in 2005 he won a campaign to lift the constitutional term limits.

3 March 2016

WHY IS BARCLAYS BANK PULLING OUT OF AFRICA AFTER 100 YEARS

Why is  Barclays Bank pulling out of Africa?

IS AFRICA'S ECONOMY GROWING OR?
Barclays bank in Nairobi
If Barclays is selling its African business, what does that tell us about the bank's view of the continent?

As the UK bank Barclays announced its full year results, local markets were less interested in the numbers and more interested in the back story.
The rumour mill had already been churning for months that there would be a big shake-up.
More specifically there were murmurs, now of course confirmed, of a sale in Africa.
And all this talk of Barclays wanting to get rid of its 62% stake in its Africa business is naturally viewed as an indication that the story of African growth isn't as real as many "Africa rising" headlines have been suggesting.
When a leading British bank gives up a legacy and a long history of operating in Africa, it's not a good a sign.

Bogged down

However the story of Barclays' supposed failure in Africa has as much to do with Barclays as it does with Africa as a continent.
Even though Barclays has maintained a presence in Africa for more than a century, the bank was very slow in taking up the fresh opportunities that presented themselves in the past decade.
Barclays was not as nimble as other banks, such as Standard Bank, Ecobank or GT Bank, which have been snapping up opportunities in Africa.
It was bogged down by the internal bureaucracy of tying up all its assets in a merger with South Africa's ABSA bank in order to create Barclays Africa.
That process began in 2005, and is yet to be fully completed, and both banks have retained their separate identities thus far.
BARCLAYS IN AFRICA SINCE 1925
  • Barclays has had a presence in Africa since 1925
  • Barclays Bank Plc currently owns 62.3% of Barclays Africa Group Limited (BAGL) which controls banks in 10 African countries including Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda
  • Barclays Africa Group employs 45,000 people across the continent
  • Barclays Bank Plc has announced plans to dramatically reduce its stake in BAGL
  • In addition Barclays owns Barclays Bank Egypt and Barclays Bank Zimbabwe which it also plans to sell
  • A full rebranding exercise was suspended a month ago, which should have been an indication of things to come.
    The process took longer than had been anticipated which required global shareholders to wait patiently before earning the fair value for their stake.

    Continental problems

    But the challenge for Barclays has certainly been compounded by the volatility in global markets over the past year, the downturn in the commodities cycle, the slowing of China and the depreciation of many African currencies.
    So the opportunities for more growth in Africa simply dwindled.
    That may have created fears within Barclays that local African economies simply weren't ripe for retail banking.
    In other words the thinking might have been that in the near future the signs were not promising.

    The unemployment figures suggested that not enough jobs were being created for young Africans to start opening up personal and business banks accounts.
    Oil worker
    Many African economies have grown strongly over the last decade, including Nigeria: but Barclays isn't convinced the future is rosy enough
    That doesn't bode well for a bank looking to increase its footprint on the continent.
    It's quite unfortunate that Barclays was seemingly ham-strung in a situation where it should have had first mover advantage, having been in Africa for almost a century.

    Staley's moves

    Another important variable is Jes Staley himself. The new chief executive was appointed in late October and in less than six months he has made bold moves.
    The urgency with which he is acting creates the impression that he's under pressure to turn things around - quickly.
    From the moment he took over, he immediately raised concerns about the volatile market conditions that have seen the economies of Asia and Africa slowdown.
    James Staley
    Chief executive Jes Staley says Barclays owns 62% of the assets but shoulders 100% of the liabilities for its African business, the reason he cites for wanting change
    It's important to note that Mr Staley is not only pulling out of Africa, but also plans to downsize in other emerging markets such as in Asia, Russia and Brazil.
    As the situation worsened and African currencies became weaker, the argument to stay on the continent became less compelling.
    Of particular concern, has been the current state of the South African economy since Barclays Africa is listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange.
    An almost 40% fall in the value of the South African Rand since the beginning of 2015 inadvertently reduced the value of shareholders equity into Barclays Africa.
    Unfortunately there is not much that banking executives can do to resolve global volatility and general perceptions about the state of the South African economy.
    So without guarantees of when the situation would improve Mr Staley has opted to leave.

    Who will buy?

    The focus now is going to be on the steps that need to be taken in order to sell Barclays' stake of an almost two-thirds majority.
    It doesn't come cheap.
    Potential investors would need to raise nearly $4bn to buy Barclays.
    In these markets, that could be deemed quite expensive.
    Someone holding a rand note.
    Since January 2015, the South African currency has depreciated by almost 40%
    In itself the sale will inspire a new round of speculation and possibly more rumours.
    Already, there is talk of that the Public Investment Corporation, South Africa's largest pension fund, is interested.
    But more investors will have to come to the party in order to foot that bill.
    Depositors may be worried about what will happen to their funds.
    Both Barclays and ABSA have assured bank regulators that depositors' funds are safe, and only share certificates will be changing hands.

    Lost shine

    Experts do not foresee a run on the banks.
    However for African countries needing a cheerleader, the Barclays sale will have the opposite effect.
    It signifies high risks in Africa, low growth prospects and lost shine.
    The repercussions will be felt in the long term, as other investors decide take the Barclays cue and sell-up to refocus on Europe and America, the markets now deemed safer and better.http://www.bbc.com/news/business-35695601

    ADVERTISEMENT

    ON FUCUS

    WOMEN AND SOCIAL MEDIA HARASSMENT: The Empowering Internet Safety Guide for Women

    " Women are often targeted simply because they are women. Attacks are often sexualized or misogynistic, and rhetoric tends to focus o...

    NYUMBANI POPULAR POST

    Translate lauguage

    Pageviews

    EXTRA BLOG POST