When will Nigerians stop losing money to Ponzi schemes?

HOW many more Nigerians must lose their savings before the authorities admit something is fundamentally wrong with the way Nigeria regulates investment schemes? The latest case is the alleged collapse of PXES, an online investment platform that reportedly stopped paying investors in early September. Investors who put in tens of thousands to millions of naira are counting their losses. Some reportedly visited the company’s offices in Yola, Adamawa State, and Kabba, Kogi State, after they could no longer access their money. Videos reportedly showed aggrieved investors removing office equipment in Yola. Similar incidents were reported in Kabba.

This is not the first or second such case. It is part of a pattern that has lasted for decades. From the old ‘wonder banks’ to MMM, MBA Forex, CBEX and now PXES, the names and technology change, but the pattern remains. Nigerians invest their savings, schemes collapse, promoters disappear or face prolonged investigations, and victims struggle to recover their money. Investment fraud is too often blamed solely on the victims. Nigerians must exercise due diligence, as unusually high returns, little or no risk and dependence on new investors are clear warning signs identified by the SEC. However, personal responsibility does not excuse regulatory failure. Under severe economic pressure, Nigerians seek legitimate ways to protect their savings, pay school fees and cope with inflation. When a company operates openly through offices, employees, websites, social media and recognised bank accounts, citizens may reasonably assume it is being monitored by the authorities. This is precisely why accountability must extend beyond the victims to the institutions responsible for protecting the public: beginning with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

First, the SEC, Nigeria’s capital-market regulator, registers and monitors operators, investigates suspicious activities and enforces securities laws. Although it warned Nigerians about MMM, Loom Nigeria Money, Flip Cash Investment and MBA Forex, warnings were not enough; timely detection and enforcement were needed to prevent losses. The MBA case raises serious questions. Reports from the CBN’s court action showed that 125,397 investors deposited about ?171.128 billion into MBA-related accounts before they were frozen in February 2021. Which banks held the funds? Were suspicious transactions reported? And when did the banks, CBN, SEC and NFIU act? The fraud operators bear primary responsibility, but the CBN and commercial banks must also be scrutinised. Freezing the accounts does not prove collusion, but the failure to detect and stop suspicious transactions earlier raises concerns about monitoring, intelligence sharing and regulatory intervention.

The NFIU receives, analyses and shares financial intelligence on money laundering, terrorism financing and related crimes. Having warned about Ponzi schemes and unregulated investments, it must explain whether alerts were generated when billions flowed from thousands of investors: and where the money went.The EFCC investigates financial crimes. MBA investors reportedly protested at its Port Harcourt office in April 2021, demanding recovery and prosecution, while the agency later warned against fraudulent investment schemes. But where are the convictions, recovered assets and documented results? Investigation is not conviction, arrest is not justice, and freezing an account is not recovery. The ICPC must act where corruption or abuse of office is involved. The CAC provides corporate identity, not authority to solicit investments; regulators must quickly detect CAC-registered companies operating without SEC approval. Banks and payment companies must also be investigated because Ponzi schemes rely on accounts, transfers and electronic channels. Investigators must identify who processed, received, moved and withdrew the money, trace the beneficiaries and assets, and disclose what was recovered.

The police must investigate offences within their mandate, while agencies coordinate their roles: SEC for investment regulation, CBN for banking supervision, NFIU for financial intelligence, EFCC for financial crimes, ICPC for corruption, police for criminal conduct, and CAC for corporate information. Criminals do not operate in departmental silos; government must not investigate in silos either. Victims should not simply be dismissed as greedy or foolish. Unrealistic returns should raise suspicion, but it is the promoter who designs the scheme, makes the promises, recruits investors, controls the accounts and moves the money. Fraudulent investment schemes and ‘wonder banks’ predate the internet. Technology has merely expanded their reach through smartphones, websites, social media and modern banking channels.

Government institutions must also face scrutiny. Agencies should disclose when they issued warnings, froze accounts, made referrals or recovered assets. Any negligence, corruption or collusion must be investigated and punished. The Federal Government should independently review major Ponzi schemes of the past two decades, examining their promoters, registrations, banks, suspicious-transaction reports, regulatory intelligence, prosecutions, convictions and recoveries. The CBN deserves particular scrutiny: since it eventually froze MBA’s accounts, the public is entitled to know what happened before then. Were warning signs reported and shared among the banks, CBN, SEC, NFIU and EFCC?The latest PXES case must not become another brief news story. Authorities must determine who promoted it, how much was collected, where the money went, which banks and accounts were used, whether suspicious transactions were reported, and when regulators became aware. Any institutional failure must be established; if the scheme evaded reasonable controls, the public should be told how. PXES is the latest reported example of a recurring problem seen with MMM, MBA and CBEX. The names, platforms and promises change, but the pattern remains. Nigeria cannot continue regulating Ponzi schemes only after citizens have lost their money. Promoters must be prosecuted, funds traced, assets recovered and institutions held accountable.

The question is no longer only why Nigerians fall for Ponzi schemes, but why these schemes keep succeeding despite the regulators, banks, intelligence agencies, law-enforcement bodies and laws meant to stop them. Unless that question is answered, another PXES will emerge.

Bimputh Lanka liquidation advances, Supreme Court appeal ongoing

Bimputh Lanka Investments PLC’s liquidation is moving ahead, with the court-appointed liquidator filing a preliminary report on the process, even as the company’s challenge to the winding-up order remains before the Supreme Court, the company said yesterday.

The Commercial High Court of the Western Province, in Colombo, ordered that the company be wound up under Section 270(e) read with Section 271 of the Companies Act No. 07 of 2007, provisions that allow a court to wind up a company unable to pay its debts.

The company has sought leave from the Supreme Court to appeal against the order. The case is still being heard, and the company said it would update the market once a determination is made.

Liquidator G.K. Sudath Kumar was appointed on 26 June, 2025. Notice of his appointment and of the winding-up order was published in the newspapers and in the Government Gazette of 18 July, 2025, and the relevant form was filed with the Registrar of Companies.

The Liquidator has since called for Statements of Affairs, formal declarations of the company’s assets and liabilities, from its Directors, and has filed his preliminary report on the conduct of the liquidation.

The company said it would make further announcements as material developments arise.

OpenAI shelves GPT-6.1 Astra over safety concerns

OpenAI yesterday confirmed it will not release GPT-6.1 Astra, its new autonomous AI model, after it failed to meet the company’s safety standards, a rare case of a major developer withdrawing a product over risk.

The model, designed to browse the web and operate apps without human input, fell short on staying within its scope and authorisation and on how it reports back to users on the work it has done, OpenAI Head of Safety Systems Saachi Jain said. ‘When we ship it to users, we have an extremely high bar in terms of safety and alignment,’ she said. The decision was first reported by the Wall Street Journal.

Astra’s predecessor, the flagship GPT-6 Astra, was launched in September to handle complex reasoning and execute tasks autonomously. It is unclear whether a revised version will feature at OpenAI’s annual DevDay developer conference in San Francisco.

The withdrawal follows mounting scrutiny of OpenAI’s security controls. Last week, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese disclosed that a rogue OpenAI agent had breached Government websites and systems in June, which experts described as the first known case of its kind. He criticised the company for notifying the Government through a generic email address.

OpenAI yesterday apologised, conceding it should have handled its response better. It said the breach affected Services Australia, the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, the Victorian Department of Health and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. The company said it began investigating on learning of the incidents in mid-August and notified the agencies between 10 and 24 September, but should have shared early findings sooner.

OpenAI said it will fund cyber security measures, provide dedicated support to affected agencies, set up a taskforce on risks from advanced AI agents and develop approaches for disclosing future AI incidents. A senior executive will attend an Australian Joint Select Committee hearing on AI on 6 October.

In July, OpenAI disclosed that its systems had accessed the internet and hacked into open-source developer platform Hugging Face, which Nvidia agreed to acquire this month for $ 12.9 billion. On Monday, Nvidia released software safety tools for AI agents, including one that uses its chips’ hardware features to contain them, which it said could have prevented the Hugging Face breach.

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang has largely dismissed calls for tighter regulation, arguing that rogue agents are an engineering problem. Pope Leo XIV, speaking in France on Monday, questioned that stance, noting that Huang backs technical guardrails while opposing Government regulation. ‘This is a problem that I think we need to sit down and talk about,’ the Pope said.

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei are among industry leaders who have urged a slower pace of development. US President Donald Trump, who is set to host tech executives with House Speaker Mike Johnson at the White House to discuss AI regulation, has dismissed concerns over the technology’s risks as a ‘hoax’, arguing existing US laws are sufficient.

Seyi Makinde deserves a hug

Sometimes, governance is not about making the loudest noise. It is about seeing a problem, thinking around it and solving it.

Take what Seyi Makinde has done with the new Ibadan bypass.

You are coming from Lagos on the Lagos-Ibadan Expressway. Instead of entering the belly of Ibadan to wrestle with traffic, heat, impatient ‘Micra’ drivers and the familiar Nigerian symphony of horns, you simply veer off.

Then-breeze, awesome breeze caressing your face.

You are moving, not spending what feels like half a lifetime trying to cross Ibadan. Just a smooth stretch of road, the kind that makes you lean back in your seat and say, ‘Ah! So government can actually think?’

And before you have finished enjoying the ride, you are on the Osun stretch.

Eighteen minutes, yes, just 18 minutes drive

That is not merely a road. That is time returned to the people.

That is a businessman reaching his destination earlier, a truck driver spending fewer hours in traffic, a family travelling with less stress, groomsmen arriving at the wedding before the couple enters panic mode. That is saving expensive fuel.

And this is where we must give Governor Makinde his flowers.

Some governors think. Some governors complain. Some governors think about why they cannot do something. Others think about how they can do it.

There is a particularly lazy Nigerian governmental logic that says: ‘It is a federal road, therefore we cannot touch it.’

Wonderful.

So everybody should suffer because a signboard says ‘Federal’?

Please.

There are governors who have discovered that leadership sometimes means thinking beyond the legal boundary of your desk. You engage the Federal Government. You collaborate. You negotiate. You find funding. You solve the problem within the law.

Because the ordinary traveller does not care whether the pothole belongs to Abuja, Ibadan, Osun or Mars.

He just wants to get home alive and on time.

That is why infrastructure such as this bypass is bigger than Oyo State.

Look at the geography.

Lagos connects to Ogun. Ogun connects to Oyo. Oyo opens the route towards Osun, Kwara and the rest of the country.

When Ibadan traffic is eased, many states breathe.

A Lagos trader heading to Osogbo benefits.

An Osun farmer taking produce towards Lagos benefits.

A transporter moving goods northward benefits.

A family travelling from Lagos through Osun benefits.

Businesses benefit.

Tourism benefits.

Logistics benefits.

And most importantly, ordinary Nigerians get back something governments have stolen from them for decades: time.

Soon, with the right road connections and continued improvements, the journey from Lagos to Osogbo could become less than three hours rather than the unpredictable ordeal Nigerians have become accustomed to.

That is legacy.

Not the number of billboards carrying your face.

Not the number of times your commissioners praise you on television.

Not the number of committees you inaugurated.

A road that continues to save people’s time and money long after you have left office? Now, that is legacy.

And perhaps that is the difference between a governor who is merely occupying a Government House and one who is actually thinking about the people outside it.

Because governance should not be a permanent exercise in wringing one’s hands and explaining why something cannot be done.

‘It is a federal road.’

‘There is no money.’

‘The previous administration…’

‘We are waiting for approval…’

‘It is not our responsibility…’

At some point, Nigerians simply want to ask:

‘Oga, are you governing or writing an excuse letter?’

Governor Makinde has shown something refreshing: sometimes, the problem is not that the government cannot solve a problem. The problem is that nobody has bothered to think creatively enough about solving it.

So, yes, Governor Seyi Makinde deserves the applause here.

Not because everything in Oyo is perfect. It isn’t.

Not because governors should be worshipped. They shouldn’t.

But because when somebody does something that makes life demonstrably easier for thousands-perhaps millions-of people, we should be grown enough to say so.

Nigeria has enough complainers and finger-pointers.

What 22A debate left behind

Laws are passed and forgotten. Perceptions stay. Long after the details of the 22nd Amendment fade, Sri Lankans will remember what the debate around it seemed to reveal. It is worth asking what that is.

The first perception is the one the critics warned about: a Government reaching into the courts. The concern was not baseless. The amendment raises the retirement age of sitting judges, not only future ones, and its timing coincided with the approaching retirement of a Supreme Court judge. The UN Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers raised the same worry, though she was careful to say that appearance is not proof, and that a judge who benefits from a law is not, for that reason alone, biased.

Yet the facts deserve equal weight. The age was raised for every judge of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal alike, by the same two years. A favour meant for one person rarely comes in one size for all. If this was a scheme to keep a friendly bench, it was a strangely clumsy one. The Government, for its part, kept the doubt alive by refusing simple safeguards, such as transitional rules, that would have put the matter to rest. Stubbornness is not the same as intent, but it looks like it.

So the first perception remains possible, but thin.

The second perception was not what anyone set out to create. It came from watching who grew angry, and how.

Principled objection has a certain tone. It argues about rules, cites precedents and proposes alternatives. It is patient, because principle can afford to be. Parliament heard some of that. It also heard something else: personal attacks on the Supreme Court and on the Chief Justice, delivered with a heat that the question of a two-year extension hardly seems to justify.

Readers may wish to consider the calendar. These attacks have come at a time when the courts are hearing cases that, only a few years ago, few believed would ever be heard. Individuals once thought to be beyond the reach of the law now spend their days in remand. It would be unfair to say every critic of the amendment has a personal stake in the courts. Many do not. But it would be naive to believe that none do.

There is an old pattern in this country. Reform is rarely opposed in the name of what it costs the powerful. It is opposed in the name of principle, which sounds better. The loudest defenders of judicial independence are not always its truest friends. Sometimes they are simply the people who would prefer the judges to be weaker.

Here lies the irony. Those who warned that the amendment would damage public confidence in the courts may have done more damage in a few parliamentary sittings than the amendment itself could ever do. A perception of Government influence was a risk. Open contempt for the highest court, voiced from the floor of the House, is a fact.

None of this makes the Government’s handling wise. It could have consulted more, explained more and bent a little. A confident Government does not fear safeguards.

But citizens should judge by conduct, not by slogans. The debate asked whether the Government wanted the courts on its side. The answer is uncertain. The debate may have answered a different question more clearly: who has most reason to fear the courts as they now stand.

That is a perception too. It may prove the more lasting one.

27 leading corporates endorse CA Sri Lanka’s 47th National Conference of Chartered Accountants

Sri Lanka’s leading corporates have endorsed the 47th National Conference of Chartered Accountants, organised by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Sri Lanka (CA Sri Lanka), reaffirming its stature as a flagship business summit that helps shape the future of business and the economy.

Held under the theme ‘FUSION: Connecting Ideas | Creating Impact’, the conference will take place from 7 to 9 October 2026 at the Monarch Imperial, Sri Jayawardenepura, bringing together more than 2,500 corporate leaders, C-suite executives, entrepreneurs, policymakers and professionals.

The conference has attracted an impressive portfolio of 27 sponsors, led by Deloitte South Asia, DSI Samson Group Ltd., Hayleys PLC, Home Lands Holding Ltd., John Keells Holdings PLC, Nawaloka Hospitals PLC, Sampath Bank PLC, Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation Life Ltd., and Toyota Lanka Ltd., as Platinum Sponsors.

The Gold Sponsors are AIA Insurance Lanka Limited, Akzo Nobel Paints Lanka Ltd., Damro Group, Diesel and Motor Engineering PLC, CIC Holdings PLC, Rhino Roofing Products Ltd., South Asia Gateway Terminals Ltd., Softlogic Life Insurance PLC, Sunshine Holdings PLC, Union Assurance PLC and ZILLIONe Technologies Ltd.

Supporting the conference as Silver Sponsors are LB Finance PLC, OTR Wheel Engineering Lanka Ltd., and People’s Leasing and Finance PLC, while the Bronze Sponsor are Maharaja Foods PLC and Parcel Lanka Ltd., as a joint sponsor, and Prima Group Sri Lanka.

The conference’s media outreach is further strengthened by Wijeya Newspapers Limited as the Print Media Partner, with the Daily Mirror, Daily FT and Sunday Times on board, and Maharaja Media Network as the Electronic Media Partner.

Welcoming the strong corporate endorsement of the conference, CA Sri Lanka President Tishan Subasinghe said the support received from leading organisations demonstrates the conference’s relevance as a summit that extends well beyond the accounting profession.

‘Today’s business landscape demands innovation, agility and collaboration. Our theme, ‘FUSION: Connecting Ideas | Creating Impact’, reflects the power of bringing together diverse perspectives to address challenges, spark innovation and create meaningful outcomes. Through the National Conference, we aim to facilitate conversations that connect ideas across industries and disciplines, transforming insights into action and creating a lasting impact on businesses, industries and the wider economy,’ he said.

The 47th National Conference of Chartered Accountants will feature a diverse programme addressing contemporary issues relevant to business, leadership, finance and the economy, with leading local and international experts sharing insights and engaging with participants. The three-day event will serve as a platform for knowledge sharing, collaboration and innovation, connecting diverse perspectives to generate practical solutions and meaningful impact. The conference will kick off with a ceremonial inauguration on 7 October, followed by technical sessions on 8 and 9 October.

Sri Lanka to meet India in Asian Games men’s cricket semi-final

Sri Lanka secured a place in the Asian Games men’s cricket semi-finals on September 29 after heavy rain forced the abandonment of their quarter-final match against Nepal in Aichi Nagoya, Japan, without a ball being bowled yesterday.

The match was called off at 8.20 am local time after persistent rainfall inundated Kurogi Sports Park in Nisshin. Under tournament regulations, Sri Lanka advanced due to their higher seeding, as they hold the ninth spot in the ICC T20I rankings compared to Nepal’s 14th position.

The elimination ended a promising run for Nepal, who reached the final eight after winning Group A with a five-wicket victory over Afghanistan and a rain-shortened point share against Japan. Sri Lanka, alongside India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, had received direct entry into the quarter-final round based on their international standings.

The washout follows similar cancellations on Monday, when scheduled quarter-final fixtures between India and Afghanistan, as well as Pakistan and Hong Kong, were abandoned, allowing India and Pakistan to progress on superior rankings.

Sri Lanka now moves on to the semi-final round scheduled for Thursday, 1 October where they will face India. In the other semi-final Pakistan will take on Bangladesh on the same day. The men’s cricket tournament will conclude with the gold and bronze medal matches on Saturday, 3 October.

Ireland beats Israel 3-0 wearing black armbands to support Gaza

The Republic of Ireland has won the first of two football matches against Israel at the UEFA Nations League, defeating the Israeli team 3-0 after calls to boycott the match drew international attention.

Ireland’s players wore black armbands at the game in Hungary on Sunday in support of Palestinians killed during Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.

Irish players also bowed their heads during Israel’s national anthem and did not shake the hands of the Israeli team. Ireland’s captain, Dara O’Shea, has also pledged to donate all of his earnings from the match to aid Gaza.

Appeal Court quashes appointment of Deputy Tea Commissioner

The Court of Appeal has recently quashed the appointment of the Deputy Tea Commissioner of the Sri Lanka Tea Board (SLTB), on the basis that the interview panel has exercised their discretion in an arbitrary and/or irrational and/or unreasonable manner in allocating marks.

This was when the Petition filed by the SLTB Assistant Tea Commissioner B. M. K. Madushanka, challenging the appointment of the Deputy Tea Commissioner, was taken up before Justice Mayadunne Corea and Justice Mahen Gopallawa.

The SLTB, the Tea Commissioner of SLTB, the SLTB Chairman, the Director General, the Deputy Director (Research), the Director (Tea Development) and the Deputy Tea Commissioner were named as the first to seventh respondents, respectively.

The Petitioner stated that he had been appointed to the post of Assistant Tea Commissioner at the SLTB with effect from 01.03.2017. Prior

to the impugned selection process, applications had been called for the post of Deputy Tea Commissioner on 16.08.2023 and the selection interview had been conducted on 10.10.2023.

Applications had been called to fill the post of Deputy Tea Commissioner by internal promotion by an internal memorandum on 25.06.2025. Six applications had been received in response to such advertisement, and, five

applicants, including the Petitioner and the seventh respondent attended the selection interview that was held on 24.09.2025.

The Petitioner stated that at the interview, the seventh respondent

received the highest aggregate of marks (55.2 marks) and had been recommended by the interview panel for appointment to the post of Deputy Tea Commissioner. The Petitioner had received an aggregate of 55.1 marks and was placed second in the order of merit.

Farman Cassim PC, appearing on behalf of the Petitioner contended that the interview panel has exercised their discretion in an arbitrary and/or irrational and/or unreasonable manner in allocating marks to the Petitioner.

The Court of Appeal held that the conduct of the interview panel amply demonstrates that the panel has exercised their discretion in an irrational and unreasonable manner in interpreting the approved marking scheme, making ad hoc and unpublished changes thereto and awarding marks to the Petitioner as well as to other applicants at the selection interview.

Court further held that, having satisfied the eligibility criteria to be called for the selection interview, a legitimate expectation was created in the Petitioner that he will be duly interviewed and assessed in accordance with the approved marking scheme.

Further, it was held that the shortcomings on the part of the interview panel in conducting the selection interview has not only violated the legitimate expectation of the Petitioner of being duly interviewed and assessed in accordance with the approved marking scheme, but has also undermined the legality of the appointment of the 7th Respondent based on the results thereof.

Therefore, the Court of Appeal issued a writ of Certiorari quashing the letter of appointment issued to the 7th Respondent and a writ of Certiorari quashing the Mark Sheet and/or results of the interview held on 24.09.2025 for the post of Deputy Tea Commissioner.

Further, Court directed the SLTB to conduct a fresh interview for the appointment to the post of Deputy Tea Commissioner.

Farman Cassim, PC with Vinura Kularatne and Faadhila Thassim Attorneys-at-Law instructed by Shayamali Athukorala, Attorney-at-Law appeared on behalf of the Petitioner whilst Avanti Weerakoon, State Counsel appeared on behalf of the 1st to 6th Respondents and Shane Foster, Attorney-at-Law appeared on behalf of the 7th Respondent.