News
ActionAid Advocates for Windfall Tax on ‘Climate Wrecking’ FirmsSays Over US$420 billion in Windfall Profits Made in 24 months by 36 Top Fossil Fuel, Financial Firms
ActionAid Advocates for Windfall Tax on ‘Climate Wrecking’ Firms
Says Over US$420 billion in Windfall Profits Made in 24 months by 36 Top Fossil Fuel, Financial Firms
By: Michael Mike
ActionAid International has advocated for massive imposition of windfall tax on fossil fuel companies including financial institutions, lamenting that ‘climate-wrecking’ firms make billions in ‘surplus profits’ and should be made to pay to ameliorate the harms done.
ActionAid in a statement on Wednesday said a report it conducted has shown that 36 top companies in the fossil fuels and financial sector, often funding fossil fuel use, made over US$420 billion in windfall profits in the 24 months preceding July 2023.
It stated that a tax of 90% on these windfall profits could generate as much as US$382 billion in revenue, an amount that could be spent on public services such as education, or climate action, calling for urgent introduction of windfall profits taxes.
The statement read: “Thirty-six top companies in the fossil fuel industry and their funders made over US$420 billion in
‘surplus’ profits in the 24 months before July 2023, shows a new ActionAid report.
The report shows that taxing these extraordinary profits, referred to as windfall profits, could generate funds to boost public spending, especially for key areas such as education and climate action.
“Windfall profits are often attributed to external context changes and are considered a ‘surplus’ above the regular and expected profits.
“A tax of 90% on the windfall profits of these 36 firms could generate as much as US$382 billion in revenue, shows the report launched as world leaders meet at Davos for the World Economic Forum. This amount is almost 20 times more than the US$21 billion provided by donors for climate adaptation in 2021.”
ActionAid Secretary-General Arthur Larok said: “The scale of profits that fossil fuel companies and their bankers are making in the wake of global crises is truly astounding, especially when compared to the hardships that these crises have brought upon regular people around the world,” insisting that: “Windfall profits taxes make sense. They can bring in significant revenue for climate action and social services, while taxing only the extraordinary corporate profits.”
According to the statement, ActionAid’s research is an analysis of the profits of the top 14 fossil fuel companies and top 22 financial corporations by value on the stock market. In the 24 months to July 2023, these firms made US$1,218 billion in profits. Windfall profits from this amount comes to US$425 billion.
It added that fossil fuel company profits in the 12 months before July 2023 were up by an astounding 278% compared to the average in the period between 2017/2018 and 2020/2021
It noted that both the fossil fuel and the financial industries have been making extraordinary profits in recent years, widely attributed to the impact of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and high interest rates adopted by many countries in response to growing inflation, stressing that: “ActionAid’s research in 2023 found that banks alone have poured over US$3.2 trillion into fossil fuels in the Global South since the Paris Agreement was adopted in 2015, making them complicit in climate damage.”
The statement recalled that at COP27, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres asked governments to tax the windfall profits of fossil fuel companies and redirect that money to those impacted by climate change, lamenting that over a year later, only some EU Member States, the UK, and a few Latin American countries, have introduced some forms of temporary and often limited windfall taxes on fossil fuel companies.
ActionAid Advocates for Windfall Tax on ‘Climate Wrecking’ Firms
Says Over US$420 billion in Windfall Profits Made in 24 months by 36 Top Fossil Fuel, Financial Firms
News
VP Shettima Attends High-Level Meeting On Africa’s Health Security Sovereignty
VP Shettima Attends High-Level Meeting On Africa’s Health Security Sovereignty
By: Our Reporter
Shortly after his bilateral discussions with United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, Vice President Kashim Shettima moved on to a high-level meeting on Building Africa’s Health Security Sovereignty on the sidelines of the African Union Summit in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
The session, organized by Africa CDC and fully supported by the Nigerian government, convenes African leaders and health policymakers to chart the path toward strengthening the continent’s health emergency preparedness, response systems, and pharmaceutical independence.

Joining the Vice President at the meeting are key Nigerian officials including the Coordinating Minister of Health and Social Welfare, Prof. Muhammad Ali Pate, and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Amb. Yussuf Tuggar.
Other African health ministers in attendance include Dr. Ibrahim Sy of Senegal, Madalisto Baloyi of Malawi, and Dr. Mekdes Daba of Ethiopia.
VP Shettima Attends High-Level Meeting On Africa’s Health Security Sovereignty
News
ISWAP suspected in Baga abduction of five civilians
ISWAP suspected in Baga abduction of five civilians
By: Zagazola Makama
Five civilians were abducted on Feb. 12, 2026, by suspected Boko Haram/ISWAP terrorists in Doro Baga, Kukawa Local Government Area, Borno State, the Police Command reported.
Sources disclosed that the victims, Alhaji Sani Boyi, Bullama Dan Umaru, Baba Inusa, Abubakar Jan Boris, and Mallam Shaibu, were taken while purchasing fresh fish at a local market around 7:00 a.m.
The troops of Sector 3 Operation HADIN KAI, Civilian Joint Task Force (CJTF)/hunters immediately responded to the incident.
Relevant intelligence has been gathered, and search and rescue operations are ongoing to secure the release of the victims.
ISWAP suspected in Baga abduction of five civilians
News
Is Russia Immune to Media Scrutiny in Africa?
Is Russia Immune to Media Scrutiny in Africa?
•Press freedom, sovereignty and Africa’s refusal to be silence
By Oumarou Sanou
A dangerous precedent is emerging across Africa’s diplomatic and media landscape: the public targeting of individual journalists by foreign missions for simply asking difficult questions. The recent pattern of responses from the Russian Embassy in Nigeria toward African journalists and media platforms raises deeper concerns, not only about geopolitics but also about press freedom, sovereignty, and the dignity of African voices.
Bullying a single African journalist through official diplomatic channels is not merely a disagreement; it is an intolerable affront to free expression. Journalism exists to question power, whether domestic or foreign. When embassies shift from presenting facts to publicly discrediting individuals, the implication is clear: criticism will be punished personally rather than debated professionally. Today it is one journalist; tomorrow it could be an entire media ecosystem.
In recent months, respected outlets, including Premium Times, THISDAY, The Guardian Nigeria, and Leadership Newspaper, have faced unusually harsh diplomatic rebukes after publishing critical analyses. Prominent commentators such as Azu Ishiekwene and Richard Akinnola, as well as Oumarou Sanou, have also been singled out. Instead of counter-evidence, the response has often been personal accusations and insinuations of hidden sponsors. That approach undermines constructive dialogue and erodes trust in diplomatic engagement.
Let us be clear: journalists are human and can make mistakes. Professional reporting welcomes correction. If the facts are incorrect, present evidence, make the data open, and allow readers to judge. Insults, calumny and attempts to destroy professional reputations are not rebuttals; they are attempts to silence scrutiny. No foreign government should expect immunity from questioning on African soil.
Africa’s position in the evolving global order must remain principled and independent. Africans are not invested in the confrontation between Russia and the West; it is not our war. A genuine Pan-African perspective demands equal scrutiny of all external powers. If tomorrow credible evidence emerges that Britain, France, America, China or any other actor is recruiting Africans into foreign conflicts under deceptive pretence, the same criticism must apply. The principle is simple: African lives are not expendable tools in geopolitical struggles.

Reports of African nationals—including Nigerians—fighting and dying thousands of miles away in foreign wars raise serious ethical and security questions. Whether through informal networks, deceptive job offers, or shadow recruitment channels, African citizens are being drawn into conflicts that do not belong to them. Journalists who expose these risks are not attacking any nation; they are protecting their fellow Africans from exploitation and preventable tragedy.
Kenya’s recent stance offers a compelling example. Kenyan authorities publicly condemned the recruitment of their citizens into foreign conflicts and moved to close illegal agencies while seeking diplomatic explanations. That response signals a broader African awakening: governments must prioritise the safety and dignity of their citizens over the sensitivities of powerful partners. Nigeria and other African states would do well to adopt similar vigilance.
Beyond individual cases lies a deeper philosophical question. Neocolonialism today is not defined by flags or territorial control but by influence, dependency and narrative domination. Great powers—East or West—sometimes behave as though African voices must align with their geopolitical agendas. This assumption is unacceptable. Africans have their own interests, challenges and aspirations. We are not puppets in anyone’s strategic theatre.
Respect in diplomacy must be reciprocal. If a foreign embassy publicly attacked a journalist by name inside Moscow, Paris or Washington, would it be considered acceptable conduct? Sovereignty demands mutual respect, not selective outrage. African countries deserve the same diplomatic courtesy that global powers expect at home.
At the same time, African journalism must remain grounded in professionalism and evidence. Responsible reporting strengthens credibility and protects the integrity of public discourse. But professionalism cannot thrive in an atmosphere of intimidation. When journalists are targeted individually, the chilling effect extends far beyond the targeted individual; it discourages others from investigating sensitive issues of public concern.
The response from Africa’s media community must therefore be collective. Silence in the face of intimidation risks normalising it. Journalists, editors and civil society organisations should stand together to defend the right to ask difficult questions without fear of diplomatic retaliation. Protecting a single journalist ultimately concerns protecting the profession and safeguarding the democratic space.
Africa’s future in a multipolar world will depend on its ability to engage all partners while remaining fiercely independent. That independence begins with intellectual sovereignty: the freedom to question everyone and align with no external agenda. Whether criticism targets Russia, Western nations or any other power, the standard must remain consistent: facts over propaganda, dialogue over intimidation, and mutual respect over coercion.
No nation is above scrutiny. No African journalist should be silenced for doing the work that democracy demands.
Oumarou Sanou is a social critic, Pan-African observer and researcher focusing on governance, security, and political transitions in the Sahel. He writes on geopolitics, regional stability, and African leadership dynamics. Contact: sanououmarou386@gmail.com
Is Russia Immune to Media Scrutiny in Africa?
-
News2 years agoRoger Federer’s Shock as DNA Results Reveal Myla and Charlene Are Not His Biological Children
-
Opinions4 years agoTHE PLIGHT OF FARIDA
-
News10 months agoFAILED COUP IN BURKINA FASO: HOW TRAORÉ NARROWLY ESCAPED ASSASSINATION PLOT AMID FOREIGN INTERFERENCE CLAIMS
-
News2 years agoEYN: Rev. Billi, Distortion of History, and The Living Tamarind Tree
-
Opinions4 years agoPOLICE CHARGE ROOMS, A MINTING PRESS
-
ACADEMICS2 years agoA History of Biu” (2015) and The Lingering Bura-Pabir Question (1)
-
Columns2 years agoArmy University Biu: There is certain interest, but certainly not from Borno.
-
Opinions2 years agoTinubu,Shettima: The epidemic of economic, insecurity in Nigeria
