Increase In Minimum Capital Requirements For Nigerian Banks​​ Part I

By Bashorun J.K. Randle

It would be something between hyperbole and premature jubilation to describe the minimum capital requirements for banks announced by Mr. Yemi Cardoso, Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) as a bombshell.

On the contrary, the Governor of the CBN deliberately and meticulously stuck to his well choreographed strategy of sensitizing the banking community in particular and the financial markets (both domestic and international) that the increase in minimum capital requirements for banks was a priority item on his agenda. Hence, there was no surprise element in the equation when the new policy was officially announced.

EDITOR’S PICKS

• JAMB And Candidates: A Case Study Of Nigerian Institutions’ Disdain For Nigerians

• Price Wars: Naira’s Counterattack And FG’s Bid To Address Escalating Prices

• EFCC’s Pursuit Of Portable: A Case Of Social Media Justice Or Overreach?

At the press briefing on 28th March, 2024 the CBN Governor was lucid, intentional, professional and focused. He skipped superfluous references to slogans cliches, ambiguities and catch phrases – “Game-Changer”; “Visionary”; “Ground-breaking” etc. Instead (and rightly too), his main message was that the minimum capital requirements were the outcome of the main item on the economic/financial landscape: To Build a U.S.$ 1 TRILLION Economy by 2030.

Whether or not, this is a realistic proposition is a subject for another day. KPMG has come out bluntly to declare it as unattainable. To achieve that goal, the annual growth of our GDP (Gross Domestic Product) would have to leap to a minimum of 11 per cent per annum.
The forecast for this year is 3.3%.

Front page report in “ThisDay” newspaper “WORLD BANK PROJECTS 3.3% GROWTH FOR NIGERIA IN 2024, 3.4% FOR AFRICAN ECONOMIES”

“The World Bank has predicted that West Africa’s biggest economy, Nigeria would grow at 3.3 per cent this year, below its long-term average.

Also, it forecasted that economies in Sub-Saharan Africa would post a growth rate of 3.4 per cent and 3.8 per cent in 2024 and 2025 respectively, although not enough to lower the level of poverty on the continent.

According to the Bank’s latest Africa’s Pulse report, growth would rebound in 2024, rising from a low of 2.6 per cent in 2023 to 3.4 per cent in 2024, and 3.8 per cent in 2025.

South Africa’s growth rate was projected to double in 2024, but just to 1.2 per cent, while Angola’s was set to pick up to 2.8 per cent from 0.8 per cent last year, driven mainly by the non-oil sector amid falling oil production

In contrast, the East African Community region was expected to grow 5.3 per cent this year, due to strong growth in Kenya, Rwanda, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Zambia defaulted on its external debt in 2020, followed by Ghana in 2022 and Ethiopia late last year.

The Africa Pulse report underscored the fact that many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa were hit hard by the shocks of COVID-19 and Russia’s war in Ukraine, which pushed up inflation at the same time as rising global interest rates made borrowing prohibitively expensive while drought and conflict have also affected swathes of the region.

“Growth is set to bounce back in Sub-Saharan Africa but the recovery is still fragile.

Per capita GDP growth of 1 per cent is associated with a reduction in the extreme poverty rate of only about 1 percent in the region, compared to 2.5 per cent on average in the rest of the world.

In a context of constrained government budgets, faster poverty reduction will not be achieved through fiscal policy alone. It needs to be supported by policies that expand the productive capacity of the private sector to create more and better jobs for all segments of society,” said World Bank Chief Economist for Africa, Andrew Dabalen.

While noting the economic recovery in the region, the report stated that the recovery remains tenuous.

Just as inflation is cooling across most economies, falling from a median of 7.1 to 5.1 per cent in 2024, it remains high compared to pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels.

Also, while growth of public debt is slowing, more than half of African governments grapple with external liquidity problems, and face unsustainable debt burdens.

Overall, the report explained that despite the projected boost in growth, the pace of economic expansion in the region remains below the growth rate of the previous decade (2000-2014) and was insufficient to have a significant effect on poverty reduction.

Moreover, due to multiple factors, including structural inequality, economic growth reduces poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa less than in other regions.

Sub-Saharan Africa’s public debt-to-GDP ratio was forecast to fall from 61 per cent in 2023 to 57 per cent this year, but more than half of countries are still in or at high risk of debt distress, the report stated.

While increased private consumption and declining inflation are supporting an economic rebound in Sub-Saharan Africa, however, the report observed that the recovery remains fragile due to uncertain global economic conditions, growing debt service obligations, frequent natural disasters, escalating conflict and violence.

It called for transformative policies to address deep-rooted inequality to sustain long-term growth and effectively reduce poverty.

The report further explained that external resources to meet gross financing needs of African governments are shrinking and those available are costlier than they were prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Political instability and geopolitical tensions weigh on economic activity and may constrain access to food for an estimated 105 million people at risk of food insecurity due to conflict and climate shocks, it added.

Noting that African governments’ fiscal positions remain vulnerable to global economic disruptions, necessitating policy actions to build buffers to prevent or cope with future shocks, it stressed that inequality in Sub-Saharan Africa remains one of the highest in the world, second only to the Latin America and Caribbean region, as measured by the region’s average Gini coefficient.”

What is on the table right now is what we have to contend with, namely the last time we beamed the searchlight on the minimum capital for banks was in 2005. That was when Professor Charles Soludo was the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria and Chief Olusegun Obasanjo was the President and Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces of Nigeria. The minimum was fixed at N25 billion which at that time was the equivalent of U.S.$18.9 million.

Incidentally, I was in the audience when President Obasanjo announced the policy change at Georgetown University, while he was on an official visit to the United State of America. That was a truly memorable occasion as the freshmen and women clung to every word President Obasanjo had to say.
To quote William Wordsworth: (1770 to 1850).

“Young eager faces with eager pace and no less eager thoughts.”

That was almost twenty years ago and we are now talking of N500billion (US$359 million) for operating an international bank. It was previously N50 billion. It is the prerogative of the Central Bank of Nigeria as an institution to defend its inertia, tardiness and delinquency in addressing such a critical and strategic component of our economic and financial infrastructure.

Before we draw any conclusions, it would serve us well to avail ourselves of archival materials – books, speeches and seminal dissertations by Professor Charles Soludo and his successor His Royal Highness Sanusi Lamido Sanusi (14th Emir of Kano) as well as the trenchant criticism of Mr. Lawson Omokhodion in his book: “Powered by Poverty”.

Anyway, we are back at another epochal juncture in our nation’s economic and financial history.

I am not at liberty to go into details but I was at an international conference a few days ago when a professor from Cambridge University delivered a scholarly dissertation in which he canvassed that the price of oil (not U.S. dollars exchange rate) should be the reference point in adjusting the minimum capital requirement for Nigerian banks. At worst, it should be a weighted average of both critical elements – U.S. dollars and oil price.

It is almost one hundred pages of data; statistics; graphs; metrics plus Artificial Intelligence (AI) thrown in. I am yet to digest it all fully.

For now let me give kudos to the Governor of the Central Bank for adopting a strategic approach that has earned him applause and commendations both locally and internationally. The markets are not in the mood to tolerate mediocre performance or wrong-headed policies. Reaction is always swift.

The real challenge is to consistently adopt Best Global Practice when formulating policy and even more so when matters advance to implementation, monitoring and sanctions.

As an institution, the Central Bank of Nigeria is duty bound to adopt and formally institutionalise STRESS TESTING of banks under its supervision, at regular intervals.

The “Financial Times” has earned well deserved commendations for the following report.

Front page headline: “FED STRESS TESTS SHOW BIG BANKS WOULD SURVIVE $541 BILLION LOSSES”

“The largest US banks would lose $541bn in a hypothetical doomsday economic scenario but still have more than enough capital to absorb the losses, according to annual stress tests conducted by the Federal Reserve.
The passing grades given by the Fed on Wednesday to banks including JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs lent support to claims from Wall Street executives and regulators that systemically important banks can withstand heavy losses.
The results will also help determine how much capital banks have to hold in the next 12 months. As long as banks match or exceed the requirements, they are free from Fed restrictions on how much capital they can put towards shareholder dividends and stock buybacks.
Analysts predicted the capital requirements of institutions such as Goldman, JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley and Bank of America will decline due to the results. This bolstered hopes for higher dividends or more share buybacks, sending the banks’ stocks up about 1.5 per cent in after-hours trading.

The results come just months after three of the largest bank failures in US history — Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank and First Republic — triggered a regional banking crisis. Smaller banks that have come under pressure from investors following the collapse of SVB, including PacWest and Comerica, were not included in the stress tests. “Today’s results confirm that the banking system remains strong and resilient,” Fed vice-chair for supervision Michael Barr said in a statement. In a nod to the recent crisis, Barr warned the stress tests were “only one way to measure that strength” and said regulators “should remain humble about how risks can arise”.
The Fed stress tests are an annual exercise required under the post-2008 crisis Dodd-Frank financial regulations that gauge whether banks’ loss-absorbing capital ratios would remain above minimum requirements in the event of an economic catastrophe. This year, banks needed to show they could withstand unemployment rising to a peak of 10 per cent, commercial real estate prices plunging 40 per cent, house prices declining 38 per cent and short-term interest rates falling to almost zero. Of the 23 banks tested, Deutsche Bank’s US subsidiary suffered the biggest capital hit, followed by UBS Americas.

Goldman’s capital levels fell the most among the banks headquartered in the US, followed by Morgan Stanley. Both banks’ businesses skew more than peers towards trading, which is classified as riskier by the Fed. The tests showed that all of the banks tested, including Bank of America, Citigroup, State Street and Wells Fargo, would meet minimum capital requirements despite projected losses of $541bn. Of the losses, $424bn came from loan losses and $94bn from trading and counterparty losses.

The eight largest banks would suffer nearly $80bn of trading losses in a scenario with persistently high inflation necessitating steep interest rates, an environment not dissimilar to the current economic outlook. The stress test results will help determine the so-called stress-test capital buffer for each bank. This is the amount of common equity tier one capital they must hold in excess of regulatory minimums relative to their risk-weighted assets. The stress capital buffer is a combination of the maximum losses of CET1 capital during the stress test and the bank’s capital return plans for the next 12 months to shareholders through dividends.

The banks tested will be able to publicly confirm their indicative stress-capital buffer starting from Friday, when they may also reveal potential buyback or dividend plans. Later this summer, the Fed and other US banking regulators will publish new international standards for calculating risk-weighted assets, known as the Basel III endgame rules.
Analysts and bank executives anticipate these rules, which will bring the US in line with international standards, will mean American banks will have to hold more CET1 capital. The Financial Services Forum, a Washington lobby group for the largest US banks, said the results underscored that lenders had sufficient capital and more stringent requirements were not needed. “The reforms of the post-Dodd-Frank period have achieved the goals of a stronger, safer banking system,” the FSF said in a statement.

US regulators are also expected to expand the new Basel rules to include midsized banks of similar size to Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank and First Republic. The list of banks subject to the Fed’s stress tests has come under intense scrutiny in the wake of SVB’s demise due to its exposure to outsized interest rate risk stemming from its stock of unhedged bond holdings. Under the current rules, which were imposed in 2019 following legislation that loosened regulations on midsized lenders, SVB’s first official stress test would not have taken place until 2024. However, even if SVB had been subject to the Fed stress tests, it might have passed because the scenario did not model the kind of sharply higher interest rates that sparked the lender’s downfall.

Time and space will not permit me to dwell on the vital and paramount role of: RISK MANAGEMENT with emphasis on prevention rather than lamentation after the horses have bolted !!

This is not the time to quibble over the “Independence” of the Central Bank of Nigeria. Some of us have been around long enough to witness at first hand the intensity of the power play between the Central Bank and the Presidency.

Lurking in the shadows are the Senate and House of Representatives which have vast powers under the Constitution to subject the Governor of the Central Bank to “Oversight” in the course of his/her appointment and removal, as well as the timely presentation of the audited annual accounts.

Indeed, it is worth remembering that when the last Governor of the Central Bank, Mr. Godwin Emefiele tormented Nigerians with a bogus and convoluted change of the currency accompanied by agonizing cash shortage, (at the same time as petrol queues) it was the National Assembly (Senate and House of Representatives) and State Governors (led by Mallam Nasir El-Rufai of Kaduna State) who gallantly and mercifully intervened. People were literally dropping dead in banking halls or adjacent premises (when they were denied entrance into banks). It was as callous as it was grotesque. The queues to withdraw cash from banks became longer and longer. Nigerians were even forced to bid for Naira !!

Following the announcement by the Governor of the Central Bank regarding the minimum Capital requirements by banks, a Professor of Law at Harvard University has raised sensitive potential legal issues which I have just finished reading. Two hundred and fifty pages !!! Plenty of banana skins.

Also, I am half way through an intimidating tome from a Professor of Economics at King’s College, University of London (with specialization in Development, Banking and Finance) who has plenty to say on the “Retained Earnings” of Nigerian banks which the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria has excluded from the calculation of Tier 1 capital (paid up share capital and share premium account).

According to her and her colleagues, available data suggest that apart from “Revaluation Surplus” (from property and other assets) as well as “Exchange Gains” (derived from unrealized profits/translation gains) there are legacy issues (forbearance granted to banks by the Central Bank especially by the last Governor) as well as documented red flags in the Examination Reports by the Central Bank itself and Nigerian Deposit Insurance Corporation (NDIC). We also need to factor in the reports and Management Letters of External Auditors.

Regardless, the Central Bank of Nigeria and its Governor must be wary of class action by Bank directors or shareholders who may opt to rely on the classification by Basel III (which are recommendations anyway; they are not mandatory).

I am still grappling with the very aggressive posture of a Professor from Yale who insists that in the United States of America, the Chairman of the Reserve Bank, Mr. Jerome H. Powell, their own equivalent of the Governor of the Central Bank, would have to carefully and cautiously restrict himself to new licences for banks with regard to capital and other conditionalities.

With regard to existing banks, the modus operandum would be dictated by the principle of “CASE BY CASE”.
The process would have to be painstaking, meticulous, transparent and unassailable. You cannot just lump banks together in “International”; Tier 1; Tier 11 or whatever – otherwise you would be in court forever plus one day !!

I am inclined to believe that the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria would have to, on his own, review the Cash Reserve Requirement which have been fixed as follows in an official statement sent to banks:

“The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) is ceasing daily CRR debits and will be adopting an updated Cash Reserve Requirement (CRR) mechanism that is intended to facilitate your capacity for planning, monitoring, and aligning your records with the CBN.

The determination of the segment of deposits subject to sterilization with the CBN as CRR will follow the processes outlined below:

Phase 1 – Utilization of the Incremental Approach: The extent ratios (commercial banks 32.5% and merchant bank 10%) will be applied to increases in the banks’ weekly average adjusted deposits.

Phase 2 – CRR levy of 50% of the lending shortfall will be enforced for banks that do not meet the minimum Loan to Deposit Ratio (LDR) as per our correspondence to all banks referenced BSD/DIR/GEN/LAB/12/049 dated September 30, 2019.

The CBN will provide your bank with details of the applied charges and their underlying computation rationale.”

There is plenty of room for flexibility.

I must say that most of the blow back from our professional colleagues (both local and international) has been hugely constructive. I especially commend those who advocate that we can only enrich the process by sharing data for the sake of transparency.

Basically, how were the requirements arrived at ?

Why N500 billion and not N600 billion or even the lower figure of N400 billion ?
The scoping must be expanded to take care of variables, uncertainties and headwinds.

We cannot even ignore political fall out. A case in point is the protest by Alhaji Bashir Dalhatu (former Minister of Transport and Aviation in 1993 and Chairman of The Arewa Consultative Forum ACF) that the 2005 recapitalisation of banks short-changed the North. The entire North was left without a bank of its own.

Where we need to thread carefully is with regard to the warning by a Professor of Psychology at Princeton University, United States of America who has injected “Behavioural Science” into the equation. His take is that by indexing recapitalization to the dollar / naira ratio, we may be unwittingly creating another problem – namely, bandits and kidnappers may index their demand for ransom to the same dollar (if they are not already doing so) !!

In any case, we really need to decouple the dollar from our national psyche especially within the context of inflation. We are entitled to ask what has the dollar got to do with escalating cost of home grown products and services – from yam tubers to tomatoes and even haircuts?.

We may even extend matters to dollarization of dowry for marriage !!

Besides, Labour Unions may insist on dollar as the index for negotiating minimum wage across our nation. In any case university lecturers have consistently argued that their salaries have fallen well below the dollar remuneration of their colleagues in the global intellectual market place.

There is indeed a compelling argument for a post-mortem (forensic analysis) of the last recapitalization of banks in 2005. This would vigorously address all the thorny issues raised by Lawson A. Omokhodion in his book.

As for the recently announced minimum capital requirements by the Governor of the Central Bank, we should take a cue from 95-year-old Dr. Michael Omolayole (ex-St. Gregory’s College, Lagos and Corpus Christi College, Oxford University). For several years he taught science at St. Gregory’s College. The lesson and theory he delivered with tremendous gusto were propounded by Sir Isaac Newton. Sir Isaac’s third law of motion states that “every action has an equal and opposite reaction.”

Mr. Yemi Cardoso, Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria who was a student at the St. Gregory’s College (from 1969 to 1973) will do well to take the lesson to heart. Beware, the banks may well choose to fight rather than simply comply and be rolled over. It would be interesting to see whether any bank would be bold enough to insist that the critical matter of minimum capital (recapitalization) should be driven by economic / financial realities, especially ROI (Return On Investment) rather than regulatory diktat.

What is beyond contention is that we are operating in a very toxic environment and the temptation to “Game The System” or “Shaft Regulatory Controls” is a very powerful steroid.
The shenanigans that went on during the last capitalization in 2005 are truly mind boggling.

The Governor of the Central Bank has been consistent all along by repeatedly drumming into the ears of those who care to listen that what he is seeking is fresh capital – preferably FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) and domestic saintly/virgin first timers whose funds are not contaminated by “Dirty Money” – drugs, round-tripping, proceeds of kidnapping, money laundering etc.

Regardless, he has to balance micro-economics with macro-economics. Even beyond that he has to be mindful that the “Independence” of the Governor of the Central Bank is not in the realm of absolutism.

It is not uncommon in the global arena to ponder on who should be the main driver of the economy – the Governor of the Central Bank (Monetary policy) or the Minister of Finance (fiscal policy) ?

Under President Muhammadu Buhari, the then Minister of Finance, Mrs. Zainab Ahmed stunned the National Assembly when she revealed that she had no prior knowledge of the change of the Nigerian currency (naira) which the then Governor of the Central Bank, Mr. Godwin Emefiele had launched with disastrous consequences.

With the benefit of hindsight, it is a miracle that the repercussion of the mismanagement of the currency was confined to relatively peaceful protest and despair nationwide without crossing the boundary into violent demand for regime change.

The reputation of the Central Bank was at rock bottom. It may sound like fiction, but “DSS” (Department of State Security) actually filed criminal charges against the Governor of the Central Bank – for illegal possession of a gun and financing terrorists !!

Indeed, we were all aghast when the Governor of the Central Bank was alleged to have purchased an application form for 100 million naira to run as a presidential candidate in the 2023 election. Billboards with his photograph were all over the place. We were also treated to fleets of branded campaign vehicles.

“A Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) employee has disclosed how he collected $3m cash for Emefiele

The witness, Mr Monday Osazuwa, on Friday told an Ikeja Special Offences Court how the former apex bank governor, Godwin Emefiele, on different occasions, directed him to collect three million dollars cash in tranches.

Osasuwa, while being led in evidence by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) counsel, Mr Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), said he was a dispatch rider in Zenith Bank in 2001 before he joined the CBN in 2014.

Osasuwa said he joined the apex bank as a senior supervisor in 2014.

He said Emefiele was the Managing Director of Zenith Bank Plc while he was working as a dispatch rider in the bank.

The witness said he knew Emefiele, who was his boss, while in Zenith Bank and that he later joined him at the CBN.

The witness said he was later appointed as a senior supervisor (full time) in recording and filing of documents while working in the CBN governor’s office in Lagos.

“I was still working in the CBN governor’s office while I was appointed as a full staff member and we usually communicated through Whatsapp and email.

I function as a senior supervisor, recording and filing with other official roles.

I recall that in 2020, when he was outside Lagos, he called me that he would give me a number that a man had something I should collect from him and that the man would give me the number of another person.

When I got to the man’s office, I was given an envelope. I counted the money and the man said I should give it to my boss,” he said.

The witness further told the court that the first defendant used to collect money by himself anytime he was in Lagos but anytime the defendant was not around, he would tell him to give the money to the second defendant.

Osazuwa added that Emefiele sent him to MINL Ltd. when he was with Zenith Bank.

“This company is situated at Isolo, the first defendant did send me to collect cheques from the company from Mr Monday and when I collected the cheque from Mr Monday, I would give it back to Emefiele and he would lodge the money into Dumies Oil and Gas.”

According to him, Emefiele’s co-defendant, Henry Isioma-Omoile, lived in the residence of the former CBN governor.

He stated that when he collected money for his boss, he would take it to his residence at Iru Close, Ikoyi.

“Whenever I received the money and take it to my boss’s residence, Mr Emefiele would tell me to give it to the second defendant whenever he was not at home.

I did not keep a record of transactions because the instruction he gave me was that I should collect the money and bring the money to his house.

The highest amount I collected was one million dollars all in cash and some weeks later, the businessman also called me to collect $850,000, $750,000 and $400,000 cash in tranches.

I have never been rewarded, paid or given anything because I am doing it out of faithfulness and he knows it but he has never for once said, ‘take this’,” he said.

Under cross-examination by the defence counsel, Mr Abdulakeem Labi-Lawal, the witness confirmed to the court that he had been working with the defendant since 2002.

According to the witness, Emefiele passed instructions to him through the second defendant and that he had been collecting cheques for Dumies Oil and Gas.

He, however, told the court when he was made to confront the second defendant during investigation but the second defendant failed to admit it.

“I started collecting cheques for Dumies Oil and Gas when I was in Zenith Bank.

I cannot calculate the exact year I have been collecting the cheques but it all started when the first defendant was the Managing Director at Zenith Bank and I was working at Zenith Bank,” he said.

According to late Robert Mugabe, President of Zimbabwe:
​“If money were to be found in the trees,
​most people would be married to monkeys”

India takes great pride (having dispensed with the services of the “Big 4” accountancy firms) by insisting that the accounts of the Central Bank of India should be audited by local firms.

On 10th November 2023, it made the following announcement:

Change in Auditor:
“2023 to replace the two Audit firms i.e. Messrs AKG & Associates and Messrs Amit Ray & Co. as SCAs of the Bank for Financial year 2023-24 and asked to furnish the required details of two already shortlisted Audit Firms to facilitate their appointment as SCAs of the Bank for FY 2023-24. Details of new SCAs of Banks shall be intimated to the Stock exchanges after receipt of RBI approval.”

We are still trying to digest the allegation that on the eve of the 2023 election, the signatures of then President Muhammadu Buhari and the Secretary to the Government, Mr. Boss Mustapha were forged regarding the withdrawal of U.S.$6.3 million from the vault of the Central Bank in order to pay gratification to international election observers.

As for the allegation that the former Governor of the Central Bank owned a gun, two Gregorians – a Professor of Law at Leiden University, Netherlands and the other a Professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) who is the grandson of a late entrepreneur (he owned a bakery) have asked me to pass a very thoughtful message to their fellow Gregorian:

“The Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria does not need to carry a gun or hold a gun to anybody’s head. He has plenty of tools at his disposal, to turn the economy round. He should just stick to his core mandate.”

Montagu Norman was Governor of the Bank of England from 1920 to 1944. To this day, he is the longest serving Governor of the Bank of England.

Norman played a critical role in rebuilding the International Monetary System after World War One.

It is also interesting to observe that the official title of the Governor of the US Federal Reserve Bank is Chairman of the Board of Governors.

On the website we have full disclosure of the following names :

Jerome H. Powel​​-​Chairman
Philip N. Jefferson​-​Vice Chairman
Michael S. Barr​​-​Vice Chairman for Supervision
Michelle W. Bowman
Lisa D. Cook
Adriana D. Kugler
Christopher J. Waller

The current external auditors of Reserve Bank of India are:

The accounts of the Reserve Bank for the year 2019- 20 were audited by M/s Prakash Chandra Jain & Co., Mumbai and M/s Haribhakti & Co., LLP, Mumbai, as the Statutory Central Auditors and M/s Kothari & Co., Kolkata, M/s Suri & Co., Chennai and M/s Bansal & Co. LLP, New Delhi as Statutory Branch Auditors.

When Britain was desperately searching for the right Governor of the Bank of England, it eventually appointed a Canadian, Mr. Mark Kerney.

At his farewell dinner at Mansion House, London he quoted extensively from William K. Black’s book:

“THE BEST WAY TO ROB A BANK IS TO OWN ONE: HOW CORPORATE EXECUTIVES AND POLITICIANS LOOTED THE SAVINGS AND LOANS INDUSTRY”

In this expert insider’s account of the savings and loan debacle of the 1980’s, William Black lays bare the strategies that corrupt CEO’s and CFO’s in collusion with those who have regulatory oversight of their industries – use to defraud companies for their personal gain.

I actually met Mark Kerney at a lecture he delivered at the London School of Economics. He was spell-binding and absolutely professional. He certainly knew his onions. What was truly amazing was his humility. At the end of the lecture, he was not in a hurry to leave. He answered all the questions from the audience. Indeed, when it was time to leave, he shook hands with all and sundry – right down to those of us at the back of the lecture hall. He was accompanied by only one assistant who he instructed to hand out his own card and collect ours in case we wanted to get in touch with him. Such humility is very rare indeed.

As a gesture of goodwill, the King’s College Old Boys Association (KCOBA) has mandated me to deliver copies of Professor Kenneth Rogoffs book titled:

“THIS TIME IS DIFFERENT : EIGHT CENTURIES OF FINANCIAL FOLLY”
to Mr. Yemi Cardoso and his fellow Gregorian, Mr. Phillip Ikeazor, Deputy Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria.

FURTHER READING

• Police Detain FIJ Reporter ‘For Cybercrime On IGP’s Orders’

• Journalist ‘Hit By Stray Bullet’ Inside Kano Government House

• ‘Avoiding CBN’s Hammer:’ Fintechs Issue Crypto Trading Warning To Customers

Professor Rogoff was formerly the Chief Economist at the IMF (International Monetary Fund) and he is currently Professor of Economics and Maurit C. Boas at Harvard University. This is what the erudite professor and distinguished scholar has to say:

That was before Haiti and Somalia came on the scene. In those two countries, every street corner has its own Central Bank Governor!!!

Opinions expressed in this article are solely the writer’s and do not represent the views of Eko Hot Blog.

Click here to watch our video of the week: