ZENITH BANK OPENS MANCHESTER BRANCH TO SUPPORT CROSS-BORDER TRADE AND INVESTMENT

Zenith Bank Plc has announced the opening of a new branch in Manchester, United Kingdom, marking another significant milestone in the bank’s international growth and its commitment to strengthening financial connections between Africa and global markets.

The official opening ceremony, scheduled to hold on Tuesday, March 17, 2026, is expected to attract government officials from Nigeria and the United Kingdom, regulators, investors, customers, and business leaders from both countries, underscoring the growing economic ties and investment opportunities between the two markets.

The new Manchester branch will complement Zenith Bank’s existing operations in the United Kingdom and serve as a strategic hub for supporting businesses engaged in international trade and investment. Through the branch, the bank will provide corporate banking, trade finance, treasury and related financial services to clients operating across the United Kingdom, Europe and Africa.Speaking ahead of the launch, the Group Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer of Zenith Bank Plc, Dame Dr. Adaora Umeoji, OON, said: “The opening of our Manchester branch represents another important step in Zenith Bank’s growth as a leading African financial institution connecting businesses and markets across continents. Manchester is one of the United Kingdom’s most dynamic commercial centres, and our presence here will further strengthen financial connections between businesses in the UK and opportunities across Africa’s rapidly expanding markets.

”Founded in 1990 by its Founder and Chairman, Jim Ovia, CFR, Zenith Bank has grown into one of Africa’s most respected banking institutions, boasting a robust capital base and a remarkable history of year-on-year profitability. Built on a strong foundation of people, technology and service, the Bank has consistently delivered innovative financial solutions while maintaining a disciplined approach to growth and risk management. The impressive performance of the Bank has consistently earned it excellent ratings, recognition and endorsement from local and international agencies and institutions.Headquartered in Lagos, Nigeria, Zenith Bank operates over 500 branches and business offices across the 36 States of the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). The Bank currently operates subsidiaries in several African countries including Ghana, Sierra Leone, Gambia, and Cote d’Ivoire, while maintaining a presence in major international financial centres including the United Kingdom, France, UAE and China.

In recent years, Zenith Bank has continued to expand its international network as part of its strategy to support global trade and investment flows involving Africa.Manchester, widely regarded as one of the United Kingdom’s most vibrant economic centres, hosts a diverse base of businesses across sectors such as manufacturing, engineering, logistics, technology and consumer goods. The city’s strong commercial ecosystem and international outlook align closely with Zenith Bank’s expertise in corporate banking, structured finance and trade finance.The Manchester branch will work closely with the Bank’s London operations and its broader international network to support clients seeking to expand across markets and unlock new opportunities in both the United Kingdom and Africa.

With the opening of the Manchester branch, Zenith Bank continues to advance its vision of building a truly global African banking institution that connects businesses, facilitates trade and investment, and creates stronger economic bridges between Africa and the world.

*“New Petrol Import Permits May Reverse Nigeria’s Push for Domestic Refining and Increase Pressure on Foreign Reserve” — Energy Policy Group Tells President Tinubu*

An energy policy group has advised President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to reconsider the wider economic consequences of newly issued permits allowing marketers to import petrol into the country, warning that the move could undermine Nigeria’s efforts to strengthen domestic refining and stabilise the economy.

In a statement released on Sunday in Abuja, the Energy Transparency and Market Justice Initiative (ETMJI) said the approvals granted by the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) could produce unintended consequences if not carefully managed.

The group’s president, Dr. Salako Kareem, said Nigeria was at a delicate moment in its energy transition and that policy choices made now would determine whether the country finally escapes its decades-long dependence on imported refined petroleum products.

Kareem said while the regulator’s responsibility to guarantee adequate fuel supply is understood, expanding import permissions at this stage could weaken the policy direction required to encourage local production and long-term sector stability.

“Our respectful appeal to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is that decisions concerning petrol importation must be carefully weighed against their long-term economic consequences,” Kareem said.

“Nigeria has spent decades trying to overcome the paradox of being a major crude oil producer while relying heavily on imported refined products. Any policy action that appears to reopen the floodgates of importation may slow down the progress that has been made toward strengthening domestic refining capacity.”

He warned that increasing petrol imports could place additional pressure on the country’s foreign exchange reserves, especially at a time when the government is pursuing difficult economic reforms aimed at stabilising the naira and improving fiscal discipline.

“For many years, the country has lost enormous volumes of foreign exchange importing petroleum products that could ideally be refined locally,” Kareem said.

“If import volumes begin to rise again, the demand for foreign currency will inevitably grow. This could place renewed strain on the naira and undermine the broader economic stabilisation programme that the government is currently pursuing.”

The group also warned that excessive reliance on imported petrol could create opportunities for product dumping and the entry of substandard fuel into the Nigerian market, a challenge that has troubled regulators and consumers in the past.

According to Kareem, Nigeria’s downstream sector has historically struggled with quality control issues whenever importation becomes widespread, because imported fuel often travels through multiple intermediaries before reaching domestic depots.

“One of the lessons from the past is that when imports dominate the supply chain, the market sometimes becomes vulnerable to the dumping of inferior petroleum products,” he said.

“This not only creates regulatory complications but also exposes Nigerian consumers to fuels that may damage vehicles, affect industrial machinery and ultimately impose hidden economic costs on the country.”

He added that encouraging domestic refining and strengthening local supply chains would provide better product traceability and improve overall market transparency.

Kareem stressed that the group’s intervention was not intended as criticism of the NMDPRA, noting that regulators must often make complex decisions to prevent supply disruptions in a volatile energy market.

However, he urged the federal government to ensure that short-term supply management does not weaken long-term national objectives in the petroleum sector.

“We recognise that the regulator has the responsibility to ensure that Nigerians do not experience fuel shortages, and that duty is extremely important,” he said.

“But at the same time, policy coherence is essential. The country must avoid sending signals that could discourage investment in local refining or create uncertainty about Nigeria’s commitment to energy self-sufficiency.”

Kareem said Nigeria now has a rare opportunity to restructure its downstream petroleum industry in a way that strengthens domestic production, protects foreign exchange reserves and builds long-term industrial capacity.

He urged the president to ensure that the country’s regulatory framework reflects that strategic vision.

“Our appeal is simply for policy alignment. If Nigeria truly wants to build a resilient energy economy, then every major decision in the downstream sector must reinforce the goal of reducing import dependence, strengthening domestic production and protecting the country’s economic stability,” Kareem noted.

The group added that careful policy coordination between regulators and the presidency would help ensure that Nigeria avoids repeating the costly fuel import cycles that have historically drained public resources and weakened the national economy.

Recapitalisation Without Transformation is a Risk Nigeria Cannot Afford

BY BLAISE UDUNZE

In barely two weeks, Nigeria’s banking sector will once again be at a historic turning point. As the deadline for the latest recapitalisation exercise approaches on March 31, 2026, with no fewer than 31 banks having met the new capital rule, leaving out two that are reportedly awaiting verification. As exercise progresses and draws to an end, policymakers are optimistic that stronger banks will anchor financial stability and support the country’s ambition of building a $1 trillion economy.

https://www.stanbicibtcbank.com/nigeriabank/personal/products-and-services/all-loans/stanbic-ibtc-mreif-home-loans

The reform, driven by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) under Governor Olayemi Cardoso, requires banks to significantly raise their capital thresholds, which are set at N500 billion for international banks, N200 billion for national banks, and N50 billion for regional lenders. According to the apex bank, 33 banks have already tapped the capital market through rights issues and public offerings; collectively, the total verified and approved capital raised by the banks amounts to N4.05 trillion.

No doubt, at first glance, the strategy definitely appears straightforward with the idea that bigger capital means stronger banks, and stronger banks should finance economic growth. But history offers a cautionary reminder that capital alone does not guarantee resilience, as it would be recalled that Nigeria has travelled this road before.

During the 2004-2005 consolidation led by former CBN Governor Charles Soludo, the number of banks in the country shrank dramatically from 89 to 25. The reform created larger institutions that were celebrated as national champions. The truth is that Nigeria has been here before because, despite all said and done, barely five years later, the banking system plunged into crisis, forcing regulatory intervention, bailouts, and the creation of the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) to absorb toxic assets.

The lesson from that experience is simple in the sense that recapitalisation without structural reform only postpones deeper problems.

Today, as banks race to meet the new capital thresholds, the real question is not how much capital has been raised but whether the reform will transform the fundamentals of Nigerian banking. The underlying fact is that if the exercise merely inflates balance sheets without addressing deeper vulnerabilities, Nigeria risks repeating a familiar cycle of apparent stability followed by systemic stress, as the resultant effect will be distressed banks less capable of bringing the economy out of the woods.

The real measure of success is far simpler. That is to say, stronger banks must stimulate economic productivity, stabilise the financial system, and expand access to credit for businesses and households. Anything less will amount to a missed opportunity.

One of the most critical issues surrounding the recapitalisation drive is the quality of the capital being raised.

Nigeria’s banking sector has reportedly secured more than N4.5 trillion in new capital commitments across different categories of banks. No doubt, on paper, these numbers may appear impressive. Going by the trends of events in Nigeria’s economy, numbers alone can be deceptive.

Past recapitalisation cycles revealed troubling practices, whereby funds raised through related-party transactions, borrowed money disguised as equity, or complex financial arrangements that recycled risks back into the banking system. If such practices resurface, recapitalisation becomes little more than an accounting exercise.

To avert a repeat of failure, the CBN must therefore ensure that every naira raised represents genuine, loss-absorbing capital. Transparency around capital sources, ownership structures, and funding arrangements must be non-negotiable. Without credible capital, balance sheet strength becomes an illusion that will make every recapitalization exercise futile.

In financial systems, credibility is itself a form of capital. If there is one recurring factor behind banking crises in Nigeria, it is corporate governance failure.

Many past collapses were not triggered by global shocks but by insider lending, weak board oversight, excessive executive power, and poor risk culture. Recapitalisation provides regulators with a rare opportunity to reset governance standards across the industry.

Boards must be independent not only in structure but also in substance. Risk committees must be empowered to challenge executive decisions. Insider lending rules must be enforced without compromise because, over the years, they have proven to be an anathema against the stability of the financial sector. The stakes are high.

When governance fails, fresh capital can quickly become fresh fuel for old excesses. Without governance reform, recapitalisation risks reinforcing the very weaknesses it seeks to eliminate.

Another structural vulnerability lies in Nigeria’s increasing amount of non-performing loans (NPLs), which recently caused the CBN to raise concerns, as Nigeria experiences a rise in bad loans threatening banking stability.

Industry data suggests that the banking sector’s NPL ratio has climbed above the prudential benchmark of 5 percent, reaching roughly 7 percent in recent assessments. Many of these troubled loans are concentrated in sectors such as oil and gas, power, and government-linked infrastructure projects, alongside other factors such as FX instability, high interest rates, and the withdrawal of Covid-era forbearance, which threaten bank stability.

While regulatory forbearance has helped maintain short-term stability, it has also obscured deeper asset-quality concerns. A credible recapitalisation process must confront this reality directly.

Loan classification standards must reflect economic truth rather than regulatory convenience. Banks should not carry impaired assets indefinitely while presenting healthy balance sheets to investors and depositors.

Transparency about asset quality strengthens trust. Concealment destroys it. Few forces have disrupted Nigerian bank balance sheets in recent years as severely as exchange-rate volatility.

Many banks still operate with significant foreign exchange mismatches, borrowing short-term in foreign currencies while lending long-term to clients earning revenues in naira. When the naira depreciates sharply, these mismatches can erode capital faster than any credit loss.

Recapitalisation must therefore be accompanied by stricter supervision of foreign exchange exposure, as this part calls for the regulator to heighten its supervision. Banks should be required to disclose currency risks more transparently and undergo rigorous stress testing at intervals that assume adverse currency scenarios rather than best-case outcomes. In a structurally import-dependent economy, ignoring FX risk is no longer an option.

Nigeria’s banking system has long been characterised by excessive concentration in a few sectors and corporate clients, which calls for adequate monitoring and the need to be addressed quickly for the recapitalization drive to yield maximum results.

Growth in most advanced economies comes from the small and medium-sized enterprises that are well-funded. Anything short of this undermines it, since the concentration of huge loans to large oil and gas companies, government-related entities, and major conglomerates absorbs a disproportionate share of bank lending. This has continued to pose a major threat to the system, as the case is with small and medium-sized enterprises, the backbone of job creation, which remain chronically underfinanced. This imbalance weakens the economy.

Recapitalisation should therefore be tied to policies that encourage credit diversification and risk-sharing mechanisms that allow banks to lend more confidently to productive sectors such as agriculture, manufacturing, and technology rather than investing their funds into the government’s securities. Bigger banks that remain narrowly exposed do not strengthen the economy. They amplify its fragilities.

Nigeria’s macroeconomic conditions, which are its broad economic settings, are defined by frequent and sometimes sharp changes or instability rather than stability.

Inflation shocks, interest-rate swings, fiscal pressures, and currency adjustments are not rare disruptions; but they have now become a normal part of the economic environment. Despite all these adverse factors, many banks still operate risk models that assume relative stability. Perhaps unbeknownst to the stakeholders, this disconnect is dangerous.

Owing to possible shocks, and when banks increase their capital (recapitalization), it is required that banks adopt more sophisticated risk-management frameworks capable of withstanding severe economic scenarios, with the expectation that stronger banks should also have stronger systems to manage risks and survive economic crises. In Nigeria today, every financial institution’s stress testing must be performed in the face of the economy facing severe shocks like currency depreciation, sovereign debt pressures, and sudden interest-rate spikes.

Risk management should evolve from a compliance obligation into a strategic discipline embedded in every lending decision.

Public confidence in the banking system depends heavily on credible financial reporting.

Investors, analysts, and depositors need to be able to understand banks’ true financial positions without navigating non-transparent disclosures or creative accounting practices, which means the industry must be liberated to an extent that gives room for access to information.

Recapitalisation provides an opportunity to strengthen the enforcement of international financial reporting standards, enhance audit quality, and require clearer disclosure of capital adequacy, asset quality, and related-party transactions. Transparency should not be feared. It is the foundation of trust.

One thing that must be corrected is that while recapitalisation often focuses on financial metrics, the banking sector ultimately runs on human capital.

Another fearful aspect of this exercise for the economy is that consolidation and mergers triggered by the reform could lead to workforce disruptions if not carefully managed. Job losses, casualisation, and declining staff morale can weaken institutional culture and productivity. Strong banks are built by strong people.

If recapitalisation strengthens balance sheets while destabilising the workforce that powers the system, the reform risks undermining its own economic objectives. Human capital stability must therefore form part of the broader reform strategy.

Doubtless, another emerging shift in Nigeria’s financial landscape is the rise of digital financial platforms that are increasingly changing how people access and use money in Nigeria.

Millions of Nigerians are increasingly relying on fintech platforms for payments, microloans, and everyday financial transactions. One of the advantages it offers, is that these services often deliver faster and more user-friendly experiences than traditional banks. While innovation is welcome, it raises important questions about the future structure of financial intermediation.

The point here is that the moment traditional banks retreat from retail banking while fintech platforms dominate customer interactions, systemic liquidity and regulatory oversight could become fragmented.

The CBN must see to it that the recapitalised banks must therefore invest aggressively in digital infrastructure, cybersecurity, and customer experience, while cutting down costs on all less critical areas in the industry.

Nigerians should feel the benefits of recapitalisation not only in stronger balance sheets but also in faster apps, reliable payment systems, and responsive customer service.

As banks grow larger through recapitalisation and consolidation, a new challenge emerges via systemic concentration.

Nigeria’s largest banks already control a significant share of industry assets. Further consolidation could deepen the divide between dominant institutions and smaller players. This creates the risk of “too-big-to-fail” banks whose collapse could threaten the entire financial system.

To address this risk, regulators must strengthen resolution frameworks that allow distressed banks to fail without triggering systemic panic, their collapse does not damage the whole financial system, and do not require taxpayer-funded bailouts to forestall similar mistakes that occurred with the liquidation of Heritage Bank. Market discipline depends on credible failure mechanisms.

It must be understood that Nigeria’s banking recapitalisation is not merely a financial exercise or, better still, increasing banks’ capital. It is a rare opportunity to rebuild trust, strengthen governance, and reposition the financial system as a true engine of economic development.

One fact is that if the reform focuses only on capital numbers, the country risks repeating a familiar pattern of churning out impressive balance sheets followed by another cycle of crisis.

But the actors in this exercise must ensure that the recapitalisation addresses governance failures, asset quality concerns, risk management weaknesses, and transparency gaps; and the moment this is done, the banking sector could emerge stronger and more resilient.

Nigeria does not simply need bigger banks. It needs better banks, institutions capable of financing innovation, supporting entrepreneurs, and building economic opportunity for millions of citizens.

The true capital of any banking system is not just money. It is trust. And whether this recapitalisation ultimately succeeds will depend on whether Nigerians see that trust reflected not only in financial statements but in the everyday experience of saving, borrowing, and investing in the economy. Only then will bigger banks translate into a stronger nation.

Blaise, a journalist and PR professional, writes from Lagos and can be reached via: [email protected]