The International Monetary Fund (IMF) Managing Director, Christine Lagarde, has come and gone, but Nigerians have not stopped examining the reasons for her visit.
While some think Lagarde’s visit is positive, saying it could help show Nigeria the way out of her present economic crisis, others are cynical about the visit.

Financial experts and other analysts particularly have been offering advice to the government on the need to be cautious of whatever solutions the IMF boss may offer.
A legal practitioner and Director of a Non-Governmental Organisation, Centre for Social Justice (CENSOJ), Eze Onyekpere described her visit as a welcome development, though this is not the first time the IMF boss would come to Nigeria.

Lagarde also visited Nigeria in 2011 when she came to discuss about youth unemployment among other issues.
According to Onyekpere, Lagarde’s call for fiscal discipline and prudent use of available resources against the background of dwindling oil revenue is a “welcome development”
But Nigerian government is not under obligation to accept the IMF’s advice, he added.

Dr. Tumala Musa Mohammed, a specialist in Time Series, Econometric Modeling, and Statistical System Development, said the visit was in order, especially in view of the fact that Nigeria was experiencing balance of trade challenges, a situation he said the IMF may be able to proffer useful tips to the country.

As stated on its website, the IMF’s primary purpose is to ensure the stability of the international monetary system—the system of exchange rates and international payments that enables countries (and their citizens) to transact with each other.
The Fund’s mandate was updated in 2012 to include all macroeconomic and financial sector issues that bear on global stability.
Mohammed said IMF could provide an independent view of their understanding of the developments in Nigeria’s economy, vis a vis developments in other economies and how these will interplay in the long run.
“The IMF may try to prescribe solutions, and provide its advice on the premise of an open and competitive economy. I think Nigeria is at the crossroads of re-defining itself in many areas including the economy. Our economy is an open one, but not competitive. Anything other than how to make our economy competitive should not be accepted at this time.”
In spite of these positive expectations, Trade Union Congress (TUC) has warned the government against accepting IMF advice. In statement by the Union President General, Comrade Bobboi Bala Kagaima, Nigeria is already in “dire state and cannot cope with the IMF’s characteristic shylock conditionality attached to its credit facilities”.

The press release reads thus: “We are hard pressed to believe that the IMF chief’s visit is a mere courtesy call. True to the traditions of her organisation, she would definitely look to dabble and meddle in our fiscal and monetary challenges and seek to sell our government another of their portage of self-serving, ill-adaptable theories and policies that are sure to further impact negatively on the country’s revenue and increase the pressure on the naira in the foreign exchange market. While we are not adverse to genuine mutually beneficial partnership with the Fund or any other body, we shall fight any agenda inimical to the economic and other interests of the Nigerian masses.”
This position is informed by the previous experience of Nigeria when it received IMF loans in the 80s when the economic was in crisis, the Union stated.

In a rather similar scenario, Nigeria is again faced with a plummeting oil price; decades after the circumstances of foreign currency needs led the then military junta to accept the loan and the conditionalities that was then encaspulated as Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP).

In line with TUC’s argument, observers believe that the recent policy direction of President Buhari administration may have motivated the visit of the IMF boss.
One of such is the attempt by Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) to control demand for foreign exchange use by citizens through restrictions by banks and bureau de change operators.
The CBN governor, Godwin Emefiele had recently dismissed calls from some quarters in the international community to devalue the Naira amid growing concerns about the tough economic outlook in the face of falling oil price. He emphasized rather that demand management of forex arising from limited supply and the exclusion of certain groups from accessing forex from the official market was yielding positive results.

Also, the CBN had late last year listed importers of 41 items and barred them from accessing forex from the interbank market, saying that the products they imported could be produced in-country. He explained that the move was designed to shore up the value of the naira and preserves the country’s scarce foreign reserves.
As a consequence, JP Morgan, an American bond trading company made good its threat in mid-October last year to phase out Nigeria’s bonds from its Government Bond Emerging Market Index (GBI-EM), alluding to unbridled government interference by way of foreign currency controls in Nigeria. Rather than grief over the development, the Federal Government through the Ministry of Finance, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) together with the Debt Management Office (DMO) issued a joint statement to say that they remained undaunted and would continue to take steps that would best serve the interest of Nigeria and her citizens.
The Federal Government have stressed their resolve to ensure steady liquidity and transparency in the market, despite oil price fall, assuring JP Morgan also and other investors that the market for FGN Bonds remained strong and active due primarily to the strength and diversity of the domestic investor base.
“For the avoidance of doubt, the Federal Government sees Nigeria and the interest of Nigerians as paramount. It will therefore only continue to take economic decisions that will impact positively on the lives of all Nigerians,” the government stated.
Notwithstanding, the IMF chief has assured Nigerians that there is no such thing as exposing Nigerian to any burden of loan.

“Let me make it clear that I am not here (in Nigeria) nor is my team in this country to negotiate a loan with conditionality.
“We are not into programme negotiations and frankly at this point in time, given the
 determination and resilience displayed by the President and his team, I don’t see why an IMF programme will be needed.
“So of course, discipline is going to be needed, of course, implementation is going to be key 
for the objectives and the ambitions to serve the country well, in order for it to be actually sustainable.”