In political strategy literature, a politician is typically anyone that has contested any election (won or lost) AND/OR anyone who is a member of a ruling or opposition political party (irrespective of whether or not the person has any designation in the party) 😁
However, in anti-money laundering (AML) world, a politically exposed person (PEP) is an individual with a high profile political role, or who has been entrusted with a prominent public function.
The above means that a PEP might not necessarily be a politician.
In political strategy literature, however, you may have significant political influence by being a PEP (as described in the earlier tweet), OR by being “connected” (if one has a relationship or related) to an individual with a high profile political role.
On education, the FGN needs to grant full autonomy to the schools, issue clear KPIs (admission, teaching, research, infrastructure quality, graduates’ placement rates), and then regulate.
Let me attempt to answer @ItsChristy__ ‘s question 😁
Apparently, she went back to negotiate the termination clause.
The company had a policy that termination or resignation required 4-weeks notice with no payment-in-lieu.
She didn't like it. It limits her flexibility to switch to a new job if such an opportunity comes.
They agreed to give her a waiver because they desperately needed her.
The company now agreed to amend the clause to say that both parties could terminate the employment contract with one week notice or payment in lieu. The updated employment letter was signed.
Thanks Prof @yomitheprof for this article. While your conclusions are not aligned with my views on this topic, I believe that most of the arguments are logical and fair.
I believe that some of the issues raised should drive the discussion for the first amendment to #CAMA2020 😁
Yomi’s article is actually the best non pro-CAMA article that I have seen - it came with strong logic that is devoid of unnecessary emotions and sentiments.
Let me just share my thoughts on some of the issues raised.