The Federal Government’s Janus-faced position on the National Gender Policy has been condemned by the President of Women In Politics Forum (WIPF), Ebere Ifendu.
Ifendu who was interrogating why the Muhammadu Buhari administration came up with the policy in the first place, said it is highly incongruous for an administration to make a law, go against it, and at the same time challenge it in court.
Speaking in Abuja during the recent one year in office and award ceremony of the National President of the National Council for Women Societies (NCWS), Hajia Lami Adamu Lau, the Women In Politics boss, said:
“We went to court and won on the 35 percent affirmation. It is very embarrassing for a government to appeal such a judgement that is based on its own policy. So why did you come up with the policy?
“Sadly, the gender policy was just revised and assented to by the present government and you are in court against your own policy.
“We need to do better to get the political party to give more women tickets to run for seats If we have more women as candidates, it means that more women will win elections, we have to talk about political parties being deliberate about supporting women.
“Although we did not get much women at the Senate, it goes a long way as more women are being conscious and participation is not only when one wins election but the general involvement as election observers, as party agents, women canvassing for votes for other women, that is a huge success for us.”
To the incoming administration, Ebere Ifendu that it “takes a bold step firstly, to withdraw the case in court, then ensures that as they are nominating for ministerial appointment, they are giving a minimum of 35 percent as this was part of their campaign promises as this shows they are responsible to their words because if you are not committed to your words then we cannot trust you. We are hopeful that the right thing will be done this time.”
On Wednesday 6 April 2022, the Federal High Court in Abuja ordered the federal government to enforce the National Gender Policy by allotting 35 percent of appointments in the public sector to women.
Nine civil society organisations filed a suit against the Nigerian government on 24 August 2020, seeking the implementation of the 35 percent Affirmative Action in appointments of women into public office.
The plaintiffs include the Women Empowerment & Legal Aid (WELA) Initiative, the Nigeria Women Trust Fund (NWTF), International Federation of Women Lawyers, Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD -West Africa).
The others are the Women Advocates Research and Documentation Centre (WARDC), Vision Spring Initiatives (VSI), Women In Politics Forum (WIPF), 100 Women Lobby Group, and YIAGA Africa.
In his judgement Hon. Justice Donatus Okorowo agreed with the plaintiffs that Nigerian women had been subjected to various forms of discrimination concerning appointments into key positions of government.
The judge dismissed the preliminary objection of the federal government which had argued that the plaintiff’s case did not disclose any cause of action.
Citing Section 42 of the Nigerian constitution as it relates to the suit, His Lordship upheld the plaintiffs’ contention to the effect “that of all the 44 ministries, there are only about six females in leadership position, and that the situation is worse in other MDAs and agencies.”
Okorowo noted that the defendant, by its conduct, insinuates that there are no competent and reliable women that should be appointed to “stop the apparent male dominance as witnessed in the appointments” of men into key government positions.
“I agree with their (plaintiff) contention that this cannot be possible out of 70 million women in Nigeria,” Mr Okorowo said.
The judge held that the Attorney-General of the Federation (Abubakar Malami) who was the sole defendant in the case, “failed to disprove the material allegations contained in the affidavit, and led no credible evidence to debunk material evidence of the plaintiff.”
“The plaintiff has led cogent, verifiable evidence backed by incontrovertible depositions in their affidavit evidence contrary to the objections raised by the defendant.
“These violations with impunity and reckless abandon were projected by the plaintiff… the defendant merely based their arguments on the grounds that the plaintiff’s demands are not justiceable.
“Dismantling barriers to women’s participation in public spheres has been achieved through progressive interpretation of municipal laws and international obligations and treaties.
“Formulating Policies based on sex, stereotyping, and feudal and patriarchal traditions will no longer be tolerated due to the supremacy of constitutional values…
“This court is not expected to achieve less for Nigerian women, since the constitutional obligation of this court is to apply the law.”
Dissatisfied with the verdict, the Nigerian government headed to the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal seeking an order “setting aside the judgment; striking out and/or dismissing the Respondents’ (women) suit in its entirety.”
The lawyers for Appellants (Federal Government and AGF; T. A. Gazali, SAN, T. D. Agbe, Suleiman Jibril, Ibukun Okoosi, Onyinye Halliday, O. D. Okoronkwo from Department of Civil Appeals Federal Ministry of Justice formulated 16 grounds of appeal for determination.
The government on one of its grounds submitted that: “The learned trial judge erred in law when he held that the Respondents’ suit was founded on enforcement of fundamental rights, and therefore disclosed a cause of action against the Appellants.
“Particulars Of Error: The Respondents’ suit was for the enforcement of the National gender policy. The National gender policy for 35% affirmative action on the appointment of women is not based on Chapter 4 of the Constitution. The National gender policy was a Federal Government policy which cannot be enforced by way of fundamental rights.
