Home Blog Page 1320

Limit Of Compulsory Membership Of Nigerian Bar Association

By Femi Falana SAN

INTRODUCTION 

I was the former Secretary- General of the defunct African Bar Association (2000-2002) and former President of the West African Bar Association (2004-2009). I am a current life member of the Pan African Lawyers Union. Owing to my involvement in unifying African lawyers at the continental and regional levels I have been reluctant to join the campaign for the bulkanisation of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA). However, I am compelled to react to the debate on the compulsory membership of the Nigerian Bar Association by all Nigerian lawyers for two reasons. First, I was privileged to have handled some of the cases in which  the democratic space in Africa has been expanded by municipal and regional courts. Second, I have noted that some respected colleagues who have contributed to the debate did not advert their minds to the several decisions of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal which have upheld the fundamental right of the Nigerian people to freedom of association guaranteed by the Constitution and the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights.

ILLEGALITY OF COMPULSORY MEMBERSHIP OF NBA 

In making a strong case for the compulsory membership of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) by all lawyers who have been called to the bar not a few colleagues have placed a high premium on the Court of Appeal case of the Nigerian Bar Association. v. Kehinde (2017) 11 NWLR (PT 1576) 225. In the leading judgment of the Court, her Ladyship NIMPAR, JCA, had held that:

“The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) was established for the purpose of regulating the affairs and conduct of all legal practitioners in Nigeria and upon being called to the Nigerian Bar, there is automatic membership to the NBA on a lawyer. See Chinwo v. Owhonada (2008)3 NWLR (Pt.1074)341. Hence, as long as one has elected to join and remain within the noble profession, he is a member and ought to comply with the directive of the Association.” 

With respect, the law does not support the statement of the Court of Appeal that the NBA has been founded “for the purpose of regulating the affairs and conduct of all legal practitioners in Nigeria”. Indeed, the NBA was founded in 1900 as a friendly society to protect the  interests of  the first generation of Nigerian lawyers led by the late Mr. Sapara Williams. The  NBA Constitution has since been registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission as a voluntary professional body of lawyers with full and honorary membership. Under the Legal Practitioners Act it is the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee, General Council of the Bar, Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee and Body of Benchers that are empowered to “regulate the affairs and conduct of all legal practitioners in Nigeria”. Even though the NBA is represented in these statutory bodies it does not have the legal capacity to regulate the conduct of any lawyer who has been called to the Bar in Nigeria.

Therefore, while the NBA is a LEGAL association of lawyers because it has been incorporated under the CAMA other associations formed by lawyers are LAWFUL whose members are entitled to associate for the protection of their interests pursuant to section 40 of the Constitution of Nigeria. The distinction between an incorporated and an unincorporated organisation was brought out vividly in the case of Fawehinmi v. N.B.A (No. 2) (1989) 2 NWLR (Part 105) 558 at 633 wherein Karibi Whyte JSC said:

“Thus the right to form any association for the protection of the interests of the members is guaranteed under this provision of the Constitution 1979 and is an entrenched right. However, such an association of persons, though recognised by the Constitution does not ipso facto vest in the association the attributes of incorporation, which alone confers legal personality… . Thus an association of persons recognised by section 37 is a lawful association simpliciter. It is a recognition of the reality that the group of persons who have formed an association has an existence in fact.”

Notwithstanding the  automatic membership of the NBA by all lawyers the Constitution of the NBA has accorded recognition to other associations of lawyers representing regional, religious, ideological and other interests. Such associations include the Arewa Lawyers Association, Eastern Bar Forum and Egbe Amofin. While it may be said that the regional bodies operate within the NBA others like the Federation of Women Lawyers, National Association of Democratic Lawyers, Christian Lawyers Association and Muslim Lawyers Association have Independent existence.

Even though the NBA is affiliated to the Pan African Lawyers Union there are some Nigerian lawyers who belong to the African Bar Association. To the extent that these groups of lawyers are allowed to operate without let or hindrance the right of others to form another national lawyers’ associations cannot be challenged without infringing on the fundamental right to freedom of association. In other words, the compulsory membership of the NBA cannot debar lawyers from exercising their fundamental rights of assembly and association by forming or belonging to another national body of lawyers for the protection of their interests pursuant to sections 39 and 40 of the Constitution.

VOLUNTARY MEMBERSHIP OF NBA

It is submitted that the automatic membership of the NBA or or any other private organisation constitutes a flagrant infringement of the fundamental right to freedom of association. In Agbai v. Okogbue (1991) 7 NWLR (Part 204) 391, the Appellant had kicked against his automatic membership of an age group in his village on religious grounds and therefore challenged the power of the Respondents to induct him into the group by force. Nwokedi JSC who read the leading judgment of the apex court stated that:

“One does not automatically become a member of the association because he was so grouped. One was not under compulsion to join the age group association under which he was grouped as he had the option to join any other age group of his liking… Much as one would welcome development projects in the community, there must be caution to ensure that the fundamental rights of a citizen are not trampled upon by popular enthusiasm. These rights have been enshrined in a legislation, that is, the Constitution, which enjoys superiority over local customs.” 

In concurring with the leading judgment of the Court, Karibi-Whyte JSC , emphatically stated that “the concept of age-grade per se, does not offend the provisions of the Constitution. On the other hand the idea of the automatic membership … is an infringement of the freedom of association which is the fundamental right of the individual…” Similarly, in the case of Independent National Electoral Commission v Balarabe Musa (2003) 10 WRN 1, the Supreme Court struck down the guidelines drawn up by the appellant on the grounds that they constituted a breach of the fundamental right of the Respondents to free association. Tobi JSC who dwelt in extenso on Section 40 of the Constitution stated that:

By the section, every person shall be entitled to assemble freely and associate with other persons, and in particular he may form or belong to any political party, trade union or any other association for the protection of his interests.”

In view of the authoritative pronouncement of the apex court on the voluntariness of private associations the automatic membership of the NBA by all lawyers is a constitutional aberration under the current democratic dispensation. The point that I am labouring to make is that no Nigerian or group of Nigerians can be compelled to belong to or remain in any association by force. In other words,  the compulsory membership of the NBA, a private body, has not obliterated or extinguished the fundamental right of lawyers to form or belong to other societies of lawyers. In Fawehinmi v NBA (supra) Obaseki JSC said that:

“The Constitution of the Nigerian Bar Association is not a statutory instrument. It is not a subsidiary legislation to the Legal Practitioners Act. It is a pure and simple private document which the members of the Nigerian Bar Association were entitled to draw up in exercise of their right to provide a constitution for the Association to regulate its affairs. It was accorded its due superior position by the Legal Practitioners Act, 1975 in the conduct of the affairs of the Nigerian Bar Association by the General Council of the Bar.”

It is trite law that members of a private association are entitled to draw up a Constitution to bind the members inter se. The voluntariness of the membership of private associations was judicially recognised by Supreme Court in Onuekwusi v The Registered Trustees of The Christ Methodist Zion Church (2011) 6 NWLR (Pt 1243) 341 where Fabiyi JSC held that:

“The representatives of the respondent belong to a domestic association in which they are only bound by their own voluntary submission. See Akintemi v Onwumechili 1985 1 NWLR (Pt 1) 68. Their liberty on the matter perpetually inheres in them. They can hardly be compelled to act in the contrary fashion.”

In Inspector General of Police v All Nigeria People’s Party (2008) 12 WRN 65, the Court of Appeal affirmed the decision of the Federal High Court which had annulled the issuance of police permit for rallies and other public meetings on the grounds that it was a breach of the fundamental rights of citizens to freedom of expression and association guaranteed by sections 39 and 40 of the Constitution.

SECURING THE FUTURE OF THE NBA 

A few years ago, a group of Nigerian lawyers decided to revive the African Bar Association notwithstanding that the body had dissolved into the Pan African Lawyers Union in 2002.  Some top official of the PALU had wanted me to sue the leaders of the AFBA in a Nigerian court. But I turned down the request and made them to realise that the action would not succeed in view of article 10 of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights which has guaranteed the human right of all Africans to freedom of association. They became persuaded when I referred them to the case of the Civil Liberties Organisation (in respect of the Nigerian Bar Association) v Nigeria (1995) 186 wherein the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights held that “Freedom of association as an individual right and is first and foremost a duty of the State to abstain from interfering with the free formation of associations. There must be a general capacity for citizens to join, without State interference, associations in order to attain various ends.

It is submitted that under the current human rights regime in Africa the compulsory membership of any lawyers’ body is an anathema.  If the NBA continues to operate outside the ambit of its aims and objects lawyers have the constitutional liberty to form alternative national law societies. For instance,  article 3 (9) & (11) of NBA Constitution provides that the NBA shall ensure the encouragement and protection of the right of access to courts at reasonably affordable fees and of representation by counsel before courts and tribunals as well as the promotion and protection of the principles of the rule of law and respect for the enforcement of fundamental rights, human rights, and people’s rights.To achieve the aforementioned objectives the 1st Vice President of the NBA is saddled with the responsibility to coordinate the activities of the branches including their human rights programmes while each of the 125 branches of the NBA has a human rights committee headed by the vice chair of the branch.

This means that the NBA is the most territorially spread non governmental human rights body in the country. But due to the  persistent failure of the NBA to galvanise its members to address the mounting abuse of human rights in the country a number of public spirited lawyers have established human rights bodies or join existing ones to defend the human rights of the Nigerian people under the rule of law. Such bodies which are usually led by lawyers include the Socio Economic and Accountability Rights Project (SERAP), Access to Justice, Committee for the Defence of Human Rights (CDHR), Civil Liberties Organisation (CLO), National Association of Democratic Lawyers, Human Rights Defenders, Women Empowerment and Legal Aid (WELA), Network of Human Rights Lawyers etc. Without any input from the NBA some of these bodies successfully campaigned for the amendment of the  Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009, National Human Rights Act and the Legal Aid Council Act which have  facilitated the enforcement of fundamental rights and enhancement of access to justice for poor and vulnerable citizens.

In addition, these human rights groups have, through human rights cases filed by them convinced the Supreme Court to jettison the colonial doctrine of locus standi and endorse public interest litigation. The point that I am labouring to make is that the NBA is becoming increasingly irrelevant in the defence and promotion of human rights of the Nigerian people. Even the NBA no longer takes up cases of lawyers  that are arrested and detained illegally by the police and other security agencies.  For instance, the NBA has not joined the campaign for the release of Mr. Emperor Ogbonna who has been detained since March 2020 in defiance of three orders of the Federal High Court directing the SSS to restore his liberty. Therefore, the NBA cannot muster the moral will or courage to restrain lawyers from forming or joining other societies of lawyers for the protection of human rights and promotion of popular causes that will benefit the Nigerian people.

It will be recalled that the Ibrahim Babangida junta had taken advantage of the 1992 internal crisis of the NBA over election to take over the body. Thus, pursuant to the Legal Practitioners (Amendment) Decree No 21 of 1994, a caretaker committee was imposed on the NBA. The Ikeja branch of the NBA approached the Lagos State High Court to enforce the fundamental right of the members to freedom of association. The order of interim injunction granted by the High Court to restrain the junta and members of the caretaker committee from interfering in the internal affairs of the NBA was challenged at the Court of Appeal in the case of Williams v Akintunde (1998) 3 NWLR (Pt 381) 101. In its epochal judgment the special panel of 5 Justices of the Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the appeal and set aside section 23A of the decree which had not only ousted the jurisdiction of the trial court but also criminalise the filing of any action connected to or arising from the management of the NBA.

In his contribution to the leading judgment of the Court Pats-Acholonu JCA (as he then was)  said that the military junta might have enacted the decree to “restore sanity and I dare say unbridled and frightening incipience and un-lawyer-like behaviour that seemed then to envelop and overwhelm the once proud professional association.” However, his Lordship cautioned the legal profession not to wait for military dictators “to put its house in order.” No doubt, the NBA took the advice of his Lordship by putting its house in order. Regrettably, the house has been turned upside down, once again, as its foundation is under serious attack from a a cabal of bar leaders who have institutionalised the biennial imposition of national officers through e-fraud elections. Even branch elections of the NBA are also manipulated with impunity by the same reactionary forces. Hence, many branches of the NBA are managed, from time to time,  by caretaker committees imposed on them by national officers whose own mandate is questionable.

If  the NBA does not arrest the ugly development in a decisive manner, as soon as possible, there is going to be an implosion with dire consequences. Therefore, the lawyers who are desirous to have a united bar should be prepared to ensure that the elections of the officers of the NBA are conducted in a credible and transparent manner while the affairs of the body are managed in a democratic manner. Otherwise, the bulkanization of the NBA is a matter of time. After all, it has just been confirmed that only 18,000 out of the over 200,000 lawyers on the roll of legal practitioners in Nigeria participated in the just concluded controversial 2020 NBA election. The implication of the increasing loss of interest in the affairs of the NBA by a large majority of lawyers ought to engage the attention of those who  are desirous to have a united bar. They owe it a duty to make conscious efforts to restore sanity in the bar and reposition the NBA to defend the rights of the Nigerian people which are under renewed assault under a civilian regime whose sheer contempt for the rule of law is legendary.

Lawyers who have insisted on the compulsory membership of the NBA may wish to consider the implications of certain provisions of the CAMA 2020 on freedom of association in the country.  By virtue of section 839 (1) of the law the Corporate Affairs Commission may by “order suspend the trustees of an association and appoint an interim manager or managers to manage the affairs of an association where it reasonably believes that — (a) there is or has been any misconduct or mismanagement in the administration of the  association; (b) it is necessary or desirable for the purpose of — (i) protecting the property of the association, (ii) securing a proper application for the property of the association towards achieving the objects of the association, the purposes of the association of that property or of the property coming to the association, (iii) public interest; or (c) the affairs of the association are being run fraudulently.” It is hoped that the axe of the CAC will not fall on the NBA since it is not prepared to stop the misconduct of conducting fraudulent elections.

CONCLUSION 

It is sad to note that after 21 years of civil rule members of the legal profession are yet to demilitarize their psyche. Hence, it is being argued that every lawyer must belong to the NBA willy nilly. Even when Nigeria was under the  jackboots and civil liberties were put in abeyance some of us defended  the fundamental right of Nigerian lawyers to exercise their freedom of association enshrined in article 10 of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights. It ought to be pointed out that the  regimentation of lawyers espoused by some judges and lawyers is reminiscent of military rule. It cannot be justified in a democratic society. In Eperokun v University of Lagos (1986) 4 NWLR (Pt 34) 162, Irikefe CJN (as he then was) urged Nigerians to appreciate that …constitutionally entrenched provisions, particularly those safeguarding individual rights, should not, save in a fascist system, be lightly trampled upon.”

Finally, let it be made abundantly clear that no group of Nigerians can be compelled to belong to or remain in any association by force. In other words,  the compulsory membership of the NBA for the purpose of legal practice has not obliterated or extinguished the fundamental right of lawyers to form or belong to other societies of lawyers. However,  since the NBA has apparently lost focus and relevance in the country the progressive extradition of Nigerian lawyers should continue to  defend human rights and other public interests  with renewed vigour, courage and commitment. They should continue to remember the apt words of Sapara Williams that “A lawyer lives for the direction of his people and the advancement of the cause of his  country.”

Okutepa (SAN) Disagrees With Ozekhome (SAN), Says Aggrieved Persons Have Right To Opt Out Of NBA And Nobody Can Stop Them

An eminent lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Samuel Jibrin Okutepa, has reacted to the statement credited to Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN) suggesting that formation of another Bar Association is dead on arrival.

Okutepa (SAN), in a statement made available to TheNigeriaLawyer (TNL), said he is surprised that such a view is coming from a lawyer he respects. He described Ozekhome’s statement as “provocative” and the addition of “pepper” to an already “aggravated injury”.

“When I read the views of some of my colleagues, and in particular the view of Chief Mike Ozekhome SAN, whom I love and respect, that formation of another Bar Association outside of NBA is dead on arrival, I feel terribly amazed. Such statements are not only provocative but are clearly not pacifying and reconciliatory.

“To make such statements in the face of recent events in NBA, is to add pepper to already aggravated injuries,” Okutepa said

Though Okutepa admitted that membership of NBA is open to all lawyers, he contended however that is “idle” and “illogical” to say that no other Bar Association can be formed outside NBA. He added that by virtue of section 40 of the constitution, aggrieved members of NBA have the right to opt-out of NBA and no one can stop them.

He said “Let me make it clear that Nigerian Bar is one and indivisible Bar, unless there is an amendment to the legal Practitioners Act.

“All lawyers duly called to the Bar in Nigeria are members of Nigerian Bar and are solicitors and advocate of the Supreme Court of Nigeria.
There is no Regional Bar or State Bars as we have outside the shore of Nigeria.

“But having said that, it is idle with respect to contend that membership of NBA is statutory and compulsory or that another Association cannot be formed by lawyers called to the Nigerian Bar outside of NBA. Such position is not only illogical, it does not and cannot represent the position of law and Nigerian constitution
No Nigerian lawyer was called to the Nigerian Bar Association. NBA is not Nigerian Bar. It is an Association of members of the Bar. The right to freedom of Association is a fundamental right and enshrined in section 40 of Nigerian constitution 1999 as amended. Let nobody tells me that lawyers who feel terrible aggrieved about the ways and manner the affairs of NBA are being run cannot opt-out of the Association.

“They can and nobody can stop them. Let nobody say it is dead on arrival. Such statements are clearly inciting and provocative. You don’t dare a person who has capacity to do a thing and say he or she should do it let us.”

Okutepa pitched tent with the words of Chief Yomi Aliu, SAN, and Yusuf Ali, SAN, and described their statements as” conciliatory” and “pacifying”. He said

“I think the views of Mallam Yusuf Ali SAN and Chief Yomi Aliu SAN sounded more conciliatory and pacifying. According to reports, Malam Yusuf Ali (SAN) told Saturday Tribune on Friday that aggrieved members of the NBA should imbibe the spirit of forgiveness and save the association from fragmentation.

‘I want to appeal to our colleagues that an eye for an eye will make the whole world blind. The spirit of forgiveness is not just a religious issue, it permeates all human affairs. Two wrongs can never make a right. The solution does not lie in balkanizing the NBA.

‘The Bar association commands respect because of the strength and size of its membership. Creating a parallel structure is not the solution. I just want to appeal. If we balkanise the NBA, each part becomes weaker. “We should allow reason to prevail. This is a matter that should be sorted out. We should not behave like Nigerian politicians who jump ship at the slightest disagreement to create new platforms. The result is a large number of weak political parties in the country,’. ”

Okutepa said Yusuf Ali, SAN’s view is “worth considered and exploited.” adding that “Those who are aggrieved must not be provoked by statements that are inciting. We all read law and no one has a monopoly of knowledge to make statements that sound final.”

He also quoted Chief Yomi Aliu, SAN, extensively. He said:

“Chief Yomi Aliu SAN was forthright in his views. Chief Yomi Aliu (SAN) said the dis-invitation of El-Rufai, in the first place, was an indication that the NBA had been taken over by politicians.
He said the withdrawal of the invitation to the governor was an unnecessary political move that has caused dissension among members. Chief Aliu said:

‘The NBA has been hijacked by political lawyers to the disaffection of real practitioners of law. “Elections from 2016 or so vide e-voting had been manipulated to favour members of this class.
They often engage in class wars as could be seen from the dis-invitation of El-Rufai.

‘One may ask what crime El-Rufai had committed that Obasanjo or Wike had not committed. Or what do we say of Iraqi warmonger, British ex-prime minister, Tony Blair?

‘Before the northern lawyers’ resolution, disenfranchised and cheated members of the Bar from the last election that produced Olumide Akpata had perfected schism of NBA and have over 10,000 lawyers across the country on its roll. “In fact, the last election had produced a Rehoboam and as such, a Jeroboam must arise to save the Bar from the biennial rape of majority decisions by the over-rich minority spending billions on professional elections as in the Israel of old.

‘However, there is one militating issue of law calling for clarification. “Have I signed away my right to freedom of association by choosing law as a profession and as such, bound legs and feet to an association to wit NBA registered as a private organisation with the Corporate Affairs Commission or whether as a Nigerian I can take benefit of the freedom of association enshrined in the constitution? From Fawehinmi case in 1985, we had our freedom to freely associate and disassociate from NBA but over time, the Court of Appeal had held that anybody that read law is in eternal bondage to NBA.

‘The NBA has failed woefully, neglected and refused to protect the interest of the majority of its members. It has refused to speak to power but rather it hobnobs with power, albeit in a beggar-like manner.

‘The ship is filled with filth and any occupant not used to dirt is free to disembark and join or form another organisation that will protect his interest.

‘Law Society of Nigeria was incorporated in 1994 as a fallout of the Port Harcourt conference imbroglio of 1992. Today, we have in the offing New Nigerian Bar Association, Nigerian Bar Society, and Northern lawyers should stop bid to real NBA —SANs Bar Society of Nigeria. Some members of the Board of Trustees that could save the NBA from imminent schism became partisan by congratulating the declared winner, even when a candidate had protested in the course of the election.

‘They thereafter sat and decided the petition of the declared loser, thereby throwing away the avowed principle against bias.

‘Certainly, this cannot be the Bar of our dream and nobody can put the rope on the neck of any lawyer to join by force. Let there be the choice as obtainable in other civilized climes or accountancy profession that has ICAN and ANAN.’ ”

Okutepa, SAN said the words of Chief Aliu, SAN cannot be dismissed with a wave of a hand. He urged the current leadership not to be misled with stands thst cannot divide the NBA

“For me the views of Chief Yomi Aliu SAN quoted above cannot be dismissed with the waves of hands. I share his view. The current leadership of NBA will do itself great good if it does not allow itself to be misled by stand that tends to promote the breakaway or divisions now too ripped to be plucked. There is a saying in my place that when a foolish man is holding gold in his hands on the man road, there is a wise man following him at the back. Those who have ears to hear should hear.” Okutepa, SAN concluded

2020 NBA-AGM: NBA Remains One United & Indivisible Bar, Report Reveals Dele Adesina (SAN) Has Accepted The Outcome Of NBA 2020 Elections — Paul Usoro, SAN

THE immediate President of the Nigerian Bar Association, Mr Paul Usoro SAN has stated that Deacon Dele Adesina, SAN has accepted the outcome of the 2020 NBA National Officers’ Elections.

The former NBA President disclosed this at the concluded NBA Virtual Annual General Meeting (AGM) held on 28th day of August, 2020.

Meanwhile, he noted that the concluded election was a very transparent process.

“Whatever one may say about this election, one thing that can not be taken away from it is that that was the first-ever of our national election where everyone was turned in to election monitors as well as electoral and returning officers all rolled into one, from the comfort of our homes, using our various devices and tracking the ballot right from the first vote up to the last.

“From most of our members and based on the comment that I have received, this was an exhilarating experience in transparency and it was fun. The transparency was unparalleled and we are expecting that subsequent bye-elections would build on that quality of transparency.” He said.

However, he noted that Dele Adesina, SAN has accepted the outcome of the polls, according to a report he received.

“Now, I need to say something about that election and the result of that election and what I need to say in particular is, I have read some recent reports where I learnt that our colleague, my brother, my friend, has accepted the result of that election and I am referring to Deacon Dele Adesina.

“Incidentally, I have not spoken with him but I do believe those reports and I want to thank him for that magnanimity. I do intend to speak with him and indeed to congratulate him. Because it takes a real spirit of wanting to build one’s Association to come to that conclusion in a contentious environment like we have. I am expecting and hoping that that report is correct and I have no reason to doubt him. I was also told that a representative of his, indicated that they would not be going to Court. That for me will be a very welcome development and I thank him very much.” He said.

“The election may not have been perfect but that election was a serious improvement on the previous elections that we have had and we can only continue to build on that platform. And by the grace of God, we will continue to improve and we would keep making progress and we would be even much better as the years go by.

“I have already said that there is room for everyone as far as the Bar is concerned and in any case, for somebody like my brother, Deacon Dele Adesina, he has served the Bar, he continues to serve the Bar, his place is assured, he is a life member. Nobody could take that place from him. He would continue to be an asset, even for this administration and when I have a moment to discuss with the President…Olumide Akpata, I definitively would also remind him that as our people say, wisdom is contributory and he has to reach out to the different people, including those who contested election against him and the same applies to all our other officers. We have to reach out, we have to bring those people in, we have to make them a part of our collective.”

However, he emphatically stated that the NBA remains an indissoluble Bar and that efforts to create parallel Associations to the NBA are actions of the detractors.

“The nature of the Nigerian Bar as one indivisible hold. In recent times, I have heard comments that have suggested that some of our people may be looking at different alternatives.

“I think we are like SAP, for those who are old enough to know what SAP means. SAP was that Structural Adjustment Programme that was there in the days of General Babangida and for those who are old enough, the scene then was that there was no alternative to SAP. Well, a lot of people contested that and said there was an alternative to SAP.

“In our own case, we are saying there is no alternative to a united, indivisible Bar. We are stronger together and whatever grievance or challenges we might have, we have to settle it in-house.

“There is no room for anybody to break away. I do not take those other reports that I saw flooding the media yesterday seriously, the one that talked about New Nigerian Bar, I am convinced that those are the handiwork of our detractors who wish to distract us and who wish to plant confusion amongst us.

“We must not allow them to. We must remain one united and indivisible Bar. That is the only way that we can improve our lots, that is the only way we can influence whatever happens, whether it is in government or it is in judiciary, that it is the only way we can protect and promote the rule of law and by the way, as a priest in that temple of the rule of law, we must remember that the rule of law has no religion, the rule of law has no ethnic group, the rule of law does not have social class.

“The rule of law is for everyone and if we must be true priest at that temple, then we must avoid having to make our judgement, our decisions, our comments as far as the affairs of the NBA is concerned based on religious considerations, based on ethnic considerations, based on class distinctions, based on political defines, based on those things that divide the outside world, we must not bring those things into the house. We must keep them outside. We must remain one indivisible Nigerian Bar Association.” He said.

Applicability Of Arbitration And Conciliation Act In The National Industrial Court

By Adetokunbo Davies, Esq

Introduction

In a bid to expeditiously resolve and determine commercial disputes and employment claims, some organizations and employers in Nigeria have taken the initiative of including arbitration clauses in many of their contract agreements, including contracts of employment, by designating arbitration as the preferred means of resolving any dispute arising from such contracts.

This epiphany could not have come at a better time as most employers, especially corporate bodies, are averse to the length of time spent on litigation. Also, most corporate bodies prefer confidentiality as against the exposure associated with litigation, hence arbitration is often their preferred choice as it offers privacy and faster resolution of dispute.

The Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1988

The Federal law on arbitration is the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, Cap A18 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria (LFN) 2004 (“ACA”). The Act is based on the UNCITRAL Model Law and incorporates the UNCITRAL arbitration rules. Also, the ACA ratifies and incorporates the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (NYC).

Furthermore, apart from the ACA, which is a Federal Law, some states have their respective arbitration laws. One of such states is Lagos State which has enacted the Arbitration Law of Lagos State 2009 (LSAL) and applies to all arbitrations within the state except where the parties have expressly agreed that another law should apply.

Jurisdiction of the National Industrial Court

The jurisdiction of the NIC is as contained in section 254 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended). By section 254 (C) of the constitution, the NIC has exclusive jurisdiction over Labor and Employment disputes. See Mainstreet Bank Registrars Ltd v. Ahaiwe (2019) LPELR-47057 (CA) and Chiroma v. Forte Oil Plc (2018) LPELR-43873 (CA), See also Section 7 of the National Industrial Court Act (NICA), 2006. In relation to arbitration and or arbitral proceedings, Section 254 (C) (4) specifically provides that:

“The National Industrial Court shall have and exercise jurisdiction and powers to entertain any application for the enforcement of the award, decision, ruling or order made by any arbitral tribunal or commission, administrative body, or board of inquiry relating to, connected with, arising from or pertaining to any matter of which the National Industrial Court has the jurisdiction to entertain.” 

From the above provisions, it is clear that the NIC has jurisdiction to entertain arbitral awards and or issues arising from arbitral proceedings which are connected to and bother on Labor and employment disputes. The question however is does the NIC have jurisdiction to entertain issues bothering on arbitration which have arisen from the ACA?

Applicability of the ACA to NIC

There is the argument that the ACA is not applicable to the NIC. In an obvious bid to hold the position that the ACA does not apply to the NIC, many protégés of this concept have held that the ACA applies strictly to commercial disputes and does not apply to labour and employment disputes and by a large extent, the NIC. The cornerstone of this theory is the long title of the ACA, which states as follows:

“An Act to provide a unified frame work for the fair and efficient settlement of commercial disputes by arbitration and conciliation; …..”

Reliance has also been placed on section 57(1) of the ACA, the interpretation section of the Act which defined ‘court’ to mean the High Court of a State, High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja and the Federal High Court; ‘judge’ to mean a judge of the above mentioned Court. Which seems to have precluded the NIC.

Interestingly, propagators of the above theory have argued further using the unreported case of Gluseppe Frances co E. Ravilli v. Ditisteel Integrated services Limited (Unreported) Suit No: NICN/LA/1599/2016, where the Applicant approached the NICN by an Originating Motion, praying the Court to exercise its discretion in appointing an arbitrator for the parties. The application was brought pursuant to the ACA. The Court held that the ACA does not apply to the NIC. The Court also held that the ACA applies only to commercial disputes and not to labour and employment dispute. Likewise, in Compagnie Generate de Geophysique v. Etuk (2004) 1 NWLR (pt. 853) 20 it was held that the provision of the ACA applies only to domestic commercial arbitration.

With due respect, the above contentions fly in the face of the provisions of Section 254C (4) of the Nigerian Constitution (as amended). It is explicit from the said provision that the constitution has vested the NICN with exclusive jurisdiction over any issue arising from an arbitral proceedings connected with Labor and employment disputes. Therefore, it is safe to submit that, employment disputes can be resolved through arbitration.

On Section 57 of the ACA, it is the contention of this article that the provisions of Section 57(1) of the ACA must not be read in isolation. It is imperative to consider the provision of section 54(2) of the NICA in interpreting the above section of the ACA. Section 54(2)(a)(b) of the NICA provides thus:

“for enabling full effect to be given to the provision of this Act-

a: any reference (whether express or by necessary implication) in any enactment (other than the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999) to the “the Federal High Court” “High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja” “High Court”, “court of law” or a “court of record”- (i) in so far as the reference relates to or is connected with the jurisdiction, powers practice and procedure of a High Court, and (ii) except in so far as it is inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, shall include a reference to the court established by the this Act.

Having expressly stated that the High Court in any enabling Act must by implication include the NIC, it is the very strong and firm view of the author that the ACA when read with the section 54  (2) of the NICA, vests jurisdiction in the NICN to entertain issues arising from arbitral proceedings which connected to labor and employment.

Unfortunately, the Court in the Ravilli case did not consider the above provision in arriving at its decision. If it had, it wouldn’t have arrived at the decision it did. Hence, that decision is, in the author’s view, per incurium. See Nikagbatse v. French & Ors (2014) LPELR-23310 (CA), Olaiya v. Lawal (2019) LPELR-48205 (CA) and Makun v. Federal University of Technology Minna SC.241/2002 Delivered on Friday 24th June, 2011.

Having demonstrated above that the NIC is a Court contemplated under the ACA, it is submitted that the ACA is applicable to the NIC contrary to the decision in the Ravelli case.

On the long title of the ACA which has been interpreted to limit the ACA to commercial disputes, it must be stated that there is no provision in the ACA that expressly excludes its applicability to Labor and employment issues. By virtue of Section 35 of the ACA the ACA will only be inapplicable to disputes where a law has expressly stated that such dispute cannot be submitted to arbitration. Instructively there is however currently no Law which expressly excludes employment disputes from arbitration.

Furthermore, by the combined provisions of Section 254 (C) (4) of the constitution, Section 57 of the ACA and Section 54 (2) of the NICA, the ACA applies to labor and employment disputes. Hence, any provision in the ACA which is to the contrary will by virtue of its inconsistency with the provisions of the constitution be null and void. See: Eligwe v. Okpokiri (2014) LPELR – 24213(SC). In any event, it is the opinion of the author that an employment dispute which seeks to determine the rights and liabilities of the parties to the contract of employment, is commercial in nature and according to Frost P, H.S Freehills and P. Goulding QC in their article titled ‘Arbitration of Employment Disputes’, arbitration is adaptable to all manners of employment disputes.

Finally, it is important to stress the point that the applicability of the ACA is determined by the agreement of parties and not the ACA itself. The implication of this is that the ACA is only ‘procedural’ and seeks to guide the arbitral proceedings which parties have submitted to freely. See: RasPalgazi Construction Company Ltd V. FCDA (2001) LPELR-2941 (SC). Where there is no arbitration agreement, the ACA cannot apply.

Therefore, where parties in an employment relationship have agreed to submit their disputes to arbitration under the ACA, it is submitted that such reference to arbitration under the ACA is valid and the NIC will have jurisdiction to entertain same without any hindrance or inhibition. In Olumuyiwa V. BMIL Nigeria Limited, Suit No. NICN/LA/313/2013(Unreported Decision) where the NICN had to consider an application to strike out the suit in enforcement of an ACA arbitration clause, which application was filed in response to an employment/labour claim filed in the Court. The sole issue for determination, as identified by the NIC, was whether the parties ought to have submitted themselves to arbitration as per the contract of employment of the claimant before coming to the court? The court held that the matter was premature as it ought to have gone to arbitration, in compliance with the arbitration clause in the claimant’s contract of employment, thus it struck out the suit.

Conclusion

The ultimate implication of the foregoing is that the ACA applies to labor and employment disputes and parties to such dispute may at anytime prior to commencement, during or after arbitral proceedings, approach the NICN for interventions as permitted under the ACA.

I will end this article by admonishing the Honourable Judges of the NICN to always hold in favor of the applicability of the ACA to the NICN in Labor and employment disputes.

ADETOKUNBO DAVIES, ESQ, MCIArb. is an Associate Partner, Pinheiro LP   

[DOWNLOAD] SERAP Launches Report on Assets Declaration In Nigeria, Urges CCB To Grant Citizens Access To Such Asset Declaration Forms For Accountability Purpose

The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has on Saturday 29th August, 2020, launched a latest report against the ceaseless denial of assets declaration details of public officials in Nigeria.

The report which is titled: “Citizens’ Guide to Asset Declarations by Public Officers in Nigeria” was launched at a virtual event organised by SERAP in collaboration with the Open Society Initiative for West Africa, OSIWA.

At the virtual event were stakeholders in the fight against corruption, including citizens, civil society organizations, the media, lawyers, ministries, agencies and departments (MDAs), anti-corruption agencies, Code of Conduct Bureau Officers and other major actors in these sectors.

According to professor of Law, Yemi Akinseye-George, SAN, during his presentation on the webinar’s subject: “No Escape For The Corrupt: Lifting The Lid On Asset Declaration In Nigeria”, the objective of the launched Guide is to facilitate the Strengthening of the operational capacity of public officers, government functionaries and institutions involved in the implementation and daily management of asset and income disclosure systems in Nigeria and to inform the legal and policy discourses around these issues through a good practice manual and other tools

He noted that making asset declaration open to public scrutiny enables citizens to hold leaders accountable

“Overwhelming empirical research studies have proven that an asset declaration open to public scrutiny as a way for citizens to ensure leaders do not abuse their powers for personal gain and publication of information on a person’s asset allows civil society to hold leaders to account. If leaders are seen to live beyond their means, an asset declaration can be a starting point for investigations.”

On why Nigerian assets declaration system is not effective, he mentioned “Non-compliance by most public officials, lack of transparent follow-up and verification of declared assets, persistent reluctance of the custodian of the CCB to publish the records for public scrutiny, non-verification of most assets declaration forms have been been left unverified by the regulatory body.”

The learned silk cited laws like the Nigerian constitution, Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act, United Nation’s Convention Against Corruption, Freedom of Information Act, and many others and argued that if the laws are juxtaposed with historical narrative of public sector corruption, the conclusion is that assets declarations are not just to be submitted “but the custodian of the submission shall make them available to citizens of Nigeria for purposes of transparency, verification and accountability.”

Akinseye-George, SAN urged the CCB to make it compulsory for all public officials to declare their assets and liabilities, verify any any account when there are doubts or only for positions with high risk of conflict of interest, view the organized civil society and journalists as partners in enthroning transparency and accountability in Nigeria rather than antagonize their efforts. He also recommends deployment of information technology in the assets declaration filing and verification and linking the information from other government agencies and other private organizations and granting reasonable requests for the disclosure assets and liabilities declared by public officials.

Click on the link below to download a copy of the SERAP Report

ACJA/ACJL: Panacea to Orderly Society

By Maroof Asudemade

Different despicable episodes of human rights violations by security operatives have been a common feature of the Nigerian society. Nigerian citizens are not safe from the public paid operatives saddled with securing their lives and property. Citizens suffer arbitrary arrests for civil issues and prolonged detention for bailable offences. In order to extract confessions, suspects are subjected to inhuman tortures. Suspects are arrested without being told reason(s) for the arrest. The result of all these security anomalies is an unsafe, chaotic society.

Nigeria used to have two principal statutes on criminal justice: Criminal Procedure Act and Criminal Procedure Code. The two enactments were defective and inefficient, while the people they were meant to protect were at the serious receiving ends. Because of the long use of CPA and CPC, without appropriate reforms, some lawyers leveraged on their defects to delay cases unnecessarily in courts.

The glaring lapses found in CPA and CPC led to the promulgation of Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 (ACJA) and the Oyo State Administration of Criminal Justice Law, 2016 (ACJL) respectively. The principal aim of ACJA is to engender formal compliance with human rights issues. The provisions of ACJA have brought about certain innovations, including improving issues of human rights and proffering solutions to the challenges of prolonged trials in courts.

With ACJA in place in Nigeria and in some states, a number of human rights issues that beset members of the public in the hands of security operatives is set to experience rapid reduction or total eradication. Issues of human rights that will be things of the past include unlawful arrests, proxy arrests, arrests without warrant, arrests for civil wrongs like breach of contracts, application of torture and unleashing of inhuman treatment to suspects. So far, some states in the country have replicated ACJA in their respective states. These states include Oyo, Lagos, Ekiti, Kaduna, Anambra, Rivers, Abuja and few others.

ACJA/ACJL, as lifesaving as they appear, cannot function effectively without some forms of advocacy in terms of sensitization and education. This advocacy is what CLEEN Foundation, formerly called Centre for Law Enforcement and Education, has been in the forefront of. Established in 1998, its mission is to ‘promote public safety, security and accessible justice through the strategies of empirical research, legislative advocacy, demonstration programmes and publications in partnership with government, civil society and the private sector ‘. CLEEN Foundation has field offices in many states of the federation and they organise regular interactions with relevant stakeholders. During one of such monthly virtual interactions occasioned by the Covid-19 pandemic, the 5th Bi-Monthly Meeting of Oyo State Working Group, held on 28 August 2020, the state partner of CLEEN Foundation in Oyo State, Barrister Kehinde Adegbite, stressed the need to ensure that security could only be guaranteed when the criminal justice system was effective.

In his opening remarks, the chairman, Nigerian Bar Association, Oyo State branch, Barrister Olayinka Esan, expressed delight at the regular meeting as he said it’s an avenue to educate lawyers, members of the public and other stakeholders on the provisions of ACJL. In his contribution, Barrister Fola Awoyemi proffered solutions to the problem of police officers who are not lawyers prosecuting criminal cases. He suggested that states could grant fiat to private lawyers so as to prosecute criminal cases pro bono since there are private legal practitioners who are ready, willing and capable to offer such free legal services to shore up their status in the legal profession.

Present at the virtual meeting sponsored by CLEEN Foundation included lawyers, human rights activists and other relevant stakeholders.

Maroof Asudemade is a Media Practitioner, Publisher, Author and Public Affairs Analyst., [email protected]

How Chadwick Boseman Died, And The Pains He Went Through

By Nehru Odeh

Chadwick Boseman, the American actor who played Black icons Jackie Robinson and James Brown before finding fame as the regal Black Panther, has died of colon cancer. Boseman who had been battling the disease for four years died at his home in Los Angeles with his wife and family by his side. He was 43

Boseman was truly the boss man. According to the statement released by his family, he was diagnosed with colon cancer four years ago.

But the intriguing thing about this actor who was so loved by fans across the globe is that he had been living with cancer, undergoing several chemotherapy and surgeries and still acting to bring joys to families. Yet he bore his pains stoically and never spoke about his diagnosis.

“A true fighter, Chadwick persevered through it all, and brought you many of the films you have come to love so much,” his family said. “From Marshall to Da 5 Bloods, August Wilson’s Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom and several more – all were filmed during and between countless surgeries and chemotherapy. It was the honor of his career to bring King T’Challa to life in Black Panther.”

Another intriguing thing about his death is that he died on a day that Major League Baseball was celebrating Jackie Robinson day. “His transcendent performance in ‘42’ will stand the test of time and serve as a powerful vehicle to tell Jackie’s story to audiences for generations to come,” the league wrote in a tweet.

Since news of his death broke, social media has been buzzing with tributes for him: “This is a crushing blow” actor and director Jordan Peele said on Twitter, one of many expressing shock as the news spread across social media.

“This broke me,” said actor and writer Issa Rae.

Captain America actor Chris Evans called Boseman “a true original. He was a deeply committed and constantly curious artist. He had so much amazing work still left to create.”

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden tweeted that Boseman “inspired generations and showed them they can be anything they want — even super heroes.”

Born in South Carolina, Boseman graduated from Howard University and had small roles in television before his first star turn in 2013. His striking portrayal of the stoic baseball star Robinson opposite Harrison Ford in 2013′s “42” drew attention in Hollywood and made him a star.A year later, he wowed audiences as Brown in the biopic “Get On Up.

His T’Challa character was first introduced to the blockbuster Marvel movies in 2016′s “Captain America: Civil War,” and his “Wakanda Forever” salute reverberated around the world after the release of “Black Panther” two years ago.

“I don’t think the world was ready for a ‘Black Panther’ movie before this moment. Socially and politically, it wasn’t ready for it,” he told AP at the time.

Even at the outset of his Hollywood career, Boseman was clear-eyed about — and even skeptical of — the industry in which he would become an international star.

“You don’t have the same exact experience as a Black actor as you do as a white actor. You don’t have the same opportunities. That’s evident and true,” he told AP while promoting “42.” “The best way to put it is: How often do you see a movie about a black hero who has a love story … he has a spirituality. He has an intellect. It’s weird to say it, but it doesn’t happen that often.”

In addition to Robinson and Brown, Boseman portrayed the future U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall in 2017′s “Marshall.” He humanized the larger-than-life historical figures with the same quiet dignity — interrupted by flashes of sparkling wit — that he would later bring to T’Challa. . However, it was his role as T’Challa, the king of Marvel’s mythical African land of Wakanda, that gave him international recognition.

He took on his first producing job in last year’s action thriller “21 Bridges,” in which he also starred, and was last seen on-screen in Spike Lee’s film “Da 5 Bloods” as the leader of a group of Black soldiers in the Vietnam War.

Boseman completed one last performance, in an adaptation of August Wilson’s “Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom.” The Netflix film, which reunited Boseman with his “Get On Up” co-star, Viola Davis, finished shooting last summer.

It took some time for Boseman’s moment to come. He first got into theater, acting and writing plays as an undergrad at Howard. He visited Africa for the first time during college with director and theater professor Mike Malone, working in Ghana to preserve and celebrate rituals with performances on a proscenium stage. He later called the trip “one of the most significant learning experiences of my life.”

Boseman had roles on TV shows like ABC Family’s “Lincoln Heights” and NBC’s “Persons Unknown,” but before “42” he had only acted in one film, 2008’s football drama “The Express.” Boseman attracted notice, but missed out on big parts.

“2011 was a rough year,” he said. “I was up for everything that was happening that year, really good roles. I would get down to the end and then it would go to someone else.”

Asked about his own childhood heroes and icons, Boseman cited Black political leaders and musicians: Malcolm X, Martin Luther King Jr., Bob Marley, Public Enemy, A Tribe Called Quest and Prince. Deeply private and often guarded in his public appearances and interviews, he made clear that he understood the significance of his work and its impact on the broader culture.

At the 2019 Screen Actors Guild Award, “Black Panther” won best ensemble, electrifying the room. Before an auditorium full of actors, Chadwick Boseman stepped to the microphone. He quoted Nina Simone: “To be young, gifted and black,” and put the moment in context.

“We know what it’s like to be told there isn’t a screen for you to be featured on, a stage for you to be featured on. … We know what’s like to be beneath and not above. And that is what we went to work with every day,

“We knew that we could create a world that exemplified a world we wanted to see. We knew that we had something to give,” Boseman said

CBN grants 9Mobile first payment service bank licence


The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has granted final approval to Nigeria’s lifestyle and first payment service bank, 9PSB (Payment Service Bank) to commence operations in fostering financial inclusion drive in the ecosystem.

It is owned by mobile giant 9Mobile.

This is expected to help ease the challenges of long queues in the banking halls, consistent network failure, stringent documentation to assess credit facilities and frequent transaction/dispensing error, delay in transaction completion, and process among others.

Speaking on the vision of 9PSB’s entrant to the financial sector, 9mobile CEO Alan Sinfield, stated that there was a huge potential in the market and “9PSB is strategically positioned to expand its operations into financial services”.

He said: “We are happy to be the first Payment Service Bank to provide all Nigerians with access to banking services and open up a digital world of possibilities to improve everyday lives.

“We know that this new development will further improve the country and the people going forward. In 2018, 9mobile partnered with Nigerian bank, UBA to roll out 9Pay, a mobile payment solution while also pushing for a fintech license.

“We are delighted that we have now secured finale approval for a Payment Service Bank.”

The CFO of 9mobile, Mr. Phillips Oki, said: “The financial inclusion that 9PSB will provide will be an enabler to achieving unparalleled benefit in everyday transactions.

“The *990# allows Nigerians to perform all financial transactions including utility payment from the comfort of their phones and homes on any mobile network at no charge.

“With a large network of agents strategically located in both urban and rural communities, 9PSB is going to make sending and receiving money possible, easier, seamless, and less stressful for all Nigerians.

“9PSB is also available on mobile App and internet banking for ease of banking and simplicity. Over the coming weeks, 9PSB will unveil its products and services to Nigerians.”

In October 2012, the CBN introduced the National Financial Inclusion Strategy (NFIS) to provide Payment Service Banks across Nigeria with the aim of breaking the traditional barrier preventing financial inclusion and promoting low cost, secure convenient financial services across the country.

ICPC quizzes NDDC officials over alleged corruption

The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) says it recently quizzed top officials of the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) over various allegations of corruption.

Mrs. Azuka Ogugua, Spokesperson of the Commission, said this in a statement on Saturday in Abuja.

Ogugua said the allegations included the diversion of funds, procurement fraud, and misappropriation of the agency’s COVID-19 funds.

The ICPC spokesperson said some directors of the NDDC, who she did not identify, were arrested and quizzed at the ICPC headquarters recently.

According to her, this came after months of intelligence gathering, following the receipt of petitions from Nigerians on the alleged illegalities and contract fraud by some officials of the agency.

“Top officials of the agency are being investigated for their complicity in an alleged diversion of N5.474 billion meant for the purchase of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for health workers handling the COVID-19 pandemic in the nine states of NDDC.

“The commission is also investigating the payments of millions of Naira to the staff of the agency for foreign training during the COVID-19 full lockdown which were never attended.

“As well as the nonpayment of entitlements to students on foreign scholarships.

“Other allegations being investigated by ICPC include the selling of backdated contract award letters for projects and awards of contracts that were not captured in the budget of the NDDC,’’ she said.

She added that ICPC had already retrieved relevant documents with which to continue investigations towards the recovery of diverted funds and prosecution of breaches of the law.

It would be recalled that NDDC has dominated headlines in recent times following a corruption probe launched by the National Assembly.

During one of the hearings, the Acting Managing Director of the NDDC, Prof. Kemebradikumo Pondei, admitted that the commission spent N1.5 billion as COVID-19 palliatives first on its staff.

The Senate later disclosed in a report that top management of the commission paid themselves N85.6 million to attend a graduation ceremony in the United Kingdom during the lockdown in Nigeria.

The legislative investigation became controversial when the commission’s management accused some senators and members of the House of Representatives of benefiting from several NDDC contracts. (NAN)

Senate Has No Plan To Secretly Pass Social Media Bill ― Sen. Basiru

The Senate on Saturday described as false the report making the rounds that it was considering passing the contentious Social Media Bill.

Rather, it said the passage of the bill was not on the card of the upper legislative chamber as the relevant committee is yet to complete necessary legislative work on it.

The Chairman of the Senate Committee on Media and Public Affairs, Senator Ajibola Basiru, in a release titled: “On That False Story On Social Media Bill by SaharaReporters”, also noted that:
“The story made up by SaharaReporters that the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is to pass Social Media Bill despite rejection by Nigerians is false and a lie concocted by the medium to ridicule and tarnish the image of the Senate.

“This report is yet another example of irresponsibility taken too far as there has not been any recommendation for passage of the bill by the Senate. By deliberately publishing falsehood, SaharaReporters is not only doing no good to the nation but it is also shooting itself down as its recklessness and incredulity would always speak against it.

“The Senate wishes that Nigerians will be circumspect, shunning gullibility which makes them to lap up those invidious write ups and begin to comment on non-existent issues. If some people have chosen the path of perfidy wanting to bring the nation and its sacred institutions down, Nigerians must be wary and unwilling to be led by those to believing the false fabrication.”

According to him, the Senate conducts its sittings in the open and matters for consideration are well laid out “and therefore, would not require anyone’s investigation to ‘dig’ out what the Senate would do”.

He added that the relevant committee of the Senate has not submitted its report for the bill to be passed at all or surreptitiously as claimed by SaharaReporters.

“We will not allow unscrupulous writers to denigrate the Senate and ridicule the great work that is on-going. SaharaReporters must be afraid to see the platform where they peddle their trade of falsehood tampered with, even at that, there should be no need to lie so brazenly,” the Senate spokesman said.

TIPS