Home Blog Page 452

High court throws Kenya deputy president replacement into confusion

Kenya’s parliament on Friday unanimously voted to back President William Ruto’s pick to replace his impeached deputy Rigathi Gachagua, even as a High Court injunction threw the historic political process into disarray.

In a fast-moving political drama, Gachagua was sacked by the upper house on Thursday night on accusations of stirring ethnic hatred and undermining the judiciary, charges he denied and vowed to fight in court.

Interior Minister Kithure Kindiki was swiftly nominated to replace Gachagua in a shake-up that analysts suggested could help Ruto consolidate his grip on power that has been shaken by recent anti-government demonstrations, the biggest test of his two-year presidency so far.

But in a further twist to the political turmoil, a High Court in the capital suspended the appointment process within minutes of parliament voting overwhelmingly to approve Kindiki, a 52-year-old academic turned political heavyweight.

It followed a case filed by Gachagua’s legal team alleging his ouster had been unfair and rushed.

“The petition and application raise monumental constitutional issues,” the High Court order said, effectively blocking Kindiki from taking office until October 24 when a bench will hear the case.

Almost at the same time, Kindiki’s appointment was published in the official government gazette, a necessary step ahead of his swearing-in, leaving it unclear over what the next move from either side could be.

The high-stakes political drama has transfixed the East African country, generally regarded as a stable democracy in a turbulent region.

While Ruto has not given any public comment on the impeachment, Gachagua has said the process could not have gone ahead without his boss’s blessing.

– Violating the constitution –

The Senate pushed ahead with Gachagua’s impeachment on Thursday — finding him guilty of five out of the 11 charges against him — despite the absence of the embattled 59-year-old due to ill health.

He failed to testify in his defence after being rushed to hospital in a Nairobi suburb with severe chest pains. The facility’s chief cardiologist Dan Gikonyo later told reporters he was stable but would remain under observation for 72 hours.

Still, his absence plunged the session into disarray, with the Senate rejecting an appeal by his legal team to delay the hearings, prompting the lawyers to walk out in protest.

Gachagua is the first deputy president to be impeached since the process was introduced in Kenya’s revised 2010 constitution.

The National Assembly, the lower house of parliament, had overwhelmingly also voted for impeachment in an October 8 vote.

Gachagua’s downfall is the culmination of a bitter falling out with Ruto, whom he helped win a closely fought election in 2022 by rallying support from the crucial Mount Kenya region.

Kindiki — who has served as interior minister in Ruto’s government for more than two years — also hails from the vote-rich region.

Gachagua was found guilty on charges of “gross violation” of the constitution, including threatening judges and practising ethnically divisive politics, but cleared of others including corruption and money-laundering.

He has denied all the charges and no criminal proceedings have been launched against him.

A powerful businessman from Kenya’s biggest tribe, the Kikuyu, Gachagua has weathered previous corruption scandals.

But in recent weeks, he has complained of being sidelined by the president, while also being accused of supporting youth-led anti-government protests that broke out in June.

Vanguard

Unconstitutional judicial construct of section 45(1) of the Nigerian constitution as a limitation clause

By Fredrick  Awkadigwe

Introduction 

From the time of Osawe & 2 Ors v Registrar of Trade Unions (1985) 1 NWLR Pt 4 Pg 755, till today, the Supreme Court of Nigeria, SCONA, has consistently held that section 45(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, CFRN, is a limitation clause on fundamental rights entrenched in sections 37-41 of the CFRN.

The objective of this work is to determine whether section 45(1) of the CFRN, as held by SCONA, is indeed a fundamental right limitation clause; or an unconstitutional judicial construct that has significantly harmed guaranteed fundamental rights of persons in Nigeria. 

Fundamental rights in sections 37-41, not limited by section 45(1), of the CFRN.

Fundamental constitutional rights are those rights of persons which stand above the ordinary laws of the land, and which in fact are antecedent to the political society itself. See Eso, JSC, in Ransome-Kuti v The Attorney General Federation (1985) 2 NWLR (Pt. 6) 211. The fundamental rights are so basic that they are inserted into the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in sections 33-45. Like every other right emanating directly from the provisions of the CFRN, they cannot be controlled by the legislatures unless with a constitutional approval. See NCP v National Assembly (2016) 1 NWLR (Pt 1492) 1 CA. 

Fundamental rights are variously controlled in the national constitutions of different countries, by different constitutional mechanisms. Under the CFRN, the different constitutional mechanisms used, range from the use of exemption terms or phrases within a fundamental right section to exempt some attributes of the protected fundamental right, as seen in section 33(1) of the CFRN; the use of subsections to create some exceptions to the preserved fundamental right, as seen in section 34(2) of the CFRN; use of the schedules to the CFRN to empower the legislatures to make ordinary laws in fields already covered by the fundamental rights section, seen in sections 4 & 40 of the CFRN, and Item 34 & 56 of Part I of the Second Schedule to the CFRN; use of another section of the CFRN to create a parallel or opposing right, seen in  sections 37 & 39(1) of the CFRN; empowering the legislatures to make restrictive ordinary laws in the field of the fundamental right, as seen in section 41(2) of the CFRN; the use of fundamental right limitation clause to empower the legislatures to limit fundamental rights in a particular condition, which is what this work is set to pulverize; or empowering the legislatures to make ordinary laws that derogate fundamental rights in periods of emergency.

The legislatures cannot employ a mechanism outside the ones provided in the CFRN. A fundamental right that escapes all these constitutional mechanisms of limitation, is still not absolute; the courts are there to balance out competing ‘absolute’ rights at the end of the day.

In Aviomoh v COP (2022) 4 NWLR (Pt. 1819) 69, SCONA holds, though as what appears to be an orbiter, that section 45(1) of the CFRN excludes the supremacy provision in section 1(3) of the CFRN. How SCONA arrives at that conclusion is most baffling in the light of the clear provisions of the CFRN, and the previous decisions of the same SCONA, particularly in Nkwocha v. Governor of Anambra State (1984) 6 S. C. 164. A concession to the existence of constitutional limitation clause of section 45(1) of the CFRN on sections 37-41 of the CFRN, is a concession that the legislatures can limit the rights in sections 37-41 of the CFRN even by the criminalization of the exercise of the rights. 

The law, as ordained by section 4 & 318(1) of the CFRN and Parts I, II & III of the Second Schedule to the CFRN, is that for a legislature to have the competence to legislate an ordinary law on a constitutional legislative matter that shall have been constitutionally assigned to the legislature, the legislature shall have a competent substantive constitutional legislative power to legislate on a competent substantive constitutional legislative matter. See also AG Abia v AG Federation (2002) 6 NWLR (Pt. 763) 264; (2006) 16 NWLR (Pt. 1005) 265 SC.

A fundamental right limitation clause crystalizes a substantive constitutional legislative matter under Item 67 of Part I of the Second Schedule to the CFRN, and creates the ground for criminalization of the exercise of the right under Items 67 & 68 of Part I of the Second Schedule to the CFRN. 

There is nothing in subsection 45(1) of the CFRN, outside the marginal note of the section 45, that suggests that there is any intendment to permit the legislatures to ‘derogate’ the fundamental rights guaranteed in sections 37-41 of the CFRN. The marginal note of section 45(1) of the CFRN reads: ‘Restriction and Derogation from Fundamental Human Rights’. While ‘limitation’ is the restriction term used in peace time, the term ‘derogation’ is the restriction term used in international conventions to signify restrictions of fundamental constitutional rights in periods of emergencies. See the difference between the Limitation Clauses (Part I) and the Derogations in a Public Emergency (Part III) of the Siracusa Principles on the Limitation and Derogation Provisions in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1985/4, Annex (1985). 

The SCONA, relies on the marginal note, and repeatedly uses the term ‘derogation’ to refer to subsection 45(1) of the CFRN in its decisions, in periods of no emergency. As far back as 1982, the Supreme Court of Nigeria has admonished, in the case of Uwaifo v Attorney General of Bendel State (1982) LPELR-3445(SC), that marginal notes, explanatory or side notes are to be ignored as mere aids in construing provisions of statutes.  

Furthermore, section 45(1) of the CFRN has not excluded, in any way whatsoever, the general constitutional invalidating effect of the provision of section 1(3) of the CFRN from the purpose of section 45(1) of the CFRN. The law is now well settled that no provision of a section of the CFRN shall restrict or limit the other. One section of the CFRN cannot limit, derogate or override the provision of another section of the CFRN. See Opara & Anor v Amadi & Anor (2013) LPELR 20747(SC). To reinforce the above recounted jurisprudencial matters of constitutional interpretation, the case of Nkwocha v Governor of Anambra State (1984) 6 SC 164, becomes relevant. In Nkwocha’s case, section 315(5) of the CFRN excludes the invalidating effects of section 1(3) of the CFRN, from invalidating any provision of the Land Use Act; yet, the Nigerian Supreme Court still refuses to recognize the exclusion, and goes ahead to hold that any provision of the Land Use Act that is in conflict with the provision of CFRN shall to the extent of the inconsistency be declared null and void, by virtue of section 1(3) of the CFRN. 

If section 315(5) of the CFRN, that has expressly excluded the invalidating effect of section 1(3) of the CFRN, cannot save conflicting provisions of the Land Use Act from the provisions of the CFRN, is it section 45(1) of the CFRN, that does not exclude the invalidating effect of section 1(3) of the CFRN, that can save the provisions of conflicting ordinary laws made within the scope provided in section 45(1) of the CFRN!  

There is also no term of limitation in section 45(1) of the CFRN. The text of the passage does not contain words associated with limitations. Instead, the passage appears to be an affirmative provision, confirming that laws reasonably justifiable in a democratic society will not be invalidated by sections 37-41 of the CFRN. It is not only sections 37-41 of the CFRN that can invalidate an ordinary law; section 1(3) of the CFRN is lethal; and even if sections 37-41 of the CFRN does not invalidate, section 1(3) will still go ahead and invalidate any conflicting ordinary laws. 

In other words, all the ordinary laws made within section 45(1) of the CFRN, are only valid to the extent that they do not in any way, seek to invalidate the clear provisions in sections 37-41 of the CFRN. The use of permissive, rather than restrictive, words in paragraphs a & b of subsection 45(1) of the CFRN therefore clearly shows that there is no intention to limit the fundamental rights in sections 37-41 of the CFRN through subsection 45(1) of the CFRN. Section 45(1) of the CFRN is therefore a shield, and not a sword. 

All the ordinary laws, made within subsection 45(1) of the CFRN, are saved from the invalidation of sections 37-41 of the CFRN by the provision of subsection 45(1) of the CFRN, while sections 37-41 of the CFRN are also saved from the invalidation of ordinary laws made within subsection 45(1) of the CFRN by the provision of section 1(3) of the CFRN. 

Nigeria does not need limitation clause for state protection and preservation.

The SCONA’s position that section 45(1) of the CFRN is a limitation clause on sections 37-41 of the CFRN, is without any constitutional legislative basis or value, as the limitation offered by section 41(2) of the CFRN, for instance, to the fundamental right in section 41 of the CFRN, is even wider in scope and extent than what SCONA purports to attribute to section 45(1) of the CFRN. While section 41(2) limits the right to movement whenever it is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society, section 45(1) of the same CFRN purportedly limits the right to movement, when it is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society in certain circumscribed public and private interests. Assuming without conceding that section 45(1) of the CFRN is a limitation clause on section 41 as held by SCONA, the reasoning of the courts will therefore suggest that section 45(1) of the CFRN is promulgated to provide a limitation that is already provided in section 41(2) of the CFRN, albeit to a spent and vain extent.

In the US, fundamental rights are couched in absolute terms, while fundamental rights in Canada, are couched in relative terms of a limitation clause. See Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, which is enacted as Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982, 1982, c. 11 (UK). The US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) has fashioned limitations by itself. See District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 626 (2008). The lack of a limitation clause in the US national Constitution has not resulted in rights being deemed absolute but rather in the judicial implication of limits. See Stephen Gardbaum, The Myth and the Reality of American Constitutional Exceptionalism, 107 Mich.L. Rev. 391, 401 (2008). 

Although the USA has no limitation clause in its national Constitution, yet it has numerous ordinary fundamental right limitation laws, signifying that the absence of limitation clauses in national Constitutions does not mean that fundamental rights cannot be limited by ordinary laws. According to Justice Black, in Black, The Bill of Rights and the Federal Government, in The Great Rights, p. 60 (Cahn ed. 1963), the Bill of Rights is constantly watered down through judicial ‘balancing’ of what the Constitution says and what judges think is needed for a well-ordered society. 

Black maintains that ad hoc judicial balancing gives the courts and the Congress greater powers of overriding the texts of the Bill of Rights on a finding that a weighty public interest exists. As Irving Brant see Irving Brant, in ‘Seditious Libel: Myth and Reality’, 39 Nyul Rev 1, 18-19 (1964), says that the balancing test developed by SCOTUS does not dis-enable the legislatures of the power to trench upon the field in which the Constitution says that the Congress should not make ordinary civil laws. See Garrison v Louisiana 379 U. S. 64, 74 (1964). 

The far-reaching effect of Irving Brant’s position is that the US legislatures are free to churn out ordinary laws in restriction of persons’ guaranteed constitutional rights until the judiciary intervenes.  

The major difference between ordinary laws made pursuant to a limitation clause and those made without the authority of a limitation clause, is in the judicial approach in the construction of the ordinary laws. The court will place judicial reliance on the principle of ad hoc judicial balancing in the latter, and on the Siracusa Principles in the former. The principle of ad hoc judicial balancing of rights requires that judges should look at each case of conflict of rights independently to avoid broad bans that might impede upon entrenched constitutional rights or freedoms of persons. 

The power of the US judiciary to apply ad hoc judicial balancing, is a judicial contraption, per Douglas J, concurring in Garrison v Louisiana, 379 U. S. 64, 74 (1964), mainly enabled by the implied and inherent jurisdiction of courts, and designed to overcome the difficulties inherent in the absolute terms of the fundamental constitutional rights, where the life of the state is severely threatened by the exercise of entrenched fundamental constitutional rights. 

While the judicial contraption of ad hoc judicial balancing arose from the necessity of an incentive filling a void created by the absence of limitation clause in the US Constitution, the construct of section 45(1) of the CFRN as a limitation clause to fill the void created by the absence of limitation clause in the CFRN is unfortunate. The implied and inherent constitutional power of the judiciary to apply the principle of ad hoc judicial balancing in Nigeria is adequately covered by sections 1(3), 4(8), 6(6), 36 and 46 of the CFRN, but SCONA derelicts. 

While ad hoc judicial balancing in jurisdictions without limitation clause is a judicial contraption, the Siracusa Principles applied in jurisdictions with limitation clauses, which Nigeria is not one, are judicial approaches based on constitutional legislative requirements. The end game of applying the Siracusa Principles and the principle of ad hoc judicial balancing is for the assessment of whether a limitation of a guaranteed right is permissible or not in a particular situation, legislative or judicial. 

However, the judicial approach of arriving at that endgame is completely different from the legislative approach. It is the approach that makes the difference, not the end game. While ad hoc judicial balancing is sensitive to the fundamental right preservation, the Siracusa Principles are sensitive to the preservation of the ordinary law.

Conclusion 

Section 45(1) of the CFRN is not a limitation clause, and has not excluded section 1(3) of the CFRN on ordinary laws made within section 45(1) of the CFRN; the legislative restrictions to fundamental rights, in some progressive countries of the world, are not tied to limitation clauses; Nigeria does not need a limitation clause in the CFRN before it can protect the well-being of the country within constitutionally permitted limits; and, the term ‘derogation’ is only applicable in emergency situations.

“How Govt. officials nearly frustrated the 15 percent electricity needs I generate for Nigeria”— Davido’s father

Adedeji Adeleke, the father of the award-winning superstar, David, popularly called Davido, has revealed what he went through securing the environmental permit for his power plant worth over $2 billion.

The billionaire industrialist disclosed this while speaking as a Layperson from the West-Central Africa Division during the Seventh Day Adventist General Conference Annual Council on Tuesday, which was held in Maryland, United States of America.

While sharing his experience as a Baptist member, Adeleke recounted how he ran into bottlenecks with ‘difficult government officials’, with a particular official saying to him that the project would never ‘see the light of day’.

He said he went on his knees and prayed to God because he did not want to accept the government official’s statement as the final say for his company, Pacific Energy which was closely working with Chinese engineering companies for the construction and design of the power projects.

“I am a businessman in Nigeria. I’m into the electricity business. I own a power plant, I generate about 15 per cent of the electricity needs for Nigeria. I have Chinese engineering companies that work for me. I’m building the biggest power plant in Nigeria that will be completed in January 2025. It is a 1,250-megawatt power plant.

“During the course of the design and getting the permit, we ran into difficult government officials. For environmental reasons, our permit was denied, and the particular government officials that I held a meeting with told me to my face that my project would never see the light of the day.

“But while he was saying that, I was saying in my mind that this guy is talking as if he is God. I was saying in my mind that God should listen to him; Because he is not God, whatever he is saying is null and void.”

“So I left, disappointed and I told my Chinese friends that unfortunately we have difficulty and this project is going to stall. Meanwhile, the project is worth about $2 billion. In the process, a lot of money had already gone into the design and preliminaries. Before we get to the stage where we would need a permit and then break ground.

“So my Chinese friend was worried because the Afrexim Bank of China was involved so that meant bankruptcy for him. I told him not to worry,” he said.

Adeleke further stressed that his Chinese friend had to travel down to Nigeria to discuss a way out because he never believed that prayer was enough to get the project done, noting that it did as the then Minister of Power granted the approval because he saw that the project was a brilliant one.

Recall that Adeleke had earlier spoken about this power project while delivering a lecture note at the 9th graduation ceremony of Adeleke University, Ede, Osun State in July 2023.

Group says FG must check sexualisation of Nigerian pupils

  • Says “We cannot copy abrasive foreign lifestyles”

 Press Release

By  FOUNDATION FOR AFRICAN CULTURAL HERITAGE  (FACH)

On

a.   The move by the Federal Government to legalize abortion in Nigeria

b. The Bill at the National Assembly to regulate Surrogacy in Nigeria

c. The LGBT Provisions in the SAMOA AGREEMENT signed by Nigeria

d.   Sexualization of Nigerian school pupils through the corruption school curricula to include teaching school pupils how to do abortion, masturbation, beast enlargement, touching of their genitals

We, the FOUNDATION FOR AFRICAN CULTURAL HERITAGE (FACH), a coalition of values-driven NGOs in Nigeria which includes: Family Action Africa, Project for Human Development (PHD), Global Pro-life Alliance (GPA), Doctors Health Initiative, Happy Home Foundation, Association of Concerned Mothers, Nigerian Life League, Islamic Education Trust, Association of Catholic Medical Practitioners of Nigeria, Islamic Medical Association of Nigeria, Knights of St. Mulumba, Blissful Life for Youth Empowerment, Nigerian Association for Women Advancement, National Association of Catholic Lawyers, Sympathy Worldwide Organization, Life Choice International Initiative, Good Parenting and Youth Empowerment Initiative, Social Inclusion of the Voiceless and Neglected (SIVON),  Foundation for Marriage and Family, Centre for Corrections and Human Development, Islamic Platform of Nigeria, Advocacy for moral sex Education, AyubsonLife Foundation, ConstitutionalWatch (CONSWATCH), Voters Awareness Initiatives.

HEREBY issue a Press Release on the above and state as FOLLOWS:

A         ABORTION

  1. If the U.S Supreme Court has upturned ROE V WADE that hitherto legalized abortion in the U.S, the Tinubu government cannot be seen to be legalizing abortion in Nigeria. More importantly, the abortion issue is a very sensitive religious and moral issue. It is also a very divisive issue capable of destroying the trust and loyalty which is the people of Nigeria have in the President Tinubu government.
  2. Abortion is murder. If the West is experiencing demographic disaster owing to diminishing human capital, how can Nigeria be legalizing the killing our babies?
  3. Abortion is completely illegal in Nigeria, without any exception under which abortion can be permitted. By virtue of the combined effects of sections 228, 229,230, 297, 309, 328, of the Criminal Code Act CAP C38 (and their equivalent provisions in the Penal Code); sections 3,4, and 17 of the Child Rights Act 2003; sections 17 and 33 of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution; Articles, 3, 4 and 5 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights; Preamble to the 1990 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) (ratified and adopted by Nigeria) abortion is completely illegal in Nigeria.
  4. The Federal Ministry of Health, Abuja has no right to legalize abortion in Nigeria. Consequently, the National Guidelines on Safe Termination of Pregnancy and National Guideline on Self-Care For Sexual Reproductive and Maternal Health 2020 issued by the Federal Ministry of Health, Abuja  legalizing abortion and sterilization in Nigeria are unconstitutional and illegal.

B.       SURROGACY

  1. Surrogacy- renting a girls’ womb to bear children-thrives in Nigeria. It is the exploitation and objectification of women and girls’ bodies with the commercialization of childbirth. This practice diminishes the humanity of the women and girls who bear the child.
  1. Surrogacy seeks to legitimize the manipulation and renting of women’s wombs, as well as the manipulation of embryos and zygotes, the import and export of human embryos, and the splitting and harvesting of human eggs and sperm.
  1. Establishing and preserving identity of products of surrogacy can be difficult or impossible for children born through surrogacy. Articles 7 and 8 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) (Nigerian has ratified and domesticated this Convention) protect a child’s right to be registered at birth and to preserve their identity, but surrogacy can negatively impact these rights.

4. Surrogacy is illegal in Nigeria under sections 17(3)(h), 21, 33, 37, and 38 of the           1999 Constitution; section 30 of the Child Rights Act; Sections 13, 21, 82, Trafficking In Persons (Prohibition) Enforcement And Administration Act (TIPPEA Act).

    5.  Surrogacy is banned in the European Union, as Article 3 of  the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union states: “In the fields   of medicine and        biology, the following must   be respected in particular: […] (c) the prohibition  on      making the human body and its parts as such a source of financial gain.”

   6.     Therefore, if surrogacy is illegal in Nigeria, government cannot regulate surrogacy. Government cannot regulate illegality. You cannot regulate or amend a snake because it will still bite you. We cannot regulate surrogacy. Surrogacy requires outright ban.

     C.            SAMOA AGREEMENT

   1.    If Nigeria has outlawed LGBT by virtue of the Same-Sex Marriage(Prohibition) Act     2014, why should Nigeria turn round to sign and embrace the SAMOA AGREEMENT containing LGBT provisions?

  2.     Articles of the Samoa Agreement especially Articles 2.5,29.5, 36.2, 88, 97 clearly endorse LGBT, abortion, sexualization of children and consequently violate Nigeria’s laws, Nigeria’s sovereignty and African Charter on People’s and Human Rights

  3.     The African Bar Association (AfBA) has recently issued a Report on SAMOA AGREEMENT highlighting  deceptive LGBT Provisions in the SAMOA AGREEMENT.

  4.     Therefore Nigeria is advised to enter a RESERVATION in the Samoa Agreement or          seek for outright amendment to remove the LGBT, abortion, sexualization of children

D.  SEXUALIZATION OF NIGERIA SCHOOL PUPILS

 1. The National Sexuality Education Curriculum developed by the National Council on      Education is modeled after the book – Guidelines for Comprehensive Sexuality Education in  Nigeria– published by Action Health Incorporated (AHI), a Lagos-based NGO and this AHI book is an adaptation of the 1991 Guidelines for Compressive Sexuality Education New York produced by Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS).

 2.  In this Curriculum, school pupils are taught different techniques of masturbation, dating, how to wear the condoms, how to do an abortion, kissing, caressing, erection, ejaculation, sterilization procedure is damaging to the character and morals of Nigerian school pupils and are in violation of sections 17(3)(f) (g), 21 (a),23, 37, 38,42 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Articles 2, 8, 18, 28, 29 of the African Charter on Human & Peoples’ Rights (Ratification Enforcement) Act, CAP 10 and therefore illegaland unconstitutional.

3. Shockingly, some textbooks and novels used in Nigerian primary and secondary      schools such as Tears of a Pride- By Oyekunle Oyedeji; The Precious Child- By Queen O. Okweshine; Precious Little Darlings- By Oladosu Ayodeji; Classic Basic and Technology 3 (For Junior Secondary Schools) By M. Abdussalam, D E Akintelure, F .A Ibekwe and B.B Akintele contain techniques of doing abortion, explicit sexual, masturbation, breast enlargement, sterilization, abortion injection, erotic and lewd materials aimed at luring the school pupils into early sex, dating, pornography are damaging to the character and morals of Nigerian school pupils and are in violation of sections 17(3)(f) (g), 21 (a),23, 37, 38,42 of the1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Articles 2, 8, 18, 28,   29 of the African Charter on Human & Peoples’ Rights (Ratification Enforcement) Act, CAP 10

4. A people without identity are a people without existence. Europe and America are now defined by LGTBQ1+ and marriage and between a woman and a woman (lesbianism) and marriage between a man and a man (homosexuality), or,   marriage between a man and animal (bestiality),    surrogacy, abortion, sexualization of school children. Are these what we want to import into Nigeria?  Certainly No. We are a different people. We cannot be copying hook line and sinker abrasive foreign lifestyles and imposing them on our people. Gay practices and gay marriage are illegal in Nigeria by virtue of the Same Sex (Marriage) Prohibition Act 2014.

5. The consensus reached at the various United Nations Conferences, is that the law passed in every developing country including Nigeria must reflect the diverse social, economic and environmental conditions of that country, with full respect for their religious, cultural backgrounds and philosophical convictions. LGTBQ1+, surrogacy, abortion, sexualization of school children have no respect for the religious and philosophical convictions of the Nigerian people and therefore cannot be imported into Nigeria.

6.  Laws are made in consonance with the values of a people. Every country is interested in protecting what it holds dear or its cherished values. LGTBQ1+, surrogacy, abortion, sexualization of school children  are a complete break with African civilization.  We must stick to our own values and traditions. It is suicidal to import practices and lifestyles which are alien to Nigeria and seek to impose them as laws all in the name of observing international obligations.

7. The value of democracy stands or falls with the fundamental values that it embodies and promotes. A democratic government ought to conduct its activities in line with the will, aspirations and cultural values of the people. Any democracy that violates the inalienable human rights of citizens and their cultural values is despotism par excellence, even though it externally wears the toga of democracy.

Signed

Mrs. Haleemah Alli-Bankole

Advocacy for Moral Sex Education (AMOSED)

Barr. Aham Njoku   

Director,  ConstitutionalWatch  (CONWATCH)

Mr. Yusuf Ayuba

Director, AyubsonLife Foundation

Mrs Chinwe Eze

Association of Concerned Mothers

Barr. Mary Ekemezie

Legal Consultant, Foundation for African Cultural Heritage (FACH)

Dr. Nkechi Asogwa

Director, Foundation for African Cultural Heritage (FACH)

Ms Naomi Ojugbeli

Program Officer,  Doctors Health Initiatives

Dr. Regina Akosa

Director, Happy Home Foundation

Resistance, Liberty and Heritage: How enslaved people are gaining freedom by deconstructing negative identities rooted in painful memories

By Kachi Okezie

For many individuals of African descent, the legacy of slavery and colonialism has left an indelible mark on cultural memory. This collective memory has often been a source of negative identity, fostering feelings of inferiority, victimisation, and powerlessness. The social, psychological, and economic scars of slavery have contributed to the internalization of inferiority and limited the imagination of what is possible for the future.

The Caribbean writer and thinker Frantz Fanon, in his seminal work Black Skin, White Masks (1952), speaks potently to this phenomenon. He argues that the oppressed often internalise the colonial narratives of inferiority, leading to a fractured sense of self that aligns more with the identity imposed by the coloniser than with an authentic sense of self-worth.

HE Dr Hajo Sani, OON, Ambassador, Permanent Representative of Nigeria to UNESCO

I was therefore, delightfully intrigued by the remarks made by HE Dr Hajo Sani, OON, Nigeria’s Ambassador and Permanent Representative to UNESCO at the 30th anniversary commemoration of UNESCO’s programme of the route of enslaved people earlier in the week. With the theme, Resistance, Liberty and Heritage, Dr Sani noted that “Over the last three decades, this programme has constantly reminded us of the effects of the imprint of history on the present and the future, how memories could shape a person and the need to deconstruct negative identities, to gain freedom from continued slavery of the mind.” The speaker went on to describe the programme as a “tool to shape our construction and imagination of the world for the present and future orientations.”

A seemingly subtle but highly significant tinkering with the title of the programme caught my attention: the shift in emphasis from “slave” to “enslaved people”, thereby highlighting the elements of resistance, liberty and heritage as key characteristics of people compelled or coerced against their will into a condition of great disadvantage. The name change has become something of a game-changer, which has “proved fundamental to the deconstruction of the discourse, de-radicalisation of our vision and decolonisation of our imaginations, particularly as pertains to the concept of race that justifies exploitation, such as the erroneous belief by some that all men are not equal.”

Under the programme, two historic sites in Nigeria have been identified for recognition and attention, both of which epitomise resilience and relics of history, depicting the strength of the then enslaved people. These are the Seriki Faremi Williams Abass Slave Museum and Monuments associated with the slave trade, in Badagry, Lagos State; the Slave History Museum at Marina Beach (Old Calabar Slave Port-Point of No Return) together with the Esuk Mba Slave Beach Market in Cross River State.

To its credit, UNESCO has, in creating a network of ‘places of history, linked to enslavement and the slave trade”, delivered a truly worthwhile initiative which advances the cause of deconstructing negative identities to gain freedom from continued slavery of the mind. Which calls to mind the immortal and iconic words of Bob Marley from his “Redemption Song”: — “Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery; none but ourselves can free our minds” — encapsulating a profound message about liberation that is just as relevant in the post-slavery, post-colonial era for Africans and people of African descent.

This idea of mental emancipation no doubt goes beyond physical freedom, addressing the deeper psychological and cultural effects of slavery and colonialism, and calls for an urgent re-evaluation of identity, history, and self-perception. After all, history records that even after the physical chains of slavery were broken and colonial powers retreated from African lands the psychological scars and cultural damage linger still.

Colonialism and slavery were not just systems of economic exploitation; they were also systems of cultural domination, where African people were made to internalise feelings of inferiority and powerlessness. Mental slavery therefore refers to the continuing effects of that conditioning — the internalised beliefs that African people are somehow less worthy, less capable, or less important in the global human narrative.

It is impossible to over-state the importance of mental emancipation in the post-slavery, post-colonial era. Yet, it is a task that must be accomplished if lessons from the past must truly be learned. Emancipating the mind from these ideas is crucial for several reasons. First is the need to reclaim identity and dignity, reclaiming a sense of pride in African identities, histories, and cultures that were devalued under slavery and colonial rule. This involves reconnecting with indigenous traditions, languages, and worldviews that were marginalised.

Second is the need to break the cycles of oppression. Without mental liberation, people may unknowingly perpetuate the very systems of inequality that oppressed them. Internalised colonialism can manifest as colourism, self-hate, and the desire to emulate Western ideals at the expense of African heritage.

Third is the need to promote cultural and economic autonomy. A mentally free population can drive cultural, economic, and political autonomy. Freed from the colonial mind-set, African nations can prioritise African solutions to African problems, rather than defaulting to Western models of development and governance.

Fourth is the need to heal and be healed of generational trauma. Colonialism and slavery inflicted deep trauma on African societies, breaking up families, disrupting social structures, and instilling fear. Mental emancipation is part of the healing process, allowing people to address the pain of the past and move forward. It is a long-term process that requires both individual and collective efforts. One of such efforts is education and awareness-raising. Education that centres on African history, philosophy, and culture can help reverse centuries of miseducation. African intellectuals like Chinua Achebe, Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o, and Amílcar Cabral have emphasised the importance of cultural reclamation in the liberation process.

Art and culture is another. Art, music, film, and literature are powerful tools for reshaping identity. Artists and creators can challenge colonial narratives and offer new images of African life, rooted in dignity, resilience, and joy. Equally important is political and economic independence. While mental freedom begins in the mind, it cannot be sustained without material changes. African nations must continue the work of achieving true economic and political autonomy from former colonial powers, creating systems that prioritise the well-being of African people.

Spiritual and emotional healing is also vital. Mental slavery also has deep emotional and spiritual dimensions. Addressing trauma through cultural practices, communal support, and psychological healing is essential for breaking free from its grip.

Thankfully, Ambassador Sani’s message was amply philosophical and forward-looking: “As a people, we would rather convert the pains of yesterday to a source of inspiration, to move past the memories of those phenomena that divide humanity on to those that unite it such as human dignity, human resilience, social justice, equality, equity and renaissance.”

“Those sites where merchandising and shipping of fellow humans took place are today sites of remembrance of how this inhumanity translated into a diversity of colours, cultures and heritage,  spread beyond Nigeria and Africa, to Europe,  America, the Caribbean, and beyond. Our differences should and must forever be a source of pride; never again to be used as a source of complex – whether inferior or superior.”

All considered, memories have the power to shape identity, but they do not have to define it permanently. By actively deconstructing negative identities rooted in painful memories and re-imagining new possibilities, individuals can break free from mental enslavement and move toward a liberated and empowered self. The path to freedom is paved with self-awareness, healing practices, and the courage to reimagine one’s role in the world; not as a passive product of the past but as an active creator of the future.

©Kachi Okezie is a lawyer and international management consultant. He can be reached by email at [email protected]

We’re not greedy, just rich – Remi Tinubu tells hurting Nigerians

By Ikeddy Isiguzo

Only a day after the price of petrol, a major liquid that moves Nigerian life was increased again – for the third time in a month – Mrs. Remi Tinubu, President Tinubu’s wife, had no soothing words for millions of Nigerians who were groaning under the harsh policies that the President announced while being inaugurated on 29 May 2023.

The most crushing of the policies was the removal of subsidy on petrol which has adversely affected prices across all sides of life. Inflation is racing at a rate the National Bureau of Statistics cannot capture. The people feel it. The pangs of stiff economic conditions are matched by the words and deeds of Mrs. Tinubu. When she speaks, her words are as annoying as the millions that the First Lady’s Office wastes on foreign trips at time the economy runs partially on borrowed funds.

Mrs. Tinubu was First Lady in Lagos State in the eight years her husband was Governor and a Senator for 12 years, during which nobody remembers her contributions, except an altercation with Dino Melaye on the floor of the Senate where unprintable words were thrown around. She requested for more security following Melaye’s threats to beat her up outside the Senate Chambers.

Her penchant for saying annoying things could earn her an award for excellence in that sphere. Proud of her voice, desirous of being heard, and pointedly distant from issues, she delights in minimalising the sufferings of Nigeria with prescriptions that erect her clear indifference to the agonies the President’s policies have created in 18 months.

She told us to plant our own food as food prices soared, claiming her vegetables come from her garden. Lucky her.

Pump price of petrol has increased from N198 on 28 May 2023 to N1,030 by 9 October 2024. The President rationalises subsidy removal by saying it would free up resources that would be deployed to improve the economy.

Mrs. Tinubu while speaking at the Palace of Ooni of Ife, Oba Adeyeye Ogunwusi, on Thursday, said the Tinubu administration was too young, and could not be blamed for the nation’s doldrums.

“We are just two years (actually 17bmonths) into our administration, we are not the cause of the current situation, we are trying to fix it and secure the future,” she told the gathering.

“We know that subsidy has been removed but with God on our side in the next two years Nigeria will be greater than this. With your prayers in the next two years, we will build a nation for the future.”

Even if the First Lady knows nothing about governance, she knows that most of those working with her husband cannot do much to change the situation. She knows too that the President’s indiscernible commitment to improving the economy is obvious in his policies, long absences and expenditures that rich countries do not make.

The purchase of two new presidential jets, a new accommodation for the Vice President at N21 billion, the Lagos Calabar Coastal Highway, and the First Lady’s trips are drains on resources.

Recourse to “the grace of God” and prayers are not standard policies, particularly when those resorting to the divine leverages have ungodly tendencies. Mrs. Tinubu’s supported thuggery during last year’s presidential election. One would have thought her exposure would redeem her from narrow views of that nature.

Her insults continue thus, “With your prayers in the next two years, we will build a nation for the future”. How are we to understand this forlorn hope?

Our prayers will determine what happens. If we do not pray well, or hard enough, Tinubu’s continuous failure would be our fault.

No matter how we pray, not minding our current plight, the results of our pleas to the Almighty would take two years to materialise, that is by 2026. In case Mrs. Tinubu has forgotten, by then we would be in the morass of the campaigns for Tinubu, who has done so well. His magic, strategic vision, sagacity, economic management skills and experience garnered from his days in international organisations would rescue Nigeria from certain doom. We would be reminded that only Tinubu could have steered Nigeria from a certain doom to an uncertain doom.

More strikingly, Mrs. Tinubu has assured us that by 2026, “we will build a nation for the future”. Those expecting answers today or in two years, should perish the thought. Tinubu, according to his wife, is building for the future, not for you.

When you complain about today, you would be left behind. Only those who understand “build a nation for the future” would realise that the presidential jets and ceaseless comforts the President provides for himself are parts of the nation’s future.

We criticise the President in vain when we discuss today, the immediate. The President is in-charge of the future. He has immersed himself in the future hence he has conceded the present to prayers and market forces.

A quick reminder, the President graduated with honours in Economics from Chicago State University, was on the Dean’s List for most of his stay in Chicago. He recalls these achievements with glee. He was a most sought-after student by international organisations that tapped into the breadth and depth of his mastery of Economics, Accounting, and Business Management.

The nearest we came to a glimpse of the fecundity of the President’s fondness for the future is what we were told during the campaigns. It was revealed that he made his money through investments in stocks, and futures. We have Chicago State University to thank for helping deliver a President of outstanding managerial skill sets to Nigeria

A minor challenge is that an undiversified economy for people of diverse tendencies like Nigerians can only be appreciated only in future, certainly beyond 2026.

None understands the future more than the First Lady who has stood with the President all these years. She may not speak with that Chicagoan drawl that is exclusive to the President, but knows him enough to speak with a confidence that without assurance hints at a co-presidency that has Mrs. Tinubu as a central partner.

“We give glory to God for our status, myself and my husband, we are not greedy but we thank God for what God has done for us,” said the First Lady, who was in Ife to inaugurate a hostel and a 2.7-kilometer road donated to Ọbafẹmi Awolọwọ University, OAU, Ile Ife, by the Ooni of Ife. Both projects are named after Mrs. Tinubu.

And we can ask her more question.

  • Is your status the Presidency?
  • Who dared accuse you of greed?

The Tinubus are the most selfless politicians to have held public office since 1914. It must have hit the First Lady hard for her and her husband to be accused of greed, and without proof.

“It is not common for rich people to get to this seat but I am grateful to God. We cannot disappoint Nigeria and with the help of God, we are getting to the promised land in no distant time,” Mrs Tinubu promised, on behalf of the President.

Until her important speech in Ile-Ife, I considered things I have heard about Tinubu being rich as exaggerated speculations. I would not get into debates on whether he is rich or wealthy or a man of means.

The First Lady could also have been hurt by the lack of public recognition of how rich she and the husband were. Jokes apart, have Nigerians studied the implications of the uncommonness of a rich Tinubu being President? The point should not be pushed further until the President obliges us his assets declaration form.

Perhaps provoked by the insensitivity of Nigerians taking the “grateful to God”, rich presidential family for granted, the First Lady, a 1983 alumna of the then University of Ife donated N1 billion to the university’s development, doubtlessly, another investment in the nation’s future.

These donations are remarkable and draw attention to the wife of the President and sources of her income.

Mrs. Tinubu is not new to big donations. On Tuesday, 12 September 2023, the 500 families devastated by communal clashes in Plateau State got N500 million from her. She gave N500 million on Wednesday 18 September 2024 to the flood victims in Maiduguri.

In three weeks, she has shelled out N1.5 billion. An applause is appropriate and more applause when Zacch Adelabu Adedeji, chairman of the Federal Internal Revenue Service, FIRS, tells us how much Mrs. Tinubu pays as tax.

We should not wait for the information from Adedeji before commending impoverished Nigerians, who were wherever they were on Wednesday to learn that transport fares had neared the skies with the increase in the price of petrol. How they made it home sprout stories that can fill books.

They are not rich. They are not greedy. Are they being punished for their poverty that is rooted in poor policies and governments’ wastes?

Mrs. Tinubu has answered the questions with the cocksure footedness of the President’s wife – Tinubu is only after the future, a future that would be clearer from 2026! Side-stepping the present to hasten the future is the major execution strategy.

We have Mrs. Tinubu to thank for revealing what could have been a secret for much longer.

Isiguzo is a major commentator on minor issues

Catalogue of Lootings in Nigeria: How corruption under PDP became a child’s play under APC

By Femi Falana, SAN

Globally, subsidies, whether for food, transportation, energy or housing, are part of good governance. So, the issue is not subsidies but who benefit from them.
In Nigeria, subsidies are primarily of the rich, by the rich and for the rich.
I will highlight a few, how they are being manipulated and how huge sums of money can be recovered not just to subsidize fuel but also provide funds for development.

  1. Diversion of N40 billion from Federation Account

A company, Continental Transfert Technique had been hired by the Ministry of Interior to collect the Combined Expatriate Residence Permit and Alien Card (CERPAC) Fee of $2,000 per annum from every expatriate in Nigeria.
The revenue from 2019 comes to an average of N40 billion per annum.
This collection which violates Section 162 of the Constitution and provisions of the Immigration Act 2015, is then shared on percentages of Federal Government, 30, Interior Ministry, 7, Immigration Service, and Continental Transfert Technique, 58 per-cent.

We challenged this illegality at the Federal High Court and won the cases.
The court directed the NIS to collect the funds henceforth and remit same to the Federation Account.
But the contractor and the federal government appealed against the judgment and have continued to share the N40 billion per annum

  1. Additional Revenue of $1.5 billion payable to Federation Account

In July 2015, I drew the attention of the Federal Government to the fact that the 15-year fiscal incentives given to the oil and gas companies operating under the Deep Offshore and Inland Basin Production Sharing Contracts Act had expired in June 2014.
When the Federal Government ignored our request, we drafted a Bill for the amendment of the law.
The Bill which was adopted and sponsored by Senator T. Orji scaled the first reading in the Senate but was not passed before the dissolution of the 8th National Assembly.

However, the same Bill was modified and passed by both houses of the 9th National Assembly and assented to by President Buhari on November 4, 2019. In justifying the passage of this Bill, Senate President Ahmed Lawan announced that the new law would increase the revenue of the nation by not less than $1.5 billion per annum.

  1. Outstanding royalties of $62 billion

In campaigning for the amendment of the Deep Offshore and Inland Basin Production Sharing Contracts Act,
I requested the Federal Government to collect outstanding royalties payable by the International Oil Companies under the Act.
The Federal Government admitted that the country had lost a whopping sum of $60 billion.
But my demand for the collection of the huge fund was ignored.

The governments of Rivers, Akwa Ibom
and Bayelsa States then approached the Supreme Court which on October 20, 2018 ordered the Federal Government to collect the royalties for the past 18 years.
The Federal Government confirmed that the outstanding royalty withheld by the IOCs is $62 billion but has refused to collect it.

  1. FG denied revenue of $500 million by a group of corrupt public officers

The international Cargo Tracking Note Scheme to protect international shipping and prevent the movement of dangerous cargo and arms shipments was introduced into Nigeria in 2010 via an agreement between the Nigerian Port Authority and TPMS, a private company. Barely a year later, the agreement was suspended.
When our attention was drawn to the illegal suspension of the Cargo Tracking Note system, we protested and the suspension was lifted on May 28, 2015 only to be suspended again in 2016.

In 2022, President Buhari issued an executive order which authorized a company to operate the Cargo Tracking Note.
But 5 companies sponsored by top government functionaries overruled the President and hijacked the contract.
The company that won the contract has since sued the federal government at the Federal High Court.
Meanwhile, Nigeria has lost at least $500 million while the security of the nation has been compromised by a bunch of corrupt public officers.

  1. Sale of public assets and enterprises

Successive regimes have been selling assets and enterprises owned by the Federal Government to members of the ruling class in the name of privatisation.
The buyers turned round to engage in asset stripping.
According to the Bureau of Public Enterprises, between 2004 and 2002, the federal government sold 142 public enterprises to members of the ruling class.
The 10 per cent shares reserved for the staff of every privatised enterprise have been cornered by the so called “core investors” contrary to the provision of section 5(3) òf the Privatization and Commercialization Act.

  1. $7 billion fixed in 14 banks

Sometime in 2006, the CBN yanked off $7 billion from the nation’s foreign reserves and fixed it in 14 commercial banks in Nigeria.
The deposit and the accrued interests were not recovered from the banks.
When I reported the matter to one one of the anti-graft agencies, the CBN claimed that it had forgiven “the forbearance”.

  1. Sale of Heritage Bank, Keystone Bank, Union Bank and Polaris Bank by CBN

The CBN took over Heritage Bank, Keystone Bank, Union Bank and Polaris Bank, spent trillions of Naira to revitalise them only to turn round to sell them under the table.
For instance, CBN invested N1.3 trillion in Polaris Bank but sold it for N50 billion!

  1. Theft of Crude oil

The Nigerian Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (NEITI) has revealed that Nigeria lost 619.7 million barrels of crude oil valued at N16.25 trillion ($46.16 billion) to crude oil theft between 2009 and 2020.
Immediate past National Security Adviser, General Babagana said that Nigeria might lose $23 billion in 2023 to crude oil theft.

  1. Theft of gold and other solid minerals

The theft of the nation’s mineral resources is not limited to crude as solid minerals are equally smuggled out of the country by highly placed criminal elements.
Former Minister of State for Mines and Steel Development, Dr Uche Ogah recently disclosed that private jets are being used by the rich for gold smuggling in Nigeria. He stated this at an investigative hearing on $9 billion annual loss to illegal mining and smuggling of gold organised by the Senate Committee on Solid Minerals, Mines, Steel Development and Metallurgy.
During his contribution at the hearing, Senator Orji Uzor Kalu disclosed that Nigeria lost close to $54b from 2012-2018 due to illegal smuggling of gold.

  1. AMCON is owed N5.4 trillion by the rich

A few years ago, commercial banks were going to collapse due to toxic loans taken by members of the ruling class. To prevent the impending economic doom, the Federal Government set up the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) to buy off the loans with trillions of Naira provided by the CBN.
AMCON has not been able to recover the loans of N5.4 trillion from about 370 corporate bodies.

  1. Indiscriminate import duty waivers

A few privileged members of the business community buy dollars at official rate while they are allowed to import all manners of goods into the country.
In the last 5 years, import duties worth N16 trillion were waived for them.

  1. Effort to track and monitor tankers conveying fuel sabotage by NNPC

On August 8, 2018, the Federal Executive Council (FEC) approved the installation of technology monitoring schemes and structures under the Petroleum Equalisation Fund (PEF) for N17 billion.
The technology which was designed to track and monitor tankers conveying fuel and other petroleum products was not acquired while the N17 billion approved for it was diverted.

  1. N10 trillion diverted by CEOs of Government enterprises

The Buhari government revealed on December 19, 2018 that government enterprises including the CBN owed about N10 trillion in unremitted operating surplus as at August 2018.
The details were provided. The said sum of N10 trillion remains unpaid.

  1. N6 trillion unpaid ground rents by buyers of Government properties

On March 29, 2023, the Senate noted that since 1992, over two million houses across the 36 states and the FCT had been built and allocated to beneficiaries by the federal government without evidence of payment of ground rent on the properties.
Consequently, the Senate set up an Ad Hoc Committee to recover over N6 trillion unpaid ground rents from property owners in the country.

  1. Stolen crude oil valued at $29.17 billion

A group of lawyers engaged by NIMASA confirmed that 60.2 million barrels of crude oil valued at $12.7 billion of crude oil was stolen and illegally exported to the United States of America between January 2011 and 2014. This has not been recovered.
Also, the House of Representatives investigated and confirmed that undeclared crude oil worth $17 billion was exported to global destinations during the same period.
The affected companies are known but government seems to lack the will to bring them to book and recover the sum of $29.7 billion being the value of the stolen crude.

  1. Oil theft of N16.25 trillion

The Nigerian Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (NEITI) revealed that between 2009 and 2020
Nigeria lost 619.7 million barrels of crude oil valued at N16.25 trillion ($46.16 billion) to oil theft.
The security forces have not been able to stop the stealing and smuggling of crude oil from Nigeria.

However, Tantita Security Services Nigeria Ltd (TSSNL), a private company discovered pipelines through which crude oil was being diverted from a 40,000 barrel per day Forcados pipeline to the high seas for export.
The indicted oil companies including an IOC involved in this grand theft are yet to be prosecuted.

  1. Deduction of collection costs by FIRS & NCS

The Federal Inland Revenue Service and Nigeria Customs Service are allowed by their enabling laws to deduct percentages of the taxes and duties collected by them as collection costs.
Thus, the FIRS between 2016 and 2020 made N533.39 billion deductions
while Nigeria Customs Service withdrew N128.64 billion as cost of collection in 2022.

The laws which allow agencies of the Federal Government to deduct collection costs are contrary and inconsistent with section 162 of the Constitution which provides that all revenues collected by the Government of the Federation shall be paid into the Federation Account.

  1. Diversion of $6.065 billion approved for turn-around maintenance of refineries

Between 1993 and 2016, successive regimes spent, through the NNPC, about $6.065 billon on the so-called turn around maintenance and rehabilitation of the four refineries at various times.

It is public knowledge that the turn-around maintenance of the refineries was not carried out.
Therefore, the contractors should be invited by the EFCC and compelled to refund the said sum of $6.025 billion.

  1. Investment in Dangote refinery and rehabilitation of 4 refineries

The Federal Government has invested $2.7 billion in Dangote Refinery while the NNPCL will supply the refinery with 300,000 barrels of crude oil per day.
Furthermore, the Government has awarded the contracts for the rehabilitation of the two refineries in Port Harcourt for $1.5 billion, as well as Kaduna and Warri refineries for $1.4 billion.

We are compelled to call on the Nigeria Labour Congress and Trade Union Congress to monitor the ongoing rehabilitation and upgrade of the 4 refineries.

  1. Special salaries for top public officers, security votes, and pension for governors

Top public officers have illegally taken themselves out of the general salary structure.
For instance, contrary to section 70 of the Constitution which provides that the salaries and allowances of legislators shall be fixed by the Revenue Allocation Mobilization and Fiscal Commission the members of the National Assembly are paid emoluments ranging from N13 million to N15 million per month.

In addition to their salaries the 36 State Governors are paid security votes running into hundreds of millions per month.
The largesse has since been extended to all senior public officers, including heads of ministries, departments, and agencies of the federal and state governments, as well as local government chairmen.
The security votes paid to senior public officers are about N241 billion per annum.

As if such subsidy is not enough, state governors have been placed on scandalous pension of billions of Naira.
But due to public criticisms, the Lagos State Government has halved the pension for ex-governors while the Governments of Kwara, Imo, and Zamfara States have abolished the payment of the outrageous pension to former governors and deputies.
We call on all other state governments to emulate the example of the aforementioned 3 state governments.

  1. Diversion of dividend and feed gas of $33 billion by NNPCL

Nigeria LNG Limited is jointly owned by Nigeria and the OICs. The 49% shares of Nigeria in the joint venture were paid for from the Federation Account in 1989. On March 29, 2021, former President Buhari disclosed that the Nigerian Liquefied Natural Gas (NLNG) had generated $114 billion in revenues,
paid $9 billion in taxes, $18 billion as dividend and $15 billion in Feed Gas Purchase to the Federal Government.
However, rather than pay the fund into the federation account as constitutionally directed, the $33.9 billion dividend and feed gas was diverted by the NNPCL.

  1. Diversion of trillions of Naira through fuel subsidy fund

Notwithstanding the allocation of 445,000 barrels of crude oil to NNPC per day for domestic consumption,
it has been confirmed that the figures for fuel importation in Nigeria between 1999 and 2023 are as follows:

  1. 1999-2006 =N813 billion;
  2. 2007-2009= N794 billion;
  3. 2010-2014= N3.9 trillion;
  4. 2015-2023= N11 trillion.

Last week, the Chief Executive Officer of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL), Mr. Mele Kyari stunned the nation when he said that the federal government still owes the company N2.8 trillion in fuel subsidy payments. But the monumental fraud that has characterized the fuel subsidy scam has been confirmed by the Buhari regime.

Thus, on March 27, 2022, former Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, Mr. Timipre Sylva publicly lamented the controversies surrounding the amount of petrol that the nation consumes daily, said the subsidy regime encouraged criminal activities like smuggling, which in turn impact negatively on the nation’s oil resources. He said that, “I am told the figure sometimes rise to as high as 90 or over 100 million litres. I don’t know how that happens. At this rate, I have said if anyone is looking at a criminal enterprise, look no further than the fuel subsidy.”
The criminal enterprise ought to be probed by the Bola Tinubu administration.

Conclusion

It is crystal clear from the foregoing that members of the ruling class are heavily subsidized by the peripheral capitalist system while the masses are subjected to excruciating economic pains. We are therefore compelled to call on the Nigeria Labour Congress and Trade Union Congress as well as the progressive extraction of the civil society to mount pressure on the federal government to stop the dollarisation of the national economy,
indiscriminate grant of duty waivers,
theft of crude oil, gold, and other mineral resources and recover the nation’s looted wealth. In other words, these ‘subsidies’ should be recovered while the nation’s refineries are fixed so that the country can provide genuine subsidies that can make life livable in Nigeria.

Navigating the step-by-step guide to applying for NBA stamp online

Dear Colleagues,

Below is the step by step process for the application for stamp and seal;

1. Log in: Visit https://portal.nigerianbar.org.ng and log in to your personal portal.

2. Navigate to Payment: On the left-hand side of your dashboard, click on the “Payment” option.

3. Select Stamp & Seal: When the “Stamp & Seal” option appears, click on it.

4. Choose Number of Packs: Indicate the number of stamp packs you wish to order.

5. Select Category: Choose either “Public” or “Private,” depending on your area of practice.

6. Upload Branch Dues Receipt: Upload a copy of your proof of payment for branch dues. (Note: Only your branch dues receipt is required.)

7. Proceed to Payment: Complete the payment for the stamp and seal.

8. Confirmation: Once payment is made, the system will display “Application Complete,” and your application status will be updated to “Pending Review.”

Important Notes:
1. All applications will undergo a review before final approval.
2. If the branch dues receipt is incorrectly uploaded, your application will be rejected, and you will receive an email requesting a re-upload. To re-upload your branch dues receipt, go to the ‘Stamp Application’ tab in your portal and click on the ‘Upload document’ button.
3. Upon successful application, you will receive a message that “your stamp application has been approved. You shall be duly notified by your branch as soon as it is delivered.”

For further enquiries, contact NBA Bar Services via email at [email protected]

Thank you for your cooperation.

Dr. Mobolaji Ojibara
General Secretary

Affidavit fingers Aig-Imoukhuede in plot to take control of late partner, Herbert Wigwe’s assets

  • View and download affidavit

A cousin of the late Herbert Wigwe and former group managing director and CEO of Access Bank, Christian Chukwuka Wigwe has filed an Affidavit of Truth at the Lagos High Court Probate Registry alleging that Aigboje Aig-Imoukhuede is plotting to take indirect guardianship and custody of the deceased’s assets and children.

Christian Wigwe in the affidavit stated that Aig-Imoukhuede, who was the deceased business partner is taking on a role that should rightfully belong to Pastor Shyngle Wigwe, the grandfather of the children.

In the affidavit dated October 7, 2024, sighted by Law & Society Magazine, Christian stressed that Pastor Shyngle should be the one to determine the welfare of his grandchildren David, Hannah and Great.

He said: “In accordance with African values and good order, it will naturally be the father of the deceased, Pastor Shyngle Wigwe, who will act as guardian to the minor children or at the very least, he will be consulted to ascertain who should act as guardian.

“Pastor Shyngle Wigwe (grandfather) should ordinarily play a role in determining the welfare of his grandchildren. Given his fatherly role, his involvement in their upbringing would be both natural and beneficial.”

This act, Christian said, had made it difficult for Shyngle to act as “guardian for the children, particularly the minor children.”

He added: “Aigboje Aig-Imoukhuede is currently controlling the assets of the late Herbert Wige. While Pastor Shyngle Wigwe, otherwise natural guardian of Herbert’s minor children, would usually not be bothered by this, the way Aigboje Aig-Imoukhuede is handling the assets is grossly undermining Pastor Shyngle Wigwe’s role as guardian and the head of the Wigwe family.

“Aigboje Aig-Imoukhuede’s access to Herbert’s funds gives him a certain level of influence over decisions that affect the deceased’s children. Although he is not their legal guardian, his control over the estate puts him in a position where he indirectly acts as one. This situation has made Pastor Shyngle Wigwe uneasy.”

He said Aig-Imoukhuede’s actions had raised concerns for Shyngle, who doubts that if this continues, the grandfather’s legal and natural role as guardian will be further eroded.

While Christian acknowledged Aig-Imoukhuede’s role in providing continued financial support to the deceased’s dependent parents, Shyngle and his wife Mrs. Stela ‘Affong-Wigwe, as well as covering the ongoing expenses related to the deceased’s children, he mentioned that Aig-Imoukhuede has not provided any formal updates or disclosed how these expenses are being met, or their impact on the overall Estate.

He said, “The absence of critical information or any accounting makes it unclear how much of the deceased’s wealth is being expended for the sustenance of the deceased’s dependents.”

Christian also mentioned that Aig-Imoukhuede’s domineering attitude, along with his unrestricted access to Herbert’s wealth, is causing some family members to align with him to gain his favour.

He said such a dynamic was creating tension within the family, alienating other members, and potentially causing rifts if not addressed properly.

Christian further pointed out in the court document that this development had effectively given Aigboje Aig-Imoukhuede indirect control over the deceased’s assets, without being formally accountable to the beneficiaries or dependents of the estate, which “goes against the deceased’s purported will.”

Aigboje Aig-Imoukhuede and the late Herbert Wigwe were business allies and friends from childhood and co-founder of Access Bank.

They both left GTBank as Executive Directors to take over Access Bank in early 2000. Herbert succeeded Aigboje after he finished his term as the Group CEO following CBN Directive in 2010 that forced Bank CEOs that had spent more than 10 years in office to step down.

The late Herbert Wigwe expanded the presence of the bank across Africa and made it bigger after strategic acquisitions of Diamond Bank and other banks in Kenya and South Africa

In the past months, there have been controversies within the family, especially regarding concerns about the control of the late Herbert Wigwe assets.

An online publication had indicted Wigwe’s parents of filing a caveat at the Probate Registry, seeking to challenge the distribution of his estate as outlined in his will.

This legal manoeuvre was allegedly aimed at altering the directives set forth by the deceased regarding the administration of his estate.

Shyngle has since denied the reports making the rounds that he was fighting over his late son’s property.

In a statement signed on behalf of the family by Emeka Wigwe on Tuesday, the claims made in the report was refuted by Old Pastor Shyngle Wigwe stressing that at no point had he requested 20 per cent of the estate of his late son.

Click here to download the affidavit.

The-Wigwe-Affidavit

“It looks like his professional reputation is worth less than 1 #TPain kobo”, Odinkalu drags Nkem Okoro

Law teacher and rights advocate Chidi Anselm Odinkalu has again hit hard on Nkem Okoro, the legal practitioner who issued a 7-day ultimatum months ago demanding that Odinkalu writes an apology to then CJN Olukayode Ariwoola, CJ FCT, Hon. Justice Husseini Baba-Yusuf and Justice Sylvanus Oriji or face court action following an article In the matter of the yam eating division of the FCT High Court written by the Professor of law.

Earlier, the the ex-Chair of National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) revealed that Okoro has had brushes with the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) and even received a warning from the Committee over a judicial breach.

In a Wednesday post on his X (formerly Twitter) page Odinkalu further revealed that Okoro still has a pending matter before the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) bordering on falsification and more.

1...451452453...1,401Page 452 of 1,401

TIPS

Load more