Home Blog Page 887

Southern Kaduna: Shari’ah Council seeks execution of Lekwot, 5 others

0

The Supreme Council for Shari’ah in Nigeria (SCSN) has called for the revisit of the death sentence passed on prominent sons of Zango-Kataf following the 1992 bloody crisis saying the law must be allowed to  take its full course.

The 1992 incident which claimed the lives of hundreds of persons occurred during President Ibrahim Babangida regime, which set up a tribunal, headed by the late Justice Pius Okadigbo to try Maj-Gen. Zamani Lekwot (retd), late Major James Atomic Kude (retd) and other Kataf indigenes alleged to have been complicit in the crisis.

Justice Okadigbo in his judgment had sentenced Lekwot, Kude, Yohanna Karau Kibori, Marcus Mamman, Yahaya Duniya and Julius Sarki Zamman Dabo to death by hanging over complicity in the crisis. Lekwot and the other convicts, however, were granted state pardon in 1995 by  Gen. Sani Abacha.

Secretary of the SCSN, AbdurRahman Hassan, at a press conference, yesterday,  said all those sentenced to death, but pardoned by the  military regime, should be executed by the present government.

“We want those pardoned in 1992 during Zango-Kataf crises, after being condemned to death to be executed now, because that is the only way peace will return to the area. Till now Zonkwa is still a ghost town. Surprisingly  Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), Southern Kaduna People’s Union ( SOKAPU) and their allies had never cried foul in the massacre of innocent law abiding citizens on the account of their faith. Many more ethno-religious crises continued to occur in Kasuwan Magani, Kajuru, Zangon Kataf and some other places,” Hassan said.

Hassan said after every crisis in the area,  a commission of enquiry is usually inaugurated, but the reports submitted to the government never implemented.

“For instance, late Justice Pius Okadigbo’s tribunal on the Zangon Kataf crises, found Gen. Zamani Lekwot and others guilty of the massacre that took place there and were sentenced to death, but they were later pardoned.  That was what opened the floodgate of violence, mayhem, upheavals and total breakdown of law and order in that axis, which is ravaging the area till today,because some people felt they are above the law. The Council have been saying time without number that all those found guilty in these crimes against humanity, must face the wrath of the law,” he said.

When asked to react to the position of the Shari’ah Council, President of the Southern Kaduna People’s Union (SOKAPU), Jonathan Asake said: “I can’t comment on it without seeing the press briefing.”

Military deploys special operations 

The Defence Headquarters has said  in its efforts to curb the recent attacks and isolated killings in Southern Kaduna, it has deployed special operations forces to various flash points in the area.

Coordinator, Defence Media Operations, Maj.-Gen. John Enenche, stated this at the updates briefing on military operations across the country in Abuja.

“In a bid to curb the recent attacks and isolated killings in Southern Kaduna, troops of Operation Safe  Haven have continued to intensify efforts aimed at securing the lives and property in the general area. Particularly, Special Operations Forces have been deployed to the Joint Operations Area covering the various flash points. This move is expected to achieve the desired result with the provision of credible and actionable intelligence specifically from primary sources,” he said.

Enenche, however, urged the locals to cooperate with the military by supplying credible and reliable information that would help troop in their operations.

He also urged  the public not to give false information on the issue of terrorism or banditry in Kaduna.

Eneche denied the allegation that the troops in Baga were indulging in other activities other than fighting the war, stressing that the allegation was unfounded and baseless.

According to him, “for the past one month, we have witnessed downward trend in the activities of armed bandits and cattle rustlers in the general areas of Katsina, Kebbi, Zamfara, Sokoto and adjoining states.

“Most of these criminal elements have been decimated. Gradually there is restoration of human activities in the zone. Farmers have returned to their farms, while other economic activities have picked up across the zone. The troops have continued to dominate the general area with clearance patrols, aggressive fighting patrols and confidence-building patrols.

“The High Military Command congratulates the troops for the feat recorded and encourages the good people of the zone to continue to provide credible information to the troops,” he said.

Enenche said the military had also continued to sustain the tempo in the fight against terrorism in the North East with attendant successes.

He said that within the period under review, there had been reduction in the number of incidences recorded so far from the zone.

“That is an evidence of  troops overwhelming superiority over the criminal elements which have drastically degraded the operational capabilities of the BHT/ISWAP elements. Troops have also sustained the clearance operations, aggressive patrols and intelligence surveillance reconnaissance missions, sustained air offensive operations as well as artillery and aerial bombardments in the theatre of operation,” he said.

Cleric chides Presidency on spike in crime rate, Southern Kaduna killings

General Supervisor of ThankGod Awaited Liberation Ministry, Ikeja, Lagos, Prophet Francis Onwudiwe Otukwu, has flayed the Presidency over the continued killings in Southern Kaduna and the increasing rate of blood-letting by criminal elements in the country.

He also decried  the sleaze by political office-holders and civil servants amid crushing  poverty, debilitating unemployment and absence of social nets, despite the fast-spreading pandemic in an environment of inadequate health-care facilities.

Prophet Otukwu was speaking at the 14th anniversary of the church with the theme “Jesus is the way” (John 14:6). He regretted the growing incidents of crimes, like ritual killings and rape in which some churches have been implicated, adding: “It is unfortunate that even at this end-time, people who call themselves Christians engage in shameful immoral and despicable acts because of their inordinate quest for instant wealth, fame and funs of life.”

On rising wave of killings by bandits, herdsmen, kidnappers, cultists and armed robbers across the country, he reiterated his earlier call on the Federal Government to urgently re-examine the nation’s security architecture in the light of the near-total breakdown of law and order in parts of the country, including the performance of the Nigerian military against the terrorist Boko Haram fighters in the North-East, which governors in the zone berated last week.

“What convincing reasons will the Presidency and Kaduna State government offer for the prolonged one-sided killings going on in Southern Kaduna, in the presence of Nigerian soldiers and policemen?”  he queried.  The cleric said the trend  leaves much to be desired about equity and fairness in the country.

He also wondered how the Presidency hopes to persuade Nigerians on commitment to the war against corruption, when public office holders and civil servants, including federal legislators are being implicated in stealing public funds, either directly or through inflated contracts that were not executed even after the politicians have been fully paid.

APC-Led Govt Has Failed Nigerians – Wike

0

Rivers State Governor, Nyesom Wike says the All Progressives Congress-led Federal Government has failed Nigeria.

Wike disclosed this on Thursday while receiving the newly inaugurated Executive Council members of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) who paid him a courtesy visit at the Government House in Port Harcourt, the state capital.

While charging the PDP members to focus on governance rather than playing politics, he said the move is necessary to demonstrate a commitment to the people.

According to him, the ruling APC has failed to deliver on its electoral promises, adding that Nigerians are hoping on the PDP.

“APC has failed Nigeria. Nigeria is hoping on PDP. There is nothing anybody can talk about again. This is no more time for politics.

“You have promised and you have failed, nothing to try you again. We have tried APC and it has not worked.

“Nigerians have realised that it is better they stay with PDP that has the future, that has the interest of Nigeria than the party that gives excuse every day.

“We are tired. You know there is a problem with Nigeria and you make promises that if you vote for me, I will do this. Now they have voted for you, yet you cannot solve the problem. The party cannot solve any problem,” he said.

Speaking further, the governor charged the party exco members to respect COVID-19 safety protocols.

He also asked them to run an inclusive party for all in order to maintain victory in future polls in the country.

Validity Of Electronic Signatures Under Nigerian Laws

By Sunday Agaji

Technology is one of the hallmarks of civilization, and has had a positive impact on all areas of society. In the area of commerce, technology has simplified and amplified activities to a ridiculous extent. Prior to the digital era in which we live in, geography was a significant barrier to commercial transactions. It was difficult to procure goods and services from other regions without a physical presence there, a phenomenon that has since changed with the advent of technology. In the present day and age, one can purchase goods or acquire services anywhere around the world from the comfort of their home using electronic devices such as phones, tablets, laptops etc. The use of electronic devices to carry out commercial transactions over the internet gave birth to the term electronic commerce. Electronic Commerce has grown at an incredible rate since its birth. It has permeated every continent in the world and arguably all countries likewise, thereby essentially making the world a global market. 

The continuous rise in electronic commerce has raised novel issues in the areas of contract and business transactions between organizations, firms and individuals in Nigeria. Germane amongst the issues that have arisen is that of validity or otherwise of the use of electronic signatures in contract and other business transactions in Nigeria. This article is aimed at addressing same.

Definition.

An ‘E-signature’ may simply be defined as any mark, symbol or data in digital form which is attached to an electronically transmitted document to serve as verification of the sender’s intent to sign the document and to attest to its validity. It is a distinctive way of identifying the signatory in relation to the data message sent in an electronic form, and to indicate the signatory’s approval of the information contained in the data message.[1] Examples of e-signatures include but are not limited to; a typed name underneath a digital document, a hand signature created on a tablet using your hand or a stylus, a scanned image of a person’s ink signature, a signature signed using a specialized application which is protected using crypto digital software and cannot be easily tampered with, a person agreeing to the terms and conditions by ticking a box on a web form which expressly provides that the person ticking the box agrees to be bound by all the relevant terms etc.

Legal framework for use of e-signatures in Nigeria

In Nigeria, the use of electronic signature is valid and recognized under extant laws.[2] Section 17(1) (a) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Act, 2015 (herein after referred to as Cybercrimes Act) provides that;

 “Electronic signatures in respect of purchases of goods, and any other transactions shall be binding”.

The implication of the above is that e-signature is a legally acceptable means of attesting to the validity of digitally transferred documents or electronically completed transactions in Nigeria. An e-signature is generally presumed valid unless otherwise proven. Whenever the genuineness or otherwise of an e-signature is in question, the burden of proof that the signature does not belong to the purported originator of such e-signature shall be on the contender who contends its validity.[3]

E-signatures may be proved in any manner, including by showing that a procedure existed by which it is necessary for a person, in order to proceed further with a transaction, to have executed a symbol or security procedure for the purpose of verifying that an electronic record is that of the person.[4]

Exceptional cases where e-signatures shall not be valid.

Where a law provides that a document must be signed for it to be valid or provides for certain consequences if a document is not signed, an e-signature shall satisfy the provision of that law and shall avoid those consequences when used.[5] A contract or a transaction shall not be declared invalid merely because it was conducted and signed electronically except for transactions or contract that have been expressly excluded by the Cybercrimes Act.

Below are the lists of transactions that cannot be concluded using e-signature;[6]

  • Creation and execution of wills, codicils and or other testamentary documents
  • Death certificate
  • Birth certificate
  • Matters of family such as marriage, divorce, adoption, and other related issues
  • Issuance of court orders, notices, official court documents such as affidavit, pleadings motions and other related judicial documents and instruments
  • Any cancellation or termination of utility services
  • Any instrument required to accompany any transportation or handling of dangerous materials either solid or liquid in nature.
  • Any document ordering withdrawal of drugs, chemical and any other material either on ground that such items are fake, dangerous to the people or the environment or expired by any authority empowered to issue orders for withdrawal of such time.

Practical issues associated with the use of e-signatures in Nigeria.

One of the practical issues associated with the use of e-signatures in Nigeria is security and confidentiality. E-signatures are arguably less secure than the traditional signatures because of the possibility of a third party intercepting electronic documents and extracting same for dubious purposes. Also, contents of documents already signed electronically may be altered when intercepted. E-signatures may be easily forged and used by internet fraudsters unless they are  adequately protected. Individuals, firms and organizations are therefore advised to incorporate the use of ‘digital signature’ which is more secure and has sophisticated security measures. Digital signature is a form of e-signature which is more secure and less likely to be intercepted, copied or altered when transferred electronically. It is an advanced form of e-signature and was specifically developed to solve security problems associated with the use of e-signature.

Unauthorized interception, alteration and use of e-signatures

It is a crime for any person to unlawfully intercept, forge or fraudulently alter the e-signature of another with the intent to defraud or misrepresent to another person that he owns the signature.[7] Any person found wanting for engaging in unauthorized interception, alteration and or use of e-signature of another shall upon conviction be sentenced to 7 (seven) years imprisonment.

Conclusion

The use of e-signature is highly essential to the conclusion of transactions or contract entered to over the internet. This is moreso when the parties are resident in different countries or continents. The enactment of a legal framework by the Nigerian parliament to regulate its use and validate same is commendable. Businesses, organizations and individuals who regularly conduct transactions over the internet are advised to use digital signature as against e-signatures for the execution of such transaction. Digital signatures as mentioned above are highly secure and cannot be easily intercepted or altered.

Sunday Agaji is an Associate at Giwa-Osagie & Co., [email protected]

[1]See Article 2 of United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on Electronic Signature.

[2] See section 93 of the Evidence Act 2011 and section 17 of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention etc) Act 2015

[3] See section 17(1) (a) Ibid.

[4] See section 93(3) of the Evidence Act 2011

[5]See section 93(2) Ibid.

[6] See section 17 (2) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention etc) Act 2015

[7] See section 17 (1) (c) ibid.

Court Of Appeal Affirms Lawyer’s Automatic Membership Of The NBA

0

This is Born out of the fact that some believe that the mandatory membership of Lawyers in the NBA is not provided in statute for Constitutional reference and as such a breach of the Right to freedom of Association as stated in the 1999 Constitution. Most recent of such arguments are the articles titled ‘The Freedom of Association and the NBA” written by Seun Lari Williams and a rejoinder on same topic written by his learned friend, Ebi Robert.

However, the court seem to have given a judicial pronouncement on the issue following the case of N.B.A. v. KEHINDE (2017) 11 NWLR (PT 1576) 225 AT 250 -251 paras H- A where His lordship NIMPAR.JCA observed as follows:

“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”

The court went further to speak on the status of the NBA, and whether it has the authority to regulate the legal profession.

The Court of Appeal per TUKUR, JCA at page 246 in the NBA v. KEHINDE

(supra) put the points lucidly as follows:
“I agree with the arguments of appellant’s counsel to the extent that the NBA is statutorily recognised by the Legal Practitioners Act. This was why my Lord Hon.Justice Obaseki,(JSC) in the case of Chief Gani Fawehinmi v. Nigerian Bar Association & Ors (No.2) (1989) LPELR-1259( SC)PP. 92-93,paras. C-E, (1989)2 NWLR (pt.105) 558 at p.628, paras. G-H while commenting on the status of the Nigerian Bar Association stated thus: “The Constitution of the Nigerian Bar Assocition is not a statutory instrument. It is not a subsidiary legislation to the Legal Practitioners Act….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”

A recent example of the recognition of the Nigetian Bar Association’s regulatory role in the Legal Profession is the issue of seal and stamp, which flows from the provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct 2007, which is a subsidiary legislation.

Rule 10( 1) of the Rules of Professional Conduct provides thus:
” A Lawyer acting in his capacity as legal practitioner, legal officer or adviser of any Governmental deparment or Ministry or any Corporation, shall not sign or file a legal document unless there is affixed on any such document a seal and stamp approved by the Nigerian Bar Association”

In the case of Bello Sarkin Yaki v. Senator Atiku Bagudu (2015) LPELR 2571 (SC), (2015) 18 N.W.L.R (Pt. 1491)288 the apex Court held that failure to affix the seal and stamp as approved by the Nigerian Bar Association, on a legal document renders such document voidable.”

Following the foregoing, it is obvious the Court of Appeal’s point of view concerning ”The Election to join the profession” as a road to automatic enrolment. This is to say that every lawyer called to the Nigerian Bar automatically becomes a member of the NBA. This seems to be close to the argument of the learned writer, Chioma Unini and Ebi Robert, Co-Editor of TheNigerialawyers, and until the Supreme Court says otherwise, the mandatory membership of the NBA remains the Law.

Company Secretaries Are Not Needed In Small Companies.

0

The new company law in Nigeria has ushered in some changes, designed to improve the ease of doing business in Nigeria. The President of Nigeria signed into law, a new federal legislation on companies and related matters. The new law has repealed and put to rest the earlier Companies and Allied Matters Act made since January 2, 1990. Among the changes brought by the new law is the place of company secretaries in small companies. 

With the new Act that was signed on 7 August 2020, small companies no longer need company secretaries. Before now, at incorporation (registration), a small company was required to appoint a company secretary. This caused hardship, especially to small scale businesses. Now a small company can be registered in Nigeria without a company secretary. Also, the new federal law allows a single person to register, operate and own a small company in Nigeria, contrary to the previous practise, where a company must have at least two (2) persons as directors and shareholders.   

A small company in any given financial year is a private company without a turnover of more than N120 Million Naira/an amount to be determined by CAC, without net assets value of not more than N60 Million Naira/an amount to be determined by CAC, without a member that is a foreigner/government/representative of government as a shareholder and if a company with shares, its directors hold not less than 51% of the equity share capital. And, a private company is a company that its memorandum of association states that it is a private company and does not have more than 50 members, excluding employees. 

My authorities are:

  1. Sections 22(1), 22(3), 330(1), 394, 868 and 870 of the Companies and Allied Matters Act 2020. 

#SabiLaw

#DailyLawTips

#SabiBusinessLaw

#SabiElectionLaws

#SabiHumanRights

#SabiLawOnBeatFm

#SabiLawLectureSeries

#CriminalJusticeMonday

#SabiLawVideoChallenge

Speak with the writer, ask questions or make inquiries on this topic or any other via [email protected] or [email protected] or +2348037665878. To receive our free Daily Law Tips, follow our Facebook Page:@LearnNigerianLaws, Instagram: @LearnNigerianLaws and Twitter: @LearnNigeriaLaw

Please share this publication for free till it gets to those that need it most. Save a Nigerian today! NOTE: Sharing, modifying or publishing this publication without giving credit to Onyekachi Umah, Esq. and “LearnNigerianLaws.com” is a criminal breach of copyright and will be prosecuted.

This publication is the writer’s view not a legal advice and does not create any form of relationship. You may reach the writer for more information.

Powered by www.LearnNigerianLaws.com {A Free Law Awareness Program of Sabi Law Foundation, supported by the law firm of Bezaleel Chambers International (BCI).}

OML 11: RIVERS STATE GOVERNMENT WINS SUIT AGAINST SHELL

4

The Rivers State High Court sitting in Port Harcourt and presided over by Hon. Justice Charles Nwogu, has today delivered judgement in suit No.PHC/652/CS/2020 filed by the Attorney General of Rivers State against Shell Petroleum Development Company(SPDC) of Nigeria Limited.

The Rivers State Government had claimed that SPDC Defendant’s/ Judgment Debtor Interest in it’s fixed landed assets comprised in Kidney Island Base, Port Harcourt and interests in Lands comprised in Oil Mining Lease No. 11(OML 11) sold to the Claimant pursuant to the execution of the combined court judgments in Suit No.FHC/PH/231/2001; CA/PH/396/2012 and the Supreme Court Appeal No.SC 731/2017 is consistent with the command contained in Section 287(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999( as amended).

The Claimants further claimed that the continued defiant appropriation (despite the completed sale) of possessory and usufructuary including pecuniary accruals in respect of it’s fixed landed assets comprised in its Kidney Island Base, Port Harcourt and interests in Lands comprised in OML 11 infringes on the Claimant’s vested respective rights to title, and pecuniary interests therein.

That SPDC is bound to render accounts to and pay over to the Claimant all accruals from the Defendant’s continued appropriation of the pecuniary interests in the said OML 11 including arrears of commercial rents for their use of the said property from the date the Deputy Sheriff of the High Court of Rivers State issued title documents thereon to the Claimant until the Defendant peaceably yields up possession thereof.

The Court in a considered judgment upheld the claims of the Rivers State Government in the following terms:

SPDC Judgment Debtor’s interests in it’s fixed landed assets comprised in its Kidney Island Base, Port Harcourt and interests in Lands comprised in OML 11 sold to the Claimant pursuant to the execution of the combined Court judgments in Suit No. FHC/PH/231/2001; CA/PH/396/2012 and the Supreme Court Appeal No. SC 731/2017 is consistent with the command contained in Section 287(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999( as amended).

That the Defendant’s continued defiant appropriation(despite the completed sale) of posssessory and usufructuary rights including pecuniary accruals in respect of it’s fixed assets comprised in its Kidney Island Base, Port Harcourt and interests in Lands comprised in OML 11 infringes on the Claimant’s vested respective rights to title and pecuniary interests therein.

Also that the Defendant is bound to render accounts to and pay over to the Claimant all accruals from the Defendant’s continued appropriation of the pecuniary interests in the said OML 11 including arrears of commercial rents for their use of the Kidney Island Base and Jetty from the date the Deputy Sheriff of the High Court of Rivers State issued title documents thereon to the Claimant until the Defendant peaceably yields up possession thereof.

That the Claimant ought to be accorded with all interests, rights, privileges and benefits derivable from its acquisition of Defendant’s fixed landed assets comprised in its Kidney Island Base, Port Harcourt and interests in Lands comprised in OML 11 in accordance with the title documents issued by the Deputy Sheriff of the High Court of Rivers State.

That the Claimant is entitled to the Defendant’s fixed landed assets comprised in its Kidney Island Base, Port Harcourt and the license in Lands comprised in OML 11 in accordance with the title documents issued by the Deputy Sheriff of the High Court of Rivers State.

An Order compelling the Defendant, their agents, assigns, representatives, privies or whosoever called to accord the Claimant with all rights , privileges and benefits accruable from its purchase of Defendant’s fixed landed assets comprised in its Kidney Island Base, Port Harcourt and interests in Lands comprised in OML 11 in accordance with the title documents issued by the Deputy Sheriff of the High Court of Rivers State.

The Court directed the Defendant to account for and handover to the Claimant all monetary accruals it had made from its continued appropriation of the fixed landed assets comprised in its Kidney Island Base, Port Harcourt and interests in Lands comprised in OML 11 from the date the Deputy Sheriff of the High Court of Rivers State issued title documents thereon to the Claimant until the Defendant peaceably yields up possession thereof.

The Court also perpetually restrained the Defendant, their agents, assigns, representatives, privies or howsoever called from embarking on acts or omissions adverse to the title, right and interest of the Claimant over the fixed landed assets comprised in its Kidney Island Base, Port Harcourt and interests in Lands comprised in OML 11.

Finally, the Court condemned SPDC’s continued violation of the legal process by her continued occupation of the said Kidney Island Base, Port Harcourt and other properties already acquired by the Rivers State Government.

Paulinus Nsirim
Commissioner for Information and Communications

August 13, 2020.

What The Act Says On VC’s Sack

A UNIVERSITY is noted for excellence. It is a citadel of character and learning.

In the university system, teaching, research, service to the community, committee system and its non-negotiable law, the University Act, cannot be compromised. Procedures, due process and other cherished traditions are strictly followed. They give content, form, predictability and reputation to the system. They are the foundation of its permanent integrity.

The Governing Council, led by the Chairman/Pro-Chancellor, is the employer of the vice chancellor. It can hire and fire its employee. But, to prevent arbitrary, the law, which is sacrosanct, cannot be brushed aside.

The University of Lagos Act is the grundnorm. Section 17 of the Act (as amended) stipulates the procedure for the removal of the VC.

According to the clause, “if it appears to the Council that there are reasons for believing that the Vice Chancellor, the Deputy Vice Chancellor, the Provost of a College or any other person employed as a member of the academic or administrative staff of the University or a College should be removed from his office or employment on the grounds of misconduct or of inability to perform the functions of his office, the Council shall:

(a) Give notice of those reasons to the person in question,

(b) Make arrangements:

(i) For a Joint Committee of the Council and the Senate to investigate the matter, where it relates to the Vice Chancellor, the Deputy Vice Chancellor, the Provost of a College or the Registrar, and to report on it to the Council; or

(ii) Make arrangements for the person in question or his representative to be afforded an opportunity of appearing before and being heard by the investigating committee with respect to the matter, and if the Council, after considering the report of the investigating committee, is satisfied that the person in question should be removed as aforesaid, the Council may so remove him by an instrument in writing signed on the directive of the Council.”

Were these legal provisions followed before Prof. Toyin Ogundipe was sacked as Vice Chancellor of the University of Lagos by the Governing Council presided over by Dr. Wale Babalakin (SAN)?

If they were followed, it is the end of an era. The curtains have been drawn on Ogundipe’s tenure. If they were set aside by the polarised Council, it is up to the temple of justice to decide.

NYSBA President, Scott M. Karson Says MOU Recognizes Importance Of Women In Legal Profession, As NBAWF & NYSBA Strike Partnership

0

*Legal Profession has moved away from a male-dominated to diversity & gender-balanced one — Paul Usoro, SAN
*The partnership, a progressive & milestone event— Prof. Bamigbose
*NBA will give all necessary supports to women under my watch—Olumide Akpata
*NYSB Women In Law Section will advance the interest of women through the MOU— Chair, NYSB Women in Law Section
*Strengthened relationship with Africa largest Bar is vital & critical—Carlos Ramos-Mrosovsky
*MOU, pathways to gender equality—Ayotola Jagun

The Nigerian Bar Association Women Forum (NBAWF) and New York State Bar Association (NYSBA) Women In Law Section have signed a memorandum of understanding partnership.

This was signed at the virtual ceremony held on 13th day of August, 2020.

Meanwhile, the virtual ceremony witnessed the attendance of NYSBA President, Scott M. Karson; NBA President, Paul Usoro, SAN; NBA President-elect, Mr. Olumide Akpata; Chair, NYSBA-Women In Law Section, Terri A. Mazur; Chair, NBA Women Forum, Prof. Oluyemisi Bamgbose, SAN; Senior Vice-Chair, International Section of NYSB, Mr. Carlos Ramos-Mrosovsky; Mrs. Ayotola Jagun; Sheryl B. Galler amongst others and moderated by Dr. Foluke Dada, Head, Advocacy Committee, NBA Women Forum.

However, the moderator noted that the virtual occasion is “truly historical and one worth the ceremony” being done, while she called on the President of NYSB to give his opening remarks.

In his opening remarks, President Scott M. Karson stated that “it is a honour and pleasure to join in the wonderful event” and on behalf of the 70,000 members of New York State Bar, he welcomes everyone to the virtual ceremony.

In addition, he described the virtual event as an “historical occasion” and stated that it is hoped “this will lead to a further future engagement”. Also, he described the Coronavirus pandemic as one that has changed the way we view the world noting that the forecast of scientists has been very true about the pandemic. Hence, the need to embrace technology in order not to allow all matters grounded, an example of the virtual ceremony being held.

Furthermore, he noted that New York “has a preeminent state in the world stage” and also, with “an unparalleled reputation in the world arena”. Thus, New York State Bar has managed for have a strong network base across the globe. This, he said, is driven by one of its key initiatives by opening membership to Lawyers across the world and thus, “we urge others to join us”, he said.

Meanwhile, he stated that the MOU recognizes the importance of women in the Legal Profession and he applauded the “women colleagues” in the giant stride achievement.

He also noted that for more than 30 years, the Women In Law Section of NYSB has been the largest and one of the best-driven section of the Association. Therefore, he stated that when the report was submitted on the proposed partnership, he took into cognizance several things.

“Our world is in uncertain times” as a result of the pandemic and “we believe Lawyers in this time are more important and meaningful than ever”.

Finally, he urged that Lawyers in this trying times take up pro bono cases and access to justice initiatives.

In another development, President of the Nigeria Bar Association NBA, Paul Usoro, SAN , equally gave his opening remarks and congratulated the 121st President of NYSB and stated that “hope to reach out to the Atlantic” and have a “handshake”.

In addition, he gave a brief background of Nigeria and stated that it is the largest economy in Africa amongst others.

Similarly, he gave a brief account of the Nigerian Bar Association(NBA) and Nigerian Bar with 125,000 qualified Lawyers as members.

Furthermore, he noted that the profession has moved from a male-dominated profession to one driven by inclusiveness, “diversity, gender-balance & encourages our women”. With this, he cited the example of the first female Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Maryam Aloma Mukhtar stated to be one of the most brilliant mind produced and equally, he alluded to the President of the Court of Appeal, a testament of women participation.

Besides, he noted that Prof. Bamigbose, SAN is one of those examples, having attained the apogee in practice of Law and academics. Thus, the reason why she was selected to head the NBA Women Forum by him.

Meanwhile, he stated that Nigeria and a world he envisages or visualizes is one driven by women participation across board.

Finally, he wished the NBA & NYSBA “greater successes in this endeavor.

In addition, Prof. Bamigbose, SAN extends her cordial appreciation and describes the ceremony as “progressive and milestone event”.

She introduced the NBA and noted that several committees were established by President Paul Usoro, SAN for a better and efficient service delivery.

Thus, she expressed her delight that the virtual ceremony is being held projected at the welfare of the women in the two Associations.

In another development,the NBA President-elect, Mr. Olumide Akpata expresses his great delight and thanked the incumbent President, Paul Usoro SAN for providing the NBAWF an opportunity to thrive.

He stated that in all his life, he has been “gender-blind” and therefore promises women colleagues that he “will support NBAWF and other elected officials will collaborate” to ensure that all supports are given to them. He equally stated that he believes in capacity building and finally on the event, he noted that he is “proud of NBAWF”.

Furthermore, the NYSB Women In Law Section Chair, Terri A. Mazur equally expressed her delight and noted that the section has been driven by effort to take care of domestic violence against women, child abuse amongst others.

Meanwhile, he noted that the Association has many committees saddled with different responsibilities like Legislative Affairs Committee , Programming Committee amongst others.

She stated that they shall strive to attain the goals stated in the MOU for the advancement of women. Thus, she concluded that “we look forward to a national collaboration.”

Also, Carlos Ramos-Mrosovsky noted that the International Section of NYSB has over 2,000 members and geared towards capacity building through webinars, internships etc.

In addition, he noted that a strengthened relationship with Nigeria is vital and critical being the largest Bar in Africa.

Finally, he stated that the MOU is a fantastic step.

Furthermore, Ayotola Jagun gave her remarks on the expected outcomes of the partnership.

She noted that there are several benefits of the MOU driven by gender equality advocacy. Also, she stated that the MOU is geared at deployment of knowledge exchange, networking opportunities, promotional support and introduction to experts from diverse fields from both Associations.

Besides, she noted that the partnership is timely and a coordinated one meant to expand the pathways to gender equality. Meanwhile, she noted that the implementation of the MOU is a successful collaboration which is key to the alliance.

Finally, the MOU was signed by the NYSBA President, Karson together with Tom Richard and one other as witnesses. He promises to ensure that the goals of the MOU are met.

In addition, Prof. Bamigbose signed on behalf of the NBA President, Paul Usoro, SAN who promised to sign later as a result of unavailability.

Meanwhile, it was witnessed and signed by Mrs Ayotola Jagun, Head, NBAWF External Relations Committee and the Secretary of NBAWF, Mrs Aideyan.

Equally, Sheryl further congratulated the both Associations.

Finally, the vote of thanks was given by Mrs. Chinyere Okorocha, Vice Chair, NBAWF who described the virtual ceremony as “iconic, historic and fulfilling session”.

Who Can Legislate On Data Protection In Nigeria? An Opinion

In recent times, I have had a number of stimulating on and offline conversations with privacy professionals and enthusiasts on the reasons for the dearth of data protection laws and materials in Nigeria and possible solutions.

There is no gainsaying that our country remains on the list of African Countries without a data protection law (the Nigeria Data Protection Regulation 2019 (NDPR) is not considered a law in this context). It is further sad that, in spite of being a signatory to the ECOWAS Supplemantary Act on Personal Data Protection 2010 and African Union Convention on Cyberscurity and Personal Data, we are yet to have a general data protection law.

It must however be noted that, some commendable attempts have been made by in the past by the National Assembly in the mould of the Data Protection Bill 2010 (HB 276, HB 45) and later the Data Protection Commission Bill 2019 as presented to the Executive in May 2019 but it was not deemed worthy of presidential assent for some right or wrong reasons. I also understand that two (2) Data Protection Bills are currently pending before the 9th National Assembly as sponsored by Hon. Yakubu Dogara (HB: 564) and Hon. Ndudi Elumelu (HB: 504) but not so much has been heard about the progress of these very significant bills.

However, as the Federal Government continues to, with respect, struggle in its tracks to deliver a Data Protection Act to the country, States’ Governments have also appeared uninterested in legislating data protection with the exception of one of the states in the southwest which I hear, has concluded works on a bill on data protection in readiness for sponsorship to their House of Assembly.

As it appears that, the States may come to our nation’s rescue faster than the Federal Government, we may need to interrogate the legislative competence of the various Houses of Assembly to make laws on data protection under our extant Constitution.

Data protection as a component of right to privacy

An interrogation of legislative competence must necessarily start from first ascertaining the nature of ‘data protection’ as a concept within the context of law-making powers of the legislative houses concerned. For localization purposes, I will restrict myself to some Nigerian academics who have written on the subject for clarity on the vexed argument as to the relationship of data protection with right to privacy.

Dr. Kemi Omotubora, lecturer of Information Technology Law, University of Lagos, is perhaps, the fiercest critic of conflation of data protection and privacy. In a recent paper she co-authored with another academic from Leeds University, United Kingdom, the learned data protection lecturer decried the problematic definition of personal data because it has blurred the fine lines between the concepts of privacy and data protection that has been drawn from the inception of the data protection regime”

However, she went ahead to acknowledged that: “Following the same track, the European courts have consistently conflated data protection and privacy and treated the former as an extension of the latter.” She referred to a number of decisions (Breyer, Volker, Rundfunk etc) reported in my Casebook on Data Protection, where the European courts ruled on the fusion of data protection with privacy. See ‘Next Generation Privacy’ Information and Communications Technology Law accessible at https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2020.1732055

In another co-authored paper titled “Personal Data Protection in Nigeria: Reflections on opportunities, options and challenges to legal reforms”, Dr. L.A. Abdulrauf of the Department of Public Law, Faculty of Law, University of Ilorin, states that:

“In spite of its commercial purposes, there is no denying that, data protection has its roots in the right to privacy in international human rights instruments…Thus, the normative basis of data protection is in the human rights instruments which arguably makes it human right too. While some jurisdictions do not even distinguish privacy from data protection, others have anchored their data protection laws on right to privacy. The relationship between data protection and other human rights also strengthens the argument in favour of it being a human right.”

In his contribution to a book titled “African Data Privacy Laws”, Iheanyi Samuel Nwankwo, a research associate at Institute for Legal Informatics, Leibniz Universitat, Hannover, Germany states at page 47 that:

“But irrespective of these conceptual differences, this chapter will focus on information privacy in Nigeria, that is, the aspect of the law that regulates how personal information is collected, processed, accessed, shared and stored by others….The words “data protection” and “information privacy” are used interchangeable and they are intended to mean the same thing…”

From the foregoing interventions, it appears that, from whatever perspective one decides to view ‘data protection’, the underpinning presumption, especially in Nigeria where there exists no judicial decision at the moment, favours the concept of data protection as an integral constituent of right to privacy and that is where this writer has, unassertively, chosen to pitch his tent until a defining decision is handed down by our courts.

Can State governments legislate data protection?

Apparently, “data protection” or its semblance does not exist under the exclusive legislative list but some commentators have curiously argued that, only the Federal Government of Nigeria has the legislative competence to make laws relating to data protection. Senator Ihenyen, Esq.- a consistent Information Technology Lawyer, in a data guidance note, stated that:

“Following Nigeria’s federal system, only the National Assembly has the power to legislate on broadcasting, posts, telegraphs, telephones, televisions, wireless communication and any incidental matters. This is in accordance with the provisions of the second schedule of the Constitution. The implication of this is that, if Nigeria’s federal legislature failed to legislate on data and privacy related matters, state legislators do not have the power to legislate on them”

Without necessarily commenting on the aptitude or otherwise of Mr. Ihenyen’s opinion above, it is worth of note that, item 28 of the exclusive list provides for “fingerprints identification and criminal records” which are universally classified as sensitive data covered by data protection laws, but that is not to say that, sensitive data alone forms the whole gamut of data protection to make it an exclusive matter.

Although a direct answer to the poser here cannot be found in the Constitution which does not prohibit states from legislating fundamental rights, I will attempt an answer by drawing inferences from a similar but specific data protection laws passed by States Houses of Assembly in relation to fundamental right to privacy.

Freedom of Information Act 2011 (FOIA)

The FOIA was passed in 2011 by the National Assembly to, among other things, make information freely available and for the protection of personal privacy. This Act has been repeatedly argued in various courts to guarantee freedom of expression which includes “freedom to receive information” under section 39(1) and right to privacy under section 37 of the Constitution.

In that same 2011, the Ekiti State House of Assembly followed suit when it passed its own Freedom of Information Law to make information available and protect personal privacy. Not long after that Imo and Delta States also passed their own Freedom of Information Laws which, in part, protect personal data as well.

Conclusively, although these laws are not comprehensive as far as standard data protection provisions are concerned, they are nevertheless States enactments on data protection and right to privacy.

With the absence of any item under the exclusive legislative list ceding sole powers to legislate data protection to the Federal Government, it is this writer’s respectful opinion that, States’ Houses of Assembly possess requisite legislative competence to make laws on the subject.

Olumide writes from Lagos, Nigeria.

We Will Arrest You If You Insult A Governor, Senator, President’ – NBC

0

The Nigerian Broadcasting Corporation (NBC) on Thursday said it would take legal action against any broadcaster that violates its rules. It cautioned the media to understand the rules and regulations of the profession.

Lagos State NBC Director Chibuike Ogwumike made the announcement in a press release.

Explaining a section of the Broadcasting Code: Section 3.1.: Professional Rules: 3.1.1: No broadcast shall encourage or incite to crime, lead to public disorder or hate, be repugnant to public feelings or contain an offensive reference to any person or organisation, alive or dead or generally be disrespectful to human dignity.

“We expect Broadcasters, especially anchors to show professionalism in the handling of programmes such that guests or callers that exhibit such tendency are professionally handled.

“The recourse to abusing, denigrating and insulting the President, Governors, MPs, and other leaders does not show us as cultured people.” He added.

You want to share a story with us? You want to advertise? You need publicity for a product, service, or event? Contact us on WhatsApp – +234 803 3018 881