Home Blog Page 935

I KNOW AN AGED INFANT, NIGERIA.

Law & Society Magazine
-
0
I KNOW AN AGED INFANT, NIGERIA.

By Chinedu Agu

1914:
Like a plaything
In the hands of two obsessed Lovers
Lugard and Shaw’s
Sizzling romance
On the chilly shores of Niger
Culminates in the birth of a girl child.

“I shall christen her Nigeria,
For in this Niger area
Was she conceived and birthed.
She shall for me remain
An evergreen remembrancer of our love on the sea-shore”
Shaw whispers to Luggard,
As in sweet-nothings.

From the far-flung
Southern and Nothern Protectorates,
Two families of diverse Roots were forced into
A dicy matrimony.

1914 – 1959:
On Shaw’s back
Is she constantly strapped.
At her breasts does she constantly suckle,
Ever dependent on cereals and dairies,
She has refused to be weaned,
Even when Ghana her neighbourhood playmate
has long weaned herself.

1960 – 2019:
With cane was she, in 1960, weaned.
But at Shaw’s breasts
She still cries and points.

While her neighbours run
She crawls on her aged knees.
Crying and pointing at Shaw’s breasts.

I know this aged infant.

Only her tummy she still bathes
Mouths her toys.
Babbles in the midst of speeches.
Drools at the mouth
And licks the phlegm
From her leaking nose.

When shall you grow,
Oh infant!

Happy dependence, Nigeria.

Donald Trump and First Lady Melania test positive for COVID-19

Law & Society Magazine
-
0
Donald Trump and First Lady Melania test positive for COVID-19

US President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania have tested positive for coronavirus

President Donald Trump has tweeted to say he and First Lady Melania have tested positive for coronavirus.

‘We will begin our quarantine and recovery process immediately. We will get through this TOGETHER!’ he wrote.

The president is 74, putting him at higher risk of serious complications from the virus. In his 2019 physical, Mr Trump also met the technical threshold for obesity, which is considered another risk factor. .

A statement from the White House doctor said both the president and first lady are ‘well at this time’ but did not say if either have symptoms.

The First Lady also tweeted to say the pair were feeling well.

FG directs reopening of all schools

Law & Society Magazine
-
0
FG directs reopening of all schools

The federal government has directed the reopening of all schools, Speaking at a media briefing on Friday, Adamu Adamu, minister of education, said ”unity schools” are to reopen on October 12 while private and state schools will determine their own opening schedule.

“We have consulted widely with all stakeholders in the education sector. Our eyes and ears are opened to the international media. I’m glad to report that there has not been any single case of COVID-19 in all Unity Schools. No single fatality among the students,” he said.

“We have come to the conclusion that we have to review our decisions. After consultation with PTF, we have resolved that our Unity Schools be opened on October 12, 2020.”Advertisement

The minister asked academic institutions to maintain strict compliance with COVID-19 protocol.

In March, the federal government directed the closure of all schools following the outbreak of COVID-19 in the country.

Some states had already reopened their institutions of learning.

Nigerian nominee Ishaq Bello ranked low amongst 20 contenders for ICC job

Law & Society Magazine
-
0
Nigerian nominee Ishaq Bello ranked low amongst 20 contenders for ICC job

ICC advisory committee says Justice Ishaq Bello lacks the knowledge of the workings of the court.

Justice Ishaq Bello, the only Nigerian nominated for election to the International Criminal Court (ICC) jury in 2020, may have fluffed the country’s chances after a poor performance in the assessment exercise.

The ICC, headquartered in The Hague, Netherlands, prosecutes international crimes, crimes against humanity, war crimes, genocide, and aggression by nationals of the 123-member countries.

President Muhammadu Buhari had in June nominated Mr Bello, the Chief Judge of the FCT High Court, for the contest. He was among the 20 nominated for the election scheduled for the 19th session of the assembly of states parties.

The assembly will be held at the United Nations, New York, from December 7 – 17.

According to the Rome Statutes, every three years, the Assembly replaces one third of its 18 judges by electing six new judges for non-renewable terms of nine years.

For candidates to be elected, they must garner two-thirds of the votes from the state parties.

As contained in the statement of nomination submitted to ICC, Mr Bello has served as a magistrate, legal adviser, deputy Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court of Nigeria), judge and acting chief judge.

More so, he had served on several bar and bench committees before his appointment as a member of the National Judicial Council (NJC).

“He has also held high-level positions, including chairing election petition tribunals and Presidential Committee on Prison Reforms and Decongestion (PCRD), among others. He is very familiar with the workings of the court, having led numerous Nigerian delegations to various international fora.

“Justice Bello has several publications to his credit, including papers presented towards advancing the judiciary. He is a member of several notable professional bodies. He is currently the Chief Judge of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court of Justice in Abuja, Nigeria.

“As Chief Judge, one of his core responsibilities includes supervisory authority over the court’s judicial and administrative functions. He is also responsible for the assignment of cases and in the process ensures that judicial work is equally distributed. His deep knowledge and practical experience of the Court, allied to his proven leadership skills, make him uniquely qualified as a judge of the International Criminal Court,” the Nigerian government said.

Assessment

Due to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, which discourages physical meetings, the advisory committee on nomination conducted interviews via virtual means between August 12 and August 28 with the 20 candidates presented for the election.

Based on its standards, the candidates, after assessment, are graded under three levels: ‘Highly qualified’ – the candidate excels in terms of the experience and knowledge about the Court and its jurisprudence; ‘Qualified’ – the candidate has some relevant experience and knowledge about the court and ‘Only formally qualified’ – the candidate that meets the requirements set out in the Rome Statute for election as a judge but uncertain if the candidate could make a noteworthy contribution to the work of the Court.

However, according to its report, only nine candidates are “Highly Qualified” while three fall under the “Qualified” category and seven are ranked “Only Formally Qualified”.

Mr Bello belongs in the third category, the lowest before disqualification.

The committee noted that Mr Bello, although articulate and knowledgeable regarding criminal law and procedure at the national level, lacks the knowledge of the workings of the ICC.

“…based on his answers to questions particularly regarding participation by victims and the functions of the Pre-Trial Chamber (but also other areas), the candidate appeared notably to have a very limited knowledge of the Rome Statute, the practices and procedures of the Court and its jurisprudence.

“Based on both his professional experience as well as his answers during the interview. and bearing in mind particularly his lack of detailed knowledge of the workings of the Court, the Committee concluded that the candidate was only formally qualified for appointment as judge of the International Criminal Court,” the committee’s report read.

Dent on career

While Mr Bello’s poor rating and knowledge of rhe ICC may work against his candidature, he is best remembered in Nigeria for a controversial ruling that freed a police officer who ordered the shooting of six persons in 2005.

It was a sad case of extra-judicial killing of Ifeanyi Ozor, Chinedu Meniru, Augustina Arebu, Anthony Nwokike, Paulinus Ogbonna and Ekene Isaac Mgbe, popularly referred to as the ‘Apo Six.’

The judicial panel of inquiry found the police account that the victims were armed robbers to be false and recommended the officers involved for trial.

The five accused officers and eight other police witnesses testified that the then Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), Danjuma Ibrahim, ordered the killings.

After more than a decade of protracted court proceedings that left the victims’ families emotionally and financially drained, judgement was delivered by Mr Bello.

Two of the officers involved were convicted and sentenced to death on March 9, 2017, in a landmark judgment of the FCT High Court.

But the presiding judge, Mr Bello, said “there was not enough evidence to convict Mr Danjuma,” whom the police officers said ordered the shootings.

After the ruling, Mr Danjuma was reinstated and later promoted to Commissioner of Police and then to Assistant Inspector-General of Police (AIG).

Open Society Justice Initiative Sues Trump Administration over International Criminal Court Executive Order

Law & Society Magazine
-
0
Open Society Justice Initiative Sues Trump Administration over International Criminal Court Executive Order

NEW YORK—The Open Society Justice Initiative and four law professors, Diane Marie Amann, Gabor Rona, Milena Sterio, and Margaret deGuzman, have filed a complaint against the U.S. government over a Trump administration executive order authorizing draconian economic sanctions and severe civil and criminal penalties for those who support the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The lawsuit is the first to challenge Executive Order 13928, and comes one month after the U.S. imposed sanctions on senior officials at the ICC, including Fatou Bensouda, the court’s chief prosecutor.

The lawsuit—filed today in a federal court in the Southern District of New York against President Trump, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Secretary of Treasury Steven Mnuchin, Office of Foreign Assets Control Director Andrea Gacki, Attorney General William Barr, and their respective U.S. Departments—argues that the executive order violates constitutional rights, including the plaintiffs’ freedom of speech, and prevents them from carrying out work in support of international justice.

The plaintiffs, all who speak, write, and advocate about international justice issues around the world, contend that it irreparably harms their professional work. The lawsuit also seeks to stop the U.S. government from enforcing the executive order while the court considers its constitutionality.

James Goldston, executive director of the Open Society Justice Initiative, said, “By issuing this outrageous order, the Trump administration has betrayed Washington’s long-standing support for international justice, snubbed its allies, and violated the U.S. constitution. We are going to court to end this reckless assault on a judicial institution and the victims it serves.”

The ICC was created in 2002 by the Rome Statute, a treaty, and is authorized to investigate and prosecute serious crimes including genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, that are committed on the territories, or by the nationals, of the 123states that are party to the treaty. The U.S., while instrumental in setting up the ICC, has never ratified the treaty. The ICC only acts when countries are unwilling or unable, upon request of the UN Security Council or a state party to the treaty, or on initiative of the prosecutor if authorized by the ICC judges. 

The executive order is the latest in a series of attacks by the U.S. government on the ICC. On March 15, 2019, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that the U.S. would impose visa restrictions on “individuals directly responsible for any [ICC] investigation of U.S. personnel.” On June 11, 2020, President Trump issued Executive Order 13928, targeting persons associated with or supporting the International Criminal Court.

On September 2, Secretary Pompeo announced that the U.S. was imposing asset freezes and other financial sanctions on two senior officials at the ICC, Bensouda and Phakiso Mochochoko the head of the ICC’s jurisdiction division. Officials from the United Nations, the European Union, other U.S. allies like Canada, and Bensouda’s home country, The Gambia, swiftly condemned the U.S.’ actions.

The plaintiffs are represented by a team of lawyers at Foley Hoag LLP, led by Andrew Loewenstein.

Open Society Justice Initiative et al. v. Donald J. Trump et. al Download the 53-page report.Pages, 2.33 Mb, PDF DOWNLOAD

(justiceinitiative)

Buhari: ‘It Makes No Sense For Oil To Be Cheaper In Nigeria Than In Saudi Arabia’

Law & Society Magazine
-
0
Buhari: ‘It Makes No Sense For Oil To Be Cheaper In Nigeria Than In Saudi Arabia’

AS Nigeria celebrates her 60th Independence Anniversary, President, Muhammadu Buhari says makes no sense for Premium Motor Spirits (PMS) otherwise known as petrol to be cheaper in Nigeria than in Saudi Arabia.

Buhari said this during his nationwide broadcast to commemorate the country’s independence from the British.

“Petroleum prices in Nigeria are to be adjusted. We sell now at N161 per litre. A comparison with our neighbours will illustrate the point,” the President.

“Chad which is an oil-producing country charges N362 per litre, Niger, also an oil-producing country sells 1 litre at N346, in Ghana, another oil-producing country, the petroleum pump price is N326 per litre.”

“Further afield, Egypt charges N211 per litre. Saudi Arabia charges N168 per litre. It makes no sense for oil to be cheaper in Nigeria than in Saudi Arabia,” he added.

He noted that sustaining the level of petroleum prices in Nigeria is no longer possible stating that his government, since coming into office has recognized the economic argument for adjusting the price of petroleum.

Buhari stated that the government has also suffered a 60 per cent reduction in revenue occasioned by the drop in oil prices and reduced economic activities due to Coronavirus pandemic.

“In addition to public health challenges of working to contain the spread of the Coronavirus, we have suffered a significant drop in our foreign exchange earnings and internal revenues due to a 40 per cent drop in oil prices and a steep drop in economic activities, leading to a 60 per cent drop in government revenue,” the president stated.

The President reiterated his commitment to protecting lives and properties of citizens and residents of the country urging Nigerians to provide community-level intelligence to the government.

“As a government, we remain committed to our constitutional oath of securing the lives and properties of the citizenry. I, however, call on the citizenry to also support the government by providing the necessary community-level intelligence in addressing these challenges,” he further noted.

Buhari urged Nigerians to work together with the government by focusing on ways to resolve the identified ‘critical challenges’ of the country.

According to the President, the critical challenges include evolving and sustaining a democratic culture that leaves power in the hands of the people, supporting the enthronement of the rule of law, demanding accountability of elected representatives and contributing to good governance, increasing our commitment to peaceful co-existence in a peaceful, secure and united Nigeria.

He also highlighted harnessing and optimizing our tremendous human and natural resources to attain our goal of being in the top twenty economies of the world and in the process, lifting 100 million Nigerians out of poverty in 10 years, strengthening institutions to make them stronger in protecting National Interests and imbibing tolerance in diversity as part of the critical challenges.

How To Prove Payment Of Rent And Who Must Prove It

Law & Society Magazine
-
0
How To Prove Payment Of Rent And Who Must Prove It

Daily Law Tips (Tip 666) by Onyekachi Umah, Esq., LL.M, ACIArb(UK)

Introduction:
It is common to find landlords, tenants and their tenancy matters/cases in courts, over non-payment of rent. Most tenancies and landlords survive on rent, so failure to pay or delay in payment of rent has huge consequences. In courts, the eyes of law, is not often the eyes of man. Courts have fixed procedures that must be followed in quest for justice unless where such procedures will cause injustice. Having in mind court procedures, this work examines the burden of proof on landlords and tenants to prove payment of rent.

Courts, Facts and Proof of Evidence:
Courts in Nigeria expect parties to a case to prove every fact placed before the court, except for facts that are generally known and which the courts have taken notice of (judicial notice). For example, a party in a litigation (land dispute case) must prove his ownership, may be by showing to court his land documents. However, the party does not need to prove that he is a Nigerian, since a property owner must not be a Nigerian and courts know this fact, also he does not need to prove that by the custom/native law of Mgbowo People in Enugu State, that a son can inherit from his father. Generally, courts want proof and will base their judgments on proof. So, no matter how accurate a fact may sound or seem, unless he/she has sufficient evidence to proof such fact, no court will believe him/her. Generally, he who claims anything must prove the existence of what he claims.

Courts and Proof of Payment of Rent:
Rent is simply an agreed value given to a property owner by a tenant for the period of time the tenants uses the property. It is the fee paid to a property owner by a tenant for the time the tenant uses the property of the property owner. Where there is a case in court and there is need to prove payment or non-payment of rent, the court expects proof of evidence of payment from the part that claims that rent was paid. This will be further examined using the judgment of the appellate courts in Nigeria.

1. “…In civil cases the initial burden of proof is on the party who desires that Judgment be entered in his favour based on facts which he assert to prove those facts as required by law. See the following cases:- OKOBULE VS. OYAGBOLA (1990) 21 N.S.C.C. PART 3 PAGE 193. NEPA VS. AKPATA (1991) 2 NWLR PART 175 PAGE 536. SECTIONS 131,132 AND 133 OF THE EVIDENCE ACT 2011. But the burden of proof in civil cases is not static, it shifts depending on the state of the pleading of the parties. See the case of -BUHARI VS OBASANJO (2005) 7.S.C. PART II PAGE 123. The standard of proof in civil cases is on the balance of probabilities or preponderance of evidence. See SECTION 134 OF THE EVIDENCE ACT 2011, and the following cases:- ITAUMA VS AKPE- IME (2000) 7 S.C. PART II, PAGE 24 ENO VS ANI (2004) 1 S.C PART II PAGE 115. … (tenant) Respondent (has) to prove that he paid his rent as and when due. He could do this by production of the receipt of payment he made as pleaded and testified to at the lower Court. The failure of the (tenant) Respondent to tender in evidence the receipts referred to earlier in his pleadings and evidence is fatal to his case and the only inference that could be drawn from the scenario is that he never paid any rent apart …. Section 167 (d) of the Evidence Act 2011 is therefore applicable in this case because the evidence like receipts which ought to be tendered/produced and is not produced would if produced, be unfavourable to the (tenant) Respondent who withholds it. Per JIMI OLUKAYODE BADA ,J.C.A ( Pp. 11-15, paras. F-B ) ARIGBABU v. OYENUGA (2019) LPELR-47381(CA)
2. “The evidential burden of proof has thus shifted to the Respondent. He had the legal burden to prove that he paid the rents. He had a duty to tender the receipts of payment which he pleaded. It is only when he has done that he would be held to have discharged the evidential burden of proof on him. To prove he paid rents after the expiration of the initial rent paid, the Respondent adopted his statement on oath as his oral evidence. The deposition in his statement on oath on this point is a repetition of the averment in his pleadings. He did not tender the receipts evidencing the payment of the rent as he pleaded. He thus failed to discharge the burden of proof on him.” Per FOLASADE AYODEJI OJO ,J.C.A ( Pp. 19-21, paras. B-C ) ARIGBABU v. OYENUGA (2019) LPELR-47381(CA)
3. In the case of African Petroleum PLC v Soyemi (2008) All FWLR Part 397 Page 117, the Court of Appeal, Lagos per Galinje J.C.A. Para B-D held as follows: In civil cases, the burden of proving a particular fact is upon the party who asserts it and who will fail if no evidence is called upon the issue, regard being had to any presumption which may arise from the pleadings of the parties. This onus is not static. It continually shifts from side to side in respect of a fact in issue until it finally rests on the party against whom judgment will be given if no further evidence is proffered.” Per OLUDOTUN ADEBOLA ADEFOPE-OKOJIE ,J.C.A ( Pp. 16-22, paras. C-B ) in the case of MATOH v. ADMIRAL ENVIRONMENTAL CARE LTD (2015) LPELR-25905(CA)
4. “As in civil proceedings it is trite law that he who asserts proves and the onus of proof is on him who will fail if no evidence is given on an issue vide Section 135, Evidence Act (ibid) – See also Are v. Adisa (1967) NMLR 304.” Per SYLVESTER UMARU ONU, J.S.C ( Pp. 31-32, paras. G-A) in the case of EZEMBA V. IBENEME & ANOR (2004) LPELR-1205(SC)

Conclusion:
When a case is filled in court, the plaintiff (the person suing another) must have proof/evidence of the facts he claims. When the plaintiff proves the facts, the duty to disprove them goes to the defendant (the person being sued by another person). Generally, any person that makes any claim must have evidence to back it up. In a case for rent, the person that claims that rent has not been paid, which will be the tenant, must prove that he/she has not received any rent. Then, the party that want claims that rent has been paid, which will be the tenant, must prove that rent was paid and show evidence of payment/receipts of rent. It is never enough to shout and write that payment has been made, there must be proof. Tenants must insist that their landlords issue receipts to them. Where they are no receipts, tenants should keep proof of bank deposits, transfers, cheques for payment of rent, preferably with good descriptions of the purpose of their payment.

My authorities are:

1. Sections 131, 132, 133, 134, 136, 140 of the Evidence Act, 2011.
2. Judgment of the Supreme Court of Nigeria (on the burden of proof) of EZEMBA V. IBENEME & ANOR (2004) LPELR-1205(SC)
3. Judgement of the Court of Appeal (on the burden of proof and proof of rent) in the case of ARIGBABU v. OYENUGA (2019) LPELR-47381(CA)
4. Judgement of the Court of Appeal (on the burden of proof) in the case of MATOH v. ADMIRAL ENVIRONMENTAL CARE LTD (2015) LPELR-25905(CA)

#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).}

Pension Fund Administrators in Nigeria and their scorecard

Law & Society Magazine
-
120
Pension Fund Administrators in Nigeria and their scorecard

Despite the disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, which affected most aspects of the Nigerian economy, Pension Fund Administrators (PFAs) in Nigeria performed satisfactorily, as they recorded positive returns between January and August 2020.

According to the report from Pension Nigeria, no PFA had negative returns on investment (ROI) during the period under review, indicating that all PFAs for Fund I, II, III, and IV recorded positive returns.

This is quite impressive, given that the pandemic had impacted most aspects of the Nigerian economy negatively, causing a 1.95% (year-to-date) decline of the NSE’s All Share index, while the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) contracted by 6.1% in the second quarter of 2020.

Industry average Return on Investment (ROI)

  • Fund I industry with 20 PFAs, recorded an average of 8.14% returns between January and August 2020.
  • Fund II industry has 22 PFAs, and recorded an average return of 9.33%.
  • Fund III recorded an industry average returns of 10.37%, with 22 PFAs.
  • While Fund IV with 22 PFAs, recorded 9.01% return on investment.

It is worth noting that no single PFA was dominant in all the four funds. NLPC PFA Limited and Investment One Pension Managers Limited, however, had dominance in three funds.

Veritas Glanvills pensions Limited, Fidelity Pension Managers Limited, and IEI-Anchor Pension Managers Limited topped the list in two funds. Radix Pension Fund Managers Limited, Stanbic IBTC Pension Managers Limited, Sigma Pensions Limited, OAK Pensions Limited, AXA Mansard Pension Managers Limited, NPF Pensions Limited, Crusader Sterling Pensions Limited, and Nigerian University Pension Management Limited dominated the list in one fund.

How the PFAs performed in each of the Funds 

  • Fund I – Veritas Glanvills Pensions Limited topped the list in average return on investment on Fund I with 21.11%, followed by Stanbic IBTC Pension Managers 12.33%, Sigma Pensions Limited 11.95%, OAK Pensions Limited 11.59%, and IEI-Anchor Pension Managers 9.88%.
  • Fund II – NLPC Pension Fund Administrators Limited led the pack with an average return on investment of 24.32%, followed by IEI-Anchor Pension Managers Limited 11.59%, Crusader Sterling Pensions Limited 10.74%, Investment One Pension Managers Limited 10.65%, and Nigerian University Pensions Limited 10.25%
  • Fund III – NLPC Pension Fund Administrators Limited dominated the top 5 list with 24.84%, followed by Investment One Pension Managers Limited 17.58%, Radix Pension Fund Managers 14.78%, Fidelity Pension Managers Limited 12.45%, and AXA Mansard Pensions Limited 11.46%.
  • Fund IV – NLPC Pension fund Administrators Limited maintained the lead in the top 5 PFAs with 23.59%, followed by Investment One Pension Managers Limited with 15.28%, Fidelity Pension Managers Limited with 12.3%, NPF Pensions Limited with 10.98%, and Veritas Glanvills Pensions Limited with 9.74%.

How all the PFAs performed in all the Fund categories 

12 out of the 22 PFAs performed above the average ROI of 9.28%, for all the funds put together. NLPC Pension Fund Administrators Limited topped the list (20.33%), followed by Investment One Pension Managers Limited (14.5%), Veritas Glanvills Pensions limited (12.02%), AXA Mansard Pensions (10%), OAK Pensions Limited (9.7%).

Others include Leadway Pensure PFA Limited (9.67%), Crusader Sterling Pensions Limited (9.65%), AIICO Pension Managers (9.61%), IEI-Anchor Pension Managers Limited (9.51%), Fidelity Pension Managers (9.46%), Stanbic IBTC Pension Managers (9.45%), and Radix Pension Fund Managers Limited (9.28%).

Meanwhile, 10 PFAs performed below the average ROI, with Premium Pensions Limited (4.96%) at the bottom of the list, followed by APT Pension Fund Managers (5.81%), First Guarantee Pensions Limited (6.46%), TrustFund Pensions Plc (6.61%), ARM Pension managers (7.0%).

Other Administrators that made the list includes, Nigeria University Pension Management Co. Limited (7.23%), Pension Alliance Limited (7.40%), FCMB Pensions Limited (7.60%), Sigma Pensions (8.86%), NPF Pensions Limited (8.95%).

About PFAs

In Nigeria, the requirement for the Contributory Pension Scheme is that the pension funds are to be privately and exclusively managed by licensed Pension Fund Administrators (PFA). The main functions of the PFAs are to open Retirement Savings Accounts (RSA) for employees, invest and manage pension fund assets, payment of retirement benefits, and accounting for all transactions relating to the pension funds under their management.

Currently, there are twenty-two (22) PFAs in Nigeria with a total asset value in excess of N11 trillion as of date.

Effective from 2nd July 2018, the MultiFund Structure for Retirement Savings Accounts (RSA) was required to be implemented across all the PFAs in Nigeria. The Multi-Fund structure is a framework that aims to align the age and risk profile of RSA holders, by dividing the RSA Fund into four distinct fund categories;

  • RSA FUND I: Retirement Savings Account Fund I (An Active Contributor who is below 50 years of age, and chooses for his contribution to be invested in this fund).
  • RSA FUND II: Retirement Savings Account Fund II (default fund for all Active Contributors, who are below 50 years of age)
  • RSA FUND III: Retirement Savings Account Fund III (default fund for all Active Contributors, who are 50 years and above)
  • RSA FUND IV: Retirement Savings Account Fund IV (Fund for Retirees only)

Inter-Fund Movement 

In implementing the Multifund framework, the Pension Commission allows Retirement Savings Account (RSA) holders to move from one fund category to another.

  • Fund I – It is a special but optional fund category that RSA holders who are below 50 years of age can request to be moved to. It has the highest exposure to the stock market amongst all the funds under the multifund structure, as a higher percentage of the fund is usually invested in buying shares of companies, compared to other fund categories.
  • Fund II – It is the default fund under the multifund framework for RSA holders who are below 50 years of age. Most RSA holders fall under this category. It is quite necessary to consciously monitor the performance of Fund I to assist in making decisions, whether to move to fund I or remain in the fund category.
  • Fund III – It is the default fund for RSA holders who are 50 years of age and above, but are still active in the employment service. The multifund structure permits the PFAs to move anybody who is 50 years and above from Fund II to fund III. The law allows the RSA holders to request to be moved back to fund II if she/he so desires. If the RSA holder is 50 years and above and has not requested to be moved back to fund II, he/she will be automatically moved in Fund III. It is imperative the RSA holder monitors the performance of Funds III and II, as to be able to decide whether to remain in fund III or migrate to fund II.
  • Fund IV – It is otherwise known as the Retiree fund. All the RSA holders who are retired from active service are automatically moved to fund IV category, and the retirees are not permitted to move to any other fund categories.

Polish man blasts Buhari: Nigerian court sentencing 13-year old for blasphemy disgraceful, offers to serve term on his behalf

Law & Society Magazine
-
0
Polish man blasts Buhari: Nigerian court sentencing 13-year old for blasphemy disgraceful, offers to serve term on his behalf

The director of the Auschwitz Memorial in Poland has offered to serve time for a Nigerian child who was convicted of blasphemy and ordered to spend ten years in prison by a Sharia court .

In an open letter, Piotr Cywinski asked Nigeria’s President to intervene and pardon 13-year-old Omar Farouq for the conviction.

“As the director of the Auschwitz memorial, which commemorates the victims and preserves the remains of the German Nazi concentration and extermination camps, where children were imprisoned and murdered, I cannot remain indifferent to this disgraceful sentence for humanity,” he wrote.

Omar Farouq was arrested earlier this year by religious police in Kano, Nigeria’s second-largest city, after he had a ‘blasphemous’ conversation with an older man. His conviction by a religious court has provoked condemnation by the United Nations and global human rights groups.

Mr Cywinski told The Telegraph that he felt he had to act when he heard about Omar.

“When I heard about this story last week, I remembered that [Nigeria’s] President Buhari visited Auschwitz in 2018. So I thought that maybe a voice coming from this difficult place would have some effect on him… I have kids that age.

“There are some times we have to stop our own silence and try to do something. It’s not enough to just like something on Facebook or retweet it.”

Mr Cywinski added that since he sent the letter last week, no one from the government had responded yet.

Kola Alapinni, Omar’s lawyer, told The Telegraph that the adolescent has been held in a prison for adults and not been allowed to see any legal representation. If Omar had been older, Mr Alapinni says, he would have been sentenced to death.

At a federal level, Nigeria is a secular state. But 12 of the country’s northern Muslim-dominated states have a Sharia system running in parallel to the secular courts. These courts can only try Muslims and regularly serve out medieval-style punishments.

Mr Alapinni, a graduate of the University of Essex and a secularist campaigner, says he will keep fighting Omar’s corner.

“Section 10 of the constitution says Nigeria is a secular state. We are not Iran; we are no Saudi Arabia; we are not the Vatican. We are a multi-religious state with freedom of thought, expression and religion enshrined in the constitution,” he says.

“This should not be happening.

Yahoo.com

Victory for Victims of Crime

Law & Society Magazine
-
38
Victory for Victims of Crime

Kenya’s Supreme Court has ruled that it is permissible for crime victims’ legal representatives to actively participate in the trials of those charged with the crimes. Tania Broughton reports.

The apex court, in considering an appeal by murder accused Joseph Lendrix Waswa, against a High Court and Appeal Court ruling that the victim’s family had a right to participate in his trial, said criminal justice processes should empower victims and their voices should be heard. 

This was not only as witnesses for the prosecution but as rights holders with a valid interest in the proceedings and the outcome of the case.

Waswa is accused of killing student Mitch Kibiti Barasa. 

Counsel for his family asked for leave to actively participate in the proceedings, rather than just observe as a “watching brief”.

The trial judge ruled in their favour. 

She said the Victim Protection Act (VPA) allows for victims to participate, either directly or through a representative.

She ruled that the legal representative could make submissions at the close of the prosecution case – whether there was a case to answer, final submissions about whether he should be put on his defence, and on points of law.

Aggrieved, Waswa appealed, but lost and he then took the matter to the Supreme court, arguing that his constitutional right to a fair trial was being impinged and that the family’s counsel were, in effect, a second prosecutor.

The Director of Public Prosecutions took sides with Barasa’s family submitting that the High Court order was not open-ended, and the right to actively participate could only be exercised upon meeting certain conditions, including making an application to the court which would be determined by the judge, weighing up public interest and the interests of the administration of justice.

Counsel for the family said they, and the victim, also had a right to a fair trial.

The court agreed.

“Although the adversarial criminal trial process is a contest between the State, represented by the DPP, and the accused, represented by defence counsel, and the traditional role of victims is often perceived to be that of a witness for the prosecution, it is without doubt that, flowing from both the constitution and the VPA, a victim too has the right to participate in criminal proceedings,” the court said.

“The participation of victims, though a novel trend in our laws, is in accord with international developments.”

The judges said the rights of an accused could not be considered in isolation without regard to those of the victim and the criminal justice system should cultivate a process that inspires the trust of both sides.

It was up to the trial judge to protect the rights of all parties involved.

The judges issued “guiding principles” to trial judges considering applications for active participation. 

These include:

*The applicant must be a direct victim or his/her legal representative;

*The granting of such rights must not cause any undue delay in the proceedings;

*The presentation must be limited to the “views and concerns” of the victim;

*It must not be prejudicial to the accused;

*Questions may be posed to witnesses that have not already been posed by the prosecutor;

*The judge remains in control over the right to ask questions;

*While the court has a duty to consider the victim’s views and concerns, there is no obligation to follow the victim’s preference for punishment.(Africa Legal’)

1...934935936...1,105Page 935 of 1,105

Law & Society Magazine is a general interest magazine with a bias for law and its effects on the society

Contact us: [email protected]

© 2024 Copyright - Law & Society Magazine