The Nigeria Customs Service (NCS) yesterday said it is not against the implementation of the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCTA) or any other protocol which the country is a signatory.

The clarification came against the backdrop of misleading media reports that the Comptroller-General of NCS, Col. Hameed Ibrahim Ali (rtd), was allegedly opposed to the implementation of the agreement.

Ali was reportedly misquoted during his presentation at a public hearing of the Senate Committee on Finance.

But in a statement issued by Customs spokesman, Mr. Joseph Attah, the service pointed out that the CGC had only highlighted the implications of the AfCTA on revenue should the country fail to boost local production in order to curtail dumping.

According to him, all imports from member countries will be duty-free when the agreement takes effect, adding that Nigeria must encourage local production and excise duty rather than import duty, which will drastically drop soon.

Ali was quoted to have said: “I would rather collect excise duty than import duty because for every import, you are taking money out.”

The statement further decried attempts to link the Customs boss to issues of scanners and partial border closure, describing the controversial article as having a “total loss of the understanding of CGC’s presentation.”

It read: “For the avoidance of doubt, the CGC, and indeed NCS, is not against the implementation of any protocol that Nigeria is a signatory.

“NCS role is to implement and provide input that might help policy formation in the interest of Nigerians.

“We strongly believe that Nigerians have a right to know the implications of ACFTA and actions that must be taken to benefit from it and not becoming a dumping ground for other countries’ goods.

“Twisting and giving it a different narrative relating to import duty is not only dangerous but mischievous misrepresentation that does the country no good.

“NCS, therefore, call on Nigerians to discountenance the misleading piece and focus on what we must do to benefit from ACFTA.”

Thenigerialawyer

The Senator representing Niger East, Mohammed Sani Musa, has declared he did not sponsor any Bill seeking more powers for the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice to control the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

Musa, in a message, said that the Bill he sponsored was “An Act to amend the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act 2004, to among other things widen the scope of the choice of a Chairman of the Commission.

He said: “By including a legal practitioner, retired or serving High Court Judge among those eligible to be appointed as Chairman of the Commission and to limit their tenure to a single term of five years; and for other related matters.

“I never proposed or spoke about any amendments to give AGF more powers or to weaken EFCC in the discharge of its responsibilities in anyway,” he said.

The lawmaker added that what he did was “in consonance with the view of most public commentators on the state of our nation’s corruption fight and how the appointment of the EFCC Chairman can be widen to make it more strong, and not allowing it limited to only the police officers, which they had all been at the helm of affairs in the Commission.”

According to him, his proposed legislation was also meant to limit the duration of the Chairman of the EFCC to a single one term of five years.

He said that his Bill did not in anyway seek more powers for the AGF over the EFCC.

His lawyer, Dandison Akurunwa Esq, of Dandi Akurunwa & Co, also protested.

The lawyer said: “Our instruction revealed that in your online publication of Saturday 22nd August, 2020, you caused a libelous publication to be done against our client by your reporter.

“The publication is libelous, false and is not true in content and in form.

“Your reporter never deemed it proper on his part to carry on proper investigation to ascertain the truth or otherwise of the story cooked against our client.

“The vivid description with the picture of our client who is the sponsor of the bill superimposed on the publication leaves no one in doubt that your paper is referring to our client.

“We wish to register the feeling of our client about the said publication.

“It did not only malign our client but cast him in bad light as someone who is against good governance of our nation.”

“This has caused him psychological pains and traumatized his peace as he has been inundated with phone calls from friends and foes over your publication.”

The federal government yesterday insisted on the implementation of the recent amendment to the sixth edition of the Nigerian Broadcasting Code by the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC), saying it was in the best interest of the country.

The Minister of Information, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, stated this at the NBC’s 28th anniversary and sixth annual lecture in Abuja.

The amendment, which has attracted controversies, prohibited exclusivity of sporting rights and raised the fine for hate speech to N5million.

It caused a disagreement between the commission’s acting Director-General, Armstrong Idachaba; and the chairman of the commission’s board, Ikra Bilbis, who is supporting further review to accommodate concerns raised by stakeholders.

But Mohammed said government’s expectation was that the ongoing reforms, including the amendment of the code, would revolutionise the nation’s broadcasting industry.

He explained that the Federal Executive Council (FEC), led by President Muhammadu Buhari supported the amendments after a review of the 2019 general elections.

He said Buhari decided to approve the recommendations in order to reposition the NBC.

The minister explained, “The approval necessitated some amendments in the Code and the Act (of NBC).

“The amendments are mostly in the areas of political broadcasting, local content, coverage of emergencies, advertising and anti-competitive behaviour.

“There are obviously lots of positive and desirable outcomes from the new Broadcasting Code; the provisions on exclusivity and monopoly.

“This antitrust provision will boost local content and local industry due to laws prohibiting exclusive use of rights by broadcasters whose intent is to create monopolies.”

Mohammed also said the implementation of the new code would encourage open access to premium content.

The minister said the provision was not new in Nigeria, saying broadcasting exclusivity was disallowed at a certain time in the history of the nation’s broadcasting.

He recalled Multichoice sub-licensing EPL matches to other local operators in Nigeria while HiTV engaged local operators on sub-licensing the EPL when they got the rights.

“Sublicensing and rights sharing create opportunities for local operators to also gain traction and revenue for their services,” he said.

The minister said the law prohibiting backlog of advertising debts would promote sustainability while the law on registration of web broadcasting would regulate negative foreign broadcasts that could affect the country negatively.

Federal Capital Territory High Court sitting in Apo, Abuja, has granted leave for substituted service on Ibrahim Magu, the Acting Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

Justice Silvanus Oriji gave the order of substituted service on Tuesday, after listening to the submissions of Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN), counsel to an Abuja-based lawyer Monday Ubani and former senator Christopher Enai.

On March 26, Justice Orji granted leave to an ex-parte motion filed by Ozekhome for EFCC to charge Ubani and Enai to court or release them on bail on or before March 28.

The judge held that the court had the power to make an order for substituted service of the process where it appears that prompt service cannot be conveniently effected.

”In exercise of the power of the court under Order 7 rule 11, I grant this motion,” he said.

Ishaya Markus, the bailiff, was denied access to Magu by armed security personnel at his office at the EFCC headquarters.

Ozekhome said the operatives told the bailiff that he could only see Magu on an invitation.

In the ex-parte motion, Ozekhome prayed the court to order form 48 and 49 be served on any officer at the mail registry of the EFCC Chairman and the legal department at the headquarters in Jabi.

He also prayed an order of the court to post same at the gate of the EFCC’s head office.

Ubani, a former President of the Ikeja branch of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), and Enai, the former lawmaker representing Bayelsa, were invited and detained by EFCC operatives on March 19.

They were detained for standing as sureties for Ngozi Olejeme, who once served as the Chairman of the Nigeria Social Insurance Trust Fund from 2009 till 2015.

They are still yet to be charged to court by the EFCC.

Saharareporters

Meanwhile, 65 Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and 60 individuals have jointly issued a statement condemning the order of the Chief Magistrates Court in Harare, Zimbabwe, to bar leading human rights lawyer, Beatrice Mtetwa, from representing political detainee, Hopewell Chinono.

This is contained in a statement issued by them dated 24th day of August, 2020 which was made available to TheNigeriaLawyer (TNL), where they described the Ruling as one with“great concern”. The statement is signed by leading organisations & lawyers from over 35 African countries. Signatories include former Chief Justice of Kenya, Dr. Willy Mutunga; president of the International Federation of Human Rights, Botswana’s Alice Mogwe, CEO of Pan-African Lawyers Union, Don Deya, & former Chairman of Nigeria’s Human Rights Commission, Chidi Anselm Odinkalu.

“We note that Beatrice Mtetwa testified before the court that she has no control over the said Facebook page and therefore, did not author or authorize the said publications. She is not listed as an administrator of the said Facebook page” the statement said.

The ruling of Regional Magistrate, Ndunna N. of the Regional Court for the Eastern Division, Harare has sparked off debates in the ongoing state’s prosecution of a Journalist in State V. Hopewell Chin’ono (CRB No. Acc..77/2020), when the Court barred a Lawyer, Beatrice Mtetwa from further representing her client (accused person) and also recommended her for possible prosecution over a post she was credited to have made on Facebook titled “Beatrice Mtetwa and the rule of law.”

The prosecutor claimed that the post brought the court into disrepute.

However, the Facebook post in question reads as follows:

“Where is the outrage from the International Community that Hopewell Chin’ono is being held as a political prisoner? His life is in serious peril. Raise awareness about his unlawful imprisonment. Do not let him be forgotten You or someone you love could be the next one abducted from your home and put in leg irons.

“SPEAK OUT”

In a bail application filed by the Lawyer on behalf of her client, the counsel to the state drew the attention of the Court to the above post, asking that defence counsel, Ms. Mtetwa, be disqualified as a counsel in the case on the strength of the post.

“The state alleges these posts are attributable to the lead counsel herein one Beatrice Mtetwa to be precise and that as a result she must be debarred from appearing before the court as she has become personally involved so as to diminish her objectivity as an officer of the court.” The Judge said.

Prior to this Facebook post, it was said that the Lawyer has written two letters, dated 24th day of July, 2020 and another one dated 27th day of July, 2020, considered to be demeaning to the integrity of the Court in what she said was a political persecution of her client.

“Both these letters characterise the court and the legal system in picture portrayed in the Face Book posts at Beatrice Mtetwa and the rule of law.” The Judge said.

Meanwhile, in the Ruling of the Court which was made available to TheNigeriaLawyer (TNL), some excerpts therefrom read:

“The posts then clearly continue to portray that picture of a legal system and a court that is perpetuating the alleged abduction. The posts rebrand the accused to be a political prisoner and this court to be complicity in the dealing with the alleged now political prisoner. The world is being invited to outrage.”

“Clearly the posts demean the court severely. However, whether the contempt is in the face of the court or not in the face of the court, it is important that it should be borne in mind by courts themselves that the court should use its summary powers to punish for contempt sparingly.”

“Defence Counsel like a public prosecutor has a mandate to present her case in the utmost diligent manner and within the confinements of the acceptable decorum of a legal process. He or she must not exhibit an attachment to the case which goes beyond the acceptable professionalism of a lawyer so as to be personally involved; or so as to appear to be serving multiple constituencies.”

“A lawyer who is professionally seized with a case does not conduct the case with such desperation. This moment you are in court arguing the case, the next you are writing letters in bad taste and smuggling them into the record and the next you are posting on social media that the whole trial process is for political expediency and that an accused, your client, is a political prisoner and inviting the whole world to show its outrage.”

The Court made the following orders:

“1. That the application for disqualification of Ms Beatrice Mtetwa as a counsel participating in this matter is hereby granted as prayed for by the state

2. That the Prosecutor General consider institution of prosecution against Lead Counsel Beatrice Mtetwa for contempt of court emanating from disparaging contents of her letter of 27 th posts at Beatrice Mtetwa and the rule of law July 2020 and the Face Books

3. That a copy this judgment be made available to the Law Society of Zimbabwe

4. The proceedings are postponed to an agreed date between the state and the other co counsels to enable accused to consider his legal representation in view of this ruling.”

Reacting to these orders, the groups noted that as a lawyer, assuming the said post emanated from her as alleged, Ms. Mtetwa was protected by the dint of right to freedom of expression under Section 61 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, Article 19(2) of ICCPR, Article 9(2) of African Charter and Principle 23 of United Nations Basic Principles on Role of Lawyers.

Furthermore, it was contended that her disqualification has undermined “the accused person (Hopewell Chin’ono) right to legal representation which is guaranteed in section 70(1)(d) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe” and that “this undermines the accused person right to fair trial.”

“We therefore express our concerns over this judgment as it undermines not just Beatrice Mtetwa’s right to practice law but it has a chilling effect on many other associated rights.”

In addition, they noted that “ordinarily, courts must be the shield that protects these rights rather than being the sword that destroys fundamental rights.”

“We call on Zimbabwean authorities to respect, protect, promote and fulfill the human rights of everyone, including Beatrice Mtetwa’s right to freedom of expression and to practice her profession, the right of the accused to fair trial including legal representation. There is no justice without freedom and the rule of law.” The statement concluded.

The Senior Staff Association of Nigerian Universities (SSANU) has called on President Muhammadu Buhari, who is the Visitor to the University of Lagos (UNILAG), to re-constitute the special visitation panel set up to investigate the crisis rocking the university.

In a letter written to the president, SSANU said it called for the review of the visitation panel to reflect neutrality, fairness and proper representation.

The union condemned the panel, insisting that the principle of natural justice was lost in the present composition of the visitation Panel.

In a letter dated August 24, 2020 and addressed to President Buhari, the union said: “While SSANU appreciates the prompt intervention of the Visitor in the ongoing crisis and the sincere efforts in nipping the crisis in the bud, the directives of the Visitor as contained in the Press Release have a further tendency to cause more crisis as issues bordering on due process and fair hearing have been trampled upon arising from the Visitor’s directives under reference.

“The crisis in the University of Lagos has the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) as a major participant. Indeed, ASUU is the complainant in this matter.

“The composition of the Special Visitation Panel with a preponderance of Professors (ASUU members) is an indication that the decisions of the Panel would be tampered with by ASUU. The fact that they are former vice- chancellors also implies the tendency to protect one of their own – an embattled vice-chancellor.

“It is our informed observation therefore, that a fair and unbiased Panel, representative of all stakeholders in the University system should have included at least a retired Registrar, a retired Bursar, and a prominent individual with undoubted integrity, who should be a former Pro-Chancellor and not a Professor, as Chairman of the Panel. With the present composition and membership of the Panel, the Federal Government may have unwittingly handed over the Panel to ASUU to return victory to its member and condemn all others.

“SSANU therefore calls for a re-composition of the Panel to reflect neutrality, fairness and proper representation and not using ASUU to probe itself as the situation currently is. The principle of natural justice is lost in the present composition of the Visitation Panel and it is totally condemned by SSANU.”

On the directive recusing the Pro-Chancellor, Dr Babalakin from official duties, SSANU noted that President Buhari may have inadvertently fallen into the ASUU position of seeing Dr Babalakin as the problem of the University of Lagos.

The letter, signed by the Union President, Comrade Samson Ugwoke, said: “SSANU appreciates the intention of the Visitor by directing the recusal of the Pro- Chancellor and Professor Ogundipe from official duties during the period of the Visitation. It is assumed that the directive on recusal is to enforce peace in the University pending the outcome of the Visitation.

“SSANU however wishes to note that the Visitor may have inadvertently fallen into the ASUU position of seeing Dr Babalakin as the problem of the University of Lagos. To the best of our knowledge, the decision to remove Professor Ogundipe was a decision of Council and not Babalakin.

“It would have been fairer if the Visitor had directed the entire Council to recuse itself from official duties until the end of the Panel’s assignment than asking Babalakin alone to recuse himself.

“We wish to therefore observe that this directive personalizes the decisions of Council to Dr. Babalakin which in itself does not do justice to the issues on ground.”

The letter added: “SSANU while not unconcerned about the principles of natural justice i.e. fair hearing and due process in the removal of Professor Ogundipe as Vice- Chancellor of University of Lagos, is equally worried that the underlying allegations of fraud and corrupt practices seem to be lost due to technicalities.

“Government should be concerned that the major agitation of the loudest voices in the University system has always been that of poor funding of the University system. Ironically, those same voices use every tricks, threats and forceful actions to ensure that corrupt practices that fritter away the meagre resources allocated by Government are covered up, while perpetrators are allowed to escape.

“This is reflective in the actions of the ASUU Branch of University of Lagos, pre-emptively ensuring that the Governing Council of University of Lagos would not sit to take decision on the alleged infractions of Professor Ogundipe, by threatening the Pro-Chancellor not to step into the University of Lagos, and declaring him persona non grata.

“This violent trend is only a stock in trade of ASUU to cover up its own and has been witnessed in many universities where allegations of financial improprieties have been levelled against Vice-Chancellors. It would be recalled that the Autonomy Act was brought into being by acceding to the demands of ASUU.

“This Act has however caused ASUU to hijack Council with a majority of Council members being its members thereby rendering the Federal Government powerless in the running of the Universities. Only Universities with strong-willed Pro-Chancellors have a semblance of Councils. Others are at the whims and caprices of vice-chancellors once they have the support of ASUU.

“This is the reason for the loud complaints of ASUU where such strong-willed pro-chancellors exist. to allow the status-quo to remain would be sounding a death knell for the university system.”

President Muhammadu Buhari on Monday approved the composition of the Governing Council and appointment of Executive Secretary of the National Commission for Persons with Disabilities in line with the Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities (Prohibition) Act 2019.

According to a statement by Special Adviser to the President on Media and Publicity, Femi Adesina, according to the Act, the Commission shall be headed by a Part-Time Chairman and six Members who shall be Persons with Disabilities representing the geo-political zones of the federation subject to confirmation of the Senate for a four-year term of office in the first instance and may be reappointed for a second term of four years and no more.

The Executive Secretary, who shall be responsible to the Council for the implementation of the policies and administration of the daily affairs of the Commission, shall also be a Person with Disability with a five-year tenure in the first instance and may be reappointed for a second term and no more.

Below are the names, designations and geo-political zones of members of the Management of the Commission: Hon Dr Hussaini Suleiman Kangiwa – Chairman – North West; Oparaku Onyejelam Jaja – Member – South-East; Philomena Isioma Konwea – Member – South-South; Omopariola Busuyi Oluwasola – Member – South-West and Amina Rahma Audu – Member – North-West.

Others are Mrs Esther Andrew Awu – Member – North-Central, Abba Audu Ibrahim – Member – North-East and James David Lalu – Executive Secretary – North-Central.

The National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) says single ladies in the country might have to undergo drug tests before embarking on marriages.

Mohammed Mustapha Abdalla, NDLEA chairman, spoke on Friday during the destruction of illicit substances seized in Maiduguri, Borno state capital.

Abdalla said drug tests may have to be included in premarital screenings due to the increase in the rate of drug addiction among girls and married women across the country.

He also said the target of illicit trafficked drugs, which hitherto used to be among the male youthful population, was fast expanding to now include teenage girls, young women, and old married women.

“As an extension of the proposed Drugs Integrity Test Policy in the public service, the NDLEA is also considering partnering with religious leaders to make drug test a prerequisite for marriage in Churches and Mosques just as the case of HIV/AIDS and genotype test, the NDLEA boss said.

“We can no longer remain indifferent to the problems and refused to take responsibility in an effort to control drugs, we must come to term that drugs issue is a shared responsibility for all in the society.

“Government at all levels, community and religious leaders, parents, social workers, the media, youth organisations and policy makers should see it as a point of duty to come together and identify with our office efforts of combating drug abuse.”