Tag: Abortion

“Despite having two abortions, I don’t go around sleeping with sugar daddies”- Phyna brags

BBNaija season 7 winner, Ijeoma Otabor, aka Phyna, has revealed that her first pregnancy occurred at age 19, stressing that despite having two abortions, she does not go around sleeping with sugar daddies.

According to her, she is not ashamed of revealing her secrets about committing an abortion twice.

Recall that a few days ago, Phyna and a hard-die fan of Beauty Tukura clashed on Twitter. The troll took to the comment section of the reality star and tagged Beauty as a ‘mother’; a subtle shade to Phyna.

In the process of defending herself Phyna disclosed that although she has had two abortions, she does not go around forcing young men to sleep with her as their ‘favorite’ does.

Speaking about her clash with the troll in an interview, Phyna emphasized that she is not ashamed of her past.

Explaining the reason why she aborted two pregnancies, Phyna said her first pregnancy occurred at age 19, and couldn’t open up to her parents.

She further disclosed that her second pregnancy was due to her toxic relationship with her boyfriend.

In her words:” In my family as a whole, we are very open. People just read meaning to things and say whatever they want, I really do not care. I was just laughing at their responses to me because those that know me know me, I am an open book.

“I actually responded to that woman when she said “I can’t respond to you, you are an abortionist,” and then I said yes that I have committed abortions. It is fine how people want to see me, I am not ashamed of anything about myself. If I ever make a mistake, I own up to my mistakes.

“As for my reasons for taking abortion pills, if there are 100 women in Nigeria today, 98 have done abortions. So, no one should judge me. I was in a 12-year relationship then and I was so young. The first abortion was when I was 19; I couldn’t go home to tell my parents that I was pregnant at that age.

“And the two pregnancies were so early like two to three weeks that I could just use tablets. The second was when I was 24, and I had finished serving then. I was ready to keep it but the relationship was getting toxic. He abused me and always beat me up. I said to myself that I couldn’t do this anymore, so I took it out and that was how I ended the relationship.”

January 11, 2023
CDS calls for investigation into alleged military abortion programme

The Chief of Defence Staff, Gen. Lucky Irabor has called on the National Human Rights Commission to launch an independent investigation into allegation by Reuters of illegal abortion programme by the military.

Irabor made the call when he led principal staff officers of the Defence Headquarters on a visit to the Executive Secretary of the commission, Mr Tony Ojukwu on Friday in Abuja.

Reuters had alleged in a report that Nigeria’s military run a secret abortion programme in the country’s North East, terminating at least 10,000 pregnancies since 2013.

Irabor insisted that the allegation by Reuters was baseless and false, adding that the military had nothing to hide hence the need for an independent investigation to exonerate itself.

He said there was need for the commission to carry out such investigation in line with its responsibilities.

According to him, the armed forces as an establishment of the Federal Republic is bound by the Nigerian constitution to operate based on local and international laws.

This, he added, include international humanitarian laws and laws of armed conflicts as domesticated in Nigeria.

“And recognizing the place of the national Human Rights Commission and ensuring that all the activities of government and all its citizens and of course, inhabitants, including friends of Nigeria who are within our space conduct their affairs in line with the laws of the land.

“In recent times, there have been reports which alluded that the armed forces is involved in government programme of abortions in the northeast of Nigeria from 2013.

“And that report was published by Reuters and of course when we looked at it, we felt this is certainly not us and it does not indeed represent the professional standing of the armed forces of Nigeria.

“Where we have footprints of operations in line with the dictates of the constitution.

“We felt that perhaps there are some extra territorial powers that want to weaken the strength of the armed forces being at the forefront of the current engagements that seeks to bring peace to our land.

“And so some actions need to be taken but of course, being bound by law, being guided by laws, we’ve taken a look and we felt that the right establishment that should undertake investigation is the national Human Rights Commission.

“So it is in that light that I have come to formally inform you if perhaps you are not thinking about it that we as an armed force stand ready for any investigation, and I think in this case, the NHRC stands a good ground to carry out an investigation,” he said.

Irabor assured the commission that the military would grant it unfettered access to all its establishments across the country.

He also gave assurance that the personnel of the armed forces would be available to answer questions in the course of the investigation.

“We are doing this because we believe we have remained very transparent in our personal engagements and so we have nothing to fear.

“We have also indicated before now that the report is evil.

“We felt that since we are the crux of the allegation it is necessary for us to give you that assurance that we stand ready for you to carry out that investigation,” the CDS emphasised.

Responding, the Executive Secretary of NHRC, Ojukwu said the commission was established under the law to deal with all matters relating to human rights protection, promotion and enforcement in Nigeria.

He said the request of the CDS was in line with the determination of the commission to investigate the allegations because of its human rights implications.

“As you may be aware, the investigation process of the Commission must meet the International Human Rights standard required for this kind of investigation.

He said that the investigation will be public and open, transparent, and in accord with principle of fair hearing.

Ojukwu added that it will ensure accountability, non-discrimination and accommodate variety of interest.

“As we look forward to announcing further steps in the near future towards the constitution of the Panel of Investigation into the Reuters Report, please accept the warm regards of the National Human Rights Commission,” he said.

December 16, 2022
Why Lagos must not legalize abortion – By Jerry Okwuosa

I read with keen interest the advocacy of Dr. Abiola Akinyode-Afolabi writing on behalf of Women Advocates Research & Documentation Centre (WARDC) requesting for the legalization of abortion in Lagos. Her reason for this request is as follows:

“It gives women improved health-care services; sets guidelines on safe termination of pregnancies for legal indications; women have a right to their bodily integrity and to life; the guidelines are pushing to save women from preventable deaths and It will reduce maternal mortality”.

It is important to recall here that before the European union (EU) forced Ireland to legalize abortion a few years ago, Ireland and Chile have been two of the safest places in the World for pregnant mothers and their unborn children as they achieve lower maternal mortality rates (mmr) than even the United States, UK, France, Germany etc. W H O reports on mmr confirm a trend: countries with restricted abortion laws or who prohibit abortion out rightly have the lowest mmr in their regions. The WHO 2009 report informs that the nation with the lowest mmr in African is Mauritius whose laws are among the Continent’s most protective of the unborn. The report further shows how countries like Ethiopia that have decriminalized abortion in recent years in response to pressure have failed to lower their maternal death rates.

Ethiopia’s mmr is 48 times higher than Mauritius’. Similarly, the WHO statistics for the South East Asia region show that Nepal, where there is no restriction on abortion, has the region’s highest mmr. The lowest in the region is Sri Lanka, which has one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the world, with a rate 14 times lower than Nepal. It is not surprising therefore that Chile, which protects unborn life in its constitution is the country with the lowest mmr in South America and that the country with the highest mmr there is Guyana, with an mmr 30 times higher than Chile. Ironically, one of the two main justifications used in liberalizing Guyana’s law was to enhance the “attainment of safe motherhood” by eliminating deaths and complications associated with abortion. This is one of the arguments WARDC is using in Lagos. Evidence therefore abound that legalization of abortion in any country worsens its mmr. Check out the mmr of Ghana and Republic of South Africa before and after the legalization of abortion in those two African countries to confirm the evidence.

The Dublin Declaration (DD)

Unveiled at the International Symposium on Maternal Healthcare in Dublin Ireland in 2012, and has since been signed by over 2,000 medical experts, the Dublin Declaration (DD) states: “As experienced practitioners and researchers in obstetrics and gynaecology, we affirm that direct abortion – the purposeful destruction of the unborn child – is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman. We uphold that there is a fundamental difference between abortion and necessary medical treatments that are carried out to save the life of the mother, even if such treatment results in the loss of life of her unborn child. We confirm that the prohibition of abortion does not affect, in any way, the availability of optimal care to pregnant women.”

In the light of the above declaration, what then is the basis of WARDC’s claim that the STPG give women improved health-care services whereas the medical experts through DD “confirm that the prohibition of abortion does not affect, in any way, the availability of optimal care to pregnant women”.

As for WARDC’s assertion that the document in question sets guidelines on safe termination of pregnancies for legal indications, we argue that the so-called “safe” termination (abortion) of any pregnancy is an illusion because every abortion kills a baby and harms the mother, so how can such a procedure be declared safe AND that there are no legal indications for abortion in Nigeria because abortion remains illegal here.

Yes, it is only when they are not pregnant that women have a right to their bodily integrity. Once a woman becomes pregnant either by choice, accident, rape or incest, she can no longer lay claim to the integrity of her body because she no longer maintains one body but two bodies. As regards the right to life, this is always taken care of – whether or not a woman is pregnant – by doctors being trained (especially in countries where abortion is not legal) to see two patients and two lives (mother and child) in every pregnant woman that needs medical care.

WARDC’s claim that the guidelines are pushing to save women from preventable deaths is a false claim and a misrepresentation of facts because pregnancy is not a disease which if not treated may result in the death of the mother and fertility is not a curse but a blessing most African women desire. As the DD makes abundantly clear, “there is a fundamental difference between the lifesaving treatment a woman may need during pregnancy, and abortion, which is the direct and intentional taking of the life of the unborn child”.

Finally, WARDC claims that the STPG will reduce maternal mortality. Even if this claim were to be true, its immediate effect will be to increase infant mortality – abortions kill babies -. But this is unacceptable because human life has equal value; the mother’s life is not more valuable than the baby’s. If this claim is true it leaves the wrong impression that God blesses women with childbearing only to let them die of a disease called pregnancy. The claim is actually false because statistics show that abortion contributes 11% of maternal deaths in Nigeria i.e. if our women do not attempt abortion, 11% more of them will be alive to cuddle their new born babies. As a nation, we should, while enforcing the ban on abortion, focus attention on the other causes of death (89%) of our pregnant mothers as these include Haemorrhage (23%); Infection (17%); Obstructed labour, Eclampsia, Sepsis and Anemia (11% each) and Others (5%). Through the Dublin Declaration, obstetricians, gynecologists, neonatologists, pediatricians and other doctors from across the specialties of medicine and surgery confidently testify that “a country does not need legalized abortion in order to preserve maternal health and reduce maternal mortality” but here is WARDC misleading us to believe that legalized abortion will reduce maternal mortality. A principal signatory to the DD, Dr. Eoghan de Faoite, advises that “The first step towards turning today’s society against abortion, is to show it that legal abortion is not needed in maternal healthcare, that it is not needed to save women’s lives and that banning abortion does not bring about a rise in maternal mortality”.

WARDC and its culture of death co-promoters should listen to the voice of reason – pregnancy is not a disease and fertility is not a curse – and to the medical experts who took the time and trouble to educate the world by issuing the Dublin Declaration and see abortion for what it really is – a killer of innocent unborn babies and does enormous damage to their mothers – and work to restore the culture of life for which Africans are well known. If it is any consolation, their arguments are sound only if what is inside a pregnant mother is not a baby. It is only fair to state that a baby once conceived has a right to be born because the right to light is fundamental and inalienable.

Engr. Jerry Okwuosa.
Director-General, Project for Human Development (PHD)

September 6, 2022
Re: Lagos State’s Abortion Guidelines (LSAG) – By Jerry Okwuosa

By Jerry Okwuosa

In their rejoinder to Sonnie Ekwowusi’s article on the Lagos State’s Abortion Guidelines recently published in your esteemed paper, the Nigerian Feminist Forum (FNN) set out to deliberately misinform the Lagos State government and Nigerians on the legality of abortion in Nigeria. Yes, there were indeed several spirited efforts to legalize abortion in Nigeria under several guises which failed woefully but efforts to keep trying have continued, hence these topical LSAG.

The 5th Commandment of the Decalogue in the Christian Bible commands: Thou shall not kill (unborn babies, children and adults) and there are so many repetitions of this command in the Bible that NFF’s assertion that the Bible is silent on abortion exposes them as blatant liars. Quran 17: 31 stipulates “slay not your children (born and unborn) fearing a fall of poverty…lo, the slaying of them is a greater sin” and NFF missed this too. Nigerian cultures abhor the killing of unborn babies and Nigerians’ love children has made the legalization of abortion a near impossibility.

The NFF concluded its rejoinder with this: “To Mr. Ekwowusi and others like him who continue to misinform the public, we must state unequivocally: abortion is healthcare, and abortion is a human right”. Our response to this is simple: the opposite is the truth so we confidently reaffirm that ABORTION IS NOT HEALTH CARE and ABORTION IS NOT HUMAN RIGHT, because if it is either or both, Roe v Wade would not have been overturned by the US Supreme Court on June 24, 2022, after 49+ years and 63 million American babies lives wasted; 30% of them blacks. How could the killing of an unborn child ever constitute the human right of anybody? The life of any baby is his/her inalienable right, hence it is never legitimate or right to eliminate human life to resolve any problem. No, never!

As regards the over flogged issue of legalizing abortion for cases of sexual assault; rape, incest etc. raised by the NFF, we wish to remind them that even in such unfortunate instances, the baby remains ignorant of and innocent of the crime committed by his/her father and should not therefor be killed for the criminal act of a father s/he may never meet. Also, who among us will ever offer to suffer the death penalty in the place of his/her biological father who s/he knows, loves and cherishes? None! But by legalizing abortion for cases of sexual assault, we are forcing unborn babies to suffer the death penalty in the place of their fathers (criminals). We need to reconsider this injustice and condemn the abortion of babies conceived in sexual assaults.

ABORTION IS NOT HEALTH CARE either: it cannot be for the baby who gets killed and it is not for the mother who suffers dozens of side effects ranging from sterility, breast cancer to death. Note well that The Dublin Declaration On Abortion of 2012 (DD) states that “The purposeful destruction of the unborn in the termination of pregnancy is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman”. DD has been signed by thousands of specialist/expert medical practitioners from all over the world and remains unchallenged to date.

The NFF misinforms us that “In Nigeria, abortion is allowed in circumstances where the continuation of the pregnancy threatens the life of the pregnant woman…” that “The guidelines do not represent new legislation or the ‘legalization’ of abortion” and that “They simply serve to operationalize existing legislation on abortion…” These claims unfortunately assume that abortion is legal in Nigeria, but our Legal experts tell us it is not and so if abortion were ever to be legalized in our country on the assumption that pregnancy threatens the life of a woman, then the Dublin Declaration (DD) will surely make nonsense of that piece of legislation. Now, if “The abortion guidelines do not represent new legislation or the ‘legalization’ of abortion “as claimed by the NFF, what are they if not legalization of abortion through the back door?

The NFF informs us that “In 2011, the Lagos State House of Assembly updated the Criminal Code, providing for abortion…”, that “In 2015, the Violence Against Persons Prohibition Act was passed, protecting the rights of gender-based violence survivors to receive comprehensive medical services…, that “The guidelines were modelled after the National Guidelines for Legal Indications prepared by the Federal Ministry of Health….” And asks how Mr. Ekwowusi could have a better input than all these experts who worked on this guideline over the years. Yes, Mr. Ekwowusi can claim to have better input than all of these experts because the Federal and Lagos State Guidelines on abortion are illegal because they are in conflict with the existing laws. Simple!

As for the Maputo Protocol, which Nigeria ratified in 2004, it cannot be enforced in Nigeria because it is not domesticated in Nigeria.

The NFF in stating that “Yet, despite this context and Nigeria’s restrictive law on abortion, more than a million women and pregnant people induce abortions every year in Nigeria…. This shows that Nigerian women are not culturally opposed to abortion, as they clearly partake in the interest of their lives” correctly reflects our own estimate of Nigeria’s scandalous maternal mortality figures but it gives the wrong reasons for it and therefor draws the conclusions that support its murderous causes. This is why. In Dr. Regina Akosa’s write-up in the Guardian of Sunday 15/7/07, which to date stands unchallenged, there are four broad groups of causes of maternal deaths in Nigeria: medical, socio cultural and economic, health services and reproductive factors. Under medical causes fall: Haemorrhage (23%); Infection (17%); Obstructed labour, Eclampsia, Sepsis, Abortion and Anaemia (11% each) and Others (5%). From these figures alone, 11% of Nigeria’s pregnant mothers will not die if they are law-abiding by not attempting abortion, but NFF advises them otherwise and turns round to blame what it tags “unsafe” abortion. Note that 89% of maternal mortality cases in Nigeria relate to issues our governments can impact positively. Will they? Never! because the wives of politicians and top government functionaries give birth abroad.

In June 2009, when the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights requested for information relevant to a thematic study on “Preventable maternal mortality and morbidity and human rights”, it received a report on WHO studies which show that the top killers of women in childbirth are bleeding, hypertensive disorders, anemia and sepsis etc. Abortion – including “spontaneous abortion” or miscarriage – is tenth on the list and accounts for 5% of deaths. The paper says “it is scientifically, medically, and morally unacceptable to divert resources from what is really needed to save women’s lives: skilled birth attendants and emergency obstetric care” and invest such resources in efforts to legalize abortion. Considering these local and international medical reports, there is really no justification for the relentless pressure mounted on Nigeria to legalize abortion. Abortion is the killing of an innocent unborn baby (murder) and murder should never be legalized. Abortion is intrauterine baby lynching.

We are sure that many of Nigeria’s pregnant women will not attempt abortion if they do not believe NFF’s lies viz: “Abortion, when carried out using a method recommended by WHO, appropriate to the pregnancy duration, and by someone with the necessary skills, is very safe, even safer than childbirth”. The NFF speaks of “necessary skills”, but does any parent send his child to medical school to specialize in abortion and acquire the “necessary skills” to kill babies against the law of the land? The NFF declares that abortion is very safe, even safer than childbirth. And we ask: Is pregnancy a disease? Never! With the NFF around and active, there is little wonder that maternal deaths and abortions are on the increase in Nigeria. They promote abortifacient contraceptives use and in collusion with the Federal Ministry of Health are struggling to increase contraceptive prevalence from 13.1% to 30% in Nigeria asap, so we can only expect more back street abortions because the confirmed failure rates of these contraceptives remain high: 3% -15%). The plan is to introduce contraceptives to our children as early as possible because everybody is having sex (a big lie) but because No Contraceptive Can Guarantee 100% Effectiveness (All manufactures accept this fact) there will surely be failures: pregnancies, STDs & HIV, emotionally and psychologically devastated young romantics and of course the mortal sin of fornication. So the abortion providers/ “experts” like Marie Stopes International can step in and harvest their millions of blood money.

Locked onto the World Health Organization (WHO), we at Project for Human Development have traversed the world on this issue and the WHO reports are basically the same: countries with restricted abortion laws or who prohibit abortion out rightly have the lowest maternal mortality rates overall. We are yet to come across an instance in the WHO reports where a country legalized abortion and her maternal mortality figures came tumbling down so we have no reason to believe that Nigeria’s case will be different.

Note that in the pro-abortion world, the word “safe” has lost its ordinary meaning. A “safe” abortion is any abortion performed in a country where abortion is legal and an “unsafe” abortion is one performed in a country that has refused to legalize abortion. Every abortion kills a child/children and every abortion harms the mother in ways ranging from sterility to even death. Abortion harms the father of the child, the child’s siblings and siblings-to-be, grandparents, community, country and even the entire world because nobody can tell what an unborn child could become. On the other hand, every pregnancy changes a woman permanently; whether she gives birth, aborts or miscarries because every child deposits its embryonic stem cells in his/her mother; whether she delivers, miscarries or aborts. Once conceived therefore a child has the right to be born as there is no way of completely deleting a child, whose soul (for Christians) lives forever.

Engr. Jerry Okwuosa, DG, Project for Human Development (PHD), 24 Bishop Crowther Street, Surulere, Lagos. jerryokwuosa@yahoo.com. 0703 137 7740.

About Project for Human Development (PHD)

PHD is a pro-life, pro-family, trans-political, trans-religious NGO registered with the CAC. We endeavor to hold the moral high ground, act as the moral policeman of society and speak truth to power in order to restore the culture of life for which Nigeria was known until recently.

July 17, 2022
“Re: Legalization of abortion in Lagos State”: A Rebuttal – By Sonnie Ekwowusi

I would like to thank the Nigerian Feminist Forum (NFF) for joining issues with me in its very thoughtful and illuminating rejoinder entitled: “Re: Legalization of abortion in Lagos State”. For the avoidance of doubt and for the benefit of those who have not been following the recent development in the abortion debate in our country, three weeks ago the Lagos State government, contrary to the law, dramatically released what it dubbed abortion guidelines in Lagos State, that is, the guidelines for termination of pregnancy or killing of unborn babies in Lagos State. The release of the aforesaid abortion guidelines caused no small stir in the Lagos polity. Apart from triggering off a series of discourses in the media, it was trailed by peaceful demonstrations in Lagos and Abuja. For example, displaying different colourful placards inscribed with attractive inscriptions: “Say No to abortion”, “Abortion Kills Women”, “Abortion Kills Babies”, the members of Civil Society organization staged a peaceful protest at Alausa, Lagos. The protesters, most of whom were young girls aged 10-18, danced joyously as they marched through the block of buildings of the Lagos State Ministries en route to the Lagos State House of Assembly before finally returning to the esplanade of the Ikeja Shoprite from whence they initially took off. Aside the protests, notable stakeholders in Lagos State including the Catholic Archbishop of Lagos issued public statements stating that they were not consulted in the making of the impromptu abortion guidelines, and, that besides the guidelines were antithetical to the political, moral, cultural, religious and philosophical convictions of the Nigerian people.

On my part, I penned an essay with the title: Legalization of Abortion in Lagos State. In that essay, I stated, inter alia, that the abortion directives fragrantly violate sections 145, 146, 147 and 201 of the Criminal Laws of Lagos State (as amended in 2011); sections 228, 229,230, 297, 309, 328, of the Criminal Code Act CAP C38 (and their equivalent provisions in the Penal Code); sections 3,4, and 17 of the Child Rights Act 2003; Child’s Right Law of Lagos State 2015: sections 17 and 33 of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution; Articles, 3, 4 and 5 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights; Preamble to the 1990 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) (ratified and adopted by Nigeria). Consequently, I prayed that in the interest of justice the aforesaid directives should be rescinded.

Apparently peeved by the facts contained in my said essay, the NFF had last week joined issues with me in their rejoinder entitled: “Re: Legalization of abortion in Lagos State”. It is noteworthy that the members of the NFF are pro-abortionists and pro-choicers. They propagate, for instance, that a married woman in her matrimonial home can procure an abortion with or without the consent of her husband because, as far as NFF is concerned, women are the owners of their bodies, and, therefore men have no right to dictate to women how to use their bodies. Before faulting the said rejoinder of the NFF, let me quickly state that Lagos State has suspended the aforesaid abortion guidelines. I must thank the Lagos State government for its prompt display of fatherly maturity and understanding in this matter.

Contrary to the view of the NFF, the guidelines were not anchored within the ambit of the laws of the land. They were ultra vires the laws and therefore were null and void. In my aforesaid essay, I stated that by virtue of the combined effects of sections 145, 146, 147 and 201 of the Criminal Laws of Lagos State (as amended in 2011); sections 228, 229,230, 297, 309, 328, of the Criminal Code Act CAP C38 (and their equivalent provisions in the Penal Code); sections 3,4, and 17 of the Child Rights Act 2003; Child’s Right Law of Lagos State 2015: sections 17 and 33 of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution; Articles, 3, 4 and 5 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights; Preamble to the 1990 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) (ratified and adopted by Nigeria) abortion is completely illegal in both Lagos State and in Nigeria as a whole without any exception under which abortion could be procured. I further submitted that section 201 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State which is in pari materia with section 297 of the Criminal Act is not an exception permitting abortion in Lagos State, and, that even if it is an exception it would, by virtue of the doctrine of covering the field, be inconsistent with the provisions of the Criminal Act and other Federal laws, and, to the extent of that inconsistency would be null and void.

It is amazing that the phrase: “killing the unborn in order to save the life of the mother” has somehow become a convenient cliché or a dubious catchphrase or subterfuge which the NFF and the abortionists always latch on or hide under to advocate for the perpetuation the heinous crime of abortion. Over the years they have been deceiving the unwary public into believing that abortion is permissible in Nigeria when the life of the pregnant woman is threatened. But this is completely unfounded under our law. As I have stated above, there is no such exception or provision both in the Lagos Criminal Law (as amended in 2011) and in the Criminal Act and that even if such exception exists in Lagos State it is inconsistent with the Federal laws and to the extent of that inconsistency becomes null and void.

Sharing her own medical experience on this matter, prominent Nigerian public health practitioner, Dr. Regina Akosa, writes that even in situations in which the life of the mother is threatened, it is not permitted to kill the unborn child because such murderous act may still not save the life of the mother. According to her, “when there is the medical need to separate an unborn baby from the mother because the latter’s life is threatened, say, in the case of eclampsia, every effort should be made to protect the life of the unborn baby and its mother. In the process of doing so the unborn baby could survive, but even if it doesn’t survive, the process cannot be termed as an abortion because the doctor did not deliberately intend to kill the baby. Abortion is the deliberate act with the intention of killing a baby. That is wrong because doctors are enjoined under the Hippocratic Oath to save human life not to terminate or take away human life. No medical doctor should deliberately intend to kill the unborn baby under any circumstance, not even when the life of the mother is threatened because the doctor is not even sure that the mother would be alive after killing the unborn baby. Abortion is neither a health care nor a human right not even when the life of the mother is threatened. By virtue of the Hippocratic Oath, it is the job of the Obstetrician and Gynecologist to save the life of both the mother and the unborn baby at all times. If a pregnant woman is sick of cancer, for instance, and wants to be treated even though she is pregnant, she has the right to be treated for cancer. But what the doctor must not do is to abort the woman’s baby in order to treat her for cancer. The baby must not be aborted. If the baby dies in the process of treating the woman for cancer, so be it, but in most cases the baby does survive. The Society for Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Nigeria (SOGON) is notorious in Nigeria for always pressuring the government to legalize abortion in Nigeria. I recall that in 2006 Senator Daisy Danjuma sponsored a Bill to set up the Institute of Reproductive Health in Nigeria, which in actual fact was a cover up for legalization of abortion in Nigeria. Because we all knew at that time that reproductive health was another euphemism for abortion, we all opposed the Bill and the Bill was defeated at the National Assembly”

I agree with Dr. Akosa. SOGON is heavily funded by foreign pro-abortionists. It has been pressurizing the government to legalize abortion under the fabrication that many Nigerian women are dying because they lack access to safe, legal abortion. I am not a medical doctor but common sense tells me that abortion is not food or medicine that Nigerian women badly need in order to stay alive. But abortionists argue that rape and incest victims and women whose lives are in jeopardy badly need abortion to survive. But cases of rape and incest are very rare cases. And even if they are not rare cases all rape and incest cases do not automatically result in pregnancy. The truth of the matter is that about 98% of all abortions committed in Nigeria are committed for other reasons unconnected with rape or incest or “circumstances where the continuation of the pregnancy threatens the life of the pregnant woman” as the NFF wants us to believe. 98% of female abortion seekers in Nigeria are unmarried young girls who willingly and knowingly got entangled in the complex web of pelvic issues and have resolved to abort their pregnancies without the knowledge of their parents. For example, two years ago, the Lagos Police raided the notorious Marie Stopes abortion Clinic located in Surulere, Lagos. During the raid, the Police discovered the abortion files containing the particulars of the under-aged girls who had been aborted by the Clinic. On being quizzed by the Police on why the clinic was committing abortion on the under-aged girls without the consent of their parents, Dr. Bernard, the abortion doctor on duty on that fateful day told the Police that the clinic was not aborting the girls but merely doing “family planning” with them. In response, the Police further queried and said to him: “How can you be doing “family planning” with unmarried young girls?. It was Eleke the bird that said that since men have learnt to shoot without missing he has learnt to fly without perching. Analogously, since abortion is illegal in Nigeria, and, since the word “abortion” is repugnant in our cultural and religious setting, Nigeria abortionists have deftly learnt to promote abortion under euphemisms such as “family planning”, “unsafe abortion”, “post-abortion care”, “family health”, “interruption of pregnancy” et cetera. So whenever you hear the Federal Ministry of Health, Abuja, talking about “family planning” be assured that they are talking about abortion.

On February 7 2009 The Vanguard newspaper hit the newsstand with a screaming headline: “70-abortion-a-day doctor arrested. “A Lagos-based medical doctor got what he did not bargain for as a new year package when a team of detectives…swooped on his hospital…based on information earlier received about the doctor’s criminal activities in the hospital situated in the densely Orile area of Lagos State”. The name of the hospital where the doctor was criminally killing babies was Rotunda Hospital, a tall-four-storey building once standing adjacent to Orile Police Station. The doctor’s clients, or, sorry, his victims, were mostly Nigerian secondary school girls including young girls from Cotonuo, Togo and other countries sharing boundaries with Nigeria. The doctor charged between N1, 500 to N5, 000 to abort various degrees of pregnancies. For example, he charged N5, 000 to burst open the womb inhabiting a 5-month old pregnancy. From his hospital diary, the police discovered, to their consternation, that he performed 11 abortions Christmas Day, 25 December 2008. On January 1, 2009 he started the New Year by performing 9 abortions. His administrative secretary confessed that he is “stupendously rich as a result of proceeds from procuring abortion and had always ‘settled security agents’ with huge sums of money in order to divert their attention from his criminal activities”. Sources said the girls arrested in the hospital confessed that they throng the hospital because the doctor is reputed to “successfully abort pregnancies at any stage of growth…”. The Assistant Inspector General of Police Mohammed Abubakar who ordered for the doctor’s arrest said that the doctor was wasting humanity

The NFF argued that the suspended Lagos abortion guidelines have the imprimatur of SOGON, with support from the Population Reference Bureau (PRB). They also said that the guidelines were modeled after the National Guidelines of the Federal Ministry of Health, Abuja. And so what? Nobody is above the law of the land. Neither the abortionists nor SOGON nor PRB nor the Federal Ministry of Health, Abuja is above the law of the land. In any case, the directives are not laws. They do not have the force of law. Therefore nobody is bound to obey them. I had argued in my earlier essay that directives or policies that are in violation of the existing laws should neither be obeyed nor enforced. The Federal Ministry of Health, Abuja is a big scandal. It is in dire need of purge. Nigeria is the first country in the world with the highest number of people lacking access to basic primary health care. Cancer epidemics have erupted in Nigeria. Nigeria’s life expectancy has plummeted to 35 years. In various parts of Nigeria, the ordinary primary health care system for preventing preventable diseases such as polio, cholera, and measles is virtually non-existent. Medical infrastructure and equipment are in shambles in Nigeria. Yet the Federal Ministry, Abuja is busy channeling all its resources in promoting safe-sex for kids, abortion and population control in Nigeria.

The current Minster of Health Dr. Osagie Ehanire, who is the brother of Senator Daisy Danjuma, has recently, under the guise of “family planning (FP) services” or “Family Planning 2030” or “sexual reproductive health”, launched a comprehensive abortion, infanticide and contraception national policies and programs in Nigeria aimed at killing Nigerian babies and children. In August 2012 Federal government said it was spending a total of $11.3 million to purchase condoms for ‘safe sex.’ In April 2011, the then Health Minister, Prof Chukwu flagged off an aggressive free distribution of contraceptives (including hormone and injectable contraceptives) in all public health centres and institutions in Nigeria. The Federal Government planned to spend N915 million in 2017 on procuring contraceptive commodities for safe sex. The then Health Professor Isaac Adewole announced in July 2017 that Nigeria, in collaboration with its partners and the private sector, would spend an additional $4.3 million on contraceptive procurement to achieve a modern contraceptive distribution rate of 27 percent among all women by 2020. He also stated that Nigeria was committed to increasing its annual allocation for contraceptives in each state to $4 million. At the request of Prof Adewole, the Federal Government announced in January 2018 that $1 million had been set aside for the free distribution of contraceptives to improve the quality of safe sex among Nigerian adults and teenagers. The preceding reveals the vast sums of money spent on promoting safe sex at the expense of people’s actual health problems. So why do we fail to get our priorities right in Nigeria? It defies belief that at a time when malnutrition and kwashiorkor are wreaking havoc on the citizenry; a time when medical statistics show that 2,300 under-five children and 145 pregnant women die in Nigeria every day, the Federal Ministry of Health, which was established to develop health policies and programs that will, among other things, strengthen the country’s health system, has chosen to conspire with foreign agencies such as the World Health Organization. In addition, the Federal Ministry of Health, Abuja provides the Nigerian public with IUCD, postinor 2, Lo-femenal, Norplant, suction tubes, Vasectomy y (male sterilization), tubal ligation (female sterilization), and other procedures. Shame to the Federal Ministry of Health, Abuja !.

In case the NFF does not know, although the Maputo Protocol has been ratified by Nigeria it does not have the force of law because it has not been domesticated in Nigeria by virtue of section 12 (1) of the 1999 Constitution. In the locus classicus Abacha V Fawehinmi, the Justices of the Supreme Court held that an international treaty or regional treaty entered into by the government of Nigeria does not have a binding force in Nigeria until created into law by the National Assembly by virtue of section 12(1) of the Constitution. In the aforesaid case, Justice Michael Ekundayo Ogundare JSC (of the blessed memory) unequivocally stated that the African Charter is not superior to the Constitution. Consequently in the event of a conflict between the African Charter and our 1999 Constitution, the latter prevails to the extent of the inconsistency. Justice Okay Achike JSC (of the blessed memory) minced no words in stating that “unincorporated treaties cannot change the aspect of the Nigerian law even though Nigeria is a party to those treaties. Indeed unincorporated treaties have no effects upon the rights and duties of citizens either at Common law or Statute law” .To Justice Akintola Olufemi Ejiwunmi JSC, CON, (of the blessed memory) “If such treaty is not incorporated into our municipal law, our domestic courts have no jurisdiction to construe or apply its provisions…”. These pronouncements of the law Lords are in agreement with the position of the law in Nigeria on this matter. A contrary pronouncement would lead to a travesty of the Constitution.

Maputo protocol was hurriedly ratified on 16 December 2004 by a bunch of unknowledgeable Nigerian officials probably over a glass of champagne without knowledge of the import of the protocol. The National Assembly is empowered by the constitution to make good laws for the country. Therefore since the Maputo Protocol is a complete break with the values of African civilization, the National Assembly cannot proceed to domesticate it let alone Nigerian courts “respecting it”. Maputo Protocol is incompatible with African regional instruments such as the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights domesticated in Nigeria and applied by the Supreme Court in the case of Abacha V Fawehinmi. Specifically Article 14 (2)(c) of the Maputo Protocol cited by NFF is incompatible with the language of African values, and in particular with the language of African Charter which upholds the human rights of both the child and the mother. Therefore Maputo Protocol is unacceptable and must not be domesticated in Nigeria.

Contrary to the view of the NFF, Muslims, in principle, are against abortion (Quran 17:31 stipulates: “slay not your children, fearing a fall of poverty, we shall provide for them and for you, LO the slaying of them is greater sin”) although some Muslims believe that abortion can be committed at the early stage of pregnancy. Of course, the Ten Commandments and the Bible condemn abortion. But above all, the law “thou shall not kill” is a natural law written in every one’s heart. It is a natural law which every rational person, be he a Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, atheist, Marxist, internet free-thinker, juju worshipper, agnostic, animist etc applying his/her natural intellect comes to grasp and appreciates by his/her own effort. St. Thomas Aquinas, Hugo Grotus, Sophocles Antigone and St. Augustine of Hippo and others of the Natural Law School argued that natural law constituted the basis for good ordering of the society. Abortion destroys the good ordering of society. Abortion is murder. Murder is murder. Whether the victim is a vulnerable child in the womb crushed to death by the doctor or a 45-year old politician killed by a bandit, it is the same murder. And we cannot be advocates of the human rights of adults and feign ignorance of the human rights of the most vulnerable unborn child.

I am surprised that after reading my earlier essay the NFF is still quibbling with the phrases “safe abortion” and “unsafe abortion”. As I said in my aforesaid earlier essay: “Safe-abortion” is not only an oxymoron: it is a medical impossibility since every abortion is always unsafe for the unborn baby because it kills the unborn baby. The notion “unsafe-abortion” is also misleading because it implies that some abortions done by competent medical doctors are “safe” or without risks. This is a big lie. All abortions carry serious risks for the aborted woman regardless of the quality of medical care employed. If the abortion kills the child how can they be talking about “safe-abortion”?. More importantly, abortion is a crime in Nigeria. Therefore you cannot modify the crime of abortion with the prefix “safe” in the same way you cannot modify stealing with the prefix “safe”. For example, you cannot say “safe-stealing”

Perhaps the biggest blunder in the rejoinder of the NFF is its assertion that maternal deaths in Nigeria can only be curtailed by giving Nigerian women access to safe, affordable abortion. I have never heard a more illogical assertion. With due respect, medical experts have ceaselessly maintained that the main cause of high maternal deaths in Nigeria is lack of access to acceptable and affordable primary, secondary and tertiary health care system; lack of drugs, lack of access to skilled birth attendants; lack of consumables, medical equipment, poor referral linkages in our hospitals; poor transportation and general lack of access to basic emergency obstetrical care associated with save birth in Nigeria. For example, severe bleeding (hemorrhaging), during birth and after birth accounts for about 44% of maternal deaths in Nigeria. So, what Nigerian women need for survival is access to well-equipped affordable Nigerian hospitals, not access to abortion. I hope I am understood.

All said, I can understand why the Nigerian abortionists are putting so much pressure on the government to legalize abortion despite the fact that the U.S Supreme Court has recently upturned ROE V WADE. The abortion industry in Nigeria is now a multi-billion dollar industry. This is why SOGON, Federal Ministry of Health, Abuja and other pro-abortion persons and institutions are waxing stronger and stronger in the industry. They want money, quick money. But that is blood money. Blood money kills.

July 15, 2022
RE: Legalization of abortion in Lagos State by Sonnie Ekwowusi

Letter to the Editor: On Lagos State’s new abortion guidelines

In an article published by The News Guru entitled Legalization of abortion in Lagos State, author Sonnie Ekwowusi urges Lagos State Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu to “withdraw the abortion directives” in the recently-released Lagos State Guidelines on Safe Termination of Pregnancy for Legal Indications. He argues that the guidelines cannot be enforced because they would be inconsistent with the existing legal and policy framework of Nigeria and Lagos State on abortion. He suggests that the guidelines effectively legalises abortion in Lagos State.

Mr. Ekwowusi is either misinforming the public or is himself misinformed, and it is dangerous to give a platform to someone who seeks to deliberately misinform the public. The guidelines do not represent new legislation or the ‘legalization’ of abortion. They simply serve to operationalize existing legislation on abortion in Nigeria and update the standards for the provision of care within the ambit of the criminal law of Lagos State. Hence, they are completely consistent with existing legal and policy frameworks.

In Nigeria, abortion is allowed in circumstances where the continuation of the pregnancy threatens the life of the pregnant woman. Otherwise, it is criminalized. Revision of penal and criminal laws in Nigeria, however, can be carried out at the State level. In 2011, the Lagos State House of Assembly updated the Criminal Code, providing for abortion to save the life and protect the physical health of the woman. Meanwhile, in 2015, the Violence Against Persons Prohibition (VAPP) Act was passed, protecting the rights of gender-based violence survivors to receive comprehensive medical services.

In 2018, the development of the Lagos State Guidelines began with the ‘Safe Engage Project’ led by the Lagos State Ministry of Health and hosted by the Society for Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Nigeria (SOGON), with support from the Population Reference Bureau (PRB). The guidelines were modelled after the National Guidelines for Legal Indications prepared by the Federal Ministry of Health and designed to provide guidance to medical practitioners and other stakeholders on the grounds on which abortion. Mr. Ekwowusi cannot claim to have better input than all of these experts who worked on this guideline over the years.

Such grounds for allowing abortion are in keeping with the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa, also known as the Maputo Protocol, which Nigeria ratified in 2004. Article 14 (2) (c) of the Maputo Protocol urges all ratifying countries to “protect the reproductive rights of women by authorizing medical abortion in cases of sexual assault, rape, incest, and where the continued pregnancy endangers the mental and physical health of the mother or the life of the mother or the fetus”.

Mr. Ekwowusi repeatedly uses children’s rights and cites the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), which Nigeria has also ratified, to argue that provision of abortion is tantamount to the murder of children. Meanwhile, the Committee on the Rights of the Child has made clear distinctions on the legal identity of children and fetuses by ruling on at least three occasions.

Mr. Ekwowusi invokes the religious and cultural context of Nigeria in his appeal to have the new Lagos State Guidelines withdrawn. However, he neglects to mention that abortion is permissible in Islam to save the life of the mother, while the bible is completely silent and does not prevent abortion. Yet, despite this context and Nigeria’s restrictive law on abortion, more than a million women and pregnant people induce abortions every year in Nigeria; this number represents one in seven pregnancies ending in abortion. This shows that Nigerian women are not culturally opposed to abortion, as they clearly partake in the interest of their lives.

While Mr. Ekwowusi correctly admits that “abortion is a medical procedure”, he over-emphasizes the health risks associated with having a safe and legal abortion. Abortion, when carried out using a method recommended by WHO, appropriate to the pregnancy duration, and by someone with the necessary skills, is very safe, even safer than childbirth. But when such conditions are not satisfied, an abortion may be classified as an unsafe abortion. Hence, the use of safe or unsafe is not as arbitrary as Mr. Ekwowusi suggests.

For a country that is ranked as having the second-largest burden of maternal mortality in the world, a more proactive stance on ensuring access to safe abortion is much welcome. Maternal mortality as a result of unsafe abortions are suffered more by women living in rural areas, younger women, women with little or no education, and poor women. These deaths could be prevented by allowing access to safe abortion. No woman should compromise her physical or mental health from conditions that can be prevented or addressed.

The Lagos State Guidelines are also timely as it comes on the heels of the updated World Health Organization (WHO) Guidelines on Safe Abortion, which recommends the full decriminalization of abortion and repeal of laws and regulations restricting access to abortion. According to the WHO guidelines, restrictive laws do not reduce the need and demand for abortion; these only delays the provision of care or lead women to seek out unsafe methods of abortion.

While Nigeria’s abortion laws are a far leap from WHO policy recommendations, the Lagos State Guidelines represent an important step in recognizing how restrictive laws on abortion result in confusion among service providers and stall effective implementation at appropriate levels of care.

The presence of clear guidelines will help ensure that service providers can provide care according to appropriate healthcare standards and best practices and decrease the incidence of preventable death and disability.

To Mr. Ekwowusi and others like him who continue to misinform the public, we must state unequivocally: abortion is healthcare, and abortion is a human right.

About the Nigerian Feminist Forum

The Nigerian Feminist Forum (NFF) is a public policy forum that brings together Nigerian feminists. It is an ideological and political space, that is made up of individuals and organizations located both in Nigeria and the diaspora, who are committed to challenging and dismantling patriarchal oppressions that perpetuate gender inequality. The NFF creates a space for women, organizations, and individuals to build formal and informal networks, organizations, personal friendships, and collective feminist energies.

The NFF is guided by the African Feminist Charter. Read the charter here; http://bit.ly/3qSXob0

July 9, 2022
BREAKING: Gov Sanwo-Olu suspends Lagos abortion guidelines

Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu of Lagos State has directed the suspension of the state’s guidelines on safe termination of pregnancy.

Prof. Akin Abayomi, the State Commissioner for Health made the disclosure in a statement on Thursday in Lagos.

Abayomi noted that the guidelines had generated immense public interest which necessitated escalating it to the Governor.

He said that the governor advised further sensitisation of the public and key stakeholders to ensure a clearer understanding of the objectives of the guidelines.

“To this end, we are suspending the implementation of these guidelines in the meantime for the Executive Council to deliberate on this matter and ensure adequate public sensitisation and stakeholder engagement to reach a consensus required for a successful guideline development,” he said.

According to him, the ministry is seeking different methods to eliminate illegal abortions and ensure that a mother does not die at childbirth, thereby disrupting an entire family unit.

The commissioner said that illegal abortions and high risk pregnancies leading to unresolvable complications rank high among the several factors that contribute to maternal mortality.

“In this regard, it became imperative to examine, in keeping with existing National and State laws and policies, if there are indeed justifications and medical reasons to offer abortion to a woman whose life is threatened by a pregnancy,” he said.

He noted that following this, the guideline was developed over four years through painstaking work by experts in Law and in Obstetrics and Gynaecology.

Abayomi noted that the guidelines focus was on creating the opportunity to reduce maternal mortality in line with existing laws.

He said that the ministry remains committed to planning, devising and implementing policies that promote qualitative, affordable, and equitable healthcare services to the citizens.

The 40-page document titled: “Lagos State Guidelines on Safe Termination of Pregnancy for Legal Indications,” was issued by the ministry’s Directorate of Family Health and Nutrition.

The document released on June 28 sets out guidelines for safe termination of pregnancy within the ambit of the criminal law of Lagos State.

Dr Olusegun Ogboye, the Permanent Secretary, Lagos State Ministry of Health, at launch of the document, said that the document would provide evidence-based data and information for health workers in public and private sectors with requisite skills to provide safe termination of pregnancy to reduce preventable deaths.

Ogboye said that while therapeutic termination of pregnancy was permissible under the state’s law, absence of clear guidelines had stalled the effective implementation at appropriate levels of care resulting in preventable deaths.

July 7, 2022
Legalization of abortion in Lagos State – By Sonnie Ekwowusi

The abortion directives issued last week by the Lagos State Governor Mr. Babajide Sanwo-Olu to the effect that Lagosians can now “safely” kill their unborn babies without any qualms are illegal and therefore null and void. Frankly speaking I don’t know why Mr. Sanwo-Olu has allowed himself to be drafted into the simmering, highly-sensitive political, cultural, religious, moral and contentious issue of abortion. I don’t know any Nigerian politician who had promoted abortion without his or her political career being completely ruined. So why is Governor Sanwo-Olu toying with his political career?. Already the Sanwo-Olu’s abortion directives have sparked off demonstrations in Lagos and Abuja. The Governor’s abortion directives fragrantly violate sections 145, 146, 147 and 201 of the Criminal Laws of Lagos State (as amended in 2011); sections 228, 229,230, 297, 309, 328, of the Criminal Code Act CAP C38 (and their equivalent provisions in the Penal Code); sections 3,4, and 17 of the Child Rights Act 2003; Child’s Right Law of Lagos State 2015: sections 17 and 33 of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution; Articles, 3, 4 and 5 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights; Preamble to the 1990 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) (ratified and adopted by Nigeria). Therefore, as earlier stated, the aforesaid abortion directives issued last week by the Lagos State Governor are illegal and therefore null and void.

Therefore the Lagos State Governor is humbly advised to withdraw the abortion directives. Why? Because the abortion directives or policies cannot be enforced or obeyed in Lagos State. It is trite law that directives or policies that are ultra vires the existing laws of the land or do not fall within the ambit of the laws of the land or are in violation of the laws of the land cannot be enforced or obeyed in the State. Only enacted laws or Acts can be enforced or obeyed. Governor’s Directives that are in flagrant violation of the laws of the land cannot be enforced. The combined effects of sections 145, 146, 147, 201 of the Criminal Laws of Lagos State (as amended in 2011) and sections 228, 229,230, 297, 309, 328, of the Criminal Code Act CAP C38 (and their equivalent provisions in the Penal Code) is that anybody who, with an intent to procure the miscarriage of a woman or intents to abort or kill her baby in the woman by unlawfully administering on her any noxious substance or contraceptives or pills or drugs or instruments or by inserting instruments into the womb of the woman and crushing her baby to pieces in order to achieve the aforesaid purpose is guilty of a felony punishable under the various sections of the Criminal Code of Lagos or the Criminal Act of the Federation. In fact, section 328 of the Criminal Act prescribes life imprisonment for killing an unborn child. The section stipulates: “Any person who when a woman is about to be delivered of a child prevents the child from being born alive by any act or omission of such a nature, that, if the child had been born alive and had then died, he would be deemed to have unlawfully killed the child, is guilty of a felony, and is liable to imprisonment for life”. Section 17(1) of the Child’s Right Act 2003 clearly provides for the right of the unborn child. It states: “A child may bring an action for damages against a person for harm or injury caused to the child willfully, recklessly, negligently or through neglect before, during or after the birth of that child”. In similar fashion, section 16(1) of the Child’s Law of Lagos State 2015 clearly provides for the right of the unborn child. It states thus: . “Right of the unborn child to protection against harm, etc. (1) A child may bring an action for damages against a person for harm or injury caused to the child willfully, recklessly, negligently or through neglect before, during or after the birth of that child”. The preamble to the CRC states: “Bearing in mind that, as indicated in the Declaration of the Rights of the Child, “the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth”.

The deduction from the forgoing is that abortion is outlawed under our laws. In fact, both sections 16(1) of the Child’s Law of Lagos State 2015 and 17(1) of the Child’s Right Act 2003 clearly provide that an unborn child can bring a legal suit, of course via locus parentis or guardian ad lite, against any person for damages for harm or injury willfully or negligently inflicted on the child before its birth, during its birth and after its birth. So, you can see that the unborn child enjoys enormous the right to life under our laws. Therefore unless the aforesaid laws are amended to permit the killing of unborn babies, the Lagos State Governor has no right to issue directives approving the killing of the unborn babies in Lagos State. It is instructive to note that section 201 of the Criminal law of Lagos State erroneously relied upon by abortionists to argue that medical abortions are permissible in Lagos State to “save the life and protect the physical health of the woman” does not by any stretch of imagination prescribe abortion. Section 201 merely states that a person or a medical doctor is not criminally liable for any surgical operation performed in good faith and with due diligence on any person for his benefit, or upon an unborn child for the preservation of the mother’s life. Therefore section 201 is not an exception allowing the procurement of abortion in Lagos State. Equally section 297 of the Criminal Act is worded exactly like section 201 of the Lagos State Criminal law. Again section 297 is not an exception allowing procurement of abortion. The Dublin Declaration on Maternal Health 2012 and other declarations unequivocally state that abortion is not medically necessary even to save the life of a pregnant woman. So why are these abortionists misinforming the Lagos populace? In any case, assuming section 201 of the Criminal law of Lagos State permits medical abortion in Lagos State, it would be inconsistent with the provisions of the Criminal Act and other federal laws, and, to the extent of that inconsistency would be null and void. By virtue of the doctrine of covering the field, the Criminal Act and other federal law have outlawed abortion in Nigeria.

Therefore Sanwo-Olu’s directives or any Lagos Law “legalizing” abortion in Lagos State, would, to the extent of their express or implied inconsistency with the Criminal Act or other Federal laws, be held null and void and no effect whatsoever. In other words, in the event of any inconsistency between the Lagos law on abortion and the Criminal Act and other federal laws on abortion, the latter will prevail to the extent of the inconsistency. Those who pretend or feign ignorance of the right of the unborn child forget that in the U.K, and, I think in other criminal jurisdiction, any person who kills a pregnant woman is charged for double murder, that is, he is first charged for the murder of the pregnant woman, and, then separately charged for killing the unborn child in the woman’s womb. If the fetus in the womb is not a human being, why is the murderer of a pregnant woman charged for double murder or homicide?

What is most unacceptable about the Governor’s abortion directives is that the critical stakeholders such as the Churches, Mosques, traditional rulers, purveyors of Nigeria’s cultural heritage, security agents, anti-abortion legal practitioners, anti-abortion medical practitioners were not consulted or invited in the fashioning out of the 40-page abortion directives. The Catholic Archbishop of Lagos Most Rev. Alfred Adewale Martins has just issued a press statement condemning the legalization of abortion in Lagos State and stating that the Catholic Archdiocese of Lagos was never invited or consulted in the making of the abortion directives. Neither were Muslims in Lagos invited or consulted. The Pentecostals were not consulted either. Only abortionists, pro-choicers and pro-abortion institutions, namely, Marie Stopes abortion clinics, the Federal Ministry of Health, Society for Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Nigeria (SOGON), Population Reference Bureau (PRB), Ministry of Health, Lagos, Prof. Innocent Ujah, Prof. Ayodele Atsenuwa were consulted in the making of the abortion directives. I have crossed paths with SOGON, Prof. Ujah and Prof. Atsenuwa at Conferences, and, I would tell you that they were vehemently campaigning for the legalization of abortion in those Conferences. SOGON is a notorious abortion NGO. The Federal Ministry of Health, Abuja is another dangerous abortion organization. Last week the Health Minister Dr. Osagie Ehanire said that last 1% of the Nation’s health budget is allocated for abortificients and contraceptives to facilitate abortion. You can now see what I am talking about. A country in which her citizens have no access to basic primary health care is budgeting huge amount of money for abortion. The PRB is an international abortion agency that has been promoting population control in Africa through abortion. Marie Stopes is a notorious U.K abortion clinic with abortion clinics in Nigeria.

Acting on a petition written by a concerned body about the illegal abortion activities of Marie Stopes in Lagos State two years ago, the Police raided the Marie Stopes abortion clinic in Surulere, Lagos. During the raid, the Police confiscated the abortion files and abortion instruments such as Manual Vacuum Aspirators found in the clinic. On opening the abortion files the Police discovered to its chagrin that the clinic had aborted under-aged girls below the age of 17 without the consent of their parents. The Police handcuffed Dr. Bernard, one of the abortion doctors found on duty in the clinic on that day. The police later took him and the abortion files and Manual Vacuum Aspirators to their station. The funny aspect was that as the Police tried to arrest the clinic’s security guard who was manning the clinic’s gate at the material time, the poor man knelt down and swore to high heavens that he did not know that Marie Stopes performs abortion at the clinic. He was obviously lying to avert police arrest and detention. It is scandalous that the Lagos State government is consulting Marie Stopes, the largest global abortion provider in the English-speaking world. According to the Marie Stopes website, Marie Stopes aborted over 700,000 women in 2018, meaning that it killed 700,000 Nigerian babies in 2018. Marie Stopes abortion clinics had been shut down in Niger Republic, Kenya, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Togo, Madagascar, Ethiopia, Ivory Coast and Burkina Faso. To fully understand what I am saying, just google “Marie Stopes abortion clinic”.

Now let’s examine the content of Sanwo-Olu’s abortion directives. The content of the directives is the singsong of the abortionists and pro-choicers in Nigeria over the years. They argue that legalizing abortion makes it “safe” because when abortions are legal, it become “safe” because women can seek out competent medical doctors to perform them unlike when abortions are illegal the abortions will be performed by quack medical doctors and medical personnel in “unsafe’ conditions and by doing make abortions “unsafe” for women. Therefore they argue further that abortion or termination of pregnancy should be made “safe” and “lawful” for those women. In summary, the Sanwo-Olu directives are aimed at making abortion and termination of pregnancy in Lagos State “safe” and “lawful” because according to abortionists “unsafe” abortion leads to the death of women. This is false. All abortions have serious negative impacts on women. 17% of women undergoing the so-called “safe-abortion” or legal abortion procedure experience physical complications (such as abdominal bleedings or pelvic infections) after the abortion. The percentage is likely higher with long-term physical and psychological effects of abortion such as heavy bleeding (requiring blood transfusion), nausea, abdominal cramping, heart attack, perforation of the uterus, miscarriage of future pregnancies, death (it is estimated that 20% of maternal deaths result from abortion), guilt, anger, depression, suicidal thoughts, memory repression, eating disorders and sleep disorders are considered.

The truth of the matter is that abortion is a medical procedure, and, as with any medical procedure, abortion is fraught with health risks, even if it carried out by the most competent medical practitioner and under the best medical conditions especially in Nigeria and other developing countries. Therefore prefixing or modifying abortion with “safe” is not only misleading but medically inaccurate. “Safe-abortion” is not only an oxymoron: it is a medical impossibility since every abortion is always unsafe for the unborn baby because it kills the unborn baby. The notion “unsafe-abortion” is also misleading because it implies that some abortions done by competent medical doctors are “safe” or without risks. This is a big lie. All abortions carry serious risks for the aborted woman regardless of the quality of medical care employed. The abortion kills the child. How can you say that abortion is “safe” when it claims the life of an unborn child? More importantly, abortion is a crime in Nigeria. Therefore you cannot modify abortion with the prefix “safe” in the same way you cannot modify stealing with the prefix “safe”. You cannot say “safe-stealing”

Consequently, the Lagos State Governor is humbly advised to rescind the abortion directives. The directives are coming on the heels of the recent upturning of ROE V WADE by the American Supreme Court. ROE is the famous abortion case law that hitherto had legalized abortion in America. If the U.S is rethinking and outlawing abortion, why should Lagos State be setting pace in legalizing abortion through the back door? I like this quotation recently sent to me. “Man’s laws cannot make moral what God has declared immoral. Even if a sin is legalized, it’s still a sin in the eyes of God” (Dallin H. Oaks). The killing of an unborn baby, whether euphemistically self-styled “safe-abortion” or “post-abortion care” or “termination of pregnancy” or “interruption of pregnancy” or “women’s reproductive right” or “women’s health” is a crime punishable under our laws. We must stick to our own cultural and religious values in Nigeria. It is suicidal to import foreign practices and lifestyles which are alien to Nigeria and seek to impose them as directives simply because money has exchanged hands. The consensus reached at the various United Nations Conferences, is that the law passed in every developing county including Nigeria must reflect the diverse social, economic and environmental conditions of that country, with full respect for their religious, cultural backgrounds and philosophical convictions.

Abortion is anthitectical to the religious, cultural and philosophical convictions of the Nigerian people and therefore cannot be imported into Nigeria. There is no Nigerian culture that endorses the killing of an unborn baby. Termination of pregnancy is murder simpliciter. The Bible condemns abortion or termination of pregnancy. In Islam, Quran 17: 31 stipulates: “slay not your children fearing a fall of poverty; we shall provide for them and for you, lo the slaying of them is greater sin”. Every country is interested in protecting what it holds dear or its cherished values. The West can continue killing their children. But we love children in Nigeria. Abortion is a complete break with the Nigerian cultural heritage.

July 4, 2022
US Supreme court strikes down constitutional right to abortion

The supreme court has ruled there is no constitutional right to abortion in the United States, upending a precedent set nearly 50 years ago in the landmark Roe v Wade case – a rare reversal of long-settled law that will fracture the foundations of modern reproductive rights in America.

According to The Guardian, the court’s ruling came in the pivotal case Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, in which the last abortion clinic in Mississippi opposed the state’s efforts to ban abortion after 15 weeks and overturn Roe in the process.

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” said the majority opinion, written by Justice Samuel Alito. The case’s outcome was joined by the court’s five other conservative justices.

“The constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision,” it said.

The court’s three liberal justices dissented.

The reversal of the 1973 opinion will again allow individual US states to ban abortion. At least 26 states are expected to do so immediately or as soon as practicable.

The Dobbs decision is certain to be one of the most consequential in generations. It will have profound, immediate and enduring consequences for the lives of tens of millions of American women and other people who can become pregnant, and unpredictable ripple effects that could play out over decades.

“This is kind of unparalleled, and even if it’s not completely unprecedented it’s extremely rare,” said Mary Ziegler, a visiting professor of constitutional law at Harvard Law School, professor at the University of California, Davis School of Law and a historian of abortion.

“It’s also extraordinary to do something like this so quickly, with no kind of advance notice,” said Ziegler.

The final ruling from the conservative-dominated court comes after a draft opinion was leaked in early May. In it, right-leaning associate justice Samuel Alito laid out a caustic argument for reversing Roe v Wade.

Experts believe the coming days and weeks will bring chaotic attempts by conservatives to ban the procedure as soon as possible, as a patchwork of some of the most severe abortion restrictions in the world go into effect.

Large swaths of the US south and midwest are expected to ban abortion or impose severe restrictions, forcing patients who want the procedure to potentially travel hundreds of miles or self-manage abortions at home.

At least one economist has estimated such bans could result in an additional 60,000 births a year among women who want an abortion, but are unable to obtain one. Such bans are likely to affect 41% of women of reproductive age in the US, and hit the young, poor, Black and brown women and people who already have children the hardest.

The ripple effects of the decision could also herald greater restrictions in other areas of private life, with ramifications for gay marriage, sex and possibly even birth control.

“Backlash to the decision is really unpredictable, and part of the reason we know that is because backlash to Roe was unpredictable,” said Ziegler.

The decision is likely to spark more protests and rallies, and intensify debate within and between states about abortion, and even cities. The shock decision could also upend the midterm elections in November.

In the run-up to the decision, Democratic-led states have enacted laws to aid patients who travel for abortions. Republican-led states have done the opposite. Many have worked to further restrict abortion and some have already debated prosecuting women who seek abortions under homicide statutes.

Although an estimated 85% of Americans support legal abortion under certain circumstances, extreme partisan manipulation of electoral districts, or gerrymandering, has insulated right-leaning Republican leaders from popular opinion.

Internationally, the decision will make the US one of only four countries since 1994 to restrict abortion, according to the Center for Reproductive Rights, the other countries being Poland, Nicaragua and El Salvador. This will further set America apart from peer countries as life expectancy falls. It could also damage the nation’s ability to advocate for the rights of women and girls globally.

June 24, 2022
U.S. Speaker, Nancy Pelosi barred from taking Holy Communion over abortion rights

Speaker of the United States (U.S.) House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi has been barred from taking Holy Communion by the Catholic Church for supporting abortion rights.

TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) reports Salvatore Cordileone, the Archbishop of Pelosi’s home Diocese in San Francisco made this known on Friday in a letter in which he stressed that his decision was a pastoral one and not political.

Recall that the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives had in the past declared herself as a devout Catholic.

“A Catholic legislator who supports procured abortion, after knowing the teaching of the Church, commits a manifestly grave sin which is a cause of most serious scandal to others.

“I have determined that the point has come in which I must make a public declaration that she is not to be admitted to Holy Communion unless and until she publicly repudiate her support for abortion ‘rights’ and confess and receive absolution for her cooperation in this evil in the sacrament of Penance,” part of the letter reads.

TNG reports abortion rights have been a trending conversation in the US after a draft Supeme Court opinion to overturn it was leaked.

May 21, 2022