TheNewsGuru

Tag: bill

  • ANALYSIS: What Nigerians should not know about the infectious diseases bill 2020 – Rep Kingsley Chinda

    ANALYSIS: What Nigerians should not know about the infectious diseases bill 2020 – Rep Kingsley Chinda

    By Rep Kingsley Chinda

    I should start this analysis by commending the sponsors of the Bill for the idea that there is need to review and update our health laws as it has to do with infectious diseases. What I call the spirit behind the law is very laudable but the letters of the law are very poorly couched or copied and should be rejigged to suit Nigerian realities. The credit still goes to the sponsors of the Bill.

    This Bill after the rushed 1st and 2nd reading should be committed to relevant Committees and subjected to rigorous public scrutiny (Public Hearing) for all stakeholders to make an input and a better work returned to the House. If we do otherwise and send it to committee of the whole, we will end up with a bad law that cannot stand the test of the law and time or it will be killed in the Senate.

    Let me attempt at considering some specific sections of the Bill.

    The Bill is 97% copied from the Singapore Infectious Disease Act 1977 verbatim. Whilst we concede that Statutes and legislations are exempted from the legal burden of the offence of plagiarism, they are however, not exempted from the moral burden of copying a work copiously. The level of reliance on the Singaporean Bill leaves the impression of Parliamentary laziness and the 9th House of Representatives is not that lazy, a lot of industry abound within and has been demonstrated. Again, where Bills are imported, they are adopted to the local circumstances. Singapore was under the reign of a maximum Ruler, Lee Kuan Yew, operating a one-party socialist State. Some of Lee’s famous quotes amongst others are “Between being loved and being feared, I have always believed Machiavelli was right. If nobody is afraid of me, I’m meaningless. “If you can’t force or are unwilling to force your people to follow you, with or without threats, you are not a leader.” This theory of leadership though forward, it will be out of place in our Nigerian setting today.

    Thus the Bill is draconian in a multi-party federal system democracy that is practiced in Nigeria. We cannot domesticate the law of another nation. The Singapore Infectious Disease Act 1977 is not an international protocol that we should adopt without changes. Whilst we can borrow the idea of the Bill from Singapore, we must adopt it to local circumstance and bring it in line with existing local Statutes.

    The long Title of the Bill is “A BILL FOR AN ACT TO REPEAL THE QUARANTINE ACT CAP. Q2, LAWS OF THE FEDERATION OF NIGERIA, 2004 AND ENACT THE CONTROL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES BILL, MAKE PROVISIONS RELATING TO QUARANTINE AND MAKE REGULATIONS FOR PREVENTING THE INTRODUCTION INTO AND SPREAD IN NIGERIA OF DANGEROUS INFECTIOUS DISEASES, AND FOR RELATED MATTERS (HB.836)”

    A closer look at the content of the Bill reveals that the title of the Bill is deceptive as it purports to regulate “infectious diseases’ whilst it actually goes beyond infectious diseases and regulates diseases of any nature depending on the discretion of the Minister – Section 5(1)(b) of the Bill. The short title of the Bill should actually be Control of Diseases Bill 2020 rather than “Control of Infectious Diseases Bill, 2020” as contained in Section 81 of the Bill.

    The powers to administer the Bill is vested on the Director General of Nigeria Centre for Disease Control (NCDC) (DG) under the directive of the Minister. Note that the office of the DG was created by another Act, the Nigerian Center for Diseases Control Act 2018 with powers and functions bestowed on him.

    The powers vested on these political appointees is humongous and bound to be abused. More so, they are accountable to their appointor and takes instructions from him and not the Nigerian people.

    The NCDC Act that created the office of the DG gave him powers and also gave some powers to the Board of NCDC. Some of the functions of the Board under the NCDC Act are given to the Director under this Bill.

    The Bill as stated in paragraphs 3 and 4 above, failed to take cognizance of our local circumstances, consequently, the Bill has some serious constitutional and statutory contradictions. Several sections that are the live wire of the Bill conflict with existing laws and the Constitution.

    The Federal System of Government in Nigeria was not considered in the Bill, thus no role for other tiers of government, (States and Local Governments), particularly the States as a federating unit. This is more serious taking cognizance of the fact that Health is an item in the concurrent legislative list in the Constitution.

    The Powers of Governors to take steps and come up with Executive Orders in times of heath emergencies contained in the Quarantine Act sought to be repealed were jettisoned. Thus Governors have no role and are at the mercy of the DG NCDC and Minister for health. This is abnormal and will be counter productive.

    All Governors today are relying on the Quarantine Act to come up with Executive Orders to manage the COVID-19 peculiar situations in their states. If this power is removed, the DG cannot micro manage all the states in the federation in time of health crises.

    The Bill severally and frontally attacked the rights of citizens under Section 4 of the Constitution (Fundamental Human Rights) and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Right (Ratification and Enforcement) Act Cap. A9 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004: United Nations Declaration on Human Rights 1948 and International Convention on Civil and Political Rights 1976 which are ratified by Nigeria and so are local legislations.

    The Bill conflict with the Environmental Health Officers (Registration ETC) Act 2002. The DG is empowered in S.2 of the Bill to determine who a Health Officer is against the Provision of sections 13(1) and 14 of the Environmental Health Officers Act that outlaws any practice or provision of Health services in Nigeria without certification by the Council – Health Officers are professionals and cannot be picked discretionally by an individual.

    The national Programme on immunization Act, Cap. N.71 LFRN 2004, Vol.9. Section 6 of the Act covers some contagious diseases like TB, Whooping Cough etc with an omnibus clause in Section 6(f) which empowers the Minister to cover any other disease he deems fit. These are the same diseases the present Bill seeks to take care of. The Immunization Act is a specific law on immunization whilst the present Bill has immunization as one of the items covered in the Bill.

    Nigerian National Health Act 2014 regulates health practice and practitioners in Nigeria, including protection of the fiduciary relationship of Medical Practitioners and their patients.

    Section 3 which empowers the President to declare a public emergency and public health emergency zones in the country or any part thereof did not state the method of publishing the declaration. Under S.3(5) of the Bill, the method of publication is left at the discretion of the President and no time frame within which same should be sent to NASS for ratification. It only says “as soon as possible”, this is subject to interpretation of the operators.

    Section 6 of the bill provides for compulsory testing based on mere suspicion by the DG. Failure to test at own cost, attracts legal sanctions including a conviction. This provision can and will be abused by power drunk officers without an option of legal challenge to such abuses. There are people whose religion does not permit injections or blood test or transfusion. This could be a breach to the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. Section 38 Const.

    Section 7 empowers the DG to order postmortem test based on suspicion. No exception was considered and it’s at the discretion of the DG. This could breach the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. Section 38 Const.

    Section 8 of proposed Bill removes the fiduciary relationship (the duty of confidentiality) between patients and their personal Physician on mere suspicion. The Nigerian Health Act still protects this relationship and is therefore in conflict with this Bill. This can only be reasonable after a test is carried out and the person is confirmed to be infected. A citizen can be subjected to inhumane treatment and denied his right to privacy by publishing his/her medical history without his/her consent and refusal is a crime.

    Section12 empowers the DG on mere suspicion to stop a wake keep and prohibit the burial of a deceased by his/her family. This again violates Sections 34 and 38 of the Const. The Citizens right to human dignity and Right to Thought, Conscience and Religion. Burial rites are mostly cultural or religious based. This would be reasonable if it is confirmed that the corpse is infected. Even at that the infected corpse does not need to be present at the wake-keep.

    Section13 empowers the DG on mere suspicion to detain a citizen as long as he wishes without an order of a competent Court and he of course cannot be sued even where his suspicion turns out to be wrong afterwards, as S.70 protects the DG and his agents from personal liability. This runs foul of the victim’s fundamental right to liberty (S.35) and movement (S.41). Also note that S. 35 (e) which provides an exception only contemplates those suffering from a disease not “suspected” as provided in the Bill. Thus the Bill tends to amend S.35(e) of the Const. through the back door.

    Section 14 again gives the DG power to place a citizen under surveillance on mere suspicion. The worry is that these encroachments on rights of citizens are done on mere suspicion and since no personal liability is incurred for any default, the DG or his Rep could be careless. This contravenes S. 37 (Right to private and family life).

    Section 15 of the bill empowers the DG by only issuing a notice to take over a citizen’s property and declare it an isolation center without the consent and permission of the owner. This provision is subject to serious abuses as perceived political enemies and or opposition party members can be easily abused on the guise that their property is declared an isolation Center without recourse to a Court of law. It runs foul of S. 44 of the Const (Right against compulsory acquisition of property). Again the section conflict with rights of Governors over lands in their States under Land Use Act as property can now be acquired in a state without the Governor’s consent.

    Section16 of the proposed bill is a very potent instrument against the religious and social organizations. Thus, if in the opinion of the DG any building is deemed overcrowded he can make an order dispersing the crowd and anybody who goes in commits an offence. How do you opine or conclude that the gathering is likely to expose occupants to infectious disease.

    Once a decision is taken, it becomes effective regardless of any protest or appeal. The appeal is to the Minister whose decision is final and he is an interested party. Thus he is a final arbiter in his own matter. This is again violating the Citizens right to fair hearing, S. 36(2)(a) and (b).

    The Bill in section 19 gives the DG power to stop any meeting or gathering as he deems fit on the ground that such activity is likely to increase the spread of infectious disease for 14 days’ renewable thereafter. The concern is the exercise of excessive discretion which leads to abuse. Sections 35 and 40 Const (Personal Liberty and Right to peaceful assembly and association) are breached by this provision.

    Section 20. Here talks about a carrier unlike other sections where a suspect is made to suffer.

    Section 24 empowers Enforcement Officer to get order from a Court (Magistrate) to destroy a building where infectious disease occurred. This is too draconian as fumigation or disinfection of such building will sanitize it rather than destruction. Also note that the owner has no claim against the Officer under S.70 of the Bill.

    Section 27 also allows the DG to exempt a vessel coming from an infected area from being deemed to be infected. There are no grounds for the DG to arrive at that conclusion, it is left to his discretion.

    Section 30 also gives the DG the discretion to determine any vaccine that will be compulsory for citizens to take before they can travel out of Nigeria. Note that vaccines are made from animal genes and it could be one made from a prohibited animal, amongst Moslem and some Christian sects swine (haram) and you will be compelled to take it, else you can’t travel out of the country or come into the country. This is most unconventional, what is obtainable is that countries, depending on their peculiarities request that visitors must be vaccinated against certain diseases so if you are travelling to such countries, it’s one of the requirement but not to impose it on citizens that you must be vaccinated before travelling out of the country.

    Sections 46 and 47 of the Bill provide for compulsory vaccination of children and adults with some specified vaccine. This should not be compulsory as in some climes, there are incentives given to encourage vaccination. There must also be an exception on health or religious ground. Recall the Pfizer experience in Kano where vaccine turned a killer injection and South Africa where HIV vaccines was deliberately administered on blacks. Vaccines sometimes have turned out to be dangerous. To compel one to take a vaccine made of stuff that is against his belief is a breach of S. 38 of the Const (Freedom of thought, conscience and religion).

    More so under S.47(4) of the Bill, the DG is required to give notice of the order for vaccination as none compliance is a crime under section 51, yet he still has discretion on the method of notice. Thus he could paste the order for vaccination on his office notice board and if you fail to vaccinate within the prescribed time, you commit an offence.

    Section 49 which provides exception to the vaccination only allowed medical grounds without the very important religious ground and the exemption is also at the discretion of the DG. He determines who will be exempted or not and issues exemption certificate.

    Section 53 provides for fees for vaccination which the Bill makes compulsory. If compulsory vaccination is not free to all, it should at least be free to the vulnerable class as poverty is not defense under 51. Someone who cannot afford the vaccination commits an offence as poverty will not be an excuse.

    Section 54 empowers the DG to enter a premises at anytime and without warrant and with such force as may be necessary, note, the Bill did not even provide for use of “reasonable force” to enter, search or cease any book or material suspected to be connected to disease out break. The force that is necessary is determined by the Enforcement Officers.

    In Sections 55, 56 and 57, the Bill authorizes the entry, search, arrest, seizure and disposal of any premises, thing, vehicle, document or person as the case may be without warrant based on mere suspicion and private opinion of the DG of NCDC, Health Officers and Police Officers. These Sections are wrong on every level, because they give the Police Officers unfettered powers to cease, arrest and detain based on suspicion and without proof of guilt thereby taking away this all important legal rule that an accused is deemed innocent until proved guilty. Under the Bill, the reverse is the case a suspect is deemed guilty until he proves otherwise. The DG’s power under Section 56(1) to seize information considered relevant to public health in his opinion may be abused to interfere with the constitutional right to freedom of speech and press in Nigeria.

    The Bill also allows the executive officers take extra-judicial decisions to the detriments of citizen’s constitutional rights to freedom of movement and dignity of human person. This can be seen in Section 57, (7-8) of the Bill. Clearly Subsection 8 of the Bill gives meaning to the measures referred to in Subsection 7 which includes the entry into a place without warrant and the use of such force as maybe necessary. The question now is what force can be used by the police officers that will be deemed necessary? This is unconstitutional as section 34 of the 1999 Constitution as amended clearly stipulates that no person shall be subjected to torture, inhuman and degrading treatment.

    Section 62 is mere repetitive and surplus age as it is the primary function of Police to execute laws. It’s not necessary to state that the “Inspector General of Police shall provide such Police assistance as may be necessary to carryout any of the provisions of this Act”.

    Section 64, the reference is wrong as it should be S. 63 instead of 64.

    The immunity provided in Section 70 of the Bill is unconstitutional because this effectively ousts the jurisdiction of the Court to hear Human Rights abuse claims, as the Bill provides that no liability shall lie personally be against the DG, health officer and police officers who does anything in the execution of the Act. Human rights abuses are usually personal.

    General remarks on the defense that Section 45 of the 1999 Constitution as amended allows derogation from certain fundamental rights pursuant to a law made for the purpose of securing public health can not hold water in all the abuses or Fundamental Human Rights derogations in this Bill.

    A). The provisions of the Bill are so wide and not reasonably justifiable in a democratic society having been fashioned after a single party communist State.

    The provisions of Section 45 of the 1999 Constitution as amended may not be sufficient to save the Bill from being declared unconstitutional if passed in its present state and tested in a court of law.

    B). The exception in Section 45 does not apply to infractions of Sections 42, 43 and 44 of the Constitution (Freedom against discrimination: Right to acquire private property and Right against compulsory acquisition of property). Thus all the sections of the Bill on compulsory acquisition of property are outside the exemption

    C). By Section 45(2) derogation of Sections 33 (Right to life) and 35 (Right to personal liberty) are allowed in an Act only during “emergency period”. This is only when the President under Section 305 of the Constitution declares a state of emergency. Even under such emergency period, the measures must be “reasonably justifiable in dealing with the emergency situation”. Even in a state of emergency, is it reasonably justifiable to demolish a property for the singular reason that an infected person was therein?

    D). The exception under Section 45 of the Constitution applies only during emergency period and so reliance on the section to breach the liberty of citizens is unconstitutional.

     

    REP. O. K. CHINDA

    MEMBER REPRESENTING OBIO-AKPOR FED. CONSTITUENCY, RIVERS STATE

  • TNG X-ray: Reps vow to ‘naked’ quarantine bill during plenary

    TNG X-ray: Reps vow to ‘naked’ quarantine bill during plenary

    …claims and counter-claims by proponents and opponents

    The stage is set as members of the most vibrant Green Chamber in Africa set to pass a Bill on Quarantine designed to help check infectious diseases in Nigeria on Tuesday.

    This whole drama started last Tuesday when the House moved to repeal the Quarantine Act 2004.

    Thereafter, a petition which has gone viral mounted the centre stage in the sicial media tearing the Bill into shreds and asking Nigerians to pass a death sentence on it.

    Some top ranking members in the House of Representatives that spoke to thenewsguru.ng, (TNG) vowed that the Bill unarguably the most talked about Bill in recent time would be exhaustively discussed and properly thrashed.

    One of such lawmakers from the North Central geo-political zone who spoke to TNG under the condition of anonymity declared that”we’ve allowed too many wrong things to go the wrong way.

    “This time around we’ll bare our fangs and open the underbelly of the Bill for all to see because you can’t imprison us in the name of a law and disease control.

    Another Lawmaker from the South South geo-political zone simply said I will stoutly stand on the side of truth if I am allowed to speak because some of us have been named enemies of leadership.

    A Lawmaker from the North East geo-political zone said” I will speak against all the anti-Nigerian aspect of the Bill if the presiding officer gives me the nod.

    “You know some of us here are tagged internally displaced parliamentarians despite the fact that we are ranked but adequately relegated to serve new lawmakers that are chairmen of committees.

    “But we fervently pray and hope that it will be a free level playing chamber when we resume.

    The last Lawmaker that bared his mind without fear or favour is Rep Uzoma Nkem-Abonta who told TNG that there’s “no going back untill we expunge all the satanic contents of the controversial Bill.

    “We won’t migrate into error by speedily considering such a Bill without public hearing as Nigerians will never forgive us and our generations yet unborn.

    Proponents for the Bill:

    Those clamouring for its passage argued that no Nigerian will be arrested or forcefully made to take any vaccine without his consent.

    They claimed that there’s nothing like plagiarism in the legislative parlance so re-producing the Singoporean of 1976 law is not out of place.

    Various reasons were given which were hinged on the covid 19 pandemic stating that if it was in place travelers into the country could have been controlled by the NCDC.

    Nigeria would have been saved from the embarrassing situation it found herself today.

    But the opponents of the Bill argued that no if there’s is no hidden intent why the speedy approach to ensure its immediate passage.

    They submitted that the Bill as it is cannot fly as it has too many defects.

    The Bill if passed into law will concentrate too much powers in the NCDC and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

    They equally emphasised that they may move it into the exclusive list.

    However, how the Bill would be shaped or unshaped legislatively would be unfolded on Tuesday.

  • TNG Probe: Why Nigerians want proposed Bill on quarantine killed

    TNG Probe: Why Nigerians want proposed Bill on quarantine killed

    Trending in the social media is a petition calling on Nigerians to sign a petition against a Bill proposed by the House of Representatives to repeal the Quarantine Act of 2004.

    The House last Wednesday had moved to repeal the 16 years old law to accommodate the reality of modern day.

    TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) in its tradition if getting to any issue decided to probe deeper as the said proposed repeal of the law is already generating some undercurrent heat that is fast snowballing into a serious issue.

    Despite its good intent the Bill has been variously described as anti-people, unfriendly, unholy and the Bill Gates bill.

    The House on Tuesday speedily passed the Bill Into second reading and immediately referred it to the committee of the Whole for speedy consideration and eventual passage.

    Lawmakers who spoke against the contentious Bill:

    Hon Sergius Ogun, PDP, Edo condemned the bill and begged his colleagues not to support it.
    Hon . Bamidele Salaam believes that the sponsor of the bill meant well, but there are certain areas that need to be amended .

    “How are we sure that immediately after the pandemic we will not go back again about the state of our health Institutions.

    “This is an emergency situation. The way we are sitting in the house have already defined the essence of the bill.

    “Just like we handled the stimulus bill we should do same here, when the bill was about to take off it wasnt easy. Many people did not believe In the bill”, Rep. Salaam Stated

    Hon. Uzoma Nkem-Abonta, PDP, Abia in his contribution said:

    “We are all aware of what is awash in the social media.

    “Why am saying this is, I have seen the quarantine act, something bigger than disease control. We need a bill for control of prevention disease.
    What am trying to say is we should not because of what we are trying to do, make a big error.

    “If we are going to do away with public hearing then we must seek for direction and not speed. The bill is a wrong timing.

    “Please let us apply restraint on the speed.” Abonta cautioned.
    But responding Rep Femi Gbajabiamila, promoter of the Bill said that a drastic situation required drastic measure.

    A lawmaker who spoke to TNG under the condition of anonymity said: The most annoying thing about this whole nonesense is that PDP lawmakers who ought to know better seconded and shamelessly supported the bill we all know is anti-Nigerians.

    “If we pass it today what it will translate into is that you and I can be detained without legal recourse, quarantined and compulsorily given any vaccine.

    ‘What we are saying is that the Quarantine Act as it is has enough powers to quarantine anybody why give it absolute powers.

    ‘They brought a a 47 page bill and wanted it passed in one plenary to achieve what and for what purpose, the Rep queried.

    ” If this Bill is passed it will be the fastest bill passage in the entire universe.

    The Bill was passed into second reading by the House and it may not unergo the mandatory public hearing as stipulated by law.

    Senator Dino Melaye in a video clip that has gone viral equally condemned the move by the House without mincing words.

    See video below:

  • Non-Passage of PIB has made Nigeria lose over $20bn – Hon Nwawuba

    Non-Passage of PIB has made Nigeria lose over $20bn – Hon Nwawuba

    …insists PIB’s passage won’t go beyond 2020

    By Emman Ovuakporie

    The deputy Chairman House of Representatives Committee on Niger Delta Affairs, Hon Henry Nwawuba on Thursday said the Non-Passage of the Petroleum Industry Bill, PIB has made Nigeria lose over $20billion over the years.

    The Imo State born lawmaker made this known in a chat with TheNewsGuru(TNG).

    As a member of the adhoc Committee on PIB, Nwawuba said””our committee will not waste any valuable time again as we are set to pass this all important Bill that will have a spiral effect on our economy.

    “But since we are already in March we should be looking towards the end of the year for its passage.

    “You saw the vigour with which the Senate President, Ahmad Lawan and the speaker, Femi Gbajabiamila dedicated their time and energy to the Bill.

    “So far so good this Assembly has been enjoying a lot of cordiality with the executive arm of government.

    “This cordiality will go a long way in helping because in the last Assembly we passed the PIB but there were flaws which were noticed in the twilight of the 8th Assembly.

  • Reps pass South South Devt Comm Bill into second reading

    Reps pass South South Devt Comm Bill into second reading

    Emma Ovuakporie

    A bill seeking for the establishment of South-South Development Commission on Wednesday was passed by the House of Representatives into second reading.

    The Bill if passed into law would aid speedy rehabilitation of damaged infrastructure in the oil producing region of Nigeria.

    The Commission would be charged with the responsibility to receive and manage funds from the federation account allocation and other sources, donations, grants aids for the integration, development, resolution of infrastructural deficit, militancy, communal crisis as well as tackle ecological, environmental and other related matters.

    The promoter of the bill, Hon Awaji-Inombek Abiante (PDP, Rivers) said it was expedient to conclude that the existing Niger Delta Development Commission was not created for the South-South States, but for all the oil producing States, irrespective of the Region.

    According to him, Mr. Speaker, my Distinguish Honourable Colleagues, in view of the foregoing and the need for rapid and equitable development of all the Regions in the Country, there is a need for the establishment of the South-South Development Commission to ensure the development of the South-South.

    Additionally, “the South-South Development Commission is to serve as a springboard for the engagement, integration and development of the SouthSouth region as well as resolve issues of infrastructural deficit, militancy, communal crises as well as the ecological problems and (any) other related environmental or developmental challenges in the region”.

    Abiante referred to the fact that, in 1993, the regime of Late General Sani Abacha created six (6) geopolitical zones with the aim amongst others of enhancing equal distribution of the Nation’s economic, political and educational resources. ” In 1993, the regime under the late General Sani Abacha created geopolitical zones for equitable distribution of the nation’s wealth.

    He deserves commendation for this welI-thought idea that was tailored towards bringing development to every part of the Country especially given the peculiarity and diverse nature of the country with greater affinity in the regional structure thereby having very workable solutions.

    Speaking on the importance of the commission, when there’s already the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) in place, the lawmaker said the South-South commission would focus on the development of the region solely unlike NDDC which caters for oil producing States.

    “It is instructive to point out that the Niger Delta Development Commission created by the former President Olusegun Obasinjo merely replaced Oil Mineral Producing Areas Development Commission (OMPADEC). And it was for the development of oil producing States or better still communities which includes States in the South-East (Abia, Imo) and South-West (Ondo) and Lagos respectively.

    “It is also worthy of note that the North-East Development Commission is in place and functioning, a bill for the establishment of South-West Development Commission has scaled second reading while the bills for the establishment of zonal development commissions are also in the works at various stages”.

    He further explained that the bill would not gulp as much funds as anticipated.

    “Mr speaker, the financial cost and implications of establishing a South-South Development Commission may not necessarily add up financial burden on the Federal Government.

    “The Bill when passed will go a long way in ensuring speedy rehabilitation of damaged infrastructure in the South-South region thus enhancing the quality of life in the area in particular and Nigeria in general.

    I respectfully urge you all to support the Bill in the spirit of social justice, equity and national integration”, he solicited.

    The bill was passed when the presiding officer, Femi Gbajabiamila put the question to vote and referred it to the Committee on Justice for further legislative business.

  • BREAKING: Ogun Assembly passes Amotekun bill

    BREAKING: Ogun Assembly passes Amotekun bill

    The Ogun House of Assembly on Tuesday passed a bill for a law to establish the Ogun State Security Network Agency and Amotekun Corps.

    The Majority Leader, Mr Yusuf Sherif, had presented the report of the Committee on Security and Strategy during plenary in Abeokuta.

    Sherif stated that the committee recommended that the bill be passed as approved by the Conference of Speakers of South West Legislature.

    The majority leader moved the motion for the adoption of the report and it was seconded by Musefiu Lamidi a member of the House.

    The motion was also supported by the whole House.

    Sherif thereafter moved the motion for the third reading of the bill and this was seconded by Sola Adams.

    The clerk of the house, Mr Deji Adeyemo, read the bill for the third time while the Speaker, Mr Olakunle Oluomo, ordered that a clean copy of the bill be forwarded to Gov. Dapo Abiodun for his assent.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the lawmakers had during the second reading of the bill on Feb. 20 stated that the bill was to assist in maintaining law and order in the state.

    They posited that the Amotekun corps would be a community policing body that would complement the work of other security agencies in the state.

    The lawmaker stated that Amotekun would curb criminal activities such as kidnapping, robbery, cultism and terrorism.

  • SERAP to LAWAN: Drop bill seeking foreign education for repentant Boko Haram members now

    Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has sent an open letter to the Senate President Dr Ahmad Lawan, urging him to use his leadership position to “ensure that the bill that would allow ‘repentant Boko Haram terrorists’ opportunities to access public funds to enjoy foreign education is immediately dropped.

    SERAP also asked the Senate President to sponsor bills that would ensure access to justice and reparation for the victims of Boko Haram terrorist group.

    According to SERAP, “the bill, which has passed the first reading at the Senate would give opportunities to ‘repentant terrorists’ to receive foreign education including by accessing funds from the Universal Basic Education Commission, the Tertiary Education Trust Fund and subventions from the government.”

    In the letter dated 28 February 2020 and signed by SERAP deputy director Kolawole Oluwadare, the organization said: “This bill erodes justice and makes a mockery of the suffering of victims, and the unspeakable human tragedy, humanitarian crisis and appalling atrocities committed by the Boko Haram terrorist group.”

    SERAP said: “By calling Boko Haram members ‘ex-agitators’, the bill mocks the victims of appalling atrocities committed by the terrorist group, and is a blatant affront to victims’ dignity. ‘Repentant Boko Haram terrorists’ are not ‘ex-agitators’; they are terrorists under Nigerian and international laws.”

    READ ALSO: Buhari Replaces Security Officials Over Release Of 295 Smuggled Petroleum Tankers

    According to SERAP: “Boko Haram members should not be allowed to enjoy foreign education while over 13 million Nigerian children of school age are roaming our streets. Alleged perpetrators of gross violations should not get the benefits at the expense of these and other deserving children. Rather than allowing perpetrators to access public funds to enjoy foreign education, the Senate should be promoting reparation for victims, to prevent future criminality and ensure the best interest of justice.”

    SERAP also said: “Should the Senate go-ahead to pass the bill, and should the bill be supported by the House of Representatives and assented to by President Muhammadu Buhari, the Registered Trustees of SERAP shall take all appropriate legal actions nationally and internationally to challenge the legality of any such law and ensure that it is never implemented.”

    The letter read, in part: “Prioritising the education of Boko Haram members over the rights of Nigerian children to quality education is discriminatory, as it violates Nigerian constitutional provisions, international and regional human rights obligations, and will undermine national development.”

    “This bill serves neither justice nor the public interest. The bill also does not represent value for money for Nigerian taxpayers, especially coming from an institution whose individual member reportedly takes home about N182 million yearly, translating to N15.1 million monthly or N45.3 million quarterly.”

    “Internally displaced persons (IDP) camps in many parts of the country are in shambles, with people lacking access to basic necessities like food, clothing and children of victims lacking access to basic education.”

    “Without justice, the seeds of future criminality and militant terrorism will grow. This bill, if passed, would only lead to more terrorism and suffering.”

    “The Senate should focus on passing bills that would ensure access of victims to effective remedies including adequate reparation, and effective prosecution of ‘repentant Boko Haram members’ rather than rewarding them with opportunities to study abroad.”

    “Prioritising alleged perpetrators’ rights at the expense of the victims’ rights, interests and needs is discriminatory, illegal and unconstitutional, as it amounts to ‘re-victimization’. While the alleged ‘repentant Boko Haram terrorists have the right to an impartial and fair trial, they have absolutely no right to enjoy foreign education.”

    “Pursuing accountability of perpetrators would also show that Nigerian authorities will take action against those who commit gross human rights violations against their own people.”

    “In proposing bills to respond to the atrocities committed by the Boko Haram terrorist group, the Senate should ensure strict adherence to the 1999 Nigerian Constitution (as amended) and Nigeria’s international human rights obligations and commitments, including the 1985 United Nations Declaration of the Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power, which provides for the basic standards for victims treatment.”

    “The Boko Haram terrorist group has committed numerous human rights atrocities against the Nigerian people. By prioritising prosecution of alleged perpetrators, the Nigerian authorities will be sending a powerful message to the victims and the international community that atrocities committed by the terrorist group will not be ignored.”

    “According to our information, the proposed bill aims to establish a “National Agency for the Education, Rehabilitation, De-radicalisation and Integration of Repentant Insurgents in Nigeria.” The agency will get its funding from the Universal Basic Education Commission, the Tertiary Education Trust Fund and annual subventions from the government.”

    “Section 5(m) of the bill gives ‘repentant terrorists’ the opportunity of receiving foreign education, by among others accessing the services of offshore and Nigerian institutions in the pursuit of the educational needs of ex-agitators.” Under the bill, one per cent of TETFund and UBEC fund will be used in funding the agency for rehabilitating the terrorists. The agency will also be funded by 0.5 per cent of the federal allocation of the six North-East states.”

    “The bill, sponsored by Senator Ibrahim Geideam, representing Yobe East, has passed the first reading in the Senate. Among the likely beneficiaries under the bill will be 25 Boko Haram members and their wives, who recently arrived in Maiduguri, the Borno State, after they reportedly surrendered to troops in Niger Republic.”

    SERAP therefore urged Dr Lawal to urgently initiate four separate bills to ensure:

    1. adequate reparations for victims of Boko Haram atrocities;

    2. the delivery of humanitarian assistance to those much in need;

    3. access to free, inclusive and quality education to Nigerian children from socially and economically disadvantaged sectors of the population. Any such bill should remove school fees and charges to ensure all students can access school equally, and target financial support for girls at risk of dropping out through girls’ education strategies;

    4. accelerate effective prosecution of alleged repentant Boko Haram members and other members

  • Bill on immunity for presiding officers of legislature passes second reading

    A bill to alter the constitution to extend constitutional immunity to Presiding Officers of the Legislature narrowly scaled through second reading on the floor of the House of Representatives on Tuesday.

    But Speaker of the House, Rep. Femi Gbajabiamila dissociated himself from the content of the bill saying when passed it should take effect from 2023 when the tenure of the current presiding officers would have expired.

    Some members who spoke in favour of the bill, including House Leader, Rep Ado Doguwa said the bill was not about individuals, but about the institution of the parliament.

    The bill seeks to amend section 308 of the constitution to grant immunity to presiding officer of the state and National Assembly.

    Details Shortly…

  • Reps propose bill to punish employers for late, underpayment of salary, other entitlements

    The Speaker of the Ninth House of Representatives, Mr Femi Gbajabiamila, is proposing a bill that will prohibit the late payment or underpayment of staff salaries and other entitlements across all sectors in Nigeria.

    The bill also recommends penalties such as fines and imprisonment for employers who delay salary payments of their employees.

    The bill reads in part: “An employer who withholds salary, wage, pension and any other benefit and emolument of any worker for a period of seven days and above, in respect of other monetary benefits shall pay 30 percent of such monetary benefits for the period.

    “An employer who fails in its obligation for a period of 60 days and above shall be liable to fine of 30 percent of the wage for the duration and one-month imprisonment and 30 percent fine of two months’ wage for a period of 30 to 60 days.

    “Fine of 20 percent of one month’s wage for a period of eight to 30 days; and 10 percent fine of the one month’s wage for a period of one to seven days respectively.”

    The bill further recommends disciplinary measures for directors of public limited liability companies who default in the payment of salaries and other benefits to workers.

    If passed into law, the legislation will be binding on all Nigerians working as a full employee or contract staff or apprentice either through oral or written agreement in both the public and private sectors.

  • PIGB most politicised bill in National Assembly – Akpatason

    Deputy Majority Leader, House of Representatives, Peter Akpatason has stated that the Petroleum Industry Governance Bill, PIGB is the most politicised bill in the National Assembly.
    PIGB was passed by the 8th National Assembly but President Muhammadu Buhari declined assent to the bill citing anomalies, particularly the reduction of Powers of the Minister of Petroleum over Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation.
    Akpatason told journalists in Abuja that the bill which dates back to the 7th Assembly (2011- 2015) has been hampered by vested interests among stakeholders in the oil and gas industry.
    According to the lawmaker, the only way the PIGB can scale through without much delay is for the executive and the legislative arms of government to come together and get some experts work out the best draft.
    “PIGB has been the most politicised bill in this Assembly, all the way from the 7th Assembly. PIGB has been the most politicised project, all the way from the Executive and even right here in the National Assembly because of a lot of contending interests all over the place.
    “The multinationals formed its block and interest. In politics we have all our various interests all through. The refining block is another, the marketers is another factor, transporters are another big factor.
    “A lot of people are benefiting from a dysfunctional oil sector and these people are very powerful and highly influenced people. People that can manipulate anything possible in this country. That is why you see that even the draft that comes to the National Assembly, you see elements of political twisting and if you try to correct at the level of Committees these interests will come to play.