TheNewsGuru

Tag: SERAP

  • Don’t leave NDDC audit report to gather dust, prosecute those hiding it – SERAP tells Tinubu

    Don’t leave NDDC audit report to gather dust, prosecute those hiding it – SERAP tells Tinubu

    Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has urged President Bola Tinubu “to direct the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice Mr Lateef Fagbemi, SAN to promptly investigate the allegations that high-ranking officials and politicians indicted in the report of the forensic audit on the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) between 2000 and 2019 obstructed the publication of the report.”

    SERAP urged him “to direct Mr Fagbemi and appropriate anti-corruption agencies to promptly identify those responsible for obstructing the release of the report and bring them to justice for obstruction of justice.”

    SERAP also urged him “to direct Mr Fagbemi to immediately publish the NDDC forensic report and to name and shame those responsible for the alleged embezzlement of over N6 trillion in the NDDC, bring them to justice and recover any proceeds of corruption, and provide adequate compensation to victims.”

    In the letter dated 5 July 2025 and signed by SERAP deputy director Kolawole Oluwadare, the organisation said: “While the audit report may make uncomfortable reading for the indicted officials and politicians, your government has a constitutional responsibility to publish it and act upon its recommendations.”

    SERAP said, “The forensic audit report of the NDDC can no longer be left to gather dust. The continued failure to publish the audit report undermines public trust and confidence, particularly of victims of corruption in the Niger Delta who have waited far too long for justice and accountability.”

    SERAP also said, “Obstructing the release of the forensic audit report or hiding it is a grave and wilful attempt to obstruct, prevent and pervert the course of justice for the allegations of corruption in the NDDC.”

    The letter, read in part: “Obstructing the release of the forensic audit report or hiding it, and delaying the implementation of its recommendations have enabled suspected perpetrators to evade justice and denied access to justice for victims.”

    “We would be grateful if the recommended measures are taken within 7 days of the receipt and/or publication of this letter. If we have not heard from you by then, SERAP shall take all appropriate legal actions before the ECOWAS Court of Justice to compel your government to comply with our request in the public interest.”

    “There is a legitimate public interest in publishing the full forensic audit report of the forensic audit on the NDDC and naming and shaming those responsible for leaving the report to gather dust and bringing them to justice.”

    “The UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) in article 25 requires your government to penalise any conduct which wrongly interferes, directly or indirectly, with the initiation, progress, or outcome of any investigation into allegations of corruption.”

    “Victims of grand corruption in the Niger Delta would lose faith in public investigations of corruption if the audit report is not immediately published and its recommendations acted upon. Victims would like to see the recommendations and what progress has been made to make the NDDC fit for purpose.”

    “The failure to publish the report and fully implement its recommendations would seem to suggest that the forensic audit was not commissioned to provide transparency and accountability, but merely as a ruse to defer and avoid it.”

    “The extraordinary delay in publishing the report is contrary to the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended] and the country’s international anticorruption and human rights obligations.”

    “About N1.4 billion was reportedly approved for the auditors who carried out the NDDC forensic audit.”

    “The fact that the forensic audit undertaken at public expense has been gathering dust on an official’s desk for several years shows the failure of the Buhari administration to deliver justice for the people of the Niger Delta who are the primary victims of alleged corruption in the NDDC.”

    “Bringing those suspected to be responsible for the grand corruption documented in the NDDC forensic report and recovering any proceeds of corruption would advance the right of Nigerians to restitution, compensation and guarantee of non-repetition and improve public confidence in the fight against corruption.”

    “The audit report raises prima facie evidence of grand corruption and its staggering effects in the Niger Delta. Nigerians have the right to know the names of those responsible for obstructing the publication of the forensic audit report.”

    “Section 15 subsection (5) of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended] requires your government to abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power.”

    “SERAP is concerned that despite the country’s enormous oil wealth, ordinary Nigerians have derived very little benefit from trillions of naira budgeted for socio-economic development in the region primarily because of widespread grand corruption, and the entrenched culture of impunity of perpetrators.”

    “The missing N6 trillion and over 13,000 abandoned projects in the Niger Delta have continued to have a negative impact on the human rights of Nigerians, undermining their access to basic public goods and services, such as education, healthcare, and regular and uninterrupted electricity supply.”

    “Public schools have been left to crumble and wither away, and health care facilities in several parts of the region lack even the most basic of amenities.”

    “Using the audit report to genuinely combat the corruption epidemic in the NDDC, and rein in those indicted would help to alleviate poverty, improve access of Nigerians in the region to basic public goods and services, and enhance the ability of your government to meet its human rights and anti-corruption obligations.”

    “The UNCAC also requires your government to ensure effective prosecution of allegations of corruption. Specifically, article 26 of the convention requires your government to ensure ‘effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions’ including criminal and non-criminal sanctions, in cases of grand corruption.”

    “Article 26 complements the more general requirement of article 30, paragraph 1, that sanctions must take into account the gravity of the corruption allegations.”

    “According to our information, some high-ranking government officials and politicians indicted in the NDDC forensic audit report allegedly obstructed the publication of the report.”

    “The administration of former president Muhammadu Buhari allegedly left the report to gathe dusk to protect those officials and politicians. The wife of a former minister allegedly collected N48 billion over 12 months ‘to train Niger Delta women.’”

    “Most of the contracts in the NDDC are also allegedly given out to members of the National Assembly.”

    “SERAP notes that the Buhari administration launched an audit to examine the commission’s financial dealings and project execution from 2001 to August 2019, seeking to uncover mismanagement, fund misappropriation, and other discrepancies.”

    “The NDDC forensic audit report allegedly reveals grim allegations of misappropriation of N6 trillion in the commission between 2000 and 2019, and that there are over 13,000 abandoned projects in the Niger Delta.”

    “The NDDC forensic audit report was supposed to be published by the Buhari administration. Four years after it was submitted to the former president, the report still has not seen the light of the day.”

    “Although the forensic audit report was submitted to the Buhari administration in September 2021, the administration apparently did not take the report and its recommendations seriously.”

     

  • SERAP drags NNPCL to court over N500bn unremitted oil revenue

    SERAP drags NNPCL to court over N500bn unremitted oil revenue

    The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) have filed a suit against the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) over its failure to account for N500 billion shortfall in remittances to the Federation Account between October and December 2024.

    The lawsuit follows a World Bank report which revealed that, out of the N1.1 trillion earned by the NNPCL from crude oil sales and other sources during the period, only N600 billion was remitted, leaving a deficit of N500 billion unaccounted for.

    The NNPCL, through its legal representatives, Afe Babalola and Co, in response to a Freedom of Information (FoI) request from SERAP,  claimed that the FoI Act does not apply to the company.

    However, in suit number FHC/L/MSC/553/2025 filed at the Federal High Court in Lagos last Friday, May 30, SERAP is seeking a mandamus order compelling the NNPCL to provide a full account of the missing N500 billion and to disclose its whereabouts.

    Additionally, SERAP is urging the court to direct the NNPCL to involve relevant anti-corruption agencies in investigating the matter, recovering the alleged missing funds, and remitting them to the Federation Account.

    The organization also demands that those responsible be identified, surcharged for the full amount, and handed over to anti-corruption authorities for prosecution.

    “The NNPCL has a responsibility to comply with the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended], the Freedom of Information Act, and the country’s international human rights and anticorruption obligations in the exercise of its statutory functions,” SERAP said.

    “The missing oil revenues have further damaged the already precarious economy in the country and contributed to high levels of deficit spending by the government and the country’s crippling debt crisis.”

  • DSS denies SERAP’s claim over alleged N5.5 billion suit

    DSS denies SERAP’s claim over alleged N5.5 billion suit

    The Department of State Services (DSS) has denied allegations made by the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) that its operatives invaded SERAP’s Abuja office. The DSS said the accusation misrepresented its officers and unfairly portrayed the agency as engaging in unlawful activities.

    A senior DSS official, John Afolabi, testified on Monday before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in Maitama during a hearing in the N5.5 billion lawsuit filed by two DSS officers—Sarah John and Gabriel Ogunleye. The officers are seeking N5 billion in damages, N50 million in litigation costs, and a public apology to be published across various media outlets. SERAP and its Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, are named as defendants.

    Afolabi, who testified as the second witness for the claimants, adopted his written statement as evidence and urged the court to uphold the reliefs requested. During cross-examination by SERAP’s counsel, Devine Oguru, he stated that the visit by John and Ogunleye to SERAP’s office on September 9, 2024, was routine and not an invasion, contrary to the impression created by SERAP’s public report.

    Although Afolabi confirmed he was not physically present during the visit, he said he became aware of the situation through media reports and his own subsequent investigation. “I wasn’t at SERAP’s office on September 9, 2024, and I’ve never been there,” he said. “But based on reports from both social and traditional media and my own investigation, I have a clear understanding of what happened.”

    Afolabi, who serves as a Director in the DSS Investigation Directorate, described both John and Ogunleye as competent and professional officers. He added that the accusations by SERAP not only damaged the officers’ reputations but also embarrassed the DSS, prompting an internal investigation.

    According to Afolabi, the DSS launched an inquiry following public reaction to the allegations. As a result, John and Ogunleye were questioned, required to submit statements, appeared before a disciplinary panel, and were subsequently suspended pending the conclusion of the investigation.

    Under further cross-examination by Oluwadare’s counsel, Oluwatosin Adesioye, Afolabi stated that the two officers, assigned to the NGO Desk within the Investigation Directorate, were acting under instructions from their supervisor during the visit to SERAP’s office.

    Justice Yusuf Halilu adjourned the case until June 30 for the commencement of the defence.

  • Privacy rights: Pay $220m fine, compensate victims or face legal action, SERAP tells Zuckerberg, Meta

    Privacy rights: Pay $220m fine, compensate victims or face legal action, SERAP tells Zuckerberg, Meta

    Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has urged Mr. Mark Zuckerberg, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Meta Platforms Incorporated (Facebook) to “immediately pay the $220 million fine imposed on Meta by the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC), and upheld by the Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal.”

    SERAP urged Mr. Zuckerberg and Meta “to provide (in addition to the fine) justice and effective remedies, including adequate compensation and guarantees of non-repetition for the victims of the grave violations of Nigerian consumer, data protection and privacy laws and international human rights standards.”

    SERAP also urged Mr. Zuckerberg and Meta to “immediately pay the $35,000 awarded by the Tribunal to the FCCPC as cost of investigation.”

    SERAP urged Mr. Zuckerberg and Meta to “immediately halt the violations found by the Tribunal and prevent their re-occurrence, as well as ensure the accountability of any person(s) responsible for the violations.”

    Last Friday the Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal upheld the $220 million fine against Meta by Nigeria’s FCCPC for the grave violations of consumer, data protection and privacy laws.

    In the letter dated 26 April 2025 and signed by SERAP deputy director Kolawole Oluwadare, the organisation said: “As Chairman and CEO, you ought to ensure enhanced transparency, human rights due diligence, accountability and remediation by Meta to ensure that Nigerians’ human rights are not threatened or violated.”

    SERAP said, “The Tribunal’s judgment confirms that the operations of Meta (Facebook) in Nigeria have violated Nigerians’ human rights and continued to have a chilling effect on the enjoyment of human rights on Meta platforms.”

    The open letter, read in part: “SERAP is concerned that the human rights violations found by the Tribunal may be ongoing, and have a high risk of recurrence, if not adequately and effectively redressed.”

    “SERAP urges you and Meta not to unnecessarily prolong the harms suffered by the victims by resisting the temptation to pursue any appeal against the Tribunal’s judgment under the provisions of section 55 the FCCP Act.”

    “The Tribunal’s judgment also shows clear and strong evidence that the operations of Meta in Nigeria are inconsistent and incompatible with international human rights standards including the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.”

    “We would be grateful if these measures are taken within 7 days of the receipt and/or publication of this letter. If we have not heard from you by then, SERAP shall take all appropriate legal actions at the national, regional or international levels to compel you and Meta to comply with our requests in the public interest.”

    “Our requests are brought in the public interest, and in keeping with the requirements of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended], Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and other applicable international human standards binding on Meta.”

    “SERAP is concerned that Meta has not only grossly violated the provisions of the FCCP Act as confirmed by the Tribunal but also international human rights standards including the UN Guiding Principle on Business and Human Rights.”

    “SERAP notes that your companies have a responsibility to respect human rights as set forth by the UN Guiding Principle on Business and Human Rights.”

    “This responsibility requires that Meta avoid causing or contributing to adverse human rights impacts through its own activities, and adequately and effectively redress such impacts when they occur.”

    “Meta should seek to prevent or mitigate adverse human rights impacts that are directly linked to its operations, products or services.”

    “Your companies also have the responsibility to contribute to and facilitate the exercise of the rights to privacy and to ensure data security and privacy, and ensure that the use of data is in compliance with international human rights law.”

    “Section 152 of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection (FCCP) Act provides that where – (a) the consumer’s right has been violated, or (b) a wrong has been committed, the consumer shall in addition to the redress which the Commission may impose have a right of civil action for compensation or restitution.’”

    “Under section 154 of the FCCP Act, victims of the grave violations by Meta are entitled to adequate compensation for the harm suffered.”

    “Section 54 of the FCCP Act provides that ‘An order, ruling, award or judgment of the Tribunal shall be- (a) binding on the parties [including Meta] before the Tribunal; and (b) registered with the Federal High Court for the purpose of enforcement only.’”

    “According to our information, the Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal on Friday, April 25, 2025 upheld the $220 million fine against Meta Platforms for the grave violations of Nigerian consumer, data protection and privacy laws and international human rights standards.”

    “The Tribunal’s judgment followed the administrative penalty imposed on Meta on July 19, 2024 by the FCCPC after concluding that the companies engaged in discriminatory and exploitative practices against Nigerians.”

    “The Tribunal’s judgment followed a 38-month joint investigation initiated by the FCCPC and the Nigeria Data Protection Commission (NDPC) into the conduct, privacy practices, and consumer data policies of Meta Platforms and WhatsApp.”

    SERAP therefore urged Mr. Zuckerberg and Meta to:

    1. Publicly commit to immediately obeying the Tribunal’s judgment and paying the $220 million fine against Meta for the grave violations of Nigerian consumer, data protection and privacy laws and international human rights standards.

    2. Publicly commit to immediately identifying the victims and providing them justice and effective remedies, including adequate compensation and guarantees of non-repetition for the grave violations they have suffered.

    3. Publicly commit to immediately paying the $35,000 awarded by the Tribunal to the FCCPC as cost of investigation.

    4. Promptly provide information as to what human rights due diligence steps, as set out in the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, if any, have been undertaken by your companies to identify, mitigate, and remedy the impact of the violations found by the Tribunal on Nigerians’ enjoyment of their human rights, including the right to privacy.

    5. Promptly provide information as to how Meta is applying the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and other applicable international human rights standards to all stages of its operations in Nigeria, following the Tribunal’s judgment.

    6. Promptly provide information as to the steps your companies have taken, or are considering, in publishing transparency reports regarding the violations found by the Tribunal, and putting international human rights standards at the centre of your business model.

  • Withdraw ‘repressive bill to regulate bloggers or face legal action’, SERAP tells Akpabio, Abbas

    Withdraw ‘repressive bill to regulate bloggers or face legal action’, SERAP tells Akpabio, Abbas

    Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has urged the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, and Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abbas “to immediately withdraw the repressive bill for an act to amend the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023, which seeks to regulate the activities of bloggers operating within the ‘territorial boundaries of Nigeria.’”

    SERAP urged Mr Akpabio and Mr Abbas “to ensure that any amendment to the Nigeria Data Protection Act promotes and protects the rights of bloggers and other journalists and does not undermine the fundamental human rights of Nigerians.”

    SERAP also urged Mr Akpabio and Mr Abbas “to end the imposition of unnecessary restrictions on the rights of Nigerians online and Internet-based content.”

    There is currently a bill titled “A Bill for an Act to Amend the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023, to Mandate the Establishment of Physical Offices within the Territorial Boundaries of the Federal Republic of Nigeria by Social Media Platforms and for Related Matters” (the “bill”).

    The bill among others seeks to regulate bloggers including by requiring all bloggers to register local offices and join recognised national association for bloggers. The bill has passed its first and second reading in the Senate.

    In the letter dated 12 April 2025 and signed by SERAP deputy director Kolawole Oluwadare, the organisation said: “This bill is a blatant attempt to bring back and fast-track the obnoxious and widely rejected social media bill by the back-door.”

    SERAP said, “If passed, the bill would also be used to ban major social media platforms—including Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), Instagram, WhatsApp, YouTube, TikTok, and independent bloggers if they ‘continuously fail to establish/register and maintain physical offices in Nigeria for a period of 30 days.’”

    The letter, read in part: “Lawmakers should not become arbiters of truth in the public and political domain. Regulating the activities of bloggers and forcing them to associate would have a significant chilling effect on freedom of expression and lead to censorship or restraint.”

    “The bill may also be used to block access of Nigerians to social media platforms. Blocking access to social media platforms is a flagrant violation of fundamental rights.”

    “In addition to infringing on Nigerians’ right to access to information and digital technology, the proposed bill would also severely hamper business operations in the country, as many are reliant on foreign tools, services and technologies for their operations, as well as other sectors that rely on online information.”

    “The bill would force international tech companies out of the Nigerian information landscape by requiring them to establish/register and maintain physical offices in the country. It would violate the requirement that the right to freedom of expression applies ‘regardless of frontiers.’”

    “Should the National Assembly and its leadership fail to withdraw the bill to regulate the activities of bloggers, and should any such bill be assented to by President Bola Tinubu, SERAP would consider appropriate legal action to challenge the legality of any such law and ensure it is never implemented in the public interest.”

    “The regulation of bloggers may be used to muzzle any dissenting voice and to silence any form of criticism or negative opinion on the policies and practices of the ruling party or the Government.”

    “Authorities may also use the proposed regulation as a pretext to punish bloggers solely for the peaceful exercise of their human rights.”

    “The bill seems to be directed at bloggers living in Nigeria and elsewhere, with severe adverse effects on the freedom of expression of a very wide range of individuals.”

    “The proposed amendment to the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023 fails to meet the requirements of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended] and international human rights treaties to which the country is a state party.”

    “The amendment, if passed would adversely affect unregistered bloggers operating ‘within the territorial boundaries of Nigeria.’”

    “The proposed amendment may also be used to violate the rights to privacy, freedom of peaceful assembly and of association as protected by the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended] and international human rights standards.”

    “The proposed amendment is entirely inconsistent and incompatible with Nigeria’s obligations to respect and ensure the effective realisation of the right to freedom of opinion and expression. The amendment would disproportionality suppress a wide range of expressive conduct essential to a democratic society.”

    “The bill would pose major barriers and threats to any individuals, especially journalists, human rights defenders and civil society organisations who may be critical of the government, as well as stifle democracy and media freedom.”

    “Mandatory regulation of journalism is incompatible with the right to freedom of expression. There is no legitimate reason why bloggers – or in fact members of the general public – should be subject to mandatory regulation or licensing to express themselves.”

    “Blogging plays an invaluable role in the free flow of information. Bloggers should never be required to register with the government or other official agencies to blog.”

    “The bill may also be used as a pretext to force bloggers to disclose their sources. The right to protect sources is a cornerstone of freedom of the press, without which sources may be deterred from assisting the press in informing the public on matters of public interest.”

    “The Nigerian Constitution and human rights treaties which the country has ratified protect everyone’s right [including bloggers] to maintain an opinion without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers and through any media.”

    “Nigerian authorities including the National Assembly have legal obligations to ensure an environment in which a diverse range of opinions and ideas can be freely and openly expressed and debated.”

    “The requirement of necessity implies an assessment of the proportionality of restrictions, with the aim of ensuring that restrictions target a specific objective and do not unduly intrude upon the rights of targeted persons.”

    “As noted in the 2005 Joint Declaration of the special rapporteurs on freedom of expression, ‘[n]o one should be required to register with or obtain permission from any public body to operate an Internet service provider, website, blog or other online information dissemination system, including Internet broadcasting.’”

    “In their 2011 Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and the Internet, the four special mandates for the protection of freedom of expression highlighted that regulatory approaches in the telecommunications and broadcasting sectors cannot simply be transferred to the Internet.”

  • Rescind unlawful suspension of Natasha Akpoti or face legal action, SERAP tells Akpabio

    Rescind unlawful suspension of Natasha Akpoti or face legal action, SERAP tells Akpabio

    Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has urged the Senate President Mr Godswill Akpabio to “immediately rescind the patently unlawful suspension of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, as the purported suspension is based solely on the peaceful exercise of her constitutionally and internationally recognized right to freedom of expression.”

    SERAP said, “The Senate should immediately reinstate Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan, and revise parliamentary procedures that unduly restrict senators’ human rights.”

    The Senate last week suspended Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan for six months, after she reportedly ‘spoke without permission’ and ‘refused her new seat in the upper legislative chamber.’ Her salary and allowances will not be paid for the duration of the suspension and she was banned from representing herself as a senator.

    In the open letter dated 8 March 2025 and signed by SERAP deputy director Kolawole Oluwadare, the organisation said: “No one should ever be punished for ‘speaking without permission’. Being a senator does not deprive Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan of her fundamental human rights.”

    SERAP said, “The Senate should be setting an example by upholding the rule of law and promoting and protecting fundamental human rights, not stamping them out.”

    According to SERAP, “Punishing Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan solely for peacefully expressing herself is unlawful, unnecessary and disproportionate. Her suspension would also have a disproportionate chilling effect on the ability of other members of the Senate to freely express themselves and exercise their human rights.”

    SERAP also said, “Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension is based solely on the peaceful exercise of her right to freedom of expression in the Senate. All the other grounds cited by the Senate for her suspension seem to be a pretext to further restrict her fundamental human rights.”

    The letter, read in part, “We would be grateful if the recommended measures are taken within 48 hours of the receipt and/or publication of this letter. If we have not heard from you by then, SERAP shall consider appropriate legal actions to compel you and the Senate to comply with our requests in the public interest.”

    “Any application of the Senate Standing Orders 2023 by the Senate must conform with constitutional and international human rights norms and standards relating to freedom of expression and should not jeopardise the right itself.”

    “Suspending Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan for peacefully exercising her right to freedom of expression has made her opinion in the Senate ineffective.”

    “No member of the Senate should suffer any consequences for peacefully exercising their freedom of expression.  A higher degree of tolerance is expected when it is a political speech and an even higher threshold is required when it is directed towards government officials including members of the Senate.”

    “The unlawful restriction of Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan’s right to freedom of expression has indirectly violated Nigerians’ right to receive information and ideas and seriously undermined the right of her constituency to political participation.”

    “Given the impracticality of direct participation of all citizens, article 13 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights provides that a citizen shall exercise political power either directly or through freely chosen representatives.”

    “The suspension of Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan from the Senate has restricted and seriously undermined the ability of the residents of her Kogi Central Senatorial District to effectively participate in their own government. The suspension therefore constitutes a violation of article 13 provisions.”

    “The Senate has the obligations to uphold the rule of law and the provisions of section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution and Nigeria’s obligations under article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”

    “Section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended] provides that, ‘(1) Every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference.’”

    “Under Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights: ‘1. Every individual shall have the right to receive information. 2. Every individual shall have the right to express and disseminate his opinions within the law.’”

    “Article 9 (1) and (2) are substantively similar because the right ‘to receive information’ is derived from the ‘right to express and disseminate’ one’s opinions.”

    “The Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression in Africa, in Principle II (2) provides that ‘any restrictions on freedom of expression shall be provided for by law, serve a legitimate interest and be necessary and in a democratic society’.”

    “Article 13 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights provides that, ‘Every citizen shall have the right to participate freely in the government of his country, either directly or through freely chosen representatives in accordance with the provisions of the law.’”

    “The right to express one’s opinion is of paramount importance, not only because it oils the engine of a representative democracy but also because it creates a free and open environment.”

    “The right to freedom of expression is a fundamental individual human right which is also a cornerstone of democracy and a means of ensuring the respect for all human rights and freedoms.”

    “The Human Rights Council, the body charged with monitoring implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights has stressed that any limitations or restrictions to freedom of expression should be applied strictly so that they do ‘not put in jeopardy the right itself.’”

    “Article 19(1) of the Covenant establishes the right to freedom of opinion without interference. Article 19(2) establishes the Senate’s obligations to respect and ensure ‘the right to freedom of expression,’ which includes the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, either orally or in writing.”

    “The Senate Standing Orders 2023 (as amended) should not and cannot set aside Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan’s right to express herself and disseminate her opinions which is clearly guaranteed in section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended], and under the human rights treaties to which Nigeria is a state party.”

    “According to our information, Mrs Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan was recently suspended for allegedly speaking without permission. She was also accused of “persistent acts of misconduct, blatant disregard for the provisions of the Senate Standing Orders 2023 and gross indiscipline.”

    “Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan was found guilty of violating Sections 6.1 and 6.2 of the Senate Rules including repeated violations of legislative decorum, such as allegedly speaking without being recognised by the presiding officer in clear violation of parliamentary practices and procedures and refusing to sit in her assigned seat during plenary on 25th February 2025, and an act of open defiance.”

  • SERAP wants court to stop CBN from ‘implementing ‘unlawful, unjust ATM fee hike’

    SERAP wants court to stop CBN from ‘implementing ‘unlawful, unjust ATM fee hike’

    Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has filed a lawsuit against the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) “over the failure to reverse the patently unlawful, unfair, unreasonable and unjust increase in Automated Teller Machine (ATM) transaction fees.”

    The CBN recently announced that ATM withdrawals made at a machine owned by a bank but outside its branch premises will now attract a charge of N100 per N20,000 withdrawn. ATM withdrawals at shopping centres, airports or standalone cash points, will incur a N100 fee plus a surcharge of up to N500 per N20,000 withdrawal.

    In the suit number FHC/L/CS/344/2025 filed last Friday at the Federal High Court, Lagos, SERAP is asking the court to determine “whether the decision by the CBN to increase ATM transaction fees is not arbitrary, unfair, unreasonable, and contrary to the provisions of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018.”

    SERAP is asking the court for “a declaration that the decision by the CBN to increase ATM transaction fees is arbitrary, unfair, unreasonable and contrary to the provisions of sections 1(c) and (d), 104, 105 and 127(1) of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018, which is binding on the CBN.”

    SERAP is seeking “an order of interim injunction restraining the CBN, its officers, agents, associates or any other persons acting on its directive or instructions from enforcing and giving effect to the decision, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice for an order of interlocutory injunction filed in this suit.”

    In the suit, SERAP is arguing that: “The increase cannot be justified under the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended], the CBN Act, Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, and the country’s international human rights obligations.”

    SERAP is also arguing that, “The increase creates a two-tiered financial system that discriminates against poor Nigerians who may not be able to afford or pay the increased ATM fees.”

    According to SERAP, “The patently unlawful, unfair, unreasonable and unjust increase in ATM transaction fees also inherently contributes to violations of the human rights of socially and economically Nigerians.”

    The suit filed on behalf of SERAP by its lawyers Kolawole Oluwadare and Andrew Nwankwo, read in part: “The CBN is compromising its stated mission to advance the management of the country’s economy, and ultimately, sustainable development.”

    “The CBN is also failing to comply with the Nigerian Constitution, the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act and the country’s international human rights obligations in the exercise of its statutory powers and functions.”

    “The increase in ATM transaction fees ought to have been shouldered by wealthy banks and their shareholders, not the general public.”

    “CBN policies should not be skewed against poor Nigerians and heavily in favour of banks that continue to declare trillions of naira in profits mostly at the expense of their customers. The increase in ATM transaction fees would inflict misery on poor Nigerians and contribute to human rights abuses.”

    “Imposing exorbitant ATM transaction fees on socially and economically vulnerable Nigerians at a time several Nigerian banks are declaring trillions of naira in profits yearly is manifestly unfair, unreasonable and unjust.”

    “The CBN through a Circular to all banks and other financial institutions dated February 10 2025 stated that it has reviewed and increased the ATM transaction fees prescribed in section 10(7) of the CBN Guide to Charges by Bank, Other Financial and Non-Bank Financial Institutions 2020.”

    “Section 1(c)(d) of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, 2018 provides that the objectives of the Act are to ‘protect and promote the interests and welfare of consumers’ and ‘prohibit restrictive or unfair business practices’ such as the exorbitant and unreasonable increase in ATM transaction fees by the CBN.”

    “The provisions of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act are directly binding on the CBN, as the provisions constrain the exercise of the statutory powers and functions of the institution.”

    “Section 2(1) of the Act provides that its provisions ‘apply to all undertakings [such as the CBN] and scope of application to all commercial activities within Nigeria.”

    “Section 2(2) provides that: ‘This Act is binding upon- (a) a body corporate or agency of the Government; (b) a body corporate; (c) all commercial activities aimed at making profit and geared towards the satisfaction of demand from the public.’”

    “According to section 70(1) of the Act, ‘For the purpose of this Act, an undertaking [such as the CBN] is considered to be in a dominant position if it is able to act without taking account of the reaction of its customers or consumers.’”

    “The Act prohibits abuse of dominant position by the CBN including charging excessive ATM transaction fees to the detriment of consumers.”

    “Section 104 of the of the Act asserts the supremacy of the Act over ‘the provisions of any other law’, such as the CBN Act. The only exception to the provision is the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended].”

    “Section 127(1) of the Act also prohibits the CBN from making any policy or providing “any services at a price that is manifestly unfair, unreasonable or unjust.”

    SERAP is therefore asking the court for the following reliefs:

    A DECLARATION that the decision by the Defendant in upwardly reviewing and increasing ATM Transaction Fees, as contained in the Defendant’s circular dated 10th February 2025 is arbitrary, unfair, unreasonable, unjust and a dis-service to the consumers of the services rendered by Banks, Other Financial and Non-Bank Financial Institutions in Nigeria, and ultimately in breach of sections 1(c) and (d), 104, 105 and 127(1) of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018.
    A DECLARATION that by the combined provisions of section 1 (c) and (d), 104, 105 and 127 (1) of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018, section 42(1) (a) of the Central Bank of Nigeria Act 2007 and section 10.7 of the Central Bank of Nigeria Guide to Charges by Banks, Other Financial and Non-Bank Financial Institution 2020, the Defendant cannot unilaterally increase ATM Transaction Fees without the consent of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC).
    AN ORDER setting aside the Defendant’s circular dated 10th February 2025 and published on 11th February 2025, with reference number FPR/DIR/GEN/CIR/001/002, directed to all Banks and Other Financial Institutions for being arbitrary, unfair, unreasonable, unjust and a breach of the provisions of sections 1 (c) and (d), 104 and 127 (1) of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018.
    AN ORDER restraining the Defendant, including its agents, assigns, privies and or representatives or such other persons acting on its behalf, and all Banks, Other Financial and Non-Bank Financial Institutions in Nigeria from implementing and/or enforcing the decision of the Defendant.
    AND FOR SUCH FURTHER ORDER(S) that the Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstance of this suit.

    No date has been fixed for the hearing of the interim application and the substantive suit.

  • SERAP sues Tinubu over ‘failure to prosecute contractors in N167bn project fraud in MDAs’

    SERAP sues Tinubu over ‘failure to prosecute contractors in N167bn project fraud in MDAs’

    Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has filed a lawsuit against President Bola Tinubu over “the failure to direct the Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Olawale Edun to name and ensure the prosecution of the contractors who collected over N167 billion from 31 ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs) but failed to execute any projects.”

    Joined in the suit as Respondent is the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr Lateef Fagbemi, SAN.

    In the suit number FHC/L/MISC/121/2025 filed last Friday at the Federal High Court, Lagos, SERAP is asking the court “to compel President Tinubu to direct Mr Fagbemi to bring to justice, as appropriate, any companies and contractors who collected over N167bn of public funds from 31 MDAs but failed to execute any projects.”

    SERAP is asking the court “to compel President Tinubu to direct Mr Olawale Edun to publish the specific names of the companies and contractors who collected over N167 billion from 31 MDAs but failed to execute any projects, as documented in the 2021 Audited Report by the Auditor General of the Federation.”

    SERAP is also asking the court “to compel President Tinubu to direct Mr Olawale Edun to publish the details of the projects, such as the locations of the projects for which the contractors and companies collected N167bn, the amount collected by each contractor and company and the names of the shareholders.”

    In the suit, SERAP is arguing that: “The allegations of corruption involving many companies and contractors who collected over N167 billion from 31 MDAs have continued to impair, obstruct and undermine access of poor Nigerians to public goods and services.”

    SERAP is also arguing that, “Holding the companies and contractors who collected over N167bn from 31 MDAs but disappeared with the money would prevent and combat waste, fraud, and abuse in the spending of public funds.”

    According to SERAP, “There is a legitimate public interest in not shielding or allowing ingrained wrongdoing by companies and contractors to go unpunished.”

    SERAP is also arguing that, “The consequences of corruption are felt by citizens on a daily basis. Corruption exposes them to additional costs to pay for health, education and administrative services.”

    SERAP said, “The allegations suggest a grave violation of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 (as amended), the country’s anticorruption legislation and international anticorruption obligations.”

    The suit filed on behalf of SERAP by its lawyers, Kolawole Oluwadare and Ms Oluwakemi Agunbiade, read in part: “Granting the reliefs sought would ensure transparency and accountability in how any public funds are spent by MDAs, and reduce vulnerability to corruption and mismanagement.”

    “The UN Convention against Corruption to which Nigeria is a state party contains requirements of integrity and honesty in economic, financial or commercial activities-both in the public and private sectors.”

    “It also imposes obligations on the government to ensure that sanctions imposed for corruption on natural and legal persons are effective, proportionate and dissuasive.”

    “Ensuring the accountability of companies and contractors and the recovery of any diverted public funds would improve public accountability in MDAs.”

    “The accountability of government to the general public is a hallmark of democratic governance, which Nigeria seeks to practice.”

    “According to the 2021 annual audited report by the Auditor-General of the Federation published on Wednesday 13 November 2024, thirty one (31) ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs) paid over N167 billion [N167,592,177,559.40] to companies and contractors for contracts and projects not executed.”

    “The Nigerian Bulk Electricity Trading Plc., (NBET) alone reportedly paid N100 billion to companies and contractors for projects not executed.”

    “Companies and contractors reportedly collected N100 billion from the Nigerian Bulk Electricity Trading Plc., (NBET) for contracts and projects not executed.”

    “The thirty other MDAs including Nigerian Correctional Service; National Pension Commission, Abuja; Federal College of Land Resources Technology, Owerri; and Hydrocarbon Pollution Remediation Project (HYPREP) Office.”

    “Others include: Petroleum Technology Development Fund (PTDF); Federal Ministry of Youth and Sports Development; Federal Medical Centre, Bida, Niger state; National Centre for Women Development; Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution; National Business and Technical Examinations Board (NABTEB); Federal University of Gasua; and Ministry of Niger Delta Affairs.”

    “Accountability requires transparency. Nigerians’ right to a democratic governance allows them to appreciably influence the direction of government, and have an opportunity to assess progress and assign blame.

    No date has been fixed for the hearing of the suit.

  • MISSING N26bn: SERAP asks Tinubu to probe Ministry of Petroleum Resources, PTDF

    MISSING N26bn: SERAP asks Tinubu to probe Ministry of Petroleum Resources, PTDF

    The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has called on President Bola Tinubu to instruct the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, along with relevant anti-corruption agencies, to probe allegations of missing, diverted, or stolen public funds totaling over N26 billion from the Petroleum Technology Development Fund (PTDF) and the Federal Ministry of Petroleum Resources in 2021.

    These allegations stem from findings documented in the 2021 audited report, released on November 13, 2024, by the Office of the Auditor-General of the Federation. SERAP emphasized the need for accountability, stating, “Anyone suspected to be responsible should face prosecution as appropriate, if there is sufficient admissible evidence, and any missing public funds should be fully recovered and remitted to the treasury.”

    The organization urged that any recovered funds be allocated toward addressing Nigeria’s budget deficit and reducing its mounting debt crisis.

    In a letter dated February 1, 2025, and signed by SERAP’s deputy director, Kolawole Oluwadare, the group underscored the public’s interest in ensuring justice and transparency.

    “Tackling corruption in the oil sector would go a long way in addressing the budget deficit and debt problems,” the letter stated. According to SERAP, the allegations represent a serious breach of public trust, violating the Nigerian Constitution, the country’s anti-corruption laws, and international commitments.

    The letter continued: “Poor Nigerians have continued to pay the price for the widespread and grand corruption in the oil sector.” SERAP further lamented that despite Nigeria’s oil wealth, ordinary citizens have benefited little due to systemic corruption and a culture of impunity.

    The 2021 annual audit by the Auditor-General highlighted multiple financial irregularities: Petroleum Technology Development Fund (PTDF) reportedly paid over N25 billion for contracts without supporting documentation, raising concerns about possible diversion. PTDF allegedly failed to account for N326 million deposited in two banks, which the Auditor-General suspects may be missing.

    A sum of N107 million meant for a library automation system at the Petroleum Training Institute (PTI) was reportedly unaccounted for, with the contract awarded without approval from the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA

  • The increase is unjustifiable, unlawful – SERAP demands reversal, issues ultimatum over tariff hike

    The increase is unjustifiable, unlawful – SERAP demands reversal, issues ultimatum over tariff hike

    The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) have demanded the reversal of the recent 50% hike in telecom tariffs, issuing a 48-hour ultimatum to President Bola Tinubu.

    TheNewsGuru reports that Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC)  on January 20, 2025, announced regulatory approval for telecom operators to raise tariffs by 50 per cent. The agency said the tariff hike will help the operators improve the country’s telecommunication infrastructure.

    The tariff hike follows agitations from the Association of Licensed Telecommunications Operators of Nigeria (ALTON) and the Association of Telecommunications Companies of Nigeria (ATCON) to review call tariffs upwards.

    In a fresh development, SERAP described the increase as “unlawful” and warned of impending legal action if the government and telecom operators fail to reverse the decision.

    “The Tinubu administration and telcos must immediately reverse the unlawful increase in calls and data costs. We’ll see in court if the 50% tariff hike is not reversed within 48 hours,” the group declared.

    SERAP’s ultimatum reflects growing public dissatisfaction over the hike, with many Nigerians expressing concerns about its impact on the cost of living.

    The organization also insisted that the tariff hike violates the rights of consumers and threatens access to affordable communication services.

    “This increase is not only unjustifiable but also unlawful. It risks undermining the accessibility of essential communication services for millions of Nigerians,” SERAP’s statement read.