TheNewsGuru

Tag: SERAP

  • SERAP sues Saraki for ‘paying Dariye N14.2m monthly allowances in prison’

    Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has filed a lawsuit asking the Federal High Court in Lagos to “stop the Senate President Bukola Saraki from paying former Plateau State governor, Senator Joshua Dariye N14.2 million monthly allowances while he serves out a 10-year prison sentence for corruption because such payment violates Nigerian law and international obligations.”

    According to SERAP’s lawsuit, Mr Dariye is still receiving the N750,000 salary and N13.5 million monthly allowances from the Nigeran Senate six months after his conviction. In June, an FCT high court convicted Dariye for diverting N1.162 billion state ecological funds while he was governor. He was sentenced to 14 years in prison, which was later reduced to 10 years by a court of appeal in Abuja. Dariye is said to have been paid N85.5 million as allowances since his conviction.

    Joined as Defendants in the suit are: Mr Dariye and the National Assembly Service Commission.

    In the suit number FHC/L/CS/2146/18 filed last Friday, SERAP argued: “Mr Saraki and the National Assembly Service Commission are trying to override Nigerian law and the judgment of our court by continuing to pay Mr Dariye’s allowances while he serves out a 10-year prison term and unable to sit and perform the functions of a senator. This action undermines the rule of law and is a great moral failure because it sends a message that corruption pays—it’s the opposite of Nigerian Constitutional principles and international obligations.”

    The organisation also argued: “Stopping the Defendants would ensure that only sitting and serving senators are worthy of drawing salaries and allowances from the public treasury. It would also further the public interest and general public confidence in the government it elects. The interest in public confidence is greater than the convicted person’s interest in continuing to receive allowances while serving his sentence for corruption in Kuje prison.”

    The 15-page lawsuit read in part: “Mr Saraki and the National Assembly Service Commission should be immediately restrained from unlawfully paying salaries and allowances to Mr Dariye who is serving jail term. Restraining them would send a clear message to Nigerian elected officials that corruption does not pay and contribute to promoting accountability and fostering public trust and confidence in Nigeria’s democracy, the rule of law and the governance system.”

    “By paying Mr Dariye’s allowances while in prison, Mr Saraki and the National Assembly Service Commission have destroyed the efficacy and purpose of Mr Dariye’s conviction and have brought the rule of law and administration of justice into disrepute. SERAP and the public are alarmed by the action of Mr Saraki and the National Assembly Service Commission and they ought to be restrained by this Honourable Court.”

    “Mr Saraki and the National Assembly Service Commission should not be allowed to continue to make a mockery of the rule of law, our process of administration of justice and our judicial system by behaving as if the Nigerian Senate is not bound by the court judgment which convicted and sentenced Dariye for corruption. Mr Saraki and the Nigerian Senate should be compelled to respect and obey decisions of the court.”

    “By continuing to pay Mr Dariye’s allowances after his conviction and while in Kuje prison and unable to sit and perform the functions of a sitting senator, Mr Saraki and the National Assembly Service Commission have played a negative role to wit: undermining the authority and integrity of the court. Mr Saraki and the National Assembly Service Commission knew or ought to know that Mr Dariye has been convicted and sentenced and now serving his jail term in Kuje prison pursuant to a decision of a competent court.”

    “Mr Dariye, having been convicted, sentenced and currently serving jail term in Kuje prison can no longer by virtue of his imprisonment lawfully carry out or perform the duties of a senator. Mr Dariye ordinarily ceases to be a senator, as per the provisions of section 66 of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria (as amended).”

    “Section 68(1) provides that a senator shall vacate his/her seat if any circumstances arise that would cause him/her to be disqualified for election as senator. This is exactly what happened to Mr Dariye, who is, as a result of his imprisonment, no longer fit to be a senator let alone be entitled to allowances of a sitting senator. Similarly, a senator shall vacate his/her seat if without just cause, he/she is absent from meetings of the Senate, for a period amounting in the aggregate to more than one-third of the total number of days during which the Senate meets in any one year”

    “Mr Dariye is no longer a senator having been convicted, sentenced and currently serving prison terms and having been in prison since June 12, 2018, he is caught by the provision of section 68(1)(f) as it is practically impossible for him to sit as senator.”

    “Mr Dariye, having been absent for a period amounting in the aggregate to more than one-third of the total number of days during which the Senate meets in 2018, is disqualified and therefore his seat has automatically become vacant. Mr Dariye is no longer entitled to be paid and/or to receive the allowances of a sitting and serving senator.”

    “Mr Dariye’s conviction remains in effect until it is set aside. Therefore, the argument that he has appealed his conviction will not hold water. A judgment of a competent court of law subsists until set aside on appeal. The Supreme Court of Nigeria has made this point very clear in several cases.”

    “So long as the decision exists, it must be obeyed to the letter. A judgment of court, no matter the fundamental vice that afflict it, remains legally binding and valid until set aside by due process of law. As the Supreme Court has said, the judiciary like all citizens of this country cannot be a passive on-looker when any person attempts to subvert the administration of justice and will not hesitate to use the powers available to it to do justice in the cases before it.’’

    “Mr Dariye cannot justly and reasonably earn the allowances of a sitting and serving senator, having been convicted and sentenced and serving a prison term. Under the common law principle of money had and received, Mr Dariye is under a legally binding duty to return all such salaries and allowances to the public treasury, having not justly earned such. Mr Dariye should be compelled to return the allowances he has received so far since his conviction.”

    “SERAP is seeking an order restraining Mr Saraki and the National Assembly Service Commission from paying Mr Dariye any further allowances while serving his jail term in Kuje prisons, Abuja.”

    “SERAP is also seeking a declaration that the seat of Mr Dariye in the Senate is automatically deemed vacant, having being convicted and sentenced to a prison term and currently serving jail term and having been absent at the sessions of the Senate for a period amounting in the aggregate to more than one-third of the total number of days allowed, and that he is therefore, not entitled to any allowances reserved for a sitting and serving senator.”

    “SERAP is also seeking an order compelling Mr Dariye to return all salaries and allowances paid to him as a senator while in prison, having not performed the functions and office of a sitting and serving senator and having not deservedly earned such.”

    “Unless the reliefs sought are granted, Mr Saraki and the National Assembly Service Commission will continue to act in flagrant defiance of the judgment of the court, the independence and authority of the court, and the rule of law. It is in the interest of justice to grant this application as the Defendants have nothing to lose if the application is granted.”

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

  • Strike: SERAP to take legal action against FG, ASUU

    Strike: SERAP to take legal action against FG, ASUU

    Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has said it will take legal action against the federal government (FG) and the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) if they fail to agree a deal and re-open universities in the country.

    TheNewsGuru (TNG) reports ASUU called a national strike over a month ago to press demand for implementation of its agreements with the FG, with the FG and ASUU yet to reach a deal to end the strike after several meetings held.

    “We have been contacted by many students caught up in the action. We’re taking legal action against @AsoRock and ASUU if you fail to agree a deal and re-open our universities by next Tuesday”.

    “No child should be humiliated and deprived of an education and human dignity because of the failure of @AsoRock and @ASUUNGR to agree a deal to end strike action. Every child has a right to exploit his/her talents including through university education,” SERAP said.

    Meanwhile, President of ASUU, Professor Biodun Ogunyemi, had told striking lecturers to brace for a longer strike. He also told ASUU members “to be on the watch and prepare for a long-drawn-out struggle to salvage the university system”.

    “Government is yet to change its ‘keep them talking’ style and stance as all the meetings held so far with the Minister of Education are yet to resolve any of the demands of ASUU,” Ogunyemi said.

    Speaking after their zonal meeting at the Ladoke Akintola University, Ogbomoso, ASUU chairman, University of Ibadan, Dr Deji Omole, said the Ibadan zone of the union had been fully mobilized to win the battle with the government to improve the welfare of lecturers as well as funding universities adequately.

    Omole accused the FG of mobilizing funds for the 2019 general elections without any plans to save the education sector from collapse.

     

  • Slain soldiers: SERAP writes Buhari, calls for probe of military spending

    The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, (SERAP) has charged President Muhammadu Buhari to set up a commission of inquiry to investigate the spending of defence and military budgets between 1999 and 2018 in order to promote transparency and accountability in the sector.

    SERAP said the probe would ensure that the funds meant for military operation are spent for that purpose and end the vulnerability and killings of Nigerian soldiers such as the reported death of several Nigerian soldiers in the recent Metele Boko Haram attack.

    The organization also urged President Buhari to refer to the International Criminal Court (ICC) pursuant to article 13 of the Rome Statute, all allegations of corruption in the spending of funds meant to purchase arms to empower Nigerian soldiers to fight Boko Haram, including the “diversion and sharing of the over $2 billion under the former government of President Goodluck Jonathan and approved spending by your own government.”

    In the letter signed by SERAP’s Senior Legal Adviser, Bamisope Adeyanju, the organization said: “We believe that referral of the cases to the ICC would serve as a deterrent and ensure that Nigerians, particularly those in the Northeast of the country whose human rights including to life, to human dignity, and to an adequate standard of living have been violated are not denied justice and effective remedies.”

    The organization urged Buhari to move swiftly to implement these recommendations as a way of demonstrating his government’s commitment to ending the perception of lack of transparency and accountability in the spending of military budgets in the context of the conflict in the Northeast and to ensure the safety and security of soldiers and all Nigerians in that part of the country.

    The letter reads in part: “The military’s inability to respond adequately to the Boko Haram insurgency suggests among other things a mismanagement in the spending of the country’s defence budgets. Establishing a commission of inquiry to investigate how defence and military budgets have been spent since 29 May 1999 would help Nigerians to know if the funds meant to defend the country and for purchase of arms to empower Nigerian soldiers to fight Boko Haram have been transparently and accountably spent.

    “The proposed commission should be led by a retired justice of the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court of Nigeria. The activities of the commission must be open to the public and all those who have been responsible for the spending of the country’s defence and military budgets should be summoned to give a public account of how the money was spent.
    “Testimonies should be taken in a way that ensures that specific military operations are not disclosed and national security not compromised. The commission should make recommendations including on the prosecution of those found to have mismanaged and/or stolen public funds meant to fight Boko Haram.

    “SERAP is concerned that many cases of those alleged to have diverted and shared funds meant to purchase arms to empower Nigerian soldiers to fight Boko Haram have stalled. Given the continuing delay in the prosecution of such cases, and the need to send a strong message that corruption in the spending of funds meant to fight Boko Haram insurgents will not be tolerated, we urge you to immediately refer all such cases for investigation and prosecution by the ICC.

    “Opacity and deficiencies in the way arms purchases are decided and controlled if not urgently addressed would continue to expose our soldiers to risk of attacks and killings; displace people and destroy their means of livelihoods and render them homeless, thereby undermining human rights, including the right to life, right to personal security, right to education and right to livelihood.

    “SERAP notes that in 2014 about N340billion (US$1.7billion) was allocated to the military. Also, a number of offices had budgets allocated to them in relation to the Boko Haram conflict. The military received the largest funds in the federal budget in 2014. In October 2014, the National Assembly approved a request to borrow US$1billion as an additional amount for purchase of military equipment. In 2015, about N375billion (US$1.8billion) was allocated to the military in the federal budget.

    “The same year, an interim report of the presidential investigations committee on arms procurement under the former president Goodluck Jonathan administration revealed an extra-budgetary spending to the tune of N643.8 billion and an additional spending of about $2.1 billion under the Goodluck Jonathan administration.”

  • Instruct AGF to investigate allegations of bribery against Gov Ganduje – SERAP tells Buhari

    Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, (SERAP) has sent an open letter to President Muhammadu Buhari urging him to use his “good offices and leadership position to direct the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice Abubakar Malami, SAN, and/or appropriate anti-corruption agencies to without delay investigate allegations of bribery against Governor Abdullahi Ganduje of Kano State, as contained in the widely circulated video clips allegedly showing Mr Ganduje receiving bribe.”

    The organization said: “if there is relevant and sufficient admissible evidence, Mr Ganduje should face prosecution at the expiration of his tenure as governor.” The organization also urged the government “to instruct the Attorney General and/or appropriate anti-corruption agencies to ensure the protection and guarantee the safety and security of journalist Jaafar Jaafar, who reportedly published the video clips.”

    In the open letter dated 2 November 2018 and signed by SERAP senior legal adviser Ms Bamisope Adeyanju, the organization said, “Given the history of corruption in Nigeria, especially unresolved allegations of grand corruption against many state governors, your government cannot and should not look the other way regarding the allegations against Mr Ganduje. Any allegations of bribery and abuse of power in any state of Nigeria is of concern to every Nigerian, and should therefore, be of concern to your government.”

    The organization also said, “The obligations of your government to combat corruption in Nigeria extend to all the three tiers of government, namely, the federal government, state government and local government. Although primarily a matter of concern for Kano State, the allegations of bribery against Mr Ganduje have assumed such a proportion as to become a matter of concern to the federation as a whole, and therefore, to your government.”

    The organization asked the government to “take the recommended steps within 14 days of the receipt and/or publication of this letter, failing which SERAP will institute legal proceedings to compel your government to act in the public interest.”

    According to the organization, “Taking the recommended steps would help to enhance your government’s fight against corruption and contribute hugely to promoting the public interest, the interest of justice as well as prevent any abuse of the legal process. Any failure and/or refusal to act would undermine the goal of your government’s anti-corruption fight and tacitly serve to encourage persistent allegations of corruption among many state governors to continue with almost absolute impunity.”

    The letter read in part: “Vigorously seeking to enforce anticorruption legislation and the UN Convention against Corruption to which Nigeria is a state party against alleged corrupt state governors, will show that your government is with concerned with the overall well-being of the federation and willing and able to enforce important constitutional principles.”

    “The Attorney-General of the Federation has power, conferred on him by section 174(1)(a) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and anticorruption agencies have the powers to act on the allegations of bribery against Mr Ganduje for the sake of ensuring transparency and accountability, and promoting the common good, peace, order and good government of the federation (which includes Kano State).”

    “Taking prompt action on the allegations of bribery against the governor would also be entirely consistent with the provisions of section 15 subsection (5) of the Constitution, which requires your government to abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power, regardless of the state where such practices take place. Section 15 specifically defines “government” to include the government of the federation, or of any state, or of a local government council or any person who exercises power or authority on its behalf.

    “Section 61(2) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences (ICPC) Act also provides that public officers accused of bribery may be prosecuted by the appropriate authority for such an offence.”

    “SERAP is concerned that growing allegations of corruption including bribery against many state governors have not been investigated and that several of the governors involved are getting away with their alleged crimes.”

    “We note that while a governor may enjoy immunity from arrest and prosecution, he does not enjoy immunity from investigation. Any criminal allegation against a sitting governor including Mr Ganduje can and should be investigated pending the time the governor leaves office and loses immunity. The findings of such investigation can also be the basis for initiating impeachment proceedings against the governor.”

     

  • Epileptic power supply: SERAP gets court order against Fashola

    Epileptic power supply: SERAP gets court order against Fashola

    Anti-corruption group, Socio-Economic and Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), on Tuesday got court’s leave to file for a mandamus order against the Minister of Power, Works and Housing, Babatunde Fashola, over poor power supply in the country.
     
    The mandamus order is to compel Fashola to account for about N900bn sunk into the privatisation of the electricity sector in Nigeria without any positive result to show for it.
     
    The leave to seek mandamus order against Fashola was granted on Tuesday by Justice C.J. Aneke of the Federal High Court in Lagos.
     
    The leave followed an ex parte application filed and argued by SERAP’s lawyer, Ms Bamisope Adeyanju.
     
    The judge, after granting the leave, directed that Fashola should be put on notice while he adjourned the case till November 20.
     
    SERAP’s Deputy Director, Timothy Adewale, said the court’s ruling had brightened the prospect that Nigerians would finally get an explanation on why the country remained in darkness despite huge investment in the power sector by the Federal Government.
     
    SERAP seeks a mandamus order to compel Fashola “to account for the spending on the privatisation of the electricity sector and the exact amount of post-privatisation spending on generation companies, distribution companies and Transmission Company of Nigeria till date, and to explain if such spending came from budgetary allocations or other sources.”
     
    SERAP wants Fashola to be compelled “to provide specific details on the privatisation of the electricity sector, the names of all the companies and individuals involved; and to publish widely, including on a dedicated website, any such information.”
     
    The group said, “Most of the companies that won the bids had no prior experience in the power sector and little or no capacity at all to manage the sector.
     
    “The privatisation of the Power Holding Company of Nigeria has yielded the country total darkness. The gains of privatisation have been lost through alleged corruption, manipulation of rules and disregard for extant laws and lack of transparency in the exercise.”

  • Vote-buying: INEC replies SERAP, gives conditions to prosecute, arrest suspects

    Vote-buying: INEC replies SERAP, gives conditions to prosecute, arrest suspects

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has said that it has powers to prosecute allegations of vote buying by both the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) during the recently concluded governorship election in Ekiti State but lacks the powers to arrest and investigate suspects.

    INEC said this in response to the open letter by Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, (SERAP) to the Commission’s Chairman, Professor Mahmood Yakubu requesting the electoral commission to “promptly, thoroughly and effectively investigate allegations of vote buying, and to collaborate with the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in any such investigation.”

    The organization also urged INEC to “prosecute anyone suspected to be involved and/or complicit in the alleged vote buying, if there is relevant and sufficient admissible evidence of electoral bribery and abuse of the electoral and democratic process against them.”

    But INEC in a letter signed by its Acting Secretary Okechukwu Ndeche said that while the Commission’s legal officers or any legal practitioner appointed by it can prosecute alleged vote buying, other agencies must first arrest and investigate suspects before the Commission can prosecute. The Commission however said that it would “partner with other agencies to prosecute electoral offenders.”

    The INEC response dated 20 August 2018 but received yesterday by SERAP read in part: “We refer to your letter dated 17th July 2018 wherein you requested that the Commission investigate and prosecute alleged vote buying in the recently concluded governorship election in Ekiti State.”

    “The Commission wishes to inform SERAP of the constraints posed by extant statutory provisions against your well-intended request.”

    “You may also wish to note that it is not part of the constitutional duties of the Commission to arrest and investigate suspects found to have contravened provisions of the Electoral Act or any other Law for the time being in force. Section 150(2) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) only confers powers on Legal Officers of the Commission or any other Legal Practitioner appointed by it to undertake prosecution of offences disclosed under the Act.”

    “We wish to assure you that the Commission will continue to partner with relevant security agencies to prosecute electoral offenders.”

    Reacting, SERAP said: “We note the response by INEC. We will be in court this Friday to seek orders to compel the Commission to work with other agencies to ensure the immediate arrest, investigation and prosecution of all suspects allegedly involved in vote buying in Ekiti State, Anambra State, Edo State and Ondo State.”

    It would be recalled that SERAP had earlier given Professor Yakubu 14 days to prosecute suspects “failing which SERAP will institute legal proceedings to compel you and the INEC to discharge your constitutional and statutory responsibilities in the public interest.”

    SERAP’s letter copied to both the ICPC and the EFCC read in part: “It is the responsibility of INEC as an independent body to take meaningful steps and action to minimise electoral bribery by politicians, ensure political equality and prevent unfair electoral competition. No body politic worthy of being called a democracy entrusts the selection of leaders to a process of auction or barter.”

    “Vote buying amounts to undue influence and improper electoral influence. When politicians buy votes, they reinforce social subjugation and do long-term damage to poor voters, as vote buying impairs voters’ already limited political power and participation in governance. Offering and giving poor people money to buy their votes is the hallmark of political disrespect, as it implies that politicians perceive voters as lacking autonomy.”

    “Investigating the allegations and prosecuting all those suspected to be involved would indicate your agencies’ willingness to exert your authorities and act as a deterrent against breaches of the electoral process, Nigeria’s anti-corruption legislation and international standards.”

    “SERAP therefore urges you to carry out investigation and prosecution of vote buying in Ekiti election but also in the elections in Anambra State, Edo State and Ondo State, in collaboration with the ICPC and EFCC of the allegations of vote buying, as highlighted above, and to send a strong message to politicians that INEC under your leadership would not tolerate any infringement of the electoral process ahead of the 2019 general elections.”

    “Turnout of poor voters may decrease if they view a wealth-driven electoral system increasingly stacked against their interests. It is inconsistent and incompatible with the principles of democracy, the rule of law, transparency and accountability for politicians to use vote buying to perpetuate systems of regular patronage, knowing that such acts would purchase them sympathy and support, especially from socially and economically vulnerable communities.”

    “Vote buying amounts to undue interference in the free exercise of the right to vote, as it implicitly aims at influencing or attempting to influence a voter not to vote or to vote in a particular manner. Specifically, the alleged giving of N3,000 or N5,000 to voters during the Ekiti election or payment into the bank accounts of voters is corruptly intended, and clearly aimed to influence their choice of candidates and voting intention. This practice seriously undermines the right of voters to freely vote according to their convictions.”

    “Further, vote buying gives wealthy politicians an advantage in election campaigns and outcome greater than what they already possess, and it biases political decisions in favor of the wealthy. Our democracy cannot be sustainable when the electoral system inordinately prioritises the rights of political parties and their candidates in elections over and above those of the ordinary voter.”

    “When politicians buy votes from the poor, political equality will suffer. If voters choose candidates for public office at least in part based on the voters’ economic interests, and these economic interests vary depending upon one’s wealth, candidates chosen in elections where the wealthy buy the votes of the poor more likely will reflect the views of the wealthy. Thus, economic disparities will translate into political disparities in the election of candidates.”

    “According to reports, agents of the APC and the PDP allegedly openly engaged in vote buying in some polling units during Ekiti Governorship election. Many voters were videoed moving in numbers to ‘cash collection points’ in lieu of their votes. Others received credit alerts on their mobile phones.”

    “We consider allegations of vote buying as political corruption, because it is the promising or giving of value in the form of money, in return for a promise of a vote. We are concerned that the failure of INEC to rein in electoral bribery is illustrated by the fact that the body has failed and/or neglected to investigate and prosecute similar incidents of vote buying in places like Edo State; Anambra State and Ondo State.”

    “SERAP is seriously concerned that vote buying undermines the ability of INEC to discharge its responsibilities under Section 153 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and paragraph 15(a) of the third schedule of the Constitution, the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) and under the UN Convention against Corruption to which Nigeria is a state party.”

  • Rebuild Ayefele’s Fresh FM or face legal action – SERAP threatens Ajimobi

    Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, (SERAP) has demanded that the Governor of Oyo State, Senator Abiola Ajimobi, rebuilds the demolished building of Fresh FM owned by popular juju musician, Yinka Ayefele, or face national and international legal actions.

    This was made known in an open letter by SERAP’s deputy director, Timothy Adewale on Tuesday requesting Governor Ajimobi to immediately halt all further eviction and demolition of Fresh FM building and to show full respect for the safety and dignity of residents and owner of Fresh FM.

    SERAP also urged Ajimobi to ensure full and effective respect for the rights to freedom of expression and media freedom in Oyo State.

    The letter reads in part: “We have information to suggest that the destruction of Fresh FM was based on political considerations and retaliation against the radio station on purported allegations of defamation against you.

    “The facts suggest that the demolition of Fresh FM building failed to comply with the principle of lawfulness and reasonableness. The demolition was neither done in the public interest nor carried out to achieve a legitimate aim.

    “This apparently unlawful action has set a bad precedent, and created a high level of uncertainty and anxiety among many radio stations and other media organizations in Oyo State about the future because of the likelihood of their buildings being demolished when they are deemed to broadcast views which the Oyo State authorities may consider too critical or ‘defamatory’.”

    “By going ahead to demolish the Fresh FM building despite being served with the court papers in the case filed by the station, you implicitly obstructed access of the radio station and their owners to appropriate forms of legal protection, contrary to the provisions of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to which Nigeria is a state party and which is legally binding on the government of Oyo State.

    “SERAP is seriously concerned that the Oyo State authorities carried out the demolition of Fresh FM building with wilful disregard for the dignity, health, and safety of residents and the owner, who is a person with disabilities. The demolition of the radio station has now exposed residents to the elements and the public to the risk of complete collapse of the building.

    “We urge Governor Abiola Ajimobi to ensure full and effective respect for the rights to freedom of expression and media freedom in Oyo State.

    “We request that you take this step within 7 days of the receipt and/or publication of this letter, failing which SERAP will take national and international legal actions to compel your government to act in the public interest and the overall interest of the rule of law.

    “Since your government’s action in this case suggests serious disregard for the safety and welfare of the residents of Fresh FM, the authorities’ conduct may have risen to a level of severity so as to constitute inhuman and degrading treatment of residents and owner, contrary to the provisions of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 (as amended) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Nigeria is a state party.

    “Your government has reportedly cut water, sewer, electricity, gas, and telephone lines to the radio station, rendering it uninhabitable and incapable of discharging its constitutional duties of informing the citizens and ensuring that government is both responsible and accountable to the people.

    “We contend that the action by your government has no basis in our laws, which provide that no public authorities must resort to self-help and carry out forced evictions and demolitions without a properly obtained court order. Your government’s action also violates Nigeria’s international human rights obligations, including its obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to protect private property.

    “Your government has responded to the demolition of Fresh FM building on Sunday 19 August 2018, claiming that it demolished the building worth over N800 million because your government was ‘carrying out its statutory role in the public interest. Your government claimed it gave “ample opportunity for Fresh FM to regularise its building plan”. Your government also claimed the demolition of the Fresh FM building was not politically motivated.

    “However, available facts reveal that the demolition may have been influenced by political considerations, and done in retaliation for alleged defamation by Fresh FM. SERAP has seen an audio recording of you at the radio station in 2016 wherein you claimed to be under pressure from some of the members of your cabinet to demolish Fresh FM building on the ground that the radio station and its owner Mr Yinka did not support your political ambition but that you resisted the pressure to demolish.

    “SERAP has also seen a letter dated 3rd July 2018 and signed by your Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice Oluseun Abimbola wherein you alleged ‘libellous broadcast by Fresh FM 105.9.’ The letter claimed that during a programme “Political Circuit” on Fresh FM on Saturday 30th June 2018, the radio station ‘falsely accused, maliciously and wickedly misled the public and the entire world’ on your alleged interest in a private company.’

    “Assuming there was a legitimate claim in defamation against Fresh FM, the proper venue for you and your government would have been to seek legal redress in court and not to resort to self-help in the form of arbitrary demolition of the radio station building.

    “The UN General Assembly has recognized the “fundamental obligation of governments (including that of Oyo State) to protect and improve houses and neighbourhoods, rather than damage or destroy them.

    “Further, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in Article 17 provides: ‘Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.’ Similarly, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights to which Nigeria is a state party provides in Article 14: ‘The right to property shall be guaranteed. It may only be encroached upon in the interest of public need or in the general interest of the community and in accordance with the provisions of appropriate laws.’”

  • #AdeosunGate: SERAP drags NYSC to court for failure to publish exemption certificate

    #AdeosunGate: SERAP drags NYSC to court for failure to publish exemption certificate

    The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has sued the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) for failing to publish the exemption certificate of Minister of Finance, Mrs Kemi Adeosun, was allegedly issued to her by the agency some few years ago.

    Recall that an online news platform, Premium Times, had reported last month that the Minister forged her exemption certificate even when she was not eligible by law to be exempted from one-year mandatory service, having graduated from college before the age of 30. The Minister finished from a London higher institution in 1989 at 22 and she was supposed to return to Nigeria for the NYSC programme, but she did not.

    Earlier this month, SERAP gave NYSC seven days to confirm if it issued the exemption certificate to Mrs Adeosun or face a legal action.

    However, the seven-day ultimatum passed without any response from the agency, which had earlier said it was investigating the matter.

    In the suit number FHC/L/CS/1369/18 filed yesterday at the Federal High Court, Ikoyi, Lagos, SERAP is seeking “an order for leave to apply for judicial review and an order of mandamus directing and/or compelling General Kazaure and the NYSC to urgently provide specific documents and information on Mrs Kemi Adeosun’s application to the NYSC for Exemption and to publish widely including on a dedicated and on the NYSC website, any such information.”

    The suit followed SERAP’s Freedom of Information request dated 2 August 2018 to General Kazaure, giving him 7 days to provide “information on specific details and documents on the Exemption Certificate applied for and obtained by Mrs Adeosun; clarify whether the NYSC actually granted her the Exemption Certificate and if it did, the circumstances and the provisions of the NYSC Act under which the Exemption Certificate was granted.”

    The suit, which also joined the Director-General of NYSC, Brigadier-General Sule Kazaure and filed on behalf of SERAP by its counsel, Ms Bamisope Adeyanju, read in part: “Suspicions of obtaining unauthorised certificate involving a senior member of the government if not urgently and satisfactorily addressed would weaken public trust in the government’s oft-expressed commitment to transparency and accountability.

    “By the combined provisions of section 104(1) of the Evidence Act, 2011 and sections 14(2)(b) 14(3) and 19(2) of the Freedom of Information Act, the NYSC, being the public institution in charge of issuing exemption certificates from the compulsory NYSC Programme, and having publicly declared that Mrs. Adeosun applied for exemption, has a duty to provide SERAP with details and documents containing the application for exemption and the exemption certificate itself, if it was granted.

    “Mandamus lies to secure the performance of a public duty in the performance which SERAP has a sufficient legal interest. SERAP has shown that it has demanded the performance of the duty by the NYSC in this case, and that performance has been refused by the Director-General of the NYSC obliged to discharge it.

    “The right of access to information should be subject to a narrow, carefully tailored system of exceptions. Exceptions should apply only where there is a risk of substantial harm to the protected interest and where that harm is greater than the overriding public interest in having access to the information.

    “SERAP requested the NYSC to provide the information within 7 days of the receipt and/or publication of the letter. But since the receipt of the letter by the NYSC and up till the filing of this suit, the NYSC has failed, refused and/or neglected to respond to or grant SERAP’s request.

    “This matter is of utmost national importance and public interest, because it borders on allegations of circumvention of the law, brought against a high public officer of Nigeria, who has sworn on oath to uphold the laws of the nation; including the NYSC Act. The grant of this application will help reveal the truth about the authenticity of the Exemption Certificate granted to Mrs Adeosun.

    “By the combined provisions of Sections 1; 2; 3(4); 4; 7(1)&(5); 9; 14(2)(b)&3; 19(2); and 20 of the Freedom of Information Act, 2011, the right of access to information is guaranteed and there is a statutory obligation on the NYSC being a public institution, to proactively keep, organize and maintain all information or records about their operations, personnel, activities and other relevant or related information or records in a manner that facilitates public access to such information or record.

    “The NYSC has no reason whatsoever not to comply with the demands by SERAP. There is compelling public interest in the disclosure of the information sought by SERAP, which concerns whether a high-ranking Minister had circumvented or disobeyed the law. The public interest in this case outweighs any private interest that the NYSC may be protecting. By the provision of Section 20 of the Freedom of Information Act, SERAP is entitled to apply to this Court for a review of the action of the NYSC.

    “Unless the reliefs sought by SERAP are granted, the NYSC will not provide SERAP with the documents and information requested and will continue to be in breach of the Freedom of Information Act.

    “SERAP is entitled as of right to request for or gain access to information, including information on the Exemption allegedly applied for by Mrs Adeosun.”

    The suit is seeking the following reliefs:

    “A DECLARATION that the failure of the Respondents to provide the Applicant with specific documents and information on Mrs Kemi Adeosun’s application to it for NYSC Exemption is unlawful and amounts to a breach of the Respondents’ responsibility/obligation under the Freedom of Information Act 2011.

    “AN ORDER OF MANDAMUS directing and/or compelling the Respondents to urgently provide the Applicant with specific documents and information on Mrs Kemi Adeosun’s application to it for National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) Exemption and to publish widely including on a dedicated and on the NYSC website, any such information.

    “A DECLARATION that the failure of the Respondents to provide the Applicant with specific documents and information on the following:

    “i. the procedure under the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) Act, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 to “apply” for NYSC Exemption;

    “ii. whether an authorized official of the NYSC actually issued an Exemption Certificate to Mrs. Kemi Adeosun;

    “iii. if NYSC did issue the NYSC Exemption Certificate, the circumstances and the provisions of the NYSC Act under which the Exemption Certificate was granted; and to publish widely including on a dedicated website and on the NYSC website, any such information, is unlawful and amounts to a breach of the Respondent’s obligation under the Freedom of Information Act 2011.

    “AN ORDER OF MANDAMUS directing and/or compelling the Respondents to urgently provide the Applicant with specific documents and information on the following:

    “i. the procedure under the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) Act, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 to “apply” for NYSC Exemption;

    “ii. whether an authorized official of the NYSC actually issued an Exemption Certificate to Mrs. Kemi Adeosun; if NYSC did issue the NYSC Exemption Certificate, the circumstances and the provisions of the NYSC Act under which the Exemption Certificate was granted; and to publish widely including on a dedicated website and on the NYSC website, any such information.”

    Meanwhile, no date has been fixed for the hearing of the suit.

  • SERAP issues NYSC seven days ultimatum to provide documents on Adeosun’s certificate

    SERAP issues NYSC seven days ultimatum to provide documents on Adeosun’s certificate

    The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has sent a Freedom of Information request to Sule Kazaure, Director-General of the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) asking him to “urgently provide information on specific details and documents on the Exemption Certificate granted to the Minister of Finance, Mrs. Kemi Adeosun”.

    The organisation also asked Mr Kazaure “to provide information and documents on whether Mrs Adeosun applied for NYSC Exemption Certificate, and if she did, to clarify whether the NYSC actually granted her the Exemption Certificate, the circumstances and the provisions of the NYSC Act under which the Exemption Certificate was granted”.

    The organisation said it “needs the information to determine if the crime of forgery has been committed, and if so, to consider possible action in the circumstances, including but not limited to asking the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice Mr Abubakar Malami SAN to pursue prosecution or in the absence of that, for us to consider the option of a private prosecution”.

    Its statement signed by Timothy Adewale, deputy director and released on Thursday reads in part:

    “In the FOI request dated 2 August 2018 and signed by SERAP deputy director Timothy Adewale, the organization said, “By providing information and documents on the Exemption Certificate, the NYSC would help put an end to any insinuation of complicity and show that the institution can embrace transparency and accountability in the discharge of its statutory mandates. This would in turn contribute to improved integrity and public image of the NYSC.”

    “According to the organisation, “Mrs Adeosun remains innocent until the allegations against her are properly tested and proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of competent jurisdiction based on relevant admissible evidence. But the continuing silence by the NYSC management on the matter may create an impression that an offence may have been committed, and lead to accusation that the management has something to hide.”

    “The letter read in part: “We urge you and the entire NYSC management and leadership to open-up on the matter and provide information and documents as requested. This will be one step in the right direction. If the information is not provided to us within 7 days of the receipt and/or publication of this letter, the Registered Trustees of SERAP shall take all appropriate legal actions under the Freedom of Information Act to compel you to comply with our request.”

    “SERAP is concerned about the perceived lack of transparency and accountability of the NYSC management and leadership in this matter, which has seriously undermined public trust and confidence in the NYSC as a public institution established to serve the public interests.”

    “SERAP notes that following allegations of NYSC Exemption Certificate forgery against Mrs Adeosun, the NYSC management issued a statement confirming that she did apply for an Exemption Certificate and promising to ‘investigate the origin of the purported Exemption Certificate in question.’”

    “However, we are concerned that the statement lacks specificity as to whether Mrs Adeosun was issued the Exemption Certificate. Further, although the statement was issued on 9 July 2018, the NYSC management has so far failed and/or neglected to publish the outcome of the investigation it promised. Nigerians are also entitled to the right to truth derived from the obligations of the government and its institutions to carry out an investigation into allegations of issues like forgery that have been levelled against Mrs Adeosun.”

    “By Section 1 (1) of the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act 2011, SERAP is entitled as of right to request for or gain access to information, including information on the circumstances and the provisions of the NYSC Act under which any NYSC Exemption Certificate was granted to Mrs Adeosun.”

    “By Section 4 (a) of the FOI Act when a person makes a request for information from a public official, institution or agency, the public official, institution or urgency to whom the application is directed is under a binding legal obligation to provide the applicant with the information requested for, except as otherwise provided by the Act, within 7 days after the application is received.”

    “By Sections 2(3)(d)(V) & (4) of the FOI Act, there is a binding legal duty to ensure that documents containing information relating to the granting of any NYSC Exemption Certificate are widely disseminated and made readily available to members of the public through various means. The information being requested does not come within the purview of the types of information exempted from disclosure by the provisions of the FOI Act. The information requested for bothers on an issue of national interest, public concern, good governance, transparency and accountability.”

    The Buhari-led administration is yet to address the forgery allegations against Mr Adeosun, weeks after PREMIUM TIMES first broke the story on how the finance minister avoided the mandatory one year youth service and thereafter obtained a forged exemption certificate to cover her tracks.

  • Bring governors to justice over alleged stealing of security votes, SERAP tells Buhari

    Bring governors to justice over alleged stealing of security votes, SERAP tells Buhari

    Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, (SERAP) has sent an open letter to President Muhammadu Buhari requesting him to use his “leadership position to direct the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice Abubakar Malami, SAN, and/or appropriate anti-corruption agencies to without delay investigate widespread allegations of mismanagement and corruption in the spending of security votes by several state governors in Nigeria since the return of democracy in 1999.”

    The organization said, “If there is relevant and sufficient admissible evidence, for former governors to face prosecution and serving governors to be prosecuted at the expiration of their tenure as governors.”

    The organization also urged Buhari to “instruct the Attorney General and/or appropriate anti-corruption agencies to publish the report of any such investigation including the names of governors that may have benefited from the public funds, and to ensure the recovery of proceeds of corruption. We request that you take this step within 14 days of the receipt and/or publication of this letter, failing which SERAP will institute legal proceedings to compel your government to act in the public interest.”

    In the letter dated 6 July 2018 and signed by SERAP deputy director Timothy Adewale the organization said, “Pursuing this matter would ensure that public funds are used properly, and mean state governors would be less likely to misuse or steal security votes, and ultimately improve the ability of state governments to promote, enhance and ensure the security and safety of all Nigerians in their states.”

    The organization said, “The lack of transparency and accountability in the spending of security votes is the real cause of many of the security challenges confronting Nigeria. State governments across the country are failing to ensure the safety and security of Nigerians and residents despite huge yearly allocations of security votes to governors. These funds are purportedly appropriated for State security.”

    The letter read in part: “However, despite these huge expenditures on security, many state governors are failing to prevent kidnappings, cultism, assassinations and other unlawful killings, maiming of residents and destruction of property.”

    “SERAP is concerned about the growing allegations of mismanagement, waste, and corrupt practices in the spending of security votes by several state governors. Rather than using security votes to promote, enhance and ensure peace and security in their states, many governors have allegedly used and/or still using it as conduit to divert public funds for private gain.”

    “Yet, the most general purpose of state power is to provide security for citizens and other residents and to enable them to lead a life that is meaningful to them. In fact, the Nigerian Constitution of 1999 (as amended) states clearly in Section 14 (2b) that the security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government.”

    “Many state governments do not include security vote expenditures in their appropriation laws, as they prefer to apply extra-budgetary measures in the allocation of such funds. This ensures that the public is kept out of the loop on this bogus and suspicious expenditure.”

    “State governments cannot on the one hand appropriate huge funds each year under the security vote expenditure head while on the other claim that ensuring the security and safety of Nigerians is the exclusive responsibility of the Federal Government. Rather than serving the public interest in terms of enhancing the security and safety of all Nigerians in several states, the allocation and appropriation of security votes would seem to serve the personal, political and pecuniary interests of public office holders entrusted with security votes.”

    “SERAP is concerned that majority of states do not disclose how much funds are allocated and expended as security votes by governors. Referring the allegations of mismanagement and corruption in the spending of security votes by several states would help to remove the secrecy and lack of accountability associated with security votes, improve the level of security in several states and contribute to good governance in the country.”

    “Apart from contributing to the level of insecurity across several states, corruption in the spending of security votes is also taking away the much-needed resources to provide education, healthcare, clean drinkable water and other essential public services by these states.”

    “SERAP notes that each year since the return to civilian rule in 1999, huge public funds are budgeted at all levels of government in Nigeria in the name of security votes. According to our information, the amount appropriated as security votes by state governments in Nigeria range between N400 million and N2 billion monthly. Over N1.5 trillion is allocated and expended annually as security votes by governments at all levels in Nigeria, virtually all of which is lost to corruption primarily because the spending of such funds is entirely at the discretion of the public office holder.”

    “The allegations of mismanagement and corruption in the spending of security votes by many state governors suggest a fundamental breach of Nigeria’s anti-corruption laws and several provisions of the UN Convention against Corruption including articles 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 9, 15, 17, 18, 19 and 20, to which Nigeria is a state party.”

    “We note that the Attorney General is a defender of public interest and has the powers under Section 174(1) of the Constitution of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), to institute and undertake criminal proceedings against anyone including governors, suspected to be responsible for acts of corruption.”