Tag: SERAP

SERAP, BudgIT, 34 Nigerians sue Tinubu ‘for appointing APC loyalists as top INEC officials’

Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), BudgIT and 34 concerned Nigerians have filed a lawsuit against President Bola Tinubu over “the appointment of at least four members of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and allies of high-ranking politicians as new Resident Electoral Commissioners (RECs) for the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).”

The Senate has confirmed the appointment of seven out of 10 newly appointed RECs for INEC. The alleged APC members appointed as RECs include those from Akwa Ibom, Edo, Lagos and Rivers states.

In the suit number FHC/L/CS/2353/2023 filed last Friday at the Federal High Court in Lagos, the Plaintiffs are seeking: “an order setting aside the nomination, confirmation and appointment of the alleged APC members as RECs for INEC, for being unconstitutional, unlawful, null, void and of no effect.”

The Plaintiffs are also seeking: “an order of mandamus to compel President Tinubu and Senate President Mr Godswill Akpabio to remove the alleged APC members as RECs for INEC, in line with Section 157 of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended].”

The Plaintiffs are also seeking: “an order of mandamus to direct and compel President Tinubu to appoint qualified Nigerians who are persons of unquestionable integrity and a non-member of a political party or loyalist to the positions of RECs for INEC, in line with Paragraph 14(3)(b)(c), Third Schedule and Section 156 of the Nigerian Constitution.”

In the suit, the Plaintiffs are arguing that: “The status, powers, independence of INEC, and the impartiality with which it acts and is seen to be allowed to act, are fundamental to the integrity of Nigeria’s elections and effectiveness of citizens’ democratic rights.”

The Plaintiffs are also arguing that, “INEC ought to be the primary guarantor of the integrity and purity of the electoral process. President Tinubu and the Senate have the constitutional responsibilities to ensure both the appearance and the actual independence and impartiality in the nomination and confirmation of INEC top officials.”

According to the Plaintiffs, “The credibility and legitimacy of elections depend mostly on the independence and impartiality of those appointed to manage the process. Without an independent and impartial INEC, the democratic rights of Nigerians would remain illusory.”

The Plaintiffs are arguing that, “Anyone to be appointed as RECs for INEC must clearly be non-partisan, independent, impartial and neutral. INEC officials ought to be able to discharge their legal duties and implement the Electoral Act without fear or favour.”

The Plaintiffs are also arguing that, “Nigeria’s electoral body must enjoy the independence from direction or control, whether from the government or any other quarter. It must be accountable to the electorate, and act accordingly.”

The suit filed on behalf of the Plaintiffs by their lawyers, Kolawole Oluwadare and Andrew Nwankwo, read in part: “As public officers, President Tinubu and Mr Godswill Akpabio are required to act in conformity with their oath of office and the letter and spirit of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended].”

“Treating INEC as a line department accountable to bureaucratic higher-ups and high-ranking politicians rather than as an independent and impartial body is antithetical to constitutional and international standards and the notion of the rule of law.”

“The use of the word ‘non-partisan’ means that those to be appointed to conduct credible elections must not be people who openly identify as belonging to a political party, whose occupation is politics or who are perceived by ordinary Nigerians as having political biases.”

“Section 153(1) (f) of the Nigerian Constitution provides that ‘There shall be established for the Federation the following bodies, namely – (f) Independent National Electoral Commission.’”

“Section 156(1) of the Nigerian Constitution provides among others that, ‘in the case of the Independent National Electoral Commission, he[she] [the person to be appointed as a REC] shall not be a member of a political party.’”

“Paragraph 14 of the Third Schedule of the 1999 Constitution provides among others that ‘2. A member [of INEC] shall –a. be non-partisan and a person of unquestionable integrity… 3. a Resident Electoral Commissioner shall –b. be a person of unquestionable integrity and shall not be a member of any political party.’”

“Under Section 6(4) of the Electoral Act 2022, ‘The appointment of a Resident Electoral Commissioner shall be in compliance with section 14 (3) of the Nigerian Constitution.’”

“The nomination, confirmation and appointment of the alleged APC members as RECs for INEC is a breach of Section 6(4) of the Electoral Act 2022 and Section 156(1)(a) and Paragraph 14 of the Third Schedule of the 1999 Constitution.”

“The United Nations Human Rights Committee has stated that states including Nigeria should establish independent electoral authorities to supervise the electoral process and to ensure that elections are conducted fairly, impartially and in accordance with established laws and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”

“The African Union’s African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance to which Nigeria is a state party also calls upon state parties to establish and strengthen independent and impartial national electoral bodies responsible for the management of elections.”

“Those recently appointed as RECs and confirmed by the Senate include an individual who was formerly a member of the PDP before allegedly ‘decamping’ to the APC and who served as the Chief of Staff to Mr Godswill Akpabio when he was Governor of Akwa Ibom State.”

“The alleged APC members or loyalists also include individuals who reportedly campaigned on social media for the election of President Tinubu and who was appointed as chairman of the Lagos State Traditional Medicine Board in 2001 when Mr Tinubu governed the state.”

Joined in the suit as Defendants are: INEC; Mr Godswill Akpabio, for himself and on behalf of the Senate; and Messrs Etekamba Umoren; Isah Shaka Ehimeakne; Anugbum Onuoha; and Bunmi Omoseyindemi.

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

November 20, 2023
Identify, arrest sponsors of electoral offences in Bayelsa, Kogi, Imo, SERAP tells INEC

Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has urged Professor Mahmood Yakubu, the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) “to promptly establish a joint, credible, transparent, effective, and broad-based investigation into allegations of electoral bribery and violence in the off-cycle governorship elections in Kogi, Imo and Bayelsa states.”

SERAP urged him to “identify, arrest, name and shame suspected perpetrators and their sponsors of these grave human rights crimes, and ensure their effective prosecution, regardless of their political status or affiliations.”

SERAP also urged him to “disclose the spending details on the governorship elections in Kogi, Imo and Bayelsa states, including the specific amount spent to conduct voter and civic education and activities carried out in these states.”

In the letter dated 11 November 2023 and signed by SERAP deputy director Kolawole Oluwadare, the organisation said: “If INEC is to live up to its constitutional and statutory responsibilities, it must take bold and effective measures to combat the culture of impunity for electoral bribery and violence in the country.”

SERAP said, “The recurring cases of electoral bribery and violence make a mockery of Nigeria’s electoral process and participatory democracy.”

The letter, read in part: “INEC must acknowledge its own limitations and now embrace a transparent, credible, inclusive and broad-based investigation into the allegations of grave electoral offences in Kogi, Imo and Bayelsa states.”

“Electoral integrity is critical to a legitimate democracy. When the integrity of that process is compromised, the legitimacy of our government and the public confidence in our public institutions is seriously undermined.”

“Reports of grave electoral offences in Bayelsa, Kogi and Imo states have shown that INEC and politicians have learnt little or nothing from the well-documented problems during the 2023 general elections.”

“We would be grateful if the recommended measures are taken within seven 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 to compel INEC to comply with our request in the public interest.”

“The right to vote is fundamental and is the essence of a democratic society, and any restrictions on that right strike at the heart of representative government. Nigerians should have the final say in the election of governmental officials.”

“Persistent cases of bribery and violence in the country’s elections gravely violate Nigerians’ right to vote, which is central to the effective participation of every citizen.”

“Unless there is a transparent, effective, credible, inclusive and broad-based investigation into these allegations, and perpetrators and their sponsors are named and shamed and brought to justice, impunity for these electoral crimes will continue. And citizens will continue to lose confidence in the electoral process.”

“Nigerians have the right to know how INEC is spending public funds in the discharge of its constitutional and statutory responsibilities. It is in the public interest to publish the details of spending on governorship elections in the three states.”

“According to our information, the governorship elections in Kogi, Imo and Bayelsa states witnessed cases of electoral offences including electoral violence, vote-buying, conspiracy, and undue influence.”

“The proposed joint investigation should comprise of INEC, anticorruption and law enforcement agencies, the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation, the National Human Rights Commission, the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), and independent leaders and citizens’ groups from Kogi, Imo and Bayelsa states.”

“Electoral bribery and violence and other electoral offences undermine the ability of INEC to discharge its responsibilities under Section 153 of the Nigerian Constitution and paragraph 15(a) of the third schedule of the Constitution, and the Electoral Act.”

“Electoral bribery and violence and other electoral offences reportedly committed during the off-cycle governorship elections in the three states are contrary to the Nigerian Constitution, the Electoral Act and international standards.”

“The Nigerian Constitution provides in Section 14(1)(c) that, ‘the participation by the people in their government shall be ensured in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.’”

“Sections 121 and 127 of the Electoral Act prohibit electoral bribery and undue influence before, during and after any election. Section 145(2) provides that, ‘a prosecution under this Act shall be undertaken by legal officers of the Commission or any legal practitioner appointed by it.’”

“Under section 2(a) and (b), the commission ‘shall have power to conduct voter and civic education and to promote knowledge of sound democratic election processes.’”

“The crisis confronting the country’s elections and lack of public trust and confidence in the electoral process can be addressed if impunity for electoral bribery and violence is combated through a transparent, credible and effective investigation and prosecution of suspected perpetrators.”

“There are reports of specific cases of pre-completed result sheets including in five local government areas of Kogi State – Adavi, Ajaokuta, Ogori/Magongo, Okehi and Okene.

“Suspected political thugs reportedly harassed journalists covering the governorship election in Omuma Community in Oru East Local Government Area of Imo State. INEC official in the Oguta Local Government Area (LGA) of Imo State also alleged that some men invaded her polling unit and carted away result sheets.”

“According to a report by the Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD), there were several reports of electoral violence and vote buying across the three states. For example, there were reports of incidents in PU 1, Ward 8 and PU 11, Ward 1 in Sagbama LGA in Bayelsa West.”

“In Bayelsa Central, vote trading was reported in PU 16, Ward 6 in Yenegoa LGA, PU 22, PU 30 and 31, Ward 13 in Southern Ijaw LGA with reports of voter inducements ranging from N5,000 – N22,000, and items such as wrappers and rice were also reportedly shared to buy votes.”

“In Kogi, there were reports of vote buying in PUs 004, 038 and 039 in Ward A of Lokoja LGA, where party agents were allegedly sharing out money to voters upon confirmation that they voted for their party candidates.”

“In Imo, the two major parties’ agents reportedly engaged in vote buying, sharing between N2000 to N3000. INEC officials were reportedly bribed. Electoral violence was reported in Dekini LGA, town where a thug was reportedly shot and killed by military officials while fleeing in an attempt to snatch a ballot box.”

“INEC presiding officer was also reportedly abducted in Bayelsa while on his way to the Registration Area Centre – 06 (Ossioma) in Sagbama Local Government Area.” There are reports of thugs attacking several polling units in the three states.”

November 13, 2023
NEITI report: SERAP sues Tinubu over failure to probe missing $15bn, N200bn oil revenues

Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has filed a lawsuit against President Bola Tinubu over “the failure to probe the grim allegations that over US$15 billion oil revenues, and N200 billion budgeted to repair the refineries in Nigeria are missing and unaccounted for between 2020 and 2021.”

The allegations are contained in the 2021 report by the Nigeria Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (NEITI).

In the suit number FHC/L/CS/2334/2023 filed last Friday at the Federal High Court in Lagos, SERAP is seeking: “an order of mandamus to direct and compel President Tinubu to probe the allegations that US$15bn of oil revenue, and N200bn budgeted to repair and maintain the refineries in Nigeria are missing and unaccounted for.”

SERAP is also seeking: “an order of mandamus to compel President Tinubu to direct appropriate anti-corruption agencies to probe allegations of corruption involving the Nigerian Petroleum Development Company Limited, Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NPDC) and State Owned Enterprises (SOE).”

SERAP is also seeking: “an order of mandamus to compel President Tinubu to use any recovered proceeds of corruption to enhance the well-being of Nigerians.”

In the suit, SERAP is arguing that: “There is a legitimate public interest in ensuring justice and accountability for these serious allegations. Granting the reliefs sought would end the impunity of perpetrators and ensure justice for victims of corruption.”

SERAP is also arguing that, “The allegations of corruption documented by NEITI undermine economic development of the country, trap the majority of Nigerians in poverty and deprive them of opportunities.”

According to SERAP, “Unless the President is directed and compelled to get to the bottom of these damning revelations, suspected perpetrators would continue to enjoy impunity for their crimes and enjoy the fruits of their crimes.”

SERAP is arguing that, “Many years of allegations of corruption and mismanagement in the spending of oil revenues and impunity of perpetrators have undermined public trust and confidence in governments at all levels.”

SERAP is also arguing that, “The findings by NEITI suggest a grave violation of the provisions of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended], national anticorruption laws, and the country’s obligations under the UN Convention against Corruption.”

The suit filed on behalf of SERAP by its lawyers, Kolawole Oluwadare, Andrew Nwankwo, and Ms Valentina Adegoke, read in part: “The Tinubu government has a constitutional duty to ensure transparency and accountability in the spending of the country’s oil wealth.”

“SERAP is seeking an order of mandamus to direct and compel President Tinubu to put in place mechanisms for accountability and transparency in the oil sector.”

“Section 13 of the Nigerian Constitution imposes clear responsibility on the government to conform to, observe and apply the provisions of Chapter 2 of the constitution. Section 15(5) imposes the responsibility on the government to ‘abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power’ in the country.”

“Under Section 16(1) of the Constitution, the government has a responsibility to ‘secure the maximum welfare, freedom and happiness of every citizen on the basis of social justice and equality of status and opportunity.’”

“Section 16(2) further provides that, ‘the material resources of the nation are harnessed and distributed as best as possible to serve the common good.’”

“Similarly, articles 5 and 9 of the UN Convention against Corruption also impose legal obligations on the government to ensure proper management of public affairs and public funds, and to promote transparent administration of public affairs.”

“The UN Convention against Corruption and the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption obligate the government to effectively prevent and investigate the plundering of the country’s wealth and natural resources and hold public officials and non-state actors to account for any violations.”

“Specifically, article 26 of the UN convention requires the 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.”

“Nigeria is also a participating state of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), which aims to foster greater governmental accountability for the use of natural resource wealth through the creation of a set of international norms on revenue transparency.”

“EITI also aims to tackle corruption, poverty and conflict associated with natural resource wealth. Nigeria has the obligations to implement the EITI Standard, which sets out the transparency norms with which participating States including Nigeria must comply.”

“According to the 2021 report by NEITI, government agencies including the Nigerian Petroleum Development Company (NNPC) and the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NPDC) failed to remit $13.591 million and $8.251 billion to the public treasury.”

“The NNPC and NPDC failed to remit over 70% of these public funds. NEITI wants both the NNPC and NPDC to be investigated, and for the missing public funds to be fully recovered.”

“The report also shows that in 2021, the State Owned Enterprises (SOE) and its subsidiaries (the NNPC Group) reportedly spent US$6.931billion on behalf of the Federal Government but without appropriation by the National Assembly. The money may be missing.”

“The NNPC also reportedly obtained a loan of $3 billion in 2012 purportedly to settle subsidy payments due to petroleum product marketers but there is no disclosure of the details of the loan, subsidy and the beneficiaries of the payments.”

“The report also shows that N9.73 billion was paid to the NNPC as pipeline transportation revenue earned from Joint Venture operations but the money was neither remitted to the Federation nor properly accounted for. The NPDC in 2021 also failed to remit $7.61 million realized from the sale of crude oil.”

“The report documents that about N200 billion was spent on ‘refineries rehabilitation’ between 2020 and 2021 but ‘none of the refineries was operational in 2021 despite the spending.’ NEITI wants the spending to be investigated, as the money may be missing.”

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

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

November 6, 2023
SERAP urges Akpabio, Abbas to reject bills regulating social media

Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has advised the Senate President, Mr Godswill Akpabio, and Speaker of House of Representatives, Mr Tajudeen Abbas “to reject the recently reintroduced social media regulation bill which if passed would unduly restrict the rights to freedom of expression and privacy.”

According to SERAP, the duo should request the administration of President Bola Tinubu to drop any ongoing efforts to put pressure on Google, YouTube, TikTok, and other social media companies to unduly restrict these fundamental human rights.

Continuing, SERAP said the bill would “criminalize the legitimate and lawful exercise of human rights.”
The National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) last week reportedly stated that “one of Nigeria’s major problems now is social media”, and described social media as “a monster”.In the letter dated 14 October 2023 and signed by SERAP deputy director Kolawole Oluwadare, the organisation said: “the social media is neither Nigeria’s problem nor a monster. Any regulation of it would have arbitrary and excessive effects, and cause incalculable damage, both in material and human rights terms.”

SERAP said, “Any move to regulate social media would be inconsistent and incompatible with the provisions of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended] and the country’s international human rights obligations.”

According to SERAP, “The proposed bill raises serious concerns about the rights to freedom of expression and privacy, and would lead to digital siege.”

The letter, read in part, “Rather than rushing to pass the social media regulation bill, the National Assembly should encourage the Federal Government to maximize opportunities around social media access, and address the growing social and economic inequalities in the country.”

“We would be grateful if the recommended measures are immediately taken upon the receipt and/or publication of this letter. SERAP shall take all appropriate legal actions against the National Assembly and the Federal Government if the social media regulation bill is ever passed into law.”

“We urge you to request the administration of President Bola Tinubu to publish the details of any ongoing discussion and engagement with Google, YouTube, TikTok and other social media companies.”

“The reintroduction of the social media regulation bill would lead to deterioration of the human rights situation in the country and carry major economic costs for all sectors, as well as exacerbate social and economic inequalities.”

“It would effectively deepen digital divides in the country and seriously undermine the Tinubu administration’s expressed commitment to develop this sector.”

“Under international law, all restrictions on the operation of social media companies and other intermediaries must comply with the requirements of legality, legitimacy and necessity.”

“The regulation of social media may be incompatible with the services of major social media and private messaging intermediaries, negatively impacting the free flow of information and ideas, and affecting economic and social activities.”

“The National Assembly should put pressure on the Federal Government to comply with the requirements of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 and the country’s international human rights obligations regarding the rights to freedom of expression, privacy and participation.”

“Access to social media is widely recognized as an indispensable enabler of a broad range of human rights. It is central to freedom of expression and the realization of many other human rights including education, freedom of association and assembly, access to information, and participation.”

“The Federal Government has the legal obligations to promote and facilitate the enjoyment of human rights, and to take all steps necessary to ensure that all individuals have meaningful access to social media. The authorities should refrain from unduly interfering with access to digital communications platforms.”

“Under Section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution, Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, any restriction on freedom of expression constitutes a serious curtailment of human rights.”

“The Nigerian Constitution and these human rights treaties protect everyone’s right to freedom of expression, which includes the freedom to seek, receive and impart information of all kinds, regardless of frontiers. States have the obligation to respect and ensure the right to freedom of expression, without distinction of any kind.”

“The Nigerian Constitution and human rights treaties protect a broad range of expression, including political discourse, commentary on one’s own and public affairs, canvassing, discussion of human rights, journalism, and artistic expression.”

“This includes information that may be regarded as offensive, false or untrue by some people but is considered legitimate political discourse by others. Restrictions on the right to freedom of expression are only permissible when they meet the requirements of legality, necessity, proportionality and non-discrimination.”

“The onus to show that restrictions comply with those requirements is on the State seeking to restrict rights. Social media regulation bills generally do not meet those requirements.”

“The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights has called upon States not to engage in or condone any restriction of access to the Internet or other digital technologies for segments of the public or an entire population.”

“According to our information, the Director-General of the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC), Balarabe Ilelah, recently stated that the social media regulation bill has been sent to the National Assembly. The bill is reportedly seeking to repeal and reenact the NBC Act, CAP L11 laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004.”

“According to the NBC, ‘We have already submitted a bill to amend the NBC act. One of our major problems now is social media. Unless there is a law that allows NBC to act on social media issues, the issue will continue to be a monster in our daily lives in this country.’”

“Similarly, Mrs. Francisca Aiyetan, Director, Broadcast Monitoring of NBC, recently reportedly said that without regulation, young people could be misguided. According to NBC, the Federal Government is currently engaging with Google or YouTube, and TikTok, ‘so we know the faces behind these [social media]

October 16, 2023
SERAP sues Tinubu over unlawful ban of 25 journalists

Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has filed a lawsuit against President Bola Tinubu over “the unlawful ban and withdrawal of the accreditations of 25 journalists and media houses from covering the Presidential Villa.”

According to reports, the Federal Government recently withdrew the accreditations of some 25 journalists from covering activities at the Presidential Villa, Abuja. The affected journalists were simply told at the main gate of the Presidential Villa to submit their accreditation tags.

In the suit number FHC/L/CS/1766/23 filed last Friday at the Federal High Court in Lagos, SERAP is seeking: “an order to direct and compel President Tinubu to reverse the revocation of the accreditations and ban on 25 journalists and media houses from covering the Presidential Villa.”

SERAP is seeking: “an order of perpetual injunction to restrain President Tinubu or any other authority, person or group of persons from arbitrarily and unilaterally revoking the accreditations of any journalists and media houses from covering the Presidential Villa.”

SERAP is also seeking: “a declaration that the withdrawal and revocation of accreditation tags and ban on the journalists and media houses from covering the Presidential Villa without any lawful justifications is inconsistent with the rights to freedom of expression, access to information, participation, and media freedom.”

In the suit, SERAP is arguing that: “If not reversed, the arbitrary ban on the journalists from covering the Presidential Villa would open the door to other cases of arbitrariness and would restrict people’s right to freedom of expression, access to information, participation, and media freedom.”

SERAP is also arguing that, “The withdrawal of the accreditations of the journalists is without any lawful justifications. It is inconsistent and incompatible with plurality of voices, diversity of voices, non-discrimination, and just demands of a democratic society, as well as the public interest.”

The suit filed on behalf of SERAP its lawyers Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN, Kolawole Oluwadare, and Ms Valentina Adegoke, read in part: “The ban on the journalists from covering the Presidential Villa fails to meet the requirements of legality, necessity, and proportionality.”

“The media plays an essential role as a vehicle or instrument for the exercise of freedom of expression and access to information – in its individual and collective aspects – in a democratic society.”

“The existence of a free, independent, vigorous, pluralistic, and diverse media is essential for the proper functioning of a democratic society.”

“The free circulation of ideas and news is not possible except in the context of a plurality of sources of information and media outlets. The lack of plurality in sources of information is a serious obstacle for the functioning of democracy.”

“The exercise of the right to freedom of expression through the media is a guarantee that is fundamental for advancing the collective deliberative process on public and democratic issues.”

“The strengthening of the guarantee of freedom of expression is a precondition for the exercise of other human rights, as well as a precondition to the right to participation to be informed and reasoned.”

“Under the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended] and human rights treaties to which Nigeria is a state party, freedom and diversity must be guiding principles in the measures to promote media freedom. The ban on the 25 journalists is entirely inconsistent and incompatible with these principles.”

“The Federal Government should aspire to promote and expand the scope of media freedom, access to information, freedom of expression, and citizens’ participation, not restrict these fundamental freedoms.”

“Barring these journalists and media houses from covering the Presidential Villa is to prevent them from carrying out their legitimate constitutional responsibility.”

“The withdrawal of the accreditation tags of these journalists directly violates media freedom and human rights including access to information and the right to participation. It would have a significant chilling effect on newsgathering and reporting functions, and may lead to self-censorship.”

“The withdrawal of the accreditations of the journalists would construct barriers between Nigerians and certain information about the operations of their government, something which they have a constitutional right to receive.”

“Media freedom, access to information and the right to participation are necessary for the maintenance of an open and accountable government. These freedoms are so fundamental in a democracy that they trump any vague grounds of ‘security concerns and overcrowding of the press gallery area.’”

“According to reports, the Federal Government on 18 August 2023 withdrew the accreditation tags of some 25 journalists and media houses from covering activities at the Presidential Villa, Abuja.”

“The banned journalists reportedly include those from Vanguard newspaper; Galaxy TV; Ben TV; MITV; ITV Abuja; PromptNews, ONTV, and Liberty. Other media personnel affected by the withdrawal are mostly reporters and cameramen from broadcast, print, and online media outlets.”

“Under section 22 of the Nigerian Constitution, the mass media including ‘the press, radio, television and other agencies of the mass media shall at all times be free to uphold the fundamental objectives contained in this Chapter and uphold the responsibility and accountability of the Government to the people.’”

“Section 14(2)(c) of the Constitution provides that ‘the participation by the people in their government shall be ensured in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.’”

“Similarly, Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights provides that, ‘Every individual shall have the right to receive information. Every individual shall have the right to express and disseminate his opinions.’”

“Article 13 of the Charter also provides that, ‘Every citizen shall have the right to participate freely in the government of his country. Every citizen shall have the right of equal access to the public service of his country. Every individual shall have the right of access to public property and services.’”

“Articles 19 and 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights contain similar provisions.”

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

September 3, 2023
Reverse ban on Vanguard, Galaxy TV, 23 others to cover Aso Rock now – SERAP tells Tinubu

Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has urged President Bola Tinubu to use his “good offices and leadership position to immediately reverse the unlawful ban on 25 journalists and media houses from covering the presidential villa and restore the accreditations of those affected.”

SERAP urged him “to publicly instruct the officials in the presidential villa to allow journalists and media houses to freely do their job and discharge their constitutional duty of holding those in power to account.”

According to reports, the Federal Government recently withdrew the accreditations of some 25 journalists from covering activities at the Presidential Villa, Abuja. The banned journalists include those from the Vanguard; Galaxy TV; Ben TV; MITV; ITV Abuja; PromptNews; ONTV, and Liberty.

In the letter dated 26 August 2023 and signed by SERAP deputy director Kolawole Oluwadare, the organisation said: “Barring these journalists and media houses from covering the presidential villa is to prevent them from carrying out their legitimate constitutional responsibility.”

SERAP said, “Your administration cannot with one broad stroke ban journalists from covering public functions. Citizens’ access to information and participation would mean little if journalists and media houses are denied access to the seat of government.”

According to SERAP, “Media freedom is a cornerstone of Nigeria’s democracy and journalists must be able to hold the government to account. This is a matter of public interest. The government cannot cherry-pick journalists to cover its activities.”

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 your government to comply with our request in the public interest.”

“Nigerians may consider the expulsion of the journalists from the presidential villa as your government’s ambivalence towards media freedom, and citizens’ rights of access to information and participation in their own government.”

“The legal obligations imposed on your government to ensure and uphold media freedom and human rights, and facilitate public access to the presidential villa as a public trust outweigh any purported ‘security concerns and overcrowding of the press gallery area.’”

“Media freedom, access to information and citizens’ participation in the affairs of their own government are the sine qua non of a democratic and rule of law-based society.”

“The withdrawal of the accreditation tags of these journalists directly violates media freedom and human rights including access to information and the right to participation. It would have a significant chilling effect on newsgathering and reporting functions, and may lead to self-censorship.”

“The withdrawal of the accreditations of the journalists would construct barriers between Nigerians and certain information about the operations of their government, something which they have a constitutional right to receive.”

“Media freedom, access to information and the right to participation are necessary for the maintenance of an open and accountable government. These freedoms are so fundamental in a democracy that they trump any vague grounds of ‘security concerns and overcrowding of the press gallery area.’”

“The effective exercise of media freedom, access to information and citizens’ right to participation in their government would preserve and contribute to a free and democratic society, something which is consistent with your constitutional oath of office to defend the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended].”

“Allowing the media to cover the presidential villa would improve the reliability of information available to the public and serve the public interest.”

“Your government reportedly justified this grave constitutional infraction on the pretext of ‘an internal attempt to reduce bloated number of print photographers and overcrowding in the State House.’”

“Your government also cited alleged ‘security concerns raised by State House officials and visiting dignitaries concerning the overcrowding of the press gallery area that blocks the walking path to the President’s Office.’”

“According to our information, your administration on 18 August 2023 withdrew the accreditation tags of some 25 journalists and media houses from covering activities at the Presidential Villa, Abuja.”

“The banned journalists reportedly include those from Vanguard newspaper; Galaxy TV; Ben TV; MITV; ITV Abuja; PromptNews, ONTV, and Liberty. Other media personnel affected by the withdrawal are mostly reporters and cameramen from broadcast, print, and online media outlets.”

“The affected journalists were simply told at the main gate of the presidential villa to submit their accreditation tags.”

“SERAP is concerned that the withdrawal of the accreditations of 25 journalists covering the presidential villa is a grave violation of the Nigerian Constitution and the country’s international human rights obligations.”

“Our requests are brought in the public interest, and in keeping with the requirements of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended]; and the country’s international obligations including under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights to which Nigeria is a state party.”

“Under section 22 of the Nigerian Constitution, the mass media including ‘the press, radio, television and other agencies of the mass media shall at all times be free to uphold the fundamental objectives contained in this Chapter and uphold the responsibility and accountability of the Government to the people.’”

“Section 14(2)(c) of the Constitution provides that ‘the participation by the people in their government shall be ensured in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.’”

“Similarly, Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights provides that, ‘Every individual shall have the right to receive information. Every individual shall have the right to express and disseminate his opinions.’”

“Article 13 of the Charter also provides that, ‘Every citizen shall have the right to participate freely in the government of his country. Every citizen shall have the right of equal access to the public service of his country. Every individual shall have the right of access to public property and services.’”

“Articles 19 and 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights contain similar provisions.”

“SERAP also urges you to take meaningful and effective steps to ensure respect for the rights to media freedom, access to information and citizens’ right to participate in their own government.

Kolawole Oluwadare

SERAP Deputy Director

27/8/2023

Lagos, Nigeria

August 27, 2023
SERAP drags Tinubu to court, demands spending details of N400bn subsidy savings

Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has filed a lawsuit against President Bola Tinubu over his failure to publish spending details of about N400bn so far saved as a result of the removal of subsidy on Premium Motor Spirit (PMS) popularly called petrol.

The suit followed reports that the Federal Government had saved N400bn within the four weeks following the implementation of the removal of subsidy on petrol policy.

In the suit number FHC/L/CS/1514/2023 filed last week at the Federal High Court in Lagos, SERAP is seeking: “an order of mandamus to direct and compel President Tinubu to publish details of spending of about N400 billion saved as a result of the removal of subsidy on petrol on 29 May, 2023.”

SERAP is also seeking: “an order of mandamus to direct and compel President Tinubu to provide details of the plans on how the savings from the removal of subsidy on petrol, including specific projects on which the funds would be spent.”

SERAP is also seeking: “an order of mandamus to compel President Tinubu to provide details of the mechanisms that have been put in place to ensure that the savings from the removal of subsidy on petrol are not diverted into private pockets.”

In the suit, SERAP is arguing that: “Nigerians have the right to know how the savings are spent. Disclosing the spending details of the savings would reduce the risks of corruption in the spending of the funds.”

SERAP is arguing that, “The Tinubu government has a legal obligation to ensure that the savings from the removal of subsidy on petrol are spent solely for the benefit of the 137 million poor Nigerians who are bearing the brunt of the removal.”

The group is also arguing that, “Opacity in the spending of the savings from subsidy removal would have negative impacts on the fundamental interests of the citizens and the public interest.

The savings from subsidy removal may be embezzled, misappropriated or diverted into private pockets.”

The suit filed on behalf of SERAP by its lawyers, Kolawole Oluwadare, Ms Adelanke Aremo, and Ms Valentina Adegoke, read in part: “Transparency would increase public trust and confidence that these savings would be used to benefit Nigerians.

“The Nigerian Constitution, 1999 [as amended], Freedom of Information Act, and the country’s anti-corruption and human rights obligations rest on the principle that citizens should have access to information regarding their government’s activities.

“Prevention of corruption in the spending of savings from the removal of subsidy on petrol and preventing and addressing the challenges caused by the removal are serious and legitimate public interests.

“The Tinubu government has a legal obligation to protect individuals against the threat posed to human rights by the removal of subsidy on petrol, and to effectively address the aftermath of subsidy removal.

“Unless the government is compelled and directed to publish the spending details of the savings from the removal of subsidy on petrol, the removal will continue to undermine the rights of Nigerians, and increase their vulnerability to poverty.

“The implementation of the National Social Safety Net Programme (NASSP) and spending on the programme have been mostly shrouded in secrecy.

“Publishing the details of the spending of the N400bn and other savings from the removal of subsidy would also ensure that persons with public responsibilities are answerable to the people for the performance of their duties.

“Transparency and accountability in the spending details of the N400bn saved as a result of the removal of subsidy on petrol, and on the spending of subsequent savings from the removal would mean that the savings can help poor Nigerians to overcome the effects of such removal.

“It would also help to avoid a morally repugnant result of double jeopardy on poor and socially and economically vulnerable Nigerians.

“The lack of transparency and accountability in the spending of savings from the removal of subsidy on petrol and the resulting human costs would directly threaten fundamental human rights that the government has an obligation to protect.

“The Tinubu government has the legal obligations to address the effects of subsidy removal on the human rights of 137 million poor Nigerians, and to prevent and address some of the direst consequences that the removal may reap on human rights, especially given the disproportionate impact on these Nigerians.

“The removal of subsidy on petrol continues to negatively and disproportionately affect poor Nigerians, undermining their right to adequate standard of living.

“Many years of allegations of corruption and mismanagement in the spending of public funds and entrenched impunity of perpetrators have undermined public trust and confidence in governments at all levels.

“The Freedom of Information Act, Section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution, article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantee to everyone the right to information, including the details of how the N400bn and other savings from the removal of subsidy on petrol would be spent.

“By the combined reading of the provisions of the Nigerian Constitution, the Freedom of Information Act, and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, there are transparency obligations imposed on the government to widely publish the details of how the N400bn and other savings from the removal of subsidy on petrol are spent.”

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

August 6, 2023
SERAP gives Akpabio, Abass 7 days to halt N110bn on bulletproof cars, others

Following the planned spending of N110 billion on bulletproof cars and palliative for members, the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, SERAP, has asked the Senate President and the Speaker of House of Representatives, Godswill Akpabio and Tajudeen Abbass, respectively, to halt its intention.

SERAP In the letter dated 15 July, 2023 and signed by its deputy director Kolawole Oluwadare, said: “This travesty, and apparent conflicts of interest and self-dealing by members of the National Assembly must stop.

The letter, read in part: “It is a grave violation of the public trust and constitutional oath of office for members of the National Assembly to unjustifiably increase their own budget at a time when over 137 million poor Nigerians are living in extreme poverty exacerbated by the removal of fuel subsidy.”

“We would be grateful if the recommended measures are taken within seven 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 to compel you and the National Assembly to comply with our request in the public interest.”

“Rather than exercising their constitutional and oversight functions to pursue the public interest by considering bills to improve the conditions of the over 137 million poor Nigerians who are facing the impact of the removal of fuel subsidy, the lawmakers seem to be looking after themselves.”

“According to reports, no fewer than 107 units of the 2023 model of the Toyota Landcruiser and 358 units of the 2023 model of Toyota Prado would be bought for the use of members of the Senate and the House of Representatives respectively.”

“The planned purchase is different from the official bulletproof vehicles expected to be purchased for the four presiding officers of the National Assembly.

The proposed spending of N110 billion by members of the National Assembly is apparently on top of the N281 billion already provided for the lawmakers in the 2023 National Assembly budget. The proposed spending is also different from the N30.17 billion budgeted for the ‘inauguration expenses’ for new members.”

“SERAP is concerned that the budget for the National Assembly may further be increased as members are reportedly demanding an upward review of their salaries and allowances purportedly to offset the impact of the removal of fuel subsidy.”

“Section 14(2)(b) of the Nigerian Constitution of 1999 [as amended] provides that, ‘the security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government.”

“Under Section 16(1)(a)(b), the National Assembly has the obligations to ‘harness the resources of the nation and promote national prosperity and an efficient, a dynamic and self-reliant economy’, and to ‘secure the maximum welfare, freedom and happiness of every citizen.”

July 16, 2023
Why court ordered Obasanjo, Yar’Adua, Jonathan, Buhari govts to give account for $5bn Abacha loot

The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, in a landmark judgment, has ordered the disclosure of the spending details of about USD$5 billion Abacha loot by the governments of former presidents Olusegun Obasanjo, Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, Goodluck Jonathan and Muhammadu Buhari.”

The court ordered the government of President Bola Tinubu to “disclose the exact amount of money stolen by General Sani Abacha from Nigeria, and the total amount of Abacha loot recovered and all agreements signed on same by the governments of former presidents Obasanjo, Yar’Adua, Jonathan and Buhari.”

The judgment was delivered last week by Justice James Kolawole Omotosho following a Freedom of Information suit number: FHC/ABJ/CS/407/2020, brought by the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP).

In his judgment, Justice Omotosho held that, “In the final analysis, the application by SERAP is meritorious and the Federal Government through the Ministry of Finance is hereby ordered to furnish SERAP with the full spending details of about $5bn Abacha loot within 7 days of this judgment.”

Justice Omotosho ordered the government to “disclose details of the projects executed with the Abacha loot, locations of any such projects and the names of companies and contractors that carried or carrying out the projects since the return of democracy in 1999 till date.”

Justice Omotosho also ordered the government to “disclose details of specific roles played by the World Bank and other partners in the execution of any projects funded with Abacha loot under the governments of former presidents Obasanjo, Yar’Adua, Jonathan and Buhari.”

Justice Omotosho also stated that, “The excuse by the Minister of Finance is that the Ministry has searched its records and the details of the exact public funds stolen by Abacha and how the funds have been spent are not held by the Ministry. The excuse has no leg to stand in view of section 7 of the Freedom of Information Act.”

Justice Omotosho dismissed all the objections raised by the Federal Government and upheld SERAP’s arguments. Consequently, the court entered judgment in favour of SERAP against the Federal Government.

Justice Omotosho’s judgment, dated 3 July, 2023, read in part: “The failure of the Minister of Finance to write to SERAP informing it of where the said information exists or to transfer the request to public office who has custody of such information is fatal to their case under section 5 of the Freedom of Information Act.”

“The Ministry cannot use a blanket statement that it was not in possession of the said records of about $5bn Abacha loot sought by SERAP. The government failed to provide details of the projects executed with the money. It also failed to provide locations of the projects and the names of the companies and contractors that carried out or are carrying out the projects funded with the money.”

“I hold that by the clear wordings of section 7 of the Freedom of Information Act, 2011, access to information about spending details of $5bn Abacha loot was denied SERAP by the Federal Government.”

“The Federal Government had filed a 14 paragraph Counter Affidavit deposed to by Abah Sunday, Litigation Officer in the office of the Attorney General of the Federation argued that SERAP’s suit is frivolous, as it has not shown that the government denied it the information it seeks.”

“The Federal Government has also stated that SERAP has not established sufficient interest in its application. The government urged the Court to dismiss the suit.”

“For the sake of emphasis, possession of locus standi has been the bane of the citizens’ advocates, in the public interest litigation, to query transparency and accountability in governance in Nigeria.”

“In a democratic dispensation, such as in Nigeria, the citizens have been proclaimed the owners of sovereignty and mandates that place leaders in the saddle.”

“The requirement is a serious fracture of the citizens’ inalienable right to ventilate their grievances against poor governance vis-à-vis expenditure of public funds generated from their taxes.”

“The sacrosanct provision of Section 1(2) of the Freedom of Information Act, which has ostracised this disturbing requirement, has, admirably, remedied the harmful mischief appurtenant to it.”

“Clearly, section 1 gives a person the right to access any information from any public institution in Nigeria. SERAP is an organization registered in Nigeria and thus a juristic person. As a juristic person, SERAP need not show any specific interest in the spending details of about $5bn Abacha loot to be entitled to the same.”

“I therefore hold that SERAP is entitled to the information on the spending details of about $5bn Abacha loot, and need not show any special interest in the information sought.”

“The provision of Section 4 of the Freedom of Information Act is quite clear and mandates that public institution or public officer such as the Minister of Finance and the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice must make available the information requested within 7 days of the request.”

In the letter dated 8 July 2023 sent to President Tinubu on the judgment, and signed by SERAP deputy director, Kolawole Oluwadare, the organization said, “We urge you to demonstrate your expressed commitment to the rule of law by immediately obeying and respecting the judgment of the Court.”

SERAP’s letter, read in part: “We urge you to direct the Ministry of Finance and the office of the Attorney General of the Federation to immediately compile and release the spending details of recovered Abacha loot as ordered by the court.”

“The immediate enforcement and implementation of the judgment by your government will be a victory for the rule of law, transparency and accountability in the governance processes and management of public resources including the $5bn Abacha loot.”

“By immediately complying with the judgment, your government will be demonstrating to Nigerians that it is different from the Buhari government, which persistently and brazenly defied the country’s judiciary, and sending a powerful message to politicians and others that there will be no impunity for grand corruption.”

“Immediately implementing the judgment will restore trust and confidence in the independence of Nigeria’s judiciary. SERAP urges you to make a clean break with the past and take clear and decisive steps that demonstrate your commitment to the rule of law, transparency and accountability in the governance processes.”

“SERAP trusts that you will see compliance with this judgment as a central aspect of the rule of law; an essential stepping stone to constructing a basic institutional framework for legality and constitutionality. We therefore look forward to your positive response and action on the judgment.”

Joined as defendants in the suit are the Minister of Finance and the Attorney General of the Federation and the Minister of Justice.

Justice Omotosho granted the following orders of mandamus against the Nigerian government:

AN ORDER OF MANDAMUS is hereby made directing and compelling the Federal Government [through the Ministry of Finance and the office of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice to provide and disclose the following information to SERAP:
[a] Exact amount of money stolen by General Sani Abacha from Nigeria, and the total amount of Abacha loot recovered and all agreements signed on same since the return of democracy in 1999 till date

[b] Details of the projects executed with the recovered funds, locations of any such projects and the names of companies and contractors that carried or carrying out the projects

[c] Details of specific roles played by the World Bank and other partners in the execution of any projects funded with Abacha loot since 1999

AN ORDER OF MANDAMUS is hereby made directing and compelling the Federal Government to:
[a] Refer any allegations of corruption involving the execution of projects with Abacha loot to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) for investigation

[b] Ensure that anyone involved in alleged corruption in projects executed with Abacha loot is brought to justice if there is relevant and sufficient admissible evidence.

July 9, 2023
N400bn fuel subsidy savings: Urgently publish details of spending – SERAP writes Tinubu

Following the report that federal government has saved N400bn within the four weeks of implementation of the policy on the removal of payment of subsidy on petrol, the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has urged President Bola Tinubu to use his good offices and leadership position to “urgently publish details of spending.

SERAP urged him to “provide details of the plans on how subsequent savings from the removal of subsidy on petrol, including specific projects on which the funds would be spent, and the mechanisms that have been put in place to ensure that any such savings are not embezzled, misappropriated or diverted into private pockets.”

In the letter dated 1 July 2023 and signed by SERAP deputy director Kolawole Oluwadare, the organisation said: “Your government has a legal responsibility to ensure that the savings from the removal of subsidy on petrol are spent solely for the benefit of the 137 million poor Nigerians who are bearing the brunt of the removal.

According to SERAP, “Nigerians have the right to know how the savings are spent. Publishing the details of the spending of the savings would promote transparency, accountability, and reduce the risks of corruption in the spending of the funds.”

The letter reads: “SERAP is concerned that the savings from subsidy removal may be embezzled, misappropriated or diverted into private pockets.”

“Opacity in the spending of the savings from subsidy removal would have negative impacts on the fundamental interests of the citizens and the public interest.”

“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 consider appropriate legal actions to compel your government to comply with our request in the public interest.”

“Unless the government is transparent and accountable to Nigerians in how it spends the savings from the removal of subsidy on petrol, the removal will continue to undermine the rights of Nigerians, and increase their vulnerability to poverty and social deprivation.”

“Transparency would ensure that the funds saved from the removal of subsidy are not diverted into private pockets, and increase public trust and confidence that these savings would be used to benefit Nigerians.”

“The implementation of the National Social Safety Net Programme (NASSP) and spending on the programme have been mostly shrouded in secrecy.”

“Publishing the details of the spending of the N400bn and other savings from the removal of subsidy would also ensure that persons with public responsibilities are answerable to the people for the performance of their duties including the management of the funds.”

“Transparency and accountability in the spending details of the N400bn saved as a result of the removal of subsidy on petrol, and on the spending of subsequent savings from the removal would mean that the savings can help poor Nigerians to overcome the effects of such removal.”

“It would also help to avoid a morally repugnant result of double jeopardy on poor and socially and economically vulnerable Nigerians.”

The lack of transparency and accountability in the spending of savings from the removal of subsidy on petrol and the resulting human costs would directly threaten fundamental human rights that your government has an obligation to protect.”

“Your government has the legal obligations to address the effects of subsidy removal on the human rights of 137 million poor Nigerians, and to prevent and address some of the direst consequences that the removal may reap on human rights, especially given the disproportionate impact on these Nigerians.”

“SERAP also urges you to promptly instruct Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to monitor the spending of all savings from subsidy removal.”

“SERAP notes that the removal of subsidy on petrol continues to negatively and disproportionately affect poor Nigerians, undermining their right to adequate standard of living.”

“Your government has a positive obligation to protect individuals against the threat posed to human rights by the removal of subsidy on petrol. Your government also has legal obligations to effectively address the aftermath of subsidy removal.”

“SERAP is seriously concerned that years of allegations of corruption and mismanagement in the spending of public funds and entrenched impunity of perpetrators have undermined public trust and confidence in governments at all levels.”

“The Freedom of Information Act, Section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution, article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantee to everyone the right to information, including the details of how the N400bn and other savings from the removal of subsidy on petrol would be spent.”

“By the combined reading of the provisions of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended], the Freedom of Information Act 2011, and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, there are transparency obligations imposed on your government to widely publish the details of how the N400bn and other savings from the removal of subsidy on petrol are spent.”

“The Nigerian Constitution, Freedom of Information Act, and the country’s anti-corruption and human rights obligations rest on the principle that citizens should have access to information regarding their government’s activities.”

“Section 13 of the Nigerian Constitution imposes clear responsibility on your government to conform to, observe and apply the provisions of Chapter 2 of the constitution. Section 15(5) imposes the responsibility on your government to “abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power” in the country.”

“Under Section 16(1) of the Constitution, your government has a responsibility to ‘secure the maximum welfare, freedom and happiness of every citizen on the basis of social justice and equality of status and opportunity.’”

“Section 16(2) further provides that, ‘the material resources of the nation are harnessed and distributed as best as possible to serve the common good.’”

“Similarly, articles 5 and 9 of the UN Convention against Corruption also impose legal obligations on your government to ensure proper management of public affairs and public funds, and to promote sound and transparent administration of public affairs.”

July 2, 2023