The news of the confirmation of the humungous amount of money collected every month by members of the Senate as running expenses hit Nigerians like a thunder bolt. In the past, there have been unsubstantiated rumours about the exact amount pocketed by members of the National Assembly. But this is the first time that a serving legislator will openly declare the precise sum they collect. Senator Shehu Sani told Nigerians that every senator takes home N13.5 million as running costs which is not part of the monthly salary and other allowances such as housing, transport,  assistants, etc.

Section 70 of the 1999 Constitution as amended provides that a member of the Senate or House of Representatives shall receive such salary and other allowances as the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) may determine. Thus, it is not for the legislature to fix its own remuneration. In the 2007 review of the provisions of the Certain Political, Public and Judicial Office Holders(Salaries and Allowances, etc) Act No. 6 of 2002, being the law regulating the remuneration and allowances of political, public and judicial office holders as at that date, RMAFC stated that it took the following into consideration:  “(a) Changes in the basic fundamentals of the Nigerian economy; (b) External reserves; (c) GDP Growth rate; (d) rate of inflation; (e) correct placement of some category of public office holders who were wrongly placed in the old package; (f)need to modify old salaries and allowances and introduce new allowances that were not included in the old package; (g) need for a living wage to ensure honesty and dignity of the office holders and (h) need to ensure compliance with the provisions of sections 84 (3) and 124 (3) of the 1999 Constitution which states that the remuneration and salaries payable to the office holders and their conditions of service, other than allowances, shall not be altered to their disadvantage after their appointment”.

From the review, members of the Senate and House of Representatives are entitled to a basic annual salary of N2,026,400.00 and N1,985,212.50 respectively. They also get the following as a percentage of their basic salary. Accommodation (200 per cent); furniture (300 per cent); motor vehicle loan (400 per cent); vehicle maintenance (75 per cent); personal assistant (25 per cent); wardrobe (25 per cent); domestic staff (75 per cent); entertainment (30 per cent); utilities (30 percent); recess (10 per cent); and newspaper (15 per cent). However, the constituency vote of the senator is 250 per cent of the basic salary whilst the honourable member gets 100 per cent of the basic salary.

Again, working with the above figures, in the first year of their being sworn in, the total emoluments of 360 Representatives comes up to N9.898 billion. In the second and third year, when furniture allowance and motor vehicle loan will no longer be due, the total emolument of 360 Representatives amounts to N4.895 billion per year. In the fourth year, when the severance package is included, it will amount to N7.039 billion.

Thus, for the four years, the total emoluments of 109 senators amounts to N9.586 billion whilst the 360 Representatives collect N26.728 billion; bringing the Senate and Representatives together gets the overall personnel vote to N36.314 billion.  However, these exclude medical allowance which is to be provided as a service, special assistants on grade levels 12 and 14, 3 legislative aides, Duty Tour Allowance, estacode, responsibility allowance for principal officers and security. Thus, the cost of these excluded items should not be more than 25%of the total remuneration of National Assembly members which adds an extra N9 billion bringing the four year cost to about N45 billion. Also, it is understandable that the bureaucracy that services NASS has to be paid. But this cannot escalate the budget to current reality of between N125 billion-N150 billion every year. Generally, the personnel allocation of NASS is about 10 percent of their vote whilst overheads take up about 80 per cent-85 per cent. The remaining 5% is usually for capital expenditure.

There is a consensus of opinion in Nigeria that this package of emoluments is extremely generous in a poor country where the bulk of the population live in extreme poverty; the infrastructure is in poor shape and all major human indicators are headed south. To now add N13.5 million per senator every month amounts to extra N17.658 billion every year totaling N70.632 billion over four years. We are yet to get the details of running cost of the Representatives which will definitely be higher than the figures in the Senate considering their number of 360. This is not only outrageous but an affront of incalculable proportions on the majority of citizens who find it difficult to eke out a living.

For the Senate spokesman to affirm that the running cost is already contained in the federal budget and as such, there is nothing new to it is the height of mischief.  For so many years at the Citizens Wealth Platform, we have been pointing out these frivolous, inappropriate, wasteful and illegal expenditure proposals but no one seems to be listening. The fact that legislators have the power of appropriation and they abuse it for their personal gain, rather than for the peace, order and good government of the federation does not justify, legalise or make right this N13.5 million monthly disbursement. It is simply authority stealing, using the legislative process for ignoble purposes and an abuse of power.

It is interesting that every senator and legislator takes home this money quietly and calmly without highlighting the fact that he is Christian or Moslem, Igbo, Hausa or Yoruba, etc. Thus, there is unanimity of purpose in their resolve to pocket this money without due process. And the fact that this has now become public knowledge is something that most of the members of NASS regret.  It is up to Nigerians to decide on how to react to this heist. Impunity rules where men are fearful and refuse to stand up for their rights.

The Chairman of the Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption, Prof. Itse Sagay (SAN), says the N13m allowances being received by senators is only a tip of the iceberg as Nigerians will be shocked when he releases details of the allowances of the principal officers of the National Assembly.

Sagay said this during an interview with our correspondent.

Sagay, who has for several years accused federal lawmakers of receiving outrageous allowances, said principal officers of the National Assembly, including the Senate President, Deputy Senate President, Speaker, Deputy Speaker and the majority and minority leaders of both chambers, are receiving far more than what Sani revealed.

The senior advocate said the polity might explode when he released the details of their allowances.

He said, “There are many things the press doesn’t know yet. If you come to know the allowances that the leadership of the two houses are getting… My God! It will blow up the country. What is the Senate President getting? It is not the ordinary N13m.

“What does he get as Senate President? What is the leader of the House getting, what is the deputy leader of the House getting? What is the Deputy Senate President getting? What are the minority leaders getting in both houses? Go and find out. It is an explosive stuff, I tell you. Eventually, I will come out with the figures. I am working on them now. When I am ready, I will come out with them.”

Sagay lambasted spokesman for the Senate, Senator Abdullahi Sabi, for saying that the N13.5m allowances were already in the public domain.

The PACAC chairman said it was hypocritical of the lawmakers to have berated him last year when he released details of their allowances.

He added that Sani’s revelation was at variance with the details released by Saraki last year.

“The salary details released was just about N700,000 but what they voted for themselves is about 20 times that amount. That is the whole point and they were hiding it.

“I came out with the figures last year and they wanted to cut off my neck and now it has come out in the open and Sabi Abdullahi is saying it is nothing new but you were denying it in the past. So, they have a guilty conscience because they know what they are doing is shameful.”

Meanwhile, the Movement for the Actualisation of a Sovereign State of Biafra on Sunday commended Sani for exposing the wages of Nigerian senators.

In a statement by the MASSOB leader, Uchenna Madu,  the group said providence would bless Sani for exposing his colleagues.

The Biafra agitators described other senators as “criminal lions.”

The statement partly read, “MASSOB hails Senator Sani representing Kaduna Central in exposing his fellow distinguished criminal lions roaring in the National Assembly of the Nigerian state.

“MASSOB sees the Nigerian parliament, mostly the senators, as market men and women who always see the National Assembly as a business market where they only make billions of monetary profit without investments.

“The majority of these National Assembly businessmen  and women are so insensitive and shameless in their dealings with the people of their senatorial districts.

“It is only in Nigeria that a senator will openly without shame donate a gas cooker with frying pan or grinding machines and other useless materials unbefitting of a country’s senator to the few people of his senatorial constituents as an empowerments incentives.

“Nigerian parliamentarians  lack innovative empowerments in education, healthcare, economy and technology. They have no visions, intentions or programmes for the poor.”

The group added, “Most worrisome is that the majority of these senators do not exist in the Senate chambers; they only exist during election campaigns or ceremonial functions.

“Most of them are glorified laymen with no qualitative educational background, a man without a good academic insight and exposures as a senator can never be fruitful to his nation.”

Punch

he Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board has said it will release no fewer than 1.3 million results of candidates that sat for the 2018 Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination on Monday (today) after they had gone through security checks and found to be without malpractice.

The JAMB Head of Information, Dr. Fabian Benjamin, who stated this on Sunday in an interview with our correspondent, added that the UTME results of Computer-Based Test centres where the CCTV showed malpractices had been cancelled.

The JAMB spokesman said, “We are presently viewing the CCTV to ensure that results are not released in several batches. On Monday, we will release over 1.3 million results. These are the results of the CBT centres that have been screened. We cannot say how many cases of malpractice we have yet, because we are still viewing the CCTV to discover more cases.

“Some strange findings that the CCTV has showed us include a situation where the CBT owners were collecting money from UTME candidates and seeing to how they could assist them. Our officials at the centres raised the alarm but they were also afraid so that their lives would not be endangered.

“What the JAMB officials did was to silently play along with them, but we were watching everything on the CCTV. We later sent operatives to the centres and caught them. Such UTME results were completely cancelled. We knew that there were some innocent candidates in such centres and we have asked them to go to other CBT centres and rewrite immediately.”

Benjamin said candidates whose fingers could not be captured during the biometric verification before the examination, would not be allowed to retake the examination, as the biometric verification had already disqualified them.

“We have also concluded all arrangements to do the UTME for blind candidates. The examination is taking place in five centres. These are Abuja, Lagos, Kano, Benin and Enugu. The candidates are writing on Monday (today),” he added.

Punch

The authorities could do more to protect wildlife across the country

In a devastating blow to conservation of wildlife in Nigeria, an ignorant hunter last week shot and killed an elephant at Janiyi Camp, Idanre, Ondo State after which he took photographs with the animal’s remains as proof of his crime. While the rest of the world may be laughing at us, it should worry the authorities that despite the establishment of protected areas, hunters can now freely enter many of our game reserves to kill protected animals.

It is a shame that a nation which once had the most diverse population of elephants in the world can now boast only a few because they have been hunted almost to extinction. The Idanre Forest Reserve, where the latest tragedy took place, covers 561 square kilometres and is a designated nature reserve of the International Union for Conservation of Nature. Legal and regulatory frameworks in wildlife conservation in the country date back to the colonial era. The Forestry Act and Wild Animals Act were patterned after the 1933 London Convention for Protection of African Fauna. This was updated by the Conservation of Biological Diversity and International Law, 1990 UNEP, Nairobi.

Apparently because Nigerians have still not understood the importance of environment, there is a lot of ignorance about how losing some species of plants and animals can have disastrous impact on the rest of the ecosystem. By killing a rare animal dubbed ‘gentle giant’ because of its harmless nature right in its natural habitat, the damage done to Nigeria’s image is huge. We therefore call on the authorities to find the hunter and bring him to justice if only to deter others from believing they can go into our game reserves and kill protected animals without consequences.

The ownership of wildlife in the country is vested in the federal government, according to Section 20 of the National Park Service Act, which states: “The ownership of every wild animal and wild plant existing in its natural habitat in, National park and anything whatsoever, whether of biological geomorphologic or historical origin or otherwise, existing or found in a National park is hereby vested in the federal government and subject to the control and management by the federal government for the benefit of Nigeria and mankind generally.”

Notwithstanding, there should be deliberate initiatives to protect the nation’s wildlife, even if this has to be done in collaboration with private partners, who have expertise in the field. For instance, at Yankari, there is a whole lot of protection work being done by the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) in collaboration with the Bauchi State government, which runs the park. The WCS has its Elephant Guardian programme to reduce the conflict between humans and elephants and it has helped to improve the level of tolerance towards elephants and the crop damage inflicted.

 While we call on the federal government to do all within its powers to protect the nation’s wildlife by taking its conservation responsibilities more seriously, it is also important that Nigerians be enlightened on the issues of environment. As things stand, only organised conservation work, government support and enlightenment and good habitat management are capable of saving the forest elephant species from extinction in Nigeria.

Thisday 

Often at odds with each other over issues, the Executive arm and the National Assembly have, however, recently found a common ground in pursuing a draconian legislation on “hate speech.” In this, they clearly intend to surpass the colonial overlords, successive military regimes and the world’s most brutal dictatorships in legal savagery. Nigerians should for once exercise their rights to resist blatant oppression by a degenerate political class.

Critical sections of the society — the mass media, civil society, pressure groups, the academia, writers and creative/performing artistes — that may bear the main brunt of the obnoxious law have been curiously and dangerously indifferent, as only a few voices have raised the alarm. They had better wake up. Eternal vigilance remains the price of liberty.

The Hate Speech Bill, according to its sponsors at the Senate, seeks to “eliminate” hate speech and discourage harassment on the grounds of ethnicity, religion or race among others. It prescribes stiff penalties for offences such as “ethnic hatred.” “Any person who uses, publishes, presents, produces, plays, provides, distributes and/or directs the performance of any material, written and/or visual, which is threatening, abusive or insulting or involves the use of threatening, abusive or insulting words, commits an offence,” it states.

Purveying or inciting hatred is bad, but viewed from all perspectives, this is a bad law being proposed by persons so unfamiliar and uncomfortable with the practices and nuances of fundamental rights and democracy. Not even in his first incarnation as a military head of state did President Muhammadu Buhari propose such heavy jail terms and fines against the exercise of free speech and media freedom. The infamous anti-media Decree 4 that headlined the military junta he led in 1984-85 came far short of imposing millions of naira in fines or prescribing the death penalty. Neither did the British colonial masters who drafted and enforced a succession of sedition and anti-press laws contemplate silencing free speech with the death penalty.

The bill is the culmination of threats by senior government officials railing against “hate speech” in response to criticism and inter-ethnic tension, especially the deep alienation felt, and recently stridently expressed, by some sections of the country angered by Buhari’s glaring sectionalism in appointments and actions.

Our legislators should pre-occupy themselves with passing urgently needed bills such as the 2018 budget that is stuck in the parliament, the Petroleum Industry Governance Bill and the Railway Act repeal bill that would unshackle the railway system and open it up to foreign direct investment.

This sits at odds with provisions on basic fundamental rights outlined in Chapter IV of the 1999 Constitution, especially Sections 38 and 39 that guarantee the freedom of thought, conscience and religion; and freedom of expression and the press, respectively. The basic law and enabling legislation, also sufficiently prohibit the abuse of such rights and discrimination against persons or groups on account of race, ethnicity or faith.

The proposed law is amorphous and open to abuse: who defines or determines what constitutes hate speech? Unlike Canada, Australia, Belgium, Germany, France and other European Union countries that enacted anti-hate speech laws specifically in response to rising xenophobia against racial and religious minorities, our lawmakers and public office holders reveal by their utterances that it is criticism and public scrutiny that they deplore, not the protection of minorities. Recall that the Senate once accused a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Itse Sagay, of hate speech after his scathing criticism of their poor performance, corruption and greed. Interior Minister, Abdulrahman Dambazau, reacting to public anger at Fulani herdsmen attacks, had also hinted of the impending bill to amend the Anti-Terrorism Act 2011 to punish those who publish hate speech against religious and ethnic groups. To be sure, inciting hatred or mob action against others is to be discouraged; efforts should be made to penalise those who cross the line between free speech and criminality.

There are, however, existing laws that cater for abuse of freedom or harassment of individuals and groups, as pointed out by civil society and mass media groups. Laws setting up the National Broadcasting Commission, Advertising Practitioners Council and the Nigerian Press Code have in-built provisions to stop and penalise violence or incitement against others. Nigerian film and video and the censors board filter out offensive material and pornography among others. If the laws are inadequate, they can be updated; the hate speech bill is a poisoned chalice.

Even without it, overzealous policemen and other security agencies have lately been harassing journalists on spurious grounds, signposting the possible abuse of an already obnoxious law.

The mass media, civil society, lawyers, student and labour unions should take up the gauntlet and resist this evil law.Punch

Disappointed in lawyers because of their manipulation of the legal system during his lifetime, the Lord Jesus Christ did not spare them. Apart from accusing lawyers of hiding the key of knowledge, Jesus proceeded to curse them when he said, “woe to you lawyers also because you load people down with burden they can hardly carry, and you yourselves will not lift a finger to help them”. See Luke 11:46.  

The famous English writer, William Shakespeare, was much more impatient with lawyers as recorded in the history play,   Henry VI.  There was a rebellion. Dick the butcher was a leading member of the rebellion. Convinced that lawyers would invoke the law to oppose and put down the rebellion Dick said: “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.”

Today, many Nigerians will join Dick in demanding that all lawyers be killed to prevent them from frustrating the war against corruption. As far as such people are concerned, lawyers have committed the unpardonable crime of aiding powerful criminal suspects to escape justice. Lawyers have been accused of resorting to technicalities to perpetrate injustice and colluding with judges to justify the rigging of elections and setting corrupt public officers free while jailing petty criminals.

Although the general perception of lawyers and their role in the society may be erroneous, it cannot be denied that some Nigerian lawyers have contributed to the subversion of democracy and promotion of corruption in the country. It is, therefore, important to continuously examine the role of lawyers in the society.

As far as Transparency International is concerned, corruption is the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. Corruption can be classified as grand, petty and political, depending on the amounts of money lost and the sector where it occurs.

Although corruption is not defined by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission Act (CAP C31) Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, Section 2 thereof states that it includes “bribery, fraud and other related offences.” The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Act (CAP E1) Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 has comprehensively provided for economic and financial crimes. Accordingly, the Commission established by the law is charged with the responsibility to enforce the provisions of the Money Laundering Act, Advance Fee Fraud Act, Failed Banks (Recovery of Debts) and Financial Malpractices in Banks Act, Banks and Other Financial Institutions Act, Miscellaneous Offences Act and any other law or regulation relating to economic and financial crimes.

Professor Osita Nnamani Osita once said, “the level of official corruption and moral degeneracy in our land is damming and agonizing. The ills are not only deep, but also pervasive, covering all institutions and private lives. The value system has been completely distorted. The State and its parastatals has become highly desired and prices, the control of which automatically leads to instant wealth. Any person who held government position and came out poor is generally regarded as foolish. Corruption has become a way of life in Nigeria”. In as much as the observations of the learned scholar   may be correct it ought to be pointed out that the Nigerian people are not inherently corrupt. In other words, corruption has become pervasive due to the dependent capitalist system imposed on the country coupled with the reckless impunity of the ruling class in Nigeria.

In the bid to combat corruption, a number of laws have been enacted by the federal government.

A cursory examination of the ant-graft laws in Nigeria reveals that there are sufficient laws to deal with the menace of corruption. Apart from the EFCC Act and the ICPC Act, the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act etc., the Police is also vested with the responsibility of investigating corruption and related crimes. There is also the Public Accounts Implementation Tribunal Act Cap P 36 LFN 2004, which provides for the setting up of a Tribunal to recover from public officers, contractors or companies funds misappropriated or due to the Government of the Federation. The Tribunal is to be composed of a retired judge, representatives of the AGF, Auditor-General, Accountant-General and police officer not below the rank of a Commissioner of Police. Under the Public Property Special Provisions) Act LFN 2004, the President is empowered to set up a panel to recover public properties.  The law has prescribed life imprisonment for any person convicted for unjust enrichment and 21 years jail term for false declaration of assets.

So, there is enough legislation to deal with corrupt practices, drug trafficking, human trafficking, terrorism and other dangerous offences. It is the lack of political will on the part of the ruling class coupled with the manipulation of the legal system by powerful litigants and senior lawyers who have continued to frustrate the investigation and prosecution of corruption cases. No society can successfully challenge criminality where impunity is the order of the day. Since the courts have a penchant for granting bail in corruption cases the prosecution should stop opposing applications for the bail of criminal suspects. In other words, the prosecution and the defence counsel should agree on the conditions to be attached to bail to enable the defendants to stand trial.

However, where the parties are unable to reach an agreement the trial judge should impose bail conditions that are commensurate with the gravity of the offence. The procedure will save the precious time wasted on arguing   applications for bail, which are going to be granted, in any case.

We have seen how the weakness of the criminal justice system has been exploited by lawyers to frustrate the trial of politically exposed    persons and top corporate bodies.  It is a development which has compelled the anti graft agencies to outsource justice to the detriment of our national integrity.  Even though there are enough anti graft laws in the statute books there is no political will to ensure the prosecution of corruption cases in a manner that the menace of corruption is reduced to the barest minimum.

Fighting corruption with a view to eliminating it will require a challenge of the capitalist system whose morality is influenced by fraud and exploitation. Since the ruling class will not deliberately commit class suicide, the progressive members of the legal profession should forge a political alliance with the working class towards the creation of a new society, which will be committed to the actualisation of the fundamental objectives enshrined in   Chapter II of the Constitution. Without a new political morality based on the security and welfare of the majority of citizens, corruption cannot be fought and defeated.

To the extent that some funds have been recovered while a number of suspects have been charged to court the fight against corruption may be said to be on course. But the government has to do much more to promote accountability and transparency in government. Since the federal government has not made any appreciable progress in the recovery and repatriation of the nation’s looted wealth the Nigerian judiciary should not hesitate to grant Mareva injunctions in respect of the funds and other assets which have been criminally diverted by a number of unpatriotic public officers.

While people charged with corrupt practices are entitled to individual defence counsel, the NBA ought to collaborate with the federal government in the fight against corruption including the repatriation of the nation’s resources.

In exercise of my right under the Freedom of Freedom of Information Act, I have had cause to request the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) to provide information on fuel importation. As it has no answer to the questions, which I raised, the NNPC claimed that it is “not a public institution.”  In justifying the rejection of our request for information with respect to the shameful importation of fuel by Nigeria, a leading oil producing nation, the NNPC Counsel claimed that the Corporation is not bound by the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. With respect, the misleading submission of the Counsel does not seem to historically represent the position of the Management of the NNPC.

It is on record that the NNPC Management had once dissociated the Corporation from a similar view credited to the NNPC Legal Department. During the induction ceremony for newly recruited Graduate Trainees held at the NNPC Towers in Abuja on August 10, 2012, the then NNPC Group Managing Director, Mr. Andrew Yakubu, recalled that following the enactment of the Freedom of Information Act the NNPC Management had swiftly established a Task Force with the goal of examining the law and advising management on how best to comply with its provisions.

In fact, Mr. Yakubu said, “long before the Freedom of Information Act came into force, the NNPC has been maintaining an open door policy which sees it volunteering information to its various policies through press releases, advertorials and presentations at different forums including hearings at the National Assembly.”

It was in the spirit of ensuring that its activities and operations live up to public scrutiny that NNPC disregarded the legal opinion of the Counsel when it recently informed a bewildered nation that the corporation had spent $5.8 billion for the importation of fuel in just two months of this year and that N744m is incurred daily as fuel subsidy.

The decision to give details of the cost of importation of fuel has exposed the claim of the Counsel that such matters are “trade secrets” which cannot be disclosed “in the public interest” under the Freedom of Information Act. Since the Board and Management of the NNPC have not had cause to renounce the commitment of the Corporation to comply with the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act it  ought to make it clear to the Counsel that the days of opacity in the running NNPC are over.

More so, President Mohammadu Buhari stated during the inauguration of the current NNPC board on November 18, 2016 a follows:  “Since the arrival of this administration, there has been an improvement in transparency through publishing monthly operational and financial report of the Corporation. “

With respect to the erroneous submission that the NNPC is not a public institution it is embarrassing that the Counsel did not advert her mind to Section 2(7) of the Freedom of Information Act which has defined public institutions to mean “all authorities whether executive, legislative or judicial agencies, ministries and extra-ministerial departments of government, together with all corporations established by law and all companies in which government has a controlling interest, and private companies utilizing public funds, providing public services or performing public functions.”  

Contrary to the untenable contention of the Counsel, the NNPC is a public institution as the federal government has controlling interest in it and it is utilizing public funds to provide public services. Indeed, because the NNPC is a public institution   its budget is appropriated by the National Assembly while its accounts are audited by auditors appointed by the Auditor- General of the Federation in line with section 85 of the Constitution.  

Furthermore, in exercise of its oversight functions the National Assembly regularly conducts investigation into allegations of corrupt practices against the corporation. Of course, the NNPC Board reports to President Buhari in his capacity as the head of the federal government while the NNPC Management reports to him as the Minister of the petroleum resources. It is, therefore, preposterous to say that the corporation is not a public institution.

Members of the legal profession are increasingly being blamed by the   Nigerian people because of the strong perception that lawyers and judges are using the law to suppress the quest for a better society.  This is a very dangerous perception that must be addressed timely.

Lawyers have a duty to the nation and the society to see to it that corruption and impunity are fought diligently and uncompromisingly. As defenders of human rights and the rule of law lawyers should be committed to the eradication of corrupt practices and impunity.

Nigerians on their part must change their perception and disposition to public office. Citizens have a duty to continually hold public officers accountable for their actions. The passage of the Freedom of Information Act into law has given members of the public the weapon to ask legitimate questions on the management of the affairs and resources of the country.

The civil society movement and the human rights community should redouble their efforts in the struggle to free our nation of corruption. The battle to save our nation from corruption has to be collectively fought and decisively won.

• Falana, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria and human rights lawyer, writes from Lagos

The ECOWAS Network of Electoral Commissions (ECONEC) has lauded the National Electoral Commission (NEC), Sierra Leone, for its professionalism during the March 7 general elections and urged it to sustain the exemplary conduct through the completion of the presidential run-off vote scheduled for March 27.

“Conducting four elections in one day (presidential, parliamentary, district and local council) is not a mean feat, and in spite of minor hitches reported by election observers, Sierra Leone’s political stakeholders - the electorate, government and security agencies, civil society and NEC, deserve commendation for the responsible conduct and patriotism exhibited during the first phase of the electoral process,” said Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, President of the ECONEC governing board and Chair of Nigeria’s Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

In his goodwill message to NEC on 18^th March, the ECONEC President expressed his optimism that NEC will live up to the high expectations of Sierra Leoneans and the international community in its determination to deliver peaceful and credible elections. This will contribute to the consolidation of stability and democracy in the country and the ECOWAS region as a whole.

Prof. Yakubu further reiterated ECONEC’s commitment to continued support for NEC Sierra Leone in line with the Network’s mandate of assisting its members, including through information and experience sharing, peer collaboration, pooling of resources and advocacy for technical and logistic support.

Last July, Prof. Yakubu led an ECONEC delegation on a Needs Assessment Mission to Sierra Leone. This was followed by an advocacy that resulted in the donation of logistics items by the Nigerian government to NEC Sierra Leone.

The support includes five 4Wd pick-up vehicles, two trucks, two speed boats and five motorcycles. Some of the items have already arrived in Sierra Leone.

Also, members of the ECOWAS Election Observation Mission to Sierra Leone monitoring the electoral process in the country include ECONEC secretariat staff.

Leaders of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the three senatorial districts of Oyo State have warned the party’s national secretariat to stay clear of its internal affairs.

They also vowed to resist any form of imposition and impunity from the national secretariat.

The PDP leaders also passed a vote of confidence in the state’s executive of the party – from the wards to state level – under the chairmanship of Alhaji Omokunmi Mustapha.

The party leaders from Oyo Central Senatorial District who passed the vote of confidence include Senator Ayoade Adeseun, Oloye Jumoke Akinjide, Chief Bisi Ilaka and Olasunkanmi Salami.

Others are: Asiwaju Adeyemi Aderibigbe, D. A. Lawal, Oladepo Oyedokun, Abiola Olaniyan, Matthew Abioye and Moruf Akinwande, among others.

A statement at the weekend in Ibadan, the state capital, by PDP’s State Publicity Secretary Akeem Olatunji, said the party leaders also affirmed former Governor Rashidi Ladoja as the party’s leader in the state.

The statement said the PDP leaders rose from their senatorial district meetings in Oyo South, Oyo North and Oyo Central, declaring that they would leave the party en mass, if PDP’s national leadership tampered with the state executive.

The statement reads: “Consequent upon the meeting of the Oyo Central, Oyo North and Oyo South senatorial districts, the meeting came up with the following resolutions.

“The party members and leadership in the three senatorial districts completely throw their weight behind the leadership of the party in Oyo State, Senator Rashidi Ladoja, in his fight against imposition and impunity of whatever forms within the party.

“We dissociate ourselves from the sentiments expressed by a politician, as published in Nigerian Tribune with the headline: Ladoja Cannot Intimidate Oyo PDP. The self-acclaimed leader did not speak the minds of teeming PDP members in Oyo Central Senatorial District.

“We re-affirm our support and belief in the stewardship of all members of the State Executive Committee of the party as it presently constituted under the leadership of Omokunmi Mustapha as the Chairman.

“We associate completely with the position of the leader of our party in the state that all forms of imposition and impunity hereby rejected and should not be tolerated, no matter how little.

“Anything contrary to this will be vehemently rejected. Nevertheless, the meeting pleaded with all and sundry who are still nursing grievances as a result of the last state congresses to bury their hatchet and join the progressive train in order for all of us to ferry together to the Government House in 2019.”

The Nation 

Chief Olu Falae, National Chairman of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), says his party will defeat President Buhari if he decides to run for second term.

The former presidential candidate of the defunct Alliance Democracy/All Nigerian Peoples Party declared that SDP is the party to beat.

“It is the absolute prerogative of President Buhari and his party to decide whether he should go for second term or not”, he told Vanguard

“Constitutionally, he is entitled to second term. It is his right and, if he chooses to go, it does not bother me. If he goes, it means we will meet him on the field on election day and we will defeat him.

“If he does not go, he will spare me that pain of having to defeat my good friend in the election. If his party brings somebody else, by the grace of God, we will defeat that person.”

Falae also spoke on alleged marginalisation of Asiwaju Bola Tinubu in the ruling APC after he had helped the party to capture power at the federal level.

“We had in the past made our position clear through our leader, Chief Reuben Fasoranti, that Yoruba leaders believe that part of why he is treated that way is because of where he comes from.

“We might be wrong, but that is what we believe. He is a smart guy and a politician who knows what to do to favour him at every time and every stage in his life.

“He is not a baby, he has not said he needs my advice or tutoring or mentoring, so it is unnecessary to ask for an unsolicited advice on his behalf.

“So if tomorrow Asiwaju Tinubu decides to come to the SDP, he will be welcomed. Of course yes; we were both members of the SDP before, so it will be ‘welcome home Bola Tinubu”.

On the way out of herdsmen’s crisis, Falae who has been a victim, said the authorities was acting as if dealing with the issue was impossible.

“Almost every nation on earth eats cows as we do. But you don’t go to California and run into cattle on the tarmac. You don’t even go to Ghana and find cattle in the city square.

“We found the solution at the National Conference in 2014 that free grazing of cattle is out of date, disappeared over 200 years ago in most countries and that we cannot continue to live in the past.

“Ranching is the answer, not by walking your cattle from Kano to Akure and, by the time they get here, they are all bones, and that’s why they desperately needed my maize and cassava to become fresh again so that the cows could be sold at good prices.”

DailyPost 

President Muhammadu Buhari says it is too early for him to declare his intention for the 2019 presidential election.