₦airaland Forum

* Say it’s self-serving

* Proposal triggers calls for removal of immunity for president, govs

A bill seeking to amend section 308 of the 1999 Constitution to provide immunity for presiding officers of the National Assembly including the Senate president, speaker, deputy Senate president and deputy speaker yesterday scaled through second reading at the House of Representatives. Section 308 of the country’s constitution provides immunity to the president, vice president, governors and their deputies.

The proposal is to amend the section to accommodate the presiding officers of both national and state assemblies. Daily Trust reports that thunderous rejection is trailing the proposal. This is the second time that the proposal would be made during President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration.

At the eighth assembly, a similar bill sponsored by the then House Minority Leader, Leo Ogor did not see the light of the day. The proposal, Daily Trust reports was against item five on the 2014 manifesto of the All Progressives Congress (APC) that reads, “Amend the constitution to remove immunity from prosecution for elected officers in criminal cases.”

The parliament is populated by the APC members. Section 308 of the constitution reads: (1) (a) “no civil or criminal proceedings shall be instituted or continued against a person whom this section applies during his period of office,” while (b) provides that, “a person to whom this section applies shall not be arrested or imprisoned during that period either in pursuance of the process of any court or otherwise,” and (c) says “no process of any court requiring or compelling the appearance of a person to whom this section applies shall be applied for or issued.”

Consequently, subsection (3) provides that “This section applies to a person holding the office of President, or Vice-President, Governor or Deputy Governor; and the reference in this section to ‘period of office’ is a reference to the period during which the person holding such office is required to perform the functions of the office.”

At plenary yesterday, the bill, sponsored by Rep Olusegun Odebunmi (APC, Oyo) tagged, “An Act to Alter Section 308 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 to Extend Immunity to Cover Presiding Officers of Legislative Institutions,’ scaled second reading. Odebunmi, argued that the immunity bill was to protect the presiding officers from distraction and to make them to fully concentrate on their legislative duty without compromise. The Speaker, Femi Gbajabiamila urged the sponsor to make the implementation of the bill “futuristic’’.

He said being one of the presiding officers, he will not be the judge in his own case, and he was not willing to benefit from the privilege of the bill when passed into law.

As masses fall victims of abductions It’s selective protection for elite-Civil society groups A manual emanating from the Department of State Services (DSS), which provides tips against kidnapping for Very Important Personalities (VIPs) is generating controversy among Nigerians, Daily Trust reports. Concerns are being raised as to why the DSS chose to produce the manual to serve the interest of VIPs instead of ordinary Nigerians who are more vulnerable to kidnapping in the country. The manual is coming at a time when many Nigerians have either lost their lives or valuables to pay ransom to kidnappers in different parts of the country.

A copy of the handbook titled: ‘Kidnapping, why me and my family’ was conveyed to the Central Bank governor, Godwin Emefiele through a letter dated January 17, 2020, and acknowledged on January 20, 2020. Similar copies of the handbook were also said to have been sent to top government functionaries, including heads of government agencies, departments, boards and parastatals.

Titled ‘Forwarding of kidnapping handbook’, the letter signed by Ahmed Salisu on behalf of the Director-General of DSS, partly reads: “Following in-depth assessment of kidnapping trend across the states of the federation in recent years, and the seeming lack of awareness of basic preventive tips and guidelines among the populace, the Service as part of its proactive measure against the crime has produced a handbook, aimed at sensitizing Very Important Personalities (VIPs)…” The introductory note to the manual reads: “Given the pecuniary motive driving kidnapping activities, the affluent in the society become easy targets of attack. However, with the appropriate application of relevant security tips and guidelines, the vulnerability of Very Important Personalities (VIPs) to attacks can be reduced to its barest minimum. This handbook is therefore designed to specifically acquaint VIPs of important tips that would enhance their personal security and that of their family members.” A scrutiny of the 19-page handbook showed that it provides the VIPs with kidnapping preventive tips and guidelines under different subtitles.

A tip under the subtitle: ‘Why you and your household may be targets of kidnapping’, reads: “The following if not well managed could expose you to dangers of kidnapping: Your appearance and disposition; your level of popularity; occupying sensitive and important positions in the society; raving flippant and unguided aides; engaging inadequately vetted household employees; inordinate business transactions involving one’s bank accounts without adequate knowledge about intentions; entrusting confidential and personal matters into others; inappropriate disclosure of one’s itinerary, and living a flamboyant lifestyle and inappropriate display of wealth.” Another tip, which talks about self-awareness, said: “Recognize your self-worth; assess the threat level of your environment, and the perception of others about you in any given location. “Your security aides are there to secure you and your household.

They are also to educate you and your household on security-related issues. Ensure you obtain intelligence relating to the security situation of places you intend visiting for public functions or personal purposes.

“Be humble enough to see things from your security aide’s perspective when you are advised not to visit an area. Your aides are your buffer against danger, take care of them. Vigilance keeps you at alert when others are not. It entails being conscious of every activity/happening around you and your family…” Other kidnapping preventive tips for VIPs as contained in the handbook advised VIPs on the need for installation of Close Circuit Television Cameras (CCTV), maintaining a moderate lifestyle, avoiding phone calls that discuss financial issues in the public among others.

Nigerians react kidnap a dvisory for VIPs A cross-section of Nigerians have expressed dismay and surprise at the issuance of kidnapping manual for VIPs, wondering why the DSS failed to direct it to ordinary citizens who are most vulnerable to the crime. “We sold our farm to secure the release of our eldest brother from the hands of kidnappers,” said Aisha Isa, a school teacher in Katsina.

“And our case is not an exception, many families lost their sources of livelihood because they have to sell everything they have in order to secure the release of their loved ones. In some instances, the kidnappers kill their victims even when the ransom was paid,” she said. “I wouldn’t have been kidnapped if I had access to the advisory,” said a kidnap victim who does not want his name in print.

“I am a businessman and had to pay a lot of money to secure my release. I passed through psychological trauma and my family was also rattled during my days in captivity. Despite assurances by the security agencies, it was the money we paid that my freedom was secured,” he said. “I want to suggest that the federal government and the security agencies should give equal preferences to the safety of the citizens irrespective of status in the society. This is the only way we can secure the country,” he added.

The Executive Director, YIAGA Africa, Mr. Samson Itodo, told Daily Trust that such handbook and other preventive and safety measures should have been for ordinary citizens who are the most vulnerable. Itodo said, “I am surprised that only the VIPs were entitled to the memo when ordinary citizens are the worst hit by kidnapping.

Check the statistics, the masses are the most vulnerable because they do not have the luxury of bodyguards and convoys to protect them.” On her part, the Director Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD), Idayat Hassan, said the development was unfair and selective. She said, “It is not just unfair, it is also unprofessional and selective action by the DSS, whose main duties are to protect the internal security of all Nigerians. Such action is suggesting that they serve only a few elite groups and the security of Nigerians is not a priority.”

Also, the Executive Director, Resource Centre for Human Rights and Civic Education (CHRICED), Dr. Ibrahim M. Zikirullahi, told Daily Trust that the handbook should have been released to the Nigerian public. “I agree absolutely that the handbook should have been made available to the public whose taxes and sweat the so-called VIPs are managing.

The DSS and other security agencies are created to secure the lives and properties of Nigerian citizens and not for the privileged few,” Zikirullahi said. Similarly, the Executive Director, Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC), Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, told Daily Trust that it is surprising that such important information was being given to select individuals. “One would have expected that this should be a public document to protect the citizens from kidnapping and other crimes. One expects the DSS, through its public affairs unit or department to publicize this security handbook. Limiting it to individuals and some top government officials is unfair especially that this was done with public resources.

“So, the DSS should work with the National Orientation Agency (NOA) to amplify this and other safety and security measures. The agency (DSS) should also work with the Police in this regard,” Rafsanjani said. Also speaking, Mr. Jaye Gaskia, the Executive Director, Praxis Centre and Convener, Take Back Nigeria Movement (TBNM), said: “ Given the endemic nature of insecurity in general, and kidnapping in particular, any security advisory aimed at stemming the tide ought to have been made public and productively disseminated.

“What the DSS has done in these instance smacks of selective protection for citizens, and is the latest indication of the phenomenon as well as a tragic consequence of elite capture, privatization, and personalization of the state.”

A mother of four, Mrs Janet Ayoola, lost her 39-year-old marriage to her husband, Olajide Ayoola, for denying him sex for seven years. An Igando Customary Court in Lagos on Monday granted the request of Janet’s enstranged husband, Olajide, for dissolution of the marriage. The Court’s President, Mr Adeniyi Koledoye, said that since the petitioner insisted on divorce after several interventions, the court was left with no option than to grant him his wish.

“The court hereby pronounces the marriage between Mr Olajide Ayoola and Mrs Janet Ayoola dissolved today. Both of you henceforth cease to be husband and wife. “Two of you should go on your separate ways unmolested. The court wishes both of you well in your future endeavour,” Koledoye ruled.

He, however, ordered Olajide to pay a severance of N200, 000 to Janet for her to move on with her life. The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the 70-year-old pensioner had earlier approached the court to terminate his marriage, accusing his wife of starving him of sex. “Janet who stayed under the same roof with me refused me to make love to her for good seven years. She will not even allow me to touch her, let alone sleep with her,” the petitioner told the court. Ayoola said that his wife wanted to terminate his life so as to inherit his property.

“She had attacked me both physically and spiritually,” he said. The embittered husband said that Janet lacked care for him. “My wife had to employ some domestic staff who came to wash my clothes and cooked for me. “Janet was an ungrateful woman. I had established businesses for her severally but the businesses collapsed due to her inability to manage them well. “ My wife is a fighter; she fights me and everybody on the street,” Ayoola said.

The petitioner said that the respondent lacked respect for him and also instigated their children against him. He pleaded with the court to end their marriage on the ground of lack of love. “Please court terminate our marriage because my wife may succeed one day by killing me in my sleep,” he begged. The respondent denied all the allegations. She made a fervent plea to the court not to annul their marriage, saying that she still loved her husband.

The 58-year-old businesswoman said that she did not starve her husband of sex. “My husband asked me to leave our room for another room, claiming I snored. “I never made any attempt to kill my husband nor instigated any of our children against him,” Janet said. The mother of four said that her husband always refused her food for reason best known to him. (NAN)