₦airaland Forum

OAM4J:
hehehe a ki nfi omo ore bo ore.

The Irunmoles will not accept abode.

You don become MOD for real??

Now I need to drop the gentleman toga and unleash Sango and Ara on all those Odu'a enemies in the Politics section.

Now, Saro Lady and the Geek cannot do me nothing

I don become Godfather

klas:
Council of state does not deal with federal matters but national matters. Read my post again. It deals with matters that commit or affect the states e.g. minimum wage, elections into the state offices, population census with consequential effect on revenue allocation.

What complication or waste of money are we talking about? Of all the symbol of our federalism, the council of state is the least expensive - almost at no cost. The difference between unitary and federal system of government is the requirement  for consensus of the component units on matters of common interest. That is  formally achieved thru the council.

Let us forsee a situation where africa achieves the proposed common government but no provision is made for Heads of state of component units to ever meet. It will just be like the relationship we have currently between the state and local governments.

I read thru the thread b4 making my previous comment. The impression I got is that some people dont like the face of some members of the Council and if those faces can vamoose, the council can stay.

NONSENSE!! Not you, but the idea and argument you presented.

What are the component units? National VS Federal? What are you talking about? Maybe we should add national pastors and Imams too

We already have the Executive, the Legislature, and the Judiciary, if we can't work with those then we should return to Village Square government.

You said the cost is minimal? How much is it? what is the point in throwing away money? No matter how minimal, especially when you have 150 million people to govern.

I don't care about democratically "ejected" leaders, it's not just about the former rulers currently in the body, if you really read what was written earlier you'll find the reasons.

Jonathan Should Propose a bill to Expunge the Darn thing. It is a redundant Padi Padi body a symptom of our bigmanism national disease.

Everybody can't make money like a billionaire, you cannot erase the middle class and the poor.

"The poor will always be with us" somebody needs to flip burgers, sell small small Akara or sweep the streets of Lagos, get over it.

The capitalist sky is not big enough for everybody, money will always be scarce, it is what it is. Sorry.

I read Dangote started with a 500,000 Loan from his uncle Sanusi Dantata in 1977, convert that to todays money and you will realize he did not start like the Average Emeka, Abudu or Kola.

All these motivational speakers preaching everybody can be rich need to stop lying to people.

I heard hard work pays though. Not sure really, because I see many lazy people blowing money Yanfu Yanfu for Abuja. Anyway. keep trying.

^
Thank you for your thoughts. We know what the Council of State's duties are, it's in the constitution, but point remains that it should be scrapped, the duties are redundant and the inclusion of former rulers is daft and stvpid.

Governors need to stick to attracting businesses to their states and making sure people have jobs, let the elected federal Executives and their ministers deal with federal matters. While the legislature provide oversight duties as expected.

There is no need to complicate governance or waste money by creating layers upon layers of redundant responsibilities. We have 150 million mouths to feed.

There is no need for the council of state, you can take a few moments to read the various reasons already posted.

Also, try to separate your post into shorter paragraphs so other folks can read it easily.

[size=15pt]ACN calls for national security summit[/size]

By Tajudeen Adebanjo

   
The Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) has urged President Goodluck Jonathan to urgently summon a national security summit to give stakeholders a forum to proffer solutions to the incessant bombings now ravaging the country, saying the problem should be treated as a national emergency.

In a statement issued in Lagos on Tuesday by its National Publicity Secretary, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, in reaction to the latest spate of bombings in Abuja, Bauchi and Zaria that left many dead and injured, the party said such a summit should involve all those who have positive contributions to make to end the epidemic of explosions, irrespective of their political leaning.


ACN said it has become obvious that the government alone cannot stop the explosions, which have left hundreds of innocent Nigerians dead or maimed, and which risks scaring away foreign investors [/b]at a time the federal government says it is embarking on a journey to transform the country in all spheres.

"After every bomb attack, [b]the government will vow to get the culprits and punish them. Then more explosions will occur and the government will repeat its vow. This is not reassuring to the people of Nigeria as well as foreigners who may want to do business in the country.


"Therefore, it is now clear that, in spite of its best efforts, the government alone cannot stop the bombers. It is time for all patriots to all put heads together to identify the culprits and their grievances, and seek the way forward,’’ it said.

The party observed that the way the explosions went off on the outskirts of Abuja as well as in Zaria and Bauchi, shortly after the inauguration of President Jonathan, shows that the only reason the inauguration itself was spared was because of the lock-down of Abuja and the shutdown of telecommunications services as part of stringent security measures put in place during the ceremony.


"But what happens now that the lock down of Abuja has been lifted and telecoms services restored? Is it not worrisome that those behind the explosions have continued to target public institutions and security agencies? Is it not becoming clear that these terrorists can now strike at a place and time of their own choosing, if they can detonate explosives in such high-security areas as military barracks?’’ ACN queried.


http://www.thenationonlineng.net/2011/index.php/news-update/8068-acn-calls-for-national-security-summit.html

LAGOS, Nigeria — A senator who sponsored Nigeria’s first freedom of information bill says it could give citizens of Africa’s most populous nation access to public records for the first time. [b]Sen. Abike Dabiri, a former journalist, [/b]said Wednesday the latest version of the bill is stronger than the one first presented in 1999, less than a month after Nigeria emerged from 28 years of intermittent military rule.

Senator Abike Dabiri (ACN, Lagos)


^^^^^^
If you like the FOI bill, thank that woman, her party ACN, and the civil society groups pushing it since 1999, then you can thank GEJ if you like.

See some of them here --> http://www.foicoalition.org/about.htm

[quote author=isale_gan2 link=topic=590933.msg8429777#msg8429777 date=1306878131]Like who?    I think you see Naijababe's people there.

P.S.  You meant these my people right here?  Yeah, mehn.[/quote]If Nna people dem catch you with that pic

Just remembered I'm not talking to certain people who continue to look for my trouble. 

Who are these people? If I catch them peren! don't mind them jare 

(i) national population census and compilation, publication and keeping of records and other information concerning the same;

(ii) prerogative of mercy;

(iii) award of national honours;

(iv) the Independent National Electoral Commission (including the appointment of members of that Commission);

(v) the National Judicial Council (including the appointment of the members, other than ex-officio members of that Council); and

(vi) the National Population Commission (including the appointment of members of that Commission);

You can Imagine Abacha OBJ, or IBB deciding on who gets mercy or pardon? WTF!!! IBB? Pesin wey suppose dey beg for mercy?

Red is not a bright enough colour. Lol!

I don make am brown, because na dorty dorty idea   

Beaf:
Not only are the leaders of the Senate and House of Rep involved, the Council of State also "advices" on:

Why in Gods Good Name should a bunch of unelected, unappointed individuals advice on CENSUS matters? Damn!
Why would this group be given free reign and more than a peep into govts private matters by "advicing" on something as delicate as membership of the National Judicial Council?
These guys are privy to stuff they shouldn't have a clue about. By extension, they are privy to govt officials in sensitive posts too; so, if one of these fellows decides to turn Rambo, how on Earth is he ever gonna be caught?

Dem just they take us play chess, So people who presided over prior possibly manipulated Censuses should now decide and have power to approve new ones?

NJC too?

I think this thing is even more dangerous than I thought, Wey Jonathan phone number? 

Why do we need to bother about elections when the looser might end up making the same sensitive decisions we chased him away from making?

It's like Obama inviting George Bush to help him appoint a new Chief Justice, SMH 

KnowAll:
Can d council of state really sit in unison and harmony when some constitute members turned down d opportunity to grace d President's inauguration. It is no more news that there is a deep emotive discontent and chasim b / w Mr President & Buhari on one hand and MR President & IBB on d other hand.

How does d council of state address absentism? since input from these august members would be weighted opinion disregarding their input wouldn't that defeat d whole essence of this assembly if lesser members can go ahead to profess and accentuate critical decision. I think d Cof S should be scrapped.

Thank you for lending your voice to the call.

Thank you to whoever placed this on the Homepage.

Another analogy; The Council of State is like You inviting your fiancee's ex to your house to help you decide on when to do the "nasty" with your her

Analogy: It's also like a village elders meeting filled with Soidisant elders and awon eni eleyas "sconers"

[quote author=ndu_chucks link=topic=679970.msg8430268#msg8430268 date=1306885925]@Kilode! & Beaf, you people like to cover una yansh abi? Ok O. I can bet my last million naira that the said provision would be the last to be expunged from the constitution.

Note that the constitution dos not give this body the authority to approve anything. They however do just that on a regular basis. The body is only authorized to advise the president, shikena. The question is, will GEJ continue to rubber stamp their ecommedations and allow them to be deemed as approvals and authorizations?[/quote]Why I go dey expose my yansh before, I resemble Strauss Khan?

Anyway,  moving on,

Thank you for posting that part of the constitution, it actually shows how silly the provision is.

Now, why should the Senate President and the Speaker of the House be involved in such a body? On the surface, it might look like a decent association fostering political unity and all that good "pie in the sky" stuff, but to me it is dangerous for our democracy, redundant and unnecessary at the same time.

The House of Assembly should be an oversight body, if there is any objection or assent needed to and for an executive decision or program it should be sought and granted at the House,

There is no reason why we should co-opt the Senate and House leader into a Padi Padi body with the Executive and former rulers, who wrote that nonsense sef? I suspect IBB and OBJ  

It discourages accountable oversight.

It encourages close-minded group-think politicking and policies.

It stifles robust disagreement.

It discourages the expression and propagation of different opinion and ideologies.

Look at some of the functions and responsibilities outlined in the constitution, a lot of them can be politicized and decided based on ideology, cultural worldview and other differences.

What if the president is of a different party and ideology from the Senate leadership? Very possible.

Or let's say the result of a Census has been politicized or manipulated, who does the oversight and where? At the Council meeting, at the Senate?

Or maybe there's a particular public disorder and it's Maintanance is politically charged and based on ideological differences? Which side will prevail? and who will make the decision?

We already have a Senate, House and the Judiciary, there is no need for anyone to form another jeun jeun, chop-I-chop, na we dey dia, ranke-dede, bigmanism inspired Council.

The Council of State is dum/b. It should be scrapped and removed by an amendment.

^ I often disagree with your politics, but after reading your last post up there; may the Orisas bless you bro.

^^ don't be in a haste, I already covered that with a call to GEJ to propose an amendment if necessary.

Thank you for posting that part of the constitution though. So do you support the existence of this Council of State?

johnie:
PapaBrowne, my sentiments exactly.

You mean you support the existence of a body that wields that kind of power and influence OFFICIALLY with no accountability, remember these are mostly politicians who have been rejected through term limits, the ballot box, or the advent of representative democracy. Why do we still need them wielding that much power officially?

Please if you can, try and justify the part you support in PapaBrowne's post. I'm interested in your reasons.

PapaBrowne you misunderstood my reasons, democracy gives people the power to make leadership choices for very good and fundamental reasons. My objection has more to do with those reasons than with the current folks in the Council of State. Do not assume that Tyrants only Exist in Military regimes.

Never get too comfortable with politicians:

Question; So if the people vote out a corrupt and tyrannical president, he should still be allowed to come to the State house to sign off on federal decisions? 

Council of State = Idio/tic idea

^
Why do I need rejected and "voted out" politicians to append their signatures to federal decisions? it's a redundant, silly idea rooted in out "bigmanism" culture and it encourages stvpid group-think and rewards people with authorities not rooted in accountability.

Also, the SSS should only concern themselves with protecting the president and VP and their families. We don't need them to be in every state as we currently have or spying on the people. The SSS has an evil history of oppressing us and sometimes extra-judicial killings.

The US SSS which I believe we are trying to copy is more of a financial and fraud crime prevention outfit with added responsibility for protecting the President, VP. SSS is not CIA(external intelligence) or FBI (internal federal crime investigations)
If we are going to copy, we should do it correctly.

The CIA has a well stated law that prevents is from carrying out surveillance and intelligence activities within the USA or on US citizens. It is designed for external intelligence duties.

BTW I once heard on NTA that the Council of State approved some billions of dollars in federal Infrastructural projects. I'll look for a good weblink.

Council of State is a stvpid idea, it should be scrapped.

Slight edit: clarification

The Council of State is an Organ of the Nigerian Government. I've followed their activities curiously since we got back to democracy in 1999 and I see no reason why we should have such a redundant, unnecessary and offensive organ making decisions at the upper echelon of the Nigerian Government.

For examples of such decisions click here, here and here

Let me be clear, The Council of State has former Nigerian rulers plus the Judiciary and a few other officials as members, that IMO, is just Nonsense.

How can we have IBB, OBJ, Buhari, Gowon, Abdusalami and other private citizens and unelected/rejected former leaders making sensitive decisions at that level?

I'm particularly concerned about the inclusion of former Military rulers, coup plotters and rejected politicians. Allowing them to make such decisions as evident via the links above is wrong for our democracy and a slap on our faces. It's like rewarding criminals and giving people with no mandate the power to make presidential decision.

We already have the Executive which includes the elected president and his appointed Ministers, The Legislature and the Judiciary. Why do we need a Council of State?

So if Abacha "The Butcher" was alive, he will be deciding Minimum wage and when to call the Military out too?  WTH!

We pay those former looters enough pension already, If the elected President needs their advice we will call them on individual/personal basis.


BTW as an FYI:  I was a Buhari supporter during the April election campaign and still think he should have been elected but well, GEJ is now the President, and he swore the oath, So Buhari should not be involved in the making of sensitive decisions. We need to stop the padi padi confusion,

Jonathan! Scrap the Darn thing. If it requires a contitutional amendment (I doubt it) then he should send one to the Senate.


Folks, your thoughts? 



BTW, the SSS should be scrapped too IMO, we don't need a Nazi inspired Gestapo-like police force with secret criminal investigation powers.


[img]http://thewillnigeria.com/files.php?file=inside_COUNCIL_OF_STATE_MEETING__4_779515521.jpg[/img]

Beaf:
^
I think a thread on such matters is well in order. Your analysis is spot on bro.

I'll see if I can spin off a thread from here.

Done: https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-679970.0.html

Osama10:
Any news about the PIB?

jmaine:
You are very free to feel that way . .but the progressive train is already on the move, PIB next please . . . Na that one really concern me and my field . . .


Heard it too, abi them wan make boys replicate those women protest cos of delays on health bill, before they do what is right . . .If is to accent to any bill that will favour the NASS members, they take less than 3 days to pass it under any means . .

efisher:
^ The impact of PIB will be like no other. I am already thinking of how to position myself properly to benefit from it.

I may be wrong, but I've come to notice that most posters who are excited about the PIB re die-hard Nairaland GEJ supporters ,especially during the 2011 election campaign period. I assume they are also from the South South.

I'm excited about a well implemented PIB bill too BTW

Now, my issue as raised on the Federalism thread few days ago is; how do we ensure that the PIB bill grants good access to Oil sector Jobs, businesses and contracts on merit and for ALL Nigerians? and also;

Are we sure the Bill as it's currently written is strong enough to prevent foreign companies and very influential IOC's from using greedy Nigerians as proxies to aquire jobs, assets and contracts in the Oil sector?  thereby cheating less liquid Nigerians out of fair and competitive merit bidding processes.

^
I can see a few of Isalegan's relatives in those pictures. I no go talk sha, I still want those plots of land for Lekki.

^
Thanks I'll look into some of the more interesting stuff in there.

Katsumoto:
Those 30 Ogisos didn't make contact with other closer neighbours as well

Ok, so they did not go East until later? I intially thought they did.

So where did this well kept records of history say they came from? the sky too

Abi na Egypt? or Saudi?

Most West African tribes didn't start travel until well into the 15th century. Bini started their period of conquest with Ewuare and Ozolua in the 15th century. Benin went as far as Lagos but cleverly avoided Yoruba inter-land which was mirred in internecine wars. The point I am making is that inter-tribal wars didn't really exist before Oduduwa

So my Ile-Ibinu people brought agidi to Yorubaland? 

Who is the pretender? I don't get whom you are referring to.

Oh, I was referring to Ogieamie Irebor.

If I were him I would've been hostile to Ekaladerhan too, and I won't compel his direct descendants to come back to Igodomigodo if I can avoid it.

With regards to who should pay homage, 'which came first? The chicken or the egg?' I suspect that Benin will claim that since Eweka was the great-grandson of Ekaladerhan, why should they pay homage to Ife?

Oduduwa should not bow down to his Grandkid, so they need to go to Ile-Ife and pay Obeisance 

Original Yoruba are the descendants of Orunmila. There is no Yoruba-Benin since Oduduwa married Yoruba women and his offspring married Yoruba women etc Despite the English monarchy having descended from William the conqueror (French), Queen Victoria marrying Albert (German) and Queen Elizabeth marrying the Duke (Greek), their descendants are still called English. Language, culture, way of life, etc determine who you are. The Tapa and Ijaw who migrated to Lagos have been their for so long that they are now Lagos indigenes.

That's all.

namfav:
how did it become that there are many many southerners in europe, america etc.? was it after the civil war,

You are seriously not asking this question right?

If you are older than 7 and have lived in Nigeria in the last 25 years or have families with no access to awuuf federal Oyel money, Federal contracts and Awuuf Civil service estacode money, then you will know the answer to that question.

Really? you really don't know why our people migrated enmasse in the last 3 decades?

Are you related to Sultan of Brunei?

most northerners in the west being of a western education? the fact is many many northerners who are well off do have another education apart from a western one (most of the time and sometimes you find others who have gone to universities such as khartoum, al azhar etc.), northerners do not need a western education for guarenteed success

Sagamite already answered most of these.

Let me just stress that, as a Southerner with no powerful or rich parents, It will probably be very hard for me to get a job in Nigeria or in the West with Unilag and UI degrees talk less of a degree from Al Azhar or Al Medinah, especially in the 80s and early 1990's when middle class Southerners started migrating enmasse out of Nigeria because of limited opportunities and unemployment during military rule.

Now, if my surname name was El-Rufai, Abubakar or I was related to Sultan Maccido or even Ooni of Ife, then maybe a diploma in Sweeping and Cleaning would get me a Deputy Director Job straight out of school.

Things may be changing now, with more bank and private industry jobs and increasing opportunities in Nigeria, but it was that bad.

cheikh:
namfav
@namfav

Do you sincerely believe that ^^?   .  Is Nigeria the only place you have Fulani and Peuls(Mali) etc in West-Africa? I hope you realised that the majority fulani are in Guinea Conakry,

I don't understand the Fulani craze myself.

Nigeria is probaly the Only country on Earth where fulas are viewed as some special breed. Fulanis are all over Guinea, Gambia, Sengal, Mali, even Ghana. with litle to no special status, they are not a favoured group in any way, sometimes they face systemic discrimination in Ghana and maybe Guinea

I guess they really have to thank Uthman Dan Fodio, The British and Nigerian's inglorious Military rulers for the power and influence they wielded in Nigeria. I envy that really.

It must be the reason why some people think their predicament is so different from that of folks in the South, while in reality there are millions of struggling, hustling Fulanis all over

Beaf:
That is a constant in all freedom of speech charters the World over. It is an area that can never ever be strictly defined, but is rather left to the discression of the Pres, SSS and other security agencies.
The internet presents a perfect example of why that area can never be defined. A few short years ago, it would have been possible to target legislation at letters, but who knew about emails?

Which is why people like you who care about freedom and liberty should be able to scrutinize the actions of politicians and make sure they do not hide their evil acts and corrupt intentions behind "National Security" excuses.

I'm all for progressive development, but we must see the progress in intents and actions.






[slightly off-topic] BTW, the SSS should be scrapped IMO, we don't need Palace guards and a Nazi inspired Gestapo-like police with secret criminal investigation powers. All na oppression.

. . .and while at it, GEJ should scrap that Council of State nonsense we have, making sensitive National decisions here, here and here with IBB, OBJ, Buhari, Gowon, Abdusalami and other private citizens and unelected/rejected former leaders thereby giving them control over so much decision making powers is wrong for our democracy. It's like rewarding criminality. All na oppression.

^^^
Maybe I should open a different Topic for this vexing Council Of State and SSS nonsense sef.


I do not envy GEJ, the guy get plenty work to do.

Link for my post above : http://www.foicoalition.org/foi_bill/index.htm?40,12

“Every citizen of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, has a legally enforceable right to, and shall, on application be given access to any information or record under the control of a government or public institution or private companies performing public functions,

provided the disclosure of such information or release of such record(s) shall not compromise national security and that the applicant shall have satisfied  a State or Federal High Court  of the need for the disclosure of such information or release of such  record(s).” [Emphasis supplied]

I'm particularly worried about he quote above, what is National Security?

Who determines what falls under such designation?

Also, why do we need to go to court to access public information?

Shouldn't the burden be on Public agencies to provide them freely and make them accessible?

And in the case of a more "guarded" information, shouldn't a simple application suffice? afterall the people are part of "Government" right?

I'll wait to read the Full bill before I rejoice, but if it's truly a bill designed to provide access to Information for ALL Nigerians. I will be glad indeed.

I don't know what this passed bill looks like, I've not read it, But I hope this bill reflects the real original intent of the FOI bill crusaders. These civil society folks are the true heroes of the FOI bill, not politicans and oppressors who've blocking it's passage since democracy started.

Below are a few examples of objections raised by policy professionals and civil society groups in the course of passing this bill. Most are from 2008.

Senate Waters Down FOI Bill

By Eze Anaba   (Vanguard newspaper, Thursday, 25 September 2008)

The Senate Media and Information Committee on the Freedom of Information Bill has whittled some of the provisions of the Freedom of Information Bill in a way that would make it ineffective if it is eventually passed into law.

Most worrisome of the recommendation of the committee is the new section 2, which states that “Every citizen of the Federal Republic of Nigeria has a legally enforceable right to, and shall, on application be given access to any information or record under the control of a government or public institution or private companies performing public functions, provided the disclosure of such information or release of such record(s) shall not compromise national security and the applicant shall have satisfied a Stare or Federal High Court of the need for the disclosure of such information or release of such record(s).


The caveat that the Senate Committee added to Section 2 of the report makes the FOI Bill dead on arrival if the Section is retained the way it is presently.


Sen. Ayogu Eze, Chairman, Senate Committee on Media and Communication

Observers said the amendment it reverses the traditional role of the courts within an access to information regime, which is limited to serving as the final appeal mechanism for resolving disputes related to all aspects, processes and procedures for seeking access to information and/or records held by public institutions.

“By reversing this role, as the Senate Committee proposes and making the courts become the first point of contact/decision making in any application for access to information, brings the court into the arena of conflict in the context of access to information related issues. By implication this takes away the possibility of the court being able to effectively play its traditional role of an unbiased umpire, in the events that either party resorts to judicial review of any decision taken by a public institution regarding an application for information in its custody.

“Moreover, following from the Senate Committee’s proposal, at the point of the applicant securing this leave of court to file an application for information, there are still a lot variables that would not have been clarified without the involvement of the public institution concerned, e.g., whether the information or record in question actually does exists and if so, whether it is in the custody of the particular public institution to which the application is being made?

Whether the content of record falls within any of the exemptions contained in the law, which may exclude the right of access of the applicant and this cannot be decided upon except the court is privy to the content of the particular record in question.

Additionally, this new proposal places a very heavy, needless, mandatory burden on the applicant by requiring him to, as a condition precedent to the consideration of his application, first secure leave of either a State or Federal High Court, after satisfying the presiding Judge on the need for him to have the information or record being requested for.

The applicant is also required at this stage, to convince the Court, that the information that he seeks would not in any way breach National Security, a point that is already covered by the exemption clause provided in Section 15 of the Bill,” the observer said.


2) Removal of the requirement that does away with the need for the applicant to justify his application for the information/ record.


Another very problematic amendment made by the Committee is the decision to delete the provision of Section 2(2) in draft FOI Bill which provides that “An applicant need not demonstrate any specific interest in the information or record being applied for.”


This provision which was contained in the draft Bill was in keeping with the international principles recognizing access to information as fundamental human right and so an applicant requesting information should not be required to either justify or give reasons why he needs the record or information that he is applying for. The provisions of the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights adopted by the Commission in Banjul , The Gambia in October 2002 reinforce this position.

This declaration stipulates amongst other things that;

1. Public bodies hold information not for themselves but as custodians of the public good and everyone has a right to access this information

2. The right to information shall be guaranteed by law in accordance with the following principles:

“everyone has the right to access information held by public bodies;

“everyone has the right to access information held by private bodies which is necessary for the exercise or protection of any right; “ any refusal to disclose information shall be subject to appeal to an independent body and/or the courts;

Consequently for the FOI Bill to meet the internationally accepted benchmark in this regard, this provision should retained in the Bill by the Senate, otherwise the Bill would fall short of the basic essential requirement of a good FOI law.


3) Extension of the time limit for considering applications both in the first instance and when an extension of time is granted.

The Committee in its report also proposed an amendment to Sections 5(1) and 7(1) of the Bill by extending the number of days for considering any application for information from 7 days to 30 working days in the first instance and Ninety working days, in cases where the head of the public institution decides that an extension of the time limit for considering an application is appropriate.

The net effect of a combined reading of the provisions of Sections 5(1) and 7(1) is that the total period for considering an application for information under the Bill is now 120 working days. This means that an applicant after crossing the hurdle of getting leave of court to bring an application for information to a public institution still has to wait for another 6 months before knowing if his application would be granted.


If you add the time it took for the applicant to secure leave of court to bring his application, then it may all come up to between one to two years period.

The chilling effect that this time line would have on the effective enforcement of a right of access to information under such a difficult framework should be glaring to all, more particularly our distinguished senators, except if the plan is to deny the generality of Nigerians an effective legal regime on access to information.


4) removal of the need for the public officer to give written notice to the applicant on whether or not his application was successful.


By deleting entirely, the provision of Section 5(1)(a) which makes it mandatory for a public officer to give the applicant written notice as to whether or not access to the information or record being applied for would be given, the Senate committee has effectively created a system that strengthens denial of access than approval.


This is because the implication of this amendment is that the public official is not under an obligation to give the applicant any notification that would provide him with the reasons why his application was denied. This in turn puts the possibility of effective judicial review of such decisions in jeopardy as the court would have no evidence before it on the reasons that weighed in the mind of the public official at the time he took that decision.


Additionally, it allows the public official sufficient time to cook up sufficient justification for the refusal that might not have actually been the case at the time he took the decision.


The cumulative effect of all this, is that it creates room for the public official to act with impunity and leaves a dis-satisfied applicant without any possibility of securing any remedy whatsoever.


Additionally, it is also instructive to note that deleting the provision of Section 5(1) also makes the entire provision of Section 8 unworkable and irrelevant, bearing in mind that the provision of Section


8(1) to (3) is predicated on the existence of the provision of Section 5(1).

Consequently a very grave lacuna now exists which can only be corrected by re-introducing the provision of Section 5(1) back into the Bill.

5) Reduction in the term of punishment prescribed for public officers found guilty of destruction or falsification of records.


Pursuant to what seems like a script to effectively frustrate the establishment of a robust regime on access to information, the members of the Senate Committee on Media and Information also deemed it fit to tinker with the provision of Section 11 of the Bill, by reducing the minimum term of punishment for destruction or falsification of records by public officers before they are released to members of the public from 3 years to 1 year.

6) Removal of all public interest override provisions contained in all the exemption clauses in the bill. Nothing gives more evidence of the glaring intention of the members of the Committee to give Nigerians an FOI Law that is bereft of critical content and safeguards guaranteeing adequate balance of the various contending interests in the implementation of this law than the surgical operation that they did on the Bill by carefully expunging virtually all the public interest override provisions in the Bill, save for the one in Section 19(4) dealing with Third party protection.


The full import of this exercise undertaken by the members of the Committee is that the Exemption clauses in the Bill are now sacrosanct and no longer subject to any public interest override and by so doing the Bill falls short of this globally accepted critical requirement for any legislation before it can qualify as a good FOI law.


The fact that this a serious derogation from the international principles on FOI can also be seen from the declaration jointly issued on 19 December 2006, by Ambeyi Ligabo, the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression; Miklos Haraszti, the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media; Ignacio J. Alvarez, the OAS Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression; and Faith Pansy Tlakula, the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Information at the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, where-in they all stated that;

 “Exceptions to the right of access should be set out clearly in these policies and access should be granted unless (a) disclosure would cause serious harm to a protected interest and (b) this harm outweighs the public interest in accessing the information.

7) Short time limit for filing an appeal for judicial review where an application is refused.


While the Senators were quite comfortable with extending the time limit within which public institutions may consider applications for information and records, they were ill at ease to consider extending the provision of Section 24 of the draft Bill, regarding he time limit within which a dis-satisfied applicant could file for judicial review of a decision of the head of a public institution refusing his application for information or record.

Consequently an applicant has only thirty days within which he can bring an application before a court to have a decision refusing him access to the record or information requested for, overturned, failing which he would be considered as being out of time to bring such an application. Except in special circumstances where the Court deems it fit to extend this time limit.


Deletion of section 31(2). Dealing with whistle blower protection

The distinguished Senate Committee members also deleted the provision of Section 31(2) in its entirety. The importance of the provision of this Subsection cannot be over-emphasized, more particularly when considered in the context of Nigeria ’s on-going anti-corruption crusade.


Without this all-important protection for whistleblowers in the public service, the various anti-corruption agencies (EFCC and ICPC) would loose access to very valuable information and evidence that is currently provided by this group of people in the public service and this would negatively affect the effectiveness of the anti-corruption crusade.

Open Letter to the Senate Committee on Information and Media on the Freedom of Information Bill 2007

Senator Ayogu Eze

Chair, Committee on Information and Media
The Senate
National Assembly Complex
Abuja

Dear Senator Ayogu Eze,

I am writing to you on behalf of the Freedom of Information Coalition (FOIC), an alliance of over 200 civil society organizations and thousands of Nigerian citizens campaigning for the enactment of a Freedom of Information Act in Nigeria .

The FOIC has been inundated with enquiries, observations and complaints since the report of your committee, recently submitted for the consideration of the Senate, became public knowledge through media publications.

As a vanguard organization, working for the enactment of a freedom of information law since the inception of civil rule in 1999, we take it as our historic responsibility to formally bring to your attention the aggregate of opinions so far expressed over the objectionable amendments made to the bill by your Committee.


The summary of our collective observation is that the content of the bill that your committee is proposing for enactment as FOI law, fundamentally defeats the purpose for which such a law is needed in the first instance, while completely negating the essence of the right to know.

The underlining principles of openness, accountability, transparency, good governance and popular participation which are supposed to underpin any Freedom of Information law include:

The right of access to information is a fundamental right of citizens and other members of the public.  The exercise of this right should not require individuals to demonstrate a specific interest in the information.

There should be a presumption of openness and this principle establishes a presumption that all information held by public bodies should be subject to disclosure.  This presumption may be set aside only in very limited circumstances. Where a public authority seeks to deny access to information, it should bear the burden of justifying the refusal at every stage.  The public authority must show that the information it is withholding is covered by the exceptions allowed by the law.

Requests for information should be processed rapidly and fairly. The law should provide for strict time limits for the processing of requests and require that any refusals be accompanied by substantive written reasons.

One would labour to find any of the above principles in your proposed draft. Few examples will suffice.

Section 2 only guarantees the right of a citizen to request for information to the extent that it would not jeopardize national security and even at that, such a citizen would first have to obtain the leave of a court of law before making such request. In essence, a rural dweller desirous of information on road contracts in his or her community would have to secure the services of a legal practitioner, travel to the city to depose to an affidavit that the information would not affect national security and undergo other physical and financial rigours of court processes even without being sure that he/she would get the nod of the court to proceed.   This will obviously not be a right, but a privilege and one that can only be exercised by the rich!

And supposing he/she does and now proceeds to request for the needed information? Whereas the original FOI bill as passed by the previous National Assembly, requires the head of the institution to which the request is directed to respond within 10 working days and state reasons for not providing information, should that be the case, your draft extends the period to 30 working days and states that the head of the institution need not state reasons for denial of information. Of course, where reasons are not stated, there can be no material for a court of law to review the decision.

In addition to the above, your draft completely removes the public interest override in all its exemption clauses while also removing the protection granted to whistle blowers.    

This kind of FOI bill is not worth the name and we hereby serve you notice that we completely reject it.

We urge you to withdraw it in the public interest and revert to the original bill or come up with a new draft.

Sincerely,
Lanre Arogundade

(For and on behalf of the Freedom of Information Coalition)

MRA Rejects Senate Committee Recommendations on FOI Bill

Lagos, Monday, September 29, 2008:  Media Rights Agenda (MRA) today announced its rejection of the recommendations of the Senate’s Information Committee on the Freedom of Information Bill, saying if passed as proposed it would be the worst access to information law in the world and would bring Nigeria to ridicule.

In a statement issued in Lagos, MRA argued that the Committee’s proposals make nonsense of the Bill as they defeat the essence of a freedom of information legislation.  It added that many of the proposals in the Committee’s report evidence a deep-seated contempt and disdain by the legislators for the people they are supposed to represent and serve.  

It cited as an example of such proposals Section 2 of the Bill, as amended by the Committee, which now provides as follows:

“Every citizen of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, has a legally enforceable right to, and shall, on application be given access to any information or record under the control of a government or public institution or private companies performing public functions,

provided the disclosure of such information or release of such record(s) shall not compromise national security and that the applicant shall have satisfied  a State or Federal High Court  of the need for the disclosure of such information or release of such  record(s).” [Emphasis supplied]

Denouncing the introduction of this provision into the Bill as absurd, MRA’s Executive Director, Mr. Edetaen Ojo, said:  “this provision will place an enormous burden on citizens who would be required to first go to court to justify why they require any piece of information, record or document; satisfy the court that the information would not undermine national security and obtain the court’s approval before even applying to the relevant public institution for the information, record or document”.

He added:  “Anyone vaguely familiar with the Nigerian judicial system knows that it could easily take years for a citizen to even go through this first hurdle, in addition to the unwarranted costs such a citizen would have to incur to engage a lawyer and pay court fees just to be able to apply for information from a government institution, no matter how routine or harmless the information required.  The net effect would be that no one would use such a law!”

The organization contended that contrary to a body of international jurisprudence which clearly uphold the right of access to information as a fundamental human right which every citizen is entitled to, the Senate Committee had by this proposed modification made it a privilege.

It said the Committee’s recommendations would encumber rather than facilitate access to information, adding that the proposals appear intended to block implementation of an access to information regime in Nigeria.  

MRA argued that the excuse by the Committee Chair, Senator Ayogu Eze, that the obnoxious provisions were introduced into the bill to “ensure that nobody can use it to hold the country to ransom” is untenable.  

It said:  “About 86 countries around the world now have freedom of information laws and many more countries are moving speedily towards adopting such laws.  The National Assembly has no excuse for Nigeria being left behind on this issue.  

It is does not require scientific or technological advancement to pass a decent freedom of information law; it does not take enormous resources and so the excuse that we cannot afford it does not apply; all it requires is a commitment by elected public officers to put their people at the centre of our democracy rather than the tendency to serve narrow and selfish interests.”
For further information, Please contact:

Ayode Longe
Senior Programme Officer
Media Rights Agenda, Lagos

^^ I wonder if you guys have a delete button for member comments, if you do, Just use that one for the "tribal posts"

I'm not speaking of whole topics, I mean indivdual comments with tribal hate and childish tribal baiting. If people see that their thoughts are being constantly deleted, they will exercise caution before clicking post. It will be sad to just delete a good topic because some few trolls made a few comments, just be more aggressive with the individual posts.

You might need a few more moderators to do it effectively though, I noticed that most of your Politics MODs are based in Nigeria, I think getting one or two more from different time-zones will be a good idea.

[quote author=isale_gan2 link=topic=675773.msg8427925#msg8427925 date=1306857887]No, I don't believe the Saudi connection. I don't tend to entertain origins of Black Africans that seek to connect us by force with biblical or middle eastern history. We can stand on our own.[/quote]I always resent that too, Like West Africans cannot be validated until they have a connection to Egypt or something

My question about the skin complexion was just that, about the color. Since one of Oduduwa's main defining characteristics is this shiny black beautiful skin he was supposed to have possessed, any description to the contrary will always get my attention.

That was from the A. B Ellis book right? actually you are right, one should wonder about the discrepancy, since he got his description from the supposedly dark skinned Yorubas and maybe the Ewes.

Or maybe the Spiritual/Divine Oduduwa deity is different from the physical mortal one.

Or maybe the desription was lost in translation , maybe they mean't deep one, or shiny one, or bright one, or wise one and not black one.

@Katsumoto, Without giving too much away, my part of Yorubaland  has a long controversy over our Benin connection, a few local historians support a Benin ancestry story, which is of course supported by Benin Historians themselves, while majority stick to the Ife ancestry of our founders, Which of course is supported by Ife and other Yoruba Historians.


Now, I read the story you posted, I've read it a few times before and it always reads like some good fiction from the Imagination of a brilliant writer to me. It is plausible like you said that there is a connection to Benin as the source of Oduduwa's lineage.

Now a few Observations/Questions:

So acccording to the story, Yorubas were existing at Ife before Oduduwa then?

It is strange that all through the reign of over 30 Ogisos, the Benins and ancient Yorubas never made contact until Ekaladerhan did. hmm

Also, given man's propensity to fight over anything really, why didn't they invade Ife? They should have been mad at the indigenous Yoruba people for appropriating such a vital link, don't you think? I mean, Benin Warriors went as far as present day Lagos and maybe Igboland sef. no?

On a second thought, Maybe the pretender to the Benin throne preferred it that way anyway, which will make sense from a personal gain perspective really, still curious though.

Also, this story means that the Binis should pay homage to Oduduwa's Yoruba descendants given Oduduwa-Ekaladerhan's place as an Ogiso.  


The question now is; who is Original Yoruba and who is Yoruba-Benin (Direct Ekaladerhan descendants) ?

^^I'll take "fair skinned" as described with a pinch of salt, maybe just a few shades lighter than average, after all kings and princes rarely work the farm or wander around in the sun.

GenBuhari:
We need to make sure that our present and future leaders could also be described as great.

What have we learnt from these great leaders that could be used to improve our lives?

That life is fleeting, history is cyclical, that we existed before Nigeria and we will be here after it.

That Leaders cannot do good all by themselves. Human beings are naturally selfish. They have to be compelled by a well oiled system of laws, custom, culture and a programmed or forced sense of belonging to care for others beyond themselves and their immediate family.

That ultimately, people should matter more that rules, regulations, norms, culture.

That pride can be learned and government systems can be rebuilt (the British forced new systems on us, didn't they?) we can do the same. It does not mean the country will collapse.

That we need to value our people, make the quest for their progress an obsession -especially if you are in leadership- recognize the right of the individual to seek freedom and emancipate herself from oppression.

plus more. . . We can learn plenty of lessons from these stories, and from our history.

ola olabiy:
You forgot OUR land, the mighty Southwest  . Digging well and doing kainkain

The "Great Western Region" (yes, including Kwara+Edo+Delta+Kogi + Nupeland  is kinda peculiar too, we can swing anywhere. All join.


"kainkain and well digging" LOL pesin come here dey tell us sey dem no dey hustle outside, anyway na dem country sha, and they must wack too now.