₦airaland Forum

Lawyer Challenges Lagos Govt's ‘Unconstitutional’ Move To Limit #FearlessInOctober Protesters To Specific Venue

Adedeji stated that the Attorney General’s role is to guide the government in adhering to legal standards, not to advise actions that contradict constitutional rights.

A Nigerian human rights lawyer Taiwo Adedeji Esq has condemned the actions of the Lagos State Attorney General, Mr. Lawal Pedro (SAN), in securing a court judgement confining protesters to a specific area.

Adedeji described the move as unconstitutional.

Adedeji stated that the Attorney General’s role is to guide the government in adhering to legal standards, not to advise actions that contradict constitutional rights.

He emphasized that the 1999 Constitution, in Section 40, guarantees every citizen the right to assemble freely and associate with others, including forming or joining political parties, trade unions, or other associations to protect their interests.

#FearlessInOctober Protests: Lagos Govt Reaffirms Protest Restrictions To Two Locations, Urges Compliance

The lawyer further argued that by limiting the protestors’ right to assemble, the Lagos State government, under the advisement of the Attorney General, had disregarded established legal principles and court rulings, undermining the rights of citizens to peacefully demonstrate.

Adedeji said, "I have seen a statement circulating online and credited to the Lagos State Attorney General, Mr Lawal Pedro (SAN) insisting that protesters should restrict themselves to Gani Fawehinmi Park Ojota for the purposes of the planned October 1st nationwide protest against inhuman government economic policies.

"With the greatest respect to the learned Attorney General, he is wrong and very wrong. As the Attorney General, his duty is to advise the government to follow the path of legality and not the other way round.”

The lawyer noted that Section 39(1) of the 1999 Constitution states: "Every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference."

According to the human rights lawyer, the same 1999 Constitution in section 40 Provides that “Every person shall be entitled to assemble freely and associate with other persons, and in particular, he may form or belong to any political party, trade union, or any other association for the protection of his interests”.

He noted that the above underscores the illegality of any government policy to restrict the peaceful movements of protesters.

Adedeji said the above sections of the Constitution have been given judicial affirmation in a plethora of cases.

He explained that the one that readily comes to mind and particularly relevant to the analysis is the case of Inspector General of Police Vs All Nigeria Peoples Party where the Court of Appeal upheld the earlier Federal High Court decision where it was held that requirement for police permit to organise public protest is unconstitutional.

He said, "Earlier the Federal High Court held that ‘The Public Order Act in so far as it requires the issuance of police permit as a condition precedent to the holding of rallies or processions, is inconsistent with Section 40 and the Constitution and to that extent, it is null and void."

He said the decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeal.

Adedeji said, "The general slogans of Ccnstitutional rights not being ‘absolute’ which the learned Attorney General also made allusions to is with respect to him, begging the question - if the rights are not absolute, shall we then resort to illegality in an attempt to limit the ambit of the applicability of the rights?”

Brendaniel:
Same people who claim they fought for democracy are the ones fighting against democracy, that means they lied..

danvon:
God Bless Yoruba people, one of the few tribes that can condemn their own tribe leaders when they engage in damaging activities