Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch - Politics (3) - Nairaland
Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Politics / Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch (15689 Views)
U.S. Slams Military Option In Resolving Nigeria’s Conflicts / Constitutional Amendment: See The Nine Key Areas Senate, House Of Reps Disagree. / The Controversial Kaduna Preaching Bill: A Must Read Before You Criticize (2) (3) (4)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (Reply) (Go Down)
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by Nobody: 8:50am On Apr 01, 2016 |
I'm 100% in support of this bill. God knows what religion as a whole has done to this country. Left to me, if I have my way I'll ban anything called religion. 2 Likes |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by searay(m): 8:52am On Apr 01, 2016 |
Our Facebook lawyer is trying sha |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by Enouwem(m): 8:52am On Apr 01, 2016 |
CONTINUATION By Section 9 of the Bill, "All cassettes, CDs, Flash drives or any other communication gadgets containing religious recordings from accredited preachers may be played in the following places only:- (a) inside one’s house; (b) inside entrance porch (Zaure) (c) inside the Church; (d)inside the Mosque and (e) any other designated place of worship." Any cassette containing religious recording in which abusive language is used against any person or religious organization or religious leaders (past or present) is prohibited in the State by virtue Section 10 of the Bill. Section 11 of the Bill provides that members of the ministerial committee may be paid such allowances as may be determined by the Governor. Notably, Section 12 of the Bill creates various offences thus: "A person shall be guilty of an offence who, in contravention of this law; (a) preachers without a valid licence; (b) plays religious cassette or uses a loud speaker for religious purpose after 8pm in a public place; (c) uses a loudspeaker for religious purpose other than inside a Mosque or Church and the surrounding arrears outside the stipulated prayer times; (d) uses a loudspeaker in vehicles plying the streets with religious recording; (e) abuses religious books; (f) incites disturbance of the public peace (g) abuses or uses any derogatory term in describing any religion: or (h) carries weapons of any description whether concealed or not in places of worship or to any other place with a view to causing religious disturbance shall be guilty of an offences.” Section 13 is the punishment section which states that "A person who commits an offence under the provision of this law shall be liable on conviction to a term of imprisonment not exceeding two years or a fine of two hundred thousand naira or both; and have his licences revoked." Section 14 of the Bill vest jurisdiction in the sharia courts and customary courts to try violators of the proposed law summarily and shall, on conviction give order for the forfeiture or destruction of any vehicle, equipment, instrument, gadget or book or other material carrying any offensive message. Lastly, the Kaduna State Regulation of Religious Preaching Edit No. 7 of 1984 is repealed by Section 15 of the Bill. Unsurprisingly, the Bill has generated heated debates across the country with some religious leaders issuing an ultimatum to the Governor of Kaduna State, Mallam Nasir Ahmad El-Rufai, to either retrieve the Bill from the State House of Assembly or face "serious consequences". So far, the arguments advanced in support and against the Bill has been largely tainted with sentiments and emotion. However, one question that continues to agitate the minds of legal experts, religious leaders, the media, civil society and the teeming public is: Can the Bill pass the test of constitutional validity? In other words, are the provisions of the Bill consistent with the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended)? This is the constitutional question which I intend to address and hopefully, resolve. It is elementary that by virtue of Section 1 (1) & (3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), (subsequently referred to as the '1999 Constitution') the Constitution is supreme and if any other law is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution, the Constitution shall prevail and that other law shall be declared null and void to the extent of its inconsistency. See F.R.N. v. Ifegwu (2003) 15 NWLR (Pt. 842) 113; A-G., Abia State v. A-G., Federation (2002) 6 NWLR (Pt. 763) 264; Abacha v. Fawehinmi (2000) 6 NWLR (Pt. 660) 228. A careful and dispassionate perusal of the Bill shows a litany of apparent, inherent and indisputable provisions in it which conflicts with the letters and spirit of the 1999 Constitution. |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by Enouwem(m): 8:59am On Apr 01, 2016 |
The Bill in my respectful view, is so constitutionally defective that there is clearly nothing left for a serious parliament to consider. The conflicting and inconsistent provisions in the Bill are too obvious to ignore; it cannot survive the surgical eyes of the courts. The Bill is unconstitutional for the reasons stated below: The Bill has expressly adopted Christianity and Islam as the official state religion(s) in Kaduna State contrary to the express provisions of the Constitution. For clarity, Section 10 of the 1999 Constitution states that: "The Government of the Federation or of a State shall not adopt any religion as State religion." Section 4 of the Bill declares Islam and Christianity as "the two major religions in the State." The Bill goes further to establish committees to regulate the two religions. It is instructive to note that the marginal note to Section 10 of the 1999 Constitution reads "prohibition of State Religion." The 1999 Constitution has effectively and expressly prohibited every State in Nigeria and the federal government, including the Kaduna State House of Assembly, from enacting any piece of legislation which purports to adopt any religion or religions over others. By specifically identifying Islam and Christianity as "the two major religions" in Kaduna State, and establishing committees to regulate them, the Bill has literarily set-fire on the provisions of Section 10 of the 1999 Constitution. It is needless to say that there are different religions in Kaduna State, other than Islam and Christianity, whose adherents are neither Muslims nor Christians. It is not within the legislative powers of the Kaduna State House of Assembly to determine which religion is major and which is minor. Such discriminatory legislation offends Section 42 of the 1999 Constitution which prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion among others. The Bill audaciously infringe on the constitutional rights of the citizens of Nigeria in Kaduna State to freedom of thought, conscience and religion and freedom of assembly and association. Section 3 of the Bill defines a "preacher" as "a person duly licenced by Jama’atu Nasil-Islam or Christian association of Nigeria, to preach." This definition is bereft of any legal basis. Section 38 (1) of the 1999 Constitution emphatically states that "Every person shall be entitled to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom (either alone or in community with others, and in public or in private) to manifest and propagate his religion or belief in worship, teaching, practice and observance." Sections 5, 6 & 7 of the Bill establishes committees in each local government area to screen and issue preaching licence to preachers and permits to the so-called "sponsored external preachers", and ensure compliance with the terms of the licences and permits. These provisions are offensive to the fundamental right to freedom of religion in Section 38 of the 1999 Constitution. I wish to restate three basic limbs to the constitutional right to freedom of religion under Section 38 of the 1999 Constitution supra. That provision guarantees the right of every person to belong to any religion and the right to change one's religion; under the provision, every person is free to practice any religion, including Islam and Christianity, either ALONE or in community with others. Furthermore, every person is free to manifest his religion or belief in PUBLIC or in private in worship, teaching, practice and observance. A person can decide to practice his Christian or Islamic religion and belief alone without regard or reference to other members of the society or the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) and the Jama'atu Nasir-Islam (JNI), respectively. It is manifestly unconstitutional for any government to seek to legislate on what qualifies a person to be a Christian or an Islamic preacher. That is a matter for God and Allah to decide, respectively. |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by Enouwem(m): 9:00am On Apr 01, 2016 |
A paster in Kaduna for can decide to establish a Church without joining the CAN. No person or institution in Nigeria can legally require such a pastor to join CAN and obtain a preaching licence as preconditions for manifesting or propagating his Christian religion and belief in public or in private. Lest we forget, in the celebrated case of Inspector General of Police v. All Nigeria Peoples Party and Ors (2007) 18 NWLR (Pt.1066) 457, the Court of Appeal in a landmark judgment, declared as unconstitutional the provisions of the Public Order Act, Cap. 382 L.F.N. 1990 which requires Nigerians to obtain a Police permit before staging a protest or peaceful demonstration. The Appeal Court declared that the requirement of Police permit as pre-condition to protest is a violation of the fundamental right to freedom of expression and association. The appellate court rejected the argument of the Police that such permit was in the interest of public safety and security. If Police permit is not required as a pre-condition to holding public rallies, peaceful demonstrations and protests, why should any State government even contemplate issuing licences to religious preachers or determining who is eligible to be a religious preacher in the 21st century Nigeria? The law is settled that freedom of association includes the freedom not to belong to an association. In the celebrated case of Agbai v. Okagbue (1991)7 NWLR (Pt. 204) 391, one of the issues for determination was whether the respondent who objected to membership of an age grade association on religious grounds could be compelled to do so or could be deemed to be a member willy-nilly. The respondent maintained that he was not a member of the age-grade and that his religion as a Jehovah-Witness forbade him to join. The Supreme Court per WALI J.S.C. held:"The 1963 Constitution, Section 24(1) guaranteed all Nigerian citizens freedom of conscience, thought and religion. The respondent is entitled to hold to the tenet of his religion, thought and conscience which prohibit him from joining the age grade. Any custom that holds otherwise is contrary to the Constitution and, therefore, null and void to that extent." Choice of a religious sect is a matter of personal convictions and conscience. In the case of Theresa Nwafor Onwo v. Oko (1996) 6 N.W.L.R. (pt. 456), 584 at 587 the applicant claimed damages against the respondent for shaving her hair, assaulting and locking her up as incidents of mourning for her late husband. According to her, that offends her religious belief and devotion. Although the trail court dismissed her application, the Court of Appeal allowed her appeal. It is on record that the Catholic Church in Nigeria suspended her membership of CAN in September 2012. The Constitution does not place restrictions on places where a person can manifest or propagate his religion. On the contrary, Section 38 (1) of the 1999 Constitution expressly allows for public manifestation and propagation of religion. Therefore, the provisions of Section 9 of the Bill which limits the playing of all cassettes, CDs, Flash drive or any other communication gadgets containing religious recordings to the inside of one's house, entance porch, inside the Church and Mosque and any other designated place of worship is unconstitutional, null, void and of no effect whatsoever. Going by the wordings of the Bill, it will be an offence, for example, for a person to play cassettes inside a vehicle on the road in Kaduna State If the Bill is passed into law. This Bill is not only unconstitutional but absurd. Section 10 of the Bill prohibits any cassettes which contain "abusive language" against any person, religious organization or religious leaders (past or present). Strangely, there is no definition of the phrase "abusive language" in the Bill. 1 Like |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by Enouwem(m): 9:03am On Apr 01, 2016 |
The consequence is that this provision is susceptible to mischievous inferences which may invariably lead to the violation of the fundamental right of the citizens to freedom of expression and the press under Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution. Another grave defect in the Bill is the vesting of summary jurisdiction to try violators (sic) of the provisions of the Bill in the Sharia Courts and Customary Courts. The Bill does not state specifically who is subject to this courts. If we can logically infer that Muslims are the ones subjected to the Sharia courts, can we equally infer that Christians are subject to the Customary courts? Certainly not. Customary courts do not exercise jurisdiction over Ecclesiastical matters. Unlike in Islam where there is near parity between religion and customs/traditions, Christianity is not fused with custom. It is indefensible for the Kaduna State Government to seek to subject Christians to the jurisdiction of Customary courts. Customs in most instances are inconsistent with the tenets of the Christian faith. It should be noted that the 1984 Edict which Section 15 of the Bill seeks to repeal came into force during the military era. However, with the coming into force of the 1999 Constitution, the Edict became an existing law by virtue of Section 315 (1) (b) of the 1999 Constitution and is deemed to be a Law made by the Kaduna State House of Assembly. However, the point should be made that the Edict (now Law) is still subject to the constitutional validity test. Indeed, Section 315 (3) of the 1999 Constitution expressly subjects the Edict to the jurisdiction of the courts to declare it invalid where any of its provisions offends the Constitution or an Act of the National Assembly or any other Law. This point is significant because the 1984 Edict cannot survive the constitutional validity test. Being the forerunner to the Bill, the Edict is itself unconstitutional, null, void and of no effect whatsoever. 1 Like |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by Enouwem(m): 9:03am On Apr 01, 2016 |
Once it is shown that an existing law is not within the legislative powers of the National Assembly or a State House of Assembly as the case may be, the court has a duty to declare same null and void. The Supreme Court decisions in the celebrated cases of Abacha v. Fawehinmi (2000) 6 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 660) 228 and Attorney General of Lagos State v. Attorney General of the Federation & Ors (2003) 12 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 833). P.1 are instructive in this regard. The Blue Pencil rule of statutory interpretation allows for the severance of invalid portions of an enactment from the valid portions. However, it is clear from the submissions earlier canvassed that the entire provisions of the Bill (particularly Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8,9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 of the Bill) runs contrary to the express provisions of the Constitution. My humble view is that there is nothing in the Bill that justifies its preservation. No matter the perceived nobility of Governor El-Rufai's intention or motives for initiating this Bill, the Constitution is supreme without exceptions. Admittedly, Kaduna State has been a hotbed for violent religious clashes over the years. The 2006 riots over the Danish cartoons, the Miss World riots and the 2011 post-election violence are just a few examples. What is, however, clear is that religious riots are usually orchestrated by bigoted fellows who believe that their religion has been defamed or blasphemed and that they have a divine duty to fight, maim, kill and destroy, all in the name of defending their religion. 1 Like |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by Enouwem(m): 9:04am On Apr 01, 2016 |
How many persons have been successfully prosecuted and convicted since the promulgation of the 1984 Edict? This is the question that Governor El-Rufai should answer. I dare say that the solution to this perennial menace does not lie in encroaching on sacred provisions of the Nigerian Constitution. The Kaduna State government cannot use an apparently unconstitutional legislation (the 1984 Edict) or proposed legislation (the 2016 Bill) as a weapon to fight religious extremism. No government in Nigeria, federal or state, can validly subject Nigerians that have elected to manifest or propagate their religion or belief as Christian or Islamic preachers to the requirement of obtaining a licence. That is not the business of the government. We have a duty to uphold the secular character of the Nigerian state. The various offences in Section 12 of the Bill are ultra vires the legislative powers of the Kaduna State House of Assembly. The Constitution cannot allow any State to dabble in the religious affairs of the citizens to the extent of establishing the so-called "inter-faith ministerial committee" to regulate the practice of religion. There are ample provisions under the Penal Code Law, Laws of Kaduna State 1991 that the State government can effectively deploy to checkmate violence, riots, incitement, public nuisance, etc. There are equally offences relating to religious worship under the Penal Code Law of Kaduna State. Frankly, the issue is not the inadequacy of law but the lack of political will to enforce it. The Kaduna State Government should immediately retrace from this provocative and unconstitutional expedition by withdrawing the Bill. The 1984 Edict should be repealed. There is no need creating a rancorous atmosphere that is capable of inciting members of the public and creating the very religious acrimony and hostility that the Bill purports or seeks to cure. I implore persons and organizations who are aggrieved by the Bill to seek redress in a court of competent jurisdiction. Inibehe Effiong is a Constitutional Lawyer and the Convener of the Coalition of Human Rights Defenders (COHRD). inibehe.effiong@gmail.com 1 Like |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by ElCapone(m): 9:07am On Apr 01, 2016 |
BeClever:sharrrap hungary man |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by jayyem(m): 9:12am On Apr 01, 2016 |
greatiyk4u: I like your response...neutral and mature. |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by omenka(m): 9:18am On Apr 01, 2016 |
booblacain:Dude, as per my siggy, you may go back on my TL, pre and early post- election and you'd hardly find anywhere I derided a particular people/tribe. Then, I played opposition based on party affiliation. No mention of tribe was made directly or indirectly- it was strictly about political parties and their supporters. Fast forward early post election, I extended a hand of fellowship and reconciliation to the "losers" and reviewed my siggy to reflect same. I kept on my lane supporting the party/people I believe in, but as time passed, those who felt bad about the outcome of the polls saw it best to divide the country along ethnic and religious lines. I ,as usual, kept away from such threads as I watch the religious and tribal warlords on the forum knock themselves out. Several times they'd mention my moniker on such threads but I NEVER replied their mentions. Politics on the forum became, for them, about Christians against Muslims, North against South, Hausa, Fulanis and Yorubas against Igbos and some other southern tribes. They made it seem like it was sacrilegious for the Yorubas to have voted overwhelmingly(?) for Buhari and called the Northerners bigots for voting one of their own when they themselves gave nearly 100% of their votes to Jonathan. Why didn't they vote Buhari is they aren't bigots themselves  They called me a Muslim and a Hausa man pretending to be Igbo because I dared to support Buhari when my moniker says "Omenka" as most of them assume that is an exclusive Igbo name (very ignorant folks). When it dawned on them I'm a Christian and neither Igbo nor Hausa, they started calling me an Hausa slave!! I bet you aren't aware of all these. The attacks kept going on and on, increasing in intensity until I decided to start responding in kind. No one saw what they were doing to me, but when I started paying them back with their own coins, everyone noticed!! Then they brought in another tool, Biafra, and started blackmailing the president with it- a president that was barely few months in office. They made it a taboo for anyone to hold a contrary view to theirs and descended heavily with insults on anyone who does (remember that was also the beginning of the bitter rivalry between them and Barcanista). The siggy you see today is only about a week old and a constant reminder to those who can't seem to make a comment without mentioning me that that is what they are. If they decide to be reasonable with me and act like psychologically stable adults, I'd be reasonable with them. Blackmailing me into a Buhari hater using tribe and religion is what would NEVER happen. Like I said in my other post, by nature I'm a rebel, when you push me too far, the opposite of what you desire is what I give you. My signature is a reflection of that persona. Lastly, I swear by God, out here I'm a totally different person.  . When you meet me in person, you'd be shocked at what you see.. There are things I wouldn't say here and you know why: because those who taunt and insult me the most want me to say them. #Rebel.  Ps: as the reasonable man I am, I'd erase that part of my siggy. I guess that would suffice for now. 4 Likes 1 Share |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by Nobody: 9:20am On Apr 01, 2016 |
| Aibam good morning sir you no de tire for politics?? |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by ElCapone(m): 9:23am On Apr 01, 2016 |
greatiyk4u:broz i go dash u my fine sister abeg. May God gift me with ur kind of wisdom abeg. 1 Like |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by ElCapone(m): 9:39am On Apr 01, 2016 |
LadyExcellency:abi and we shld nt take proactive stepz in forestalling da break down of law and order unda da guise of preaching rite. How did we end up wid diz boko issue? Was it nt due to da radical preachingz of mohd yusuf. We shld alwayz luk criticaly at issues b4 commenting plz. |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by jashar(f): 9:53am On Apr 01, 2016 |
greatiyk4u: Wonderful, articulate and mature response. |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by olisaEze(m): 10:02am On Apr 01, 2016 |
greatiyk4u: Well said. |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by davseun2ta(m): 10:11am On Apr 01, 2016 |
greatiyk4u: I salute your intelligence bro!!! |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by greatiyk4u(m): 10:25am On Apr 01, 2016 |
ElCapone: Lolz....hope she is blessed with front and back ingredients...any way thanks a lot and one love. 1 Like |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by greatiyk4u(m): 11:21am On Apr 01, 2016 |
Alwaystruth: If education cannot liberate you from sincere Ignorance, I wonder what else can...........I empathize @ur mentality. |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by Nobody: 12:30pm On Apr 01, 2016 |
bid4rich: You are a fo.ol. Have you ever left the shores of Nigeria and see how they practice their religions. Damn!! |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by 1Dray(m): 1:26pm On Apr 01, 2016 |
tinsel: Keep deceiving yourself... I was born and brought on in the North, I've seen it all. |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by 1Dray(m): 1:28pm On Apr 01, 2016 |
greatiyk4u:Keep lying to yourself... We all know you ain't Igbo and never can be. |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by Nobody: 1:31pm On Apr 01, 2016 |
mars123: I agree dt its trying to reduce religiousity. my problem with the bill is that there are a LOT of churches dt are not under CAN because they dont believe in CAN. What is the guide for those? Must they join CAN by force even though they dont believe in it? Also there are other religions in the country that play religious tapes in public. I know there are so many muslim bodies as well dt dont agree with each others doctrines. Must they now join the approved body to dictate and control them? Dt part of the bill is to simplistic and will lead to a lot of lacunas. |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by Zet72(m): 2:02pm On Apr 01, 2016 |
tinsel:
|
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by Zet72(m): 2:09pm On Apr 01, 2016 |
Alwaystruth:God bless you my brother for speaking out. |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by Zet72(m): 2:26pm On Apr 01, 2016 |
histemple: Whether tribalism or racism it is part of human nature and it is not going away today nor tomorrow. If such human trait can be expunged by education or civilization, the almighty USA will not still be enmelsh and eroded in/ by racism. |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by greatiyk4u(m): 2:28pm On Apr 01, 2016 |
1Dray:I owe you no explanation brother........ |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by Zet72(m): 2:29pm On Apr 01, 2016 |
shyhighner1:Definitely |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by Zet72(m): 2:43pm On Apr 01, 2016 |
vecman22: Sod off my mention please |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by vecman22(m): 2:45pm On Apr 01, 2016 |
Zet72:lol..sorry some days are like dat.. |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by Zet72(m): 2:53pm On Apr 01, 2016 |
vecman22:It seems u don't know who u are quoting, I take no prisoner in war. Don't thread where the engels dread, be warned. |
| Re: Kaduna Preaching Bill: Resolving The Constitutional Controversy (1) ...punch by 1Dray(m): 3:04pm On Apr 01, 2016 |
greatiyk4u:Take your explanation elsewhere... I won't be needing it. |
Don't Tell Us Story, Show Your Achievements To Nigerians, Obi Challenges APC / I’m Prepared, Osun Won’t Regret Electing Me – Senator Ademola Adeleke / Doyin Okupe: Peter Obi Will Get Above 40% In Lagos And Kaduna
(Go Up)
| Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 119 |