A human rights and anticorruption non-governmental
organization based in Lagos is seeking highly qualified
lawyers for the position of Legal Adviser in its Litigation and
Legal Advice Unit.

Education, Related Skills and Knowledge: Applicants must
have at least: 7 years post-call litigation experience and
knowledge of the anticorruption and human rights fields; a
strong commitment to human rights, transparency and
accountability; demonstrated ability to think legally,
analytically, strategically and effectively; excellent written
and oral communication skills in English; capacity to
appropriately plan and prioritize and to manage multiple
demands efficiently; ability to defend and explain complex
issues and positions to staff and to advocate on these positions
externally; and strong interpersonal skills to work
collaboratively within and outside the organization.
Salaries and Benefits: Competitive but subject to experience
Interested applicants should please submit a letter of interest,
resume, and a short writing sample to: NGO Vacancy
lagosngovacancy@gmail.com

Application Deadline: Please apply immediately or by 10 January, 2019.

JOB VACANCY: LEGAL ADVISER
(2 POSITIONS)
A human rights and anticorruption non-governmental
organization based in Lagos is seeking highly qualified
lawyers for the position of Legal Adviser in its Litigation and
Legal Advice Unit.
Education, Related Skills and Knowledge: Applicants must
have at least: 7 years post-call litigation experience and
knowledge of the anticorruption and human rights fields; a
strong commitment to human rights, transparency and
accountability; demonstrated ability to think legally,
analytically, strategically and effectively; excellent written
and oral communication skills in English; capacity to
appropriately plan and prioritize and to manage multiple
demands efficiently; ability to defend and explain complex
issues and positions to staff and to advocate on these positions
externally; and strong interpersonal skills to work
collaboratively within and outside the organization.
Salaries and Benefits: Competitive but subject to experience
Interested applicants should please submit a letter of interest,
resume, and a short writing sample to: NGO Vacancy
lagosngovacancy@gmail.com

Application Deadline: Please apply immediately or by 10 January, 2019.

The Minister of Water Resources Engr. Suleiman Adamu has told the Federal High Court in Lagos to “grant the Ministry more time within which to compile and furnish Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) with information on the spending on water, and locations of specific projects, in view of the high volume of the information involved.”

Mr Adamu said, “It is not true that millions of Nigerians are drinking water from contaminated sources. It is not the duties of the Ministry of Water Resources alone to provide drinking water for the citizens.”

The Ministry of Water Resources stated this in court in its reply to the Freedom of Information suit number FHC/L/CS/632/18 filed in April by SERAP requesting Mr Adamu and the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, Mr. Audu Ogbeh to “explain why millions of Nigerians have to resort to drinking water from contaminated sources with deadly health consequences, despite the authorities claiming to have spent trillions of naira of budgetary allocations on the sector since 1999.”

However, while Mr Adamu has promised to render account on spending on water projects and is now asking the court for more time to do so, Mr Ogbeh has so far failed, refused and/or neglected to respond to SERAP’s request and has not filed any paper in court to counter the suit filed by the organization.

But Mr Adamu through a counter-affidavit dated 7 September 2018 and sworn to by Kwushue Abolaji, Legal Officer at the Ministry of Water Resources, said, “The delay in furnishing SERAP with the requested information is not deliberate. The information will soon be ready and it will be forwarded to SERAP without further delay. We humbly urge the court to grant us more time within which to do this.”

The Written Address signed by M.C. Mbam, Counsel to Mr Adamu, read in part: “The Ministry of Water Resources did not refuse or decline to furnish SERAP with the requested information but was only unable to furnish it within the stipulated timeframe. We have already agreed in a letter dated 12 March 2018 to provide the information.”

“The inability of the Ministry of Water Resources to furnish the information is not deliberate rather it was because of the enormity of the materials required which could not be collated easily because more than one department is involved. Under the rules of this court, the judge may as often as he deems fit and either before or after the expiration of the time appointed by the rules extend or adjourn the time for doing any act or taking any proceedings.”

“The Ministry is still compiling the information and has written to various departments to provide the information for onward transmission to SERAP. We need more time to compile and transmit the requested information to SERAP. It will not be in the interest of justice to grant SERAP’s reliefs.”

It would be recalled that Justice Shagari had in June granted the order for leave following the hearing of an argument in court on exparte motion by SERAP counsel Ms Bamisope Adeyanju.

Before the suit was filed, Mr Adamu had agreed in a letter to “publish details of spending and locations of projects on water and sanitation for periods covering 2010—2016, as well as details of allocations to the 36 states of the federation.”

Mr Adamu in a letter with reference number FMWR/LU/S/374/I, and dated 12th March 2018 and signed by P.C. Mbam, Acting Director (Legal) of the Federal Ministry of Water Resources said, “We will work hard to provide SERAP with the details of spending, and the information requested as they relate specifically to Water and Sanitation projects from 2010 to 2016.”

Mr Adamu also said, “The Federal Ministry of Water Resources was demerged from the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development in 2010. A copy of your letter will be forwarded to the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development for action on the other years before 2010. For emphasis sake, we advise that SERAP should send a separate request directly to the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development for the period (1999-2010) outside the purview of the Federal Ministry of Water Resources’ projects.”

SERAP also then welcomed “the firm commitment by Mr Adamu to explain to Nigerians what exactly have happened to trillions of naira budgeted for water and sanitation across the country between 2010--2016. Mr Adamu’s commitment is refreshing, especially coming at a time many public institutions and ministries such as the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) are rejecting public requests for information and making information on the spending our commonwealth harder to access.”

SERAP said it would now file a reply on points of law in court to the counter-affidavit filed by Mr Adamu. The organization criticised Mr Ogbeh for so far failing to respond to its FOI request or reply to its suit.

It would be recalled that SERAP in its FOI request dated 2nd March 2018 claimed that, “Many toilets in public offices are out of order because of lack of water while millions of Nigerians remain desperate for water in their homes, often resorting to contaminated sources and drilling their own boreholes that can become easily mixed with sewage, with negative environmental impacts, and devastating for people’s health.”

SERAP’s FOI request read in part: “We are concerned that millions of Nigerians do not have access to clean and potable water and adequate sanitation. There is no water to show for the huge budgetary allocations and purported spending and investment in the sector since the return of democracy in 1999. Successive governments have failed to improve affordability of water for millions of low-income Nigerians, thereby denying them access to water.”

“Contractors handling water projects are reportedly engaging in schemes like the deliberate use of substandard pipes, among others, to make profit, leading to loss of water. This dearth of water also affects sanitation. The large number of broken down water facilities across the country has hindered effective water supply to the citizens.”

“We urge you to use your leadership position to provide within 14 days of the receipt and/or publication of this letter detailed information on the spending on specific water and sanitation projects and their locations carried out by the Ministry of Water Resources and Rural Development for the following years: 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016 (1999-2016); as well as details of allocations to the 36 states of the federation.”


http://serap-nigeria.org/i-need-more-time-to-account-for-spending-on-water-projects-minister-tells-court.ngo/

Account for spending on LUTH, other hospitals, SERAP writes Adewole

-

Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, (SERAP) has sent a Freedom of Information request to the Minister of Health, Professor Isaac Adewole, urging him to “urgently provide information about details of actual spending of allocations to the Lagos University Teaching Hospital, (LUTH) Idi Araba and other 20 federal teaching hospitals and 20 federal medical centres across the country, for the period covering 2010 to 2017.

The organization said, “The information should include details of spending on specific projects and facilities at LUTH and other teaching hospitals and medical centres under the direct control of the Ministry of Health. We would be grateful if the information is provided to us within 7 days of the receipt and/or publication of this letter, failing which SERAP shall take appropriate legal action to compel you to comply with our request.”

In the letter dated 14 September 2018 and signed by SERAP deputy director Timothy Adewale, the organization said: “Despite huge budgetary allocations, many of the teaching hospitals and medical centres under the direct control of your Ministry have been left to fall apart and health care facilities in many of these hospitals lack even the most basic of amenities. Ordinary Nigerians have derived appallingly little benefit from all of the allocations, in terms of access to basic healthcare, showing a failure to respect and ensure the right to health and human dignity in the country.”

According to the organization, “We need a ‘paradigm shift’ and little short of a ‘healthcare revolution’ in the country to end decades of mismanagement, corruption and neglect in the health sector and to improve access of millions of Nigerians to adequate healthcare and treatment. The status quo is simply unacceptable. Ensuring transparency in the spending of allocations to LUTH and other teaching hospitals and medical centres would contribute hugely to charting a way forward in this regard.”

The FOI request read in part: “As trustee of public funds, your Ministry has a legal duty to render account on the specific details of spending of capital allocations to LUTH and other teaching hospitals and medical centres under the direct control of the Ministry to the beneficiaries (Nigerians) of the trust, if and when called upon to do so. Any failure or refusal to render account will also be clearly inconsistent with the attitude of a government that has repeatedly expressed commitment to the fight against corruption, and to transparency and accountability.”

“As a key agency of government, the Ministry of Health has a sacred duty to ensure that the country’s allocations to the health sector are used solely to achieve adequate access to healthcare services for all Nigerians and residents. This implies providing strong leadership in the efforts to curb public sector corruption, mismanagement and neglect, and to honour Freedom of Information requests on the spending of allocations to LUTH and other teaching hospitals and medical centres across the country.”

“The disclosure of the information requested will give SERAP and the general public a true picture on how the allocations to LUTH and other teaching hospitals and medical centres have been spent to improve medical facilities and infrastructure in these hospitals and medical centres and to facilitate enjoyment of the right to basic healthcare by all Nigerians, especially the socially and economically vulnerable sectors of the population.”

“SERAP notes approved capital allocations since 2010 to your Ministry as follows: N49.99 billion for 2010; N33.53 billion for 2011; N57.01 billion for 2012; N60.08 billion for 2013; N49.52 billion for 2014; N22.68 billion for 2015; N22.65 billion for 2016; and N55.61 billion for 2017.”

“According to our information and latest research, despite approved capital allocations of trillions of naira over the years to LUTH and other teaching hospitals and medical centres under the direct control of the Ministry of Health, these hospitals have been left to crumble and wither away and Nigerians have suffered greatly from the decay of these vital public services.”

“Millions of Nigerian children are believed to die each year before the age of five, and most of those children lose their lives to diseases that are easily preventable or treatable at low cost. Nigeria is third highest in infant mortality rate in the world.”

“Healthcare services in the country remain extremely poor. Nigeria is rated 187th out of 191 countries in terms of health care delivery. One-third of more than 700 health facilities in the country have been destroyed because of many years of corruption, mismanagement and neglect, and that about 3.7 million people are in need of healthcare assistance.”

“By virtue of Section 1 (1) of the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act 2011, SERAP is entitled as of right to request for or gain access to information, including information on details of spending of allocations to LUTH and other teaching hospitals and medical centres in the country under the direct control of your Ministry, and the said information is in the custody or possession of any public official, agency or institution.”

“By virtue of Section 4 (a) of the FOI Act when a person makes a request for information from a public official, institution or agency, the public official, institution or urgency to whom the application is directed is under a binding legal obligation to provide the applicant with the information requested for, except as otherwise provided by the Act, within 7 days after the application is received.”

“By Sections 2(3)(d)(V) & (4) of the FOI Act, there is a binding legal duty to ensure that documents containing information relating to spending of allocations to LUTH and other teaching hospitals and medical centres under the direct control of your Ministry is widely disseminated and made readily available to members of the public through various means.”

“The information being requested does not come within the purview of the types of information exempted from disclosure by the provisions of the FOI Act. The information requested for, apart from not being exempted from disclosure under the FOI Act, bothers on an issue of access to healthcare, development, good governance, transparency and accountability.”

“SERAP therefore requests you to provide detailed information on the spending of allocations to LUTH and other teaching hospitals and medical centres under the direct control of your Ministry, for periods covering 2010 to 2017.”

It would be recalled that SERAP last week launched its latest report titled: Failing Healthcare: How Federal Hospitals are letting Down the Poor and Making Healthcare a Privilege rather than a Right.

The report among others alleged that, “At LUTH, even bed sheets are in short supply. Patients use their wrapper for bed sheets sometimes. And when they use LUTH bed sheets, they are usually old and torn most of the time. Toilets in LUTH are centres of disease distribution. You can be sure to get urinary tract infections and the like. I am referring to the toilets in different wards.”

http://serap-nigeria.org/account-for-spending-on-luth-other-hospitals-serap-writes-adewole.ngo/

Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has dragged the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to court over the commission’s “failure to put Ekiti vote buyers on trial and do something about the allegations of vote buying by both the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) during recent governorship election in Ekiti State.”


In the suit number FHC/L/CS/1418/18 filed last Friday at the Federal High Court, Ikoyi, Lagos, SERAP is seeking “an order for leave to apply for judicial review and to seek an order of mandamus compelling INEC and its Chairman Professor Mahmood Yakubu to instruct security agencies to forward to them reports of their investigations into allegations of vote buying during the governorship election in Ekiti State and to collaborate with the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to commence prosecution of indicted persons.”


The suit followed the electoral commission’s response to SERAP last week saying that while it had powers to prosecute alleged vote buyers, it lacked the powers to arrest and investigate suspects. In the letter signed by its Acting Secretary Okechukwu Ndeche INEC said while the Commission’s legal officers or any legal practitioner appointed by it “can prosecute alleged vote buying, other agencies must first arrest and investigate suspects before the Commission can act on the matter.”


The organization is also seeking an order compelling INEC and its Chairman to “prosecute anyone suspected to be involved and/or complicit in the alleged vote buying during the elections in Ekiti State, Anambra State, Edo State and Ondo State.”


The suit filed on behalf of SERAP by its counsel, Timothy Adewale read in part: “To date, INEC and its Chairman have failed, neglected and/or refused to comply with the request by SERAP to prosecute alleged vote buyers. INEC has no reason whatsoever not to comply with SERAP’s request, as the commission has constitutional and statutory responsibilities to prosecute bribery and undue influence in the context of elections and other electoral offences, as well as conduct and ensure a free and fair election.”


“By virtue of Section 153(1)(f) and paragraphs 14 and 15 of the Third Schedule to the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria (as amended) and Section 150 of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended), INEC and its Chairman are under a binding legal obligation to prosecute indicted persons who are alleged to have participated or been involved in vote buying during elections and other electoral offences to guarantee that the free participation of the people is ensured, as intended by Section 14 (2)(C) of the Constitution.”


“INEC is failing in its duties to set machinery of justice in motion to see to the prosecution of those suspected to have violated electoral and anti-corruption laws. We seek an order of mandamus to compel the commission and its Chairman them to perform such duties in the public interest and in the overall interest of transparency and accountability of the entire electoral process.”


“Mandamus is simply an order to compel the performance of a public duty in which the person applying for the mandamus has sufficient legal interest. SERAP by its mandates has sufficient legal interest as to the way and manner laws are being obeyed and statutory duties effectively performed in Nigeria. It is the right of any citizen or interested group to see that the law is enforced where there is an infraction of that right or a threat of its being violated in matters affecting the public law and the society will be adversely affected by doing nothing.”


“Obedience to the rule of law by all citizens but more particularly those who publicly took oath of office to protect and preserve the constitution is a desideratum to good governance and respect for the rule of law. In a democratic society, this is meant to be a norm; it is an apostasy for government to ignore the provisions of the law and the necessary rules made to regulate matters”.



The suit is seeking the following reliefs:



A. AN ORDER granting leave to the Applicant to apply for Judicial Review and to seek an order of Mandamus directing and/or compelling the 1st and 2nd Respondents to instruct security agencies to forward to them reports of their investigations into allegations of vote buying by both the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) during the governorship election in Ekiti State held on the 14th day of July, 2018, and to collaborate with the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and other appropriate anti-corruption agencies to without further delay commence prosecution of indicted persons;

B. AN ORDER granting leave to the Applicant to apply for Judicial Review and to seek an order of Mandamus directing and/or compelling the Respondents to prosecute anyone suspected to be involved and/or complicit in the alleged vote buying;

C. AN ORDER of Mandamus directing and/or compelling the Respondents to prosecute anyone suspected to be involved and/or complicit in the alleged vote buying by both the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) during the governorship election in Ekiti State held on the 14th day of July, 2018 and the elections in Anambra State, Edo State and Ondo State;

D. AND for such order or other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstance.


INEC’s letter dated 20 August 2018 read in part: “We refer to your letter dated 17th July 2018 wherein you requested that the Commission investigate and prosecute alleged vote buying in the recently concluded governorship election in Ekiti State. The Commission wishes to inform you of the constraints posed by extant statutory provisions against your well-intended request.”


“You may also wish to note that it is not part of the constitutional duties of the Commission to arrest and investigate suspects found to have contravened provisions of the Electoral Act or any other Law for the time being in force. Section 150(2) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) only confers powers on Legal Officers of the Commission or any other Legal Practitioner appointed by it to undertake prosecution of offences disclosed under Act.”


SERAP had earlier warned INEC to “take steps within 14 days of the receipt and/or publication of the letter, failing which SERAP will institute legal proceedings to compel you and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to discharge your constitutional and statutory responsibilities in the public interest.”


No date has been fixed for the hearing of the suit.


http://serap-nigeria.org/serap-drags-inec-to-court-over-failure-to-put-ekiti-vote-buyers-on-trial.ngo/

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has said that it has powers to prosecute allegations of vote buying by both the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) during the recently concluded governorship election in Ekiti State but lacks the powers to arrest and investigate suspects.

INEC said this in response to the open letter by Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, (SERAP) to the Commission’s Chairman, Professor Mahmood Yakubu requesting the electoral commission to “promptly, thoroughly and effectively investigate allegations of vote buying, and to collaborate with the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in any such investigation.”

The organization also urged INEC to “prosecute anyone suspected to be involved and/or complicit in the alleged vote buying, if there is relevant and sufficient admissible evidence of electoral bribery and abuse of the electoral and democratic process against them.”

But INEC in a letter signed by its Acting Secretary Okechukwu Ndeche said that while the Commission’s legal officers or any legal practitioner appointed by it can prosecute alleged vote buying, other agencies must first arrest and investigate suspects before the Commission can prosecute. The Commission however said that it would “partner with other agencies to prosecute electoral offenders.”

The INEC response dated 20 August 2018 but received yesterday by SERAP read in part: “We refer to your letter dated 17th July 2018 wherein you requested that the Commission investigate and prosecute alleged vote buying in the recently concluded governorship election in Ekiti State.”

“The Commission wishes to inform SERAP of the constraints posed by extant statutory provisions against your well-intended request.”

“You may also wish to note that it is not part of the constitutional duties of the Commission to arrest and investigate suspects found to have contravened provisions of the Electoral Act or any other Law for the time being in force. Section 150(2) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) only confers powers on Legal Officers of the Commission or any other Legal Practitioner appointed by it to undertake prosecution of offences disclosed under the Act.”

“We wish to assure you that the Commission will continue to partner with relevant security agencies to prosecute electoral offenders.”

Reacting, SERAP said: “We note the response by INEC. We will be in court this Friday to seek orders to compel the Commission to work with other agencies to ensure the immediate arrest, investigation and prosecution of all suspects allegedly involved in vote buying in Ekiti State, Anambra State, Edo State and Ondo State.”

It would be recalled that SERAP had earlier given Professor Yakubu 14 days to prosecute suspects “failing which SERAP will institute legal proceedings to compel you and the INEC to discharge your constitutional and statutory responsibilities in the public interest.”

SERAP’s letter copied to both the ICPC and the EFCC read in part: “It is the responsibility of INEC as an independent body to take meaningful steps and action to minimise electoral bribery by politicians, ensure political equality and prevent unfair electoral competition. No body politic worthy of being called a democracy entrusts the selection of leaders to a process of auction or barter.”

“Vote buying amounts to undue influence and improper electoral influence. When politicians buy votes, they reinforce social subjugation and do long-term damage to poor voters, as vote buying impairs voters’ already limited political power and participation in governance. Offering and giving poor people money to buy their votes is the hallmark of political disrespect, as it implies that politicians perceive voters as lacking autonomy.”

“Investigating the allegations and prosecuting all those suspected to be involved would indicate your agencies’ willingness to exert your authorities and act as a deterrent against breaches of the electoral process, Nigeria’s anti-corruption legislation and international standards.”

“SERAP therefore urges you to carry out investigation and prosecution of vote buying in Ekiti election but also in the elections in Anambra State, Edo State and Ondo State, in collaboration with the ICPC and EFCC of the allegations of vote buying, as highlighted above, and to send a strong message to politicians that INEC under your leadership would not tolerate any infringement of the electoral process ahead of the 2019 general elections.”

“Turnout of poor voters may decrease if they view a wealth-driven electoral system increasingly stacked against their interests. It is inconsistent and incompatible with the principles of democracy, the rule of law, transparency and accountability for politicians to use vote buying to perpetuate systems of regular patronage, knowing that such acts would purchase them sympathy and support, especially from socially and economically vulnerable communities.”

“Vote buying amounts to undue interference in the free exercise of the right to vote, as it implicitly aims at influencing or attempting to influence a voter not to vote or to vote in a particular manner. Specifically, the alleged giving of N3,000 or N5,000 to voters during the Ekiti election or payment into the bank accounts of voters is corruptly intended, and clearly aimed to influence their choice of candidates and voting intention. This practice seriously undermines the right of voters to freely vote according to their convictions.”

“Further, vote buying gives wealthy politicians an advantage in election campaigns and outcome greater than what they already possess, and it biases political decisions in favor of the wealthy. Our democracy cannot be sustainable when the electoral system inordinately prioritises the rights of political parties and their candidates in elections over and above those of the ordinary voter.”

“When politicians buy votes from the poor, political equality will suffer. If voters choose candidates for public office at least in part based on the voters’ economic interests, and these economic interests vary depending upon one’s wealth, candidates chosen in elections where the wealthy buy the votes of the poor more likely will reflect the views of the wealthy. Thus, economic disparities will translate into political disparities in the election of candidates.”

“According to reports, agents of the APC and the PDP allegedly openly engaged in vote buying in some polling units during Ekiti Governorship election. Many voters were videoed moving in numbers to ‘cash collection points’ in lieu of their votes. Others received credit alerts on their mobile phones.”

“We consider allegations of vote buying as political corruption, because it is the promising or giving of value in the form of money, in return for a promise of a vote. We are concerned that the failure of INEC to rein in electoral bribery is illustrated by the fact that the body has failed and/or neglected to investigate and prosecute similar incidents of vote buying in places like Edo State; Anambra State and Ondo State.”

“SERAP is seriously concerned that vote buying undermines the ability of INEC to discharge its responsibilities under Section 153 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and paragraph 15(a) of the third schedule of the Constitution, the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) and under the UN Convention against Corruption to which Nigeria is a state party.”



‘We can prosecute Ekiti vote buying but can’t arrest suspects’, INEC tells SERAP

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has said that it has powers to prosecute allegations of vote buying by both the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) during the recently concluded governorship election in Ekiti State but lacks the powers to arrest and investigate suspects.

INEC said this in response to the open letter by Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, (SERAP) to the Commission’s Chairman, Professor Mahmood Yakubu requesting the electoral commission to “promptly, thoroughly and effectively investigate allegations of vote buying, and to collaborate with the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in any such investigation.”

The organization also urged INEC to “prosecute anyone suspected to be involved and/or complicit in the alleged vote buying, if there is relevant and sufficient admissible evidence of electoral bribery and abuse of the electoral and democratic process against them.”

But INEC in a letter signed by its Acting Secretary Okechukwu Ndeche said that while the Commission’s legal officers or any legal practitioner appointed by it can prosecute alleged vote buying, other agencies must first arrest and investigate suspects before the Commission can prosecute. The Commission however said that it would “partner with other agencies to prosecute electoral offenders.”

The INEC response dated 20 August 2018 but received yesterday by SERAP read in part: “We refer to your letter dated 17th July 2018 wherein you requested that the Commission investigate and prosecute alleged vote buying in the recently concluded governorship election in Ekiti State.”

“The Commission wishes to inform SERAP of the constraints posed by extant statutory provisions against your well-intended request.”

“You may also wish to note that it is not part of the constitutional duties of the Commission to arrest and investigate suspects found to have contravened provisions of the Electoral Act or any other Law for the time being in force. Section 150(2) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) only confers powers on Legal Officers of the Commission or any other Legal Practitioner appointed by it to undertake prosecution of offences disclosed under the Act.”

“We wish to assure you that the Commission will continue to partner with relevant security agencies to prosecute electoral offenders.”

Reacting, SERAP said: “We note the response by INEC. We will be in court this Friday to seek orders to compel the Commission to work with other agencies to ensure the immediate arrest, investigation and prosecution of all suspects allegedly involved in vote buying in Ekiti State, Anambra State, Edo State and Ondo State.”

It would be recalled that SERAP had earlier given Professor Yakubu 14 days to prosecute suspects “failing which SERAP will institute legal proceedings to compel you and the INEC to discharge your constitutional and statutory responsibilities in the public interest.”

SERAP’s letter copied to both the ICPC and the EFCC read in part: “It is the responsibility of INEC as an independent body to take meaningful steps and action to minimise electoral bribery by politicians, ensure political equality and prevent unfair electoral competition. No body politic worthy of being called a democracy entrusts the selection of leaders to a process of auction or barter.”

“Vote buying amounts to undue influence and improper electoral influence. When politicians buy votes, they reinforce social subjugation and do long-term damage to poor voters, as vote buying impairs voters’ already limited political power and participation in governance. Offering and giving poor people money to buy their votes is the hallmark of political disrespect, as it implies that politicians perceive voters as lacking autonomy.”

“Investigating the allegations and prosecuting all those suspected to be involved would indicate your agencies’ willingness to exert your authorities and act as a deterrent against breaches of the electoral process, Nigeria’s anti-corruption legislation and international standards.”

“SERAP therefore urges you to carry out investigation and prosecution of vote buying in Ekiti election but also in the elections in Anambra State, Edo State and Ondo State, in collaboration with the ICPC and EFCC of the allegations of vote buying, as highlighted above, and to send a strong message to politicians that INEC under your leadership would not tolerate any infringement of the electoral process ahead of the 2019 general elections.”

“Turnout of poor voters may decrease if they view a wealth-driven electoral system increasingly stacked against their interests. It is inconsistent and incompatible with the principles of democracy, the rule of law, transparency and accountability for politicians to use vote buying to perpetuate systems of regular patronage, knowing that such acts would purchase them sympathy and support, especially from socially and economically vulnerable communities.”

“Vote buying amounts to undue interference in the free exercise of the right to vote, as it implicitly aims at influencing or attempting to influence a voter not to vote or to vote in a particular manner. Specifically, the alleged giving of N3,000 or N5,000 to voters during the Ekiti election or payment into the bank accounts of voters is corruptly intended, and clearly aimed to influence their choice of candidates and voting intention. This practice seriously undermines the right of voters to freely vote according to their convictions.”

“Further, vote buying gives wealthy politicians an advantage in election campaigns and outcome greater than what they already possess, and it biases political decisions in favor of the wealthy. Our democracy cannot be sustainable when the electoral system inordinately prioritises the rights of political parties and their candidates in elections over and above those of the ordinary voter.”

“When politicians buy votes from the poor, political equality will suffer. If voters choose candidates for public office at least in part based on the voters’ economic interests, and these economic interests vary depending upon one’s wealth, candidates chosen in elections where the wealthy buy the votes of the poor more likely will reflect the views of the wealthy. Thus, economic disparities will translate into political disparities in the election of candidates.”

“According to reports, agents of the APC and the PDP allegedly openly engaged in vote buying in some polling units during Ekiti Governorship election. Many voters were videoed moving in numbers to ‘cash collection points’ in lieu of their votes. Others received credit alerts on their mobile phones.”

“We consider allegations of vote buying as political corruption, because it is the promising or giving of value in the form of money, in return for a promise of a vote. We are concerned that the failure of INEC to rein in electoral bribery is illustrated by the fact that the body has failed and/or neglected to investigate and prosecute similar incidents of vote buying in places like Edo State; Anambra State and Ondo State.”

“SERAP is seriously concerned that vote buying undermines the ability of INEC to discharge its responsibilities under Section 153 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and paragraph 15(a) of the third schedule of the Constitution, the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) and under the UN Convention against Corruption to which Nigeria is a state party.”


http://serap-nigeria.org/we-can-prosecute-ekiti-vote-buying-but-cant-arrest-suspects-inec-tells-serap.ngo/

SERAP to Ajimobi: Repair Ayefele's Fresh FM building or face legal action

------


Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, (SERAP) has sent an open letter to Senator Abiola Ajimobi, Governor, Oyo State requesting him to “immediately halt all further eviction and demolition of Fresh FM building and to show full respect for the safety and dignity of residents and owner of Fresh FM. We also urge you to immediately begin repairs of the Fresh FM building and to adequately compensate the radio station and its owner and publicly guarantee non-repetition.”

The organization urged Ajimobi to “ensure full and effective respect for the rights to freedom of expression and media freedom in Oyo State. We request that you take this step within 7 days of the receipt and/or publication of this letter, failing which SERAP will take national and international legal actions to compel your government to act in the public interest and the overall interest of the rule of law.”

In the letter 21 August 2018 and signed by SERAP deputy director Timothy Adewale the organization said, “We have information to suggest that the destruction of Fresh FM was based on political considerations and retaliation against the radio station on purported allegations of defamation against you. The facts suggest that the demolition of Fresh FM building failed to comply with the principle of lawfulness and reasonableness. The demolition was neither done in the public interest nor carried out to achieve a legitimate aim.”

The organization said, “This apparently unlawful action has set a bad precedent, and created a high level of uncertainty and anxiety among many radio stations and other media organizations in Oyo State about the future because of the likelihood of their buildings being demolished when they are deemed to broadcast views which the Oyo State authorities may consider too critical or ‘defamatory’.”

The letter read in part: “By going ahead to demolish the Fresh FM building despite being served with the court papers in the case filed by the station, you implicitly obstructed access of the radio station and their owners to appropriate forms of legal protection, contrary to the provisions of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to which Nigeria is a state party and which is legally binding on the government of Oyo State.”

“SERAP is seriously concerned that the Oyo State authorities carried out the demolition of Fresh FM building with wilful disregard for the dignity, health, and safety of residents and the owner, who is a person with disabilities. The demolition of the radio station has now exposed residents to the elements and the public to the risk of complete collapse of the building.”

“Since your government’s action in this case suggests serious disregard for the safety and welfare of the residents of Fresh FM, the authorities’ conduct may have risen to a level of severity so as to constitute inhuman and degrading treatment of residents and owner, contrary to the provisions of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 (as amended) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Nigeria is a state party.”

“Your government has reportedly cut water, sewer, electricity, gas, and telephone lines to the radio station, rendering it uninhabitable and incapable of discharging its constitutional duties of informing the citizens and ensuring that government is both responsible and accountable to the people.”

“We contend that the action by your government has no basis in our laws, which provide that no public authorities must resort to self-help and carry out forced evictions and demolitions without a properly obtained court order. Your government’s action also violates Nigeria’s international human rights obligations, including its obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to protect private property.”

“Your government has responded to the demolition of Fresh FM building on Sunday 19 August 2018, claiming that it demolished the building worth over N800 million because your government was ‘carrying out its statutory role in the public interest. Your government claimed it gave “ample opportunity for Fresh FM to regularise its building plan”. Your government also claimed the demolition of the Fresh FM building was not politically motivated.”

“However, available facts reveal that the demolition may have been influenced by political considerations, and done in retaliation for alleged defamation by Fresh FM. SERAP has seen an audio recording of you at the radio station in 2016 wherein you claimed to be under pressure from some of the members of your cabinet to demolish Fresh FM building on the ground that the radio station and its owner Mr Yinka did not support your political ambition but that you resisted the pressure to demolish.”

“SERAP has also seen a letter dated 3rd July 2018 and signed by your Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice Oluseun Abimbola wherein you alleged ‘libellous broadcast by Fresh FM 105.9.’ The letter claimed that during a programme “Political Circuit” on Fresh FM on Saturday 30th June 2018, the radio station ‘falsely accused, maliciously and wickedly misled the public and the entire world’ on your alleged interest in a private company.”

“Assuming there was a legitimate claim in defamation against Fresh FM, the proper venue for you and your government would have been to seek legal redress in court and not to resort to self-help in the form of arbitrary demolition of the radio station building.”
“The UN General Assembly has recognized the “fundamental obligation of governments (including that of Oyo State) to protect and improve houses and neighbourhoods, rather than damage or destroy them.”

“Further, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in Article 17 provides: ‘Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.’ Similarly, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights to which Nigeria is a state party provides in Article 14: ‘The right to property shall be guaranteed. It may only be encroached upon in the interest of public need or in the general interest of the community and in accordance with the provisions of appropriate laws.’”


http://serap-nigeria.org/serap-to-ajimobi-repair-ayefeles-fresh-fm-building-or-face-legal-action-2.ngo/

SERAP sues NYSC over failure to publish Kemi Adeosun’s ‘exemption certificate’

-----

Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has sued the Director-General, National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) Brigadier-General Sule Kazaure and the NYSC over “failure to publish specific documents and information on Minister of Finance Mrs Kemi Adeosun’s application for NYSC exemption, and seeking to compel them to explain if Adeosun obtained any Exemption Certificate from the NYSC.”



In the suit number FHC/L/CS/1369/18 filed yesterday at the Federal High Court, Ikoyi, Lagos, SERAP is seeking “an order for leave to apply for judicial review and an order of mandamus directing and/or compelling General Kazaure and the NYSC to urgently provide specific documents and information on Mrs Kemi Adeosun’s application to the NYSC for Exemption and to publish widely including on a dedicated and on the NYSC website, any such information.”



The suit followed SERAP’s Freedom of Information request dated 2 August 2018 to General Kazaure, giving him 7 days to provide “information on specific details and documents on the Exemption Certificate applied for and obtained by Mrs Adeosun; clarify whether the NYSC actually granted her the Exemption Certificate and if it did, the circumstances and the provisions of the NYSC Act under which the Exemption Certificate was granted.”



The suit filed on behalf of SERAP by its counsel, Ms. Bamisope Adeyanju read in part: “Suspicions of obtaining unauthorised certificate involving a senior member of the government if not urgently and satisfactorily addressed would weaken public trust in the government’s oft-expressed commitment to transparency and accountability.”



“By the combined provisions of section 104(1) of the Evidence Act, 2011 and sections 14(2)(b) 14(3) and 19(2) of the Freedom of Information Act, the NYSC, being the public institution in charge of issuing exemption certificates from the compulsory NYSC Programme, and having publicly declared that Mrs. Adeosun applied for exemption, has a duty to provide SERAP with details and documents containing the application for exemption and the exemption certificate itself, if it was granted.”



“Mandamus lies to secure the performance of a public duty in the performance which SERAP has a sufficient legal interest. SERAP has shown that it has demanded the performance of the duty by the NYSC in this case, and that performance has been refused by the Director-General of the NYSC obliged to discharge it.”



“The right of access to information should be subject to a narrow, carefully tailored system of exceptions. Exceptions should apply only where there is a risk of substantial harm to the protected interest and where that harm is greater than the overriding public interest in having access to the information.”



“SERAP requested the NYSC to provide the information within 7 days of the receipt and/or publication of the letter. But since the receipt of the letter by the NYSC and up till the filing of this suit, the NYSC has failed, refused and/or neglected to respond to or grant SERAP’s request.”



“This matter is of utmost national importance and public interest, because it borders on allegations of circumvention of the law, brought against a high public officer of Nigeria, who has sworn on oath to uphold the laws of the nation; including the NYSC Act. The grant of this application will help reveal the truth about the authenticity of the Exemption Certificate granted to Mrs Adeosun.”


“By the combined provisions of Sections 1; 2; 3(4); 4; 7(1)&(5); 9; 14(2)(b)&3; 19(2); and 20 of the Freedom of Information Act, 2011, the right of access to information is guaranteed and there is a statutory obligation on the NYSC being a public institution, to proactively keep, organize and maintain all information or records about their operations, personnel, activities and other relevant or related information or records in a manner that facilitates public access to such information or record.”


“The NYSC has no reason whatsoever not to comply with the demands by SERAP. There is compelling public interest in the disclosure of the information sought by SERAP, which concerns whether a high-ranking Minister had circumvented or disobeyed the law. The public interest in this case outweighs any private interest that the NYSC may be protecting. By the provision of Section 20 of the Freedom of Information Act, SERAP is entitled to apply to this Court for a review of the action of the NYSC.”



“Unless the reliefs sought by SERAP are granted, the NYSC will not provide SERAP with the documents and information requested and will continue to be in breach of the Freedom of Information Act.”



“SERAP is entitled as of right to request for or gain access to information, including information on the Exemption allegedly applied for by Mrs Adeosun.”



The suit is seeking the following reliefs:


A DECLARATION that the failure of the Respondents to provide the Applicant with specific documents and information on Mrs Kemi Adeosun’s application to it for NYSC Exemption is unlawful and amounts to a breach of the Respondents’ responsibility/obligation under the Freedom of Information Act 2011.

AN ORDER OF MANDAMUS directing and/or compelling the Respondents to urgently provide the Applicant with specific documents and information on Mrs Kemi Adeosun’s application to it for National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) Exemption and to publish widely including on a dedicated and on the NYSC website, any such information.

A DECLARATION that the failure of the Respondents to provide the Applicant with specific documents and information on the following:

i. the procedure under the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) Act, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 to “apply” for NYSC Exemption;

ii. whether an authorized official of the NYSC actually issued an Exemption Certificate to Mrs. Kemi Adeosun;

iii. if NYSC did issue the NYSC Exemption Certificate, the circumstances and the provisions of the NYSC Act under which the Exemption Certificate was granted; and to publish widely including on a dedicated website and on the NYSC website, any such information, is unlawful and amounts to a breach of the Respondent’s obligation under the Freedom of Information Act 2011.

AN ORDER OF MANDAMUS directing and/or compelling the Respondents to urgently provide the Applicant with specific documents and information on the following:

i. the procedure under the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) Act, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 to “apply” for NYSC Exemption;

ii. whether an authorized official of the NYSC actually issued an Exemption Certificate to Mrs. Kemi Adeosun; if NYSC did issue the NYSC Exemption Certificate, the circumstances and the provisions of the NYSC Act under which the Exemption Certificate was granted; and to publish widely including on a dedicated website and on the NYSC website, any such information.



No date has been fixed for the hearing of the suit.


http://serap-nigeria.org/serap-sues-nysc-over-failure-to-publish-kemi-adeosuns-exemption-certificate.ngo/

SERAP asks NBC to lift the ban on radio station, Falz's 'This is Nigeria', others

-----

Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has called on the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) “to immediately lift the ban on Jay FM 101.9 Jos, stopping the radio station from playing songs such as Falz's 'This is Nigeria', Wande Coal's 'Iskaba' and Olamide's 'See Mary, See Jesus', and rescind the unlawful fine of N100,000 imposed on the station.”

The organization said the action by the NBC “amounts to illegal restrictions on media freedom, the right to freedom of opinion and expression and free information and ideas.”

The NBC had in a letter dated August 6th, 2018 and addressed to the Chief Executive Officer, JODAJ Global Communications Limited, Jos, owners of Jay FM 101.9 stated varying reasons for the ban and fine ranging from 'vulgar and indecent lyrics' in contravention of the body's regulations.

But in a statement today signed by SERAP deputy director Timothy Adewale, the organization expressed “Concern about the censorship of the media and songs deemed ‘vulgar and indecent’ by the NBC, as such action risks undermining legitimate expression and independent voices. The NBC must immediately lift the ban on the radio station and rescind the arbitrary fine.”

The organization said, “The right to freedom of expression, information and ideas is applicable not only to comfortable, inoffensive or politically correct opinions, but also to ideas that offend, shock and disturb. The constant confrontation of ideas, even controversial ones, is a stepping stone to achieving a vibrant democratic society, transparency, accountability and respect for the rule of law.”

The statement read in part: “Vague rules on vulgarity and indecency should not be used subjectively to ban or fine independent media outlets, particularly radio and television channels. The action by the NBC can create an uncertain environment for radio and television stations and media professionals in general and lead to fostering self-censorship and shunning any meaningful criticism of public policies and authorities.”

“The NBC is adopting vague rules vulgarity and indecency to undermine freedom of expression, right to information and opinion. By banning the radio station from playing the songs, the NBC is not only undermining and harming the station, but also undermining everyone’s right to information, public participation and open and democratic governance”

“Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Nigeria is a state party includes the right of individuals to criticize or openly and publicly evaluate their Governments without fear of interference or punishment.”

“It is important for the NBC to strive to promote diversity of views, and the media’s importance as a platform for public debate about important matters of public interest and ideas. Censorship or impermissible restrictions in the exercise of media freedom and freedom of expression can restrict free circulation of ideas and opinions and impose obstacles to the free flow of information.”

“Freedom of the press and other news media afford the public one of the best means of discovering and forming an opinion of the ideas on political and social issues and other issues of public interest. Not only does the NBC have the task of ensuring that radio stations and other media organizations can function effectively to impart such information and ideas: the public also has a right to receive them.”

“SERAP notes that three clear-cut conditions must be respected for any limitation on the right to freedom of expression and free information: (a) restrictions must be established in law; (b) they should pursue an aim recognized as lawful, and (c) they must be proportional to the accomplishment of that aim. SERAP considers the action by the NBC against the radio station to be inconsistent with the principle of proportionality and therefore impairing the free exercise of the right both to impart and to receive information and ideas.”

It would be recalled that the NBC had cited the radio station’s airing of a song by Falz titled “This is Nigeria” saying the song was laced with vulgar lyrics, ‘this is Nigeria, look how we living now, everybody be criminal.’ Also, the NBC cited the airing of a song by Wande Coal titled, ''Iskaba'' as laced with vulgar lyrics, ''Girl you de make me kolo, shaking the ass like kolo'' in contravention of Section 3.6.1 and 3.13.2.2c.'.

The NBC also cited Jay FM airing a song by Olamide titled “See Mary, See Jesus” which it claimed was laced with casual use of the names of “Mary” and “Jesus” regarded as sacred by the Christian faith which contravenes Section, 4.3.1e.

read more: http://serap-nigeria.org/serap-asks-nbc-to-lift-the-ban-on-radio-station-falzs-this-is-nigeria-others.ngo/

SERAP begs court to quash tuition hike by Ajasin varsity, Areredolu



Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has sued the Adekunle Ajasin University and the Government of Governor Rotimi Akeredolu SAN over “unfair and arbitrary tuition hike, abuse of power, lack of free, prior, and informed consultation as well as a fundamental breach of legitimate expectations of students.”


In the Originating Summons with Suit No: AK/103/18 filed last Friday at the High Court of Ondo State, Akure, SERAP argues that: “The power of the Ajasin University and Ondo State government to change policy is constrained by the legal duty to be fair, among other constraints imposed by law. A change of policy which would otherwise be legally unexceptionable may be held unfair by reason of prior action, or inaction, by the authority. There is no overriding public interest in the tuition hike.”


According to SERAP, “A public authority possesses powers only to use them for public good. This imposes the duty to act fairly and to adopt a procedure which is fair-play in action. The tuition hike by the Ajasin University and Ondo State government amounts to a broken promise and breach of established practice of notice or consultation. The unfairness of the lack of consultation cannot be overridden by any countervailing consideration. Therefore, the absence of consultation amounts to an unlawful process of tuition hike by the Defendants.”


SERAP also argues that, “Not less than 80 per cent of the students will adversely be affected should the Honourable Court not stop this excessive and unjustified increase in school fees. The University and the Government of Ondo State arbitrarily, abruptly and outrageously increased and without any free, prior and informed consultation, the school fees of students from N35,000 to N180,000 (for fresher); and from N27,000 to N100,000 (for returning students); and N80,000 for final students.”


The suit filed on SERAP’s behalf by Timothy Adewale and Olaniji Olabinjo read in part: “The students have the right to free, prior and informed consultation before any change in fees is effected by the Defendants. The hike in school fees is a breach of the students’ right to equal protection of the law and access to affordable education.”


“A combined reading of the provisions of sections 17(2­­) (a), 18 and 42 of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 (as amended) on citizens right to equality of rights, obligations and opportunities before the law, education and freedom from discrimination, show that the act of Defendants in increasing the fees without recourse to any acceptable procedure has rendered the hike illegal.”


“The law is clear that as per section 18(1) of the Constitution to the effect that the Government shall direct its policy towards ensuring that there are equal and adequate educational opportunities at all levels. It is therefore natural to expect that any action to increase school fees by any authority, such authority must take into cognizance the effect of its action on the students’ right to education.”


“Similarly, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to which Nigeria is a state party provides that the Ajasin University and Ondo State authorities shall ensure access to education and make education equally accessible to all, based on capacity, by every appropriate means, and by the progressive introduction of free education.”

“The hike in the school fees by the Defendants was never done based on the capacity of the students, nor was it carried out by appropriate means. This arbitrary act of the Defendant has robbed education off the hands of indigent students and majority of those coming from disadvantaged background.”


“It is disheartening to realize that the very government and school authorities that should ensure equal and adequate educational opportunities to students are the very ones destroying it by denying the students of their rights by acts of hiking the fees. On the indispensability of education as a fundamental right, Article 17(1) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act stipulates that: ‘Every individual shall have the right to education.’”


“Any perceived financial hardship faced by the Ajasin University and Ondo State government cannot justify the violations of the students’ constitutional guarantees of equal protection and Nigeria’s international obligations to ensure equal access to the right to education. The Defendants act of hiking the school fees has infringed on the students’ right to education.”



SERAP is seeking the following reliefs:


A DECLARATION that the action of the Defendants is arbitrary and unfair and a clear breach of their legal duty to be fair, the doctrine of legitimate expectation, and the affected students’ right to free, prior and informed consultation before any change in fees by the Defendants can be effected.


A DECLARATION that the hike in school fees by the Defendants amounts to violation of the right of the students to education as guaranteed by Article 17(1) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act and Article 13 (1) (2) (c) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.


A DECLARATION that the action of the Defendants is illegal and a clear violation of the students’ right to equal protection of the law, as guaranteed by sections 17, 18 and 42 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), Articles 3(2) and 19 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act.


AN ORDER directing the Defendants to forthwith reverse the hike in fees payable by the 1st Defendant’s students to its initial amount.


AN ORDER on the 2nd Defendant to sponsor a bill for a law in the Ondo State House of Assembly that would: end arbitrary imposition of fees in the 1st Defendant; grant exemptions to students from disadvantaged background; ensure that the 1st Defendant is adequately funded on an equitable basis to ensure the proper exercise of the rights to equal protection of law and education and redress inequalities in provision of education.


ANY ORDER(S) that the Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstance of this suit.



http://serap-nigeria.org/serap-begs-court-to-quash-tuition-hike-by-ajasin-varsity-akeredolu.ngo/