Category: Law

By Adebisi Onanuga

An advocacy group, Access to Justice (AJ), has pleaded with the striking judiciary workers to call off their strike.

It was embarked on to press for the implementation of financial autonomy for the judiciary.

The group made the appeal in a statement signed by the Convener, Mr. Joseph Otteh and the Project Director, Deji Ajare.

It asked JUSUN to show good faith by calling off the strike.

The Judiciary workers under the auspices of Judicial Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) had embarked on indefinite strike since April 6, over the refusal of the state governors to implement full autonomy for the judiciary as enshrined in the 1999 Constitution, as amended .

Access to Justice urged the striking workers to consider the rights of detainee, who were denied justice since the commencement of the strike.

Access to Justice admitted that financial dependence threatens the efficiency of the judiciary, and makes it an appendage of the executive.

The group also recognised the need for JUSUN’s strike and expressed concern about the negative impact the non-implementation of the autonomy on the judiciary

It however, emphasised that  there is need to ensure the preservation and protection of human rights.

Access to Justice expressed fears that the current situation presents an open ticket for human rights violations, overcrowded cells and Public Health Risk.

It stated that: “There are reports from across the country that Police cells and Custodial Centres are overcrowded, because those who have been detained since the start of the strike could not get bail as courts remained closed.

“This is a violation of their rights as provided in the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015.

“As Nigeria and the World continue to battle the scourge of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is worrying that detention centres are holding more detainees than they were designed to hold, making them fertile grounds for the transmission of COVID-19”.

The group however, commends the pledge by the Governors’ Forum to begin the implementation of financial autonomy for the Judiciary by May, 2021.

It promised to closely monitor the governors’  promise to ensure full compliance with constitutional provisions on financial autonomy for the judiciary.

By John Austin Unachukwu

An Akwa Ibom State High Court in Uyo has struck out the N166 billion suit by the Akwa Ibom State Internal Revenue Service against Addax Petroleum Development (Nig) Ltd for want of jurisdiction.

Justice Theresa Obot upheld the firm’s contention that the court had no jurisdiction to adjudicate on claims arising from Oil Mining Lease (OML) operations, and struck out the government’s entire claims.

The claimant had claimed the sum of N166b against the defendant for various taxes and levies, including Pay as You Earn (PAYE) and Value Added Tax, purported to have been unremitted by the defendant between 1997 and 2018 and arising from the defendant’s operations of OML 123 allegedly falling within the territorial jurisdiction of Akwa Ibom State.

The defendant, however, contended at the trial that it was not liable to the claimant for any of the taxes and levies claimed, since it did not have any staff or vendors resident within Akwa Ibom State, or otherwise, carry on business in the state.

The defendant further contended that OML 123 is offshore Nigeria and the abolition of the onshore/offshore dichotomy by legislation heavily relied upon by the claimant only related to the revenue derivation formula and did not change the seaward boundary of littoral states including Akwa Ibom State.

Citing relevant provisions of the 1999 Constitution, Federal High Court Act, Allocation of Revenue (Abolition of Dichotomy in the Application of the Principle of Derivation) Act and other legislations alongside decisions of the appellate courts the defendant’s counsel argued that the Federal High Court had the exclusive jurisdiction to determine matters howsoever arising in respect of mines and minerals and offshore Nigeria.

The defendant thus submitted that the High Court of Akwa Ibom State lacked the competence to assume jurisdiction over the matter, both from a subject-matter and territorial perspective.

To mark the World IP Day which is observed every April 26, Similoluwa Oyelude and Fidelis Oguche explore how understanding the dual concepts of Intellectual Property (IP) and Small and Medium Scale Enterprises (SMEs) can bring growth

The integrality of SMEs to a country’s economic development and aspirations cannot be overemphasised. In the Nigerian context, for instance, the National Bureau of Statistics estimates that SMEs contribute 48 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP). The Central Bank of Nigeria broadly defines an SME as a business with a turnover of less than N100m per annum and/or less than 300 employees.

The World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) recognises IP as a category of property (intangibles). These intangibles are creations of the mind, which include inventions, literary and artistic works, designs, symbols, names, and images used in commerce.

Categories of IP that are protectable are artistic and literary works, musical works, computer programmes, and advertisements. Symbols, logos, names owned and used by businesses are also categories of IP that can be protected by trademarks or service marks. Industrial designs protect ornamental or aesthetic aspects of an article which may consist of three-dimensional features like the shape of an article or two-dimensional features like patterns, lines and colours.

How SMEs can leverage IP as a driver of commercial growth

IP is important in the day-to-day running of any business. It is, therefore, no surprise that developed and developing economies have taken keen interest in the protection of IP assets. If well protected and managed.

1. IP can act as a catalyst for economic development, as well as a driver of commercial growth for the concerned entity. If unprotected, it may lead to intellectual property infringements, loss of customers, finance, goodwill, and revenue for the concerned business.
2. IP can be traded, licensed, and sold by an SME, thereby creating additional revenue streams for such SME. Trademarks, service marks, industrial designs, and confidential information such as recipes, business methods and processes, patents/inventions can each be licensed in consideration for periodic royalty payments to the licensing SME.
3. An SME’s IP assets also make such an SME attractive to prospective investors. This is because IP assets increases the worth of a business as it hunts for investment injection, as such, IP assets can be valued and listed as part of the assets of an SME.
4. A well-managed IP portfolio enables an SME to obtain high returns on investments made on its assets. IP, according to the Institute of Entrepreneurship Development, helps stimulate innovation and growth, and assists in the generation of brand visibility, which can in turn be further translated to increased profitability for the concerned SME.
5. IP helps an SME to establish enterprise and business identity through branding strategy. IP also protects innovations through patents, utility models and trade secrets. This is in addition to the IP’s capability to assist in preventing competitors from imitating an SME’s products or services.
6. IP enables an SME to have exclusivity over the exploitation of its innovative products, creative designs, and brands, whilst further creating an adequate incentive for investing. In short, IP, if adequately leveraged and well-managed, adds value at every stage of the innovation and commercialisation process, WIPO has, in publications, made no secret of the fact that IP assists SMEs to market and build their innovations, position themselves competitively for trading in the global markets and access knowledge, networks, partners, and new commercial pathways.

Channelling IP for commercial exploitation: observed challenges SMES face

In Nigeria, it is often the case that SMEs underutilise their IP. Challenges faced by SMEs in IP management and commercial exploitation are  wide-ranging, some of which stem from a below-par understanding of the mechanics of IP and means of exploiting it for the purpose of growing the SME’s business. Nigerian SMEs are typically, for instance, unaware of the different categories of IP available for protection, as well as the importance of protecting their IP, using the registration platforms and methods made available by law. Unfortunately, there exists the common perception that the registration of IP is irrelevant to businesses. WIPO has posited that some SMEs’ attitude toward the management of their IP may stem from such SMEs’ concerns about the high cost of obtaining registration, combatting counterfeits, and enforcing their IP rights.

At the WIPO, OAPI and ARIPO (WAO) conference, 2019, it was observed that, on a general level, SMEs’ IP awareness and technical knowledge is low, and as a result, there is a minimal usage of IP protection by SMEs. In fact, most SMEs do not have a developed IP strategy. Thus, in as much as SMEs are taking steps to register their companies and business names at the companies’ registry, it is also important to take cognisance of their IP rights and seek to register these rights in the relevant IP registries.

Way forward

On the strength of the foregoing observations, it goes without saying that it has become necessary to raise awareness on the importance of IP rights to SMEs. Governmental institutions (IP registries), chambers of commerce and stakeholders can do much more to educate SMEs on the importance of IP rights, on the processes of obtaining registration, and means of monitoring and enforcing their IP rights.  An example can be gleaned from the European Union, which is taking positive steps to help in the creation of awareness and the provision of training and technological information to SMEs for the purpose of boosting commercial growth and driving innovation in relation to such SMEs.

In the Republic of Korea, the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), the chambers of commerce, the government SME support agency, the Korean Patent Attorneys’ Association, public and private partners, financial institutions, business training centres cooperated and established a network of support for SMEs on IP matters. The objective was basically on IP acquisition campaign for SMEs, assisting with the creation of IP, reducing the cost of obtaining IP amongst other measures for the commercialisation of IP.

At the WAO conference, it was recommended amongst others that awareness should be raised on the strategic opportunities offered by IP rights, and that IP education and training should be brought closer to SMEs to address issues around SMEs’ constraints in the access to IP rights, and make the existing IP regime more SME-friendly.

It is important to note that in 2003, the SME division of WIPO stated the objectives of a National IP Strategy for SMEs. Some of the objectives are meant to enhance SMEs’ competitiveness through a wider and more effective use of the IP system, by promoting awareness amongst SMEs on how to exploit their innovations. WIPO further committed to improving its policy and institutional support framework and business environment to make it conducive and easier for SMEs to exploit their IP rights. The propounded National IP Strategy revolved around six policies, namely the innovation policy, SME development policy, export policy, education policy, taxation policy and cultural policy.

In the final analysis, Nigeria can take a leaf from the above cited examples of actions that countries and organisations have taken to encourage the exploitation of IP rights by SMEs. We specifically recommend the following:

1. The creation of a national IP strategy for SMEs to promote awareness on intellectual property matters and how to exploit their innovations.
2. The provision of policies, institutional support, a workable framework, and a conducive business environment which will allow SMEs to exploit their IP rights.
3. IP registries should produce layman-friendly materials on IP on their websites. (The Intellectual Property Office (United Kingdom) and the KIPO both have such materials on IP on their social media platforms and websites.)
4. The provision of financial assistance/programmes to help SMEs exploit their IPR. WIPO has particularly commended Singapore’s Patent Application Fund, which finances 50 percent of legal and administrative cost for patents/innovation.
5. The erection of IP enforcement and border control measures to forestall counterfeiting and piracy, and enable SMEs enjoy returns on their investments on products developed.
6. Furthermore, one of the tax policies for WIPO’s SMEs-dedicated division is centred on making available tax incentives for research and development activities such as commercialisation of IP rights and licensing regimes. This can be replicated in Nigeria.
7. Stakeholders, the government, chambers of commerce, and financers can aid SMEs on matters relating to protection, management, and commercialisation of IP rights, by raising awareness, conducting IP rights training for SMEs, providing technological information services, and financial assistance on IP exploitation and commercialisation.

 

• Oyelude is a Senior Associate in G. Elias & Co.’s New Economy”, technology, media and entertainment practices. She can be reached at simi.oyelude@gelias.com

Oguche is an Associate in G. Elias & Co. He writes and negotiates contracts by which intellectual property rights are assigned or licensed.

He can be reached at fidelis.oguche@gelias.com

Prof Margaret Okorodudu-Fubara, internationally renowned Professor of Environmental law and Policy,  retired from the services of the Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU) Ile-Ife few weeks ago. In this interview She shares her views on the development of Environmental law in the country, climate change and sundry national issues. Legal Editor, JOHN AUSTIN UNACHUKWU met her

What prompted your interest in Environmental Law in Nigeria?

Environmental law is a relatively new field or subject of law compared to the Law of Contract, Law of Torts, Land Law, Criminal Law, Law of Evidence, Constitutional Law, Labour Law, Family Law, etc.

The novelty is not peculiar to Nigeria but cuts across the globe. As a matter of fact, when I was studying for my LL.M/Doctorate degrees in Harvard Law School, USA in the late 1970s, Environmental Law was an emerging field of law in the law school curriculum. The United States holds the distinct record as the pioneer of the “first substantive environmental statute” in the world. The National Environmental Policy Act (USA), 1969, NEPA which was signed into law in 1970 by President Richard Nixon, requires all federal agencies in the United States to go through a formal process before taking any action anticipated to have substantial impact on the environment.

So, how did the policy get to Nigeria?

Here in Nigeria, the watershed, origins or the birth of Environmental Law is tied to the country’s infamous “Koko Toxic Waste Dump” experience in 1987. Before that date environmental law as a distinct course did not feature in any law faculty curriculum. When the incident occurred, the Koko toxic waste dump was widely condemned as an unconscionable “crime” against the country with serious implications for the health of the people. Nigerian students in Italy at the time deserve all the commendation for alerting the Nigerian government and the press to this surreptitious toxic waste deal between the private Italian companies and their naïve Nigerian business partners.

What and how did it happen?

Before the shiploads of barrels of toxic waste took off from the Italian port, the Nigerian students had alerted strategic segments of the country, including the newspaper houses. When the toxic wastes eventually arrived at Koko Port, these patriotic Nigerian students in Europe didn’t stop at that. Despite the alarm they raised, they doggedly insisted on crying foul and making sure that the Nigerian press did not blink and allow it to be swept under the carpet. The government was kept actively engaged on the matter in order to avert adverse consequences to the detriment of human life.

What was the Nigerian government’s role in the Koko waste saga?

The government was awakened to its primary constitutional duty for preservation of life and security of the country and people. So, the question was: what can we do to these people who transported these toxic wastes to our country? Unfortunately for us, there was no existing law in the country under which the Italians and their Nigerian partners could be tried for any crime relating to importation of toxic and hazardous wastes. That is the Rule of Law, no person can be tried for a crime which was not inexistence or prescribed as such crime at the time of commission of the alleged “crime” under a valid extant statute or law. Nigeria resorted to international law and extant treaties both global and bilateral and we got the Government of Italy to take responsibility for the toxic wastes exported from Italy; scoop up and ship back to Italy several drums of toxic wastes and contaminated soil from the Koko Port, in the then Bendel State.

What was the effect of this experience on Nigeria?

It became imperative for the government to promulgate appropriate laws and policies for the protection of the environment in Nigeria. Support for this national commitment was received from international organisations and friendly western countries, notably Germany, United States, Canada, Japan and the United Kingdom.

Was this what prompted your foray into Environmental Law?

My foray into Environmental Law started in 1988 when I was consulted to write a paper (co-authored with Professor Antony Imevbore, Director, Institute of Ecology, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife) titled: “Review of Existing Laws and Statements on the Environment in Nigeria”, to be presented at the “International Workshop on Goals and Guidelines of National Environmental Policy for Nigeria” organised by the Environmental Planning and Protection Division, Federal Ministry of Works and Housing in conjunction with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNDP) at the Sheraton Hotel, Ikeja Lagos in September 1988. At the time that I was commissioned to write this paper, I was the Acting Head, Department of Jurisprudence and Private Law. Basically, what I did was that I scanned through all the laws of the federation in my departmental office searching for laws that had relevance or tangentially related to the integrity of the environment media – the air, land and water. The aim was to search for laws with bearing on environment protection that can serve as the basis for the prosecution of those that brought the toxic wastes into the country. Of course we had several sanitation/hygiene type laws in the statutes. But all these fell short of a comprehensive and substantive environmental law that fits into the modern post Industrial Revolution construct, for the preservation of wholesome environment and conservation of natural resources.

What was the fallout of this?

The fallout of the 1988 “International Workshop on Goals and Guidelines of the National Policy for Nigeria” where I presented the almost 100 pages paper “Review of Existing Laws and Statements on the Environment in Nigeria” was my determination to develop the paper into a book on Environmental Law, first of its kind in Nigeria, that would help to promote the emergence and inclusion of Environmental Law as a course of study on the curriculum in law faculties in Nigeria. By the special grace of God, I got unprecedented support for this book project. I won the Fulbright (Senior) Scholar Award, 1990/91 and the Robert S. McNamara (World Bank) Fellow, 1990/91, and I was reliably told by the Focal Person at the USIS while congratulating me on the double awards that that was the first time a Nigerian University Scholar would clinch both highly prestigious awards in the same year. With this I was able to go on sabbatical leave from the university in order to carry out further research and start writing the Environmental Law text book in the United States.

ow has the field evolved since your involvement?

To the glory of God, I would say ‘exponentially’. Nigeria today easily boasts of a vast array of environmental legal experts and practitioners. I was really impressed to observe that not less than 75 per cent of the newly constituted Nigeria Law Professors Forum indicated Environmental Law as their field of expertise. There is rising interest in Environmental Law as a subject and field of research by law students and scholars as well as other fields of study, especially post-graduate students from department of ecology who subscribe for Environmental Law as an elective course.

What do you consider to be the impact of your book on Environmental Law in the development of the subject matter in the country?

The publication of my book, “Law of Environmental Protection: Materials and Text” the first in Nigeria was sponsored by Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC), Nigeria. As I stated earlier, the proposals I submitted on the basis of my proposed book project won the two most coveted Scholarly Award. The book was very useful in the training of the first crop of Environmental Law students. Over the years, the book has been used in tutoring many students who are now very sound experts in Environmental Law. It was also used as a resource material in training new set of law makers at the inception of the Fourth Republic in the country. So, the book was written in a very easy to read and comprehend style. It has helped to build up lawyers and non-lawyers quite knowledgeable in Environmental Law. And today many of them are taking the subject to the next level. I am most appreciative of the role SPDC played in getting the book published without expressing any bias, not minding the fact that I unequivocally called out the company in aspects where I found the company falling short of national or global environment protection best practices.

How do we develop Environmental Law to tackle climate change, without stifling the poorer global south’s development?

Climate change is a major global issue. So let’s consider it from the sense that Environmental Law is a facilitator of the development. To put this into proper perspectives, let’s revert to the incidence of impacts of oil drilling, gas flaring and climate change in the Niger Delta region of the country. For now Nigeria is reluctant to heed the demand of environmental activists to leave the crude oil in the soil.

Why?

Simple. Oil is the major foreign revenue earner for the country and the Niger Delta acknowledged layer of the golden egg of the country. Climate Change has implications for varied socio economic problems plaguing the region, primarily driven by crude oil drilling/production which exacerbate conditions of poverty, hunger, diseases, insecurity and other forms of ecological disasters in the region. In the process of crude oil production there is massive gas flaring with emission of carbon dioxide which is seriously implicated in global warming. Fortunately, the 2015 Paris Agreement has come up with what I would characterise as global standards to tackle climate change. However, although there are global best practices, there is no universal pace or model for this, each country has the mandate to define its own priorities for compliance with the Paris Agreement. Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC)  to combat climate change,  which are essentially non-binding national plans highlighting climate actions, targets, policies and measures government plan to implement in response to climate change and as contribution to achieve global efforts at curbing climate change.

Was Nigeria part of this agreement?

Nigeria has its NDC well-articulated and presented to the global body. The issue is how do we walk the talk to feel the positive impact of the NDC? Probably this is where to enlist the legal tool which Environmental Law affords. In my view we do this by creating a “climate”(using that word in the colloquial sense) in which the goals of sustainable development can be attained, and innovation and sustainable lifestyle can thrive, through enacting appropriate laws and setting in place apt policies to check the long-term impacts of climate change through mitigation and adaptation. Right now in Nigeria, there is low capacity for adaptation and inadequate adaptation strategies.

Can Environmental Law help to lessen if not eradicate Nigeria farmers/herders crises?

The answer is yes and no. The reason that I say yes is because there are extant environmental law/regulations relating to livestock grazing in Nigeria. But law as a tool of environmental control and management cannot exist in isolation. We have provisions in the National Environmental (Wetlands, River Banks and Lake Shores Protection) Regulations S.I. 26 of 2009 and the National Environmental (Protection of Watershed, Mountainous, Hilly and Catchment Areas) Regulations, S.I. 27 of 2009 which attempt to regulate open livestock grazing in environmentally sensitive areas. The local government is required to ‘determine watering points and routes for animals to have access to water in “each” river or “each” lake. And every land owner or user of land in the vicinity of a river or lake is required by law, that is, duty bound to prevent the degrading and repair degraded river banks and lakeshores by several measures listed in the law, including the control of livestock grazing.

What is the role of the National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA) in this respect?

NESREA (the National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency) in collaboration with the state government, has the mandate under S.I. 27 of 2009 to restrict grazing in areas that are identified as threatened by environmental degradation. In collaboration with the state and local government the Agency may prescribe maximum number of animals allowed to graze on a particular area of land. Under this same S.I. 27 of 2009, a person who desires to graze livestock in the specified areas must submit an application endorsed by the Chairman of the Local Government Area to the Agency in the prescribed form under the Regulation. It is an offence under the law for any person to cause or permit his livestock to graze in contravention of this Regulation. Penalties including imprisonment and or fine are stipulated for violation of these environmental regulations. We all know that these are toothless laws and regulations, hallowed more in breach than compliance.

Why do you say this?

Herdsmen roam the length and breadth of the country to graze cattle completely mindless of extant environmental laws and regulations. Despite the seemingly good intentions of the draftsman, these laws as presently drafted are largely inadequate and do not fully address the sustainable development, environmental protection and socio-economic issues as major targets of the environmental laws and regulations. The fallout from this is the fact that regulatory impact is at variance with specified goals and long term objective. Some of the provisions are grossly people insensitive, causing non-compliance. There are no economic options for segments of the regulated community, as the Regulations are silent on economic and market incentives.

How?

For well over a decade the country has witnessed threat to security from the herdsmen farmers’ conflict. Indiscriminate grazing of cattle by the herders has been the main cause of the conflicts. Several attempts have been made to find a solution to the incessant conflicts and violence, including the unpopular and controversial RUGA (Rural Grazing Area) policy which was suspended. So, I believe the question is whether Environmental Law can lessen or eradicate Nigeria farmers/herders crises? Barring the political, ethnicity, tribal and national territorial integrity dimensions of this Fulani herdsmen/farmers’ crises, I believe appropriate environment laws and regulations combining measures required to make implementation, compliance with and enforcement of the laws more effective, will definitely be a game changer going forward to establish peaceful co-existence between the herders and farmers. Cattle grazing are an industry/business; therefore the law also should critically address the establishment of “industrial grazing plots/acres” as private enterprises. The regulated community should be given facilitative incentives and support for maximum compliance with the environmental laws and regulations. Nigeria can borrow a leaf from other parts of the world where there is civilised cattle rearing as private business/industrial enterprise.

What is the solution in your view?

Education can go a long way to help us overcome the herdsmen/farmers’ crisis. What we are witnessing with the Fulani herders/farmers’ crisis is a very serious civilization crisis in Nigeria today. Education can also be the panacea for this crisis. As I pointed out in my valedictory lecture, the educational value inherent in the Earth Charter (a unique declaration of fundamental ethical principles for building a just, sustainable and peaceful global society in the 21st Century, to inspire in all people a new sense of global interdependence and shared responsibility for the well-being of the whole human family, the greater community of life, and future generations) would highlight what we have in common.

What do you mean by this?

We must find what we have in common, what binds us together rather than highlighting our differences and what divides us as human beings, which if care is not taken and wisdom applied, will only tend to war or severe conflict. This makes it all the more imperative for us as a country to entrench education for sustainability into the national psyche. It is a sine qua non for peace and political stability and viability of our national development.

 

 

 

Why did you remain in Nigerian academia, when many of your colleagues opted for teaching jobs abroad?

The patriotic spirit in me made me to stay. Moreover, I believe that I am divinely located here in Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife. I have enjoyed the entire period of my stay here in OAU. This place of my divine location has been a huge blessing to me. I got married and reared amazing Godly children in this place. I give all the glory to God Almighty. I had the opportunity to have carried out research and taught in law schools in the United States, during my Sabbatical years at the St. Mary’s Law School, Saint Mary’s University, San Antonio Texas 1990/91 and School of Law, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon, USA, respectively. So, really I cannot pretend to have taught only in Nigeria. The experience of teaching both here and abroad has been quite fulfilling, I must confess. I had the best of both worlds with my colleagues in the legal

academia and the students, with pleasant memories that linger.

 

How did you manage, combining marriage with your high flying academic career?

It is purely the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous to me personally. It is not by power or by might, but by His grace that I have successfully combined raising kids with a successful career. That is

my loaded response to that question.

 

What advice do you have for the  young brainy girls  who want to be where you are in the next 50 years, amidst all the sexual harassments, sex for grade issues?

I will say to the young brainy girls, have a very close relationship with God Almighty, your Maker. Make sure you do not breach the edge and remain divinely cocooned inside His envelope of Divine protection. Loving fear of God will keep the young brainy girls in the right path as they navigate through the treacherous paths of university life, even when they are miles away from their doting parents/guardians. Temptations will surely come knocking, but with divine guidance they can solidly hold their own ground and able to overcome. They must remain focused on their  studies; the primary goal for seeking university education; and the ultimate goal to make a huge success of their lives ambition such that their  generation and future generations will notice their footprints on the sands of time.

 

In this article, two Associates of Pinheiro LP Aanuoluwapo Babalola and Stephen Jones identify and analyse the steps Nigeria is taking to adequately address the problem of taxation of NRCs.

Taxation is a vital stream of revenue generation for Nigeria and in order to maximise this, there has to be valiant provisions to ensure the country generates enough revenue into her coffers. Taxation is the imposition of levies and financial obligations on citizens and corporate entities. Taxation revenue includes companies’ income tax, customs and excise duties, value-added tax and personal income tax.

For decades, Nigeria’s mainstream revenue has been through the trade of crude oil, until the oil crisis in 2014, which led Nigeria into an economic recession. Before then, the country had long neglected other viable sources of income (such as taxation, particularly the taxation of digital companies.) To salvage the prevailing negative economic position at the time, the regulatory authorities directed their minds towards tax optimisation which shift has resulted in the enactment of the Finance Act 2020 (FA 20). The FA 20 has widened the tax net by imposing taxes on the activities of Non-Resident Companies (NRCs) that generate income from Nigeria. This article will focus specifically on the taxation of (NRCs) carrying on business in Nigeria and the practicability of the laws, by examining whether or not the purpose and intent of the legislature are realistic and achievable.

Non-Resident Companies

NRCs are foreign companies which are not domiciled/incorporated in Nigeria, although carrying on business in Nigeria or having the intention to carry on business in Nigeria.

The challenges faced with the taxation of NRCs are not problems specific to Nigeria, but a worldwide conundrum and there have been concerted efforts to tackle this. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) is currently leading multilateral efforts to address tax challenges from digitalisation of the economy.

In the interim, we would be dedicating the remainder of this article to identifying and analysing the steps Nigeria is taking to adequately address the problem of taxation of NRCs.

First, Section 78 (1) of the Companies and Allied Matters Act No. 3, 2020 (CAMA) mandates that NRCs having the intention of carrying on business in Nigeria shall take all steps necessary to obtain incorporation as a separate entity in Nigeria for that purpose, but until so incorporated, the foreign company shall not carry on business in Nigeria or exercise any of the powers of a registered company.

Section 78 (2) of CAMA goes on to provide that any acts of NRCs in contravention of the incorporation mandate is void. It is the opinion of the author that the purpose and intent of these provisions is to ensure that through incorporation in Nigeria, the NRCs fall within the ambit of section 55 of Companies Income Tax Act Cap. C21 (CITA) which mandates every company in Nigeria to at least once a year without notice or demand therefrom, file their audited accounts, as well as tax computations. It ensures that through incorporation, NRCs become taxable in Nigeria.  Examples of NRCs that comply with these provisions include Standard Chartered Bank, Domino’s Pizza, Shell Nigeria, Texaco, KPMG, amongst others.

In reality, there are NRCs who carry on business in Nigeria without registration/incorporation, thereby not paying tax in Nigeria. Examples of such companies include Netflix, Spotify, Twitter, YouTube, among others.

There have been three (3) main enactments by legislators to mitigate the loss of tax revenue that Nigeria suffers as a result of this tax leakage, these are namely: CITA, the Finance Act 2019 (FA 19) amendments, and the further amendments by Finance Act 2020 (FA 20). These will be dealt with individually.

Companies Income Tax Act (CITA)

Section 13 (2) of CITA was the first provision with the aim of imposing tax on companies other than Nigerian companies. It provided thus:

The profits of a company other than a Nigerian company from any trade or business shall be deemed to be derived from Nigeria-

(a)  if that company has a fixed base of business in Nigeria to the extent that the profit is attributable to the fixed base;

(b) if it does not have such a fixed base in Nigeria but habitually operates a trade or business through a person in Nigeria authorised to conduct on its behalf or on behalf of some other companies controlled by it or which have a controlling interest in it; or habitually maintains a stock of goods or merchandise in Nigeria from which deliveries are regularly made by a person on behalf of the company, to the extent that the profit is attributable to the business or trade or activities carried on through that person;

(c) if that trade or business or activities involves a single contract for surveys, deliveries, installations or construction, the profit from that contract; and

(d) where the trade or business or activities is between the company and another person controlled by it or which has a controlling interest in it and conditions are made or imposed between the company and such person in their commercial or financial relations which in the opinion of the Board is deemed to be artificial or fictitious, so much of the profit adjusted by the Board to reflect arm’s length transaction.

CITA was enacted in 1977 and the provisions cited above did a good job in qualifying how a foreign company should be taxed at the time. The business landscape at the time of CITA’s enactment was very different as this was before the advent of the internet and other modern communication tools that made it easier for people and businesses to interact without being physically present in the same place. However, the growth of technology and ease of doing business has broken down a lot of barriers to entry in carrying on business.

The world has become a global village, as such companies are able to tap into different markets without being domiciled in that market. An example is Spotify, a digital music streaming service that gives its users access to podcasts and millions of songs. Spotify recently made its services available in Nigeria; its offering contains a specified pricing plan that takes into effect the economic position and buying power of its Nigerian target market. Spotify is not incorporated in Nigeria, nor does it have a fixed base/office in Nigeria, as such per the application of the CITA provisions cited above, the profits Spotify makes in Nigeria would not be deemed to be derived from Nigeria and therefore not taxable. This provision occasioned tax leakage in the light of technology advancements and thus needed to be amended.

Finance Act 2019

It is important to note that the Finance Act 2019 made amendments to CITA which took effect on                                                                January 13, 2020. The aim of the amendments pertaining to NRCs was to widen the categorisation of NRCs that will be taxable in Nigeria to reflect technological developments since the world becoming a global village. Section 4 of FA 19 introduced new provisions to section 13 (2) of CITA, it added new subsections (c) and (e):

The profits of a company other than a Nigerian company from or taxable in any trade or business shall be deemed to be derived from Nigeria-

(c) if it transmits, emits or receives signals, sounds, messages, images…to Nigeria in respect of any activity,…high frequency trading…to the extent that the company has significant economic presence in Nigeria and profit can be attributable to such activity;

(e) if the trade or business comprises the furnishing of technical, management, consultancy or professional services outside of Nigeria to a person resident in Nigeria to the extent that the company has significant economic presence in Nigeria.

These provisions, particularly (c) was added so that digital companies such as Spotify, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Netflix, amongst a plethora of others who operate in Nigeria without incorporation in Nigeria or having an office in Nigeria will become taxable in Nigeria.

The words “Significant Economic Presence’’ alluded to in the new provisions added by FA 19 was defined in Companies Income Tax (Significant Economic Presence) Order 2020 as where a NRC derives gross turnover or income of more than N25 million or its equivalent in other currencies from its digital operations in Nigeria in that year.

Section 3 of FA 19 also introduced a new provision which substitutes the provision of Section 10 of CITA. This new provision requires every company operating in Nigeria to obtain a Tax Identification Number (TIN) which shall be displayed by the company on all business transactions with other companies and individuals. Conversely, one of the requirements in obtaining TIN in Nigeria is a Certificate of Incorporation in Nigeria as well as other Incorporation documents. This requirement means NRC not incorporated in Nigeria would find it impossible to obtain TIN without first incorporating the company in Nigeria.

Finance Act 2020

The further amendments pertaining to NRC made by FA 20 to CITA focuses on how NRCs will pay tax. It provides thus:

1A) Where any company other than a Nigerian company derives profit from or is taxable in Nigeria under section 13 (2) of this Act, such company shall be required to submit a return for the relevant year of assessment containing:

1. a) the company’s full audited financial statements and the financial statement of the Nigerian operations, attested by an independent qualified or certified accountant in Nigeria;
2. b) tax computation schedules based on the profits attributable to its Nigerian operations;
3. c) a true and correct statement, in writing, containing the amount of profits from each and every source in Nigeria; and
4. d) duly completed Companies Income Tax Self-Assessment Forms:

Provided that in a year of assessment where a company other than a Nigerian company only earns income on which withholding tax is the final tax under this Act, the obligation to file a tax return in the manner prescribed shall not apply to such company in that year of assessment.

These provisions mandate that NRCs who derive profit from Nigeria shall submit financial statements of their Nigerian operations as well as the financial statements from every country in which it operates at least once a year to the Federal Inland Revenue Service. This is a clearly onerous and ambitious responsibility being placed on NRCs, especially as the aim of the legislation is to ensure that NRCs become easily compliant with the taxation requirements in Nigeria, as well as promote the ease of doing business in Nigeria which is one of the goals of the present administration as laid out by the Presidential Enabling Business Environment Council (PEBEC).

There is also the issue of ascertaining exactly how much revenue is derived from their Nigerian operations as well as ascertaining capital expenditure attributable to the Nigerian market, i.e. issues of determining the tax deductible expenses from the total accrued income. How an independent certified accountant in Nigeria can satisfy itself of the true position on the profits of NRCs generated within and outside Nigeria remains unclear.

What are the penalties for failure to comply?

Section 55(4) of CITA provides that any company that fails to comply with the time of filing returns shall be liable to pay as penalties:

(a) N25,000 in the first month in which the failure occurs; and

(b) N5,000 for each subsequent month in which the failure occurs.

To put these fines in perspective as it targets NRCs who more often than not transact in foreign currencies, a defaulting NRC would be liable to pay $200 per annum (based on current exchange rate) as penalties for failure to comply with the time of filing returns. This in the opinion of the author is pittance and does little or nothing as the deterrence it is intended to be.

Additionally, section 85(1) of CITA provides that if any tax is not paid within the period of assessment, a sum equal to 10 percent per annum of the amount of tax payable shall be added, the tax due shall also carry interest at bank lending rate. Interestingly, this provision also applies even where the NRCs have not submitted its tax filings as section 65(3) of CITA provides that:

Where a company has not delivered a return and the Board (Federal Inland Revenue Service) is of the opinion that such company is liable to pay tax, the Board may, according to the best of its judgment, determine the amount of the total profits of such company and make an assessment accordingly.

This means that even where a NRC does not file its returns, the Board may exercise its discretion in determining the taxable profits attributable to the NRC, using the best judgement assessment.

The penalties set out in section 55(4) of CITA has largely remained unchanged since 1977 and are shrouded in ineffectiveness and uncertainty, thereby making them pointless and/or inapplicable to the realities of NRCs.

Also to be noted is that a majority of NRC that fall under these new taxation provisions are companies that carry on business in other countries through a permanent establishment situated therein. As such, they might fall under the Double Taxation Relief (DTR) Orders Nigeria has with other contracting States which precludes them from paying tax in Nigeria as they have already paid tax in the contracting state. Nigeria currently has DTR with 14 countries, namely: The United Kingdom, Netherlands, Canada, South Africa, China, France, Philippines, Singapore, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Romania, Belgium, Pakistan, Italy, and all these treaties are comprehensive except that of Italy which covers Air and Shipping Agreements only. An example of a NRC that may fall under the DTR is Spotify. Spotify is domiciled and pays tax in the United Kingdom; based on this Spotify may be exempted from paying Companies Income Tax in Nigeria.

Is there a silver lining? (Conclusion)

These amendments are welcome improvements as they mean that the legislative arm of government are becoming pragmatic and not stuck in the old ways of doing things. However, there is a realisation that some of the provisions of the legislation might be difficult to enforce, or such enforcement would lead to more damage than good to Nigeria’s economy. For example, deciding to ban the operations of NRCs who do not comply with the taxation requirements in Nigeria would likely lead to more harm than good; there would be public outcry if the Federal Government decides to ban Twitter.

Also, there is no clear way to ascertain revenue generated in Nigeria vis a vis the capital expenditure on the Nigerian market. This therefore creates a clog in the way of enforcing taxation by non-resident companies.

The innovative amendments have done a good job in widening the tax net to account for the world becoming a global village and the changes in how companies operate. For example cryptocurrency and commodities trading platforms that operate in Nigeria such as Binance, eToro, and DriveWealth are now taxable in Nigeria. These platforms are a departure from the traditional way of trading commodities which required people going to registered stock brokers before they could trade stocks.

The applicability of the provisions has not been smooth sailing as the provisions impose onerous filing obligations on the NRCs. If the intention of the legislators were to make NRCs tax compliant in Nigeria, then the focus should be on the ways to make it easy for them to comply with the said provisions. For example, the requirements of NRCs to submit the company’s full audited financial statements from all territories in which it operates and the financial statement of the Nigerian operations should be eased; NRCs should only submit the full audited financial statement of its Nigerian operations.

The legislators were relying on the good faith and integrity of the NRCs to willingly comply with the taxation requirements. However, business owners operate a cutthroat culture and expecting them to willingly submit to paying tax is akin to viewing the world through an unduly idealistic, optimistic, or wistful perspective. Whilst the theoretical part of the provisions sounds good, its application has failed to live up to expectations.

Overall, the improvements made to CITA are laudable as they seek to plug the hole of tax leakage and will increase the revenue generated from tax in the country. This is however the first iteration of such policies, therefore there are bound to be areas for improvement. Subsequent iterations would seek to cure the oversight and/or lack of proper structure occasioned by its implementation.

The OECD leading multilateral efforts to address tax challenges from digitalisation of the economy would create a consensus-based solution thereby evicting the need for Nigeria to act unilaterally.

Recommendations:

To further strengthen Nigeria’s drive towards taxation of NRC, we recommend:

• That regulatory authorities particularly the FIRS engage with relevant stakeholders to clarify grey areas of implementation.
• That the relevant regulatory agencies draw up clear and implementable strategies which would prevent tax evasion by NRCs.
• Investment in the creation of a central database for all companies operating physically and digitally in Nigeria in order to harmonize information.
• Upward revision of the penalties provided for default to file returns to meet present commercial needs.
• The requirements for obtaining TIN should be eased specifically for NRCs. The requirement of CAC Number/Certificate of Incorporation should be removed for NRCs in order to encourage compliance.

Babalola and Jones are Associates of Pinheiro LP

 

 

Afolabi Cassandra Adeola, an Intern with Directorate of Research and Policy Analysis, Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution (IPCR), Abuja writes on the state of insecurity affecting the country contending that weak institutional frameworks, weak and poorly funded military establishments, inequality and absence of fairness and justice, unemployment and ethno-religious rivalry must be addressed effectively for stability and growth.

Section 14(2) of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution provides that “The security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of the Government”. The safety of citizens and the protection of their human rights is paramount. On April 21 2021, unidentified gunmen attacked a private University in Kaduna State killing a staff and kidnapped an unknown number of students, days later remains of three of the kidnapped students were found dead in a village close to the university. The gunmen haven’t been found, the other students haven’t been rescued.

The above mentioned attack is just one amongst the several crimes being orchestrated in the Northern parts of Nigeria by bandits. Over the past few years, the state of insecurity and level of safety has degenerated. Lives are lost daily, most businesses are in comatose, the population is being depleted, investments are diminishing and unemployment is soaring high.

There have been countless reports of kidnapping, armed robbery incidents on high ways, inter-communal farmers-herders conflicts, various assaults and killings on citizens regardless of class and other inter-ethnic tensions all over the nation. The insecurity paranoia is beginning to affect every inhabitant of the country and citizens are realising that the government cannot effectively guarantee the security of their lives and properties.

These security issues have significantly gotten worse and they can be traced to several fundamental issues. One, weak institutional framework ridden with corruption resulting in the inability/incapacity of the government to provide basic necessities for the Nigerian people, this has prompted a multitude of frustrated people who resort to violence at the slightest incitement or opportunity. Because of this situation, the crime rate shoots up and the security of lives and properties are no longer guaranteed.

Secondly, ethno-religious conflicts, this exist when the social relations between members of one ethnic or religious group and another of such group in a multiethnic and multi-religious society is characterised by lack of cordiality, mutual suspicion and fear, and a tendency towards violent confrontations to settle grievances. These conflicts have also revolved around who gets what and how in the state especially as it concerns the distribution of scarce resources. This particular situation forms the etiology of the conflicts between farmers and herders in the Benue valley, which has now extended to the eastern and western parts of the country.

Thirdly, military and paramilitary establishments and the Police force under federal control are weak institutionally, heavily politicised and poorly funded thereby leaving the nation’s security compromised. Funds also allocated to the states for security are siphoned for other purposes, leaving the citizens unprotected against criminals.

Fourthly, the growing awareness of inequalities, and disparities in life chances which leads to violent reactions. A general perception of marginalisation exists by a section of people in areas of government development policies, political patronage which in turn leads to resentment of the government and revolt.

All of these have attributed to the security challenges we are currently facing in the country. Consequently, they have resulted in a plethora of issues that are adversely affecting the economy and socio-economic development of the nation. The inability of the government to provide a safe and secure environment for persons to conduct business has amounted to low foreign investment rates and also difficulty in sustaining local businesses. It has occasioned a rise in unemployment rates and the shutdown of several businesses.

The agricultural sector in the country has also been affected, the herdsmen and farmers conflict in the different parts of the country have resulted in the displacement of farmers and their families, destruction of farmlands and farm produce resulting in an increase in prices of food items nationwide. Currently, agricultural and economic activities in the North-East have seized as a result of terrorist activities.

The state security agents who are saddled with the responsibility for the security of life and property which include- the police, state security service, the military, immigration and correctional services have all performed poorly in the discharge of their duties. These security problems had obviously defied the capacity and competence of the existing security apparatus and infrastructure in the country. The state security agents have been overwhelmed by the increasing nature of threats to our collective security and national well-being.

The poor performance of the Police Force has led to the lack of public confidence for the institution, Nigerians constantly live in fear and majority have resolved to form local or community vigilantes to protect themselves against attacks by criminal gangs and bandits.

During the last quarter of 2020, a movement began in the country by youths to end police brutality perpetrated by a particular unit of the Nigeria Police Force (SARS) and to necessitate the review and reform of the entireNi geria Police Force, to make them more responsive and accountable in dealing with the current security issues in the country. Little has been done by the government to effect these changes to reposition the police force to meet the security challenges.

Nigeria’s situation is a paradox where the country is over-policed and under-secured. The policing system is plagued with several operational issues. In the words of Mohammed D. Abubakar (former Inspector General of Police), he states that

“The Nigeria Police Force has fallen to its lowest level and has indeed become a subject of ridicule within the law enforcement community and among members of the enlarged public. Police duties have become commercialised…Our men are deployed to rich individuals and corporate entities such that we lack manpower to provide security for the common man. Our investigations departments cannot equitably handle matters unless those involved have money to part with. Complainants suddenly become suspects at different investigation levels following spurious petitions filed with the connivance of police officers. Our police stations, State CID and operations offices have become business centres and collection points for rendering returns from all kinds of Squads and Teams set up for the benefit of superior officers. Our Special Anti-Robbery Squads (SARS) have become killer teams, engaging in deals for land speculators and debt collection. Toll stations in the name of check-points adorn our highways with policemen shamelessly collecting money from motorists in the full glare of the public.” These issues have been overstated and reiterated countless times but actions from the government to solve these issues are still lacking.

It is possible to link the unprecedented rise in violent crimes and the alarming new dimensions of organised terrorist activities to corruption and bad governance. The government often appears indifferent about these issues and the nature of response to conflict management is often slow & misdirected. The overall stance of the government towards security issues are weak. For instance, the rehabilitation of the arrested members of the Boko Haram (the terrorist group plaguing the North-east). It is confusing what these measure seems to accomplish. It is trite law that where a crime has been perpetuated, such crime is to be punished according to law so that justice will be deemed served. This punishment often serves as a form of deterrence for others in the society. Now when a non-deterrence measure is being adopted “to stabilise the region” and it proves not effective and does not curb the prevalent crime, would it be wise to still continue with such non-deterrence measures. Putting in consideration that measures to stop the recruitment of citizens into these terrorist groups have not been adopted and measures to limit the activities of this terrorist group to the barest in this region has not also been adopted yet the government is asking the victims of these terrorist attacks to accept them into the community even as they struggle to heal and rebuild. Can this act by the government be likened to justice for the survivors of the brutal terrorist attacks?

The government has continued to trudge on in the face of this daring challenge and has continued to evolve strategies to contain or douse this conflagration rather than put an end to them infinitely. The importance of putting the citizens first in planning the development of the nation cannot be overstated.

On regional and state levels, security outfits have been launched and deployed to deal with security challenges. In as much as this is a step in the right direction, these security outfits exist only to assist the Nigeria Police Force. However, where the Police Force is plagued with fundamental issues that affect their performance, it is not expected for these steps to amount to reasonable and quantifiable results. The government needs to act strategically, taking into consideration policing systems in other developed countries and adopting other conflict resolution methods as opposed to the use of force towards putting an end to insecurity in the country.

It is important to point out that if the issue of weak institutional frameworks, weak and poorly funded military establishments, inequality and absence of fairness and justice, unemployment and ethno-religious rivalry are not addressed effectively, the state of insecurity will continue to degenerate and give rise to an unstable economy which will stifle national development and growth.

• Adeola is an Intern, Directorate of Research and Policy Analysis Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution (IPCR), Abuja.

By Adebisi Onanuga

The executive of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and branch chairmen have been urged to ensure full participation and support in the forthcoming SPIDEL Annual Conference taking place in Ibadan between May 23 and 26, 2021.

Chairman, NBA Section on Public Interest and Development Law (NBA-SPIDEL), Prof. Paul Ananaba (SAN) made the appeal in a letter written to the bar leaders.

He said the conference will hold May 24 at the popular Jogor Event Centre and declared open by Governor Seyi Makinde of Oyo State.

The theme of the conference is “The Role of Public Interest in Governance in Nigeria.”

The sub-themes included: “The Imperatives of Public Interest in Governance in Nigeria; Internal Security: A Prerequisite for National Development; Legality and Efficacy of Public Inquiry Panels by State Governments; Legality and Efficacy of Regional Vigilantes; When the State Truly Defends: assessing the role of the Office the Public Defender Lagos State; Anti-Corruption Model: Assets Declaration and Public Access; Showcase Session for NBA: Public Interest Litigation Committee – Broadening the strategy for NBA’s Intervention in Public Interest Lawyering” among others.

Prof. Ananaba listed those to speak at the conference to include the Vice President, Prof.  Yemi Osinbajo (SAN); the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN),  Justice Tanko Muhammad ; Justice Eko Ejembi of the Supreme Court of Nigeria, Speaker of House of Representatives ,  Femi Gbajabiamila, President of the Senate, Senator Ahmed Lawan; Governors  Makinde , Rotimi Akeredolu (SAN), Dr Bala Mohammed and Engr. Dave Umahi  of Oyo, Ondo, Bauchi and Ebonyi, States respectively.

He listed others who have confirmed their attendance to include Senator Ibrahim Shekarau and Senator Shehu Sani: Prof Pat Utomi; Prof Festus Emeri (SAN); ICPC Chairman, Prof  Bolaji Owasanoye (SAN); Oyo State Attorney General, Prof. Oyelowo Oyewo (SAN); former Chairman, National Human Rights Commission (NHRC)Prof. Chidi Odinkalu; Ogun State Attorney General, Mr. Gbolahan Adeniran; NBA Board of Trustees Chairman, Dr. Olisa Agbakoba (SAN); Mr. Austin Alegeh (SAN); Mr. Paul Usoro (SAN); Dr. Babatunde Ajibade (SAN); Chief Bolaji Ayorinde (SAN); Mr. Kemi Pinheiro (SAN).

Others are former Solicitor General, Lagos State,  Mr. Lawal Pedro SAN; Mr Muiz Banire (SAN), Mr J.S. Okukpeta (SAN), Mr Afam Osigwe (SAN),  Attorney General  of Lagos State, Moyosore Onigbanjo (SAN); Mr Seun Abimbola (SAN, Ms Hafsat Abiola and leading human rights lawyers such as  Femi Falana (SAN); Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN); Mr. Ebun Adegboruwa (SAN) and Mr. Jiti Ogunye, .

Others are Executive Secretary, NHRC, Anthony Ojukwu , Aisha Yesufu, Liborous Oshoma and Mr. Opunabo Inko-Fariah.

He said the legislature will be represented by  Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, Senator Ike Ekweremadu, Senator Dino Melaye, Oyo State House of Assembly Speaker, Rt. Hon. Adebo Ogundoyin and his Lagos counterpart, Rt. Hon. Mudasiru Obasa.

The Chief Host is the NBA President, Mr. Olumide Akpata while NBA-SPIDEL Chairman, Prof. Paul Ananaba SAN is the Host.

Ananaba said the ancient city of Ibadan is already wearing a new and beautiful look as a result of the tremendous effort being put in place by the current administration to deliver the dividends of democracy to the people.

“Therefore, we are poised to have a beautiful conference in an atmosphere of peace and tranquility. In fact, Governor Makinde has been emphatic in assuring delegates thus: “We will ensure that you have a very good experience”, he assured.

He urged members wanting to register for the conference to click on the link http://nbaspidel.ng/nba-spidel-conference/.

The 2021 Annual Conference of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA)  Section on Legal Practice is scheduled to hold between June 13 and 16, 2021 in  Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria.

The theme of this year’s Conference is “Law, Lawyers and the Next Generation”.

NBA Chairman on SLP, Olusegun Abimbola (SAN) said the focus of the conference is to periscope the journey of the bar over the years as a nation of laws, the role of lawyers, and chart the course for a desirable future for the next genre of laws, and generation of lawyers.

It is also to prepare for a wonderful conference experience with exciting business sessions, inspiring speakers, and the warmth, attractions & cuisine of Akwa Ibom, ‘’The Land of Promise’’.

Abimbola requested lawyers to contact  fadekeslp@gmail.com or baderemi@nba-slp.org for further information on the programme.

 

By Robert Egbe

The African Bar Association (AfBA) has described any unconstitutional overthrow of government as an international crime that would only lead such individuals to misery.

It warned that it could also reverse such a country’s socio-political and economic gains.

AfBA president Hannibal Uwaifo stated this while reacting to the recent attempted military interference in the government of the Niger Republic.

The government of Niger said that on March 31, 2021, it thwarted an attempted coup d’é·tat just days before the inauguration of its current president Mohamed Bazoum.

Armed attackers tried to seize the presidential but were fought off by the presidential guard.

The democratic transfer of power in the country, which is prone to coups, won international praise, but Mr Bazoum’s rival Mahamane Ousmane rejected the result of the election.

Uwaifo said: “Military take-over of the government of Niger Republic is not acceptable and will not be tolerated anywhere in Africa.

“We are alarmed that despite the laudable efforts of the institutions of governance in the Republic of Niger to sustain democratic governance and take the country to the next stage of global recognition as a peaceful democratic country, some renegade military officers are planning to take the country back to anarchy”.

He called for proper investigations of the culprits for punishment according to law.

“We commend the government of Niger for swiftly bringing the situation under control and call for a thorough investigation to identify the perpetrators of this crime and their sponsors for the maximum punishment allowed by the law.”