The Nation Newspaper

Tag: commission

  • Rights Commission to resolve herdsmen, farmers dispute

    Rights Commission to resolve herdsmen, farmers dispute

    The Executive Secretary, National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), Prof. Bem Angwe, has inaugurated a working committee to resolve the perennial clashes between herdsmen and farmers.

    According to him,  for the past decade, the incidence of clashes between pastoralists and farmers have become a recurring issue.

    He said: “The central issue is the increasing scarcity of economic resources. Desertification and massive devastation of vegetation and soil, particularly in the arid zones in the far north, as well as lack of access to adequate water supply have necessitated the southward movement of pastoralists with their cattle all the year round.

    “Presently, some states are worse hit. These include Kaduna, Nasarawa, Benue, Plateau, Taraba and Adamawa. The conflict is also taking a more dangerous dimension as it is dividing the affected people along ethnic and religious lines even though the primary issue is economic.

    “More recently, cattle rustling is fast becoming an organised crime in the affected areas while small arms proliferation has also become the order of the day with its attendant toll on the capacity of the state to provide its primary constitutional responsibilities of protecting life and property.

    “The historical relationship among the different peoples of northern Nigeria especially, has served to aggravate the matter as the political class, rather than providing lasting solution to this problem by engaging in massive environmental regeneration and development, continued to exploit this situation to serve their narrow political interest which in many instances reinforces the dividing lines among the affected people and communities.”

    Prof. Bem Angwe said: “A number of enquiries and studies have been commissioned by governments – federal and states – at different times, but the nation is yet to develop a multi-perspective, pragmatic work plan aimed at achieving a holistic and integrated approach to solve the problem.

    “The Commission, therefore, owes a statutory duty to address this issue because it substantially affects protection of right to life, property, environment, health as well as freedom from fear and murder, amongst others.

    He mentioned the Committee’s terms of reference to include: “To undertake a desk review of all the existing reports on this matter and draw up a list of issues and stakeholders mapping to guide the current exercise;  visit to some of the affected areas (including visits to relevant government officials and agencies); to interact with affected people in order to get their perspective on this matter; organisation of town hall meetings/community dialogue in the affected states – particularly, Kaduna, Nasawara, Benue, Plateau, Taraba and Adamawa. It also include holding a national conference in Abuja to bring together all the key stakeholders and representatives of the affected communities.

    “The conference proceedings and other feedbacks generated from all the above engagements would be brought together to make a policy recommendation to the federal and relevant state governments.

    The cnference will equally submit Draft Conference Report to the Executive Secretary on or before  October 31, 2016. “It is my hope you will justify the confidence reposed in you by ensuring a diligent discharge of this important national assignment,” Prof Angwe said.

     

     

  • Commission intervenes in Abia/Ebonyi boundary dispute

    The National Boundary Commission (NBC) has directed both Abia and Ebonyi states to submit before the end of the month four copies of any documented information that could be helpful in tracing their boundary lines.

    This was contained in a 12-point communiqué issued at the end of a joint meeting of officials of NBC, Abia and Ebonyi states interstate boundary held in Umuahia.

    The communiqué said that the technical committees of both states were expected to proceed to Abuja for the delineation of the boundary in accordance with already screened and accepted documents.

    It is expected that the stakeholders of the communities along the dispute boundary areas are to sustain the relative peace through joint utilisation of the border resources of both states.

    The communiqué which was presented by the national director of NBC, Dr Mohammad Ahmad, directed the police to release all those detained from both states as agreed in the resolution of 1st August this year.

    It said that investigations into the reported case of a missing Chukwuma Akwa of Ivo local government area of Ebonyi state will continue, adding that adequate security be provided for the Joint Field Team whenever they are on duty.

    The communiqué further directs that the federal government, and the two states involved should provide logistics such as fund, vehicles among others to their representatives on the field exercise.

    It is also expected that the chairmen and traditional rulers of the affected local government areas should carry out joint enlightenment campaign in the areas, while status quo should be maintained until the boundary is properly defined.

    The communiqué said that the committee directs that the joint field team will be inaugurated on November 17th 2015 at Umunneochi council area, while the field work shall commence at Uru-Lokpanta axis all in Abia state and will be completed on or before 18th December, 2015.

    In his speech the host and deputy governor of Abia state, Hon Ude Oko-Chukwu listed the steps so far taken by governments of both states to usher peace over the years, including addressing the 15th July incident at Umunneochi/Ivo area of both states.

    Oko-Chukwu reiterated the readiness of Abia state government to cooperate in the joint efforts to demarcate the boundary between the two sister states as soon as possible, while calling on NBC to speed up action in resolving the boundary issue permanently.

    In his own address the deputy governor of Ebonyi state, Dr Eric Kelechi Igwe said that the government of Ebonyi state attaches top priority to the boundary resolution and called on the meeting to discuss all issues dispassionately while pledging their cooperation towards a peaceful resolution.

  • UK-Nigeria’s Joint Commission seeks review of insider dealings

    A joint committee on investment and development made up of the United Kingdom and Nigeria has called for a review of the rules on insider dealings in the  capital market to ensure clarity, enforcement and strong deterrence.

    The final report of the Nigeria-United Kingdom Capital Markets Project, obtained by The Nation, underlined the importance of clearer and more comprehensive rules on insider dealings and the need to institute stronger punitive measures against offenders.

    The Nigeria-United Kingdom Capital Markets Project is an offshoot of the UK’s Emerging Capital Markets Taskforce (ECMT), which aimed at fostering innovative collaboration between government, the private sector and UK missions overseas, to enhance inflow of UK’s investments and participation in the capital market.

    The report noted that insider dealing jeopardises the development of fair and orderly markets, undermines investor confidence, damages the reputation of companies and their shareholders and undermines confidence in the markets and as such, there must be a robust regulatory framework to curtail and punish insider dealings.

    “Even the perception of insider dealing is sufficient to hinder the development of the capital markets. In order to promote transparency and avoid distortion of the market, up to date information must be made available to investors, other market participants and regulators of the shareholdings and share dealings by directors, controllers and all others classed as insiders of a listed company. Furthermore, the infrastructure available to regulators for market surveillance and enforcement must be robust enough to compel adherence to the rules,” the report stated.

    The report highlighted that the regulatory framework fails to address concerns over insider dealings pointing out that the description of insider dealing under the Investment and Securities Act (ISA) and the rules of SEC and NSE did not provide adequate clarity on what conduct amounts to insider dealing and what conduct may be exempt from prohibition.

    “Rule 401(a) of the SEC rules 2013 requires disclosure to the SEC, not only by the company but also by insiders of any trades made in respect of the shares of which they are insiders. Rule 401 does not go far enough in its regulation of insider dealing. For instance, the rule does not extend to the transfer by an insider of its beneficial ownership of shares in respect of which it is an insider,” the report noted.

    According to the joint commission, SEC’s Rule 401 also falls short because it only provides that the requisite disclosure be made to SEC alone and not required to be notified to the company, the stock exchange or to the public whereas with regard to surveillance and enforcement of the insider dealing rules, the exchanges, in their capacity as Self-Regulatory Organisation (SROs) rely on the information disclosed to them.

    The commission pointed out what it described as absence of a system for alerting the NSE or any other exchange of trading patterns or other trails that would put the exchange on alert as to the possibility of insider dealing and trigger the need to request the disclosure of the recorded information of questionable trades.

    “The SEC rules do not, in our opinion, go far enough. In particular we note that the penalties imposed on the insider for breach appear to be limited, being a fine imposed under Section 115 of ISA and should, where appropriate and as a minimum, include the disqualification of directors; the information disclosed by the insider to SEC should not be disclosed to SEC alone and should also be notified to the company, the stock exchange and to the public; in view of the intricacy and deleterious impact of insider dealing, there should be a requirement for the members of the board of listed companies to undergo compulsory training on insider dealing and other regulatory matters,” the joint commission stated.

    The report noted that there has so far been no prosecution for insider dealing in Nigeria, which raises doubts on the effectiveness of the current regulatory regime, adding that the provision of clear guidance on what conduct amounts to insider dealing would make it easier for the regulators to investigate perceived breaches and promote compliance.

    The commission called for harmonisation of rules and provision of more detailed guidance under a code of conduct for the market, which should provide guidance in determining whether a particular conduct amounts to insider dealing or falls within any of the safe harbours created by the code in the mode of the UK Code of Market Conduct.

    The report noted that to boost the integrity of the capital markets, there is a need to enhance the framework of rules and develop initiatives so as to improve information disclosure and dissemination, deter manipulation of the market through insider dealing or conflict of interest and promote an industry-led transparency and good governance culture.

    It pointed out that trust and confidence in capital markets transactions in the country is needed in order to attract investors to the market but such trust and confidence will be harder to establish where there are perceptions of shortcomings in the standards.

    “It is therefore necessary to adopt strategies aimed specifically at improving the ethical standards of operation in the capital markets as well as changing the perception of the standards that operate in the markets,” the report noted.

    The report further underscored the importance of an effective regulatory regime that will foster capital market development by encouraging the participation of investors and issuers in capital market transactions, noting that the regulatory regime must be robust enough to protect investors without acting as a disincentive to the participation of issuers.

    It, however, called for a balance between ensuring investor protection and enabling efficient capital formation adding that the regulatory process must be carried out within a reasonable timeframe in order not to discourage potential participants from using the capital markets for their fund-raising.

    According to the report, the regulations must have the effect of protecting investors without imposing undue costs on the compliant issuers due to difficulties in negotiating the regulatory landscape and the duplication of procedures between the various approving regulators.

    The report also canvassed for more incentives to quoted companies and other capital market issuers arguing that the current incentives are few and insufficient to propel capital market as the preferred hub for global capital.

     

     

    “There are very few incentives for issuers to participate in the Nigerian capital markets. Yet incentives have been an important factor in deepening capital markets in other emerging economies. Furthermore, the incentives that currently exist in the Nigerian capital markets at times lack clarity or are not sufficiently appealing to change the established market behavior of raising capital privately or through banks,” the joint commission stated.

    Insider trading occurs when a person or group of persons who being in possession of some confidential and price sensitive information not generally available to the public, utilizes such information to buy or sell securities for the benefit of himself, itself or any person.

    An insider can be any individual who is or has been, in a period no longer than six months, a director, officer or an employee of a company such that he holds or has access to material, price sensitive and non-public information of the company; or has been involved with a company in a professional or business relationship, including auditors, accountants, printing contractors, lawyers, and regulatory personnel. Such a person must hold or have access to material, price sensitive and non-public information.

    Under a new code of conduct for capital market executives and officials recently introduced by the NSE,  non-action may be considered insider trading, if that non-action is as a result of the knowledge of information, hitherto unknown, obtained by or from an insider and has led to a decision to change a prior course of action, not selling or buying securities of a company.

    Besides, stockbrokers are under obligation to report substantial orders from clients in companies in which such clients are directors or employees of the firm, or have business relationship with the firm, including auditors, reporting accountants and lawyers.

    Directors, officers, and employees are also prohibited from disclosing non-public price-sensitive information to a third party for the purpose of trading while no directors, officers, and employees must trade in restricted list of securities during the closed period.

     

  • Commission asks IGP to prosecute ‘fake doctor’

    THE Federal Civil Service Commission (FCSC) has asked the Inspector General of Police, Solomon Arase, to investigate and prosecute one Mr. Martins Ugwu.

    Ugwu, according to the commission, impersonated his friend, Davidson Daniel George (a medical doctor), to gain employment into the Federal Civil Service since 2006.

    A letter to the Inspector General of Police dated June 11, 2015 and signed by its chairman, Deacon Joan Ayo, indicated that the commission decided to look into a petition against the medical doctor by a group and its findings revealed that he was an impostor.

    The letter reads: “The investigation commenced when a group of petitioners alleged that a “Dr. George David Daniel” appeared to be a fake doctor. On FCSC investigation and based on a letter Ref. No. MDCN/760/Vol.II/99 of June 4, 2015, from the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria, the FCSC discovered that the man under investigation is actually Mr. Martins Ugwu, who stole the certificate of his friend to impersonate and take up appointment as a medical doctor.”

    Ugwu, according to the letter, has been using Daniel’s certificate to work for nine years before the discovery.

    FCSC, in the letter, alleged that Ugwu, on discovery that his cover has been exposed, threatened to the friend he impersonated.

    The commission attached the letter from the MDCN conforming that Ugwu has been impersonating George, who is undertaking his Residency Training in Jos, Plateau State.

    In the letter, MDCN said it summoned and interacted with the genuine doctor, who gave some vital information which further confirmed Ugwu as an impostor.

    “Council has reported the matter to the law enforcement agency as a case of impersonation, with the genuine doctor deposing to a statement with regards to what happened between him and the fake doctor, whose real name Mr. Martins Ugwu,” said MDCN.

    Also attached to the letter is another letter from the Faculty of Medicine, Ahmadu Bello University, which disowned the accused as a graduate from the faculty.

  • Forum seeks Nigerians in Diaspora Commission

    Forum seeks Nigerians in Diaspora Commission

    Nigerians in Diaspora have urged President Muhammadu Buhari to sign into law the Nigerians in Diaspora Commission Bill.

    Speaking in a chat with our correspondent, Coordinator of Nigerians in Diaspora Leadership Forum, Mr. Alistar Soyode, said the bill, which was among the 46 bills passed by the 7th Senate last week, would “provide the engagement of Nigerians in Diaspora in the policies, projects and participation in the development of Nigeria and for the purpose of utilising the human and material resources of Nigerians in Diaspora towards the overall socio-economic, cultural and political development of Nigeria.”

    Soyode, who expressed optimism that the president would assent to the bill, added that the Commission would be run by a board of distinguished Nigerians with impeccable record, with a three-year renewable tenure.

    When the Commission becomes fully operational, Soyode, who is also the Chief Executive Officer of UK-based BEN TV, said it would comprise of representatives from each of the 36 states of the federation. He said the Commission would have a comprehensive data base of Nigerians in Diaspora.

     

  • Evidence of suspicion cannot replace legal proof of commission of criminal allegation

    Evidence of suspicion cannot replace legal proof of commission of criminal allegation

    The appeal arose from the decision of  the High Court of Justice of Lagos state whereby it convicted and sentenced the Appellant to death for the murder of a Mr. Ikechukwu Idoko contrary to Section 319 of the Criminal Code Cap 17 (volume 2) Laws of Lagos State, 2003 (CAP 17 of 2003).

    In a nutshell, the deceased had been an apprentice trader under the Appellant, his master.  He had lived with the Appellant in the same premises at No. 14, Oduloju Street, Cele Alaba International, Lagos. The deceased was to serve the Appellant for six years. He completed the six years of apprenticeship. The deceased was to be released from the apprenticeship in 2006. The Appellant refused to release him. The deceased continued the apprenticeship. Police investigation through some eye witnesses who were not called to testify indicated that the Appellant had a quarrel with the deceased for returning late in the night to the house on the fateful day of 9-07-07. That in the course of the quarrel a fracas ensued between the Appellant and the deceased. The Appellant was said to have pushed the deceased. The push caused the deceased to fall from the balcony of the second floor of a two storey building. The said fall made the deceased unconscious. According to PW1, a medical doctor, operating a clinic about 50 metres from the said premises, the deceased was brought to his clinic in a state of comatose and gasping in the night of 9-7-07.  The deceased bled from the ear and the nose.  PW1 concluded the deceased had a fracture at the base of the skull or had head injury.  PW1 gave the deceased first aid treatment. From there PW1 referred the deceased to Lagos University Teaching Hospital (LUTH). The Appellant and the four other persons that brought the deceased to PW1 took him to LUTH. About the morning of 10-07-07, they brought back the corpse of the deceased with the story that there was no oxygen to manage the deceased at LUTH, so they decided to take the deceased to Ikeja Teaching Hospital where he died on the way.  PW1 stated that his hospital which was a primary health care facility had no mortuary, so the deceased was taken by the Appellant and the four other persons for autopsy at another medical facility.

    PW3, a consultant pathologist and specialist or morbid anatomist, did the post mortem examination on the deceased on 10-07-07. He observed that the deceased had external injury comprising bruises and contusion on the right shoulder. The injury extended to the upper hand. According to PW3 there was no other external injury. PW3 stated that upon opening the body they saw fracture of the 5th rib on the left side and collection of about 50 milles of blood on the left side of the chest cavity and collection of 200 milles of blood in the brain. PW3 also stated that the head had no external injury.  PW3 opined that the cause of death was due to massive haemorrhage to the brain caused by “blunt forced injury”. The Appellant’s version was that the deceased was his apprentice and used to stay with him. That the deceased came back to the house late on 9-7-07. He punished the deceased by kneeling. While the deceased was on his knees, he went into his room.  Within a short interval one of the Appellant’s brothers rushed into his room to inform him the deceased was seen lying on the ground floor. He went to the scene. There the Appellant discovered the deceased unconscious. He took the deceased for medical treatment. The deceased did not recover consciousness. He died. The Appellant concluded the deceased jumped to his death from the balcony of the two storey building where they lived.

    The High Court accepted the version of the Respondent. It found the Appellant guilty of murder and convicted him as charged.  The Appellant was unhappy with the decision of the High Court.  He filed a notice of appeal with eight grounds of appeal on 5-11-10, questioning the decision. In his brief of argument the Appellant distilled these issues for determination –

    (a) Whether the testimony of PW3 (consultant Pathologist) was direct evidence and could be relied upon to establish the guilt of the Appellant.

    (b) Whether the evidence proffered by the prosecution proved the charge of murder against the Appellant beyond reasonable doubt.

    (c) Whether the Lower Court properly evaluated the evidence before it, before coming to a finding of guilt of the Appellant.

    Arguing the first issue, the Appellant contended that the PW3, a pathologist, was not an eye witness to the crime, nor did the circumstantial evidence surrounding the death of the deceased pin the crime on the Appellant, therefore the lower Court was wrong to hold that the PW3 gave direct evidence of the cause of death of the deceased as having arisen from a fall from a push on a balcony of a two storey building as his said expert evidence is unreliable and does not accord with reason, nor is the expert evidence cogent, compelling and conclusive vide the cases of Attorney-General of Oyo State v. Fairlakes Hotels (1989) 5 NWLR (pt.121) 285; (1989) LPELR-625(SC), Lori v. State (1980) 1-2 SC 11 at 22; (1980) LPELR-1794(SC), Abieke and Anor. v. State (1976) 10 SC 255 at 265; (1975) LPELR-8042(SC), Adepetu v. State (1998) 9 NWLR (pt.565) 185 at 223 -224; (1998) LPELR-135(SC).

    Arguing the second issue to the effect that, although the death of the deceased was established, the five witnesses that gave evidence for the Respondent at the lower Court did not establish beyond reasonable doubt the cause of death of the deceased in that the PW1 and the PW2 testified that the deceased sustained head injury from a fall which caused his death; whereas the PW3, the pathologist, testified that the deceased had no external head injury nor fracture of the bone of the head at the time he performed post mortem examination on the deceased on 10-7-07, a day after the incident which, according to the Appellant, is a material contradiction which created reasonable doubt and made it unsafe for the lower Court to base the conviction of the Appellant thereon vide Ogoala v. State (1991) 2 NWLR (pt.175) 509 at 536; (1991) LPELR-2307(SC. He was also argued on the second issue that there is no evidence to link the Appellant with the death of the deceased, nor did the evidence for the Respondent rule out the possibility of the death of the deceased from other causes, so the case against the Appellant that he actually killed the deceased and the cause of the death of the deceased were not proved beyond reasonable doubt vide Gira v. State (1996) 4 NWLR (pt.443) 375;(1996) LPELR-1322(SC), Nwaeze v. State (1996) 2 NWLR (pt.428) 1;(1996) LPELR-2091(SC).

    Arguing the third issue for determination, the Appellant contended that at best the evidence against the Appellant was based on suspicion which does not take the place of legal proof of an offence beyond reasonable doubt vide Onah v. State (1985) 12 SC 61; (1985) LPELR-2668(SC).

    In determining the appeal, the Court held that the lower Court was in error in making use of the statements of the witnesses to the police who did not testify in the case to find that the Appellant was responsible for the death of the deceased by deliberately pushing the deceased to death from a balcony of a two storey building. Onwe v. The State (1975) N.S.C.C. 375 at 381 -382;(1972) LPELR-2708(SC). In addition, the Court noted that the witnesses whose statements were compiled in Exhibit P7 were not presented for cross-examination at the lower Court. The Court stated that it has been held that the evidence of a witness who was not presented for cross-examination or whose evidence was untested under cross-examination by the failure to put him for cross-examination after his evidence-in-chief has no probative value vide the cases of Shofolahan v. State (2013) 17 NWLR (pt.1383) 281 at 320 -321;(2013) LPELR-20998(CA), Al Mustapha v. State (2013) 17 NWLR (pt.1383) 350 at 423 -424;(2013) LPELR-20995(CA). The Court stated that outside the so-called corroborative evidence of the witnesses that were not called to testify, there is no scrap of evidence, direct or circumstantial, to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant murdered the deceased.

    The Court further noted that the other reason the lower Court gave for the conviction of the Appellant was that PW3, the morbid anatomist, gave “direct evidence” of the cause of death of the deceased. The Court noted that PW3 is a pathologist/morbid anatomist. He examined the corpse of the deceased.  He did not witness how the deceased met his death. Therefore PW3 was not in a position to give direct evidence of the cause of death of the deceased.  The Court held that the lower Court was, accordingly, in error in holding that PW3 gave direct evidence of the cause of death of the deceased. The evidence of PW3 was based on his post mortem examination of the deceased. Thus it is opinion evidence of an expert vide sections 67 -76 (especially Section 68) of the Evidence Act 2011 (Evidence Act) dealing with opinion or expert evidence. The Court held that it is not direct evidence.

    Finally the Court noted that flowing from the fact that the Appellant did not admit killing the deceased by pushing him from the balcony of a two storey building, the lower Court went too far in its judgment to hold and infer that because the Appellant was allegedly with the deceased at the material time when there was no firm cogent, compelling and conclusive evidence to lead and did not lead to the irresistible or inevitable/unavoidable conclusion that the Appellant was with the deceased and actually murdered the deceased vide the cases of Ukorah v. State (1977) 4 S.C. 167; (1977) LPELR-3345(SC), Adie v. State (1980) 1 -2 S.C. 116; (1980) LPELR-176(SC) and Lori v. State (1980) 1-2 SC 11 at 22; (1980) LPELR-1794(SC).  The Court further held that the surrounding circumstances of the case only cast a thick cloud of suspicion on the Appellant that he had the opportunity to kill the deceased. But evidence of suspicion no matter how strong and/or evidence of the opportunity to commit the offence charged cannot replace legal proof of the commission of the criminal allegation against the person charged with the offence vide Abieke and Anor. v. State (1975) N.S.C.C. 404 at 408; (1975) LPELR-8042(SC). The Court held that from the pattern of the extra judicial statements of the Appellant in Exhibits P and P1 and his sworn evidence, the Appellant lied on circumstances that led to the death of the deceased; but in the absence of evidence positively linking the Appellant with the death of the deceased and/or that the Appellant in fact killed the deceased, the lies per se and the bad image or demenour of the Appellant in the witness box cannot ground his conviction for the offence charged vide Omogodo v. State (1981) N.S.C.C. 119 at 128; (1981) LPELR-2644(SC) and Okpere v. State (1971) 1 All N.L.R. 1 at 5; (1971) LPELR-2519(SC.

    In the result, the Court found merit in the appeal and thereby allowed it and quashed the conviction and sentence imposed on the Appellant by the High Court. Accordingly, the Court entered a verdict of not guilty for the Appellant and thereby acquitted and discharged the Appellant of the offence charged.

     

    • Edited by LawPavilion

    LawPavilion Citation: (2015) LPELR-                              24534(CA)

     

     

     

     

     

  • Commission launches complaints boxes in Lagos

    The National Complaints Commission (NCC) has launched complaints’ boxes in Lagos State.

    Launching the transparent boxes at its former office at the National Assembly Complex in Tafawa Balewa Square (TBS), Lagos, the Federal Commissioner, Funso Olukoga, said people could drop their written complaints  inside the boxes.

    He said the commission would look into the  complaints, adding that the boxes, which have the commission’s name inscribed on them, would be positioned in conspicuous locations  for easy access by people.

    Such places include: local council development authority (LCDA) offices, hospitals, eateries, airport, seaport, market places, and hotels.

    Although the commission resolved 754 cases this year compared to 338 the previous year, Olukoga said the commission could have performed better, but for ‘’recalcitrant respondents’’.

    Recalcitrant respondents, he said, constitute a challenge to the commission, adding that where it is faced with such respondents, the commission is empowered to issue summons against them.

    “When we issue summon, it becomes an offence for such respondents to stay away,”he said.

    “In the coming year, a lot is going to be done to ensure that recalcitrant respondents are sanctioned for not responding to invitations. We want to ensure that respondents realise that the commission has teeth and can bite.

    ‘’That way we hope more cases would be resolved when more respondents come forward,” he said.

    The commissioner said the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has helped the commission to resolve a lot of cases that hitherto would have gone to court.

  • Public complaints commission to start prosecutions soon

    The law establishing the Public Complaints Commission is now being reviewed to give it powers to  prosecute cases.

    The Federal Commissioner in Lagos State , Mr. Funso Olukoga, made this known during the annual press conference of the commission held yesterday at the former National Assembly Complex, Tafawa Balewa Square (TBS), Lagos.

    Olukoga  disclosed that proposals for the  review of the act is presently undergoing the different stages, including inputs from the different states of the federation so that the commission “would not just bark but also be able to bite”.

    He explained that the review which would entail constitutional amendment would empower the commission to sanction recalcitrant respondents and prosecute certain offences in the courts.

    He said the issue of recalcitrant respondents has been a challenge to the activities of the commission.

    The commissioner disclosed that the number of complaints received this year rose to 754 from 338 received last year.

    He said the achievement was made possible with the adoption of new methods introduced into its investigation strategies and the application of modern information technology.

    “The rise in the number of complaints is clear evidence that the commission is becoming known better in Lagos and the residents are becoming aware of their rights to challenge what they considered as administrative injustice on the part of the public and private institutions”.

    Olukoga also gave a sectoral account of the activities of the commission called on Nigerian Communication Commission to rescue mobile phone users from undue advertisement drive.

    He said his commission received several complaints about unsolicited calls from network service providers advertising their products.

    He said: “Some question the propriety of preceding a caller tune with an advertisement when calling a number, others find the frequency of unsolicited calls distractive and oppressive”.

    He urged the NCC to  intervene by investigating and sanctioning erring network service providers to reduce unacceptable and unfair trade practices.

    He reported that investigation lamented that bank customers are still subjected to poor services in spite of new service charges imposed on them while cases of malfunctioning ATM were very common.

    Despite  the fact that customers are now charged for using ATMs other than those where their accounts are domiciled, the situation has not improved over what it was last year, adding “one would have expected a higher quality of service commensurate with the new charges”.

    The Public Complaints Commissioner urged the Nigeria Civil Aviation Authority (NCAA) to beam its searchlight on the quality of services rendered by airline operators especially domestic flight operators.

    “We are concerned with how the airline handles their operation from purchase of air tickets to cabin services. Flight delays and cancellations appear to be the rule rather than exceptions”, he lamented.

     

     

  • NERC: Tariff hiking commission?

    •Consumers are in for dark times ahead as another tariff hike takes effect this month

    Electricity consumers in Nigeria must have concluded that the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) is set up for the sole purpose of increasing electricity tariff and inflicting pain on the consumer. And on the face of it, NERC does not seem to do anything else nor is it remembered for carrying out any regulatory functions since its inception about seven years ago.

    NERC’s announcement last week of another tariff hike this month must have left the long-suffering Nigerian electricity consumer in deep angst. This is probably the third this year in a power environment that is rancid with graft, mindless opportunism, inadequate supply and shoddy service. The consumer is paying too much as it is and cannot see any justification for paying more.

    But NERC cites a $1 increase in the price of gas to power plants as the major driver of this review. Other factors warranting this current tariff review include inflation, foreign exchange rate and power generation capacity. Speaking during the meeting with industry stakeholders on the bi-annual minor review of the Multi-Year Tariff Order – 2 (MYTO), NERC vice chairman, Mr. Mohammed Bello rued the incongruence of a necessary upward review of tariff though power situation had yet to improve.

    Bello noted: “From what I have seen in the initial report, not much has changed. The tariff review is a sensitive issue to the consumer who considers paying higher and not seeing improvement in electricity supply. But there is a general consensus that this is the way to go. By paying what is due this is how the power will begin to improve.”

    Obviously the consumer is not part of this consensus and the new hike is bound to make him inconsolable, as he seems to have borne the brunt of what may be described as endless shenanigans in Nigeria’s power sector.

    One year after the Federal Government divested substantially and privatized its interest in the power sector, situations have regressed in all the value chains of generation, transmission and distribution. While both the generation and distribution arms have been divested to private investors, transmission remains with the government under a lease management arrangement. Though this fundamental restructuring of the system was meant to engender market competitiveness and efficiency, the reverse has been the case.

    Power generation target was set at 6000 mega watts (mw) at the beginning of the year. By August it was scaled down to 5000mw and now, as the year ends in a few days, even that will not be met. Only 3,750mw is being generated currently and NERC will base its retail tariff for the next six months effective December 1, 2014 on this quantum of generation. But the peak demand for power in the country now is estimated at 12,800mw.

    Ironically, Transmission Company of Nigeria, (TCN) the firm solely responsible for this leg of the chain still does not have capacity to transmit even this meager 3,750mw. It is said that about 80mw of currently generated power still gets ‘stranded’ for lack of transmission capacity.

    Distribution is another sordid tale of lack of commitment by the new owners to make fresh investment; refusal to upgrade to pre-paid meters and endless agitation for tariff increase.

    The result is that so far, the privatization of Nigeria’s power sector has been a debacle with the consumer caught in a most insouciant matrix of the Federal Government and its cronies.

    It is most unconscionable that government seems to be playing games with what is probably the most important infrastructure for growth and development. Since the era of former President Olusegun Obasanjo, it seems that the more funds sunk into the quest for electricity, the more it seems to require. Recently, N213 billion cheap fund was approved for these privatized firms by the government. Why would government throw taxpayers’ money to investors who have not shown any cause that they need such aid?

    We aver that government should retrace its steps and approach its power reform programme with a modicum of transparency and accountability.   Lest, we are in for a long night — and there is a limit to the extortion the people can bear.

  • Commission seizes illegal broadcast equipment

    Commission seizes illegal broadcast equipment

    Operatives of the Nigerian Copyright Commission (NCC) in Enugu have seized broadcast communication contrivances estimated at N25 million from electronic pirates.

    The raids leading to the seizures were carried out in Enugu metropolis and Abakaliki in Ebonyi State.

    The Enugu Zonal Manager of the NCC, Mrs. Ngozi Okeke told reporters that the operation took copyright inspectors to Asata, Uwani, Achara Layout and Agbani roads, all in Enugu metropolis while they covered Oraifite Street, Water Works Road and their environs in Abakaliki, Ebonyi State.

    Contrivances confiscated included three Humax decoders, one Dstv decoder, 20 strong decoders, two CTL decoders, two GOtv decoders and three AD/Sport smart cards.

    Also confiscated were one Al Jazeera smart card, one DStv smart card, four cash receipt booklets, three cash record notebooks and remote controls.

    According to Okeke, the two-day anti-piracy operation in the area of broadcast was headed by Macfoy Akachukwu in company of other copyright inspectors.

    The operations, she said, involved cutting and destruction of cable wires and boosters used by the pirates in the illegal distribution of content and signals.

    Other items used in the illegal connection and distribution were dismantled.

    Mrs. Okeke appealed to members of the public to heed the advice of the Director-General of the commission to continue to support it in its renewed commitment to fighting piracy and its attendant challenges.