The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Executive Order

  • Executive Order likely on state legislature, judiciary autonomy

    Should the recommendation of the Presidential Committee on the Implementation of Autonomy of State Legislature and State Judiciary be accepted, an Executive Order might soon be issued by President Muhammadu Buhari on the matter.

    The panel, chaired by the former Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, submitted its report on Tuesday to the President at the State House, Abuja.

    It recommended the signing of an Executive Order by the President for the immediate kick-off of the implementation of the autonomy for states legislature and the judiciary.

    Speaking with reporters at the State House after the submission, Malami said: “Well, substantially, arising from the position of the President relating to the deepening of democracy relating to upholding the provisions of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended, within the context of governance, Mr. President had sometimes back in March, 2019, precisely, put in place a committee.

    “That committee was mandated to package and make recommendations as it relates to the application, operations and observance of Section 121 of the Constitution which establishes the autonomy of the States Legislature and Judiciary.

    “So, the intention of the committee is to see what can be done with effect to the Constitutional order with respect to the autonomy of the states’ legislature and judiciary in the context of the provisions of the Constitution.

    Read Also: Updated: Sanwo-Olu signs executive order on traffic, refuse mgt

    “So, today (yesterday), the committee has concluded its assignment substantially by way of making available to the President, an interim report indicating the modalities this should follow with due observance of the provisions of the section 121 and due observance of the sustenance of the independence of the States Legislature and Judiciary.

    “So, it is about the constitutional order; it is about the sustenance of the requirements of the constitution as it relates to the independence of the legislature and the judiciary, and the committee has presented its report to Mr. President.”

    On how soon the implementation will commence, he said: “Well, the independence has already been established by the constitution. So, it is now about the implementation of the modalities and amongst the recommendations made to Mr. President is an Executive Order by the President designed to give effect to the implementation of Section 121 which constitutionally establishes the independence of the two arms of government.

    “So, it is about the application, Operation and enforcement of the provisions of the Constitution and with the signing of the Executive Order, l believe the necessary formalities of the whole hearted implementation of this provisions will come into effect.”

    On his continued membership of the committee despite cabinet dissolution, Malami said: “I am here based on the powers of Mr. President who exercises the powers of his prerogatives to appoint anyone, and as a Nigerian for that matter. This remains a prerogative of Mr. President.”

  • Agbakoba: Restructuring possible without constitution amendment

    National Intervention Movement Co-chairman Dr Olisa Agbakoba (SAN) Tuesday said the country can be restructured administratively pending constitution amendment.

    According to him, while restructuring, which he described as power transfer “from exclusive Federal list to concurrent state list” will involve constitutional alteration, administrative devolution of powers could be deployed in the interim.

    He said it will involve administrative transfer of power from the centre to states pending constitutional power devolution.

    This, he said, will be a temporary measure before constitutional restructuring.

    “The Federal Government can administratively devolve powers to states by Executive Order,” Agbakoba said.

    The former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) President, who chairs the Peoples Trust Party (PTP), spoke at a briefing in Lagos.

    Agbakoba, who also chairs the third force political parties, said restructuring should be top on the list of political agenda.

    “The Constitution requires that two-thirds of the 36 states, the Federal Government and the National Assembly participate in restructuring. That may take a bit of time.

    “There are things that can be done immediately through administrative restructuring. The Federal Government can make statutory transfers to the states.

    “For example, the President can receive money for a Federal road in Anambra and transfer the money to the state government to execute

    “There are so many things the Federal Government is doing. You see Minister of Transport Rotimi Amaechi and his power, works and housing counterpart Babatunde Fashola (SAN) everywhere, up and down. But there are commissioners of works.

    “The Federal Government can prepare the budgets, because under the Constitution, the Federal Government does roads. But if they budget for a particular road and it is touching two states – Lagos and Oyo for instance, you can call the governors and give them the money.

    “That way, you begin to free yourself from the challenges of a big federation. If we do this, we’ll see substantial change,” Agbakoba said.

    The SAN called for a national order, which he described as a stable arrangement of systems, as opposed to social chaos as seen in existing structures.

    “It is crucial to stabilise our national disunity. This is why restructure is vital. Examples of national order include: the treaty of Westphalia, the treaty of Vienna, the League of Nations, and Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) etc. In Nigeria, there is none. This is a big issue.

    “Without resolving issues around a stable national order, Nigeria will continue to be disunited. And we cannot move. This, therefore, is issue No.1 – the Big Issue,” he said.

    Tied to political devolution, Agbakoba said, is the notion of strengthening institutions.

    To him, the Federal Government is weak because it is made up of weak institutions.

    He suggested the adoption of Chapter 9 of the South African Constitution, so that institutions such as the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the Police, anti-graft agencies, Judiciary, Accountant General, among others, are assured to work free of interference.

    This, he believes, will limit impunity and improve independent action, as according to him, “strong institution is a critical big issue for good governance”.

    Agbakoba described the justice sector as dead, adding that legal failure has had massive impact on economic development.

    “The legal and justice sector has suffered institutional failure over the last three decades. Comprehensive and radical reform of the legal and justice sectors is overdue. The rule of law is vital to economic development. But lip service is paid to this vital process.

    “Investors, whether local and international, will not invest in a lawless country. We must give urgency to this sector and reverse legal failure. A speed of justice strategy will reduce delays.”

    On the way out, he called for new methods of dispute resolution, such as Alternative Dispute Resolution, small claims courts, traditional and customary arbitration, as well as a major centre for investment disputes resolution.

    He advocated the establishment of quasi-judicial sector-based administrative tribunals, following the UK example.

    “In England there exist many administrative courts to cover telecommunications, taxation, transportation, insurance, education, financial services, trade, investments, etc.

    “The impact on Nigeria will be enormous as consideration may be given to devolving judicial power from Federation to state level,” he said.

    Agbakoba said the government must pay attention to the three critical policies of economic governance: monetary, fiscal and trade.

    On monetary policy, he called for a reduction of lending rates to single digit to encourage business growth. To him, borrowing at 20 per cent is crazy.

    On fiscal policy, Agbakoba advocated the expansion of money supply to meet expenditure and other needs –without which government cannot fund its money requirements.

    He said import substitution should be used to encourage local industries, adding that the notion of fair trade is vital to protect industries and help them grow.

    “The priority of economic governance is to diversify the economy and make it less dependent on imports. Nigeria has long depended on crude oil as if it is the only hydrocarbon to the utter neglect of gas.

    “The economy heavily relies on oil revenue and is vulnerable to price shocks in oil and the associated risk to national stability. The most recent volatility in oil prices suggest that we must start to diversify our revenue income streams by developing non-oil tradable sectors.

    “A clear strategy, model and plan for economic diversification both horizontally and vertically is necessary. Horizontal diversification should explore new opportunities in the same oil and gas sector,” Agbakoba said.

     

  • Ekiti: APC, Bamisile hail Fayemi over executive order

    More commen-dations have been coming the way of Ekiti State governor, Kayode Fayemi, for signing an Executive Order abrogating the collection of illegal fees and levies in public schools. The state chapter of the All Progressives Congress (APC) praised Fayemi for his determination to revive education and give priority to teachers’ welfare. Also, the party’s House of Representatives candidate for Ekiti South Federal Constituency 2, Mr. Olufemi Bamisile, said the executive order would grant more Ekiti children access to education.

    The state APC Publicity Secretary, Mr. Ade Ajayi, in a statement yesterday, said Fayemi’s gesture has shown that the current government has the interest of the masses at heart. While further applauding the signing of the Executive Order, Ajayi facilitated with the people of the state because it would provide free and compulsory education in government primary and secondary schools. Ajayi said the era of collection of illegal levies and fees in public primary and secondary schools by some principals, head and class teachers were gone and gone forever, adding that it would afford poor parents to send their children to school.

    Bamisile said the imposition of education levies on pupils in private and public schools showed that former Governor Ayo Fayose was not a friend of the masses as he claimed to be. The former Ekiti Assembly Speaker said the abrogation of the levies by Fayemi was “a declaration of emergency on the education sector”, noting that the masses will benefit from the executive order irrespective of their political backgrounds.

     

  • ‘Buhari tightening tax, money laundering with Executive Order’

    The Presidency on Wednesday said that the Muhammadu Buhari administration is stepping up the regulations on money laundering and tax evasion by releasing a new Executive Order number eight.
    The new order, according to a statement by the Senior Special Assistant on Media and publicity, Garba Shehu, is tagged Voluntary Offshore Assets Regularization Scheme (VOARS).
    According to him, the new Executive Order (008) took effect from Monday, October 8, 2018, the same day it was signed by President Buhari.
    He said “By this order, Nigerian taxpayers who hold offshore assets and incomes are expected to, within a period of 12 months, declare voluntary those assets and pay taxes on them. When they do this, they should expect to derive certain specified benefits.
    According to the order, “any taxpayer who truthfully and voluntarily complies with the conditions of the scheme, pays a one-time levy of 35 percent on the total offshore assets or pays all outstanding taxes, penalties and interest after forensic audit of their offshore assets and income shall obtain immunity from prosecution for tax offenses and offences related to offshore assets, among others.
    “Equally, failure of any defaulting taxpayer to take advantage of this scheme shall, at the expiration of the scheme result in investigation and enforcement procedures concerning offshore assets anywhere in the world pursuant to information now readily available through automatic exchange of information between Nigeria and foreign countries.”
    He said that in accordance with the new order, the Federal Government, through the office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice will set up a VOARS in Switzerland for all categories of taxpayers who have defaulted in the declaration of their offshore assets, payment of taxes due and collectible subject to the fulfillment of the terms and conditions as stipulated in the order, or any other subsequent complementary regulations that follow.
    To avoid the abuse of the process, he said that the Federal Government makes clear that the “scheme is open to all persons, entities, and their intermediaries holding offshore assets and are in default of their tax obligations in any way, including those who are not already under investigation by law enforcement agencies in Nigeria or any other country and have not been charged with any crimes including theft of public funds or obtaining offshore assets through corrupt practices.”
    In signing the order, President Buhari noted that under the Nigerian law, every citizen has the duty to declare his or her income and assets and pay taxes on them but regretted that this, in most instances, had not been the case.
     “The sad reality is that efforts to recover these taxes from defaulters through litigation are often frustrated by the complications caused by the change in the character and nature of such assets, insufficient financial intelligence, long delays in courts, among several other reasons,” the President said.
    President Buhari was also optimistic that the new scheme will help to facilitate the expedient regularization of offshore assets connected to Nigeria and lead to “a new expanded tax base for the Federal Government, and also fund the Nigeria Infrastructure Fund in Switzerland.”

  • The legality of Executive Orders

    THE other day, the Presidency announced, with gusto, that President Muhammadu Buhari had signed Executive Order 6 into law. Executive Order 6 means there have been five earlier Executive Orders! Executive Order 6 whose short title, “Preservation of Suspicious Assets Connected with Corruption and Other Related Offences”. The “Order”, smacks of criminal law legislation, enacted by the president, who is the head of the executive arm of government!

    I submit, to start with, that the Order which seeks to empower the president or the agencies of the federal government to impound any landed property that is subject to litigation pending the determination of such a suit by a court of competent jurisdiction, contravenes all the known laws in the democratic world, where the rule of law and the due process of law hold sway. It stands the democratic logic on its head: presume guilty before being proved innocent!

    The doctrine of separation of powers among the three arms of government—the legislature, the executive and the judicature—is rigidly enshrined, respectively, in sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as altered), which the president solemnly swore to uphold. This doctrine was adopted to provide checks and balances among the three branches of government, a fortiori, to preclude the exercise of arbitrary power.

    In Myers v. United States 272 US 52, Brandeis J. of the US Supreme Court stated, with approval, that the “The doctrine of separation of powers was adopted by the Convention of 1787 not to promote efficiency but to preclude the exercise of arbitrary power.” This case, a locus classicus, has had a hortatory effect on a long line of Nigeria’s Supreme Court cases. In Unongo v. Aper Aku (1983) 2 SCNLR 332 @361, for instance, the Supreme Court, per Kayode Eso (JSC, as he then was), observed: “The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1979 (read 1999) … is very unique, compared with the previous constitutions, in that the executive, the legislature and the judicature are each established as a separate organ of government. There is what can be termed a cold, calculating rigidity in this separation…”

     Aside from the executive’s involvement in the legislative process, whereby the president assents to a Bill that has been duly passed by the two chambers of the National Assembly to become law, I know no zone of twilight in which the executive and the legislature possess concurrent authority to legislate. So, from where does the Nigerian president derive the authority to legislate, interpret and enforce laws, which executive orders and proclamations are?

    The president’s advisers would readily point at section 5 (1) (a) of the 1999 Constitution, which perspicuously provides that “…the executive powers of the federation—(a) shall be vested in the president…”, subject (it should be noted) to the provisions of the constitution and to the provisions of any laws made by the National Assembly. That section further states that the executive powers vested in the president could also be exercised by either the vice-president, any of the ministers of government and officers in the public service of the federation. Quite clearly, it would be asinine to suggest that the vice-president, the ministers and officers in the public service of the federation are directly or indirectly constitutionally empowered to issue executive orders and proclamations having the force of law!

    Section 5 of the 1999 Constitution can, therefore, not be the source of the executive orders and proclamations issued by the Nigerian president.

    In all probability, the president has decided to take a leaf out of the practice in the US, where the presidents issue executive orders and proclamations with abandon, even if unconstitutionally. US presidents have based their executive orders on Section 1 of Article II of the US 1787 Constitution, which nebulously provides: “The executive power shall be vested in a president of the United States of America”. That provision has been described as being maddeningly vague. In the epic case of Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer 343 US 579 (1952), the court found that the president had acted without statutory or constitutional authority. Besides, the court declined to entertain the contention that presidential power to issue executive orders should be implied from the aggregate of his powers under the constitution. The court further explained that the president’s power to issue executive orders must stem from either an act of Congress or from the constitution itself.

    However, Dames & Moore v. Reagan 453 US 654 (1981) dealt with President Jimmy Carter’s Executive Order freezing Iranian assets in the US, in November, 1979. The court, in that case, found that Congress had acquiesced in the president’s action and, accordingly, ruled in favour of that Order because, traditionally, executive orders and proclamations involving foreign policy and security are given great leeway by the courts. Other than such issues, US Courts have severely criticized the issuance of executive orders by American presidents. Justice William Howard Taft, the only individual to have served as both the president and the Chief Justice of the US, in “Our Chief Magistrate and His Powers”, (New York, 1916), posited: “The true view of executive functions is, as I conceive it, that the president can exercise no power which cannot be fairly and reasonably traced to some specific grant of power or justly implied and included within such express grant as proper and necessary in its exercise. Such specific grant must be either in the federal constitution or in an act of Congress passed in pursuance thereof.”

    A long line of the US Supreme Court cases, now loci classici, reprobates the whole concept of executive orders and proclamations as they are neither specifically provided for in the 1787 Constitution (as amended) nor defined in any statute, authorizing quasi-executive legislation.

    Executive orders in the US are generally directed at, and govern actions by, government officials and agencies, unlike in Nigeria, where executive orders are targeted at individuals directly, thereby flagrantly infringing on their fundamental human rights. If US presidents issue executive orders, they also claim to rely on a Congressional Statute, the Neutrality Act (1794), which gave the executive the power to prosecute those who violated President Washington’s proclamations. There is no such statute in Nigeria. So, what is the source of executive orders in Nigeria? One of our problems is that Nigerians, including lawyers, are hardly litigious. So, every dictatorial autocratic act of government goes!

    It is sad that Nigerian leaders luxuriate in photocopying the negative aspects of the US Constitution as though Nigeria and America shared a community of socio-cultural and politico-economic antecedents, ignoring such positive areas of the US Constitution as a rigid adherence to the Rule of Law and the Due Process of the law (usually set aside in Nigeria, with abandon and without demur, in favour of “national interest”), the democratic principle, respect for the citizens’ fundamental human rights and human dignity, catering for the welfare and security of the  citizens, etc.

    Executive Order 6 is a classic example of Nigerian leaders’ penchant for setting all democratic principles at nought; it is designed to usurp the functions of the legislature (making laws) and the judicature (interpreting and enforcing laws) contrary to section 36 (5) of the 1999 Constitution (as altered), which stipulates that “Every person who is charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed to be innocent until he is proved guilty.”

     

    • Akiri is a Lagos based attorney.

     

  • Executive Order No. 6

    According to Wikipedia, an online research engine, executive orders are issued by “Presidents of the United States to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage operations within the government.” It goes on; “at the federal level of government … laws are made almost exclusively by legislation…. The president can issue executive orders pursuant to a grant of discretion from congress, or under the inherent powers that office holds to deal with certain matters which have the force of law.”

    We have quoted copiously from the popular online research engine, for a comparative appreciation of the Presidential Executive Order No 6 (PEO6) issued by President Muhammadu Buhari, an action that has raised the alarm in the National Assembly and across the country. That PEO6 is for the Preservation of Suspicious Assets Connected with Corruption and Other Relevant Offences. By the order, the executive branch of government is empowering its agencies to determine a suspicious asset, seize and preserve same, perhaps pending a conviction by the courts.

    In essence, the president is imbuing the executive branch with powers to do an act not already appropriated to it by the legislature, in the war against corruption. Considering that our country is a constitutional democracy, it is appropriate to ask, whether under the 1999 constitution, (as amended), the president has the powers to make what amounts to a subsidiary legislation, as he did by the PE06?

    In our view, the president cannot under the guise of a PEO usurp the power to make a legislation, considering that our presidential system of government, modelled after that of the United States of America, operates what is commonly referred to as separation of powers. By that doctrine clearly enshrined in our constitution, the presidential system of government is run on a tripod – the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. The legislature is empowered to make laws, the executive the power to execute laws made by the legislature and the judiciary powers to interpret the laws.

    For the executive to make what is referred to as a subsidiary legislation, it must derive such powers from an act of parliament. Any legislation made outside the purview of such empowerment is ultra vires the constitution. For the avoidance of doubt, section 4(1) of the constitution provides: “The legislative powers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria shall be vested in the National Assembly for the federation which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives.” The section goes further to invest the state Houses of Assembly with powers to make laws for the states.

    Section 5(1)(a) of the constitution on its part, vests: “The executive powers of the federation … in the president and may, subject as aforesaid and to the provisions of any law made by the National Assembly, be exercised by him directly or through the Vice President or officers in the public service of the federation.” Sub-section (b) provides that the executive power “shall extend to the execution and maintenance of this constitution, all laws made by the National Assembly and to all matters with respect to which the National Assembly has, for the time being, power to make laws.”

    Until the legislature donates powers to the executive, the president is not imbued with the power to make a law, which could entitle any of its agencies to seize the assets of citizens without the authority of the court. By section 6(1) of the constitution: “The judicial powers of the Federation shall be vested in the courts to which this section relates, being courts established for the Federation.” Furthermore, section 6(6) provides that the judicial powers: “shall extend to all matters between persons, or between government or authority and to any person in Nigeria… for the determination of any question as to the civil rights and obligations of that person.”

    Again, under the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), and other extant laws of the country, it is courts that have the power to order interim or final forfeiture of assets, suspected to be proceeds of corruption. So, from which law did the president derive power to make the purported PEO6? Without a law empowering the president to make such an order, we urge him to quickly withdraw what could be interpreted as executive lawlessness. If he doesn’t, there should be a judicial review, to determine if the president has engaged in a power-grab, which is undemocratic.

    Unless stopped, the PEO6 could entitle a partisan president to seize the assets of his political opponents, without an order of court, in the guise of fighting corruption. Such unconstitutional exercise of power could lead to a charge of fascism, particularly in an election period; and we consider it a clear throw-back to the military era.

     

  • What Executive Order No. 5 means for Nigeria

    In the history of any nation, there comes a time when critical decisions have to be taken in order to quickly move to a new level of development of the nation, so as to more effectively protect and secure the citizens. The Executive Order No. 5 could not have come at a better time than now. In the history of our country, never has any administration shown such commitment to strengthen the role of science, technology and innovation in nation-building.

    It is important to stress that the present administration is determined to create an enabling environment, to mobilize local investment and attract more foreign direct investment into the country and at the same time empower Nigerians, both young and old, to participate actively in the management of the economy. The present administration has recognized the use of Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) as well as the effective participation of our young people, professionals, and indigenous contractors and consultants as indispensable, if our dear country, Nigeria, is to become a truly great nation.

    The present Economic Development Plan, the National Economic Recovery and Growth Plan (NERGP) 2017-2020, has recognized that Science and Technology will drive productivity and economic activity in all sectors. For the first time, science, technology and innovation has been recognized as occupying the central place for all economic activities in all sectors in the country.

    I believe that this is a major achievement for our nation. What it means is that there is now a significant change in the mental attitude that we have towards science and technology. People now recognize the central role of science and technology in the economic development of our country.

    The Executive Order No. 5 is therefore the revolutionary instrument which the Buhari administration has deployed to redirect our economy, from its old, unsustainable path of being resource-based to a new, sustainable and inclusive path of being a knowledge and innovation driven economy. The Executive Order No. 5 is meant to promote patriotism, love of country and economic nationalism as potent tools for a new social engineering of our dear country. It will certainly trigger a silent revolution in how we think as a people and how we regard science and technology as the missing link in our quest to become a truly great nation.

    The Buhari administration expects that in the next 10-20 years, Nigerian companies and firms will be competing with the very best in other parts of the world for projects and contracts in international tenders. The Executive Order No. 5 is made up of 18 sections covering various headings: Preferences; Accreditation; Contract Award; Language of Contract; Capacity Development; Disqualification from Contract Award; Database of Experts in Nigeria; Expatriate Quota; Local Material; Tax Incentives; Punishment for violation of Executive Order; Presidential Monitoring and Evaluation Council; Member of the Council; Review of Order; Miscellaneous; Application; Definitions of Terms; Effective Date of the Order.

    The executive order enjoins procuring entities to give preference to Nigerian companies and firms when awarding contracts, in line with the Public Procurement Act, 2007. Hence Nigerian companies and indigenous firms have the opportunity more than ever before to participate in national development through the award of contracts and also to serve as consultants. The age of a firm will not be important, so long as it is legally registered and possesses requisite qualification, competence and experience in the management and execution of such contracts.

    The federal government will henceforth place premium on the use of indigenous professionals and firms in the design and execution of projects involving national security. Foreign experts will only be engaged on condition that such expertise is not available in Nigeria.  Even when they are engaged, Nigerian professionals would be attached to understudy them. Also all MDAs are to take steps to encourage indigenous professionals in the Diaspora to return home and use their expertise to develop Nigeria.

    Based on this, the Federal Ministry of Science and Technology, shall establish centres for acquisition of technology in the six geopolitical zones of the country. This will be used for the promotion of technology utilization, strengthening of technology management capability and information system.

    All foreign experts working in Nigeria have to be certified by the appropriate regulatory bodies. In such cases, efforts will be intensified to train Nigerians to have the same skills. No expatriate quota will be granted unless such skills are completely unavailable. In some special cases, foreign experts will be admitted into Nigeria under a special immigration classification so as to share knowledge with Nigerians.

    Goods that are consumed in very large quantities will have to be manufactured locally, in the shortest possible time. Designs for all contracts, programmes and projects will be in English language before such contracts are signed. The software for mapping solid minerals in Nigeria must be in English language. This Federal Executive Order No. 5 may be reviewed every five years by the Federal Executive Council (FEC).

    A Presidential Monitoring Evaluation Council with Mr. President as the chairman will oversee the general implementation of the executive order. The secretariat will be domiciled in the Federal Ministry of Science and Technology.

    The Federal Ministry of Science and Technology will do its utmost to ensure that both the letter and spirit of the Executive Order No. 5 are fully implemented. It is important to always remember that implementation of the executive order, will create wealth, reduce poverty and provide employment for our teaming youths. Once this executive order is fully implemented, Nigeria will never be the same again. The rise of Nigeria to greatness and the happiness of Nigerians will be guaranteed.

    Never again will Nigeria continue to import from other countries, many of her needs. Never again will Nigeria continue to employ foreign experts, to do work that Nigerians can do. Never again will Nigeria continue to use foreign companies and firms to execute important projects, without having Nigerians to understudy them. Never again will Nigeria not be able to feed herself.  Never again will Nigeria continue to export crude oil and import refined petroleum products. Never again will Nigeria continue to export wood, only to import toothpicks. Never again will Nigeria with cash in her hands, look for essential equipment for her military, yet not having a single country willing to sell.

    From now on, Nigeria will be self-reliant, producing locally many of the things she needs and exporting the excess to other countries. From now on, Nigeria will be able to add value, by using science, technology and innovation to convert her huge and abundant resources to products and services needed at home thereby creating more wealth, more jobs and reducing poverty. From now on, Nigeria will solve the problem of removing the missing link in her search for greatness, by effectively utilizing science, technology and innovation in the important task of nation-building. By implementing this Executive Order No. 5, Nigeria will become a truly great nation, accomplishing great things, stable, united, peaceful, prosperous, secure at home, respected by others and ultimately emerge as a major force in the global arena, for the search of peace and prosperity in the world.

    So long as science, technology, and innovation are effectively deployed in nation building, the future of Nigeria is very bright. Nigeria will then be the nation on the mountain top, whose light will shine for all to see.

     

    • Excerpts of paper delivered by Dr. Onu, Minister of Science and Technology at a forum held at FIIRO auditorium, Oshodi, Lagos to sensitise the media on Executive Order No. 5.

  • Legality of Executive Order on seizure of assets

    SIR: It is trite that the power to issue executive orders is incidental to the powers vested in the president in a presidential democracy like ours. In the USA, the power is said to have been impliedly provided for in Article 2 of the US Constitution. Similarly, in Nigeria the power can be said to have been derived from Section 5 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as Amended

    Meanwhile, it is obvious from the said Section 5 that while the powers of the president above are wide, same powers along with the incidental executive orders are subject to the specific dictates of the constitution such as provisions on fundamental rights therein. Accordingly, where the exercise of such executive powers conflicts with fundamental rights, it shall be null and void and of no effect. See Ojukwu v. Governor of Lagos State (1986)

    According to President Buhari, the essence of the Executive Order No 6 of 2018 is “to restrict dealings in suspicious assets subject to investigation or inquiry bordering on corruption in order to prevent such assets from dissipation…” The implication of this order is that the moment a person is accused of corruption, rightly or wrongly, with cogent evidence or none, the assets of such person, tangible or intangible, can be seized without any court order. Similarly, the accused may not have the opportunity to approach the court to vacate the seizure until the investigation or trial is concluded even if it takes ages; neither would he be able to sell, lease, mortgage or otherwise raise earnings from the assets, even if the purpose is to raise money to hire lawyers to defend him at trial.

    The order is also capable of being easily used to cripple the opposition and critics by simply alleging them of corruption, freezing all their assets and means of livelihood, while subjecting them to indefinite criminal investigation or as long as the government remains in power.

    Given the above inevitable implications, can the order be said to be constitutional? Can it be said to be devoid of violating the fundamental rights jealously safeguarded by our sacrosanct constitution? Freezing, seizing or otherwise dealing with the assets of an accused person by the government is indisputably a limitation of the accused full enjoyment of his fundamental rights, which include right to be presumed innocent until found guilty by a competent court of law, right to defend himself, personally or by a lawyer of his choice, right to adequate facilities to prepare his defence, right to fair hearing and right against his property being compulsorily taken possession of.

    It is settled law that a limitation to a human right shall not be lawful, except it is necessary, proportional and is not capable of rendering the enjoyment of such right illusory or meaningless. Sections 24-34 of the EFCC Act and provisions of other relevant statutes have already provided for a democratic procedure for freezing/ seizing corruption related assets with the aim of preserving them, which procedure gave an accused person the opportunity of fair hearing in the matter in compliance with Section 36 of the Constitution, particularly 36(2)(a).

    The questions are: if there is a statute of this nature, with relevant constitutional safeguards, why then, this executive order, which gave unlimited discretion/powers to executing authorities? An order capable of causing array of injustices, hardships and negative implications as earlier identified above? If for instance, an accused person is, before and throughout his trial, subjected to the stated inhuman injustices and punishments, what meaning or value does his right to presumption of innocence have left?

     

    Ibikunle, Isaac M., 

    <ibikunleisaacm@gmail.com>

  • Buhari’s Executive Order a descent to fascism – PDP

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) on Friday rejected the sixth item of President Muhammadu Buhari’s Executive Order dealing with the seizure of suspicious assets.

    In a statement issued by its spokesman, Kola Ologbondiyan, the party condemned the Order, describing it as illegal, unconstitutional, reprehensible and in total disregard to the provisions of the Constitution.

    According to the PDP, the Nigerian Constitution does not, under any section, confer such fascist powers on the President in a democracy.

    It added that there can be no legitimate latitude of interpretation placed on sections 5 and 15 (5) of the 1999 Constitution cited as justifications for the order, that can excuse it.

    The statement said: “Therefore, President Buhari’s unilateral Executive Order is a travesty of justice and rule of law, as it vehemently seeks to hijack and usurp the powers of both the legislature and the courts and vest it on himself so that he can use same at will, as a political instrument, to haunt, traumatize, harass and victimize perceived political opponents.

    “In order words, Mr. President wants to change our democratic governance to a military regime, in line with his lamentation, two days ago, that the fight against corruption will be better under a military regime than under a democracy.

    “It is instructive to emphasize that the PDP is not in any way opposed to the fight against corruption. Rather, the party holds that the imposition of this Executive Order, which is radically at variance with the provisions of the constitution, is totally unacceptable.

    “PDP takes this Executive Order 6 of 2018 as a reenactment of the obnoxious Decree 2 of 1984, which incidentally was also an enactment under then military Head of State headed by Gen. Muhammadu Buhari, and this must not be permitted in our current democratic dispensation.

    “If allowed, this Order will confer limitless powers on Mr. President, whose administration’s penchant for violation of rules and order already suggests a readiness for autocracy and a drive towards fascism.

    “In a democracy, the role of the executive arm of government is to enforce court orders/judgments handed down based on the interpretation of existing laws. Any suggestion to the contrary, as clearly intended by this Executive Order, is totally an aberration and inconsistent with the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

    “We invite Nigerians and the international community to note the deliberate attempts by the Buhari administration to side-step the provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), usurp the powers of the legislature, the judiciary and impose an autocratic regime on our nation.

    “The PDP therefore charges the judiciary and the legislature to save our dear nation and her people from an imminent fascism by rejecting this obnoxious Executive Order.

    “Nigeria is a democratic state run by the dictates of the law and the constitution and not by the rule of the thumb of any elected officer.

    “Already, our lawyers are considering a legal action against the Federal Government on the illegality of Mr. President’s action in the interest of Nigeria and Nigerians.”

     

     

  • Executive Order boosts service delivery at airports

    The implementation of  the Executive Order on  the Ease of Doing Business has boosted service delivery at airports. The Order, which okays passengers screening through a single window by security personnel, has saved turnaround time for airlines and passengers, reports KELVIN OSA OKUNBOR.

    Passenger facilitation at airports has assumed new dimensions, thanks to the implementation of the Executive Order on  the  Ease of Doing Business signed last May 18 by Vice President  Yemi Osinbajo.

    In the last 10 months, passenger screening, check-in procedures and other processes have taken a new shape – no more lost hours for travellers.

    The Order has not only improved the architecture of security, but also prescribed the terms of engagement of uniformed personnel attached to critical units.

    It requires that staff members on duty should be properly identified by their uniforms and identity cards, while off-duty personnel are expected to stay away from the airport except with  the approval of the agency head.

    According to Osinbajo, aviation security personnel of the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) should address touting at airports.

    ”All non-official staff shall be removed from the secured areas of airports. No official of FAAN, Immigration, security agency or Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) or any other agency is to meet any non-designated dignitary at any secure areas of the airport,” The Vice President warned.

    He directed that the approved list of dignitaries to be received by protocol officers should be made available to AVSEC and other relevant agencies ahead of their arrival.

    ”Any  official caught soliciting or receiving bribes from passengers or other airport users shall be subject to immediate removal from post and will face  disciplinary as well as criminal proceedings in line with extant laws and regulations,’’ the Order said.

    Ten months on, passenger processing at airports and other screening procedures have been transformed.

    Investigations reveal that  it  takes less time for passengers and airlines to process check in procedures at the airports for the reworking of security architecture at the departure and arrival wings of the terminal building.

    Besides saving airlines and passengers time, there is a significant reduction in the procedure and processing of flights due to the elimination of multiple tables where passengers displayed either their luggage or travel documents.

    The controversial “Customs Table“ used by airlines have been removed at the Lagos International Airport to improve passengers’ profiling and check-in processes in line with globally accepted operational standards. The development, described as a win-win situation for passengers, airlines and security agencies, is a departure from the past.

    Before the implementation of the Executive Order, a long table was used by Nigeria Customs Service (NCS), National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA), Quarantine Service, Nigeria Immigration Service (NIS) and other agencies’ officials  to  allegedly extort money from passengers.

    This table before the implementation of Executive Order was responsible for the unnecessary delays in passengers’check-in, which sometimes ran into several hours.

    In an interview, FAAN Managing Director, Saleh Dunoma  said there was a paradigm shift at the airports since the order was signed.

    Dunoma confirmed that check in procedures and passenger processing had improved

    He said: “Desks that have been there for manual search are no longer there. The checks are being done at appropriate locations and this has created a tidy departure hall.

    “This has improved the ambience of the departure hall.’’

    An aviation security expert,  Group Captain John Ojikutu (rtd) commended the government for the new regulations, noting, however, that there was still room for improvement.

    Ojikutu, who is the and Managing Director of Centurion Securities Limited, said the removal of check-in tables was in line with the agitation by industry experts, who have, for years, called on the government to redesign the security procedure for passengers check-in.

    Also, Dana Air Group Managing Director, Mr. Jacky Hathirami, praised aviation agencies for the commitment they had so far exhibited in implementing the directive.

    He said: “Apart from the fact that aviation industry is critical to the economy, I believe the executive order has removed unnecessary bureaucracies at the airports, provide solutions to a lot of anomalies in the system.’’

    On the impact of the Ease of Doing Business at airports, Akwaaba African Travel Market organiser, Mr Ikechi Uko, commended FAAN for removing the long tables.

    Uko admitted  that passenger facilitation at airports was not only faster, but now devoid of the hassles of multiple screening and checks.

    He said: “It is easier now to go through the airport, though visa on arrival is still not easy as the processes of getting approval for visa on arrival is still difficult.”

    He said there was room for improvement in some areas at the airport like the toilets which he observed are getting cleaner.

    FAAN’s Director of Operations, Captain Rabiu Yadudu told The Nation that the Ease of Doing Business has brought about a lot of efficiency in airport operations and synergy among security agencies.

    He added that the authority is now a subscriber to the Airport Service Quality Programme (ASP) put together by the global regulator, Airport Council International (ACI).

    The programme, he said, uses data gathering to help the agency measure its passengers’ reactions to  improve service delivery.

    He said the Executive Order has broadened the horizon for the airport authority in entrenching safety and seamless facilitation.

    Yadudu said:  “It  provided a template for us  to know how to react to customers and stakeholders and give  us better understanding to serve  better.”

    The new arrangement, he said, had  provided  passengers  satisfaction at airports.

    “This programme is all about gathering data from the incoming and outgoing passengers on all aspects of our operations to help us improve our services through analysis of this data. The ASP is all about efficiency and how we response to passengers stimuli,” he added.