It may not be a smooth sail for the Bill seeking to regulate the activities of Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) if proceedings at yesterday’s public hearing at the House of Representatives are anything to go by. VICTOR OLUWASEGUN, who monitored the debate, reports.
PROMOTERS of the Bill for an Act to provide for the establishment of the Non-Governmental Organisation Regulatory Commission were yesterday shocked by Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs).
Members of the organisations unanimously condemned the Bill at the opening of a two-day public hearing organised by the House Committee on Civil Society and Development Partners of the House of Representatives in Abuja.
The groups had allies in other stakeholders, who strongly rejected the Bill, seeking the supervision, co-ordination and monitoring of NGOs and CSOs. The Bill is being sponsored by Deputy Majority Leader Buba Jubril
Those who shot the bill down described it as a threat to freedom of speech and association. Besides, they said the commission will be a duplication of already existing agency.
The objective of the Bill is to establish a body responsible for the supervision, coordination and monitoring of local CSOs and NGOs, with the aim of enabling them to accomplish their various missions in a transparent manner and be accountable.
However, many of groups at the hearing on two bills at the instance of the House Committee on Civil Society and Donor Agencies were unanimous in rejecting the bill, saying it will tamper with the rights of the people and disrupt their operations.
There was a protest at the main entrance into the National Assembly Complex. The protesters were led by former National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) Chairman Chidi Anselm Odinkalu.
Odinkalu said the protest became necessary to register NGOs and CSOs’ opposition to the bill. According to him, among the protesters were representatives of churches, mosques and other religious bodies.
The organisations that united against the bill include: Social Economic and Transparency Project (SERAP); Transition Monitoring Group (TMG); Amnesty International (AI) in Nigeria and Policy and Legal Advocacy Centre (PLAC), amongst others.
In her presentation Empower 54 President Modupe Ozolua said she had no problem with the registration of NGOs and CSOs in the country for the purpose of having a database, but the aspect of the bill mandating NGOs to have a projection of projects for the year was not feasible because of a dearth of funds.
She also flayed the aspect asking the organisations to cede assets to the regulatory commission in the proposed bill.
AI’s representative Ossai Ojigho said the NGO bill threatens freedom, pointing out that sections 11, 13 and 24 of the proposed legislation attempt to muzzle organisations and tell them how they must run their business.
“States are adopting laws and policies under the guise of transparency and accountability that seeks to exert control over civil society thereby limiting their ability to work,” she noted.
The PLAC Executive Director, Clem Nwankwo, said: “The Bill has several worrying aspects. It fails to acknowledge the existing legal regime under which NGOs operate, including Constitutional Provision under Chapter IV of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) as well as Part C (Incorporated Trustees) of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA)
“The bill grants unquestionable powers to the executive arm of government to restrain; constrain and limit non- governmental initiatives and charitable efforts in Nigeria.
“There is no doubt that the first victims of the bill would be the NGOs that are traditionally active in the area of ensuring accountability and transparency of government to its citizens, particularly in the area of human rights, rule of law, governance and management of state resources.”
Activist-lawyer Femi Falana (SAN), urged the House of Representatives to immediately drop the draft bill, which according to him, “unequivocally threatens the very existence of a free and independent civil society in Nigeria”.
Falana’s request was in a statement entitled: “NGO Bill threatens a free and independent civil society and must be dropped”, which he issued in Lagos yesterday ahead of the public hearing.
The senior advocate threatened to challenge the bill in court is passed into law, on the grounds of its unconstitutionality and incompatibility with Nigeria’s international and regional human rights obligations and commitments.
He said: “This is perhaps the worst piece of legislation in Nigeria’s history. Under the bill, any civil society group advocating for human rights, basic freedoms and good governance can be shut down and criminalised. The bill, if passed, will ultimately have a disastrous impact on Nigerian citizens’ democratic participation in furthering the development of their own country.”
In his submission, the Catholic Bishop of Sokoto Diocese, Bishop Matthew Kukah, said at the return of democracy in 1998, he wrote a book in which he concluded that without civil society, there is no democracy.
Insisting that that without civil society, Nigeria’s democracy would be in grave danger, he stressed the need for a convergence of ideas between the political class and the general public.
He the Kukah Centre was established to bridge the gap, saying that whatever could be done to bridge the gap must be encouraged.
Kukah said: “For a very long time, we have had a country where suspicions between the governed and those governing have persisted.
“There is a general assumption among the people that anybody holding a public office is a thief.
‘’The public office holders have a feeling of disregard for the masses who do not respect them enough.
“I stand with civil societies very firmly and I believe we have enough laws in this country. We are really not in short of laws covering every aspect of our national lives.
“I think the bill does not appreciate the amount of efforts that had been made to put laws in place.’’
Kukah expressed the hope that the National Assembly would take very seriously the sentiments and the arguments put forward by the various platforms that responded to the bill.
He urged that attention should be focused more on how to generate and sustain energy of Nigerians and CSOs as opposed to creating a situation which deepened the lines of suspicion.
The Executive Secretary of Sensor Empowerment Foundation, Ier Jonathan-Ichaver, warned of the consequences of passing the bill in its current state, saying that the requirement that NGOs obtain written permission before intervening in disasters would cause unnecessary delays that could result in the death of thousands of citizen in emergency situations.
“The bill does not encourage, or provide an enabling environment for NGOs to serve Nigerian citizens,” Jonathan-Ichaver noted.
Speaker Yakubu Dogara, said the essence of public hearing was to get public views on the process of law making.
Represented by Bagangida Ibrahim, the Chairman, House Committee on Finance, Dogara said the public hearing was organised to promote public participation in governance.
He said the move was in line with the Constitution, explaining that NGOs and CSOs had been involved in poverty reduction, human rights, environmental and domestic violence, anti-corruption, HIV and AIDS and other socio-political activity.
According to him, generally, NGOs and CSOs are independent organisations to a large extent, adding that their work is voluntary and non-profit making.
Dogara, who admitted that the bill to regulate the NGOs had generated a lot of public interest, urged participants to reflect the interests in their contributions.
He said: “I assure you that the process of lawmaking will always be subjected to public scrutiny and this comes after the first and second reading of the bill.’’
Akpatason urged stakeholders to oblige the committee their expert views to guide it in making recommendations for the Assembly.
The controversial Bill
The Non-Governmental Organisation Regulatory Commission Nigeria (Establishment) Bill 2016,has eight parts and 58 clauses, a schedule and an explanatory memo.
Its contents include among others, the establishment of the Commission, its Governing Board, staffing and funding.
The objectives, powers and functions include the registration and licensing of NGOs, establishment of a National Council of Voluntary Agencies (to be comprised of the first 100 registered NGOs) under the part entitled” “Self-Regulation by the Non- Governmental Organisations.”
There is a clause stipulating transitional registration of up to six months for NGOs to register from the commencement of the Act and for existing organisations to obtain a certificate.
Stakeholders’ grouse
Many of the stakeholders are quarreling with the Fund disclosure clauses 25(c) and 29(1). The clauses stipulate that funds pledged by donors must be disclosed before applying such funds on project implementation.
They are also opposed to the Unscheduled Visits (Monitoring) clause that empowers the commission to pay unscheduled visits to the NGOs to witness randomly selected activities or field operation without prior notice to the organisations
Another contentious clause is the Transfer of Assets through the Commission Clause 29 (3) which stipulates that that assets transferred to build capacity of the NGO be done through the Commission, which will identify the operation criteria.
Similarly, Clause 29(6) (b) requires that the assets of the NGO or CSO be surrendered to the government as trustee for the people.
Other contentious bills in the House
The Bill, which seeks to establish Ecclesiastical Court of Appeal in the 36 states of the Federation and Federal Capital Territory (FCT). After scaling through second reading on the floor of the House of Representatives, not much has been heard of the bill.
It also seeks to amend Cap. C23 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, seeks to give the Ecclesiastical Court the compliment of the regular courts in adjudging in matters relating to the tenets of the Christian faith between individuals and groups that yield and submit to its jurisdiction.
It seeks to alter 14 sections namely: 6, 84, 185, 240, 246, 247, 288, 289, 292, 318 of the Principal Act as well as Second, Third, Sixth and Seventh Schedule of the Principal Act and insertion of Part 1g, section 270(a to e), Part 2D, section 285(a – e) and a citation, respectively.
Judges (Cardinals) of the Ecclesiastical Court shall be drawn from those learned in law and shall be required to administer justice in accordance with the Christian faith and the law of the nation.
The Grazing Bill
The Grazing Bill seeking an Act to provide for the establishment of the National Grazing Reserve (establishment and development) Commission for the preservation and control of National Grazing Reserves and Stock Routes and other matters connected therewith.
The bill scaled second reading in both chambers of the National Assembly. But it has failed to make it through due to its controversial nature
Its key provisions and high points include but not limited to the establishment of a National Grazing Reserve Commission (NGRC) as corporate body.
Sharia Court of Appeal Bill
A Bill by the House of Representatives to expand the jurisdiction of the Sharia Court of Appeal to cover the whole country also generated controversy. It was shelved after second reading due to its sensitive nature
