Featured

2023: Judiciary Tasked On Uprightness, Transparency In post-Election Disputes

Published

2 years ago

March 16, 2023

As the courts and tribunals begin hearing post-election disputes, the Nigerian Judiciary has been tasked with proper and transparent adjudication of cases that will be brought before it by politicians and political parties.

The presidential candidates of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Labour Party (LP), Alhaji Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi, have already indicated that they will contest the February 25, Presidential elections over alleged infractions.

Apart from the two presidential candidates, many National Assembly candidates have also indicated interest in approaching the courts.

Speaking on the integrity task ahead of the Judiciary after the 2023 general elections, Abuja-based legal practitioner Barr. Chidi Onwuekweikpe called on judicial officers appointed to preside over petitions arising from the 2023 polls to “exercise their roles in an upright way and according to limits of the law.”

Onwuekweikpe led the call during PUBLIC CONSCIENCE, an anti-corruption radio programme produced by the Progressive Impact Organization for Community Development, PRIMORG, Wednesday in Abuja.

He stated that the judiciary has a crucial role at this stage of Nigeria’s electoral Jurisprudence and remains the only option available for any aggrieved person.

Onwuekweikpe blamed politicians for stimulating doubts and integrity concerns whenever judgements are pronounced from the courts, noting that civil cases do not generate controversy as much as political cases in Nigeria.

“The challenge we are having is from politicians; when a matter goes in your favour, the Judiciary is the best thing that happened to Nigeria, go on appeal it goes the other way saying I have been robbed, the Judiciary is corrupt from the same mouths, so what do you make of it, are the politicians that are now determining the integrity of the Judiciary which should not be so.

“Whatever you say about it should be based on reading through the judgement and how the judges decide. That is when you can make an informed opinion from the court’s decision. It’s not a marketplace thing when you come because the case didn’t favour you would say they have turned justice upside down. You have to read in between the lines and find out the reasons for decisions made,” Onwuekweikpe stressed.

Cautioning Nigerians on their expectations ahead of post-election litigations, the Legal Luminary said courts handling election cases could only work with available evidence and not emotions. Adding that election cases are won and lost in courts to technicalities, procedural errors or how lawyers present facts.

On his part, Daily Trust Newspaper’s Judiciary Correspondent, John Chuks Azu, reminded the Judiciary that Nigerians expect them to maintain neutrality and transparency and be above board as they entertain post-election petitions.

According to Azu, judicial officers handling election cases must understand that the judiciary is serving the people and not themselves while urging that journalists should be granted access to monitor and report the process.

His words: “The Judiciary as a 3rd arm of the government has tried to maintain neutrality. For them (Judiciary) to be above board, the public will expect that as the petition come in for the various election, both the presidential and national assembly and, of course, disputes arising from the Governorship and State Assembly elections that will be coming up on Saturday, the public will expect them (Judiciary) to be transparent in the sense that the processes and procedure should be made open.

“Journalists should be granted sufficient access, and observers both from local and international platforms should also be allowed, and the judiciary should try as much as possible to ensure that it follows the relevant rules and laws that guide our elections and are applied properly to ensure that the outcomes will not be far from what the public expect based on the evidence before it.”

On several pre and post-election petitions, Azu said the Independent National Electoral Commission must be ‘more accountable,’ which will help solve the problem.

“The problem is that INEC believes its role is just to supervise the process and then declare results.

“You have to be accountable all through the procedure. This is where they are getting it wrong, and they have to work on it to ensure that the money they are being given is used; How was the monitoring for the primaries done? Who were the officials? Where were they posted to? How did they monitor? The election proper, the budget for technology, the funding for materials, how did you utilize them? Why didn’t you get the outcome that is generally accepted?

“So they have to be up to task in terms of accountability. That’s how to build confidence,” Azu stated.

Recall that Governorship and State Assembly elections, earlier slated for March 11, were rescheduled for March 18, 2023, after the court granted INEC permission to reconfigure the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS).

Public Conscience is a syndicated weekly anti-corruption radio program used by PRIMORG to draw government and citizens’ attention to corruption and integrity issues in Nigeria.

The program has the support of the MacArthur Foundation.

Share on Facebook

Business

Tax Reform Bills: The Verdict of Nigerians

Published

2 weeks ago

March 6, 2025

The Gleamer

Ismaila Ahmad Abdullahi Ph.D

The public hearings conducted recently by the two Chambers of the National Assembly have elicited positive responses from a broad spectrum of Nigerians, cutting across regional interest groups, government agencies, civil society groups, concerned individuals, the academia, and Labour Unions, among diverse others. Contrary to a few dissensions hitherto expressed in the media, almost all the stakeholders who spoke during the week-long sessions were unanimous in their declaration that the hallowed Chambers should pass the tax reform bills after a clean-up of the grey areas.

The public hearings were auspicious for all Nigerians desirous of economic growth and fiscal responsibility. They were also a watershed moment for the Federal Inland Revenue Service, which had been upbeat about the tax reforms. Indeed, the public hearings had rekindled hope in the tenets of democracy that guarantee freedom of expression and equitable space for cross-fertilisation of ideas. Without gainsaying the fact, the tax reform bills have been unarguably about the most thought-provoking issues in Nigeria today, drawing variegated perspectives and commentaries from even unlikely quarters such as the faith-based leaders, student bodies, and trade unions, which speaks much about the importance of the bills.

In the build-up to the public hearings, not many people believed that the bills would make it to the second reading, much less the public hearings. Even the Northern stakeholders who seemed unlikely to support the passage of the bills have softened their stance and have given valuable suggestions that would enrich the substance of the bills. The Arewa Consultative Forum came to the public hearings well-prepared with a printed booklet that addressed their concerns. It concluded with an advisory that the bills should be “Well planned, properly communicated, strategically implemented and ample dialogue and political consensus allowed for the reforms to be accepted.”

The concerns of ACF ranged from the composition of the proposed Nigeria Revenue Service Board as contained in Part 111, Section 7 of the bill, the unlimited Presidential power to exempt/wave tax payment as proposed in Section 75(1) of the bill, the family income or inheritance tax as contained in Part 1, Section 4(3) of the bill, to the issues around development levy and VAT. On the development levy, the ACF stated that unless the Federal Government is considering budgetary funding for TETFUND, NASENI and NITDA, it does not see the “wisdom behind the plan to replace (them) with NELFUND”.

The position of the North was equally reinforced by the Supreme Council for Shariah in Nigeria, Northern Elders Forum, Kano State Government, Professor Auwalu Yadudu, and the FCT Imams. Like the ACF, these stakeholders lent their respective voices to the Section on the Inheritance Tax in Part 1 of the bill and the use of the term ‘ecclesiastical’, which, in their views, undermines certain religious rights and beliefs. The Kano State Government, represented by Mahmud Sagagi, affirmed that “we support tax modernisation” but cautioned that “we must ensure that this process does not come at the expense of states’ constitutional rights and economic stability”. Professor Auwalu Yadudu, a constitutional law professor, drew attention to the use of the ‘supremacy clause’ and cautioned that the repeated use of “notwithstanding” in the bills would undermine the supremacy of the Nigerian constitution if passed as such.

Other stakeholders that made contributions at the sessions included the Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas, Fiscal Responsibility Commission, Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission, Federal Ministry of Industry, Trade and Investment, Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria, Chartered Institute of Taxation of Nigeria, Nigeria Customs Service, and a host of others. While most of their concerns bordered on technical issues requiring fine-tuning, they were unanimous in their support for the bills. They aligned with the position of the Executive Chairman of the Federal Inland Revenue Service, Zacch Adedeji, Ph.D. and the Chairman of the Presidential Committee on Fiscal Policy and Tax Reforms, Mr Taiwo Oyedele, which is that the extant tax laws and fiscal regulations are obsolete necessitating reforms aimed at creating a fair and equitable tax and fiscal space to grow Nigeria’s economy.

In one of the sessions, Dr Zaach Adedeji expounded on the criss-cross of trade activities in the Free Trade Zone whereby companies misuse tax waivers as exporters to sell their goods or services in the Customs Area at an amount usually less than the price the operators in the Customs Area who pay VAT and other taxes sell theirs thereby disrupting business transactions. This way, the operators in the Free Trade Zone shortchange the government in paying their due taxes by circumventing extant regulations, which are inimical to the economy’s growth.

Overall, the presentations were forthright, foresighted, and helpful in elucidating the issues contained in the bills. According to the statistics read out at the end of the hearings at the Senate, 75 stakeholders were invited, 65 made submissions, and 61 made presentations. At the House of Representatives 53 stakeholders made presentations. By all means, this is a fair representation. Given the presentations, it is evident that the National Assembly has gathered enough materials to guide its deliberations on the bills. As we look forward to the passage of the bills, we commend the leadership of the National Assembly for their unwavering commitment to making the bills see the light of the day.

Abdullahi is the Director of the Communications and Liaison Department, FIRS.

Share on Facebook