IBHARI PRESS RELEASE: URGENT NEED FOR VENEZUELAN JUSTICE SYSTEM

IBHARI PRESS RELEASE: URGENT NEED FOR VENEZUELAN JUSTICE SYSTEM

Read online: tinyurl.com/nrwdzhw
Portuguese: tinyurl.com/pgzyu26
Spanish: tinyurl.com/o7ezdk2


INTERNATIONAL BAR ASSOCIATION’S
HUMAN RIGHTS INSTITUTE
NEWS RELEASE 
[For immediate release: Tuesday, 29 April 2014]
Urgent need for Venezuelan justice system reform is highlighted by criminal trial of Judge Afiuni states
new IBAHRI report

 A new report states the Venezuelan justice system does not
contain adequate systemic safeguards to guarantee judicial independence
and cites the trial of Judge María Lourdes Afiuni as emblematic of the
situation in general. Describing her trial as being characterised by
multiple violations of due process and other human rights, the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) points to an urgent need for reform of the Venezuelan judiciary.

The 28-page IBAHRI trial observation report, entitled The Execution of Justice: The criminal trial of Judge María Lourdes Afiuni, details a number of specific irregularities in the trial of Judge Afiuni, including:

  • her being arrested without a warrant and the late President of
    Venezuela Hugo Chavez Frías appearing on national television immediately
    afterwards calling for her imprisonment;
  • her being subjected to grievous physical abuse in the female maximum
    security prison Instituto Nacional de Orientación Femenina between
    December 2009 and February 2011, amounting to violations of her right to
    life, liberty, personal integrity and adequate conditions of detention;
  • the failure of the public prosecutor to produce sufficient evidence
    at any stage of the trial in order to substantiate the allegations
    against her; and
  • the frequent procedural delays resulting in a criminal process that
    has been drawn out over four years, violating Judge Afiuni’s right to a
    fair trial within a reasonable time.

IBAHRI Co-Chair Sternford Moyo commented ‘The IBAHRI remains
deeply concerned by the serious damage the criminal trial of Judge
Afiuni has caused to the independence of the Venezuelan judiciary and
the legal profession as a whole by creating an atmosphere of fear. On
multiple occasions the IBAHRI heard that “no one wants to be the next
Afiuni”.’
He added, ‘The independence of judges and lawyers is an
essential component of any democratic society and a fundamental pillar
of the rule of law. It is clear that the Venezuelan justice system is in
urgent need of reform if public confidence in the fair administration
of justice is to be restored. We urge the Venezuelan government to heed
the calls of national and international organisations to take swift and
meaningful steps to make these principles and obligations a reality.’

The IBAHRI sent international observers to attend Afiuni trial hearings between November 2012 and October 2013. The trial was annulled on the 23 October
because of it being ‘interrupted’ by the prosecution failing to turn up
at an evidentiary hearing. A retrial date has yet to be scheduled.

The Execution of Justice: The criminal trial of Judge María Lourdes Afiuni is
the IBAHRI’s sixth report on Venezuela. With each one the separation
between the executive and the judiciary is observed to be diminishing.
Of particular concern to the IBAHRI is:

  • the system of provisional judges under which judges are subject to discretionary dismissal without appeal;
  • the lack of implementation of the judicial code of ethics;
  • inadequate parameters regarding the appointment and removal process for judges; and
  • frequent executive interference.

IBAHRI Co-Chair Baroness Helena Kennedy QC commented, ‘The Afiuni
trial is one of the most important political cases in Venezuela and the
IBAHRI finds it troubling that Judge Afiuni was arrested without the
issuance of a warrant following her decision to release a “political
prisoner” in accordance with the Venezuelan Penal Code and a United
Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention decision. The only
conclusion a person can reach is that the arrest was arbitrary and
politically motivated.’
She added, ‘Four years later, having
endured death threats, abuse and serious health complications, there is
still no final decision in sight. Judge Afiuni remains in a Kafkaesque
criminal process. ’

The Execution of Justice: The criminal trial of Judge María Lourdes Afiuni,
published in Spanish with a translated English executive summary, will
be launched today, Tuesday 29 April 2014, at the plenary working group
meeting at the annual meeting of the Federation of Latin American
Judges’ Associations (Federación Latinoamericana de Magistrados – FLAM)
in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.

Click here to download the Executive Summary of The Execution of Justice: The criminal trial of Judge María Lourdes Afiuni English language version
www.ibanet.org/Document/Default.aspx?DocumentUid=614882EB-0B6D-436C-9C01-D4F4F33A3568

Click here to download The Execution of Justice: The criminal trial of Judge María Lourdes Afiuni Spanish language only.
www.ibanet.org/Document/Default.aspx?DocumentUid=177DC243-8A94-4E3D-9F1E-B0C7A4D97539
Ends

Notes to the Editor

(1)    Details of Judge Afiuni’s case:

  • Judge Afiuni, a titular judge, was charged with ‘corruption’ and
    ‘assistance to escape’ following the conditional release of Eligio
    Cedeño in 2009.
  • She granted bail to Mr Cedeño after two years of pre-trial
    detention, applying provisions of the Venezuelan penal code and taking
    into account a decision of the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
    that considered this individual’s detention unlawful.
  • Following her arrest Judge Afiuni was arbitrarily detained in
    prison, where she developed serious health complications as the result
    of physical abuse.
  • In February 2011 she was transferred to house arrest where she was
    kept under heavy armed guard until her conditional release on 14 June
    2013, granted by Judge Marilda Rios of the 17th Caracas District
    Tribunal.
  • Judge Afiuni is required to present herself to the court every 15
    days and is banned from leaving the country, speaking to the media, and
    using social media networks.

(2)    The International Bar Association
(IBA), established in 1947, is the world’s leading organisation of
international legal practitioners, bar associations and law societies.
Through its global membership of individual lawyers, law firms, bar
associations and law societies it influences the development of
international law reform and shapes the future of the legal profession
throughout the world.

The IBA’s
administrative office is in London. Regional offices are located in: São
Paulo, Brazil; Seoul, South Korea; and Washington DC, US, while the
International Bar Association’s International Criminal Court Programme (IBA ICC) is managed from an office in The Hague.

The International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute
(IBAHRI) works to promote, protect and enforce human rights under a
just rule of law, and to preserve the independence of the judiciary and
the legal profession worldwide.

For further information please contact:

Romana St. Matthew – Daniel
Press Office
International Bar Association
4th Floor, 10 St Bride Street,
London EC4A 4AD

Mobile: +44 (0)7940 731 915
Direct Line: +44 (0)20 7842 0094
Main Office: +44 (0)20 7842 0090
Fax: +44 (0)20 7842 0091

Email: romana.daniel@int-bar.org
Website: www.ibanet.org

STATE LIMITATION LAWS CANNOT BAR CLAIMS MADE UNDER OIL PIPELINES ACT

BENSON V. MOBIL PRODUCING NIG UNLIMITED

This summary is fully reported at (2014) 3 CLRN.
COURT OF APPEAL (PORT HARCOURT DIVISION)
(MUHAMMAD; GALINJE; AWOTOYE, JJ.CA)
In January 1998, the Appellant’s fishing nets were severely damaged when the Respondent’s oil pipeline installation burst and spilled oil into the waterways where the Appellant and others in the Bayelsa Community fished.
The Appellant claimed that the Respondent had agreed to compensate the victims whose nets were damaged by paying N10,000.00 (Ten Thousand Naira) per bundle of damaged fishing nets but that antithetically, the Respondent paid him N10,000 (Ten Thousand Naira) for the 600,000 (Six Hundred Thousand) bundles of nets that were damaged.
In spite of repeated demands by the Appellant, the Respondent failed to pay further sums as compensation for the destroyed fishing nets. Accordingly, the Appellant commenced an action at the High Court of Bayelsa State and claimed the sum of N599,999,990 (Five Hundred and Ninety Nine Million, Nine Hundred and Ninety Nine Thousand Nine Hundred and Ninety Naira) as special damages for the destruction of 599,999 (Five Hundred and Ninety Nine Thousand Nine Hundred and Ninety Nine) bundles of fishing nets at N10,000.00 (Ten Thousand Naira) per bundle of fishing net by the Respondent.
Relying on section 16 of the Limitation Law of Bayelsa State, the Respondent objected to the suit on the grounds that the Appellant’s action was statute barred having been commenced more than six years after the cause of action accrued.
In its ruling on the Respondent’s objection, the trial court held that the Limitation Law of Bayelsa State applied and dismissed the suit. Dissatisfied, the Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal.
The singular issue that emerged for the determination of the Court of Appeal as formulated by the Appellant was:
“Whether the plaintiff’s (now appellant’s) action is statute barred either by the provision of Bayelsa State Limitation Law Cap. 18 Laws of Bayelsa State or the Limitation Act of 1623.”
In arguing this issue, the Appellant contended that the Bayelsa State Limitation Law being a State Law could not apply to matters within the exclusive list neither can items 38 and 39 in the 2nd Schedule and section 251(1)(n) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 be interpreted in subordination to any state law. Similarly, he submitted that the Limitation Act of 1623 is also inapplicable.
He submitted that the decision of the lower court which was reached by relying on the case of Etim v. IGP was attained in error. Instead, he relied on the judgment of the court in Eboigbe v NNPC and urged the Court of Appeal to remit the case back to the trail court by allowing his appeal.
On the contrary, the Respondent referred to the case of Etim v. IGP and submitted that in that case, the Federal High Court applied the Limitation Law of Kaduna State to a Federal matter.
Further, it relied on section 44 of the Bayelsa State Limitation Law, the doctrine laid down by the Court of Appeal in RCC (NIG) Ltd. v. Buratto and the Supreme Court case of Egboigbe v. NNPC in concluding that the case was statute barred and that the Limitation Act of 1623 applied.  It urged the Court of Appeal to dismiss the appeal.
The Court of Appeal having found that the right of action of the Appellant was created by section 19 of the Oil Pipelines Act 1990 which is a law made by the National Assembly and was therefore indefeasible by the state limitation law, allowed the appeal and remitted the case to be tried afresh by the high court.
The Court of Appeal held as follows:
Now the right of action of the plaintiffs/appellants was created by section 19 of the Oil Pipelines Act 1990 which reads.
‘19.      If there be any dispute as to whether any compensation is payable under any provision of this Act or if so as the amount thereof, or as to the persons to whom such compensationshould be paid, such dispute shall be determined by a magistrate exercising civil jurisdiction in the area concerned if such magistrate has in respect of any other civil matter monetary jurisdiction of at least as much as the amount of compensation claimed and if there be no such magistrate by the high court exercising jurisdiction in the area concerned and, notwithstanding the provisions of any other Act or Law, in respect of the       decision of a magistrate in accordance with this secti           on there shall be an appeal to the High Cour        t of the State and in respect of a decision of the High Court of the State under this section, whether original or appellate, there shall be an appeal to the Court of Appeal.
Provided that nothing in this Act shall be deemed to confer power upon a magistrate to exercise jurisdiction in a matter raising any issue as to the title to land or as to the title to any interest in land.’
It appears to me also that a state law limiting the right created by a Federal law is in conflict with the Federal law.
Section 4(5) of the 1999 Constitution is clear on this. It States:
           
‘If any law enacted by the House of Assembly       of a State is inconsistent with any law validlymade by the National Assembly the law made          by the National Assembly shall prevail and that other law shall to the extent of the inconsistency be void.’
The Oil Pipeline Act is a Federal Law. The Bayelsa State Limitation Law seeks to curtail the exercise of the right of action created by the Oil Pipeline Act. This certainly is unconstitutional and the Bayelsa State Limitation Law cannot be so interpreted. See A.G. Abia State v. A.G. Federation (2002) 6 NWLR (Pt. 763) 264. I therefore hold that the Bayelsa State Limitation law does not apply.”
Counsel:
Chief FF. Egele with T. R. Warmate and P. Eveforiokuma for the Appellant
Babatunde Sodipo with Olusola Olarewaju for the Respondent
This summary is fully reported at (2014) 3 CLRN
Join the discussion of the above report atwww.commerciallawreportsnigeria.blogspot.com
GET FREE LEGAL ADVICE IN LAGOS

GET FREE LEGAL ADVICE IN LAGOS

Nigerians are always searching
for legal information on various aspects of the law, from issues bothering on
Tenancy, Employment Law, Divorce and even Court proceedings.  These information is valuable and in many
cases is always a life saver to people who cannot afford competent legal
representation.  As a result of not
knowing the law, many unsuspecting members of the public have been taking
advantage of by unscrupulous elements.  Via
the law blog, we aim to inform Nigerians about their rights in law and it’s
great to see the Lagos state Government taking the same initiative by establishing
the Public Advice Centre. 

The Public Advice Centre (PAC) is
an initiative of His Excellency, Mr. Babatunde Raji Fashola, SAN. The Centre is
saddled with the responsibility of providing citizens with easy access to
information and advice which will benefit and improve their lives. The PAC
serves as a port of call for citizens in distress and those seeking information
on their rights and responsibilities.
 
The PAC is accessible to all,
particularly the indigent, who have been socially excluded or subjected to
discrimination. Its office is located at 3rd Floor, (Ereke House), 15 IPM Road,
CBD Alausa, Ikeja, Lagos. PAC can be reached on 01-9500942 and 01-9500943. You can
also tweet at PAC at @LAGPUBLICADVICE and visit their web site at http://pacng.wordpress.com/.
Please note that services of the
PAC are free and if you are ever in need of free legal advice in Lagos State
without access to Legal counsel, you can give the Public Advice Centre a call.
Adedunmade Onibokun
@adedunmade
UNLAWFUL DETENTION: CASE STUDY OF CIAXON

UNLAWFUL DETENTION: CASE STUDY OF CIAXON


Onimisi Ciaxon a.k.a Isiaka Yusuf, aged 32, a member of staff of PHCN who
worked at the T-junction by State House Gate-7 has been declared missing for
over 10 days now. He is alleged to have been arrested by members of the
Nigerian State Security Service (SSS) after posting pictures on twitter, of the
gun battle between Nigerian security agencies and suspected Boko Haram members
on March 30, 2014 in Abuja. There has been a wide media appeal to the SSS about
the whereabouts of Ciaxon but nothing has been heard. You can read the news
reports HERE. No one
knows where Ciaxon is at the moment but it’s safe to assume that he is in the
custody of the Secret Service, witnesses identified him and reported that he
was handed over to a security team, read the news article HERE
FREEDOM OF SPEECH
If really Ciaxon is with the SSS or any other security agency,

then the
fundamental rights of this gentleman at this point are currently being
breached. Every Nigerian by virtue of Section 39 (1) of the Constitution is entitled
to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and
impart ideas and information without interference. Ciaxon on duty at work that
morning came upon the gun battle happening close to the Aso Villa, took
pictures with his camera and imparted the information on twitter, I do not
believe at that point it occurred to him that he might be committing a crime
because his fundamental rights entitle him to do such.

 An exemption to the Freedom of Speech rule as seen in subsection
(3)(b) is if the alleged actions imposes restrictions upon persons holding
office under the Government of the Federation or of a State, members of the
armed forces of the Federation or members of the Nigeria Police Force or other
Government security services or agencies established by law. Will you say
Ciaxon’s actions have imposed any of these restrictions, I doubt.
UNLAWFUL DETENTION
Assuming the SSS raises the “national security or terrorism” card in
support of Ciaxon’s unlawful detention, it will not support their case either.
A jail break as reported by the SSS to be the underlying cause of the gun
battle that morning hardly falls under the category of a terrorist act.
Moreover, Section 28 of the Terrorist prevention law (2011) which deals with “detention
for offences related to terrorism” provides thatwhere a person is
arrested under reasonable suspicion of having committed any offence under
sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 13 or 14, the National Security Adviser
or Inspector General of Police or a delegated officer not below the rank of
Chief Superintendent of Police or its equivalent may, subject to this section,
direct that the person arrested be detained in a custody for a period not exceeding 24 hours (highlight
supplied) from his arrest, without having access to any person other than his
Medical Doctor and legal counsel of the detaining agency.
By virtue of Section 35 Of the Constitution “Every person shall be
entitled to his personal liberty and no person shall be deprived of such
liberty save in some exceptions which Ciaxon does not come under, such as –
(a) in execution of the sentence or order of a court in respect of a
criminal offence of which he has been found guilty; or (b) by reason of his
failure to comply with the order of a court or in order to secure the
fulfilment of any obligation imposed upon him by law; or (c) for the purpose of
bringing him before a court in execution of the order of a court or upon
reasonable suspicion of his having committed a criminal offence, or to such
extent as may be reasonably necessary to prevent his committing a criminal
offence; 

Provided that a person who is charged with an offence and who has been
detained in lawful custody awaiting trial shall not continue to be kept in such
detention for a period longer than the maximum period of imprisonment
prescribed for the offence. 

More so, the law further states that “Any person who is arrested or
detained shall have the right to remain silent or avoid answering any question
until after consultation with a legal practitioner or any other person of his
own choice. 
Subsection (3) states “Any person who is arrested or detained shall be
informed in writing within twenty-four hours (and in a language that he
understands) of the facts and grounds for his arrest or detention.” 
Subsection (4) states “Any person who is arrested or detained in accordance with subsection
(1) (c) of this section shall be brought before a court of law within a
reasonable time, and if he is not tried within a period of – 
(a) two months from the date of his arrest or detention in the case of a
person who is in custody or is not entitled to bail; or
(b) three months from the date of his arrest or detention in the case of
a person who has been released on bail, he shall (without prejudice to any
further proceedings that may be brought against him) be released either
unconditionally or upon such conditions as are reasonably necessary to ensure
that he appears for trial at a later date. 
Subsection (5) states “In subsection (4) of this section, the expression “a reasonable
time” means –
(a) in the case of an arrest or detention in any place where there is a
court of competent jurisdiction within a radius of forty kilometres, a period
of one day; and
(b) in any other case, a period of two days or such longer period as in
the circumstances may be considered by the court to be reasonable.”
(6) Any person who is unlawfully arrested or detained shall be entitled
to compensation and public apology from the appropriate authority or person;
and in this subsection, “the appropriate authority or person” means
an authority or person specified by law.
FAIR HEARING
Ciaxon is also being unlawfully detained against his fundamental right of
fair hearing which is stated in Section 36 of the Constitution. The law
provides that;
“In the determination of his
civil rights and obligations, including any question or determination by or
against any government or authority, a person shall be entitled to a fair
hearing within a reasonable time by a court or other tribunal established by
law and constituted in such manner as to secure its independence and
impartiality.” 
Subsection (4) also provides that
“Whenever any person is charged with a criminal offence, he shall, unless the
charge is withdrawn, be entitled to a fair hearing in public within a
reasonable time by a court or tribunal; while subsection 6 states that “Every
person who is charged with a criminal offence shall be entitled to –
(a) be informed promptly in the
language that he understands and in detail of the nature of the offence;
(b) be given adequate time and
facilities for the preparation of his defence;
(c) defend himself in person or
by legal practitioners of his own choice;
(d) examine, in person or by his
legal practitioners, the witnesses called by the prosecution before any court
or tribunal and obtain the attendance and carry out the examination of witnesses
to testify on his behalf before the court or tribunal on the same conditions as
those applying to the witnesses called by the prosecution; and
(e) have, without payment, the
assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand the language used at the
trial of the offence. 
AT THIS POINT, WE URGE THE SSS TO
DO NEEDFUL AND EITHER CHARGE CIAXON TO COURT SO HE MAY DEFEND HIMSELF OR LET
HIM GO HOME.
Adedunmade Onibokun
@adedunmade
NIGERIA | AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL | CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY AS VIOLENCE ESCALATES IN NORTH- EAST

NIGERIA | AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL | CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY AS VIOLENCE ESCALATES IN NORTH- EAST

Group of young men killed in Potiskum, Yobe state, by the security forces following an attack by Boko Haram in a nearby village

An increase in attacks by Boko Haram and uncontrolled reprisals by
Nigeria’s security forces has seen the death toll in North East Nigeria
rise to at least 1,500 people, more than half of whom are civilians, in
the first three months of 2014, Amnesty International said in a briefing published today.

“The
escalation of violence in north-eastern Nigeria in 2014 has developed
into a situation of non-international armed conflict in which all
parties are violating international humanitarian law.  We urge the
international community to ensure prompt, independent investigations
into acts that may constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity,”
said Netsanet Belay, Research and Advocacy Director for Africa at
Amnesty International.

“More than 1,500 deaths in three
months indicate an alarming deterioration in the situation. The
international community cannot continue to look the other way in the
face of extrajudicial executions, attacks on civilians and other crimes
under international law being committed on a mass scale. Civilians are
paying a heavy price as the cycle of violations and reprisals gather
momentum.”

More than half of the killings have been
carried out by members of the Islamist armed group Boko Haram, including
scores of schoolchildren who have been the victims of deliberate
attacks.

Amnesty International has documented the
killings carried out in January, February and March 2014 by both Boko
Haram and the Nigerian Security Forces. It highlights 14 March as a
tipping point when the security forces unleashed a brutal crackdown on
former detainees.

On 14 March Boko Haram gunmen attacked
the Giwa military barracks in Maiduguri, Borno state. They reportedly
fought their way into the detention facilities and freed several hundred
detainees. Amnesty International has received credible evidence that as
the military regained control, more than 600 people, mostly unarmed
recaptured detainees, were extra-judicially executed in various
locations across Maiduguri.

Amnesty International has
pieced together a partial timeline of events following the 14 March
attack in Maiduguri. The evidence is based on interviews with residents,
lawyers, human rights campaigners, and hospital staff across the city
as well as satellite imagery showing three possible mass graves in one
area of Maiduguri.

“The scale of atrocities carried out
by Boko Haram is truly shocking creating a climate of fear and
insecurity. But this cannot be used to justify the brutality of the
response that is clearly being meted out by the Nigerian security
forces,” said Netsanet Belay.
Amongst the testimony gathered by
Amnesty International were the voices of witnesses who described what
happened when the military found 56 of those who had escaped from the
Giwa barracks.

“The former detainees were in a classroom.
They started screaming ‘we are not Boko Haram. We are detainees!’ My
neighbours and I saw the soldiers take the men to a place called ‘no
man’s land,’ behind the University of Maiduguri. We watched as the
soldiers opened fire killing all 56. They were killed in front of us.
All of them.”

Other eyewitnesses in Jiddari Polo, also in
Maiduguri, described how members of the “Civilian Joint Task Force”
 rounded up freed prisoners and handed them to soldiers. More than 190
people were executed, many of whom were too frail to run.

“I
saw the soldiers asking the people to lie on the ground. There was a
small argument between the soldiers and the civilian JTF. The soldiers
made some calls and a few minutes later they started shooting the people
on the ground. I counted 198 people killed at that checkpoint.”

Given
Nigeria’s apparent unwillingness and inability to investigate and
prosecute perpetrators of these crimes, Amnesty International is calling
on the African Commission and the United Nations to assist Nigeria in
investigating acts that may amount to war crimes and crimes against
humanity committed by both Boko Haram and the Nigerian security forces
in north-eastern Nigeria.

“The summary killing of these
detainees amount to extrajudicial executions and are crimes under
international law. These killings follow an entrenched pattern of deaths
in custody of detainees held in relation to the situation in the
northeast,” said Netsanet Belay.
“The international community,
and in particular the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights
and the UN Human Rights Council, must, as a matter of urgency, ensure
that a thorough, impartial and transparent investigation is conducted
into these allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity in
Nigeria.”

Amnesty International is also calling on the
African Union (AU), the Economic Community of West African States
(ECOWAS) and the African Union’s Peace and Security Council to assess
immediately the conflict situation in north-eastern Nigeria and provide
full and effective support to end these acts of violence against
civilians. It must also strongly condemn the on-going war crimes and
crimes against humanity committed by all parties to the conflict.

“As
Nigeria assumes the chairmanship of the African Union’s Peace and
Security Council next month, the AU needs to critically ask itself how
far its member States are living up to their commitment to uphold the
principles of the African Union and respect for rule of law and human
rights,” said Netsanet Belay.

from; www.amnesty.org

NAFDAC; DUTIES & POWERS

NAFDAC; DUTIES & POWERS


If you are Nigerian and you live in Nigeria, you must remember the last
time you held up a bottle or the pack of a food or drug item just to inspect it
for a NAFDAC number. It’s almost second nature for most people, including myself.
The NAFDAC stamp of approval on food and drug items gives a sense of security
and lets you feel confident knowing its safe to use. The agency is not only at
the forefront of the fight for safeguarding public health in Nigeria but it’s
also doing a fine job.

NAFDAC is the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control,
an agency whose mission is to safeguard public health by ensuring that only the
right quality food, drugs and other related products are manufactured,
exported, imported, advertised, sold and used. Established by the National
Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control Act, NAFDAC functions,
among others, include: to regulate and control the importation, exportation,
manufacture, advertisement, distribution, sale and use of food, drugs,
cosmetics, medical devices, bottled water and chemicals.
It is mandatory for parties in the food or drug industry to register
their products with the agency in accordance with the law. The functions of the
Agency are listed in Section 5 of the Act, they include:
(a) regulate and control
the importation, exportation, manufacture, advertisement, distribution, sale
and use of food, drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, bottled water and
chemicals; 
(b) conduct appropriate
tests and ensure compliance with standard specifications designated and
approved by the Council for the effective control of the quality of food,
drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, bottled water and chemicals and their raw
materials as well as their production processes in factories and other
establishments; 
(c) undertake appropriate
investigations into the production premises and raw materials for food, drugs,
cosmetics, medical devices, bottled water and chemicals and establish relevant
quality assurance systems, including certificates of the production sites and
of the regulated products;
(d) undertake inspection of
imported food, drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, bottled water and chemicals
and establish relevant quality assurance systems, including certification of
the production sites and of the regulated products; 
(e) compile standard
specifications and guidelines for the production, importation, exportation,
sale and distribution of food, drug, cosmetics, medical devices, bottled water
and chemicals; 
(f) undertake the
registration of food, drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, bottled water and
chemicals;
(g) control the
exportation and issue quality certification of food, drugs, cosmetics, medical
devices, bottled water and chemicals intended for export; 
(h) establish and maintain
relevant laboratories or other institutions in strategic areas of Nigeria as
may be necessary for the performance of its functions under this Act; 
(i) pronounce on the
quality and safety of food, drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, bottled water
and chemicals after appropriate analysis; 
(j) undertake measures to
ensure that the use of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances are limited
to medical and scientific purposes; 
(k) grant authorisation
for the import and export of narcotic drugs and psycho- tropic substances as
well as other controlled substances; 
(l) collaborate with the
National Drug Law Enforcement Agency in measures to eradicate drug abuse in
Nigeria; 
(m) advise Federal, State
and local governments, the private sector and other interested bodies regarding
the quality, safety, and regulatory provisions on food, drugs, cosmetics,
medical devices, bottled water and chemicals; 
(n) undertake and
co-ordinate research programmes on the storage, adulteration, distribution and
rational use of food, drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, bottled water and
chemicals; 
(o) issue guidelines on,
approve and monitor the advertisement of food, drugs, cosmetics, medical
devices, bottled water and chemicals; 
(p) compile and publish
relevant data resulting from the performance of the functions of the Agency
under this Act or from other sources; 
(q) sponsor such national
and international conferences as it may consider appropriate; 
(r) liaise with relevant
establishments within and outside Nigeria in pursuance of the functions of the Agency; 
(s) determine the
suitability or otherwise of medicines, drugs, food products, cosmetics, medical
devices or chemicals for human and animal use; and 
(t) carry out such
activities as are necessary or expedient for the performance of its functions
under this Act.
It may interest one to learn that
not only the Police have powers to enter into a premises, NAFDAC officials are
empowered by virtue of Section 24 of the Act to do the same, the provisions
state that – 
(1) An officer of the Agency may,
in the course of his duty, at any reasonable time and on production of his
certificate of designation if so required- 
(a) enter (if need be by
force) any premises in which he reasonably believes that any article to which
this Act or the regulations apply is manufactured, prepared, preserved,
packaged, stored or sold; 
(b) examine any article in
the premises which appears to him to be an article to which this Act or the
regulations apply or anything in the premises which he reasonably believes is
used or is capable of being used for the manufacture, preparation,
preservation, packaging, storage or sale of any such article; 
(c) take a sample or
specimen of any article to which this Act or the regulations apply or which he
has power to examine under paragraph (b) of this subsection; 
(d) open and examine, while on
the premises, any container or package which he reasonably believes may contain
anything to which this Act or the regulations apply or which may help in his
investigations; 
(e) examine any book,
document or other record found on the premises which he reasonably believes may
contain any information relevant to the enforcement of this Act or the
regulations and make copies thereof or extracts therefrom; and 
(j) seize and detain for such
time as may be necessary for the purpose of this Act, any article by means of
or in relation to which he reasonably believes any pro- vision of this Act or
regulations has been contravened. 
(2) The owner or person in charge
of any premises entered by an officer of the Agency in pursuant of this
section, and every person found thereon, shall give all reasonable assistance
in their power to the officer and shall make available to the officer all such
information as the officer may reasonably require for the purposes of this Act. 
(3) Any article seized under this
Act shall be kept or stored in such a place as the officer of the Agency may
direct and shall be returned to the owner or the person from whom it was seized
if the article upon analysis or examination is found to conform with the
requirements of this Act and regulations. 
(4) Any article seized by an
officer of the Agency pursuant to this Act or the regulations may be submitted
to an analyst for analysis or examination and the analyst upon making such
analysis or examination shall issue a certificate or report in the prescribed
form setting forth the result of such analysis or examination, and the officer
of the Agency shall on demand deliver a copy of such certificate or report to
the owner of the article if the article is to be the subject of a proceeding
under this Act. 
In the above stated provisions,
the expression “article to which this Act or the regulations apply”
means-
(a) any food, drug,
cosmetics, medical devices, bottled water or chemical;
(b) anything used for the
manufacture, preparation, preservation, packaging or storage of any food, drug,
cosmetics, medical device, bottled water or chemi- cal; and
(c) any labelling or
advertising material relating to or for use in connection with any food, drug,
cosmetics, medical device, bottled water or chemical, but does not include a
live animal. 
Obstructing a NAFDAC official in the performance of his duties is an
offence liable on conviction to a
fine of N5,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or
to both such fine and imprisonment. Also any person who contravenes the
provisions of
any regulations
made under the Act is guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to the penalties
specified in the regulations. 
Where no penalty has been specified,
the person shall be liable to a fine of N50, 000 or imprisonment for a term of
one year or to both such fine and imprisonment. Where an offence under this Act
which has been committed by a body corporate is proved to have been committed
with the consent or connivance of, or to be attributable to any neglect on the
part of any director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body
corporate or any person purporting to act in any of those capacities, he, as
well as the body corporate, shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and
shall be liable on conviction to a fine of N 100,000. The Federal High Court has
 exclusive jurisdiction to try offences
under the NAFDAC Act. 
For more information about the
activities of NAFDAC, visit the agencies website via http://www.nafdac.gov.ng/.
Adedunmade Onibokun
@adedunmade
DUTIES OF YOUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT COUNCIL

DUTIES OF YOUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT COUNCIL

.
The role of a government and its agencies in societies can never be over stated, govt agencies are responsible for our security; maintanance of public infrastructures & institutions; regulation of economic policies & even maintains law and order. In a nutshell, without a functioning govt infrastructure in place, only anarchy and chaos may just be left.  

Other roles of government include distributing national wealth, planning national policies and stearing the ship of governance as a whole. In achieveing its set objectives, the system of government is divided into various arms or tiers such as the Executive, Judiciary and Legislature or the Federal, State & Local authorities. In Nigeria, the duties and functions of the different arms or tiers of government are provided for in the Constitution. 
The duties of local government authorities is to foster grassroot support and partcipitation in the system of governance.  Therefore, they are saddled with a number of constitutional responsibilities such as:
(a) the consideration and the making of recommendations to a State commission on economic planning or any similar body on –
(i) the economic development of the State, particularly in so far as the areas of authority of the council and of the State are affected, and
(ii) proposals made by the said commission or body;
(b) collection of rates, radio and television licences;
(c) establishment and maintenance of cemeteries, burial grounds and homes for the destitute or infirm;
(d) licensing of bicycles, trucks (other than mechanically propelled trucks), canoes, wheel barrows and carts;
(e) establishment, maintenance and regulation of slaughter houses, slaughter slabs, markets, motor parks and public conveniences;

(f) construction and maintenance of roads, streets, street lightings, drains and other public highways, parks, gardens, open spaces, or such public facilities as may be prescribed from time to time by the House of Assembly of a State;
(g) naming of roads and streets and numbering of houses;
(h) provision and maintenance of public conveniences, sewage and refuse disposal;
(i) registration of all births, deaths and marriages;
(j) assessment of privately owned houses or tenements for the purpose of levying such rates as may be prescribed by the House of Assembly of a State; and
(k) control and regulation of –
(i) out-door advertising and hoarding,
(ii) movement and keeping of pets of all description,
(iii) shops and kiosks,
(iv) restaurants, bakeries and other places for sale of food to the public,
(v) laundries, and
(vi) licensing, regulation and control of the sale of liquor.
According to the law, the functions of a local government council shall also include participation of such council in the Government of a State as respects the following matters –
(a) the provision and maintenance of primary, adult and vocational education;
(b) the development of agriculture and natural resources, other than the exploitation of materials

(c) the provision and maintenance of health services; and
(d) such other functions as may be conferred on a local government council by the House of Assembly of the State.

From the above provisions of the constitution, it is evident the important roles our local government councils play in the administration of our various local government areas.
Knowing the different duties and roles played by govt agencies in the lives of members in the community and how to engage such agencies is quite important to encourage greater facilitation and discus among stakeholders in a community.  
This is a call for every one to demand accountability and high performance from our local government authorities and their commitees. 
Adedunmade Onibokun
@adedunmade