Connect with us

Editorial

Against Immunity For Lawmakers

Published

on

Barely four years after Nigerian lawmakers, precisely members of the 8th National Assembly backtracked on efforts to secure immunity for presiding officers of the National Assembly and their state counterparts, as a result of public outcry, the 9th National Assembly is back with a move of same purpose.
This time, via a bill sponsored by the lawmaker representing Ogo-Oluwa/Surulere Federal Constituency of Oyo State in the Federal House of Representatives, Olusegun Odebunmi, titled, “Bill for an Act to Alter Section 308 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 to Extend Immunity to Cover Presiding Officers of Legislative Institutions’, seeks to extend immunity to the four presiding officers of the National Assembly and those of the State Houses of Assembly.
Section 308 of the Constitution provides that, “notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Constitution but subject to Sub-Section 2 of this Section (a) No Civil or Criminal proceedings shall be instituted or continued against a person to whom this section applies during his period of office; (b) A person to whom this section applies shall not be arrested or imprisoned during that period either in pursuance of the process of any court or otherwise and (c) No process of any court requiring or compelling the appearance of a person to whom this section applies shall be applied for or issued. Subsection 3 of the section spells out specifically the persons to whom the privilege of immunity from prosecution applies as the President, the Vice President, governors and deputy governors.
Already, the bill has passed for second reading on the floor of the House of Representatives. Interestingly, however, many lawmakers have voiced their opposition to the bill. Also, majority of Nigerians including civil rights groups have rejected the bill with many describing it as an attempt to indulge the lawmakers and shield them from answering any question generated by their actions, particularly that of corruption.
The Tide, therefore, joins other well-meaning opponents to the bill to say that such is not what Nigeria needs at this time of her national and democratic development. We say so because we are convinced that lawmakers in the country have all they need to legislate effectively for the general good of the people.
We recall that on January 27, 2018, President Muhammadu Buhari assented to the Legislative House Power and Privileges Act, which provides protection for decisions taken by members of parliament in the country. The law grants the Legislative Houses in the National Assembly and State Houses of Assembly immunity from litigation for actions taken in plenary or committee proceedings of the House or Committee.
Thus, we wonder what further immunity the lawmakers are looking for or what contributions additional immunity clauses would serve or add to the promotion of our democracy. Indeed, using the law to provide cover for official indiscretions, recklessness, abuse of power or office, impunity and outright criminality at any level is no longer fashionable.
We are not unaware of the real intentions of immunity privileges, especially, in a political climate fraught with political mischief makers and those with the penchant for ‘pull-him-down’ syndrome. But the privilege is open to abuses. Some of those currently enjoying it are not free from abusing it even to the extent of hiding behind it to escape repercussions for infringements on extent laws of the land. They often arrogate to themselves supernatural powers and see their opinions and wishes as superior, knowing that the law safeguards them.
We think that at a time other countries are trying to whittle down immunity provisions for political office holders so that they should be answerable to law and the people, Nigerian lawmakers should not try to expand the field. The fact that in spite of the amount of opposition that has greeted the bill at inception, the lawmakers still want to take it to public hearing where the outcome could be manipulated, shows that they are desperate to foist it on Nigerians.
This, we believe, is another attempt to ridicule the country and her democracy. It is a huge setback for the rule of law that the same privileged and powerful leaders of parliament that regularly make laws that consign ordinary, powerless Nigerians to prison for even trivial offences want to establish elite immunity to protect themselves from consequences for serious crimes of corruption and money laundering.
In fact, if allowed to stand, the much-vaunted fight against corruption by President Buhari’s administration would further lose credibility and moral ground to prosecute other Nigerians. This is because the bill would not only protect lawmakers from legal consequences for corruption and other foibles, it would exacerbate the immunity that prevails in Nigerian political circles and worsen the country’s ranking in world’s corruption perception index.
We think that the leadership of the House of Representatives should, without further delay, withdraw this obnoxious bill. Any contrary action would only go to prove the belief by many that Nigerian politicians, particularly lawmakers, are insensitive to the feelings of the people and mostly engage in self-serving trips rather than true and effective representation.
If it is difficult to strip those currently enjoying immunity of the privilege, attempts should not be made, at any quarters, to enlarge the field of immunity beneficiaries.

Continue Reading

Editorial

Improving Surveillance in Rivers’ Boundary Communities

Published

on

The Rivers State Government’s promise to improve boundary security has given residents hope at a time when insecurity is becoming a serious concern. Speaking at the 3rd Annual National Assembly/Border and Boundary Community Stakeholders’ Interface in Abuja, Deputy Governor Ngozi Nma Odu called for stronger cooperation between the Federal Government, security agencies, traditional rulers, and local communities. The meeting focused on how better border/boundary management can improve security and support economic growth. Rivers people now expect these promises to lead to real action.
However, many residents are asking whether enough is being done to protect the state’s boundaries. Crimes that were once common only in some northern parts of the country are now being reported in Rivers State. According to the Nigeria Security Tracker of the Council on Foreign Relations, the South-South recorded 287 violent deaths linked to crime in 2025, representing a 19 per cent increase compared with 2023. These figures show that strong action is urgently needed.
Many communities, especially those near state boundaries, have little or no police presence. Some have no police post or station at all, making it easier for criminals to operate. The Nigerian Bureau of Statistics reported in its 2024 Crime Survey that only 31 per cent of rural communities in the South-South have a functioning police presence within 10 kilometres. This leaves many residents without adequate protection.
There are also repeated reports that armed herders have entered forests in the Ikwerre area and other parts of the state. If these reports are correct, they should be treated as a serious security threat. Many people say they face kidnapping, attacks, and harassment from armed criminals hiding in the forests. Slow official responses have increased public worry and reduced confidence.
Although the Federal Government controls the country’s security agencies, the Rivers State Government also has an important role to play. Governor Siminalayi Fubara, as the state’s chief security officer, should take stronger steps to protect lives and property. Criminals should not be allowed to enter the state freely while people live in fear. Waiting for others to act is like burying one’s head in the sand.
Security at the state’s boundaries should start with thorough screening of everyone entering Rivers State through officially recognised entry points. The Nigeria Police Force has the authority to carry out stop-and-search operations where necessary. Well-planned, intelligence-based checks can help prevent criminals and illegal weapons from entering the state without affecting lawful travellers and businesses. Weak borders/boundaries encourage crime.
Local government chairmen should also play a leading role because they are closest to the people. They can work with vigilante groups, traditional rulers, and community leaders to gather and share useful security information. According to the CLEEN Foundation’s 2023 report, Policing and Public Safety in Nigeria, 68 per cent of Nigerians believe that properly supervised community policing helps to reduce crime. Rivers State should make better use of this approach.
The Deputy Governor’s call for inclusive border/boundary governance should include local chiefs, youth leaders, women groups, and other community stakeholders. Their involvement will improve the sharing of information and make it easier to respond quickly to security threats. After all, prevention is better than cure.
The state should also invest in modern security equipment such as drones, communication radios, and solar-powered surveillance posts at important boundary locations. These are practical tools that can improve security in a state as important and geographically complex as Rivers. No community can truly develop where people live in fear.
Better security will also strengthen the economy. Boundary communities support farming, trade, and social ties with Abia, Imo, Akwa Ibom, and Bayelsa states. Insecurity disrupts business activities, discourages investors, and affects lawful trade. The World Bank stated in its 2024 Nigeria Development Update that insecurity at the state level can reduce local economic growth by as much as 2.5 per cent each year.
The Rivers State Government should, therefore, move beyond meetings and public statements by taking practical steps. More police posts should be established, community vigilante groups should receive proper training and support, and regular security meetings should be held with neighbouring states. The decisions reached in Abuja will have little value unless they are fully implemented.
The safety of Rivers people should never be delayed or left to others alone. While cooperation with the Federal Government is necessary, the state must take the lead in protecting its people and boundaries. If urgent actions are not taken, lawlessness could become more common. Rivers State must act now before the chickens come home to roost.
Continue Reading

Editorial

A Fair Wage for Difficult Times

Published

on

The latest demand by the Federal Workers Forum (FWF) for an upward review of the national minimum wage from N70,000 to N300,000 should not be dismissed as another routine labour agitation. Rather, it should be seen as a reflection of the deep economic pain confronting millions of Nigerian workers whose purchasing power has been severely eroded by inflation, rising living costs, and a struggling economy. Whether or not the figure being demanded is attainable, the message behind it cannot be ignored.
The decision of the Forum to proceed with a nationwide protest also underscores the growing frustration among federal workers who believe that repeated appeals have produced little meaningful action. Their complaints over unpaid entitlements, wage awards, promotion arrears, and other outstanding benefits deserve prompt attention from the authorities. A government that expects dedication and productivity from its workforce must also fulfil its obligations to them.
It is significant that the Chief of Staff to the President recently acknowledged that federal workers are poorly remunerated. Such an admission is welcome because it confirms what workers have consistently argued for years. However, acknowledgement alone is insufficient. Nigerians expect practical measures that will improve workers’ welfare rather than statements that only recognise the obvious.
The economic realities confronting workers are doubtlessly harsh. Food prices have climbed beyond the reach of many families, transportation costs have risen sharply, rents continue to increase, and the cost of healthcare and education has become unbearable for many households. Salaries that appeared modest a few years ago have become grossly inadequate in today’s economic environment.
Compounding the hardship is the persistent challenge of insecurity across the country. Many workers travel daily under difficult and sometimes dangerous conditions to earn incomes that barely sustain their families. The emotional and financial burden of this situation has created widespread frustration and anxiety, contributing to the tense atmosphere that now pervades the nation.
Against this background, the call for a living wage is both reasonable and urgent. The purpose of a minimum wage is not just to keep workers employed but to enable them to live with dignity. When full-time workers cannot adequately feed their families, pay school fees, access healthcare, or meet basic living expenses, it becomes clear that existing wage structures require serious review.
The Federal Government should, therefore, approach this matter with the seriousness it deserves. It should immediately commence purposeful discussions with organised labour and representatives of the Federal Workers Forum to examine realistic options for improving workers’ welfare. Delaying action or relying on promises will only deepen public dissatisfaction and erode confidence in the government.
Equally important is the need for the government to honour existing commitments. Reports of outstanding wage awards, unpaid allowances, and promotion arrears should be independently verified and settled without unnecessary delay. Keeping faith with agreements already reached would demonstrate sincerity and rebuild trust between the authorities and their employees.
That said, the workers must also appreciate the importance of sustained dialogue. While peaceful protest remains a constitutional right, industrial disputes are more productively resolved through negotiation than confrontation. Every effort should be made to avoid actions capable of disrupting essential public services or escalating national tension.
The leadership of organised labour also has a crucial role to play. The Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and the Trade Union Congress (TUC) must rise and provide united, responsible, and strategic leadership. Workers need strong representation that combines firmness with wisdom and places national interest alongside legitimate labour demands.
There is no doubt that the government faces enormous fiscal challenges. Declining revenues, mounting debt obligations, and competing development needs make public finance increasingly difficult. Nevertheless, these realities cannot become excuses for allowing civil servants to sink deeper into poverty. Sound economic management must ultimately translate into improved living conditions for citizens.
In truth, paying workers a fair and sustainable wage is not only a social obligation; it is an economic necessity. Better-paid workers stimulate consumer spending, enhance productivity, reduce corruption arising from financial desperation, and contribute to greater national stability. Investment in workers is an investment in economic growth.
Nigeria can ill afford another prolonged confrontation between government and labour at a time when insecurity, inflation, and public discontent already threaten social cohesion. Both sides should exercise restraint, avoid inflammatory rhetoric, and demonstrate genuine commitment to finding common ground. Nigerians expect solutions, not endless disputes.
The message from the current agitation is unmistakable. The Federal Government must heed the legitimate demands of workers by urgently pursuing a new living wage that reflects present economic realities and restores hope to millions of households. At the same time, workers should keep engaging the government through peaceful dialogue, mutual respect, and responsible negotiation. At this critical moment in our country’s history, compromise, compassion, and decisive leadership offer the surest path to industrial harmony and national progress.
Continue Reading

Editorial

Getting State Police Right

Published

on

Nigeria appears closer than ever to embracing state police, a transformative reform that has dominated national security discourse for years. Such a move, however, requires constitutional amendment to eliminate existing legal obstacles. The National Assembly deserves commendation for expediting work on the necessary legislation to amend Section 214 of the 1999 Constitution, which currently provides for a single, centralised national police force. Having secured passage in both chambers, the amendment bills should now be transmitted without delay to the state Houses of Assembly for prompt consideration.
The urgency of this reform is indisputable. Nigeria has been grappling with terrorism, banditry, kidnapping, communal violence, and organised crime, all of which have overstretched the existing security architecture. According to the National Bureau of Statistics, Nigerians paid an estimated N2.23 trillion in ransom between May 2023 and April 2024, while about 51.9 million crime incidents affected households during the same period. These disturbing figures underline the necessity of strengthening policing through a more pragmatic and responsive system.
State police could remarkably complement the efforts of the Nigeria Police Force (NPF), bringing law enforcement closer to local communities. Officers recruited from within their areas are often better acquainted with the terrain, languages, and cultural dynamics that shape criminal activity. Such local knowledge could produce a more perspicacious approach to crime prevention, intelligence gathering, and rapid emergency response.
Critics rightly fear that state police could become instruments of political persecution if left unchecked. Unscrupulous governors may be tempted to intimidate opponents, suppress dissent, or influence elections through the misuse of security agencies. Any constitutional amendment must, therefore, establish firm precautions that guarantee operational independence and prevent such capricious abuse of authority.
Another serious concern is finance. Running a modern police organisation requires sustained investment in personnel, equipment, technology, training, and welfare. Many states already struggle to pay salaries and pensions promptly. Without reliable funding, state police could deteriorate into poorly equipped institutions that weaken rather than strengthen public safety. Fiscal prudence must accompany political ambition.
Nigeria’s ethnic and religious diversity also demands careful reflection. Minority communities in several states have legitimate concerns that locally controlled police could be manipulated against them during periods of political or communal tension. Recruitment based on ethnicity, family ties, or political loyalty would further undermine professionalism. Only transparent procedures founded on merit can cultivate an equitable policing culture.
Equally important is the need for a comprehensive legal framework to regulate state police operations. Clear provisions are required to define jurisdiction, disciplinary procedures, civilian complaints, accountability mechanisms, and the limits of operational authority. Without such legal clarity, disputes and uncertainty could quickly overwhelm the new institutions.
The relationship between state police and the Nigeria Police Force also deserves meticulous attention. Cross-border crimes, insurgency, and organised criminal networks rarely respect state boundaries. Unless command structures, operational responsibilities, and emergency coordination are carefully defined, jurisdictional rivalry could produce dangerous ambiguity at critical moments.
A fragmented security system presents another risk. Thirty-six separate police commands operating under different priorities and standards may complicate coordinated national responses to terrorism, banditry, and other transnational threats. Intelligence sharing between federal and state agencies must be seamless, timely, and cohesive, leaving no room for avoidable security gaps.
Human rights protection should occupy a central place in the reform agenda. Nigeria’s experience during the #EndSARS protests exposed deep concerns about police brutality, impunity, and excessive force. Establishing additional police formations may merely multiply opportunities for abuse. Independent complaint commissions, judicial oversight,  and regular human rights training are indispensable guarantees.
Political transitions pose another challenge. Changes in state administrations should never trigger wholesale dismissals of police leadership or politically motivated appointments. Professional continuity, rather than partisan loyalty, must define career progression. Uniform training standards, ethical codes, and promotion procedures will help preserve the integrity of the institution regardless of who occupies government office.
History also offers a critical lesson. Nigeria operated regional police forces before 1966, but their widespread political misuse contributed to their eventual abolition. That experience should not automatically condemn present reforms, yet neither should it be ignored. Policymakers must undertake a judicious assessment of past failures and design institutions capable of preventing their recurrence.
Ultimately, state police represent an opportunity to strengthen security, but only if reform is pursued with wisdom rather than haste. Constitutional amendment alone will not guarantee success. Strong oversight institutions, transparent recruitment, sustainable funding, effective intelligence sharing, respect for human rights, and genuine accountability must accompany decentralisation. If these essential conditions are fulfilled, state police could become a valuable pillar of national security instead of another source of instability.
Continue Reading

Trending