Editorial

No To Anti-Migration Bill

Published

2 years ago

April 19, 2023

On April 6, this year, Nigeria’s lower legislative chamber, the House of Representatives, triggered an outrage. The House passed for second reading, a Medical and Dental Practitioners Act (Amendment) Bill, 2022, which seeks to make it compulsory for graduates in medical and dental fields to render services within Nigeria for five years before being licensed to practise.
The sponsor of the bill is Honourable Ganiyu Johnson, a member of the All Progressives Congress (APC) representing Lagos State. He strongly believes that once passed into law, the proposed legislation will end the massive movement of young Nigerian doctors abroad.
His argument is, Nigeria has only 24,000 licensed medical doctors in the country, which is less than 10 per cent of the number needed to meet the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) recommendation, hence, the need for the bill. He said, considering the growing trend of the Nigerian population and the current rate of emigration of Nigerian-trained medical and dental practitioners, passing this bill into law would provide Nigerians with quality medical services.
To further buttress his argument, the federal lawmaker compared the fees paid in the United Kingdom and other countries’ universities on the one side to what is paid in Nigerian universities, concluding that tuition fees in Nigeria’s public medical schools were highly subsidised. Thus, making it mandatory for the nation’s medical professionals to reciprocate.
Many Nigerian doctors have moved to the developed world, searching for greener pastures. About 5,600 of them have migrated to the United Kingdom in the past eight years. Now, in some southern states of the country, only one doctor is expected to treat about 30,000 patients while in the North, the ratio is a doctor to over 45,000 patients.
Nigeria is not the only African country losing its medical staff to developed nations. Virtually every African country is affected. Statistics from Britain’s Nursing and Midwifery Council showed that up to March 2002, over 2,000 African nurses left their countries to take up jobs in Britain. For instance, South Africa lost 2,114 nurses and midwives to Britain and Zimbabwe, 473 nurses.
Since the content of the bill became public knowledge, doctors and their unions have been lambasting the House of Representatives for the move. Tempers have been flaring, with the doctors claiming that the legislators are ill-informed to contemplate such a law, thus, picking holes in it, and vowing to stop the lawmakers on their track.
Expectedly, the National Association of Resident Doctors (NARD) rejected the bill. In a communique issued after the association’s emergency National Officers’ Committee (NOC) meeting, the resident doctors were particularly shocked by the bill’s sponsor, Hon. Johnson, and his attempts to enslave Nigerian-trained medical doctors. Also, an umbrella body of Nigerian medical doctors and dentists practising outside the country known as Diaspora Medical Association petitioned the National Assembly over the bill.
Similarly, the Medical and Dental Consultants of Nigeria (MDCAN) also faulted the bill. According to MDCAN, the proposed bill is harsh and discriminatory, lacking the basic ingredients of good faith. In a statement signed by the President, Dr Victor Makonhuola, and the Secretary-General, Dr Yemi Raji, MDCAN noted that the bill violated Section 34 (1) (b) of the Nigerian Constitution.
While we appreciate the passion and concern for the health of Nigerians as shown by Johnson in proposing this bill, we think it is misdirected, ill-informed, and poorly thought through. We wonder why the legislators should focus on medical doctors when Nigerians across all professions are fleeing the country to seek greener pastures abroad. Focusing attention only on the medical doctors is like curing one of many ailments that are threatening the life of a dying patient without finding solutions to the others.
The bill is undemocratic. It infringes on medical personnel’s freedom of movement to seek good means of livelihood elsewhere. It is laughable that these same legislators and their cronies in government who frequently go on medical trips overseas are now telling doctors where to work. Why do they not make a law against politicians going for medical tourism? Is it not our money these politicians spend abroad to treat themselves, while we have hospitals that are in dilapidated conditions?
The real motive for seeking to delay medical professionals from taking better opportunities overseas is yet to be seen. What Johnson advocates blatantly violates the acclaimed labour and market principles. The question is: how would the proposed law tackle the vexed issues of infrastructural deficits, low public investment, and poor workers’ welfare, as well as improve the quality of clinical outcomes in the least?
On the issue that medical workers must give back to society after enjoying subsidised training, it must be emphasised that bonding already exists in the civil service with clear guidelines for its application. Governments at both state and federal levels provide full sponsorship for university education at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels, with a proviso that they will bond individuals who benefit from such sponsorship for a specified number of years. This does not apply to subsidies.
Resolving the challenge of brain drain in the country’s health sector cannot be achieved through this bill. Rather, Nigeria needs to address the various factors that make skilled health workers desire to migrate from the country. They should direct considerable efforts at improving the health system, with sustainable investments, to make it conducive for health workers to work and achieve better outcomes. Besides, their work environment and career expectations must be prioritised.

Editorial

No To Political Office Holders’ Salary Hike

Published

1 day ago

September 22, 2025

Uchechukwu Okwum

Nigeria’s Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) has unveiled a gratuitous proposal to increase the salaries of political and public office holders in the country. This plan seeks to fatten the pay packets of the president, vice-president, governors, deputy governors, and members of the National and State Assemblies. At a time when the nation is struggling to steady its economy, the suggestion that political leaders should be rewarded with more money is not only misplaced but insulting to the sensibilities of the ordinary Nigerian.

What makes the proposal even more opprobrious is the dire economic condition under which citizens currently live. The cost of living crisis has worsened, inflation has eroded the purchasing power of workers, and the naira continues to tumble against foreign currencies. The majority of Nigerians are living hand to mouth, with many unable to afford basic foodstuffs, medical care, and education. Against this backdrop, political office holders, who already enjoy obscene allowances, perks, and privileges, should not even contemplate a salary increase.

It is, therefore, not surprising that the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has stepped in to challenge this development. SERAP has filed a lawsuit against the RMAFC to halt the implementation of this salary increment. This resolute move represents a voice of reason and accountability at a time when public anger against political insensitivity is palpable. The group is rightly insisting that the law must serve as a bulwark against impunity.

According to a statement issued by SERAP’s Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, the commission has been dragged before the Federal High Court in Abuja. Although a hearing date remains unconfirmed, the momentous step of seeking judicial redress reflects a determination to hold those in power accountable. SERAP has once again positioned itself as a guardian of public interest by challenging an elite-centric policy.

The case, registered as suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1834/2025, specifically asks the court to determine “whether RMAFC’s proposed salary hike for the president, vice-president, governors and their deputies, and lawmakers in Nigeria is not unlawful, unconstitutional and inconsistent with the rule of law.” This formidable question goes to the very heart of democratic governance: can those entrusted with public resources decide their own pay rises without violating the constitution and moral order?

In its pleadings, SERAP argues that the proposed hike runs foul of both the 1999 Nigerian Constitution and the RMAFC Act. By seeking a judicial declaration that such a move is unlawful, unconstitutional, and inconsistent with the rule of law, the group has placed a spotlight on the tension between self-serving leadership and constitutionalism. To trivialise such an issue would be harum-scarum, for the constitution remains the supreme authority guiding governance.

We wholeheartedly commend SERAP for standing firm, while we roundly condemn RMAFC’s selfish proposal. Political office should never be an avenue for financial aggrandisement. Since our leaders often pontificate sacrifice to citizens, urging them to tighten their belts in the face of economic turbulence, the same leaders must embody sacrifice themselves. Anything short of this amounts to double standards and betrayal of trust.

The Nigerian economy is not buoyant enough to shoulder the additional cost of a salary increase for political leaders. Already, lawmakers and executives enjoy allowances that are grossly disproportionate to the national average income. These earnings are sufficient not only for their needs but also their unchecked greed. To even consider further increments under present circumstances is egregious, a slap in the face of ordinary workers whose minimum wage remains grossly insufficient.

Resources earmarked for such frivolities should instead be channelled towards alleviating the suffering of citizens and improving the nation’s productive capacity. According to United Nations statistics, about 62.9 per cent of Nigerians were living in multidimensional poverty in 2021, compared to 53.7 per cent in 2017. Similarly, nearly 30.9 per cent of the population lives below the international poverty line of US$2.15 per day. These figures paint a stark picture: Nigeria is a poor country by all measurable standards, and any extra naira diverted to elite pockets deepens this misery.

Besides, the timing of this proposal could not be more inappropriate. At a period when unemployment is soaring, inflation is crippling households, and insecurity continues to devastate communities, the RMAFC has chosen to pursue elite enrichment. It is widely known that Nigeria’s economy is in a parlous state, and public resources should be conserved and wisely invested. Political leaders must show prudence, not profligacy.

Another critical dimension is the national debt profile. According to the Debt Management Office, Nigeria’s total public debt as of March 2025 stood at a staggering N149.39 trillion. External debt obligations also remain heavy, with about US$43 billion outstanding by September 2024. In such a climate of debt-servicing and borrowing to fund budgets, it is irresponsible for political leaders to even table the idea of inflating their salaries further. Debt repayment, not self-reward, should occupy their minds.

This ignoble proposal is insensitive, unnecessary, and profoundly reckless. It should be discarded without further delay. Public office is a trust, not an entitlement to wealth accumulation. Nigerians deserve leaders who will share in their suffering, lead by example, and prioritise the common good over self-indulgence. Anything less represents betrayal of the social contract and undermines the fragile democracy we are striving to build.

Editorial

No To Political Office Holders’ Salary Hike

Published

1 day ago

September 22, 2025

The Tide

Editorial

Rivers’ Retirees: Matters Arising

Published

2 weeks ago

September 8, 2025

The Tide

The Rivers State Government deserves commendation for the manner in which it conducted the last biometric exercise for pensioners in the state. For the first time in many years, the verification process was not only efficient but also humane, a development that has brought relief to a category of citizens that often bears the brunt of neglect.

Unlike previous verification exercises that left pensioners exhausted and unattended, the latest exercise set a refreshing precedent. Retirees were given proper and sumptuous meals, and in addition, the government paid the sum of N10,000 into their accounts to cushion their transportation costs. Such gestures go a long way in demonstrating that those who had laboured for the state are not forgotten in their twilight years.

The measure was particularly necessary given that some pensioners had to travel long distances to reach their verification centres. For elderly men and women, such journeys come with physical and financial strain. By recognising these realities and easing the burden, the government has shown that pensioners deserve dignity, not disdain.

Beyond this laudable act of consideration, the authorities must reflect on the very structure of pension verification. The era of compelling retirees to be physically present for routine verification should be reconsidered. With digital tools and innovation, the government can adopt systems that capture and confirm data without the stress of physical assembly. This is crucial for pensioners residing in other states or even abroad.

While we acknowledge the importance of verification in cleaning up pension records, we cannot ignore the darker side of the matter. It is regrettable that some allowances continue to be paid to deceased pensioners, with relatives fraudulently collecting the funds. The latest biometrics, thankfully, exposed some of these sharp practices. The exercise, therefore, is not only about order but also about justice.

We urge families of deceased pensioners to be patriotic enough to inform the government of the deaths of their loved ones. It is deeply shameful that in some instances, individuals attempted to impersonate late pensioners during the biometrics. Such behaviour undermines the spirit of honesty and deprives genuine retirees of their due entitlements.

The exercise also revealed another important area of concern: the health of pensioners. It is reassuring to learn that the state government has reportedly promised to take over the medical treatment of some retirees who arrived for the biometrics in critical condition. This is a step in the right direction. Elderly citizens, after years of service, should have access to special health care facilities in the state. Setting aside hospitals or designated centres for the aged is not just desirable but necessary.

While pension payments in Rivers State have remained consistent, attention must now be directed towards gratuities. Senior citizens deserve to receive their retirement benefits without the bureaucratic hitches that have often marred the process. After years of loyal service, nothing is more demoralising than to see retirees languish for want of their gratuities. Every worker, as Scripture reminds us, is worthy of his wage.

Retirement, in any civilised society, should not be reduced to a sentence of suffering. In dealing with pensioners, government must consistently wear a human face. The humane manner displayed during this verification exercise should not be a one-off. It must become the norm in all dealings with retirees. Measures must continually be put in place to ensure that they do not feel abandoned by the state they served.

One welcome innovation has already been introduced. The Sole Administrator of Rivers State, Vice Admiral (Rtd) Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas, has altered the method of gratuity payment. Pensioners now receive their monies directly into their bank accounts, eliminating the cheque-based system that for years served as fertile ground for corruption. This reform is both pragmatic and forward-looking. Similarly, the implementation of the N32,000 pension harmonisation is also commendable.

Direct payments gratuities ensure transparency and drastically reduce the possibility of diversion of funds. More importantly, they restore confidence in the system and assure pensioners that their entitlements will reach them without interference. In this way, the government has not only safeguarded the process but also upheld the principle of accountability.

Seamless gratuity payment has a ripple effect on the workforce as a whole. When workers are confident that retirement will not plunge them into hardship, the temptation to falsify age in order to remain in service is eliminated. Such reforms, therefore, enhance efficiency, honesty, and productivity in the public service.

In sum, the Rivers State Government has struck a refreshing chord in its handling of pension verification. It has shown empathy, innovation, and accountability. However, the momentum must be sustained, and the focus must shift towards modernising verification methods and prioritising retirees’ welfare in health, gratuity, and dignity.

When retirees are treated with compassion and fairness, the message to those still in service is clear: faithful service to the state will not go unrewarded. The humane verification exercise, though a single event, offers a hopeful glimpse of what governance can look like when people, especially the elderly, are placed at the heart of policy.