Editorial

Tackling The Rot In NCoS

Published

2 years ago

January 10, 2024

A recent disclosure that more than 3,418 inmates are currently on death row in correctional centres across Nigeria is a cause for alarm. The spokesman for the Nigerian Correctional Service (NCoS), Mr. Abubakar Umar, released this shocking revelation, adding that the total inmate population as of December 18, 2023, stood at 77,849. The stark gender disparity is also worth noting: 76,081 males and 1,768 females. The penal system also appears to be highly saturated with Awaiting Trial Inmates (ATIs) numbering 53,836.
The figures in question call for a need to critically examine and challenge the existing penal policy in Nigeria, especially regarding the death penalty. The state of a nation’s prisons often provides an unadulterated reflection of its society. Critics may argue that it is unequivocally wrong to judge a country by its prisons, citing that this may not paint an accurate picture of national values and development.
However, taking Nigeria as an example, we can convincingly counter such an argument. Judged by the parlous state of its prisons, Nigeria is perceived as a nascent and underdeveloped country with the perpetration of a facsimile of progress. Life in Nigerian prisons can be profoundly challenging. Unlike in some other countries, where prisons aim to rehabilitate offenders, Nigerian prisons often fail to achieve this goal. Instead, inmates are more likely to be influenced by criminal behaviour during their time behind bars, increasing the chances of recidivism after their release.
According to a report published by the Daily Mail of London in 2009, the conditions in Nigerian jails were deemed to be extremely harsh. As a result, Britain made an offer to construct a more humane prison facility in Nigeria, to accommodate approximately 400 Nigerian convicts who had committed crimes within the United Kingdom. This proposal was motivated by the understanding that prisoners facing deportation from the UK could potentially resist being sent back to Nigeria by claiming violations of their human rights.
In Germany, it has been reported that incarcerated individuals experience a certain degree of freedom of movement within their facilities, and are entrusted with the responsibility to make wise choices regarding how they utilise their time. Occasionally, they are granted the opportunity to temporarily leave the prison premises, either for a few hours or overnight, to visit loved ones. However, the situation in Nigeria markedly differs, as the inmates often emerge from their confinement hardly reformed. Upon completing their prison sentences, they appear more dehumanised than dignified.
The revelation of the presence of 3,418 prisoners awaiting execution in correctional facilities throughout Nigeria is disconcerting. This statistic indicates a disregard for the inherent worth of human dignity, and highlights systemic dysfunction within the criminal justice system. Following the conviction and imposition of death penalties, the state governors, who bear the duty to authorise death warrants, must cease evading their constitutional obligation, and instead, aid in alleviating the overcrowding in custodial centres.
Typically, the task is challenging. In contrast to autocracies, leaders in numerous democracies exhibit hesitancy towards implementing the death penalty. Debates regarding its ethical nature, efficacy, and equity are prevalent globally. Amnesty International reports that 112 countries have abolished the death penalty either legally or in practice. On the other hand, 55 countries, such as Nigeria, maintain the death penalty for severe crimes in their legal codes.
Unfortunately, state governors find themselves in a state of conflict because of the decisions they have to make. However, the choice they need to make is evident. Like the president, governors are empowered by the Constitution to exercise their discretion in matters of mercy. This includes the ability to reduce death sentences to imprisonment, release individuals who are on death row, or grant them full pardon. On the other hand, they also have the option to approve the death warrants, particularly those who have exhausted all avenues for appeal and have had their sentences confirmed by the Supreme Court.
A joint effort by the federal legislature and the executive branch to revamp Nigeria’s inadequate prisons appears to be in danger of failing. The proposal to restructure the prisons became tangible when former President Muhammadu Buhari approved the Nigerian Correctional Service Bill. The bill, which had been neglected by the National Assembly for several years before its passage, altered the previous name of the Nigerian Prisons Service to the Nigerian Correctional Service. However, certain aspects of the new law are already falling behind the rapidly changing circumstances in society.
Thus far, the alteration of the name is merely superficial, as the prisons have not yet experienced any critical transformation. For many years, these facilities have been unsightly, completely contradicting their initial purpose. Following inadequate funding, deplorable nourishment, and a lack of expansion efforts, overcrowding has become an unfortunately well-known issue. In Lagos, the five federal prisons, originally designed to house 4,087 inmates, currently hold 9,044 inmates as of March, a predicament shared by all other prisons in the nation.
A profound paradigm shift occurred with the last constitutional amendment in Nigeria, eliciting an extraordinary transformation in the landscape of the nation’s correctional system. This shift lies in the devolution of prison ownership and management, transferring the power from the Federal Government to the States. While this may seem a logistical or even a trifle bureaucratic change to an uninformed observer, those knowledgeable about Nigeria’s prison system understand its potential impact on a long-standing problem: prison congestion.
Governors should utilise the excellent opportunity to experiment with various models of correctional facilities.
President Bola Tinubu, and Interior Minister, Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo, should prioritise the issue of prison decongestion. It is important to note that despite previous promises made by officials, little progress has been achieved. Tunji-Ojo’s recent commitment to releasing 4,000 inmates is a positive step forward.
It is, indeed, crucial to reactivate the mercy machinery and conduct thorough reviews to assess options for clemency, such as reducing sentences. The huge population of awaiting trial prisoners is a disgrace, and state governors and state chief judges must approach this task with resolve and seriousness. It clearly paints a picture of a failed justice administration system, which must be immediately addressed from the law enforcement agencies, especially police, to the judicial officers. A situation where almost 70percent of the inmate population are ATIs is unacceptable. The time to act is now!

Editorial

Charge Before New Rivers Council Helmsmen

Published

6 days ago

September 29, 2025

The Tide

On the 30th of August, Rivers people trooped out to participate in local government elections conducted across the state. These elections, which produced new chairmen and councillors for the 23 local government areas (LGAs), were organised by the Rivers State Independent Electoral Commission (RSIEC). The exercise has ushered in a new crop of grassroots leaders whose shoulders now bear the responsibility of steering the affairs of their respective councils. With the polls concluded and winners duly announced, the time has come for the newly elected officials to roll up their sleeves and begin the hard work of governance.

According to the results declared by RSIEC, the All Progressives Congress (APC) secured a dominant lead, winning chairmanship seats in 20 of the 23 local government councils, while the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) clinched the remaining three. This outcome not only reflects the current political dynamics in the state but also places a significant weight of expectation on the shoulders of the APC-led councils to justify the confidence reposed in them by the electorate. It is imperative that political rhetoric now gives way to tangible development, especially at the grassroots level where government is felt most directly.

Following the elections, the successful chairmen were officially sworn into office by the former Sole Administrator of Rivers State, Vice Admiral (rtd) Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas. The solemn ceremony marked a transition from campaign promises to the reality of public service. With their inauguration complete, the time for celebration has ended; the time for delivery has commenced. The electorate now awaits meaningful action that reflects the hopes and aspirations of the voting public.

As helmsmen of their various LGAs, these leaders must quickly settle down to work. Their constituents expect them to provide direction, formulate policies, and execute programmes that will uplift communities long neglected. The local government tier is closest to the people and, as such, must rise above politicking to meet the everyday needs of the citizenry. It is not enough to occupy office; they must make their impact visibly and positively felt across their domains.

The Supreme Court ruling mandating direct allocation of funds to local governments—although not yet fully implemented—is a welcome development that underscores the autonomy of the third tier of government. Once this is operationalised, the excuses often cited for underperformance will no longer hold water. With funds directly accessed from the Federation Account, council administrations will be better empowered to meet the developmental needs of their localities, if only they manage resources judiciously and prioritise the right projects.

The onus is now on the chairmen to contribute meaningfully to the broader development of Rivers State. The state government cannot and should not be expected to do everything. Local government councils have defined responsibilities—ranging from rural infrastructure, primary healthcare, and basic education to waste management and local security—that must be adequately addressed. It is high time they stopped passing the buck and started acting as the elected leaders they are.

We extend our congratulations to all who emerged victorious in the elections. However, with this victory comes great responsibility. It is no longer about party affiliations or electoral campaigns; it is about governance. The chairmen must launch people-centred projects that will genuinely improve the lives of the rural populace—projects in water supply, road maintenance, school renovation, and youth empowerment, among others. Let their tenure be remembered for its impact, not its slogans.

Central to their mandate should be the welfare of workers. Council employees form the engine room of local governance, and their morale significantly affects service delivery. The new chairmen must ensure regular payment of salaries, staff training, and a conducive working environment. Neglecting this vital aspect will only hinder whatever grand plans they may have for their LGAs.

It is also essential to institute a robust peer review mechanism. The new LG officials should not operate in isolation; rather, they should learn from one another, share ideas, and compete constructively in a bid to outperform each other in service delivery. Healthy competition among council areas will drive innovation and foster accelerated development. Such a system will also help the public identify high-performing councils for emulation.

Given the typically short tenure of council administrations, it is crucial that they focus on projects that are realistic and impactful. Time and resources should not be wasted on white elephant ventures that are neither sustainable nor beneficial to the people. Instead, chairmen should pursue programmes that match their timelines and address immediate community needs.

Peace and security must remain a cardinal objective for all council steersmen. Regardless of who facilitated their election or what political loyalties they hold, they must ensure peace reigns in their areas. Development cannot thrive in an atmosphere of tension and distrust. These leaders must work closely with traditional rulers, youth groups, and civil society organisations to maintain law and order.

A critical understanding must also prevail—that chairmen are leaders of the people, not just leaders of political parties. They must conduct themselves as impartial administrators serving all constituents, irrespective of political affiliations. Additionally, they must work harmoniously with the state governor, who remains the leader of the state. Petty rivalries and political infighting serve no purpose in the development agenda.

Now that the elections are over and governance has begun, it is essential for these chairmen and councillors to adopt an inclusive approach. They must carry everyone along—party members and opposition alike—in their development plans. Creating division or playing favourites will only fracture communities and stall progress. Leadership at the grassroots demands fairness, equity, and a listening ear.

Rivers people have played their part by coming out to vote. The baton has now been passed to the new council helmsmen. They must seize the opportunity to leave lasting legacies in their communities. History will not judge them by the number of rallies they held or the speeches they gave, but by the quality of life they brought to their people. Let them not squander this moment.

Editorial

No To Political Office Holders’ Salary Hike

Published

2 weeks ago

September 22, 2025

The Tide

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.