I read it twice and did a third to study only the portions
that are of interest to my initial interest. My initial interest arose from
concerns that the operation and interests of a Professional Association to
which I belong and which we have
ordinarily regarded as an NGO, might be adversely affected if the draft Bill
becomes Law.
Part A
For the purpose of that my initial interest, the most
interesting section to me is PART VII - MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS, paragraph 57
where the definition of a NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATION, for the purpose of the
Bill, is provided.
Arising therefrom, my conclusion is that our Association,
for the purpose of that draft Bill, is NOT an NGO.
For me, what is not STATED in Legislation is not INTENDED in
Law, and I say that with no pretense to any expertise in Jurisprudence. It is
common knowledge that this position has been canvassed and accepted in Court.
In SPIRIT and in WORDS of the draft Bill, the Association is
not a candidate for registration by the intended Non-governmental Organisations
Regulatory Commission.
(Using the same argument, I hold the opinion that churches
and mosques, village-, community-, or professional Associations, do not come
under the purview of the intended Non-governmental Organisations Regulatory
Commission.
For purposes of argument, I will normally expect to see some
key words which associate very closely to objective of associations that are
intended to be regulated. For churches and mosques the word ‘spiritual’ is
critical. For the professions, the word is ‘professional’. For community
associations the word is ‘cultural’. All these are missing in the draft bill
and they are, to that extent, and in my opinion, not included in the catchment
group that the bill aims at.
Ordinarily, one should just stop here since the issue of
interest is whether or not the Association's operations and interests are under
any threat if the draft Bill becomes Law.
I suggest the Association seeks legal advice on the matter
IF the subject poses sufficient concern.
For me, it does not.
Part B
Having said that, concern about the draft bill is currently
trending and having read it,
I should have an
opinion.
I therefore express the following views on the draft NGO
Bill.
INTRO
I am old enough to be familiar with bandwagon effect of
opinions that are traded by some privileged persons who take advantage of
massive illiteracy and inability of a large number of our citizens to read
documents by themselves and thereby use sentiments of religion, tribe and class
to sell dummies to the masses. In many cases, people criticize books that they
have not read, condemn opinions that they have not heard and participate in
protests that have no foundation
NOW THE DRAFT BILL
1. WEAK COMMISSION
The composition of membership of the Board of the Commission
makes it civil servants heavy. Eight of the nineteen members are representing
various Federal Ministries. Although no specific skills or expertise are
required of these representatives of the Federal Ministries nor of any of the
other members, indeed a tenure of four years is attached to their stay on the
Board renewable for another four and no more. All of them aside the executive
Secretary are part-time. This makes it a Board that will be ineffective. Such
ineffective Boards are usually used by Governments for ulterior purposes.
Impliedly, this Commission has a high prospect of being used by Government to
destroy any NGO of their choice even for no good reasons.
Of course safeguards are provided against abuse but all
based on a weak foundation.
2. MISCHIEF
A law scholar and Professor is known to have taken 5.5
minutes of a video clip, shared over social media recently to denounce and
campaign against the draft Bill. I received 11 copies within 24 hours from
various sources and contacts all preaching nothing but emotions. The Prof
preaches vehemently to emotions such as religion, community interests, and
humanitarianism to condemn the objective and modus operandi of the intended
Commission and asks that Nigerians rise to oppose it. He says "it is
totalitarian" and the "most dangerous piece of legislation to have
come to the National Assembly since 1999".
These are mere exaggerations.
I have the experience of participation in canvassing argument
against some intended legislation for use in my industry and after our
technical presentation to the legislators, they bowed to our opinion. Some of
such bills never went far. I expect the professor to do better than drawing
ignorant masses to a battle they know nothing about.
Going by my own understanding, the bill does not regard
churches, mosques or community associations as NGOs for its purpose contrary to
what the professor preaches. The professor's method is, therefore, at best,
unfair. He is merely taking advantage of Nigerians' gullibility especially
knowing that many Nigerians cannot read and those who can read do not read. He
sounds like merely playing TRANSFERED AGGRESSION in the sense that he may have
other issues or motives that make him a self-made opposition to governance of
the day.
3. UNDUE GRAGRA
A Senator of the Federal Republic has also issued a PRESS
RELEASE condemning the object and spirit of the draft Bill while vowing to
’kill’ it when it comes to the Senate for concurrence.
This is mere theatre as he may as well use his position to
stop the bill within the Senate process without playing to the gallery.
When did it become normal that a legislator who wants to
‘kill’ a bill first makes public his desire to do so through a press release!
For God's sake go ahead to 'kill' and stop boasting.
4. AN ALBATROSS
The draft Bill is a certain albatross for NGOs that are
appendages of foreign interests or donors whose mission might not have been
salutary to Nigeria's all along. To the extent that several of the existing
NGOs are in this class, nobody should expect the draft Bill to go without
facing a bitter fight from that sector.
5. RIDICULOUS
it is reported that one NGO in particular has pushed it's
objection to the draft Bill to the level of United Nations asking that the
Nigerian legislature be stopped from passing the motion sought by the draft
Bill into law. That is ridiculous.
It shows the extent of desperation of several NGOs who are
bound to feel threatened by the proposed law.
6. ACCOUNTABILITY, NATIONAL INTEREST
I see the objective of the bill as salutary to the extent
that it is asking that NGOs be accountable and to forestall Nigeria being
vulnerable to ulterior machination of external forces that can destabilise our
country through the use of poor but pampered NGOs.
7. NOT YET A GOOD DRAFT
While I sympathise with the objective of the proposed
legislation I am unable to agree that the draft Bill has prepared genuine
ground for meeting such laudable objective in concrete terms.
8. COULD BE BETTER
A legislation that means well but poorly drafted should only
be reworked and improved through the genuine process of wider consultation and
public participation in law making. That I believe, our legislative process
allows for.
*From the Observatory of Titi Omo-Ettu, Uyo, Nigeria
No comments:
Post a Comment