Nigeria Archives - Page 9 of 9 - HUMAN RIGHTS AND CONFLICTS RESOLUTION CENTRE ABAKALIKI

May 9, 2018May 10, 2018

MY RIGHTS AS A PERSON

Welcome to our second post on Know Your Rights media project.

Our interest today is to understand what constitutes rights for an individual, and how this relates to other peoples rights. As usual, we shall begin with a story.

Evelyn and Sandra were very good friends. It happened that both friends became pregnant with Sandra being in her 9th month and Evelyn 2 months and 2 weeks less. One day, they both got into hot quarrel which eventually led to a fight. In the process, Sandra gave Evelyn a heavy kick on her pultruded stomach. Both friends developed pregnancy complications as result of the fight. Sandra immediately went into labour, was rushed to the hospital and delivered a baby girl with much ease. On her part, Evelyn equally got into premature labour and had to be forced to deliver a premature baby girl through C-session. For Evelyn, it was a narrow escape as both mother and child nearly missed chances. Evelyns husband is furious and wants Sandra to pay for the problems she caused, including the pains and trauma he went through during the trying times for his wife. Sandra and her husband believes the problems wouldnt have arose were it not for Evelyns running mouth. The neighbours who witnessed the fight, and many of whom had to assist the women to access help were equally disappointed of the duos public nuisance

About this story, we might ask:

$Does Sandra have a right to react to provocation?

$To what extent can she react?

$Do the two women need to consider the impacts of their actions (fighting) on others (the babies in their wombs, their husbands and the neighbours)?

These questions are key to understanding the scope and nature of rights as personified realities. It is true that as an individual human person, I am meant to enjoy certain rights/privileges without inhibition. But how are my rights related to those of others in my web of relationships? For instance, under the pretence of freedom of expression (enshrined in Nigerian Constitution and laws), many believe that they can go about saying anything about any person regardless of the truth-content of their expressions. Such a people represents Evelyn in the story above; they seem to possess running mouths. In similar nature, the rights to self-preservation covered in international instruments like UN Universal Declaration, article 3 (right to life, liberty, personal security), is sometimes interpreted to include unbridled act of self-defence at the slightest provocation. This is the case of Sandra in the story. She and her husband felt justified on the ground that Sandra acted out of provocation.

The point missed by these people (the Evelyns and Sandras) is that rights and responsibilities are co-extensive. They always go hand-in-hand; hence, the saying, YOUR RIGHTS STOP WHERE MINE BEGIN. While rights are fundamental privileges that are everyones due, they are never absolute in the sense that it considers relationships. This is why Okpara Okpara writes in Human Rights: Law & Practice in Nigeria (2005:42) that every human being is both the subject and object of rights. As subject, the being is expected to initiate actions to further the respects of rights, and as object, the being is a recipient of respects of rights. If we understand this correctly then, as we demand respect of our rights from others, we would equally deem it fit to extend it to others.

Consequently, it is important to highlight the responsibilities of the two women to the babies in their womb. Especially, in the context of Nigerian law which considers the foetus, though not as a human person, but criminalizes any act with intent to cause harm to the unborn child (covered in both Criminal and Penal Code, and the Constitution which is admittedly pro-life).

In the foregoing, it seems appropriate to assert thus, that taking care to respect the rights of others go a long way to promote ours. It works this way. If everyone respects everyone elses rights, individuals rights become safeguarded.

To conclude, let us take note of our take-away point: if human rights is everyones due privileges, then, no one is meant to suffer any disadvantage with regard to respecting rights. But this can only happen if people have appropriate attitude to rights consideration; it is one that always bear in mind the responsibility to respect the rights of others.

Thank you for the read, and please, share/like our posts/page. Also, dont hoard your thoughts about our posts; comment and let us know what you think.

Contributors: C. O. Ikegbunam Esq.
C. A. Nwankwo Esq.
D. A. Okoliko

May 9, 2018May 10, 2018

Essential Attributes of HRs: (1) UNIVERSALITY

Earlier this year, a young boy ran to our office crying for help. He was physically distressed and had a deep and fresh wound on the back of his head. The boy’s face and shirt were terribly stained all over by blood. He told us, his father inflicted the head-injury on him, and that it was not the first nor the second time he had suffered similar fate from his father. A team of HRCRC staff followed the boy to his parents’ home for fact-finding mission. It was discovered that his father had inflated the injury on him because of his ‘stubbornness’. When the father was found and questioned as to why he had to beat his child to that extent, he bluntly said: “na you go teach me how I de take raise my children? Na my child e be na. Ah! I can do whatever I want na. Forget tha’una human right thing. Na oyibo matter o. Here na Naija abeg”.

Like the father of the boy referred to above, many believe that the entirety or some aspects of human rights (HRs) claims are not applicable to some persons (sometimes, because of the location, race, gender, culture, religion, profession, and other accidental attributes of such persons). Others (especially in Africa) even hold it that the notion of HRs is alien to them. To these persons, gender equality, social equity, child rights, fair wage, and other issues on the fore front of international struggles to improve human conditions are simply noises from individuals who are probably seeking attention and sympathy.

The assumptions alluded to above are misconceived, and it is what #KnowYourRights post this week wants to address. Rights due to A because A is a human person should not be denied to B if B is a human person. This is simple logic, and it is the basis of the universality of rights. If you were to find “the lowest common factor” between a child living in America, an adult woman in Asia, and an adult man in Africa, you cannot avoid the conclusion that they are all human beings. Our common humanity demands that we all share in equal dignity. Hence, the forms in which our humanity manifest (that we are black, male, female, pastor, son, wife, physically challenged, from the east or west, a Christian or Muslim, etc) is inconsequential to the obligation we all owe each other. It is that we are to respect human dignity wherever the human being exists.

If you consider the foregoing and relate it to our story, the boy’s father cannot absolve himself from gross failure to treat his child with human dignity by subjecting the latter to torture. His being a Nigerian (as if Nigerian laws permit that parents can do anything to their children) is immaterial to the demand of fairness in this case. In fact, Child Rights Act (2003), a federal instrument of law which has been domesticated in many states of Nigeria (including Ebonyi) expressly criminalises torture and other maltreatment of children. Also note that the law does not care whether such children are yours biologically or by other means (including acquisition for help or fostering).

In the case of care for children, the wise sayings of Nelson Mandela, the first democratically elected President of South Africa, is apt for consideration. Mandela once said: “We owe our CHILDREN the most vulnerable citizens in any society – a life free from VIOLENCE AND FEAR.” Whether a child is in Umuezekeoha in Ezza North LGA of Ebonyi State, or in New York City, the child deserves special care for the reason that (1) their dignity is the same, and (2), “Children [everywhere] are our most valuable resource” (Herbert Hoover).

To conclude thus, it should be noted that HRs are not some discretionary privileges that may be enjoyed by some and not all human beings (take home point for this week’s #KnowYourRights post). To drive home the strength of this assertion, Barbara de Mori (2002) succinctly puts it that HRs exist “independently of recognition or implementation in the customs or legal systems of particular countries”. In other words, the universality of HRS is such that cultural or other idiosyncratic claims about certain HRs tenets does not hold in reference to claims concerning HRs values.

Contributors: C. O. Ikegbunam Esq.
C. A. Nwankwo Esq.
D. A. Okoliko

Disclaimer:
This is a free educational material and not a source of legal advice. If you need any, please consult your lawyer.

May 9, 2018May 10, 2018

Is child rights protected by law?

Recently a story about a 4-year-old girl, Uloma, made a headline in a regional newspaper, Citizens’ Advocate. Uloma was found in a slave-like manner under the watch of a certain woman, Mrs Nwali Josephine. The woman is not the little girl’s mother. Weeks before Uloma was discovered, she hawked for her ‘madam’, Mrs Nwali, with little care and feed. Her suffering was terrible such that when the Ministry of Women Affairs and Social Development found her, she was ill and had pultruding stomach indicating poor care and feeding.

You might be wondering how Uloma ended up with Mrs Nwali? Well, her mother, Veronica Igwe traded with Mrs Nwali at a rice-mill and could not pay up a balance of N 100. Uloma was then exchanged in place of the debt pending when her mother could pay. Now in the police custody over alleged child trafficking, Mrs Nwali and Mrs Igwe are wondering why anyone should frown at their actions. Was Uloma not freely given by her mother, and didn’t Mrs Nwali promise to return the child whenever she gets her pay back?

It is not difficult to see the error in the above reasoning. While the two adults engage each other in a contractual agreement, the involvement of the child problematizes their action. Child rights is a fundamental issue worldwide, and both Nigeria’s laws and international instruments have special provision for child rights protection. Often times however, interest of the child is rarely or never factored whenever adults take decisions that involve a child as it happened in Uloma’s case. The fact that children everywhere are generally dependent heightens their vulnerability. It is precisely for this reason however, that the UN Conventions on the Rights of the Child (CRC) {28/11/1989} sets out principles to mainstream child interest, such that in all nations of the world, for every act which may impact on a child, the interest of that child takes precedence. The African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, adopted at the General Assembly of AU in 1990 also prioritises child’s interest, insisting the child has the right to grow up in the family environment free from violence, fear and torture.

To step it down, beyond the provisions of the Nigeria’s Constitution in Chapter IV which sets out fundamental rights, and which in principle, are extensive to children, recent effort to give special consideration to the spate of child rights violation in Nigeria has seen the UN’s CRC domesticated as Child Rights Acts in 2003. Many states have keyed into the federal Act by enacting laws to that effect including Lagos, Ebonyi (in 2010), Enugu (in 2016) and 21 others (living 12 more states behind).

Despite this effort however, more Nigerian child are exposed to violence and abuse ranging from physical to psychological and sexual. The fact that recent survey (2014) by the National Population Commission (supported by UNICEF and the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention) indicates that 6 out of 10 children experience at least one form of violence before their 18th birthday should make us all to shudder and awaken in us a sense of urgency to campaign aggressively against child rights violations in our society. Nelson Mandela made a remark that has import for this call. He once said:

“Safety and security don’t just happen, they are the result of collective consensus and public investment. We owe our CHILDREN the most vulnerable citizens in any society – a life FREE from VIOLENCE and FEAR”. It is up to you and us to ensure we don’t have more Uloma situations in our communities.

When it comes to human rights, we must not forget that existence of a law giving express protection to them is not the only ground to ensure their respect. This point has been made in a Journal of Jurisprudence (2010), vol. 1, by Gumbis, J. et al. who argues that “the fact that a person has rights has nothing to do with enacting these rights in legal document”. It is rather embedded in the natural principle upholding human dignity. Thus, legal lacuna can never justify actions negating human dignity in any clime.

Shalom!

Contributors: C. O. Ikegbunam Esq.
C. A. Nwankwo Esq.
D. A. Okoliko

Disclaimer:
This is a free educational material and not a source of legal advice. If you need any, please consult your lawyer.

May 9, 2018May 10, 2018

RIGHT TO FAIR HEARING

As Ngozi descended the stairs into the mall hall at the first floor, she just knew she hadn’t been treated right. Tears welled up in her eyes and her knees were still trembling. How come she was not given a chance to defend herself? Each time she attempted to speak before her supervisor and the HR, they shouted her down.

Earlier in the morning, at about 8.00 hours, she was at her post as a cashier in a popular and busy mall. She had resumed at about 7.20 which was 10 minutes away from the red time of 7.30. As she was dressing her stands and fixing up the machine to get ready for the day’s job, Mr. Anale called up to her, instructing that she go see the top boss upstairs. It was at the boss’s office she was handed a note that spelled she was no longer needed at her place of work.

Before being given the letter, the boss had told her the management got a report on her that she fought a customer on her way home the previous day. According to them, the said customer had raised some issues concerning a transaction Ngozi handled for her during the day and instead of showing ‘a good customer relationship’, Ngozi engaged her in a public fight.

“That is unacceptable from any of our staff. You’re hereby fired”.
______________________________________________

The story above presents us an interesting scenario that is very much related to article 10 of UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The article provides for rights to “fair and public hearing”and is enshrined in the Nigerian Constitution under Chapter 4, section 36. Ngozi case is chosen because it mirrors what often happens at homes, public instructions (e.g. church, schools, and hospitals) and private institutions when people are summarily judged of having committed offense. Whenever people are condemned without an opportunity to present their defense, they are left grieved. Fundamentally, such incident negates natural justice which provides that anyone accused should have,Fair hearing,that is, such an individual is given an opportunity to present evidence to support this or her case and to discover what evidence exists against him or her. Fair hearing must not be only in a criminal or civil trial as in a court. It also applies to administrative procedures to entertain complaint as provided for in section 36, subsection 1 of the Nigerian Constitution (1999 as amended):

“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”.

Criminal case deserves special attention as often times, extra-judicial killings/corporal punishment take place in many communities within our country. African Commission on Human and People’s Rights (ACHPR) provides Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa (2003). A(1) provides in clear terms that “in the determination of any criminal charge against a person, or of a person’s rights and obligations, everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a legally constituted competent, independent and impartial judicial body”. In other words, it is not in the place of a mob or group of persons other than CONSTITUTED authorities to hear, convict and met out punishment to anyone SUSPECTED to have committed a crime or an offence. And section 36(4) of the Nigerian Constitution grants 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”. Under these instruments, ‘jungle justice’ or mob killing/punishment is criminalised. This is because, in whatever form they come, summary judgement takes away element of justice, fair hearing, by which an accused is supposed to have a chance for reasonable defence. In the case of ‘jungle justice’, section 36(5) of the Nigerian Constitution which provides that a suspect of any crime is presumed innocent until proven guilty is blatantly violated. Note that where the accused is to be ‘proven guilty’ is not at the market square, the police post or at the field. It is at a hearing that is constituted by “competent, independent and impartial judicial body” (e.g., the court, tribunal or administrative authority vested to entertain specific complaint).

Back to Ngozi, what can she do given the circumstances surrounding her dismal from job? If the company where she was fired from has higher authority than that which effected her dismal, she can appeal to it for redress. Another option is to institute legal action in the interest of her fundamental rights. Caution however, is needed. The action needs to take into cognisance terms of engagement between the employer and Ngpzi, and Nigeria Labour Laws. Michael Dugeri, a Regulatory Compliance and Commercial Law Advisor, offers insights on the difference between termination of a contract of employment and a dismissal under Nigeria’s legal system. According to him, “In Nigeria, an employer can terminate the contract of employment with his worker at any time and for any reason or for no reason at all provided that the terms of the contract of service between them are complied with”. See Olaniyan v. University of Lagos (1985) 2 NWLR (Pt. 9) 599 – 685 and Opuo v. NNPC (2001) 14 NWLR (Pt. 734) 552. With dismissal however, the employer is required to give reason for the action. See Union Bank of Nigeria Plc v. Soares (2012) 11 NWLR (Pt. 3112) 550.

Our take is that whether termination or dismissal, there are procedures (could be internal or external, e.g. labour laws), and the principle of fair hearing is central to the integrity of that procedure. Ramatu Umar-Bako (2012) cited a case which highlights this point:

“On 20 May 2011, a Federal High Court sitting in lagos, nullified the dismissal of the former Director – General of the Nigerian Stock Exchange (NSE), Professor Ndi Okereke – Onyuike and awarded her N500 million naira in damages for exemplary and aggravated damages for recklessness. It held that Okereke – Onyuike’s RIGHT TO FAIR HEARING was breached, the letters removing her were reckless, hasty and done in bad faith. The Judge maintained that it was ridiculous for the NSE to remove her within 24 hours based on bad and unverified allegations’ and that the NSE did not comply with the condition precedent in removing the plaintiff.”

This landmark judgement should serve to encourage other employees who have been unfairly dismissed like Ngozi in Nigeria. Equally, organisations can learn from it to avoid facing legal actions by ensuring employees are fairly treated before dismissal.

For a detailed account of principles and guidelines on fair trial, see ACHPR’s Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa (2003).

Shalom!

Contributors: C. O. IkegbunamEsq.
C. A. Nwankwo Esq.
D. A. Okoliko

Disclaimer:
This is a free educational material and not a source of legal advice. If you need any, please consult your lawyer.

May 9, 2018

Fr. Kevin O’Hara (SPS) is honoured

HRCRC congratulates Fr. Kevin O’Hara (SPS) for his most recent Humanitarian Award given in recognition of his ‘outstanding contribution to the promotion of human rights in Nigeria’. The award was bestowed on him by CAPIO (Carmelite Prisoners’ Interest Organisation), a rights-based organisation in Enugu State in October 2017.

Fr. Kevin is well known for his activism in the area of human rights, rule of law, democracy and peace. The native of Stranorlar, a small town in the Finn Valley of County Donegal in Ireland has been in Nigeria since 1980 when he first came into the country as a St Patrick’s Missionary Society priest. Observing gross violations of human rights especially in the Nigerian prisons and police cells in his place of ministry in the Eastern Nigeria, Fr Kevin was moved to act. He founded Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Centre, then known by the name Human Rights Commission (this was before Nigerian government established Human Rights Commission in 1995). The group was dedicated to the welfare of prisons and cells, touring cities, towns and villages across Ebonyi, Enugu, Abia, Benue and Cross River states.

The same passion to stand up for rights of the marginalised moved him to also establish the Centre for Corporate Responsibility (CCR) in Port-Harcourt and later Stakeholders Alliance for Corporate Accountability (SACA) in Bayelsa State. His activities with these groups helped to shed lights on the unwholesome practices of the extractive industries in the Niger Delta as a result of which the indigenous people of the region found themselves in deplorable socio-ecological conditions. ‘The goat in the flow station’, one of his notable documentary, was screened across Europe and America as a major indictment against the multinationals in the extractive industries of Niger Delta thereby creating a radical shift to the narrative on corporate social responsibilities vis-à-vis indigenous people’s rights to development.

Although, Fr. Kevin, an alumnus of Bath University, UK (studied Responsibility and Business Practice) now heads the St Patrick’s Missionary Society in West Africa as the District Leader, he remains a staunch defender and promoter of human rights in Nigeria. And while he is not new to awards as he has been given numerous recognitions for his contribution to humanity (e.g. he is a recipient of United Nations Award for ‘Waging Peace through Development”), for us at HRCRC (his very first love) we take this forum to congratulate him and wish him well.