Month: Jul 2019

By Omotayo Johnson.

1.1 THE BILL IN SUCCINCT SUMMARY:
It’s An Act To Prohibit Frivolous Petitions And Other Matters Connected Therewith.
It was sponsore by; Senator Bala Ibn Na’Allah
(Section 1) of it provides that; irrespective of the contents of any law, it is unlawful to submit any petition or statement intended to report any person for investigation or inquiry except with a dully sworn affidavit in the high court (of a state or federation as the case may be) that confirms the contents are true
(section 2) provides that any complaint not followed by a sworn affidavit shall be incompetent
(section 3) sub (1)provides that any person who unlawfully uses, publish or cause to be published any complaint not supported by a sworn affidavit is guilty of offence and if convicted is liable to 6 months imprisonment without the option of fine.
sub(2) provides that any person who acts, uses or caused to be used any petition or complaint not accompanied by a dully sworn affidavit shall be deemed to have commited an offence and upon conviction shall be liable to an imprisonment of 2 years or a fine of 2millon naira or both.
sub(3) provides that where any person circumvents this law and publish any statement or petition through any medium with a malicious intent to to discredit any person, group of persons govt institution etc, such person shall be guilty of offense and upon conviction liable of an imprisonment of 2yrs or a fine of 4million naira.
(4) provides that where any person use any media; whatsapp, tweets, sms etc to post any abusive statement knowing such to be false but with the intent to set the public against any person, group of persons or govt institution such person shall be guilty of offense and upon conviction liable of 2yrs imprisonment or a fine of 2million or both.
1.2 INSTANCES OF FRIVOLOUS PETITON IN NIGERIA

1. Justice Aloma Mukthar former (CJN) on the introduction of some strigent conditions for petitions against judges in 2009 stated that within a period of 3months she assumed office 139 petitions was received of which 106 were “vexatious and baseless” and only 33 “worthy of attention”.
2. On June 2015, 3 socio political groups in Abia state namely; (Ndi Abia League, Abia Youths Consultative Forum and Abia Peoples Congress) petitioned President Muhammodu Buhari over delay in trial of former Abia State Governor Dr. Orji Uzor Kalu for allegedly looting the states funds during his 8yrs reign.
3. On November 11 2016, a group known as (Go Petition) accused and petitioned the Federal Government to stop passing wrong information about (MMM) which they termed ‘FREE MMM NIGERIA’. One which many Nigerians have suffered huge loss to the scam.
   1.3 DEMERITS AND MERITS OF THE BILL
   1.3.1 DEMERITS
4. Major demerit of the bill is it’s a threat and possible infringement on the freedom of expression of the citizens.
   1.3.2 MERITS
5. The bill will help to save invaluable time that can be expended on other pertinent matters in the country to improve good governance, rather than on investigation of unnecessary matters.
6. It will save government funds from been expended on irrelevant and frivolous matters. E.g investigation.
7. The bill will help to retain and maintain dignity of public figures and thereby protect them incessant defamation from among the Nigerian polity.
8. The penalties stipulated in the bill will constrain busy bodies or politician machineries from being used to cause distraction to the government.
9. The bill is an improvement on section (section 373-376 of the Criminal code), which tends to tackle defamation.
   1.4 CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND ITS EXCEPTION(S) (explained)
   (Section 39) sub (1) provides entitlement to freedom of expression, freedom to hold opinion ,to receive and to impart ideas and information without interference to all citizens.
   Sub (2) provides for the freedom to disseminate any information to all citizens also.
   However, sub (3) paragraph (a-b) serves as an exception provided by the constitution itself to curtail the freedom in sub 1 and sub 2 respectively. Hence, the constitution has confined the activation of this freedom to any law reasonably justifiable in a democratic society (in which case the frivolous petition prohibition bill is one). Because it is a bill that is safeguarding the dignity of individual citizens.
   Also, (section 45) sub (1) has provided that nothing in section 39 etc, shall invalidate any law that is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society, in the interest of defence, public safety, public order, public morality or for the purpose of protecting the rights and freedom of other person. All of this purpose is what the bill has come to safeguard.
   In submission, we can all arguably come to a concurrent that, the frivolous petition prohibition bill is not a threat to Nigerians freedom of expression because the constitution itself has not provided for any such ultimate freedom.