COVID 19: BETWEEN THE WELFARE OF THE PEOPLE AND THE PROTECTION OF THEIR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS - Adedapomola G. Lawal, Esq.

The basic responsibilities of our Government is security and the welfare of the people from whom they derived the authority to rule. The authority to rule the people was reduced to a written grundnorm referred to as the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. In order words, to maintain the authority to rule the people, the policies and actions of the government must be as contained in the constitution. Otherwise, there could be a state of anarchy.

It was in February 2020 that the first case of Covid19 was confirmed in Nigeria and since then it has continued to spread like wildfire. It is not gainsaying that the virus is life threatening especially to certain vulnerable individuals in the society. It is therefore the responsibility of the government to ensure that the people are protected from the scourge of the virus. The death of loved ones is painful. True.

However, since the emergence of covid19 in Nigeria, several steps had been taken by the government in an attempt to protect the people from the virus. One of which is the lockdown. Another is the arrest and prosecution of people who violated the lockdown in pursuance to some guidelines made by the president and the governors. Then the maltreatment and torture of Nigerians by the police has become a thing of fun. In fact the beating of Nigerians is being justified by well educated people and almost everyone. Today, the governor of River State personally supervised the demolition of an hotel that allegedly violated his lockdown guidelines without proper trial. The question is are these steps in accordance to the grundnorm from which the government derived its authority? If not, can it be said that the country is heading for a state of anarchy if these behaviours should continue?

Firstly, what is referred to as fundamental human rights are so fundamental that they cannot be separated from humans. They are inherent. We are born to have them. And they cannot be taken away under any circumstances. In fact, national security is not an excuse to take away the fundamental human rights of the people. It is also the duty of the government to ensure that they are protected. That is why some of these rights have been enshrined in the 1999 Constitution.

Secondly, even though the lockdown would have been good or great in limiting the spread of the virus, it failed for obvious reason: poverty. People started going out even when there was serious lockdown. The reason these people are giving is that they are hungry. Throughout the lockdown no one I know received anything from the government to mitigate the harsh impact of the lockdown on the economy. The only thing I know they received was harsh treatment from the law enforcement agents. The fact that they complained of hunger is a failure on the part of the government. Then that they were arrested from trying to stay alive before the virus gets to them is also a failure on the part of the government. These people will not have any excuse to leave their houses if they have what they need as per essentials. Remember that they have the right to live and to survive.

Thirdly, that the government is taking arbitral steps such as the demolition of places allegedly used in violating lockdown orders (River State) is an arbitrary step. Moreso when the demolition was supervised by the governor himself in the full view of the public. That is tyrannical. It is the fundamental right of the people to own property and if you want to take it from them it has to be in line with the laws of the land. No court order empowered the governor to demolish the hotel. But to prove the point that he is serious he went ahead to demolish the hotel. That is a serious breach of the right to movable and immovable properties of the holder. The owner of the hotel was also not given fair hearing. A lot is wrong with that decision. Don't forget that the governor did this because he was trying to protect the people even the owner of the hotel, meanwhile he is also breaching numerous rights of the owner of the hotel. This is an example of many scenarios like it going on in the country during this pandemic.

Lastly, it is not hidden that these actions of the government are meant to protect the people from the Corona virus but what is lacking in their decisions is the remembrance that under no circumstances should the fundamental rights of the people be breached. If not, these people can refuse to corporate with the government and indirectly taking away the lawful authority of the government to rule them and this can degenerate to a state of anarchy. While the lockdown was supposed to be serious in March, people were really breaching it in places like Lagos and some other states. I think the government recognised this and decided to ease the lockdown to prevent a state of anarchy. However, what I think the government should do in times like this is to strike a balance between the pandemic and the fundamental human rights of the people. We are still in a democracy.

Adedapomola G. LAWAL, Esq.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

THE LAW & E-FRAUD IN NIGERIA.

Image
Adedapomola G. Lawal, Esq INTRODUCTION : In the state where I practice law, it has become a routine that everyday there must be at least 10 people at the court to get orders for reversal of funds which were fraudulently transferred from their account to other accounts in the same or other banks. The story is usually the same, upon presenting the orders to the bank, there will be no money in the account to satisfy the amount in the order. Anytime I happen to be in court when these people come for the order, I usually ask the same question which is "Hope your bank has contacted the beneficiary bank so that they can lien the account?" And the answer is usually NO. WHY? I ask. Then they say, "we are required to come with a court order before our bank can do that." And I will be like 😲.  In my jurisdiction, when you are defrauded in this way, you can say goodbye to your money. Sadly, before you can get the order for reversal your money will be gone.🙁 This made me c...
Read more

BENEFITS OF CLEAN ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION IN NIGERIA

Image
CLEAN energy is an energy that has little or no pollutants-emissions during the creation, storage process, and usage. It has decreased carbon emissions than fossil fuel. This makes it less harmful to the environment. Examples of clean energy  are solar (sunlight), wind turbines (wind), hydroelectric energy ( water). While examples of fossil energy are the petroleum oil, coal, natural gas. It is worthy  to note that while most clean energy  sources are renewable, not necessarily always. However, we can equate clean energy to clean air, but it's not totally harm-free to the environment unlike green energy. Advocating for environmental safety involves implementing urban and rural ecological policies that restore and enhance our cities and rural areas while aligning with the principles of nature. This approach respects the cultural integrity of all communities and ensures equitable access for everyone to a comprehensive array of resources. Some benefits of clean energy are: 1...
Read more

THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF REMAND PROCEEDINGS UNDER THE NIGERIA CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM - Adedapomola G. Lawal, Esq.

Image
The provisions of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria are sacred and as such they must be complied with and every institution must conform to its provisions. Furthermore, every law made in Nigeria must be in conformity to the provisions of the constitution and any law made that is contrary to the constitution is void to the extent of its inconsistency. In 2015, as a way of reviewing the already existing legal framework for criminal prosecution in Nigeria, the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 (the Act) was passed into law by the National Assembly. Among the provisions of the Act is a part dedicated to Detention Time Limits (Remand Proceedings) covering from sections 293 to 299. Subsequent to the passage of the Act in 2015, the Act has been domesticated by many states of the federation with some modifications. However, the provisions of the Act and the laws of the states on remand proceedings remain substantially the same though the titles for this part h...
Read more