Child Rights: Uwais’ Position on Tobacco Bill Faulted

Lawyer-Aides in the National Assembly (LANASS) has faulted the position of the wife of the former Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Mrs. Maryam Uwais, to the effect that Chairman of Senate Committee on Health, Senator Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello, violated the rights of the young persons by not allowing them to present their position at the just concluded Public Hearing on the Tobacco Control Bill.

Uwais had reportedly sent a protest letter to the Senate President, Senator David Mark, on the purported breach of the rights of some secondary school students who had stormed the National Assembly to witness the public hearing.

The body, in a statement issued yesterday in Abuja, said that while Obasanjo-Bello based her decision on the provisions of the 1999 Constitution, Uwais had anchored her protest on the provisions of Section 3 of the Child Rights Act.

The Section reads: “The provisions in Chapter 1V of the Constitution of the Federal republic of Nigeria, 1999, or any successive constitutional provisions relating to fundamental rights, shall apply as if those provisions are expressly stated in this Act.” LANASS said, “From the above provision, it is clear for all purposes and intent that the drafters of the Child Rights Act made it subject to the constitution and besides, it is elementary that the basic law above all laws in every nation is its constitution.”

The group further poked a hole in Uwais’ argument that Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution which provides for the Right of Freedom of Expression of every Nigerian, including the secondary school students.

According to the body, “True, not limited by age but this Section and others-37, 38, 40 and 41, in Chapter 4 are limited by the Derogation Clause as provided in Section 45 (1) of the same Constitution.

“It reads thus: Nothing in Sections 36, 38, 39, 40 and 41 of this Constitution shall invalidate any law that is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society-(a) in the interest of defense, public safety, public order, public morality and public health; or (b) for the purposes of protecting the rights and freedom of other persons.”

The body said, “Sequel to that is the provision of Section 45 (1) (b) that such limitations on the above-named sections can be for the purpose of protecting the rights and freedom of other persons, which, predictably and for the test of reasonableness, is one of the reasons adduced by the Senator (Obasanjo-Bello) for her action that the young persons be refrained from public discussions on smoking for protectionist reasons.”

LANASS said that it could not agree more because “these young people are not even supposed to be found in places where such topics are being discussed, ab-initio.”

It observed that Uwais in her position cited Section 19 of the Child Rights Act with the footnote-“Responsibilities of a Child and Parent” but that she omitted to mention Section 20 with the footnote-“Parent, etc., to provide guidance with respect to Child’s Responsibilities.”

Accusing Uwais of insincerity for citing only Section 19 without taking it together with Section 20, LANASS argued that it is only when “both sections are read together as a whole that sufficient legal analysis of that part of the Act might have been done.”

The body also tackled Uwais for berating Obasanjo-Bello for purportedly misconstruing the Senate Committee Public hearing as a court.

According to the body, “: But unknown to most Nigerians, the senator was right and Mrs. Uwais, ironically, was the erring party. Court, as defined by Section 2 of the Evidence Act, is not restricted to a structure or building where judgments are pronounced but includes judges, magistrates and all persons empowered to take evidence except arbitrators.

“Since National Assembly Committees are empowered, by law, to take evidence, they could constitute what is a court, following the provisions of the Evidence Act. “Therefore, the Senator (Obasanjo-Bello) was accurate in her analogy; even if it appears she had no knowledge of the legal truth of her statements.”

Uwais’ wife tackles Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello over tobacco bill

By Yusuf Alli

The wife of a former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Mrs. Maryam Uwais, yesterday faulted the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Senator Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello, for barring school pupils from contributing to the debate on the National Tobacco Control Bill before the Senate.
She spoke through a protest letter to Senate President David Mark on the alleged prohibition of pupils from contributing to the bill on July 20 and 21.
The letter reads in part: "You may recall that a public hearing was held on the 20th and 21st of July on a proposed National Tobacco Control Bill, sponsored by Senator Olorunnimbe Mamora, which proceedings were held under the auspices of the Committee of Health, chaired by your good self.
"Several stakeholders, representing different organisations, interests and various jurisdictions of Nigeria participated in the hearing, which fact in itself, demonstrated the significance and timeliness of the contents of this very important piece of legislation.
"Being a member of the African Union Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, I was delighted when I noticed that there were young persons (from a senior secondary school class, as I was made to understand) in the audience, who signified that they intended to contribute to the discussions at the hearing.
"To my consternation, however, they were roundly rejected by no other person than you.
" Indeed, you proceeded to state, four times, what your reasons were for puncturing their enthusiasm in such a dismissive manner, even though from the first time (and each time) you spoke to the issue, you ended your statement with ‘no more will be said on this matter’.
"You declined any observations or contributions on the issue from the floor (or indeed, as I noticed, from your distinguished colleagues), concluding that you were correct in your assertions that pupils could not be permitted to participate in the discussions on the merits and demerits of the provisions of that bill.
"Your reasons, if I may recall, were that you were a mother yourself, and so felt the need to ‘protect’ children.
"You stated that you would not allow children to be ‘used’ or ‘paraded’ before the committee; and that even in the law courts, the evidence of a child would need to be corroborated during a trial.
"Besides, in your view, since adults were present and knew what the issues were, there was absolutely no need for a person under the age of 18 to participate in the proceedings.
"To further support your assertions, you added that at hearings in the Senate, persons who intended to contribute could be compelled to swear oaths on the scriptures relevant to their faiths, which in your understanding, was another excuse for denying them the right to be heard on an issue that concerns them.
"In conclusion, you mentioned that the Child Rights Act did not allow for children to speak at such forum. I am constrained to join issues with you on your position, even because your assertions run contrary to known laws, norms and emerging trends when it comes to children and young persons, their freedom to express themselves and their participation in matters that concern them.
"The unfortunate statement that those young persons were ‘brought along’ to the hearing for the purposes of being ‘used’ or ‘paraded’ was presumptuous, to say the least, as they certainly did not look like they were coerced, uncomfortable or were present in the hearing room against their wishes.
But I will not say more on this point, as it would only distract from the aim of this letter.
"The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria guarantees every citizen, children inclusive, their freedom of expression under Section 39.
"The Constitution certainly does not preclude children from the enjoyment of this fundamental right, as I am certain you would agree that children are also persons. Indeed, the Child Rights Act, 2003, fortifies this position clearly by its Section 3.
"Moreover, S. 19 of this same Child Rights Act, 2003, categorically provides that:
(1) ‘Every child has responsibilities towards his family and society, the Federal Republic of Nigeria and other legalised communities, nationally and internationally. These responsibilities include, under (2) (c) & (d), placing his or her physical and intellectual abilities at the service of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, contributing to the moral well-being of the society and respecting the ideals of democracy, freedom, equality, humaneness, honesty and justice for all persons.’
"About 200 child rights clubs have been established all over the country, to promote representation, association and participation by building children’s capacities and competencies. This, it is hoped, would enable them act effectively as peer educators and would further boost their confidence and self-esteem preparatory to holding the sundry responsibilities of citizenship and adulthood. Children’s views on national issues have been encouraged through debates, essay competitions and art exhibitions, while special events and programs have been designed and supported by the Government, all with the aim of ensuring their effective participation in National life.
"Children and young persons have been involved in many governmental and non-governmental activities, including the promotion of the awareness of HIV/AIDS, reproductive health and the development of life skills among adolescents, while the electronic and print media have created specific spaces for children to express themselves.
None of the aforementioned efforts are considered harmful exposure, neither has any organisation or government body which involves children in its constructive activities, been accused of ‘parading’ children in pursuance of some unsubstantiated motive."
On oath taking, Mrs. Uwais said: "As a senator, you do know that a public hearing is an opportunity for interested stakeholders to participate in the business of lawmaking, even so that laws are made with input from those in whose interests the laws are made.
"A public hearing is, therefore, not a court of law, as you so strenuously sought to affirm. Indeed, heavy weather was made of proceedings relating to children in a courtroom, which points were not quite clear, despite your repeated references to that scenario.

SOURCE