President Bola Tinubu congratulates businesswoman Hajia Muinat Bola Shagaya as she celebrates her 65th birthday.

The President joins family, friends and business associates in celebrating the founder and CEO of Bolmus Group International, whose business and philanthropic endeavours have touched the lives of many Nigerians.

The President commends Hajia Shagaya’s contribution to the nation's economic growth, particularly through her diverse business investments in industries such as oil, real estate, banking, and communications.

President Tinubu extends his heartfelt wishes for the continued health and happiness of the trailblazing entrepreneur.

Bayo Onanuga
Special Adviser to the President
(Information & Strategy)

President Bola Tinubu condoles with the Group Chief Executive Officer (GCEO) of the Nigeria National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL), Mr Kolo Mele Kyari over the death of his daughter.

Kyari’s daughter, Fatima died Friday at the age of 25 after protracted illness.

The President sympathizes with Kyari and the rest of the family on the irreparable and painful loss.

President Tinubu prays for the repose of the soul of Fatima and urges the Kyari family to stay strong at these trying times.

Bayo Onanuga
Special Adviser to the President
(Information & Strategy)

The Supreme Court held that the State Governments have no power to keep, control, or disburse allocations from the Federation Account to Local Government Councils. It granted an order of injunction restraining the State governments by themselves, their privies, agents, officials, or howsoever called, from further collecting, receiving, spending, or tampering with local government council funds from the Federation Account for the benefit of Local Government Councils.

It also ordered that the Federation or Federal Government of Nigeria, through its relevant officials, should commence the direct payment to each Local Government Council of the amount standing to the credit of each of them in the Federation Account.

The age-long debate as to the status of Local Government Councils (LGC) doesn’t appear to have been finally settled, even with the recent Supreme Court judgement asserting the financial autonomy of the LGCs. Other important issues have trailed the LGCs, especially that of whether or not there should be a Local Government Electoral Commission, possibly within the structure of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), to replace the State Independent Electoral Commission. Will it make LGC elections credible, so that it’s not always the ruling political party in the State or appointees of the Governors that take all the Chairmanship and Councillorship positions within their States, as has been the outcome in most States over the years, since it is the Governor that is responsible for staffing SIEC? Will it guarantee the LGC’s independence, and their place as a third tier of Government? Will it curb the high handedness of the State Governors?

Festus Okoye, a former National Commissioner of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) gives an in-depth analysis of the issue, and recommends the best approach to settling it.

Sooner or later, the critical stakeholders in the Nigerian Federation must settle the debate on the place and role of State Independent Electoral Commissions in the matrix of electoral Commissions in Nigeria. Coterminous to the role and place of State Independent Electoral Commissions (SIEC), is the raging debate on the role, place, and independence of Local Governments in the Federal structure of Nigeria.

Related Issues

Three related issues underscore the urgency of a quick debate and resolution of the issue of Local Governments, through constitutional alteration and amendment of the constitutive legal instruments. The first is the unreported judgement of the Supreme Court in Suit No. SC/CV/343/2024 delivered on the 11th day of July, 2024 involving the Attorney-General of the Federation and the Attorneys -General of the 36 States of the Federation, on what is now popularly referred to as Local Government autonomy.

The second issue relates to a pending Bill before the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, seeking to establish a National Independent Local Government Electoral Commission (NILGEC) charged with the responsibility of conducting elections to the office of Local Government Chairmen and Councillors across all States of the Federation. The Bill titled “Local Government Independent Electoral Commission (Establishment) Bill, 2024 (SB. 531)” was sponsored by the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Finance, Senator Sani Musa, (APC, Niger-East).

The third issue is the flurry of Local Government Elections that have been conducted since the judgement of the Supreme Court delivered on the 11th day of July, 2024. There are also the judgements of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court on the dissolution of Local Governments, and the unimplemented reports of Committees set up by the Federal Government on electoral matters, that have become residual issues in our electoral framework.

The other ancillary issue is that Section 197 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), establishes the State Independent Electoral Commission as one of the State Executive Bodies. The Constitution gives the Governor of each State the power to appoint the Chairman and members, subject to confirmation by the House of Assembly of the State. Nigeria and Nigerians must resolve whether the State Independent Electoral Commissions must continue to exist and conduct Local Government elections. This is because of their performance and sheer powerlessness, before the State Governors and the State Houses of Assembly.

Impact of Supreme Court Judgement in LG Financial Autonomy Case

There is no doubt that the judgement of the Supreme Court of Nigeria on financial autonomy for the seven hundred and sixty-eight Local Government Areas in Nigeria and six Area Council Areas in the Federal Capital Territory has raised, once again, the question of the place, relevance and independence of the various Local Governments in Nigeria. It has also raised the question of the independence, relevance, and impartiality of the States’ Independent Electoral Commissions. More fundamentally, it has brought to the fore, our practice of Federalism and the place of grassroots structures in our Federal structure.

The critical question is, whether the judgement of the Supreme Court delivered on the 11th day of July, 2024 will solve the myriad challenges bedevilling the Local Government system in Nigeria. Other than the Supreme Court judgement on the financial independence of the local governments, are there other issues that must be tackled to strengthen the place of local governments in the Nigerian Federal structure? First, it will be good to understand the problems resolved by the judgement of the Supreme Court.

On the 24th day of May, 2024, the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) took out an Originating Summons before the Supreme Court of Nigeria against the Attorneys-General of 36 States of the Federation, seeking various reliefs. On the 11th day of July, 2024, the Supreme Court delivered its judgement and granted 11 Declarations and 3 Orders. The Supreme Court granted a declaration that the States of Nigeria, or any one of them, acting through their/its respective State Governors and or State House of Assembly, are/is under obligation to ensure democratic governance at the third tier of government in Nigeria, that is the Local Government level.

The Supreme Court decried the unlawful and unconstitutional dissolution of democratically elected Local Government Councils, and their replacement with Caretaker Committees. It held that State Governments and the Houses of Assembly have no power to constitute, appoint, or determine a Local Government. It held that a State Government or the Governor of a State has no power to constitute, appoint, or determine a local government that Section 7(1) of the 1999 Constitution has prescribed can only be by Local Government Councils, democratically elected by persons in a local government area.The Supreme Court stated that only democratically elected Local Governments can receive distributable amounts standing to the credit of Local Government Councils in the Federation Account. The Supreme Court held that it amounts to grave misconduct to use a State Law or Administrative directive to dissolve or cause the dissolution of democratically elected Local Government Councils. It also held that the State Governments have no power to keep, control, or disburse allocations from the Federation Account to Local Government Councils. It granted an order of injunction restraining the State governments by themselves, their privies, agents, officials, or howsoever called, from further collecting, receiving, spending, or tampering with local government council funds from the Federation Account for the benefit of Local Government Councils. It also ordered that the Federation or Federal Government of Nigeria, through its relevant officials, should commence the direct payment to each Local Government Council of the amount standing to the credit of each of them in the Federation Account.

Before the Supreme Court judgement, most Nigerians saw the local governments as glorified outposts of the State Governments, and most of them were selected and not democratically elected. The State Independent Electoral Commissions organised “one-way” elections, and in most of the States, the ruling party “cleared” all the contested positions.

The State Governments and the State Houses of Assembly dissolved the Local Government Councils at will, appointed Caretaker Committees, and arbitrarily fixed their tenure. The Courts intervened, but, the problems persisted. The bone of contention has been the interpretation and application of Section 7 of the Constitution (as it provides that “The system of local government by democratically elected local government councils is under this Constitution guaranteed; and accordingly, the Government of every State shall, subject to Section 8 of this Constitution, ensure their existence under a Law which provides for the establishment, structure, composition, finance, and functions of such councils”).

In the case of Eze & ors v Governor of Abia State & ors (2010) LPELR-4133(CA) on the dissolution of democratically elected Local Governments, the Court of Appeal per Helen Moronkeji Ogunwumiju, JCA (as she then was) held that the powers conferred on the Government of every State by Section 7(1) of the 1999 Constitution to ensure the existence under a law which provides for the establishment, structure, composition, finance and functions of a local government, can only be executed within the confines of the provisions of the Constitution. Thus, the power of the State House of Assembly under Section 4(7) of the Constitution, cannot extend to truncate the tenure of a democratically elected local government council. The Constitution only recognises elected members of the local government council. It is ultra vires the Constitution, for any State Legislature to make a law that dissolves a local government council made up of elected Chairmen and Councillors, and replace it with members of a Caretaker Committee selected by the State Government. 

The Court of Appeal in the case of AG Benue State & ors v Umar & ors (2007) LPELR-8076, emphasised that Caretaker Committees have no place in our constitutional democracy. It held that “under Section 7(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, the system of local government by democratically elected Local Government Councils is guaranteed, and the Government of every State is obliged to ensure their existence under a law which provides for the establishment, structure, composition, finance and functions of such councils”.

The Electoral Reform Committee (ERC) (2008), weighed in on the conduct of Local Government elections by the State Independent Electoral Commission (SIEC). It addressed the composition and functions of SIEC in Chapter 5 of Volume 1(Main Report). The Committee found that “the 1999 Constitution provides for the establishment of State Independent Electoral Commissions (SIECs), which have the function of conducting elections of Chairmen and Councillors into the Local Government Councils. Paragraph 3 to the Third Schedule (Part II) of the 1999 Constitution provides that “A State Independent Electoral Commission shall comprise the following members (a) a Chairman; and (b) not less than five but not more than seven other persons” who are to be appointed by the State Governor, and confirmed by the House of Assembly for the State. Many people who submitted memoranda, expressed dissatisfaction with the performance of SIECs, which were considered mere organs of the incumbent State Governors and the ruling parties. Unfortunately, the conduct of the local government elections by them in 2004, and more recently in 2008 in many States of the Federation, tended to support the negative perception of the SIECs. In most of the States where local government elections were conducted, candidates of the ruling parties won virtually all the seats. Often, such results do not reflect the voting pattern in Federal elections. In view of the performance of the SIECs in 2004 and 2008 elections, there have been popular suggestions at the public hearings, in some of the memoranda submitted, and also in the media for their abrogation. The poor performance of SIECs gives cause for concern, given the significance of local governments in a democratic society. The third tier of government, should be the foundation of democratic governance for the citizens. It is the closest level of government to the citizens. Therefore, it should be seen to address the basic needs of the citizens. Furthermore, it provides citizens with more direct representation, and opportunity for political participation. However, in its present form, Local Government operators are seen as mere nominees of State Governors who lack the independence to implement popular and democratic programmes”.

Various Recommendations on the Reform of SIECs

The Committee recommended that the existing SIECs be reorganised and integrated into the structure of INEC, for greater efficiency and autonomy. This will entail constitutional amendment and statutory provisions, integrating and coordinating the activities of the State offices of INEC and SIECs for all elections.

1) Scrapping of SIECs and Transfer of their Functions to INEC

On 4th October, 2016, the Constitution and Electoral Reform Committee (CERC) was inaugurated by Mr Abubakar Malami, SAN, the then Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice “to, among other things, recommend measures required to improve the electoral process and deepen democracy in Nigeria”. The Committee recommended the scrapping of SIECs, and the transfer of their functions to INEC. The Committee also recommended the amendment of the Constitution to include a provision that “INEC shall not be subject to the directive or control of any other authority or person, in the performance of its functions’’. This provision is to insulate INEC from the influence and control of Government and its agencies.

2) Establishment of National Independent Local Government Electoral Commission

Presently, we have a Bill before the National Assembly seeking to establish a Local Government Independent Electoral Commission. The Bill titled “Local Government Independent Electoral Commission (Establishment) Bill, 2024 (SB. 531)”, was sponsored by the Chairman Senate Committee on Finance, Senator Sani Musa, (APC, Niger-East). The Bill seeks to establish the National Independent Local Government Electoral Commission (NILGEC) responsible for conducting elections to the office of the Local Government Chairman and Councillors, and any other matter to do with local government as a third tier of government. NILGEC will organise, oversee, and conduct elections for the offices of Local Government Chairman and Councillors across all States.

Part of the functions of NILGEC will include preparing and maintaining an accurate and up-to-date voter register, ensuring the conduct of voter education and public awareness regarding the electoral process, and setting and enforcing electoral guidelines and regulations for Local Government elections, recruitment and training of electoral officers and staff for efficient election management and investigating and adjudicating electoral disputes. The budget for the proposed Commission will be approved by the National Assembly, and elections for the offices of Local Government Chairman and Councillors shall be conducted every four years. “Upon the establishment of NILGEC, all powers and functions related to the conduct of Local Government elections previously vested in any other body or authority, shall be transferred to NILGEC.”

Now, the Federal and State Governments are working out modalities to implement the judgement of the Supreme Court. This has led to a flurry of Local Government elections, and dates for their conduct. Kwara State has conducted its Local Government Election, and the ruling party “won” all 16 Chairmanship positions and the 193 Councillorship positions. Imo State conducted its Local Government elections, and the ruling party “won” all 17 Chairmanship positions and the 305 Councillorship positions. Enugu State has conducted its Local Government Elections, and the ruling party won all 17 Chairmanship positions. In Delta State, the ruling party “won” the 25 Chairmanship positions and 499 of the 500 Councillorship seats. In Sokoto State, the ruling party “won” all the 23 Chairmanship seats and the 244 Councillorship positions. Anambra State conducted its own Local Government elections on the 28th day of September, 2024. The ruling party” won” the Chairmanship and Councillorship positions in the 21 Local Government Areas of the State. Kaduna State will conduct its own on the 19th day of October, 2024 and Abia State will conduct its own on the 4th of November, 2024.

The Supreme Court’s judgement, is a huge victory for the rule of law and due process. It is a credit to the AGF, that some form of financial independence has been restored to the Local Governments. Nigerians expect the Local Governments to impact grassroots development, rather than existing for the payment of salaries and sharing overheads.

A related issue thrown up by the Supreme Court’s judgement on the local government’s financial autonomy, is whether the problems bedevilling the Local Governments have everything to do with the retention and use of money meant for the Local Governments by State Governments through the Joint Accounts. The retention of the money due to them, rendered the Local Governments redundant. The arbitrary dissolution of the local governments instills fear in the occupants of the positions, and makes them subservient to the State Government and the State Assembly. The juggling and uncertainty of tenure means that, aspirants to the position of Chairman and Councillors of Local Governments can spend so much money on nomination forms, campaigns, payment of poll agents, and other ancillary things, and lose office in less than one year after assuming office.

Financial autonomy has not changed, and may not change the dizzying scenarios associated with Local Government elections. The results from the conduct of Local Government elections after the judgement of the Supreme Court, further affirms that Nigeria has a long way to go in restoring the integrity and independence of the Local Governments.

The Bill pending before the National Assembly, seeks to establish a NILGEC. The sponsor of the Bill is responding to the challenge of the Local Governments, and the inability of the State Independent Electoral Commissions to conduct credible elections. The sponsor of the Bill therefore, seeks a collective and uniform approach to solving the problem through a single electoral management body to conduct elections in the Local Governments in the 36 States of the Federation.

The Bill may suffer a stillbirth, for a variety of reasons. Local Governments in Nigeria are a creation of the Constitution. Section 7 of the Constitution is clear and emphatic, on the system of local government administration. “The system of local government by democratically elected local government councils is under this Constitution guaranteed; and accordingly, the Government of every State shall, subject to Section 8 of this Constitution, ensure their existence under a Law which provides for the establishment, structure, composition, finance, and functions of such councils”. Furthermore, Section 197 of the Constitution establishes the State Independent Electoral Commission, as one of the State Executive Bodies. The Constitution gives the Governor the power to appoint the Chairman and members, subject to confirmation by the House of Assembly of the State.

This means that no law made by the National Assembly, can alter or override the provisions of the Constitution. The Constitution is the fundamental law of the land, and all other laws flow from the Constitution, and any other law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution will be void to the extent of the inconsistency. Section 1(3) of the Constitution provides: “If any other law is inconsistent with the provisions of this Constitution, this Constitution shall prevail, and that other law shall to the extent of the inconsistency be void”.

The National Assembly, the Executive, and the Judiciary derive their powers from the Constitution. As observed by Ayoola, JSC in the case of INEC v MUSA (2003) LPELR-24927(SC), “the legislative powers of the Legislature, cannot be exercised inconsistently with the Constitution. Where it is so exercised, it is invalid to the extent of such inconsistency”. He also observed that“where the Constitution has enacted exhaustively relating to any situation, conduct, or subject, a body that claims to legislate in addition to what the Constitution had enacted, must show that it has derived the legislative authority to do so from the Constitution”. Hon. Justice Mary Peter-Odili, JSC, made the same point in the case of Jegede & Anor v INEC & Ors and said “The Constitution is the very foundation and structure, upon which the existence of all organs of government is hinged. It must be held inviolable”. Similarly, in the case of HOPE DEMOCRATIC PARTY v OBI (2012) ALL FWLR (Pt. 612) 1620 at page 1644, the Supreme Court, per Adekeye JSC held that: “The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, therefore, the provisions are superior to every provision embodied in any Act or law, and are binding on all persons or authorities in Nigeria. The failure to follow any of the provisions, renders the steps taken unconstitutional, null, and void.”

The Bill titled “Local Government Independent Electoral Commission (Establishment) Bill, 2024 (SB. 531), cannot be used to amend the Constitution. The Bill cannot abolish State Independent Electoral Commission, as it is a creation of the Constitution. The new Commission cannot organise the registration of voters, as that power is specifically donated to the Independent National Electoral Commission. The Distinguished Senator can only introduce a Bill to amend the Constitution, and bring into being the proposed Local Government Independent Electoral Commission. While the sentiments that gave rise to Local Government Independent Electoral Commission (Establishment) Bill, 2024 (SB. 531) are understandable, the route to an independent State Electoral Commission must be found in the Constitution. It is wasteful to duplicate electoral management bodies. It is wasteful for the new body, to conduct voter registration. It is wasteful for the new body to have the full complement of offices, staff, and the paraphernalia of conducting elections.

I still submit that it is wasteful to have 36 electoral management bodies for the country, with each having offices and staff in all the Local Government areas of the country. It is wasteful for the State Independent Electoral Commissions to have their own Bimodal Voter Accreditation System, ballot boxes, and cubicles.

The Best Approach and Constitutional Amendments Required 

The best approach to an independent electoral management body that can conduct credible elections at the local governments, is suggested by the Electoral Reform Committee (2008), and that is the integration of the State Independent Electoral Commission into the structure of the Independent National Electoral Commission, to form one electoral body for the country. The Committee recommended that the existing SIECs be reorganised and integrated into the structure of INEC, for greater efficiency and autonomy. This will entail constitutional amendments, and statutory provisions integrating and coordinating the activities of the State offices of INEC and SIECs for all elections. This will entail altering Part 1 of the Third Schedule to the Constitution, to vest the Independent National Electoral Commission with the power to conduct Local Government Elections. It will entail amending Section 285 of the Constitution and all other corresponding sections, to bring them into conformity with the new legal regime.

It will also entail amending Section 7 of the Constitution, to prescribe a definite tenure for the Local Governments in Nigeria. The National Assembly must amend Section 197 establishing the State Independent Electoral Commission. They must also amend Sections 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, and 205 of the Constitution. These sections deal with the removal of members of SIEC, independence of certain bodies, quorum and decisions, powers and procedures, and interpretation. Section 110 of the Electoral Act 2022 has prescribed the procedure for the removal from office, of a Chairman and Vice-Chairman of an Area Council. The amendment must follow the same pattern, and prescribe the procedure for the removal from office of a Chairman or Vice-Chairman of a Local Government. The National Assembly must also tweak Section 150 of the Electoral Act relating to the procedure for Local Government Elections, in furtherance of Paragraph 11 of Part ll of the Second Schedule to the Constitution, to rhyme with Sections 98 to 113 of the Electoral Act.

Half measures, will not be enough. Financial independence alone, will not guarantee the autonomy of the Local Governments. The process through which Local Government Chairmen and Councillors get elected and assume office, must be protected. Their tenure must be guaranteed, and there must be diversity in the membership of the various Local Government Councils. The Executive and the Legislature at the National and State levels must put the nation first, and strengthen grassroots democracy. Every nation arrives at Federalism based on its history, culture, practices, and antecedents. We must practice Federalism that works for us, and not one that undermines grassroots democracy.

Festus Okoye, Legal Practitioner; former National Commissioner, Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)

_______________________________

I just came across an interesting Press Statement signed by one Luka Binniyat, the Middle Belt Forum's Kaduna State Chapter Chairman, dated Sunday, October 6, 2024, in which he tried to raise legitimate questions around the composition of the Board nominees of the newly established North West Development Commission (NWDC).

Without prejudice to the whole essence of the inclusivity message that the said intervention sought to push through, one would still like to insist that there are palpable signs of gross misunderstanding and misrepresentation bordering on outright confusion around the definition of the term or concept of the Middle Belt that its Forum's Kaduna State Chapter Chairman was attempting to project out there via his Press Statement.

Firstly, even from the sound of its name alone, the Middle Belt concept looks to be more of a geographical expression than anything else, and that has been the case since its formal introduction into the public consciousness several decades ago.

Indeed, it can rightly be argued that it all started as an agglomeration of the various peoples or communities spread across the middle or centre of the geographical expression we have all come to know and recognise as Nigeria today. And that has remained so for quite a while now since the Middle Belt concept’s official launch, but I stand to be corrected.

As time went by, however, successive leaders and promoters of the Middle Belt Forum and its ideals actively sought to expand its reach by way of the deliberate extension of its outreach messaging to appeal to other people of the same or similar faith and shared experiences. This is principally on account of their minority status in several of the core Northern States, with a view to fighting for a common cause. And that is all fine and good, to be honest!

But what they should probably have done from that point onwards was to promptly effect an appropriate name change to reflect its renewed focus and expanded status beyond its original geographical circumscription. This is especially so because many of its targeted would-be new entrants are undoubtedly located very far away from the centre or middle of any perceived belt, geographically speaking.

Again, you cannot possibly go on to define the Middle Belt "as all parts of Nigeria that were not ruled or conquered by the Sokoto Caliphate (emphasis mine) and the Kanem Borno Empire in pre-colonial Nigeria", in one breath, and then go right ahead to immediately attempt to contradict yourself by including such historic towns and villages of the Gwandu Emirate as Kalgo, Koko/Besse, Suru and the like, in your patented pipedream of an expanded or greater Middle Belt, in another breath.

That does not make any logical sense at all, unless you do not have the slightest idea of what you really are talking about. To do so would amount to the closest example of approbation and reprobation one could possibly think of, albeit in the reverse sense!

Indeed, if one can ever get away with 'annexing' any other town against its express wishes based on your own strictly defined criteria of not having been ruled or conquered by the Caliphate, that town would certainly not be Kalgo, would it?

Kalgo, by the way, is reputed to be a veritable staging point of sorts for several Gwandu Princes who served as its District Head, better known by its formally recognised title of Sarkin Gobir of Kalgo, en route their onward journey towards their manifest destiny of ascending the Gwandu Emirship stool of their forebears; Gwandu, being the pivotal Western flank of the expansive Sokoto Caliphate, just in case Mr. Binniyat may not have been aware of that fact.

Again, as unlikely as it may ordinarily seem to the untrained eye on account of the legendary modesty of the vast majority of the Emirs in its rich and storied history, the Gwandu Emirship stool has always been, and will forever remain, the second most revered throne in the hierarchy of the Caliphate structure after that of His Eminence, the Sultan of Sokoto; again, just in case Mr. Binniyat may not have realised that just yet.

In addition, and talking specifically about the Southern Kebbi concept, I struggle to see how a place like far away Kalgo; a town that is both critical and historically relevant to the Gwandu Emirship stool and also proximal to Birnin Kebbi, its longstanding capital located  just a stone's throw away, can ever be considered to be an integral part and parcel of any conceivable expanded Southern Kebbi or Kebbi South configuration of his dream by any stretch of the imagination.

At any rate, I am not exactly aware of the existence of any extended Belt of sufficient enough dimension, at the centre or in the Middle of which Kalgo may logically be deemed to have been factored into, and both legally and legitimately embraced.

These are just a few observations around the deliberate provocative narrative spins driven by the extremely wild and way off the mark conjectures informing that strange inclusion of the mentioned areas in the expansive buckle of the utopian Middle Belt concept that Mr. Luka Binniyat may wish to respond to.

In closing, I would still like to humbly restate that nothing I have said or written here is designed to detract from the essence of the primary message he is trying to convey around the recent nominations for the newly established NWDC Board.

Abdullahi Usman 

(Wednesday, October 9, 2024)

It seems OpenAI’s Realtime Voice API, announced a week ago, is taking the world by storm. Developers are going berserk on X, sharing their creations using the realtime voice API. 

The new offering from the Sam Altman-led AI powerhouse allows apps to have natural, real-time conversations with their users. Ever since its announcement, each new day has brought new possibilities. Watching these demos would make AI assistants or other popular chatbots seem puny.

The Director-General of the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA), Kashifu Inuwa, has said that Africa must be fully involved in the regulation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to ensure that the technology is not tilted towards the interests of the advanced nations.

Inuwa stated this on Thursday while presenting a keynote for Day 3 of the Nigeria Finech Week 2024.

According to him, Africa’s participation in AI regulation and governance is crucial to ensure that AI serves the interests of all humanities, not just the privileged few.

The NITDA DG, who was represented at the event by the Director of Standard, Regulation and Framework at the Agency, Mr Emmanuel Edet, noted that AI is not just another technology but a paradigm shift that promises to reshape every aspect of people’s lives, from healthcare education to agriculture and even governance.

Proactive measures 

Inuwa asserted that despite the transformation power of AI, it also comes with unique challenges that require careful consideration and proactive measures.

“As we witness the rapid deployment of AI technologies, primarily in the Global North, it is crucial that we, the nations of Africa and the Global South, assert our place in this evolving landscape.  

“Our participation is not just beneficial. It is essential to ensure that AI serves the interest of all humanities, not just the privileged few,” he said. 

“Issues of data, privacy, algorithm algorithmic bias, job displacement and geopolitical competition have underscored the need for a clear, fair and inclusive regulatory regime at the heart of this regulatory discussion must be the voices of the Global South, particularly Africa,” the DG added. 

• Inuwa called attention to the regulatory efforts underway in regions like the United States, China, and the European Union, noting that these frameworks often reflect specific local contexts and priorities.

• However, he emphasized that the voices of the Global South—particularly Africa—must be central in shaping global AI regulations.

• He called for a regulatory framework that acknowledges diverse cultural, economic, and social contexts, stressing that challenges and opportunities in cities like Lagos, Nairobi, and Johannesburg differ significantly from those in Silicon Valley or Schengen.

Positioning Africa in the AI space 

To position Africa as an active player in global AI regulation, Inuwa highlighted the need for substantial investment in building local capacity, including the development of AI talent, support for research and development, and fostering homegrown innovations.

• He urged for the creation of indigenous AI solutions tailored to Africa’s unique challenges in areas like agriculture, healthcare, and education, which would also enable the continent to contribute meaningfully to global AI standards.

• However, he acknowledged the hurdles faced by many African nations, such as limited digital infrastructure, regulatory frameworks, and financial resources needed to fully exploit AI’s potential.

• He pointed out that these challenges present an opportunity for collaboration, calling for strategic alliances among nations in the Global South to amplify their collective voice in global AI governance.

What you should know 

The NITDA DG’s position on equal participation in AI regulation resonates with the recent report released by the United Nations (UN), which expressed concern that only seven countries are currently involved in the governance of AI and making decisions that affect other countries.

The UN Secretary-General’s High-level Advisory Body on Artificial Intelligence in its final report titled “Governing AI for Humanity” stated that the seven countries involved in AI governance for the rest of the world include Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

• The body noted that equity demands that more voices play meaningful roles in decisions about how to govern technology that affects them.
• It emphasized that the concentration of decision-making in the AI technology sector cannot be justified, adding that historically many communities have been entirely excluded from AI governance conversations that impact them.

[Nairametrics]

A bail application by the detained Binance executive, Tigran Gambaryan, was rejected on Friday by the Federal High Court in Abuja.

The bail was rejected by Justice Emeka Nwite, who presided over the case.

On September 4, 2024, the Federal High Court in Abuja heard arguments regarding Gambaryan’s new bail application between his lawyer, Mark Mordi, SAN, and counsel for the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Ekele Iheanacho.

It would be recalled that Mordi applied for the court to admit his client to bail on liberal terms, or alternatively, to admit him to bail for six weeks on the basis of ill health.

He submitted that his client is managing serious health challenges that cannot be adequately managed in Nigeria.

The lawyer presented exhibits before the court including medical reports, showing his client needs medical care, and strongly recommended surgery.

Gambaryan’s family also submitted that he “can no longer walk” due to a health condition involving a disk issue.

However, the EFCC contested these claims.

The anti-graft agency presented a medical report (as an exhibit before the court) from the State House Annex Clinic in Asokoro, Abuja, in which it claimed that the detained Binance executive, Tigran Gambaryan, refused prescribed medications and food when attended to by a neurosurgeon in July 2024.

Delivering judgement on the bail application on Friday, Justice Nwite held that it is not in dispute that Gambaryan’s first bail application, which concerns health, has been appealed.

Nwite stated that the current bail application amounts to an abuse of court process because Gambaryan has a pending appeal against the refusal of the first bail.

He added that there are no new facts regarding medical care in the fresh bail application, as the EFCC has shown that Nigerian authorities and hospitals are capable of treating Gambaryan.

He said that since an appeal has been filed, a lawyer is restrained from re-litigating, especially having not withdrawn that appeal.

“On this leg alone, this bail application is bound to fail,” he said.

Furthermore, Nwite said that based on medical records at his disposal, renowned Nigerian medical experts are already managing Gambaryan’s health.

However, the court ordered the Nigerian Correctional Service to refer Gambaryan to any standard hospital in Abuja under security supervision.

Gambaryan has been in detention since February over allegations of money laundering.

[NaijaNews]