Members of the House of Representatives are going through the award of the controversial Lagos-Calabar coastal highway contract, on the suspicion that it did not pass the integrity test in terms of the process, one of the grounds on which the main opposition figures in the country, including Atiku Abubakar, presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Peter Obi, his Labour Party (LP) counterpart, have attacked it.

The members of the lower legislative chambe during plenary on Thursday, adopted the motion sponsored by Austin Achado, a lawmaker representing Gwer east/Gwer west federal constituency of Benue, which also included the summoning of David Umahi, Minister of Works, Wale Edun, his Finance counterpart and Lateef Fagbemi, Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), to furnish them with “all guarantees and credit enhancement instruments,” for the project.

The federal government recently commenced the construction of the 700km Lagos-Calabar coastal road — which is expected to run through the shoreline of beach resorts in Lagos, while traversing eight other states, a project which has run into murky waters of criticisms from many quarters.

The naysayers had questioned not only the transparency of the contract award process, but the viability, as well as the priority of the project at a time major highways in Nigeria are not only in states of eyesore, but have become death-traps, while providing leeway for criminals to operate.

Advertisement

Achado, who said the “award strategy” of the road contract violated the Public Procurement Act 2007, told his colleagues: “This laudable project with the prospect of providing easy access for movement of goods and services across the nation, has a financing structure, as announced by the honourable minister of works, which requires the federal government to provide 15 percent to 30 percent co-financing, while the private sector counterpart will provide the balance.

“And to toll the road when completed for a minimum period of 15 years to ensure full recovery of all debts and equity applied for the delivery of the project. There are concerns that the Procurement Strategy may have violated the Public Procurement Act 2007, section 40(2) which requires that where a procuring authority adopts to use restrictive tendering approach, it should be on the basis that the said goods and services are available only from a limited number of suppliers and contractors and as such, tenders shall be invited from all such contractors who can provide such goods and services.

“The procurement strategy adopted by the federal ministry of works for the award of the contract violates the Infrastructure Concession and Regulatory Commission Act 2005. Section 4 of the Act outlines that all approved infrastructure projects and contracts for financing, construction and maintenance must be advertised for open competitive public bid, in at least three national dailies, and section 5 of the Act further clarifies that any direct negotiations with only one contractor could be allowed, only after exhausting the provisions of section 4.”

Unyime Idem, Chairman, Committee on Public Procurement, said parliament who said that the members had received several petitions demanding the investigation of the procurement process of the project, hence the need to heed to the cries of Nigerians to scrutinise the process.

After the motion was adopted when it was put to a voice vote by Tajudeen Abbas, speaker of the house, the lawmakers mandated the committees on public procurement and works to investigate the matter, and report back within four weeks for further legislative action.

Advertisement

The Chief Justice of Nigeria will earn a total wage of N64.68million every year, broken into N5.3million monthly if the proposal currently at the final stage of passage at the Senate eventually sails through, is eventually signed into law by President Bola Tinubu, since the House of Representatives has already passed it.

It is contained in the bill seeking to increase the salaries of judicial officers in Nigeria, which will also see Supreme Court judges earning N50.52million yearly or N4.21million every month, President of the Court of Appeal earning N4.8million monthly or N57.60million yearly, while justices of the second tier court would go home with N44.76million yearly or N3.73million monthly.

Entitled: “A bill for an act to prescribe the salaries, allowances and fringe benefits of judicial office holders in Nigeria and for related matters (2024),” the proposal is sponsored by Deputy Majority Leader Ashiru Yisa (APC-Kwara South).

The House of Representatives had on March 20 passed the bill originating as an executive bill from Tinubu, who had pledged to up the pay package of judicial officers across the country, under which arrangement the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, President of the National Industrial Court, Chief Judge of the FCT High Court, Grand Khadi, FCT Sharia Court of Appeal, President of Customary Court of Appeal, Chief Judge of State High Court and Grand Khadi of State Sharia Court of Appeal and President of State Customary Court of Appeal are to earn a monthly package of N3.53 million.

Advertisement

Other allowances not embedded in the total monthly package include leave allowances, estacode per night of $2000 when applicable, duty tour allowances when applicable, severance gratuity of N80.78 million after successful completion of tenure as well as an option of motor vehicle loan to be repaid before the expiration of tenure.

It would be recalled that President Bola Tinubu had in a letter read by Senate president, Godswill Akpabio, during plenary on March 20 proposed a salary increase for judicial officers in the country.

The President in the letter argued that the bill would promote the independence and capacity of the Nigerian judiciary system.

Senator Yisa in his lead debate said remuneration was needed to reflect the contemporary socio-economic realities of the times.

He argued that the proposed legal framework would bring about significant improvement in the welfare, capacity, and independence of the judiciary, which have remained contentious issues of public discourse over the years.

Advertisement

In his contribution, the deputy president of the Senate, Senator Barau Jibrin, thanked President Tinubu for proposing a Bill to increase the salaries and allowance for Judicial Officers in the country.

Barau said: “I joined the President of the Senate to commend President Bola Ahmed Tinubu for bringing forward this Bill. This is very important and he has done well, not only for the judiciary but for the entire nation.

“Mr. President, by the nature of the judicial officers, they don’t agitate. They cry in silence, and they don’t speak out. Other workers agitate, and they stage protests. But the judiciary doesn’t talk; they cry in silence.

“Now, the president of the country has spoken for them. What he did is something laudable and we are applauding him here. Because a country that didn’t take its judiciary in a very important passion is doomed.

“And when you want to take the judiciary seriously, you have to take the remuneration of the judiciary staff seriously. That is very important, and that is what he has done. They have stagnated for several years.

Advertisement

“What the president has done should be supported and we will give him more support to continue to work on this kind of trajectory for the development of the nation. So, Mr. President, I joined you and other colleagues to commend President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.”

Senator Mohammed Monguno (APC – Borno North) Monguno, said improving the welfare of judges will insulate them from corruption and ensure they deliver just and fair judgments.

On his part, Senator Orji Uzor Kalu (APC-Abia North), said: “No right-thinking Nigerian will not think that it is right to keep the judiciary comfortable. I want to thank the executive for deeming it fit to increase the salaries of judges at all levels.”

Senators later approved that the bill be read for a second time when it was put to voice vote by Akpabio.

Akpabio thereafter referred the Bill to the Committee on Judiciary, Human Rights, and Legal Matters for further legislative input and to report back in four weeks.

Advertisement

The Nigerian Senate on Thursday, May 9, passed a law replacing the penalty for those convicted of drug offences from the initial life sentence as originally contained in the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) Act to death, raising the bar to what it used to be when the military was in power.

Mohammed Monguno (APC-Borno North), Chairman, had presented a report of the Committees on Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Matters and Drugs and Narcotics, National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) Act (Amendment) Bill, 2024, which did not contain the provision, before the lawmakers upgraded it.

The bill, which passed its third reading, and aimed at updating the list of dangerous drugs, strengthen the operations of the NDLEA, review penalties, and empower the establishment of laboratories, had the killer provision in section 11, after the lawmakers sat on the matter.

The relevant section, which initially reads: “Any person who, without lawful authority; imports, manufactures, produces, processes, plants or grows the drugs popularly known as cocaine, LSD, heroin or any other similar drugs shall be guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to be sentenced to imprisonment for life” was amended to reflect a “stiffer penalty of death.”

Advertisement

The Senators were persuaded to upgrade the sentence from life imprisonment to death after listening to the submissions of Ali Ndume, Borno South, who moved that the life sentence should be upgraded, to the death penalty.

During a clause-by-clause consideration of the Bill, Deputy Senate President Barau Jibrin, who presided over the session, put the amendment on the death penalty to a voice vote and ruled that the “ayes” had it.

But Adams Oshiomhole, Edo North, who objected to the ruling, saying that the “nays” had it, argued that matters of life and death should not be treated hurriedly, but Barau said it was too late, as he failed to call for division immediately after his ruling, and thereafter, the bill was subsequently read for the third time and passed by the Senate.

Advertisement