(+234)9029755663 hello@legalnaija.com
Civic Engagement Series – Petitions

Civic Engagement Series – Petitions

by | Feb 13, 2018 | Uncategorized

A petition is a request to do something, most commonly addressed to a government official or public entity. 

Petitions could be a potent weapon in the hands of the citizenry and an effective tool for engaging with govt or demanding a position from government. Examples include petitions that sought the release of Nelson Mandela during his imprisonment by the apartheid government of South Africa. 
Other instances are online petitions used the organisations and persons to cause govt to act in a certain way. 
As a Nigerian, if you are unsatisfied with a position of government, you may start a petition that seeks to change the situation and the more people sign your petition, the more credibility it receives. 
You may also use a petition to call the attention of government to issues of importance to your community. For instance, a petition circulated in your community for repair of public infrastructure.
#civicengagementseries
#civicengagement
Vat On Imported Services – Vodacom v. FIRS: Federal High Court Decides | Adefolake Adewusi

Vat On Imported Services – Vodacom v. FIRS: Federal High Court Decides | Adefolake Adewusi

by | Feb 13, 2018 | Uncategorized

On 19th December 2017, the Federal High
Court (“FHC”) in Lagos per Kuewumi J., upheld the decision of the Tax Appeal
Tribunal (“TAT”) in Vodacom Business Nigeria Limited v. Federal Inland
Revenue Service which set out the statutory provisions and guiding
principles in Nigeria for the imposition of Value Added Tax (“VAT”) on imported
services.Briefly, the facts of the case are that, a foreign
satellite owner, NSS had supplied Vodacom, a Nigerian company, with
satellite-network bandwidth capacities which were received in Nigeria through
earth-based stations set up by Vodacom. Also contractually, the VAT burden had
been transferred from NSS to Vodacom. 


At the TAT, Vodacom argued that the
supply of bandwidth capacities was not an imported service, as it was supplied
in the Netherlands. FIRS on the other hand argued at the TAT that by virtue of
section 2 of the Value Added Tax Act 2007 (“VAT Act”), VAT is chargeable on any
good or service supplied in Nigeria, except expressly exempted. Since the
supply of bandwidth capacities was not expressly exempted, FIRS argued that
such supply was subject to VAT. The TAT accepted FIRS’ argument. The TAT also
took the view on the basis of the “destination principle” that since the
service in question, the supply of bandwidth capacities, was consumed in
Nigeria, its supply was subject to VAT in Nigeria.

Vodacom appealed against the decision of
the TAT to the FHC. Vodacom argued that a service supplied by a non-resident
person to a person inside Nigeria is only subject to VAT if the service is
indeed rendered in Nigeria. Section 46 of the VAT Act defines “imported
service” as “service rendered in Nigeria by a non-resident
person to a person inside Nigeria.” Vodacom argued that the words “rendered
in Nigeria” as inserted by the lawmaker as it relates to the
definition of “imported service,” in Section 46 of the VAT
Act, has the location where the service was rendered, and not where the service
was received, as the relevant consideration. Consequently, the physical act of
rendering the service had to be performed in Nigeria for the service to be
liable to VAT. Vodacom also argued that the TAT had found that NSS, the
non-resident company in question, was not incorporated in Nigeria or registered
for tax purposes with FIRS. Vodacom therefore argued that NSS did not carry on
business in Nigeria. Vodacom also argued that the failure of the TAT to make
pronouncements on the arguments raised by Vodacom as regards the fact that NSS
was not carrying on business in Nigeria, made the judgment of the TAT flawed.
Vodacom further argued that its obligation to pay VAT was premised on the
issuance of VAT invoice to it by the non-resident supplier, NSS pursuant to
Section 10(2) of the VAT Act. Since NSS issued no VAT invoice to Vodacom,
Vodacom had no duty to remit VAT to FIRS. Vodacom further contended that the
VAT Act contained no provisions penalising the recipient of services for
non-payment of VAT consequent upon the non-issuance of VAT invoice by the
non-resident supplier of services.

On its part, FIRS argued that Section 2 of
the VAT Act made every supply of service in Nigeria liable to VAT except the
services which are listed in the First Schedule to the VAT Act, notably amongst
which is exported service. FIRS argued that from the definitions of“supply
of services” and “supply of goods” in Section 46 of
the VAT Act, acts of sale and delivery are acts of supply (clearly different
from production) and that sale and delivery take place when the goods or
services are received and paid for by the consumer. FIRS argued that what
matters to Section 10(2) of the VAT Act, is that the consumer, not the means of
supply, is in Nigeria, as the non-resident supplier may or may not be required
to accompany the goods or services to Nigeria, but that even where the
non-resident supplier accompanied the goods into Nigeria, that did not detract
from the requirements to comply with Section 10(2) of the VAT Act. Thus, the
physical act of rendering the service could not be restricted to the physical
presence of NSS in Nigeria.

FIRS then argued that Section 10(2) of the
VAT Act creates two statutory duties namely: (i) the duty of the non-resident
company to include the tax in its invoice; and (ii) the duty of the person to
whom the goods or services are supplied in Nigeria to remit the tax. FIRS
argued that the foregoing duties were separate, distinct and independent of
each other, further arguing that the requirements under Section 10 of the VAT
Act are only made for proper record, accountability and ease of
compliance/enforcement and not a condition precedent for liability to pay VAT.
FIRS contended that the very moment the services were received in Nigeria by
Vodacom, the liability to account for VAT arose even with the failure of NSS to
include VAT in its invoice or did but under assessed VAT. FIRS maintained that
the non-registration or non-issuance of an invoice for VAT was not fatal to the
remittance of VAT by a taxable person because Section 15(1) of the VAT Act
compels a taxable person to render account of his transaction. FIRS further
argued that if Section 10 of the VAT Act was interpreted to prevent VAT
collection when the foreign supplier of services failed to register for VAT and
raise VAT invoice, then a recipe for tax evasion would be brewed as the
consumers in imported services in future cases would only need to ensure that
their non-resident suppliers do not comply with Section 10 for them to escape
VAT on the services. On the effect of the phrase, “carrying on
business” in Section 10 of the VAT Act, FIRS argued, relying on a
judicial precedent, that sale was a transaction by way of trade notwithstanding
that it was an isolated transaction where the intention of the company was to
deal in that line of business within its memorandum of association.

In its judgment, the FHC held that Section
2 of the VAT Act was the charging clause and imposed VAT on the supply of all
goods and services other than those listed as exempted in the First Schedule to
the VAT Act. Consequently, VAT is charged and payable on all international,
inter-state and intra-state supplies of goods and services except those that
are expressly exempted bearing in mind the territorial nature of tax law. The
FHC discountenanced as untenable, Vodacom’s argument that in considering what
an imported service was, the relevant consideration was the location where the
service was rendered and not where the service was received. The FHC held that
in ascertaining whether a transaction is liable to VAT, the crucial questions
are: (i) did the transaction give rise to a supply of either goods or services
(ii) was it for consideration? (iii) is the supply of goods and services
exempted by the VAT Act? The FHC held that if questions (i) and (ii) are
answered in the affirmative and question (iii), then such a transaction is
subject to VAT. 

The FHC further discountenanced Vodacom’s argument that a
service supplied by a non-resident person to a person inside Nigeria is only
subject to VAT if the service is rendered in Nigeria. The FHC held that for
supply of imported goods and imported services, the location of the supplier
was of no consequence. What was important was whether a supply of goods and
services was made into Nigeria and for consideration, and once that question
was answered in the affirmative, a VAT-chargeable transaction had occurred. The
FHC held that in the instant case, Vodacom was supplied in Nigeria, satellite
network bandwidth capacities for consideration as shown by the contractual
document and such supply not being within the exempted services, was liable to
VAT in Nigeria pursuant to Section 2 of the VAT Act. In essence, the supply of
satellite network bandwidth capacities qualified as “imported service” because
it was supplied by a person outside Nigeria to a person inside Nigeria.

The FHC further held that in the context of
VAT, a company was a non-resident company if it was either a foreign company
unincorporated in Nigeria but present in Nigeria on the basis that it had
applied and obtained exemption pursuant to the provisions of Section 59 of the
Companies and Allied Matters Act, Cap C20, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria
2004; or a foreign entity outside Nigeria but transacting business with persons
in Nigeria. The FHC noted that the requirement for VAT registration was relaxed
for a non-resident company which had no physical presence in Nigeria to reduce
the administrative burden on such non-resident company. In some jurisdictions,
the approach in this second instance would be to under the reverse charge mechanism,
require the VAT to be paid by the recipient (i.e. the consumer) rather than the
supplier of the imported services. The FHC held that a contrary decision in
this regard would be “a gratuitous escape route for VAT evasion” since
a non-resident supplier would be able to, by refusing to be registered for VAT,
be excused from the liability to pay VAT for a transaction liable to VAT. Such
was not the purpose of the VAT Act. As regards whether or not the non-resident
supplier carried on business in Nigeria, the FHC held that in keeping with a
cardinal feature of VAT namely, flexibility to keep pace with technological and
commercial developments, “carries on business” includes a
single supply of goods and services of Nigeria.

The FHC viewed as a misdirection, the TAT’s
holding that NSS did not carry on business in Nigeria arising from the
perception that a business can only be carried on in Nigeria if the company in
issue was resident in Nigeria. In providing clarification, the FHC held that
all that was to be considered in finding out whether an entity was carrying on
business in Nigeria from outside Nigeria or not for the purpose of VAT was the
occurrence of a supply to a person in Nigeria. Physical presence was not a
condition to carrying on business in Nigeria for the purpose of the VAT Act.
Referencing the non-binding OECD VAT/GST
Guidelines, the FHC held that a service had been rendered only when it had been
consumed. Essentially, VAT should be levied in the consumer’s jurisdiction,
rather than the non-resident supplier’s jurisdiction. Consequently, a service
made without delivery had not been rendered. A service was rendered in Nigeria
if it was received by a person in Nigeria from outside Nigeria.

As a passing remark, the FHC observed that
the likely conflict the insertion of the phrase “in Nigeria” in
Section 46 of the VAT Act had set out to abort, was a situation where a person
inside Nigeria imported services that were rendered in a country other than
Nigeria. The FHC noted that in this case, the non-resident supplier, NSS had
contracted its VAT liability to Vodacom and held that even if the clause
contracting the VAT liability were non-existent, Vodacom would still be liable
to VAT by virtue of Section 2 of the VAT Act as such was a purposeful way of interpretation
to avoid double taxation or unintended non-taxation.

The FHC held that to avoid the
administrative burden of registration on a non-resident company supplying
services and to assure that VAT was accounted for, the reverse charge mechanism
was appropriate to be applied which required the VAT-registered customer to
account for the VAT on supplies received from the non-resident supplier. The
FHC subsequently held that it was just to apply the reverse charge mechanism
because a patriot dealing with a person outside Nigeria over a supply made to
him must take steps to avoid a situation where the State was deprived of
legitimate revenue.

The FHC consequently affirmed the decision
of the TAT delivered on 12th February 2016. 

Before now, it seemed like there were
two conflicting decisions on the issue of the imposition of VAT on a service
provided by a non-resident entity to a Nigerian entity arising from the
decisions of different TAT panels in Gazprom v. FIRS and Vodacom
v. FIRS.  In the earlier decided Gazprom case, The
Abuja panel of the TAT had held that since a non-resident supplier contracting
with a Nigerian company was not necessarily carrying on business in Nigeria,
such company was not obliged to register for or charge VAT and the Nigerian customer
was not obliged to remit VAT to the FIRS where the supplier does not issue a
tax invoice. In the Vodacom case decided subsequently, the
Lagos panel of the TAT took the view on the basis of the “destination
principle” that since the service in question, the supply of bandwidth
capacities, was consumed in Nigeria, its supply was subject to VAT in Nigeria
and the consumer had a duty to ensure the non-resident supplier issued a VAT
invoice.

For information as regards how
this decision may affect your tax affairs, you may contact me.

Adefolake adewusi
Senior Associate at AELEX
Source: Linkedin

Emancipation of the Nigerian Youth from Mental and Political Slavery | Adedunmade Onibokun

Emancipation of the Nigerian Youth from Mental and Political Slavery | Adedunmade Onibokun

by | Feb 12, 2018 | Uncategorized

This piece is inspired by leading actress,
activist and philanthropists, Omotola Jalade – Ekeinde, who via her works and
passion as always promoted the illumination of the African Spirit; the
Emancipation of the African mind and the strengthening of the African
Character. Most recently, on the 10th of February, 2018 and in
celebration of her 40th birthday, Omotola hosted the symposium
centered on the “Emancipation of the Black Race from Mental Slavery”.
I believe most
people have an idea of what it means to be mentally enslaved or at least
believe that they do. Some will think of it as a distant mental state, that
plagues others but of which they are immune. What would you say if I told you
that 99% of all Nigerians are mentally enslaved.

I know in typical
Nigerian fashion, many have murmured “God forbid” under their breaths and some
others would remain confident that they are one of the lucky 1%, for they cannot
be part of the madness called Mental Slavery. Probably because they are wealthy,
have travelled to many parts of the world or even because they are professors,
doctors, lawyers, senators, political leaders, have many degrees or are simply
educated. But do not be deceived, rebuke it all you want, be assured that in the
mind of every Nigerian lie the chains that have held us long bound in mental
slavery not because Mental Slavery is a Nigerian thing, it is the dilemma of
the Black Man, no matter the city, country or continent in which he finds
himself.
In the early
1500’s, slaves were transported from West Africa to America through Badagry. It
is reported that Badagry exported no fewer than 550,000 African slaves to
America during the period of the American Independence in l787. According to Olusegun
Mobee in his book, “History of the Mobee Family of Badagry and Their
Involvement in the Slave Trade“, Mr. Mobee states, “Slaves were
never captured in Badagry…As a matter of fact, then, slavery was a recognized
institution all over the world. Slaves were employed by Kings, Chiefs, and
wealthy people in their houses as domestic servants. A man’s economic and
social status were assessed by the number of slaves he possessed. This type of
slavery was known as domestic slavery and usually, many of these slaves were
captives of war. But many of the slave owners on learning that European slave
merchants were besieging Badagry with goods such as iron bars, cotton, wool,
linen, whiskey, gin, metal wares, and assorted wines in exchange for slaves,
wasted no time to bring their domestic slaves to Badagry with the hope of
exchanging them for the listed items. It was confessed that the prospects of
Trans – Atlantic Slave Trade fueled into tribal wars in Yorubaland as the kings
and slaves who had taken part of the European slave merchants’ offer, went all
out to wage war on the other towns and villages with the sole aim of getting
slaves to be exchanged for wine and guns.”
But how has the
slave trade affected the mental faculties of the Nigerian till date? And Why
has the black race and the African continent been the biggest liability to the
world. This is beacuse Africans for generations have been made to believe that we are
second class citizens of the world.This has hit the psyche of the Nigerian most
especially. We have been brain washed to believe that our cultures and norms
are second place. For instance, we celebrate Hollywood over Nollywood; we
celebrate Angelina Jolie over the likes of Omotola Jalade; we trust their
healthcare systems over ours; we value their education over ours and pay huge
sums of dollars and pounds to get a foreign degree; we have doctors but travel
abroad especially if among the wealth and political class; we have tagged our
indigenous religions witchcraft and voodoo, something evil while we have
embraced Christianity and Islam. Most recently, many Nigerians have paid their way to slavery as seen recently from news reports in Libya.
I remember
sitting at a Bar with a British Lawyer in Dubai. I was in town for the
International Bar Association Conference but he was at that time working in the
city. After a while into our conversation, he asked me where I was from and I
responded Nigeria. He said, he knew I was Nigerian by origin but was asking
where in the UK I was based.  I told him
I was based in Lagos and he looked in disbelief. I never forgot till this day
when he said he never believed anyone out of Nigeria could speak so well. He
told me, I speak well for a black person and must have been foreign trained because
he could not believe an African who was raised in Africa could speak so
well. 
Colonialization is
another factor that totally disintegrated the Nigerian  Spirit. The British colonized Nigeria in 1884.
The British controlled Nigeria by using authoritarian systems and by being
unafraid to use force and fear to keep  Nigerians under control. In essence,
the British empowered the political class and used them to control the
populace. And the political class who wanted a sustenance of their status, used
every way they could find to stay relevant and disenfranchise the masses. This is why it must not surprise you that the class of 66 is still in control of Nigeria till date.
This has resulted in
a dog eat dog society, where everyone strived to join the privileged few and the
fastest way of making that achievement was by stealing wealth in the millions
and billions. Because the richer they became, the more they became members of
that elitist society. One will be called a big man and in public people will
hail you not because they love you but because they want to be like u. Rich,
corrupt, without decency and morals. A phenomenon that has continued till
this day.
The activities of
the Nigerian political class made matters worse for the Nigerian nation. The
political class reveled in squander, corruption, ethnic bigotry and a disregard
for Nigeria’s economic and social realities. This resulted in a society where we
have come to lack empathy for one another. We do not trust one another and are
always suspicious of each other. For instance, If you are a member of my generation,
you must be familiar with many of our parents who very realistic, they are
parents who would say “do not marry anyone from the Ibo Tribe or the Yoruba
Tribe or the Hausa Tribe. Some Yoruba parents go further to say do not marry
ijebus, or egbas or ijeshas. And when you ask why? The would likely respond
with reasons such as they are not trustworthy, they are fetish, their men are
wicked, their women are too independent minded and so many others reasons.
While we may not question their reality because it is borne from their
experiences, we must note that it is not our own.
The most
pertinent question at this time is how can Nigerians carve a new identity
for ourselves. To do so, I believe we must understand that we are not here to
pleasure ourselves, we are not here to fix ourselves or take care of ourselves,
we are not here solely to find means of making ourselves more comfortable,
for there is something wrong that is not allowing us to find our greatest meaning.
A new responsibility has been placed on the Nigerian, not anything new that we
have not known before. But if we have ever needed to step up and take
responsibility, we need it now. We must not tolerate the madness, we must not
create another type of madness that allows us to say we are the ones that are
sane. We have witnessed the rise of violence on the black man everywhere
especially in the United States of America and Libya.
We must not judge
ourselves based on what we have done for ourselves but on what we have done for
others. The big question therefore is how do we play our role in all of these
struggles.
Here are outlines
of how we may accomplish same –
1.    
We must illuminate the African spirit, empower of
the African character and liberate the African mind. 
2.    
We must overcome the concept of black inferiority
with the truth of black humanity.
3.    
We must reject the lie associated with black
people. That we are inferior and 2nd class.
4.    
We must tell our story, like the saying goes; as
long as the lion does not bot have an historian, the hunter will always be the
hero. 
5.    
We must realize that no one but ourselves can free
our minds. 
6.    
We must deploy a superiority equal to any other nation
in the world.
7.    
We must let our light so shine that the world would
see our good deeds, our impact, our contribution, our role to making mankind
great.
8.    
We must ask questions on how we can be better, to take
a second look at our environment. Look at our space in which we have accepted
for hundreds of years and ask ourselves, what kind of components can we change.
We must redefine our decency, our truth and our justifications going forward.  
9.    
We must stop focusing on the little things that divide
us but look rather at the improvements we can make to our environment. So when
the people in the year, 2095 look that at the kind of impact that we made in
2018 and going forward, they would say the black race accepted a level of
responsibility that has defined the kind of peace they have accepted and the
race they have become.


10. Nigerians, most especially the youths must engage government and leaders continuously. Social media trends can be great for calling the attention of government to issues but it is not enough, especially when the energy is not channeled right.
In our emotional
emancipation, we must identify a healthy sense of self-esteem; to be free from
all thoughts of mediocrity, to learn that we can compete as a nation, as a
people on a global scale.
We must see
ourselves beyond the negative stereotypes. It requires no professional degrees
or complex government structures, policies, agencies or investigative
panel. It requires only a 4 letter word – CARE. You may be surprised at
what sort of solution I am proffering but you would be surprised to learn that,
something as simple as caring and kindness is far from us.  Allow me to
illustrate further, sometime a few years ago, while studying for my Masters in
International Business Law in London, I was walking into a bank somewhere in
the Stratford, East London. Their bank doors are not similar to ours, they do
not have those intimidating security doors that’s takes one person at a time,
it was just a glass door. The White lady in front of me held the door for me
but I just walked through and let the door swing shut. But the person walking
in behind me almost walked into the door. I immediately felt bad and realized
at that point that I had failed in my social responsibility. I had to apologise
to the person and always held the door for others behind me since that day. Further
because I realized it was part of their culture to just look out for one
another, irrespective of race or colour, a kind of social kindness I had not
experienced before.
But replay that
same scenario in Lagos and you would get a different reaction.  If you mistakenly go further to complain, you
may get a response such “Oga, you sef no get eye”,” You no fit see say door dey
there” or “na me be your gateman ni?”. Not surprisingly, 2 weeks  ago, I was walking into church on Sunday and
the I had to catch the door before it hit my face, because the gentleman who
was ahead of me just let it swing shut without minding the faith of the person
coming behind. Thank God say I get eye.

But I reminded
myself that day of our painful past and experiences, we
have become an uncaring people and I don’t just speak about Nigerians, I speak
about the black man as a whole. Going forward Nigerians must not see
material realities as testimonies but as tools of effectiveness. Like my
mentor, Olakunle Soriyan says, we must realize that it is the smallest of our
character that makes a man acquire a thing and think that his life can be
better because of it. We must audit our sense of mission and ask questions
about our morality and what the material can represent. We must ask serious
questions of our lifestyles. We must reject the impulsion to use our skill and
position as a means of showcasing our nuisance value but use them for deeds
that society can be grateful for. This is critical and must be done as a matter
of supreme urgency.   
Adedunmade
Onibokun
dunmadeo@yahoo.com
#Omotola4point0

Renaissance Trip To Trace The History of Slavery

Renaissance Trip To Trace The History of Slavery

by | Feb 11, 2018 | Uncategorized

On 9th February,
2018, I had the opportunity of joining screen icon, Omotola Jalade Ekeinde,
Captain Ekeinde, members of the Omotola4point0 team, members of the Lagos State
Ministry of Tourism and a number of amazing guests on a tour of the Badagry
Slave Route. The aim of the trip was to have a clearer understanding of the
events that occurred around the Slave Trade Era and discern how they have
shaped the mental state of the Nigerian and also the African. As expected, the
trip turned out to be both insightful and enlightening.

Imagine my utmost surprise
when I learnt that contrary to public belief, the Slave Traders were only successful
in kidnapping a few Nigerians and our local chiefs and kings were directly instrumental
to the success of what has come to be known as one of the biggest crimes in mankind’s
history. According to history, in return for items such as wine, gun powder,
gin and mirrors, Yoruba kings waged war on neighbouring towns and villages in
other to kidnap slaves for batter. One of such leaders was Chief Sunbu Mobee,
ruler of Badagry who died in 1893 and was the King of Badagry during the slave
trade era.

Would you believe that
during the era, a bottle of gin was exchanged for about 10 able bodied slaves? Or
that when the Traders played raffle draws, the first prize was a Horse while
the second prize was a slave girl? This meant that the white traders placed a higher
premium on a horse over a slave.

Furthermore, slaves who were
kidnapped in places such as Oyo kingdom had to walk to the coast in Badagry
with heavy chains around the necks and ankles while on their way to unknown
destinations. Such slaves upon reaching Badagry were housed in Baracoons,
otherwise known as slave cells. Here they were gathered and prepared for the
long journey by sea to Spain or the Americas.

The journey from the shores
of Badagry usually began with a walk through the route slave route to the point
of no return, where the big ships were waiting to cart off the slaves. Each
ship taking about 600 slaves at a time. In
the early 1500’s, slaves were transported from West Africa to America through
Badagry. It is reported that Badagry exported no fewer than 550,000 African
slaves to America during the period of the American Independence in l787. In
addition, slaves were transported to Europe, South America and the Caribbean.
The slaves came mainly from West Africa and the neighboring countries of Benin
and Togo as well as others parts of Nigeria.

According
to Olusegun Mobee in his book, “History of the Mobee Family of Badagry
and Their Involvement in the Slave Trade“, Mr. Mobee states, “Slaves were never
captured in Badagry…As a matter of fact, then, slavery was a recognized
institution all over the world. Slaves were employed by Kings, Chiefs, and
wealthy people in their houses as domestic servants. A man’s economic and
social status were assessed by the number of slaves he possessed.

Conditions on board the ship
during the Middle Passage were appalling. The men were packed together below
deck and were secured by leg irons. The space was so cramped they were forced
to crouch or lie down. Women and children were kept in separate quarters,
sometimes on deck, allowing them limited freedom of movement, but this also
exposed them to violence and sexual abuse from the crew.

On reaching the Americas the
crew of slave ships prepared the Africans for sale. They washed, shaved and
rubbed them with palm oil to disguise sores and wounds caused by conditions on
board. The captains usually sold their captives directly to planters or
specialised wholesalers by auction. Immediately owners and their overseers
sought to obliterate the identities of their newly acquired slaves, to break
their wills and sever any bonds with the past. They forced Africans to adapt to
new working and living conditions, to learn a new language and adopt new
customs.

It is important to further note that slave trade came to an end not necessarily because of the Abolitionist movements but generally because of the industrialization boom in England, where machines took the jobs of slaves and farm owners were no longer in need of slaves because they had machines that could do the jobs at little maintenance cost. Though Slave trade is
abolished, acts of slavery still continue in the world today, recent case
studies include Nigerians recently rescued Slave camps from Libya.

Adedunmade Onibokun
dunmadeo@yahoo.com
Great News For Pro Bono Lawyers

Great News For Pro Bono Lawyers

by | Feb 9, 2018 | Uncategorized

Paul Usoro & Co (PUC) is delighted to announce the second edition of the Pro-Bono challenge commencing today the 09 February, 2018.  The first edition was an eye opener with a range of video entries that inspired so many in the Legal space. 

Abasiodiong Ekpeyong, Esq emerged as the winner of the maiden edition as determined by an external evaluation committee made up of great legal minds such as Prof. Fabian Ajogwu, SAN, Mrs. Abimbola Akeredolu, SAN and Mr. EssienUdom. According to Mr Munirudeen Liadi, Head of Chambers at PUC “The decision was made to give a chance to more Lawyers between ages of 1-15 years at the Bar to showcase and inspire colleagues with their touching Pro Bono cases.”
The initiative is aimed at rewarding the selfless and sacrificial efforts of lawyers who go the extra mile to defend the defenseless, ultimately restoring confidence in and respect to the rule of Law in Nigeria.
This second edition will focus on humanitarian issues, with special attention to Law enforcement agents’ brutality, Gender related issues, and Child abuse. The 6 most compelling cases will be rewarded with N100,000 each.
Please note the following:
• Each participant is expected to create a short video (Max 2 mins) which could be shared via Instagram, Facebook or via email (puchallenge@gmail.com) 
• All video entries via Instagram & Facebook are required to use the hash-tag #PAULUSOROCHALLENGE for the videos to be discovered.
• There will be extra points for Law enforcement agents’ brutality, gender related cases, child abuse and humanitarian matters. 
• Past and present PUC lawyers are not allowed to take part in the PU Challenge.
• Participants in the maiden edition of PU Challenge are not also allowed to participate.
• Lawyers who can participate are Members of the Nigerian Bar, of 1-15 years’ experience, who have paid their practicing fees..
• Entries will be selected on a zonal basis (6 geographical zones). There will be 1 winner per zone; for outstanding Pro- Bono cases handled.
• All supporting documents should be sent to a designated email address: puchallenge@gmail.com for verification.
• Follow the Paul Usoro social media accounts for live updates – Twitter: @PaulUsoroSAN; Facebook: Paul Usoro, SAN (Personal) & Page (@pusorosan),Instagram: @paulusoro, LinkedIn: Paul Usoro, SAN.
All entries must meet the above listed requirements before they are considered valid. Acceptance of entries will end on the 09 March, 2018. A panel of external judges will decide the winners which will be announced vide the official Paul Usoro Instagram handle in April, 2018.
Best of luck.
Legal Consequences of Not having a National Identity Number | Prince Ikechukwu Nwafuru

Legal Consequences of Not having a National Identity Number | Prince Ikechukwu Nwafuru

by | Feb 6, 2018 | Uncategorized

Introduction 
The National Identity Management Commission (“NIMC”) recently published five Regulations relating to the national identity management, The already gazetted Regulations which were made pursuant to the National Identity Management Commission Act, 2007 (“NIMC Act”) are as follows: (1) the Mandatory Use of the National Identification Number Regulations, 2017; (2) Nigeria Biometrics Standard Regulations, 2017, (3) Licensing of the Frontend Services of the National Identity Management Commission Regulations, 2017, (4) Access to Register Information in the National Identity Database Regulations, 2017 and (5) Registration of Persons and Contents of National Identity Database Regulations, 2017. The focus of this article however, is on one of these Regulations, that is, the Mandatory Use of the National Identification Number Regulations, 2017 (“the Regulations”) as well as the far-reaching implications and consequences of not having a National Identification Number (“NIN” or “National Identification Number”), on business, professional services, contracts, access to public service and commercial transactions in Nigeria. The transactions that require NIN for their validation and completion will equally be highlighted. 
Distinction between NIN and the National e-ID Card.
Whilst the end product of successful enrolment and registration is the issuance of the National Identity Card now called National e-ID Card (“e-ID Card”), it is important to note that the NIN is not synonymous with the e-ID Card. It is possible to have the NIN without necessarily having the e-ID Card. As a matter of fact, experience has shown that it usually takes years to process and activate the e-ID Card unlike the NIN that can be obtained within weeks after registration. For instance, I registered in 2013 and was given a NIN few weeks after registration but it has been difficult to obtain the e-ID Card for reasons only NIMC can explain. 
It is therefore important that you take necessary steps to register and obtain your NIN if you have not done that already as the more critical issue is the possession of NIN and not necessarily the e-ID Card. Registration is mandatory for every registrable persons, defined under the NIMC Act to mean any citizen of Nigeria and non-citizens who are lawful resident in Nigeria either permanently or for a period of two years or more. Section 18(1) of the NIMC Act provides that a person who has attained 16 years at the commencement of the Act shall register within sixty days or such longer period as the NIMC may by Order prescribe. Similarly, section 18(2) provides that the duty to register any person under 16 years at the commencement of the Act shall be on any person having charge of any such under aged persons and the registration must be done within 60 days of birth or within such longer period not exceeding 180 days as may be prescribed by the NIMC.  After the completion of the enrolment process, a Slip is issued to the applicant containing the NIN. With the NIN Slip which serves as a Temporary means of identification, the registered member can carry out transactions with the NIN while awaiting the issuance of the multi-purpose e-ID Card which as I have noted above could take years before issuance. To further buttress the point that the NIN (and not necessarily the e-ID Card) is all that is required for the purpose of under-listed transactions, the Act defined a “registered individual” to mean any person in respect of which an entry has been made in the Database. Thus, the possession of National Identification Number alone qualifies one as a registered individual even without the possession of the e-ID Card. This explains why registration and obtaining your NIN are even more important than the possession of the e-ID Card.
Transactions that require the use of National Identification Number
Section 27(1) of the NIMC Act listed the transactions which require NIN. Section 27(1)(l) of NIMC Act allows the NIMC to prescribe and gazette additional transactions that will require NIN before they can be carried out. Thus, pursuant to these provisions, the Commission under Part I of the Regulations prescribed additional transactions: The combined reading of the provisions of the NIMC Act and the Regulations shows that the following transactions require the NIN:
1.     Acquisition and Transfer of Interest in Real and Personal Properties: This covers all transactions involving transfer of titles or interest in land or landed property and includes tenancy agreements. It also covers transactions involving sale, purchase and change of ownership of aircrafts, vessel, motor vehicles, motor cycles, transfer and transmission of shares or equities, and any contract for valuable consideration and for the transfer of any interest whether tangible or intangible, etc.
2.     Credit Facilities and Financial Services: The use of NIN is compulsory in transactions relating to loan facilities, opening of accounts in Banks and other Financial Institutions, purchase of Insurance policies and banking transactions generally,
3.     Registration of Business and Non-Business Organizations: This covers registration of companies, sole proprietorships, partnerships and Incorporated Trustees or non-profit organizations as well as post incorporation documentations and filings. 
4.     Public, Social and Commercial Services: This category covers a wide range of transactions and services cutting across registration of voters, provision of consular services, pension, pilgrimage, tax identification, access to social benefits, purchase of travel tickets for air, rail, road and water transportation, boarding of aircrafts, trains, commercial vehicles, hotel bookings, ships and boats, registration and user of cybercafé services, employment, enrolment and registration for examinations, enrolment and registrations in both public and private educational institutions, registration and membership of professional bodies, registration of telephone SIM Cards and other communication devices, import and export of goods and commodities, licensing and operations of telecommunications, issuance of birth certificates, driver license, operation of bureau de change and transactions involving foreign exchange and application for or bidding for any contracts or services from any government agency or parastatal, etc.
5.     Filing Court Processes: NIN is also required for filing of criminal and civil actions in courts and this extends to arbitration processes. Similarly, obtaining and processing of probate documents also require NIN.
The above list is not exhaustive of the transactions that require NIN but represents the major ones. To engage in any of the above-categorized transactions, one must present his or her National Identification Number which must be verified before the transaction is concluded. Neither the Act nor the Regulations specifically provide for the effect of failure to present the NIN on the validity of transaction itself. Will a failure to present and verify the NIN render a transaction such an agreement to transfer interest in tangible or intangible property void? Will such a contract or transaction be declared illegal? In the case of CORPORATE IDEAL INSURANCE LTD v. AJAOKUTA STEEL CO. LTD & ORS(2014) LPELR-22255(SC), the Supreme Court provided a guide on how to determine an illegal contract when it held as follows:
“The question may thus be asked. How does one identify or recognize an illegal contract or transaction? This question has since been answered by this Court in a plethora of authorities. In ALAO v. ACB LTD (1998) 3 NWLR (Pt.542) 339 at 370 paragraphs C – F, per Igu, JSC, this Court held as follows:- “It is trite that a transaction or contract the making or performance of which is expressly or impliedly prohibited by statute is illegal and unenforceable. Where a contract made by the parties is expressly forbidden by statute, its illegality is undoubted and no Court ought to enforce it or allow itself to be used for the enforcement of alleged obligations arising thereunder if the illegality is duly brought to the notice of the Court…” It is crystal clear that any contract or transaction entered into by parties, which contract or transaction is either expressly or impliedly prohibited by statute, is illegal and unenforceable. It is my view therefore that any contract or transaction which seeks to circumvent the provisions of a statute is ex-facie illegal and no party can take benefit from it.”
With the above decision, it will be interesting to know how Nigerian Courts will construe a transaction that fails to comply with the requirement of the Regulations and NIMC Act. What is clear however, is that it is an offence under the Act to carry out such transactions without the NIN. It is also not clear whether the NIN should be indicated in the transactions documents as evidence of compliance with the Regulations. In my view, there should be an indication in the transaction documents that the NIN was presented and verified as that is one sure way to prove compliance with the Regulations and the Act. A duty is imposed on government agencies offering any of the services listed above to insist that any person involved in relevant transactions with them produce his NIN. After producing the NIN, the relevant government agency is expected to verify and authenticate the person or the NIN so provided in the National Identity Database using online verification from NIMC platform, Card Acceptance Device, Card Reading Device or a combination of any of these. Again, this presupposes that the relevant government agencies must have any of these devices in place as the non-availability of these devices will hamper the enforcement of the Regulations. 
Registration Timeline and Enforcement 
The NIMC Act came into force in 2007 and the timeline for registration and obtaining the NIN is provided in the Act as I have shown above. Though the Act gives the Commission the power to make an Order extending the timeline, I am not aware of any such extension. Assuming there is no Order made by the NIMC extending the sixty days provided in the Act, it means that the timeline provided under the Act stands. It is also not clear when the enforcement of the Regulations will commence given as earlier noted the logistics and devices required to make the enforcement possible. It has been reported that NIMC wants to ensure that the database is populated before commencing enforcement of the mandatory use of the NIN for all identity-based transactions. As at September 2017 it was also reported that NIMC had registered 21,360, 000 Nigerians in the National Identity Database and issued them the National Identification Number. This figure is very low considering the country’s population of above 180 million.
Punishment and Consequences of Default
The NIMC Act provides for identity-based offences which include but not limited to carrying out transactions without a NIN. Section 28 provides for a fine of not less than N50,000.00 or imprisonment for a term not less than 6 months or to both such fine and imprisonment for any person who carries out or permits to carrying out of any transaction without a NIN. If the offender is a corporate body, it is a fine of not less than N 1,000,000.00 and in addition, the Chief Executive or the line manager or other similar officer of the body corporate, or any other person purporting to act in any such capacity shall be deemed guilty of that offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine of N1,000,000.00 each. It goes further in Section 30(1)(a)  to criminalize failure of any registrable person to register and provides for a fine of not less than N100,000 or imprisonment for term of not less than 6 months or to both such fine and imprisonment. Rule 7 of the Regulations provides that failure to comply with the provisions of these Regulations and other relevant Regulations made pursuant to the Act, shall be punishable by the imposition of administrative fines and sanctions by the Commission, in addition to the penalties provided under the Act. It is safe to state that the administrative fines and sanctions referred to in the Regulations are those fines specifically provided in the NIMC Act and it will be wrong and illegal for the Commission to impose any arbitrary fines or sanctions not specifically provided under the Act or the Regulations. 
Conclusion
The importance of registering for the NIN cannot be over-emphasized given the highlighted legal consequences of engaging in those transactions without the NIN. Whilst there is no indication as to when enforcement will commence, business owners, professionals and the public are advised to register and obtain the NINs to avoid the consequences that will follow non-registration. Every business and non-business organization should mandate their officers, employees and those acting for them to register and obtain their NINs. The NIMC Act and the Regulations have listed a range of transactions spanning virtually all commercial activities and public services such that one cannot think of any meaningful transaction in Nigeria that can be concluded without the NIN. Beyond the possible effect on the validity of the transactions, transacting without the NIN is a criminal offence which carries imprisonment and/or fine. Both the person carrying out and the person who permits the carrying out of such transaction is guilty of an offence under the Act and it is not defence that the service provider or the relevant government agency did not request your NIN. The way out of these avoidable consequences is to obtain your NIN


Prince Ikechukwu Nwafuru
Counsel 
Paul Usoro & Co. 
NBA Uyo Branch Condemns EBF Move on Adoption

NBA Uyo Branch Condemns EBF Move on Adoption

by | Feb 3, 2018 | Uncategorized

 The on-going saga of the Eastern Bar Forum took yet another ugly twist.
Despite key members of the Eastern Bar Forum from the Uyo and Port Harcourt bars categorically issuing statements dissociating themselves from the EBF’s adoption plot, Arthur Obi Okafor SAN was named by the divided forum as the sole Presidential candidate for the Nigerian Bar Association.

We ask;
Who is deceiving who here?
Why would the EBF despite warnings and a boycott from key members of the forum still go ahead to adopt Arthur Obi Okafor SAN?
Is this constitutional?
Would this be allowed to stand by the NBA?
Below is a statement by the secretary of the NBA Uyo Branch Aguda Ememobong on the matter:
I hereby categorically state and describe as a travesty of basic democratic principles the purported adoption of a certain aspirant today at the NBA Port Harcourt Branch House as the candidate of Eastern Bar Forum for the Presidency of NBA.
I wish to state categorically that Uyo Branch of the NBA dissociates itself from such clearly unpopular and controversial development. As a matter of fact the Uyo Branch chairman and other delegates staged a walk out on the purported Screening Committee Meeting of EBF which was boycotted by all but one aspirant at Hotel Presidential by 7am before the Quarterly Meeting.
The Chairman’s principled stance was predicated on the fact that such activity contravenes the position of the National Exco of the NBA against  such political activities for national offices when the ban on politics has not been lifted in addition to failure to afford a level playing field to all would be contestants from the zone. I wish to note that the open rejection, commotion and massive walk out which greeted the attempt to impose an aspirant on legal practitioners from the zone is symptomatic of the divisiveness of such ill-advised project and its capacity to splinter the forum.
The Uyo Bar insist on a level playing field for all lawyers from the zone who have intention to contest any office when the ban on politics is lifted and the Branch had never taken a position on any candidates. This will show respect to the incumbent National Exco and avoid any exercise in futility. 
The Uyo Bar notes that the so called process of adoption was flawed in many ways. At the meeting Hall for instance no one was allowed to raise a point of observation or counter motion.The only people allowed to speak were people ready to rubber stamp the said motion for adoption. For these reasons and the sake of the future of the EBF I call all fellow members to support only what is legitimate, transparent and capable of uniting us.
Aguda* Ememobong
Secretary, NBA UYO BRANCH
10 Facts about Paul Usoro SAN

10 Facts about Paul Usoro SAN

by | Feb 3, 2018 | Uncategorized

1. His firm Paul Usoro & Co., is one of the best paying firms with lawyers fresh out of law school earning 150,000 Naira Monthly. 

2. He has been on the board of Airtel, for over 18 years and has been the longest serving member. He is also on the Boards of other companies including Access Bank, PZ Cuzzons etc 
3. Mr. Usoro drafted the Nigerian Communications Act 2003, a robust and enduring piece if legislation that regulates the communications industry till date.
4. Mr Usoro the founding chairman of the Communication Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association’s Section on Business Law.
5. Mr. Usoro was called to the Bar in 1982 and started his practise in Kaduna. He was also elevated to the Inner Bar as a Senior Advocate of Nigeria in 2003
6. Paul represented the Governor of Akwa Ibom State, Governor Udom Gabriel Emmanuel and his political party in about 35 pre-election lawsuits from 2015, particularly at the Governorship and National Assembly levels. All the cases were successfully defended by Paul and his Team. Not a single one of those matters was lost at any of the Courts.
7. Paul played a crucial and leading role in the team that represented a France-based multinational oil servicing company in a landmark litigation against a Nigerian company for the recovery of judgment sums of US$11,628,962.11; US$5,214,939.98; DM212,252,751.11; N26,349,753.61 and US$7,157,865.87. The judgment delivered by the Court of Appeal in the second quarter of 2015 has become a locusclassicus in Nigerian jurisprudence on the principles of subrogation of one party for another for purposes of realizing a judgment debt.
8. Paul led the Airtel Shareholders Committee in negotiating the Celtel Transaction as the Committee Chairman, which, at the time, ranked as one of the biggest private sector equity transactions in Nigeria’s history. 
9. Paul is an active member of the NBA Legal Profession Regulation Review Committee set up in 2016.
10. Paul Usoro, SAN, a devoted and loving husband and father, is married to Mfon Ekong Usoro and they are blessed with two children, one of whom is a legal practitioner, a member of the NBA and of the New York Bar.