Date Published: 05/27/10
Anthony, Activist faults Bayelsa transparency bill
THE Bayelsa State Expenditure and Income Transparency Initiative Bill is
currently under fire although, Mr. George-Hill Anthony, a transparency
activist who faulted the bill says it is a unique concept yet to be taken
by any state in Nigeria.
Anthony, who is the executive director of the Niger Delta Budget
Monitoring Group (NDEBUMOG), claimed in an interview with AkanimoReports
on Thursday in Port Harcourt, the Rivers State capital, that he has taken
a critical perusal of the bill, pointing out that there are areas of
concern in it.
According to Anthony who is also the chair of the Coalition for
Accountability and Transparency in Extractive Industries, Forestry and
Fisheries in Nigeria, ''Part One, Section 2, paragraph C of the bill
addresses Extractive Industry Companies as 'extraction industries' and
this should be corrected. There is nowhere in the global EITI community
where extractive industry companies are addressed as ‘extraction
industries’.
''Same is repeated in Section (3) 1, 7, 9 and (8) 2. Section 3 (4) of the
bill which states 'obtain from the State and Local Governments a timely
and accurate account of all sources of income; provided that such
information shall not be used for any other purpose which is against the
interest of the State' needs further explanation. 'Interest of the state'
could mean different things to different people. Leaving this to
interpretation by the judiciary has many political, security and communal
implications''.
The NDEBUMOG boss said another conflict will be on how to reconcile this
with Chapter II of Nigeria’s Constitution. ''While it is mandatory for
stakeholders from the Niger Delta to continue demanding accountability
from the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC), it may not however be
possible for a state government to enforce a subsisting law such as this
when passed by a state legislature on a federal agency''.
Continuing, he said Part II (4) (1-5) and Item one in the Exclusive
Legislative List of the Federal Republic of Nigeria should interest the
drafters of the bill, stressing, the best approach the state can take is
to hold NDDC accountable through this bill by making a collaborative
provision at encouraging the Nigerian Extractive Industries Transparency
Initiative (NEITI) share its audits information with Bayelsa State
Government on the NDDC after the completion of every extractive audit.
''Section 3 (8) which states 'identify lapses and undertake measures that
shall enhance the capacity of any relevant organ of the State or Local
Governments having statutory responsibility to monitor income and public
expenditure' should embody the civil society among the entities for
enhancement of capacity building to monitor income and public
expenditure'', he said.
For the activist, Paragraph 9 of Section 3 is a welcome development. ''Any
state government that disseminates information about NDDC projects,
together with projects of the Niger Delta Ministry shall do well at
reducing projects duplications and promoting inter-agencies synergy.
The provision does not conflict with Part II, 4 (1-5) of Nigeria’s
constitution or the Exclusive Legislative list in my humble opinion.
''There is a need to widen Part II, 4 of the Bill on the Composition of
the Multi- Stakeholders Working Group (MSWG) to address gender issues.
Bayelsa Women Forum or any platform for Bayelsa Women should be included
to have a representative. More so, the Commissioner for Special Duties,
and the Chairman or Director-General of the State Inland Revenue Service
should also be members of the MSWG.
''I am yet to reconcile why the Commissioner for Health is included as a
member of the BEITI-NSWG. A representative of NEITI and the Revenue
Mobilization, Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) should also be
included among membership of the MSWG. But membership of the Federal
agencies in the Bayelsa BEITI is optional. It is voluntary, though has
participatory cost implication for Bayelsa State Government.
''In Section 6 which is on tenure of members of the Stakeholders Working
Group, the tenure of four years is agreeable. But the provision should
include subject for a reappointment for a second tenure of another four
years and no more. My reason for this is to retain people who may have
performed well and have gotten their capacities built'', the activist
said.
He, however, agrees that the Project Director should have the five year
tenure for the sake of succession stability of new Working Group members,
and may be reappointed for another term and no more. This, he said, should
also apply to the Project Director in (11) 2 (a).
''Section 11 (b), which is on years of experience of the Project Director
to be appointed should be amended from 10 years experience to six years
experience. I do not subscribe to the shutting out of the younger
generation which also have generational expertise for elevation of Nigeria
in the governance processes as exemplified in most of the laws and bills
passed at the national level.
''Section 7 (1) of the bill which states that 'the Working Group shall
ordinarily meet for the dispatch of business at such time and place as the
Chairman may from time to time appoint but shall meet at least once in
every three months' is flawed. I disagree with the provision that the
Chairman decides the venue of meetings from time to time. Supposing the
Chairman disagrees with some of the members on some issues and wants to
take the meeting to a location they do not like nor agree with, what
happens? This provision should state that ‘the meeting of the Working
Group shall take place from time to time at location(s)
agreeable by majority of the members’.
''Also, Section 14 (1) (b) which states 'such monies that may be paid to
BEITI by way of grants, donations, gifts, etc. provided the source of such
grants, donations and gifts are properly disclosed' is self compromising.
It should be re-phrased that, ‘provided such gifts, grants and donations
are not in conflict of interest to the general goals and objectives of
BEITI or can so comprise independent reasoning of members of the MSWG on
matters that so concern the source of gift, grants or donations’.
''Any legislation without punitive penalties is a waste of time and public
resources. This bill has no provision for penalties. Section 3 (11) and
(12) states that report about any erring MDAs shall be submitted to
Bayelsa State Anti-corruption Commission. This did not in any way have
responsible liability. Except a jail term, demotion, a fine which goes
together with jail terms are inserted into the bill as a biting instrument
to be enforced through the jurisdiction of the Bayelsa State High Court,
then, it is as bad as if this great initiative did not
exist.
''This bill holds no water without punitive penalties. It is however
commendable to see critical Civil Society stakeholders in (Bayelsa State)
coming together to wilt support for this Bill. Such should continue. This
is a pro-community bill which the community (stakeholder) groups must
lobby and put pressure on their representatives within the Bayelsa
legislature at delivering the bill.
''The civil society in the state must also (collectively) continue their
legislative interventionist surgery towards the bill'', Mr. Anthony said.
|