Senate Suspends Third Reading of the FOI Bill

 ABUJA, Tuesday, 20 December 2005: The advocacy for the enactment of the Freedom of Information Bill into law suffered a setback today as the upper legislative chamber of the National Assembly, the Senate, suspended the third reading of the draft law, which would have led to its passage.

Following extended and heated debates on some provisions of the revised bill proposed by its Committee on Information, the Senate suspended debates on the bill after dealing with only four of the 55 sections.

The Senate directed the Information Committee to conduct a further review of the bill and reconcile areas of disagreement identified by senators.  It will continue debates on the bill when it resumes plenary sitting next year.   

The Bill was passed by the lower chamber of the National Assembly, the House of Representatives, in August 2004 and transmitted to the Senate the following month for concurrence.  After the second reading of the bill in the Senate last February 22, it was committed to the Information Committee for more critical evaluation and recommendation to the plenary. 

The Information Committee held a public hearing on the bill on April 26, during which a broad range of stakeholders, representing a wide variety of sectors within the Nigerian society, including business, trade unions, the academia, religious bodies, the media, the legal profession, other professional bodies, the civil service, and human rights groups made presentations and expressed unanimous support for the Bill. 

Following recommendations made at the public hearing, the Information Committee revised several provisions of the bill originally passed by the House of Representatives.  The Committee’s chairman, Senator Tawar Wada, presented its report and the revised version of the bill to his colleagues today at the plenary session.  The Senate constituted itself into a “committee of the whole house” to consider the report and began debating the revised bill clause by clause.

The first four clauses of the bill were adopted, but when the Senators reached the fifth clause, opposition began to build up.  Opposition from the Senate Minority Whip, Aba Aji, was hinged on the argument that “a foreigner can come into the country, get licensed by the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) and thereafter apply for information under the guise that he is a Nigerian citizen”.

This was in reference to the Section 5 of the Bill which provides that “Every citizen of Nigeria may request for information or access to a record in control or custody of a public body and shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Act, be given access to such information or record.”

The section defines “citizen of Nigeria” as including “association of such citizens” or “bodies corporate constituted under the Laws of Nigeria.”

Other Senators who opposed the bill argued that the report submitted by the Committee on Information was verbose and contained questionable technical flaws which were not in the nation’s interest. They argued that it would provide members of the public easy access to classified information about the nation.

Following this trend, Senator James Manager urged the Senate not to allow itself to be stampeded into passing the Bill. He said: “We must not allow ourselves to be stampeded. We should not do what we will regret in future. Even other members of the committee have spoken and with what they have said, I am even more confused about this bill. It should go back to the Committee so that they can take a critical view of it before bringing it back to the whole house for consideration.”

Senator Jubril Aminu also argued that provisions of the Bill could "paralyse the government" if passed.

Some Senators were opposed Sections of the Bill which also grant members of the public a right of access to information held by private bodies when such information is required for the protection of a human right, to ensure the performance an obligation under contract with a public body or for the investigation of corrupt practice.

Others disagreed with the introduction into the bill of sections which stipulate that the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) will be the administrative body in charge of monitoring the implementation of the bill, when it becomes law, and resolving disputes arising from denial of access before such disputes are taken before the courts.

In response to his colleagues, Senator Wada argued that provisions of the bill reflected the recommendations and desires of stakeholders in the media and “the generality of Nigerians” that submitted memoranda to the Committee or made presentations during the public hearing.

He said: “With every humility, I take all the corrections of my colleagues. But first and foremost, my colleagues should know that this is an important bill. A public hearing was held where we invited stakeholders and collated their views. This bill is a compilation of their views. This is what the industry wants. One of the problems we have is that we have not read the bill and some of us seem to be harassed by the content of the bill.”

Despite Senator Wada’s explanations, Senator Nuhu Aliyu moved a motion that consideration of the bill be suspended because of the reservations being expressed by most senators.

Although some Senators also argued that despite the alleged flaws, the report should be debated by the Committee of the Whole House and the perceived errors corrected, Senate President Ken Nnamani, ruled that the consideration of the bill be postponed till next year, when the Senate would resume from the Christmas and New Year holidays and the Information Committee would have reviewed the report submitted on the bill.

He explained that the postponement was to enable the Committee carry out a concise review of the bill and reconcile areas of disagreement identified by senators in the course of the debates.

Senator Wada agreed to undertake the review as directed, but promised that the substance of the bill would not change when the committee completes the review.