Lawyers say no to postings of members by the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) to hot spots in the north. They fault the government on moral and legal grounds and suggest a reversal of the state’s position. John Austin Unachukwu, Adebisi Onanuga, Eric Ikhilae and Precious Igbonwelundu report.

Can a responsible government trade its primary and constitutional responsibilities for political considerations and gains? 

This question is informed by the confusion over the position of the Federal Government on the rejection of the decision of the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) to compel unwilling graduates to observe their mandatory national service in some crisis-prone northern states.

Recently, and particularly after the massacre of innocent NYSC members during last year’s post-election violence in the north, there have been increasing calls for the government to rethink the objectives and aims of the scheme established in 1973 by virtue of Decree 24 of that year, although succeeded in 1993 by Decree 51.

Aside calls for its overhaul, there have been suggestions on ways of effecting the needed change in view of the threat unending terrorism, religious and sectarian violence in the northern part of the country now pose to the scheme.

 But, rather than act, the government appeared comfortable  maintaining the status quo, a development that prompted the current controversy over the deployment of Batch B corps members for service this year.

Apparently feigning ignorance of the fact that governments and people of Borno, Yobe, Bauchi, Gombe, Plateau, Kano and Kaduna now live at the mercy of members of the Boko Haram sect and other fundamentalists, the NYSC had announced the deployment of fresh graduates to those states.

The announcement ignited protests by the affected graduates, their families and well-meaning Nigerians, who saw the act as an exhibition of callousness on the part of a public institution, against the people. It took the intervention of the House of Representatives and some state Houses of Assembly for the NYSC to reverse its position.

But, when all thought the issue had been resolved, the Federal Government decided to reignite the fire of discord by ordering the NYSC not to consider the security threats in the northern parts of the country, a decision many believed was informed by political consideration as against the need to uphold the constitutional provision in Section 14 (2) (b) to the effect that:  the security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government. 

The Minister of Youth Development, Inuwa Abdulkadir, had, while announcing the government’s position, argued that the Federal Government overruled the NYSC on the redeployment of corps members from troubled states on the ground that the posting of corps members to states other than their states of origin was enshrined in the NYSC Establishment Act. 

He contended that any other form of concessional posting of corps members other than on the grounds of health and marriage, as contained in the Act, enshrined in Section 315 (5) of the Constitution, will require the amendment of the Constitution.

This refusal by the government to consider the resolutions of the House of Reps and some state Houses of Assembly in arriving at its decision, and the confusion over its actual motive have combined to compel many to conclude that it acted solely on political ground, with less regard to the law and constitutional provisions.

Critics observed that while it took the government sometime to take a stand on the issue, the governors of the unsafe states, particularly Bauchi and Borno, were reported to have lamented the negative socio-economic implications of the redeployment of corps members from their states.

They also noted that the Bauchi State Governor, Isa Yuguda, had dismissed the unprovoked killings of corps members, deployed for election services, in the wake of the 2011 post-election conflict in some northern states including Bauchi as “their destiny.” 

Those opposed to government’s position on this issue argued that the government’s claim that its position was informed by legal and constitutional considerations is faulty on the ground that the same Constitution makes the security and welfare of the people, including corps members, the primary responsibility of the government, a consideration, they said ought to supersede others.

They contended that by literally compelling NYSC to post corps members to troubled states, despite the threat to their lives, the government deliberately negated the provisions of Sections 14 (2) (b), 15 and 17 (b) and (c) of the Constitution. To them, every responsible government should not only be driven by the urge to protect the interest of its citizenry, it should subject laws to the good of all.

Critics also noted that although the scheme was established after the civil war, as an agent of reunification and bonding, it seemed to have outlived its usefulness, the state having failed to live up to its responsibilities as required in Section 15 of the Constitution

Section 15 sub-section one says:  “The motto of the Federal Republic of Nigeria shall be Unity and Faith, Peace and Progress;” while sub-section two says:  “Accordingly, national integration shall be actively encouraged, whilst discrimination on the grounds of place of origin, sex, religion, status, ethnic or linguistic association or ties shall be prohibited.”  

Sub-section three states: “For the purpose of promoting national integration, it shall be the duty of the state to:  (a) provide adequate facilities for and encourage free mobility of people, goods and services throughout the Federation; (b) secure full residence rights for every citizen in all parts of the Federation; (c) encourage inter-marriage among persons from different places of origin, or of different religious, ethnic or linguistic association or ties; and  (d) promote or encourage the formation of associations that cut across ethnic, linguistic, religious and or other sectional barriers.”

Sub-section four provides that: “The state shall foster a feeling of belonging and of involvement among the various people of the Federation, to the end that loyalty to the nation shall override sectional loyalties.” while sub-section five says: “The state shall abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power.”

Lawyers have faulted the government’s position on the issue. They argued that its reference to legal and constitutional provisions as the bases on which it overruled the NYSC was faulty. While some urged the government to deemphasise law in resolving the issue, others contended that, by seeking to compel NYSC in its operations, the government has breached the law.

Professors Ademola  Popoola (Dean, Faculty of Law, Obafemi  Awolowo University, Ile-Ife) and Mike Ikhariale (visiting Professor of Constitutional Law at the Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies), rights activist Bamidele Aturu and Chairman, Nigerian Bar Association (Ikorodu), Lagos,  Sahid Owosile, were unanimous on the need for  an overhaul of the scheme. They also advised parents of affected gradustes to approach the court for protection.

Popoola said: “This issue cannot be handled   within the framework of state law. We are all living witnesses to the security situation in the country. We also know that some corps members have been victims of kidnappings in some parts of the country. We also know that even some of them who took part in the last general elections were assaulted, some were even killed. We should protect our youths, they are our valuable assets

 “So, the Federal Governemnt should handle the situation with a sense of imagination, and not that of strict legalism that this is what the law says. The truth of the matter is that parents and guardians are not ready to release their wards to go into troubled areas to render national service”.

He went on: “The NYSC is a desirable project and I believe that it should not be scrapped, you need to get into it. In fact, we need to review the entire programme to restore its original objective. But the present reality on ground shows that we need to handle matters with imagination and not just talking about the provisions of the law.”

Ikhariale said: “If there is a conflict between the Constitution and the Act, the Constitution should prevail, but that is if both parties are quoting their laws correctly. So, I don’t know whether the Constitution they are quoting is correct or the Act they are alluding to in supporting their intentions.” 

 “But looking at the matter generally, why did this question arise: that people should not go to serve in a particular place? For example, I am from Edo State, I did my own NYSC in Sokoto State and I am very happy about it because, today, I have many friends in Sokoto, Gusau, Birinin Kebbi, among others. In my own time, what is now called Sokoto and Zamfara states were one state. So, I was a youth corps lawyer, but my jurisdiction was Sokoto, Tsafe, and other areas, that was fun.”

“But if during that time my life was threatened, or there was the likelihood that I could be killed by some fanatics or other people, I would probably not have been able to  served there nor still  be alive, today.  So, we have an issue on our hands; a very serious issue: that is to say, how safe are our corps members?” 

“If it is true that some places have become dangerous for NYSC members, they should not be sent there until there is evidence on ground that they are now ready to receive corps members. It should be an embarrassment for those who made their place unsuitable for a good programme like the NYSC. 

“Or it should be done in such a way that graduates from those states serve in the states, if we must allow people to go there. But, that will defeat the objective of the programme which is supposed to expose us to the various cultures of our country different from the ones we are used to,” Ikhariale said.

Aturu  contended that Abdulkadir ‘s attempt to justify government’s position by clinging to the Constitution and some other laws “ is extremely insensitive, unfeeling and demonstrates, with the greatest respect, an inscrutable lack of appreciation of the tragic security situation in those parts where people are being daily mowed down in their hundreds while the government of which the minister is part watches helplessly and laments routinely.” 

He argued that the minister has completely stood the Constitution on its head and he must not be allowed to get away with it. 

“First, while it is true that the National Youth Service Corps Act is one of the laws entrenched in the Constitution by virtue of Section 315(5) of the 1999 Constitution as amended, that entrenchment simply says that nothing in the Constitution shall invalidate the NYSC Act and no more. Now, no one is saying that the NYSC Act is invalidated. 

“Second, and this is crucial, the Honourable Minister should be told plainly that the provisions of the NYSC Act preserved or entrenched by the Constitution is clearly and manifestly against his narrow and extremely unsound interpretation. Section 1(4) (b) of the Act provides clearly that: “as far as possible, Nigerian youths are assigned to jobs in states other than their states of origin.”

The implication of this is that even corps members from the volatile states cannot be posted to their states. That section would be complied with simply by posting the corps members to any state other than theirs and other than the volatile state. But that is not all. Section 991) makes it abundantly clear that: “The Directorate shall determine the place and time each person qualified to be registered under the provisions of this Act shall be deployed.”

Furthermore, Section 9(5) of the Act says unambiguously that: “In the discharge of its functions under this section (that is deployment or posting of corps members), the Directorate shall not be compelled in any manner whatsoever to deploy a member of the service to any particular undertaking or project.”

“It is thus clear that it is the minister that is violating a law entrenched in the Constitution by purportedly overruling the NYSC Directorate. It is his decision that is unconstitutional, indefensible, unsupportable, unpopular, unjustifiable, insensitive, unfeeling, and uncaring. 

“Happily, he has now provided parents who would have wanted a cause of action to sue him and his ministry for violating the NYSC Act in reposting their children and wards contrary to the NYSC Act.”

To Owosile, government’s posture is intended to create the impression that  there  is unity in the country and that all is well.

 “I do not think our children should be the bait for attracting unity. I also do not believe that peace is about not fighting. Sometimes, you may have to fight for you to understand peace. If we say don’t let them be posted to troubled states, if those states want something like that, let them improve on the security situation in their states. 

“Let them stop the killings. Where are their governors? Where are their leaders? What are they doing about it? If they are not doing anything about it, then others cannot risk placing their children in their care. 

“The fact that you want to serve the nation does not mean that you must go and commit suicide.  It looks rather suicidal for a nation that appreciates its citizens. I see the nation as a father figure when it comes to its relationship with its citizens. So, we can’t make our children the target of such things.”

Owosile continued:“Most of us are not criminals today, not because we know the laws. It is simply because we are acting reasonably. So, if you are citing laws, it is only when there are conditions for satisfying the law that you can be talking about the law. 

“The law does not exist in a vacuum.  When circumstances abound that cannot allow the law to operate, you change it. What law will say I should go and die? Let them appreciate the circumstances. Maybe by the time they burn the National Assembly, they would understand what it is to react to circumstances that endangers security.

“I don’t see any law that will support that my children, because I see all of them as my children, should be exposed to danger just because you want to show that national service is compulsory.  It is not as if those children are saying that they won’t serve.  But to post them to where there is danger, that is not service. It is disservice to this nation,” Owosile said.

Posted by admin on Jul 21 2012. Filed under Latest Politics, NYSC (National Youth Service Corp). You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry