In a desperate but primitive display of executive lawlessness the Federal Government has instructed its missions abroad not to renew the passports of Messrs Nuhu Ribadu and Nasiru El-Rufai or grant any consular services to them.
The decision is a tragic reminder of the dark days of brutal military dictatorship when the confiscation of the passports of political opponents, human rights activists and pro-democracy campaigners was the order of the day. Even then, none of the military dictators ever directed Nigerian missions not to renew passports of their opponents.
Since the Federal Government is not exposed to sound legal advice it is pertinent to draw its attention to the case of Director, SSS v. Olisa Agbakoba (1999) 6 NWLR (PT 595) 314 where the Supreme Court held inter alia:
“It is not in dispute that the Constitution gives to the Nigerian citizen the right to move freely throughout Nigeria and to reside in any part thereof. It also guarantees to the citizen the right not to be expelled from Nigeria nor be refused entry thereto or exit therefrom. Section 38(1) of the Constitution provides:
‘38(1). Every citizen of Nigeria is entitled to move freely throughout Nigerian and to reside in any part thereof, and no citizen of Nigeria shall be expelled from Nigeria or refused entry thereto or exit therefrom’
It is matter of common knowledge that for a Nigeria to travel out of Nigeria to another country he must first hold or possess a valid passport issued by the Government of Nigeria. See: Section 4(1) of the Immigration Act, Cap 171 LFN 1990 and the definition of the word ‘passport’ in Section 51 thereof. Without this document, he cannot leave Nigeria or be admitted to another country. It follows, therefore, that without a passport a citizen of Nigeria cannot exercise the right guaranteed him by the Constitution, of egress from Nigeria. Can it, then, be said that the right to hold a passport is not one guaranteed by the Constitution? That is a question that calls for determination in this appeal.
If the view is correct - and I subscribe to it – that possession of a passport makes exit out of Nigeria possible, it follows that without it a citizen of Nigeria cannot enjoy the right of egress from Nigeria given him by section 38(1) of the Constitution. In my respectful view, therefore, to hold or possess a passport is ancillary to the right of egress from Nigeria given in Section 38(1). It is, as rightly held by the Court below, per Ayoola JCA (as he then was), concomitant to the right of egress from Nigeria. It is a concomitant right without which the right of egress from Nigeria becomes hollow or empty”.
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content1'); });
In the light of the foregoing, the decision of the Umaru Musa Yar’adua Administration to strip Messrs Ribadu and El-Rufai of Nigerian citizenship by denying them of their constitutional right to hold Nigerian passports it is a dubious violations of the provision of Section 38 of the Nigerian Constitution and Article 12 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
Having regard to the fact that President Yar’adua is the current Chair of the Authority of Heads of State and Government of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) the denying of passports and their renewal is a clear violation of Article 3 of the ECOWAS Protocol on Community Citizens which has been ratified by Nigeria.
In the circumstances, the Federal Government should reverse the illegal and unconstitutional directive without any further delay. Otherwise the decision will be challenged as it may soon be extended to the growing army of political opponents of the Yar’adua administration.
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('comments'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content2'); });