Some Abuja- based Legal Practitioners have warned that Law Enforcement Agencies should not turn to debt collectors.
The Legal Practitioners gave the warning at a news conference on Friday in Abuja.
The press briefing was aimed at addressing vital issues across various sectors of the country as it affects government policies, the rule of law as well as the economic stability of the nation.
Mr Pelumi Olajengbesi alleged that the Economic and financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is deviating from its core mandate.
“The commission is beginning to give priority to matters bordering on contracts and commercial transaction as the commission is now deployed for debt recovery and ancilliary matters.
“The position of the law is very clear. EFCC, ICPC, Nigeria Police Force and other law enforcement agencies are not debt recovery agencies.
“The commission of Financial Crimes in Nigeria pursuant to Section 6 (b) of the EFCC Act (Supra) does not extend to the investigation and/or resolution of disputes arising or resulting from simple contracts or civil transactions as in this case.
“Accordingly, we urge the EFCC and other law enforcement agencies to desist from intermeddling in civil and contractual disputes between parties.”
Mr Ganiyu Bello, on his part, frowned at what he termed as double taxation, adding that taxation must take into cognizance the hallowed characteristics of being fair and transparent.
“One of the fundamental issues that raised the hope of investors, Small and Medium Scale Enterprises and business owners in this present administration was the principle against double taxation which was contained in the inaugural speech of the President on May 29.
“Sadly, as enthusiastic as this may appear, the extant laws in Nigeria has subjected citizens to various double taxation policies which is one of the many reasons why economic instability persists in the country.
“For instance, the trite position of the law is that owners of business names duly registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission is not under a legal duty to pay tax over the business name; rather such a person is expected to pay Personal Income Tax pursuant to Section 2 of CITA.
“Unfortunately, it is now a compelling practice for Business names to separately obtain Tax Identification Number (TIN) which consequently expose them to payments of tax while the proprietors of such business names equally pay Personal Income Tax resulting in double taxation.
They also called for law reforms and amendments for effective justice delivery in the country.
Mr Henry Kelechukwu said that another fundamental issue that needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency is the massive overhaul or amendments of Nigerian laws by the National Assembly.
“It is not in contention that there have been numerous contradictions and irreconcilable differences in our extant laws, part of which are now responsible for abuse of office by public office holders.
“This serves as a clog on the rule of justice for citizens, particularly against errant public officers and offices.
“For instance, the position of the law and unarguable tradition in the public sector is that a public or civil servant is expected to retire from active service after 35 years in service or upon attaining the age of 60 years.
“However, the new Police Act, 2020 under Section 7 (6) provides that a person who is appointed as the Inspector General of Police shall hold office for a term of 4 years.
“The question that now begs for an answer is what happens in a situation where an officer of 59 years old is appointed as the IGP, would he retire at the age of 60 or would he hold office till the age of 63 when his tenure will expire?
He noted that sadly, the nation has witnessed an occasion where an IGP held on to the provision of Section 7 (6) to hold the office of IGP beyond the age limit stipulated for a public officer.
“Another statute which begs for the urgent intervention of the National Assembly is with regards to the provision of the Sheriff and Civil Processes Act particularly as it affects some sections of the Act.
“For instance, Section 84 of Sheriff and Civil Processes Act makes it mandatory for a judgment creditor to obtain the consent of Attorney General before enforcing judgment particularly monetary judgment, against the government or any of its agencies.
“This provisions has proven to be a hindrance to the rule of justice as many litigants and victims of tyrannical system and conducts of errant officers have not been able to enjoy the fruit of their judgment to achieve satisfactory compensation against the government and its agencies for abuse and violation of human right.
“This has equally encouraged constant violations of human rights as officers are not made to pay for their unruly attitude,” he said.
They, therefore, called on the National Assembly to, as a matter of urgency, take a critical appraisal and review of laws with the aim of carrying out massive amendments that will meet the contemporary challenges of the nation and her citizens.
No comments:
Post a Comment