FG Urged to Confront Insecurity, Other Challenges

The Federal Government of Nigeria has been called upon by lawyers under the aegis of Lawyers4Change to put into consideration exploring the options of a permanent solution to the problems of economic downturn, insecurity and unemployment in the country. National Coordinator of the group, Adesina Ogunlana made this known at a press conference held at Ikeja. He noted with sadness that after six months into President Buhari’s government, no meaningful change has been recorded. Ogunlana lamented the week-long shortage of fuel, the dwindling economy, the level of insecurity, and the government’s approach to the fight against corruption. The National Coordinator further maintained that the scarcity of petroleum that has persisted for more than one month has remained unfortunate. He, however, expressed optimism that such occurrences would soon become a thing of the past. Speaking on the issue of corruption, Ogunlana noted that the government of President Buhari had not been able to achieve any tangible success in its war against corruption. Ogunlana said, “We acknowledge and appreciate that the words and body language of the government show serious concern and preparedness to work to deliver Nigeria from the menace of corruption. But Nigerians are tired of the tragedy of their lives, where they are thirsty and hungry in the midst of plenty. “Nigerians voted for President Muhammadu Buhari on the platform of the change that he and his party presented then. Nigerians were and still are tired of corruption and all its terrible effects on their nation and themselves, yet we fear that nothing much has been achieved so far and nothing much will happen except corruption is treated as worse that treason in Nigeria and government provides a suitable template which can really tame the monster. When speaking on the recent move by legislature to pass a social media bill, Ogunlana stated, “The Nigerian Social Media law, as proposed, without any doubt, has as its ultimate goal the erosion of voices of dissent, or how else does one explain a law which seeks, among others, to punish citizens who, according to the bill ‘falsely criticise’ public officials or institutions, knowing very well that criticisms, especially when they are genuine and constructive, form the bedrock of democratic ethos and values. “Besides, as lawyers, we know there are already enough laws to safeguard everybody’s character and integrity against assassination, such that anyone who feels impugned by another’s words may seek redress by deploying provisions of the law on defamation.”