Wednesday, 21 December 2016

BETWEEN NEW LEGISLATION'S AND VALUE RE-ORIENTATION: A CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF THE VIOLENCE AGAINST PERSONS (PROHIBITION) ACT 2015



It  was  Grant Gilmore  famous   American law Professor   and  statesman  who  stated  that  Law reflects but in no sense determines the moral worth of a society. The values of a reasonable but just society will reflect themselves in a reasonably just law. The better the society, the less law there will be. In heaven there will be no law, and the lion shall lie down with the lamb. The values of an unjust society will reflect themselves in an unjust law. The worse the society, the more law there will be.  Grant was no doubt right. This is because those who benefit from  the status especially the aristocracy and the ruling elites use  the instrument of the law as means  of  maintaining the status quo and control of  those  they intend to exclude from participation  in  the commonwealth  of  the society, in such society the aim of law is not to ensure justice , but  to ensure that the less fortunate and under privileged are prevented from becoming riotous to ensure the wealthy in society will enjoy  their wealth undisturbed.
Societies with institutionalized injustices promulgate laws that tend to exclude a certain section of the society on the bases of gender, religion and ethnicity. Example of such laws is the Laws enacted by the Nazi regime lead by Adolf Hitler which legitimatized the mass murder of Jews , the Jim crow laws in America  that placed African Americans in the same class as animals, the Apartheid laws in South Africa that legitimatized the exclusion and  discrimination of Black South African  in their own ancestral land and  Section 55(1)  of the Penal Code which legalized the ill treatment of children, wives, and servants. It is  perhaps  important  to  reproduce  the  said  obnoxious  section   of   the  Law verbatim   to  appreciate   where  we  are  coming  from. Specifically, section 55 states that:
“Nothing is an offence which does not amount to the infliction of grievous hurt upon any person and which is done- (a) by a parent or guardian for the purpose of correcting his child or ward such child or ward being under eighteen years of age;
“(b) by a schoolmaster for the purpose of correcting his child under eighteen years of age entrusted to his charge; or (c) by a master for the purpose of correcting a child servant or apprentice such servant or apprentice being under eighteen years of age; or (d) by a husband for the purpose of correcting his wife such husband and wife being subject to any native law or custom in which such correction is recognised as lawful”.
reacting to the said section 55 of the penal code, Speaking on behalf of the CSOs, the Executive Director of Centre LSD, Dr. Otive Igbuzor, insisted that there are many laws in Nigeria that needs to be changed. He regretted that under the aforementioned section, bodily harm was defined as a harm that could lead to someone being hospitalized for at least 21 days.
“The ugly implication here is that when the victim is hospitalized for 20 days; the law does not regard the case as one that resulted to grievous bodily harm. Besides, what happens to those that were not taken to the hospital?
“We as CSOs are therefore using this platform to beg that you people must not leave the parliament and allow that law to remain”.[1]
How  then  did  we get  to the  point  where by  Violence Against  women  was  legitimatized  in  our  society?  How  did  we get to the  point  where  our  legislators  could be so  comfortable  as  to  enact  Section 55  of  the  Penal  Code,  and  why  did  it  take us  so  long  to  repeal  that  obnoxious   section  of the  law  that  sanctioned   the  cruel  and  in human  treatment of  women  and  children.  
That  this  section  was  ever  in  our  law books  shows how  far  we  had gone to  exclude  women  from  social  participation,  no  wonder  we  have  one  of  the  lowest  rates  of  Gender  Parity  in  the  world.  No  wonder  we  celebrate  every  token  appointment   that  is  given  as compensation to the women to appreciate  and curry  their support in future elections. To be sure, no society can develop that relegates women to the Kitchen and the “other room”. No society that celebrates violence against women as a mark of masculinity can develop.  The development of every society is more often than not, tied to the  development  of  the women, Societies  that are highly developed and  sophisticated  have  highly educated and  sophisticated women, while those  that have relegated  women to  the kitchen and the bedroom have  always  remained retrogressive. The reason is simple, Apart from the fact that women are the gateway of human existence being responsible for child birth. The woman is also very close to the child and plays a very crucial and pivotal role in character formation and upbringing of the child. Section  55 of the  Penal  Code  is  reflective  of  the  mindset of the Nigerian  society , as  the years went by,   violence  against  persons  especially  in  a  domestic  context instead of decreasing assumed  very alarming  proportions. Spousal  abuse  became  widespread and as society further evolved, the role  of  women in  urban areas began  to transcend homemaking to breadwinning and with the enhancement her economic position,  the “city woman” became emboldened and we had role reversals whereby the man became the receipt of physical and verbal abuse  from women. So today, both side of the divide (Men and Women) suffer various forms of abuse. CLEEN FOUNDATION reports that 1 out of 3 women have suffered domestic Violence, The survey also found a nationwide increase in domestic violence in recent years from twenty one percent in 2011 to thirty percent in 2013. The Foundations 2012 National Crime and Safety Survey demonstrated that thirty one percent of persons surveyed confessed to being victims of domestic violence.  
The writer here,  attempts to  provide  a  background  of the  situation  before  the  enactment  of  the  Act  and also   thoroughly   examine  its  content  to  see  whether  , it  has the possibility of  being  successfully  implemented  .  It  should  be stated  from  the  onset that  the  traditional  African  society   placed  a lot  of  value  and  respect  on  womanhood,  women  like   Queen  Amina,  Princess Inikpi and   a host  of  others served  as  beacons  in pre colonial  African  societies.  Mrs.  Ransome Funmilayo  Kuti , Margret  Ekpo  also  played  prominent   roles  in  the  struggle  for  Nigerian  Independence.  It  is  worthy  of  note  that  the  first Nigerian  to  win  an  Olympic  Gold  medal  for  Nigeria  is  a  woman. This  demonstrates   the  fact  that  women have  always shown  their  ability  to  advance  the  progress  of  society whenever  they  are  given  the slightest  opportunity. All the prominent religion in Nigeria also celebrates women and womanhood. One  of  the most  respected  indivual that  was closest  to  the  Holy  Prophet  was  his  First  wife Khadijat , who  in fact  became the  first  person to  be converted  to  Islam. Islam  as a  religion  promoted  womanhood  and  protected  women  so  much  that  it  made  adequate  provision  for  the women during the  life  time  of  her  husband  and  even  when  she  loses  her  husband. Adequate provision is provided for her.


IMPORTANT ADVANCEMENTS IN THE NEW ACT
In the twilight of President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration, several bills were hurriedly passed by the National Assembly and signed into law by the president, for them it was a parting gift that was meant to stand as both their legacy and testimony of their commitment to advancing the frontiers of the law to meet current challenges. However discerning minds questioned the utility of hurriedly enacting so many laws at the same time, when they had four years all along  to do a thoroughly good job. Regardless of the motive of the enactors of the new law, the Act contained several sections that were meant to address the issue of domestic violence in our society. Some of the sections are listed below:
S.14 criminalizes abuse of emotional, psychological and verbal nature and punishes offenders with one year imprisonment or a fine of 100,000.00
S. 15 protects widows from harmful traditional practices
S.16 criminalizes abandonment of spouse or neglecting to provide for them.
S.19 prohibits battery of spouses. It punishes the Act and the attempt with 3 year imprisonment. Unlike in the past where the law only contemplates the woman as the victim of spousal abuse and violence. The Act uses the word “His or Her Spouse” Therefore allowing a man to sue under the Act where he is the victim of Acts of violence from  his spouse. 
The Act also expands the scope of persons who can institute or initiate proceeding under  the  act. This is very crucial  as it empowers neighbors , police officers and other persons  who may not necessarily be related to  the victims to institute  the action  on their behalf as  the victims most  of  the times  are  overwhelmed  by their abusers  who  may  have intimidated them  to a point where they are too afraid of  reporting  them to prosecutorial authorities . Very Importantly the Act repeals any previous provision in the Criminal Code, Penal Code or Criminal Procedure Code that is inconsistent with   the Provision of   the new Act. What  this means  in effect  is  that Section 55  of  the Penal Code  which  is   directly  inconsistent  with  S.19 of  the  Violence Against Persons ( Prohibition ) Act 2015 stands  repealed  . This is a welcome development as it erases from our law books that obnoxious section that stood as a relic of the injustice committed by our society against women in the past, it also indicates our attempt to rewrite the wrongs of the past. 

GREY AREAS
S. 27 give’s only the high court of the federal capital territory the power to hear and determine any application under this act. It appears the Act confers exclusive jurisdiction on a single court. It is  difficult to fathom  the true  intendment  or  the utility of  conferring  the High Court  of  the Federal Capital Territory with  the sole Jurisdiction. It appears that the legislature is taking with one hand what it has given with the other hand.
What is the possibility  of a wife who is  violently treated beaten  up  by  her  husband in a rural community in Bayelsa State or Akwa Ibom travelling  all  the way to Abuja to file an application  or  obtain an Order of protection in a High Court in Abuja. Rather  than confer Jurisdiction  solely  on the court in Federal Capital Territory ,  The Act should rather have conferred jurisdiction  on magistrates  courts in the  south   or  district  court’s in the north .
Also S. 29 of the Act could be problematic as the word “As soon as possible is open to the subjective interpretation of indivual courts seised with the application. The Act  should have rather followed the footsteps  of the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules  which  stipulates 5 days within which  a respondent  is to file his counter affidavit and 4 days in turn  for  the Applicants  to file either  his Reply on points of  Law or a further affidavit as  the case may be.
It appears   the only remedy available  to  the victim  under  the Act is a protection order, this  is grossly insufficient as abuses most of the times  are persons  of authority : Husbands, Employers or Guardians who are also responsible  for the upkeep  of  the indivual abused,  in that light  therefore  the court  should  also in addition  to  its  protection order also make a mandatory  provision order requiring  the Abuser to continue to provide for  the victim in an amount reasonable  enough  to sustain  him in  his  station in life.
POST LEGISLATIVE COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF THE NEW LAW

Laws and institutions are tending to gravitate. Like clocks, they must be occasionally cleansed and wound up and set true to time. Thus it is important that laws move along with the time, laws are expected to regulate the affairs of men not enslave. Where therefore the people perceive a law as oppressive and unreasonable, they would always find a way to break the law or better still find a way around those laws. They is nothing objective about reasonability, what is reasonable and acceptable in one community may be abhorred in another. “Polyganism” is celebrated in Africa while Homosexuality is detested, while the west abhors “Polyganism” but embraces homosexuality. By and large community moral standards may differ from place to place. Somehow at some point most African communities have come to accept violence against the weak, vulnerable and dependent (Women, Children and employees) as normal, this occurred as our society became more Patriarchal.  The woman, for example upon payment of her bride price by her husband becomes no more than the property of the man. In Yoruba culture, the woman refers to her husband as “OLOWO ORI MI” which if literally translated means he who owns me. In Tiv culture, the wife sees beating by her husband as a sign of his love and acceptance. Thus it is commonly said amongst married women in Tiv society that if your husband has not beaten you, then you have not experience  the joy of marriage . New legislations no matter how punitive  the laws become, the ill of  domestic violence will not be curb unless and until the media and civil societies join hands to ensure a process of value reorientation  amongst the populace. This is because as long as the victims and the perpetuators of this actions see nothing wrong in their actions it will be difficult to curb the growing trend, this becomes even more evident in the fact that incidences of domestic violence are rarely ever reported and even when bold indivual summon the audacity to pursue legal redress, they are cowed into withdrawing them as it is seen as a family matter that ought  to be settled in family circles and not in the glare of the public eye. The fears  of such families are not unfounded as most law enforcement officer do not take serious reports  of domestic violence  and  the victim leaves with  the stigma instead  of the abuser  bearing the shame and reprieve for his actions.
To remedy the situation, there must be a concerted collaboration between the judiciary, law enforcement agencies, the media, religious organisations  and last but certainly , importantly  civil society organisations in reorientating the minds of  the public about the subject matter. Civil society agencies can most especially sponsor public interest litigations and the media should make such trials headline so as to bring the public attention to the occurrence of this evil amongst us, ours is a society that lives in denial, such collaborations will force the society to discuss the situation not just more openly but take more practical steps to correct the anomaly.



[1] Vanguard newspaper of February 12 2016

No comments:

Post a Comment