NewStats: 3,261,681 , 8,174,760 topics. Date: Friday, 30 May 2025 at 06:12 AM 3t1d6f

I have read your open letter published on PM
News and re-published on Bella Naija,
timesng.com and a number of online
papers.
No one who read that letter could miss the fury
embedded in your words. I know where that
fury comes from: moral fiber, good conscience,
and love of people. I want to assure you that it
was the very same sentiments that drove me to
come up with that bill and the same sentiments
that led Senators and to it.
As always, your aim was to speak as the voice of
reason in our increasingly confused society. I
know you meant well. I know you acted out of
your deep comion for Nigerians and
fatherly love for the children.
But as I read your open letter, my heart sank
because this time, my dear Baba, my dear icon,
you are wrong; very wrong.
You have been misled by the misinformation
circulated by someone who could not read or
comprehend a legal draft; someone who did not
have the patience to read through a proposal,
see what was recommended and what was
finally accepted.
You were misled by someone who deliberately
distorted the content of one of the most
profound bills ever ed by the Nigerian
legislature, scandalised the proponent and the
institution for reasons that you and I may not
know.
No where in the SEXUAL OFFENCES BILL That I
proposed; no where in the bill ed by Senate
was it stated that you can defile an 11 years old.
No where in the bill ed by the Senate was
the age “11 years” mentioned.
Here is what was ed in relation to your area
of pre-occupation which is defilement clause 6
(2): “A person who commits an offence of
defilement shall upon conviction be sentenced
to imprisonment for life”.
You claimed that the bill re-defined “female
adulthood as marital status”. Where in the bill
proposed by me and where in the bill ed by
Senate did you see adulthood linked to marital
status? The extreme distortion of the spirit,
intent and even content of this bill leads me to
think that you may be talking about an all-
together different piece of legislation.
For emphasis, let me state that the bill makes
no such linkages as you erroneously stated. I
think it may be fear of Senator Yerima that is at
play here.
For your information, Senator Yerima and all
other Senators who participated in the debate,
the two times the bill came up on the floor,
ed it as a vehicle for instituting a
stringent law barring all ranges of sexual
offences in Nigeria.
They did this because they also have children,
wives, daughters, even mothers and cannot
afford to leave them in the current state where
abuses are rewarded with a slap on the wrist of
the perpetrators because our laws are outdated,
without strong in-built deterrence and
mechanisms for monitoring and control.
This is just another case of people demonising
what is clearly in the public good because of
deeply-set negative predispositions towards
individuals in an institution. By your strong
advocacy against the bill, you have unwittingly
stamped your feet in favour of maintaining the
status quo.
Where we are now..the statusquo.. is a world
in which a six year old child is raped to death
and then set ablaze. Where we are now is a
place where a father rapes his three year old
boys repeatedly and the mother weeps at night
and cannot speak out, out of shame and fear of
her life.
Where we are now is a place where young
Cynthia in her struggles for self-employment ran
into a gang who drugged her, raped and
murdered her. Where we are now is a place
where foreigners come for tourism and turn
children into their objects of tourism.
With all due respect Sir, I want to express my
deep disappointment with your hastiness in
flowing with the mob on this matter. I blame
your press officers. I think they should have
advised caution. You have known me since the
1990s. There is no way you could have sent
fellers and I would not jump onto the next
flight to answer you.
Infact, a mere telephone call could have
dispensed with the matter. If you had even
asked someone to get you a copy of the Votes
and Proceedings of Senate for that day which
published the exact words in the legislation
ed, you would have spared yourself the
time and emotions spent over what is clear
mischief circulated through the web.
The people who started it all are hate-mongers.
The merely took advantage of the negative
public feelings they have built up against the
legislature. You have no business with such
people Sir.
I am sure in the most inner recesses of your
mind you know I cannot in anyway be
associated with any anti-people law. Nothing in
my personal history, professional antecedents
or even the hard work I did to push through
pro-people legislations in Senate, could lead
anyone to think of me as capable of working
against children, the very people I fought for
over the course of my eight years in the Senate.
The Sexual Offences bill is only one of many I
did.
I also proposed the Occupational Safety and
Health bill protecting workers in virtually all
sectors of the economy from hazards at work.
The only group excluded are those in the oil and
gas sectors who have been extensively provided
for in the PIB.
There was no “accident” as you call it involved
in this legislation. Neither was there an error in
judgement. The bill has been fabricated to
provide a strong deterrence against abuses.
When implemented, it will mitigate the private
sufferings of parents; reduce their fear of what
happens in their absence to their children at
school, in the play grounds, in the
neighborhoods, even in religious spaces.
Nigeria today is not a safe place for children;
not a safe place for girls; not a safe place for
small boys; and it is not a safe place either for
old women.
This legislation it proposes consigns
punishments for abhorrent crimes such as we
are seeing in our country today. It even covers
crimes yet to arrive our shores.
Under this bill, pedophiles will be put away for
life not made rock stars as we do today. This
bill will bring sanity to our society. It will make
Nigeria a better place for all.
I suspect that some of those fighting against the
bill are fixating on the short title. Its long title
shows what it is: a sexual offences prevention
bill; a tough deterrence to crime.
I want you to take time and read the final copy
of the bill. You will be proud. You will realise
that good things can come from Nigeria and
Nigerians. It is not only legislations initiated by
outsiders and handed to us locals to push for
their age that should be deemed as good for
us.
By ing that bill, National Assembly has kept
faith with the people of Nigeria. It has provided
the cover of protection under which Nigerian
children can live normal lives of fulfillment
without fear.
By your robust advocacy against the bill
preventing sexual abuses of children, you
foreclose the future of children in this society.
But if I read you correctly, I have no doubt that
you will reverse yourself on this once you have
the correct information. This is why I have
written you this letter.
You have made your first “imposition” on Mr.
President based on your understanding of the
false information circulated by the very
offenders you despise.
I plead with you as a man who has been found
to be a great man of honour and bestowed with
the highest literary honour in the world to
reconsider.
Let me on behalf of the innumerable victims of
abuse in Nigeria; let me invoke the spirit of
Cynthia who fell victim in Lagos; and let me
plead on behalf of the many wives and husbands
deliberately infected with HIV by their partners
whose suffering impelled this bill, that you
reverse your instruction to Mr. President.
The President of the Federal Republic looks to
old sages like you for positive direction. That
was what you intended to give him.
But now that you know the truth, for the sake
of your long established reputation and known
love for Nigeria, turn it around and urge Mr.
President to sign this bill that will protect our
people, restore sanity to society and make
Nigeria a better place for all.
I remain your loyal irer and sister.
Chris Anyanwu was a Senator of the Federal
Republic of Nigeria between 2007 and 2015.

No where in the SEXUAL OFFENCES BILL That I
proposed; no where in the bill ed by Senate
was it stated that you can defile an 11 years old.
No where in the bill ed by the Senate was
the age “11 years” mentioned.
Here is what was ed in relation to your area
of pre-occupation which is defilement clause 6
(2): “A person who commits an offence of
defilement shall upon conviction be sentenced
to imprisonment for life”.
You claimed that the bill re-defined “female
adulthood as marital status”. Where in the bill
proposed by me and where in the bill ed by
Senate did you see adulthood linked to marital
status? The extreme distortion of the spirit,
intent and even content of this bill leads me to
think that you may be talking about an all-
together different piece of legislation.

Soyinka should have read the bill before commenting, at 80yrs plus, I hope the great playwright is not waning.

Where is my uduak ibom?
Ooo my uduak!
Ajibijibijibi.
Uduak ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
Ajibijibi

Mogidi:


Soyinka should have read the bill before commenting, at 80yrs plus, I hope the great playwright is not waning.

How do you know he did not read the bill, Mr Attention Seeker? Have you taken the time to review it yourself?

But Falana said the illegal removal of 18 years from the original bill and its replacement with 11 years was inconsistent with the provisions of section 29(4)(a) of the Nigerian Constitution.

The minimum age of 18 years in the original Bill was in line with the provisions of the Child’s Rights Act, 2003 and the Child’s Rights Convention of the United Nations which has been ratified by Nigeria. The Bill was referred to the Senate Committee on Judiciary and Legal Matters for further legislative work. It was that Committee that illegally removed the age of 18 years and replaced it with 11 years.

“The inserted clause is inconsistent with section 29(4)(a) of the Nigerian Constitution which provides that ‘full age’ means the age of 18 years and above.

“Having ed the Bill the Senate cannot plead non est factum in the circumstance. It has to bear full responsibility for the legislative negligence.

“But since the obnoxious provision was illegally inserted by the Committee on Judiciary and Legal Matters without approval, the Senate ought to reverse itself and amend the relevant provisions of the Sexual Offences Bill, 2015. Our Law firm has made a request to that effect,” the statement said.

Source

TheOtherview:


How do you know he did not read the bill, Mr Attention Seeker? Have you taken the time to review it yourself?

Why should I believe an article in Punch newspaper made up of rhetoric rather than the woman who sponsored the bill?
Here is what she said:

No where in the SEXUAL OFFENCES BILL That I
proposed; no where in the bill ed by Senate
was it stated that you can defile an 11 years old.
No where in the bill ed by the Senate was
the age “11 years” mentioned.

Mogidi:


Why should I believe an article in Punch newspaper made up of rhetoric rather than the woman who sponsored the bill?
Here is what she said:

The statement given by a SAN is quoted verbatim, so you can stick your thinly disguised persecution complex - the one induced by an amorphous "Lagos-Ibadan Media Axis" - where the sun don't shine.

That's my senator.
I love this Bill.
Haters of this Bill have bad intentions against little kids and young girls. They want to be abusing our future wives wih impunity, leaving chaff for us for marriage. E no go work for them.

Mekus68:
That's my senator.
I love this Bill.
Haters of this Bill have bad intentions against little kids and young girls. They want to be abusing our future wives wih impunity, leaving chaff for us for marriage. E no go work for them.

Like the haters described below?

Tyranny of the tribe has a way of negating reason.

Wole Soyinka should crawl into a hole and just die.

This silly mad man has caused enough confusion already.

Nigeria’s proposed sexual offences law obnoxious – Falana

...The Sexual Offences Bill, 2015, was among the 46 bills ed by the 7th Senate in a last minute flurry of activities last week.

In his letter, Mr. Falana said that the Bill had not been forwarded to the president for his assent as it had not been ed by the House of Representatives.

“However, it would be recalled that Senator Chris Anyanwu who sponsored the Sexual Offences Bill had justified the urgent need to it to save our girls and women from sexual exploitation and molestation,” said Mr. Falana.

[b]“When the Bill was unanimously ed for a second reading by the Senate on November 21, 2013, it sought to prescribe a penalty of life imprisonment for the offence of defilement of children less than 18 years of age.

“It also provided for compulsory documentation, supervision of sexual offenders and medical treatment for rape victims while it strengthened the weak protection offered victims and witnesses in trials for sexual offences.”

The minimum age of 18 years stated in the original Bill was in line with the provisions of the Child’s Rights Act, 2003, according to Mr. Soyinka, and the Child’s Rights Convention of the United Nations which had been ratified by Nigeria.

The Bill was referred to the Senate Committee on Judiciary and Legal Matters for further legislative work.

It was that Committee that illegally removed the age of 18 years and replaced it with 11 years, said Mr. Falana.

“The inserted clause is inconsistent with Section 29(4)(a) of the Nigerian Constitution which provides that ‘full age’ means the age of 18 years and above.”[/b]

Source: http://www.timesng.com/news/headlines/185030-nigerias-proposed-sexual-offences-law-obnoxious-falana.html

BackDatAssUp:
my senile father should crawl into a hole and just die.

My cursed smelling mother has caused enough confusion already with her rotten p.u.ssy.

Awwwwww. Spits

BackDatAssUp:
Wole Soyinka should crawl into a hole and just die.

This silly mad man has caused enough confusion already.

Dimwit-in-chief finally makes an appearance. What's new?

After all, this is what now es for political commentary on Seun's NL.

One of Jonathan's lasting legacies...

TheOtherview:


Dimwit-in-chief finally makes an appearance.

What's new? After all, this is what now es for political commentary on Seun's NL.

One of Jonathan's lasting legacies...

Wole Soyinka is an old fool who sees nothing good in others and has too much of a high opinion of himself.

Chris tactfully put the old fool in his place

BackDatAssUp:


Wole Soyinka is an old fool who sees nothing good in others and has too much of a high opinion of himself.

Chris tactfully put the old fool in his place

I am afraid that even with my limited understanding (I am more a numbers person), it is clear that Senator Anyanwu's mastery of the English language is highly suspect.
This was a point I tried to impart on a different thread...
============================================================
Naptu Sir, you know that I have never found any of your posts disagreeable up till this point.
But I beg to disagree on this one.

Let me explain why...

6.-(1) A person Who commits an act which causes penetration with a child aged Sexual activity with a child eleven years or less shall upon conviction be sentenced to imprisonment for life.

^^^No wiggle room - the language is clear and unambiguous

(2) A person who engages in sexual activity with a child between the age of twelve and fifteen years is liable upon conviction be sentenced to imprisonment for life.

^^^ By inserting the word "liable", wiggle room was provided here

Now I am no legal bird but I think changing shall to liable leaves clause 2 open to interpretation

"Liable to" is less definitive than "Shall" - that's my point.

What stopped the Senate from putting a clear and unambiguous stake in the ground eh?

Furthermore, why was threshold even lowered in a graduated form?

We've all seen our senators indulge in the same type of chicanery in the past. The rest of the sane world certainly has...

Thanks to a legal loophole, the average age of marriage for girls in Kebbi State, northern Nigeria, is 11 years old. The law is often manipulated and exploited for perverse ends, but it's rare that one forgotten detail in legislation can affect an entire mass of people quite so profoundly.

Section 29 of the Nigerian constitution allows any Nigerian of full age (18 or above) to renounce his or her citizenship. However, a subsection of that law adds that women can only be deemed of full age when they get married—a convenient loophole that's become easy to exploit by any adult man in the mood to snatch himself up a child bride.

TheOtherview:


I am afraid that even with my limited understanding, it is clear that Senator Anyanwu's mastery of the English language is highly suspect.
This was a point I tried to impart on a different thread...
============================================================
Naptu Sir, you know that I have never found any of your posts disagreeable up till this point.
But I beg to disagree on this one.

Let me explain why...




^^^No wiggle room - the language is clear and unambiguous



^^^ By inserting the word "liable", wiggle room was provided here

Now I am no legal bird but I think changing shall to liable leaves clause 2 open to interpretation

"Liable to" is less definitive than "Shall" - that's my point.

What stopped the Senate from putting a clear and unambiguous stake in the ground eh?

In legal parlance, especially when dealing with criminal or penal legislation, the term "liable" is used because the final interpretation, judgement and conviction rests on proving beyond reasonable doubt that a crime was committed and that the accused was found guilty.

"Liable" in this instance is thus the recommended sentence or punishment.

all accused remain innocent until proven guilty.

The term "shall" usually precedes that of "liable".

For example, any body convicted of first degree murder shall be liable to a minimum sentence of life imprisonment to a maximum of death.

The Appellant and/or Supreme court may set aside a sentence but still uphold a conviction.

This is why the penal code is open ended in every piece of criminal legislation since a sentence may be reduced by a higher court unless where a minimum sentence is prescribed in the statute book.

Also a pardon may be granted setting aside both a conviction and sentence

BackDatAssUp:




In legal parlance, especially when dealing with criminal or penal legislation, the term "liable" is used because the final interpretation, judgement and conviction rests on proving beyond reasonable doubt that a crime was committed and that the accused was found guilty.

"Liable" in this instance is thus the recommended sentence or punishment.

all accused remain innocent until proven guilty.

I Rest my case

But that's the point - In legal parlance, especially when dealing with criminal or penal legislation, the term "liable" is used because the final interpretation, judgement and conviction...

Why make the law absolutely water-tight for children up to the age of 11 but then open the same law to the caprices of moneybags for those who are older?

Now tell what other interpretation can be ascribed to the defilement of teenagers? Isn't this precisely the kind of latitude the Yerimas of the world seek?

A brilliant and straight forward piece by the Senator.


The bitter truth here is that one need to have all facts before taking position on issues, and not the usual 'herdsman mentality' of following the crowd, particularly the crowd on social media ...

BackDatAssUp, go back and read what Falana actually said.

Maxymilliano:
A brilliant and straight forward piece by the Senator.


The bitter truth here is that one need to have all facts before taking position on issues, and not the usual herded mentality of following the crowd, particularly the crowd on social media ...

Why not rebut Falana's argument with your own elevated thoughts - assuming you have any?

TheOtherview:


Why not rebut Falana's argument with your own elevated thoughts - assuming you have any?

I'm not under any obligation to rebut any arguements or whatsoever from Falana, the post is a reder by Senator Chris Anyawu to Wole Soyinka's article.

Mr. Man, must you defend everything. In one swoop you suspect Senator Anyanwu's mastery of English but in another you profess your ignorance of legal language. What if Anyanwu's language equates to the legal language/meaning you do not understand. Please Soyinka goofed. He is a highly respected scholar, but we cannot doubt that old age is dealing him some blows. Instead f Soyinka now being the conscience of the nation, he abdicates that role to the mob. Anyanwu is right that Soyinka should have gone through the bill and not rely on third person's view. Please and please, Soyinka is one Nigerian HERO I do not want to encounter the legendary fall of all heroes of the western world as shown in their literature. May Soyinks remain great. And may he not be so much in a haste to the bandwagon. I beg of you my model.

TheOtherview:


I am afraid that even with my limited understanding (I am more a numbers person), it is clear that Senator Anyanwu's mastery of the English language is highly suspect.
This was a point I tried to impart on a different thread...
============================================================
Naptu Sir, you know that I have never found any of your posts disagreeable up till this point.
But I beg to disagree on this one.

Let me explain why...



^^^No wiggle room - the language is clear and unambiguous



^^^ By inserting the word "liable", wiggle room was provided here

Now I am no legal bird but I think changing shall to liable leaves clause 2 open to interpretation

"Liable to" is less definitive than "Shall" - that's my point.

What stopped the Senate from putting a clear and unambiguous stake in the ground eh?

Furthermore, why was threshold even lowered in a graduated form?

Maxymilliano:



I'm not under any obligation to rebut any arguements or whatsoever from Falana, the post is a reder by Senator Chris Anyawu to Wole Soyinka's article.

Of course you are under no obligation to do anything. It is enough to glibly assert that Soyinka was simply following hordes of social media commentators?

I mean, why would Soyinka not put his reputation on line, by refusing to consult legal birds, before voicing his concerns openly. After all, according to the Maxymillianos of this world, Soyinka is easily given to making ill-informed remarks? At least so the retaarded logic goes?

Maxymilliano and others of his ilk would of course meander around Falana's take, while giving pride of place to Anyanwu's Op-ED?
That the former provides a clearer timeline of events is of absolutely no material consequence - Tyranny of the tribe!

H

omazus:
Mr. Man, must you defend everything. In one swoop you suspect Senator Anyanwu's mastery of English but in another you profess your ignorance of legal language. What if Anyanwu's language equates to the legal language/meaning you do not understand. Please Soyinka goofed. He is a highly respected scholar, but we cannot doubt that old age is dealing him some blows. Instead f Soyinka now being the conscience of the nation, he abdicates that role to the mob. Anyanwu is right that Soyinka should have gone through the bill and not rely on third person's view. Please and please, Soyinka is one Nigerian HERO I do not want to encounter the legendary fall of all heroes of the western world as shown in their literature. May Soyinks remain great. And may he not be so much in a haste to the bandwagon. I beg of you my model.

Again I ask; how do you know Soyinka did not go through the bill?
But wait, even if we assume he did not, does the same apply to Barr.Falana (SAN)?

Mogidi:


Ogidi should have read the bill before commenting, at 80yrs plus, I hope moses is not waning.

Ogidi must die.

Done at last

Who are we to believe?

Where is the damn bill sef?

BackDatAssUp:



My father is an old fool who sees nothing good in others and has too much of a high opinion of himself.

Chris tactfully put the old fool in his place

TheOtherview:


Now tell what other interpretation can be ascribed to the defilement of teenagers? Isn't this precisely the kind of latitude the Yerimas of the world seek?

Nigeria is the only Nation on earth that has two Legal codes.

Challenge the enactment of Sharia law in our constitution which does not only promote pedophilia but goes on to legalize sleeping with young girls.

As long as our constituion recognizes Sharia law then there is nothing we can do to prevent the likes of Yerima taking underage girls as their wives.

Has the president gone through these said bills?..

Lemme read 1st