Connect with us

News

Senate defends bus preaching bill amid public outcry

Published

on

The Senate has clarified that the controversial provision prescribing penalties for preaching, hawking and trading inside commercial vehicles is not a fresh attempt to outlaw religious activities or street evangelism, but a long-standing provision of the Federal Road Safety Commission Act that has been in force since 2007.

The clarification follows widespread public outrage over the passage of the Federal Road Safety Corps (Amendment) Bill, 2026, which proposes a N50,000 fine for anyone convicted of hawking, trading or preaching inside commercial vehicles.

The proposed legislation, which forms part of a broader review of the FRSC Act aimed at strengthening road safety enforcement and reducing road crashes, sparked criticism from Christian bodies, opposition parties, civil society groups and members of the public, many of whom argued that the provision was insensitive amid rising unemployment and worsening economic hardship.

In a statement issued on Monday, Leader of the Senate, Opeyemi Bamidele, clarified that the contentious provision had been misrepresented, insisting that the amendment neither introduced a fresh offence nor sought to prohibit preaching in public places.

He said, “The Senate has duly noticed public concerns on the purported proscription of preaching and hawking in a commercial vehicle under the ongoing amendment to the Federal Road Safety Commission (Establishment) Act, No. 22, 2007.

“Pursuant to Section 10(4) of the Federal Road Safety Commission (Establishment) Act, 2007 and Regulation 220 of the National Road Traffic Regulations (NRTR) 2012, preaching and hawking in a commercial vehicle are offences. The offences have been part of the Act before the current amendment.

See also  Rivers and Lagos top states where minors consume sachet alcohol

“Entrenched as Item 36 in the Second Schedule of the Act, preaching and hawking in a commercial vehicle are not new provisions in our legal system.

“The provisions have been part of the Act as far back as 2007. However, it is now listed as Item 49, Second Schedule of the Act.”

The Senate stressed that the legislation was strictly targeted at promoting road safety and protecting commuters from distractions that could endanger lives.

“The Bill, therefore, does not outlaw preaching on the streets as some interests have claimed in different fora. It is about the safety of commuters and other road users and not intended to undermine any religious activity in the public space,” he added.

The Senate also dismissed reports linking the amendment to Bamidele, saying the legislation originated from the House of Representatives.

“The Bill is not an initiative of the Leader of the Senate, Senator Opeyemi Bamidele. Rather, it is a concurrence bill first amended by the House of Representatives.

“As required by the 1999 Constitution, the Bill requires the concurrence of the Senate before it can become effective.

“The amendment process is still ongoing. In the spirit of democracy, stakeholders can channel their concerns to the appropriate institutions before the completion of the process,” he stated.

The clarification comes days after the Senate passed the Federal Road Safety Corps (Amendment) Bill, 2026, which seeks to strengthen road safety enforcement through stiffer penalties for traffic-related offences.

Apart from prescribing a N50,000 fine for anyone convicted of hawking, trading or preaching inside commercial vehicles, the bill proposes a N50,000 fine, six months’ imprisonment or both for motorists who refuse to cooperate with FRSC officials conducting roadside breath tests based on reasonable suspicion.

See also  FG approves N25m housing loan for perm secs

It also raises the penalty for driving under the influence of alcohol or intoxicating drugs from N5,000 to N100,000, with offenders facing up to two years’ imprisonment or both.

Similarly, the proposed legislation increases the penalty for disobeying traffic lights, road signs, pavement markings and other traffic control devices to N100,000, while speed limit violations and reckless driving would also attract stiffer sanctions, including fines of N100,000 and, in some cases, custodial sentences.

The revised schedule of offences contains 52 traffic violations and their corresponding penalties, with lawmakers saying the amendments are intended to improve compliance with traffic regulations, strengthen the FRSC’s enforcement powers and enhance road safety nationwide.

Before Monday’s clarification, opposition parties had condemned the proposed penalties, arguing that criminalising hawking and preaching inside commercial vehicles was misplaced at a time many Nigerians were grappling with soaring inflation, unemployment and declining purchasing power.

In separate interviews with The PUNCH, party officials described the proposal as insensitive, urging the National Assembly to prioritise legislation that addresses the country’s economic challenges rather than imposing harsher penalties on struggling citizens.

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

SEE FULL LIST: NJC recommends 28 candidates for judicial appointments

Published

on

The National Judicial Council (NJC) has recommended 28 candidates for appointment as judicial officers across six states, including 24 candidates for various State High Courts.

The recommendations cover the High Courts of Kano, Ebonyi, Edo, Adamawa and Ogun states, the Plateau State Sharia Court of Appeal, Adamawa State Sharia Court of Appeal and Adamawa State Customary Court of Appeal.

The Council announced the recommendations in a statement issued on Wednesday by its Deputy Director of Information, Kemi Babalola-Ogedengbe.

It said the decisions were taken at its 112th meeting held on November 3, 2026, under the chairmanship of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Motonmori Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun.

According to the Council, one candidate was recommended as Grand Kadi of the Plateau State Sharia Court of Appeal, while another was recommended as Kadi of the Adamawa State Sharia Court of Appeal.

Two others were recommended as judges of the Adamawa State Customary Court of Appeal.

The appointment includes “24 High Court candidates and four candidates for the Sharia and Customary Courts of Appeal.”

The full list of the 28 recommended candidates is as follows:

PLATEAU STATE SHARIA COURT OF APPEAL (GRAND KADI)

1. Tijjani Jibrin Zololo

KANO STATE HIGH COURT

2. Nafisah Yusuf Hassan
3. Halima Yahuza Ahmad
4. Abdullahi Abdulsalam Bature
5. Musa Ibrahim Umar

EBONYI STATE HIGH COURT

6. Dickson Edmund Amaga

EDO STATE HIGH COURT

7. Benson Osagie Osawaru
8. Taiye Osayanmon Omoruyi
9. Dorothy Ibhade Adamaigbo
10. Festus Osagie Usiobaifo
11. Pius Idemudia Oiwoh
12. Majebi Samuel Amune
13. Emike Jessica Imuekemhe

See also  Tinubu heads to S’Africa, Angola for G20, AU summits

ADAMAWA STATE HIGH COURT

14. Aminu Sa’ad
15. Ibrahim Ulenda Musa
16. Sadiq Giwa
17. Musa Bala Mijinyawa
18. Japhet Ibrahim
19. Aliyu Bakari
20. Yakubu Ahmadu

OGUN STATE HIGH COURT

21. Olakulehin Luqman Abiola Oke
22. Adebimpe Folusho Obienu
23. Fatimat Adeola Daudu
24. Rafiat Bolanle Kadiri
25. Oludotun Olaniyi Osho

ADAMAWA STATE SHARIA COURT OF APPEAL (KADI)

26. Abubakar Ishaku

ADAMAWA STATE CUSTOMARY COURT OF APPEAL

27. Elshama Gwama Dimas
28. David Benjamin Pembi

The NJC said all the recommended candidates were expected to be sworn in by their respective state governors without delay.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

WHATSAPP CHANNEL

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

JD Vance reveals Iran war cost Republicans midterm elections, read details

Published

on

United States Vice President JD Vance has blamed the Iran war for the Republican Party’s poor performance in the 2026 midterm elections, saying many supporters of President Donald Trump switched allegiance to Democrats over dissatisfaction with the conflict.

Vance said this in a post on his X handle on Wednesday, arguing that the party’s defeat was not primarily caused by poor voter turnout but by the defection of voters who supported the Trump-Vance ticket in 2024.

He said data analysis conducted by his team before the elections had shown that Republican supporters were turning out in significant numbers, despite opinion polls predicting a major Democratic victory.

“One of the things the data analysts on our side obsessed over was ‘composition’—whether the electorate looked close enough to 2024 for Republicans to win,” he said.

Vance explained that although turnout was encouraging in several states, a member of his data team had warned him that many Republican voters were angry and might not vote for the party.

“Well, that looks prophetic now. Our voters did show up. In Florida, for example, the electorate was nine points more Republican than Democrat, just a couple points worse than 2024,” he said.

“But the main problem is not turnout. The main problem is that many people who voted for Trump/Vance in 2024 voted for Democrats in 2026.”

The Vice President acknowledged that the party might have failed to communicate its economic policies effectively, particularly on the cost of living and inflation.

However, he said the major reasons voters abandoned the Republicans were concerns about the war, economic hardship, America’s foreign policy priorities and its relationship with Israel.

See also  FG approves N25m housing loan for perm secs

According to Vance, a pollster who accurately predicted the election outcome identified four major demands among former Republican supporters who switched to the Democrats.

The demands were to end the war, prioritise the cost of living and inflation, put America first and change the country’s relationship with Israel.

“The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night,” Vance stated.

He also defended television personality Rachel Campos-Duffy, saying her earlier call for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict had proved politically sound.

Vance warned against attempts by Republican establishment figures to attribute the party’s electoral setback to other issues, particularly immigration policy.

He said he was open to reviewing immigration enforcement strategies, including targeting businesses that employ undocumented workers, but rejected calls for amnesty.

“Anyone pushing amnesty is lying to you,” he said.

The Vice President challenged those who believed the war was worth the political cost to defend that position openly, noting that the defeat could cost Republicans control of the Senate for the next six years.

“If you’d like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next six years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay,” he said.

“Agree or disagree, that’s at least honest.”

Despite the setback, Vance expressed optimism about the country’s future, urging disappointed Republican supporters to channel their anger into rebuilding the party and electing candidates who share their political views.

“Let’s take that anger and get back to the work of saving our country,” he added.

See also  Parents seek review of UK court verdict convicting Nigerian student over robbery

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

WHATSAPP CHANNEL

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

UK to strengthen immigration enforcement with facial recognition

Published

on

The United Kingdom government plans to expand live facial recognition technology to strengthen immigration enforcement and identify individuals who have violated immigration rules.

The initiative, being developed by the Home Office, could see facial recognition cameras deployed at transport hubs and public events to help immigration officers identify people who have overstayed their visas, entered the country unlawfully or breached their immigration conditions.

According to policy documents published in October and sighted by PUNCH Online on Thursday, the proposed expansion could extend the technology’s use to general immigration enforcement, including civil immigration violations that do not necessarily involve criminal offences.

The development comes as Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood seeks to intensify immigration enforcement through increased funding, additional personnel and expanded deportation operations.

The Home Office said the technology would help officers identify individuals subject to removal proceedings and those attempting to re-enter the UK unlawfully.

The policy documents also suggest that facial recognition could reduce the need for repeated enforcement visits to residential properties and workplaces.

Authorities have already conducted three trials of the technology at Holyhead port in north Wales between November 2025 and February 2026. The trials focused on identifying individuals travelling from Ireland who were subject to deportation orders or wanted over immigration-related criminal offences.

The programme has now entered its formal delivery phase, with officials considering wider deployments at transport hubs and large public gatherings.

A Home Office spokesperson confirmed that further trials were being considered while the government examined the potential benefits and implications of the technology.

See also  Parents seek review of UK court verdict convicting Nigerian student over robbery

U K Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, said: “Facial recognition technology has been the biggest breakthrough for catching criminals since DNA matching, already helping police take thousands of dangerous criminals off our streets.

“The benefits are clear, but we must ensure that its use is fair, safe and proportionate.

“It is right we put in place clear laws to ensure that the use of this technology is watertight, so the public can have confidence that these tools, which are vital to our safety, are used responsibly too.”

However, the proposed expansion has raised concerns among civil liberties organisations and migrant rights advocates over privacy, surveillance and the possibility of inaccurate identification.

The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants described the development as a significant escalation of immigration enforcement powers, while the Open Rights Group questioned the transparency of the plans, public consent and the absence of comprehensive legislation governing facial recognition.

Critics have also warned that the technology could disproportionately affect people of colour because of concerns about identification accuracy.

Meanwhile, Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner William Webster has questioned whether existing regulatory arrangements are sufficient to oversee the expanding use of facial recognition across government agencies.

Under the proposed policy, individuals under 18 will not be included on facial recognition watchlists.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

WHATSAPP CHANNEL

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Trending