“An ounce of mediation is worth a pound of arbitration and a ton of litigation” __ Joseph
Grynbaum

By Ernest Ogezi

Everyday online transactions within and across international borders continue to
grow in intensity and complexity. The nature of ICT makes the world borderless,
therefore disputes pertaining to trade and Intellectual property rights such as
patents, trademarks, copy-rights – including software – or know-how, can quickly
spiral into complex legal situation. ICT disputes are multifaceted as they are
technical; for this reason, when parties to ICT transactions get involved in
conflicts, the most important thing to do is find a time- and cost-effective manner
to resolve the issues in order to avoid disruption of technology development,
investment and consumer interests. Conventional courts are not often well
equipped to handle the intricacies because conflicts are complex and require
expertise.

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms, including mediation, arbitration
expedited arbitration and expert determination, offer parties and their lawyers high-
quality, efficient and cost-effective ways to resolve their ICT disputes out of court,
especially contractual disputes involving parties from different jurisdictions. Some
important advantages of ADR are neutrality and expertise. In neutrality, ADR
assumes a neutral law, language and institutional culture of all parties, taking away
the home court advantage that would have been enjoyed by parties in court-based
litigation. Expertise borders on achieving high-quality solutions in ICT disputes
where judges may have the relevant knowledge in key areas. Parties can appoint
arbitrators, mediators or experts with specific proficiency in the relevant legal,
technical or business area.

Delay in the resolution of ICT conflicts has the ability of putting a whole project at
risk. This underpins the importance of economically viable and time-bound
resolution of conflicts. ADR mechanisms provide short and specific timelines
which the parties can further adapt. Mechanisms like the expedited arbitration fast-
track actions to achieve even faster solutions. Alternative dispute resolution (ADR)
helps avoid the expense and complexity of multi-jurisdictional legislation and the
risk of inconsistent result by allowing parties to settle in a single procedure.

According to Statista, the number of internet users in Nigeria as at 2020 had
reached 99.05 million. The business ecosystem within the Nigerian cyberspace is
bolstering and a lot of social entrepreneurs are emerging, offering service and
product transactions to a variety of customers or consumers. International online
transactions are also growing in Nigeria. It is inevitable that conflicts will result as
a result of the use of the internet and, Information and Communication Technology
(ICT). But conflicts occur, it is necessary to follow expert, time- and cost-effective
procedure for resolution.

Nigeria’s judicial system is currently ill-equipped to handle disputes relating to
parties in an ICT setting, litigations can be very expensive while judges and
lawyers lack the requisite technical expertise to litigate ICT-related conflicts. This
is what informed the development of the framework on Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR) developed by the National Information Technology
Development Agency (NITDA). The ADR Framework defines “ICT Conflict
Prevention” as a body that ensures that conflicts in an agreement or ongoing ICT
projects are identified at an early stage, resolved and prevented from escalating
further. Within the NITDA ADR framework ICT disputes “refers to disagreements
between parties who agreed concerning hardware (computer components and
peripheral devices), software, IT consultancy, cloud services or internet services.”
The elaborate ADR framework also encapsulates the establishment of Online
Dispute Resolution (ODR) platform. The ODR platform is seen as the most
innovative and interesting aspect of the ADR given that it is an online dispute
resolution platform. The ODR platform allows for resolving of ICT disputes online
from filling, neutral appointment of arbitrators, online discussions and rendering of
binding settlements.

The ADR framework has provision for the establishment of a body specialized in
the field of organization and ICT and made up of experts in IT conflict
management that will offer ADR options to resolve and where necessary settle
disputes in ICT related matters. The objectives of the body are:
i. To inform the respondent party about the complaint with the aim of settling
the dispute between parties. The body shall provide an electronic complaint
form to the parties.
ii. To enhance cross border transactions and market integration online while
providing means of resolving disputes where it arises in the course of a
transaction.

iii. To provide the parties and ADR entity with the translation of information
which is necessary for the resolution of ICT disputes
iv. To make online transactions safer and fairer through access to dispute
resolution tools by providing a feedback system that allows the parties to
express their views on the functioning of the ODR platform.
v. To make publicly available general information on ADR as a means of out-
of-court dispute resolution mechanism and to provide information on how to
submit complaints through the ODR platform.

A complaint is valid to the extent that the ICT agreement initially contained
arbitration clause accepting that all disputes should be resolved by the agency or
parties voluntarily consent to applying ADR to resolve ICT disputes. The
complaining party must fill in the electronic complaint form and ensure that the
there is sufficient information as to the cause of the dispute. Data processed
through the electronic complaint form and its attachment must be accurate,
relevant, and not excessive.

The ADR Framework will also incorporate the Data Protection Regulation 2019 in
the access, collection and processing of users for dispute management and
resolution. Strict confidentiality and appropriate technical and organizational
measures to ensure information security within the ADR body and the online
dispute resolution platform.

Through the scope and applicability of the ADR framework NITDA will be able to
resolve all technical, commercial or legal conflicts and apply to disputes on
contractual obligations stemming from hardware and software transactions,
consultancy, telecommunication the internet, online sales and service contracts
between consumers within Nigeria and a trade established in Nigeria using the internet services.

By Derrick Bangura

Do you frequently feel tired, sluggish and bloated? Does your hair look dull and dishevelled? Does your skin lack sparkle and is the waistband on your jeans a little too tight for comfort? If you answered yes to one or more of these questions, is that, too often, it could be a sign that your system is in desperate need of a spring clean.

So many people find cleanses and detox appealing as a way to reaffirm a commitment to healthy eating. While I certainly understand the desired dial down cravings for sweets and processed foods and create a pathway toward eating well over the long haul, the trouble I see with juicing and other similar cleanses is that too often, they leave people hungry, sluggish and distracted by constant thoughts of food. Cleansing can also lead to unwanted issues, like constipation (from lack of fibre) and bloating (due to excess fructose from juice cleanses).

You don’t need to take specific foods to detox your body. You have organs (like your liver) that are specifically designed to remove toxins.

But some foods are important components of a balanced diet that will help keep your detoxification system healthy.

What are the best detoxing foods?

There are no specific “detoxing foods” but the food is important to your natural detoxification systems.

In addition to eating a balanced diet, you can always support your body by exercising, avoiding the intake of toxins by limiting them is pertinent, chief among these toxins are alcohol and cigarettes.

The human body is designed to purify itself. You can help by drinking plenty of water and limiting highly processed, fatty, and sugary foods.

It is normal for anyone to engage in a “Detox Diet”. It encourages you to eat natural foods and veggies.

The main idea behind detox and cleanse diets is to purify and purge the body of the “bad” stuff that can cause problems like tiredness, headaches, and nausea. But the human body is designed to purify itself and there is no evidence that a detox diet works.

By Dr Olukayode Ajulo, FCIARB. UK

*Introduction*

I have read and keenly observed with great trepidation, the grotesque drama which has ensued from the battle of the pen with little or no truce, however uneasy, between two of Nigeria’s greatest political bigwigs and nationalists on the backdrop of the summit organized by a group, Global Peace Foundation on 13th December 2021 where President Olusegun Obasanjo GCFR was alleged to have exhibited hatred and disconcertedness against the Niger Delta Region.

As could be gleaned in an Open Letter from Chief Edwin Clark to President Olusegun Obasanjo, titled “My Disappointment Over Your Unapproved Outburst Against the People of the Niger Delta Region”, The Elder Statesman, among other things noted that the Niger Delta Region has been marginalized by past regimes of the government and that he was appalled that same Government attitudinal disposition towards the minority groups of the Niger Delta was exacerbated by the former President after the latter allegedly openly interjected and contradicted the submissions of both Engr. Wodu and Mr O’Mac Emakpore were Chief Clark’s representatives at the summit.

Chief Edwin Clark while emphasizing the constant marginalization of the people of the Niger Delta Region further noted that although these natural resources are found within the preserves of the Niger Delta Region, succeeding governments have not been committed to ensuring the development of the region and have not used the money gotten from the resources of the region for its development as done for other regions.

Underscoring his argument, Chief Clark further noted that by the principle of derivation as enshrined in Section 140 of the 1960 Constitution, natural resources found within regions in the country were controlled by the people of the regions.

In his response, General Olusegun Obasanjo while denouncing the notion that he had any hatred for the Niger Delta Region noted that he had no such grudge for the region and placed more emphasis on the fact that by the dint of the Constitution, all-natural resources in any part of the federation is owned by the Federal Government and within the exclusive legislative list of the National Assembly.

He further noted among other things that the territory of Nigeria is indivisible, inclusive of the resources found therein. “No territory in Nigeria including the minerals found therein belongs to the area of (sic) location and this remains so until the federation is dissolved”.

I have always dreaded to critic these Elder statesmen as these two men are among the four persons I hold in great esteem and awe in my heart when it comes to national issues and political discourses. The other two men are, Bishop Emmanuel Bolanle Gbonigi and Aare Afe Babalola, SAN, OFR, CON. Only those who know the enervating particularity and the indelible contributions these men have exerted to ensure the attainment of a better Nigeria can appreciate my choice of same.

If we must allow memory to be our guide, it must be noted that Chief Edwin Kiagbodo Clark, OFR, CON is a Nigerian elder statesman of high repute and integrity who has throughout his political career which has spanned over 7 decades, fought and still fights for the emancipation of the people of Niger Delta and Nigeria as a whole.

Similarly, except by some perverse logic and political sentiment, it is an undeniable fact that President Olusegun Obasanjo, GCFR is one of the greatest leaders who have guided the sail of the Nigerian Ship in both the military and democratic dispensation.

Be that as it may, I am obliged to note that this clash is nothing but a jiggery-pokery pastime of ancient warlords, in which the former with respect, may be said to be emotionally incautious, while the latter respectfully was merely engaging in cheeky and specious sophistry to put his points across.

President Olusegun Obasanjo interestingly and surprisingly anchored his argument solely on law, whereas the answer on the ownership is found in the extant provision of our laws and could as well be viewed from the geopolitical perspectives of the Nigeria of today’s tenuous existence.

*Dejure and De-Facto Ownership of Natural Resources in Nigeria*

Beyond the above red-hot dialogue and pantomime, it suffices to note that Section 44(3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), the Land Use Act of 1978 and the Petroleum Act vest the exclusive control and management of oil and gas in the Federal Government and not the State or Local Government where the oil and gas are found. It can therefore be said that the Nigerian Federal Government is the “de jure” owner of the oil. However, the indubitable and undeniable reality is that the Niger Delta region where the oil is found in the “de facto” owner of the oil.

In the consideration of our geopolitical aspect including the security consideration, it is patent that by the circumstance of the composition of Nigerian Federal Government, the oil and gas resources are held in trust by the Federal Government on behalf of the Citizens of Nigeria for the overall benefit and development of the nation.

Quite frankly, our extant laws also give credence to the real owners of these natural resources, hence the provision for derivative funds for host communities, particularly, the Niger Delta. In that payment of derivative funds is an implicit recognition of the primary owner of the people of the land in which the oil resource resides which position is further and more explicitly buttressed
ex cathedral by the Apex Court of the land to the effect that a state shall be entitled to natural resources emanating from within its boundaries to qualify for the allocation of funds from the Federation Accounts. See the cases of A G Federation v. A G Abia State & 35 Ors (2002) 6 NWLR (Pt.763) Pg.542; AG Rivers State v. AG Akwa Ibom & Ors (2011) LPELR-633(SC).

*Doctrine of Public Trust of Natural Resources and equitable distribution of same*

To bring the present discourse into specific perspective and for the enlightenment of those who might have been swayed by the perspicacious lustre of charm which serenaded President Olusegun Obasanjo’s reply that natural resources are owned by the Federal Government, it is crucial to state that rather than being the owner of natural resources, the Federal Government is a trustee of these natural resources for the benefit of the citizens of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Hence the Government is a steward/custodian of these natural resources to be harnessed and distributed as best as possible to serve the common good. The beneficiaries of a trust are the true owners of the same even if by the very nature of trusts, another may manage and oversee it on their behalf.

In other words, the Federal Government is holding the natural resources in trust for public use including the communities where such natural resources are found. A careful perusal of Section 17(2)(d) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) dictates that “in furtherance of the social order, exploitation of…natural resources in any form whatsoever for reasons, other than the good of the community shall be prevented.”

Hence Federal Government’s trusteeship of these natural resources should not under any guise be equated to outright ownership of the natural resources by the Federal Government. This critical relationship between ownership and trusteeship of natural resources is a vital point in the Nigerian polity and socio-economic development of the nation.

*Conclusion*

From whatever angle this issue is being considered, worthy of note is that there are certain, almost predictable similarities and convergence between the positions of these two prominent Elder statesmen which is the ardour and candour, their impatience with Nigeria’s millennial lassitude, their strident clarion call against marginalization and misgovernance.

Without much ado, it is my humble admonition that a nation is held together not just by the aggregate of its human and natural resources, but by a qualitative and progressive harnessing of those resources for the betterment of both the regions where these resources are found and the nation at large.
Ajulo is the Founder/Executive Director of Egalitarian Mission of Africa.