Since the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA) Act (amendment) bill was introduced in the National Assembly, there have been divisions between the Senate and House of Representatives on one hand and the stakeholders in the telecommunications sector and the legislators on the other.

Whereas the Senate seems to be in a haste to get the bill passed, the House of Representatives wants the Nigerian public to be given ample opportunity to make their input into the proposed legislation.

An executive bill, it is titled: “A bill for an act to repeal the and the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA) act, N0.28 2007 and enact the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA) act to provide for the administration, implementation, regulation of information technology systems and practices as well as digital economy in Nigeria and for related matters.”

Meanwhile, all the major stakeholders in the industry including the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC), the Nigeria Communications Commission (NCC), Association of Licensed Telecom Operators of Nigeria (ALTON) and the Association of Telecommunications Companies (ATCON) have all registered their strong reservations about the bill.

This scenario may have led to the aborted public hearing shortly before the two chambers proceeded on the Christmas and New Year holidays.

Public hearing controversy

On December 23, 2022, a hurriedly arranged joint public hearing by the Senate and House of Representatives committees on ICT and Cyber Security was to hold in the Senate.

While declaring open the event, Senate President Ahmed Lawan represented by the deputy chief whip, Senator Aliyu Sabi Abdullahi cautioned those he accused of describing the public hearing as a secret meeting.

Abdullahi stated that the National Assembly had no ulterior motive and had followed due process in calling for the public hearing on the NITDA Bill.

But trouble started after the Senate committee chairman on ICT and Cyber Security, Senator Yakubu Oseni and his House counterpart, Hon. Lado Abubakar presented their opening remarks.

Shortly after their remarks, Hon Nkem Uzoma-Abonta (PDP, Abia) raised a point of order calling for the public hearing to be postponed to January 2023. He noted that only a handful of members of the House Committee on ICT and Cyber Security were in attendance.

He also said even those available for the meeting did not have a copy of the bill, while the Minister for Communications and Digital Economy, Prof Isa Ali Pantami and the Director-General of NITDA, Katie Inuwa Abdullahi were absent at the hearing.

Abonta insisted that things should be properly done with the minister and the NITDA boss coming physically to speak on the bill spearheaded by them, even as members should be sent copies of the bill ahead of time.

He warned that the National Assembly should not be in a hurry to host a public hearing on a sensitive bill as members, especially the Christians, were already holidaying. He said: “This is a bill that will protect the integrity of Nigeria in the Internet space. But the drivers of the bill seem to be running on low gear.

When the Senate President ably represented here spoke, he talked about people rumouring that we are holding a secret hearing. No, here there is nothing secretive about this, we are here in this hall.

“However, the needed ingredients for us to proceed are not available. I am speaking from the side of the House. We have conferred among ourselves. We have 36 members of the committee and how many of us are here? Critically too, we don’t have the required documents here. I can’t find the Director-General of NITDA, the minister is not here.

"What needs to be done should be seen to be properly done.” Abonta’s position was corroborated by his colleagues, Hon. Idem Unyime (PDP, Akwa Ibom).

But responding, the Senate committee chairman, Senator Yakubu Oseni said members of the House were sent copies of the bill and the notice for the public hearing was properly sent out.

He said: “I want to put it on record that if there are anomalies or any documents that you didn’t see, that should be a fault from your side as House of Representatives members. As far as we on the other side are concerned everything is intact. The bill has been circulated, the necessary documents have been circulated online, that’s on one hand.”

His explanation, however, could not assuage the House as Hon Isiaka Ibrahim moved a motion that the public hearing be adjourned based on the issues raised by his colleagues. Consequently, Senator Oseni was forced to announce sine die the postponement of the public hearing.

Stakeholders’ opposition

As the Senate and House bicker, the stakeholders including NBC, NCC, ALTON and ATCON have unanimously submitted that the proposed law will be inimical to the development of the telecommunications sector and will also visit additional financial burden on already beleaguered Nigerians.

In their memoranda, the stakeholders argued that the bill will turn NITDA into a regulator rather that an agency, which was created to serve as an incubator for ideas and programmes for the Information Technology sector, especially to the benefit of Nigeria.

They submitted that “it is out of order to create a regulator, a behemoth that will regulate so many aspects of people’s lives and cover many sectors since digital culture is all-encompassing."

Continuing, they noted that “even more worrisome is section 6 of the bill which lists Powers of the agency: The agency shall have powers to – (1) implement all government policies on information technology and digital economy; (2) test, and approve the use of information technology infrastructure and services before adoption in Nigeria; (5) fix licensing and authorisation charges, collect fees and penalties as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions under this Act; (7) enter premises, inspect, seize, seal, detain and impose administrative sanctions on erring persons and entities who contravene any provision of this Act subject to the order of a court of competent jurisdiction; (12) issue and renew licenses and authorisations for the provision of information technology and digital services; “If passed the above-listed clauses from Section 6 of the bill create confusion as these roles are already being performed by NCC, SON and even the Federal Ministry of Communication and Digital Economy, which coordinates government policy and the agencies’ implementation of policies in the sector.

“Part IV of the proposed bill has got investors in the sector worried about another round of taxation; even as anti-corruption campaigners have rejected the idea of creating the National Information Technology Fund as proposed in PART IV of the NITDA Bill. This Section of the bill reads: (1) There is established a Fund, which shall be known as the National Information Technology Development Fund (in this Act referred to as “the Fund”) and shall be used for the advancement of the country’s digital economy objectives and related purposes.

“(2) There shall be paid and credited into the Fund: (a) a levy of one per cent of the profit before tax of companies and enterprises enumerated in the Third Schedule to this Act with an annual turnover of N100, 000,000 and above.” Protesting further, the stakeholders noted that Section 15 is something anti-corruption campaigners are most worried about. It gives the Director-General control of the NITDA Trust Fund.

It reads: (1) There is established a Fund, which shall be known as the National Information Technology Development Fund (in this Act referred to as “the Fund”) and shall be used for the advancement of the country’s digital economy objectives and related purposes. (2) There shall be paid and credited into the Fund: (a) a levy of one per cent of the profit before tax of companies and enterprises enumerated in the Third Schedule to this Act with an annual turnover of N100, 000,000 and above.

“Section 17 Sub-Section 3( a-e) further exposes the sinister plot to turn the NITDA Trust Fund into some kind of slush fund for the Director-General at a time when government must block existing loopholes, stop leakages and ensure that all income generated by the government is deployed for development.

Again, the National Assembly has severally kicked against MDAs not paying in money raised into the federation account, as agents of government, under the guise that the ACT establishing them gives them the power to generate income and spend. This controversial section reads: (3) The Agency may, without prejudice to the provision of Section 13 (1) of this Act, apply the proceeds of the Fund established under Section 13 of this Act: (a) to the advancement of the purpose of this Act; (b) to the cost of administration and operation of the Agency; (c) for the development and maintenance of any property vested in or owned by the Agency; (d) for investments in initiatives to attain the objectives of the Agency; and (e) to any other expenditure in connection with any of its functions under this Act.”

As the National Assembly reconvenes later this month to hold a public hearing on the bill, stakeholders are of the view that the legislators being the representatives of the people should reject the temptation to be teleguided by the executive but work in the interest of the common man and the smooth development of the telecom sector by dropping the proposed legislation. (New Telegraph)

Update news