Lagos State Defends Lawfulness of Monthly Sanitation Exercise
Translated from English, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
TLDR
- The Lagos State Government defends the reintroduction of its monthly environmental sanitation exercise, asserting its legality.
- The Attorney-General clarifies that the exercise involves controlled movement, not a total restriction, and does not breach residents' rights.
- This defense follows criticism from a Senior Advocate of Nigeria who described the exercise as illegal and unconstitutional.
The Lagos State Government has firmly defended the reintroduction of its monthly environmental sanitation exercise, pushing back against media reports that misrepresent its legality and impact on residents' freedom of movement. The Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Lawal Pedro, has clarified that the exercise is lawful and operates within the bounds of constitutional rights.
The narration in the media on the Court of Appeal ruling in respect of the case on environmental sanitation in Lagos is not correct.
Pedro cited a subsisting judgment from the Court of Appeal, delivered in November 2021, which affirmed the validity of the environmental sanitation exercise and found no breach of fundamental rights. He emphasized that while a previous ruling existed, the 2021 judgment remains the operative legal stance. The government's position is that the exercise permits controlled movement, allowing residents to use streets not directly involved in sanitation activities, thereby balancing environmental cleanliness with personal liberty.
The court held that the environmental sanitation exercise in Lagos State was valid and backed by law and that the fundamental right of the applicant, Mr Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, was not breached.
This clarification comes in response to strong condemnation from Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, who had labeled the exercise illegal and unconstitutional, alleging forced confinement of residents. The Attorney-General dismissed reliance on an earlier, superseded judgment and stressed that the current policy, which allows for temporary restrictions only in active sanitation zones, is legally sound. The government maintains that it is acting within its legal mandate to ensure a clean environment while respecting the fundamental rights of its citizens.
The Supreme Court is yet to set aside the judgment of the Court of Appealโฆ it will not be unlawful to have a controlled movement during the monthly environmental sanitation exercise.
Originally published by The Punch in English. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.