Reintroduction of Lagos monthly sanitation illegal, contemptuous – Falana

Human rights lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN), has criticised the plan by the Lagos State Government to reintroduce the monthly environmental sanitation exercise that restricts residents’ movement for three hours on the last Saturday of every month, describing the move as unconstitutional and contemptuous of a subsisting court judgment.

In a statement on Sunday, Falana said the policy was a relic of Nigeria’s military era and had no place in a democratic society governed by the rule of law.

According to him, “the decision of the Lagos State Government to reintroduce the sanitation exercise where the movement of Lagos residents is restricted for three hours during the last Saturday of every month is a sad reminder of one of the primitive legacies of the defunct military junta in Nigeria.”

The senior advocate stated that the measure was unjustifiable, especially in light of the substantial budgetary allocation to environmental management in the state.

He noted that in the 2026 Appropriation Law of Lagos State, the government earmarked N236bn for the environment, including urban waste management and sanitation.

“The planned reintroduction of the monthly sanitation exercise cannot be justified in view of the fact that in the 2026 Appropriation Law of Lagos, the sum of N236bn was earmarked for the environment, including urban waste management and sanitation,” Falana said.

He added that members of the Lagos State House of Assembly had unanimously supported improved waste management systems, rather than movement restrictions.

Instead of enforcing what he called an illegal exercise, Falana urged the government to invest in more efficient waste management strategies.

“Instead of wasting precious time and resources on enforcing the illegal monthly sanitation exercise, the Lagos State Government ought to engage more cleaners and acquire mechanical sweepers for heavy debris and vacuum sweepers for fine dust and litter,” he said.

The lawyer also drew attention to the case of Faith Okafor v. Lagos State Government, decided by the Court of Appeal in 2016.

In the case, a Lagos resident, Faith Okafor, was arrested on May 25, 2013, for allegedly violating the restriction of movement imposed during the monthly environmental sanitation exercise.

She was subsequently arraigned before a special offences court, where she pleaded guilty and was fined N2,000 for wandering and loitering during the restricted period.

After paying the fine, Okafor approached the High Court of Lagos State to enforce her fundamental rights to dignity, personal liberty, and freedom of movement, but the court dismissed her application.

Dissatisfied with the ruling, she appealed, and the Court of Appeal, Lagos Division, ruled in her favour, declaring the restriction illegal and unconstitutional.

The appellate court held that a directive issued by a governor does not amount to a law and cannot justify the arrest, prosecution, or conviction of citizens.

In a concurring opinion, Justice Biobell Abraham Georgewill warned against allowing executive directives to override constitutional safeguards.

“It is my view that democracy thrives more on obeying and promoting the rule of law rather than the whims and caprices of the leaders against the led,” the judge said.

He held, “I find the conduct of the respondent in not only persecuting the appellant, yes that is what in my view it amounts to when a free citizen of this great country such as Citizen Faith Okafor, is put through the rigours of criminal process for an offence not prescribed in any written law but merely on the directive of the Governor of the Lagos State.”

He added that subjecting a citizen to criminal prosecution “for an offence not prescribed in any written law but merely on the directive of the governor” could confer “infinite, absolute and autocratic powers” on public office holders.

Falana, therefore, urged the state government to abandon the proposed policy.

“The Lagos State Government should not reintroduce the monthly sanitation exercise as it is highly contemptuous of the Court of Appeal,” he said.(Punch)