Nigerian Immigration discriminates against women in passport issuance

By Ruona Agbroko
June 14, 2009 07:27PMT

Priye Iyalla-Amadi, wife of renowned author Elechi Amadi, might have filed (and won) a case against the Nigerian Immigration Service and its director-general, Chukwuman Udeh.

NEXT on Sunday can however confirm that the agency’s discriminatory policy against women is still being enforced, with staff of the NIS blatantly cashing in on the consequent inconveniences experienced by women to make quick money.
Mrs. Iyalla-Amadi had sought a replacement of her international passport in February 2008 and was told by Immigration officials in Port Harcourt that she needed written permission from her husband first. She told NEXT their inability to give her “a satisfactory explanation for this chauvinism” resulted in her suing the NIS.

Over one year after the incident, Justice G.K Olotu, presiding judge of the Federal High court, in his verdict, reportedly said: “this kind of policy has no place in 21st century Nigeria.”
Despite this landmark ruling, Ogbor O.R, an official of the agency’s Ikoyi passport office however showed that business goes on as usual, when NEXT visited last week.
The NIS Ikoyi office is Nigeria’s busiest -and not even the day’s heavy downpour or resulting traffic build-up could diminish this status, as Nigerians and foreigners filled the applicants’ waiting area beside the gate where NEXT stood.
There, beside a signboard which requested “Please do not patronise touts,” Mr. Ogbor told NEXT; “there are two options. If you want it (the passport) within the same week, it is N18, 000. If you want it within two weeks, it is N15, 000.” In response to NEXT’s protest that this was about a 100 percent increase from the N8750 shown on the NIS website, he listed the ‘benefits ‘of his services: “We can do everything and you get it... quickly”.
In its argument for the retention of the status quo, the NIS told the Port-Harcourt court that “the requirement for consent was put in place to perpetuate the authority of the man over his wife, no matter the status she had attained in the society.”

Letter of consent
Mr Ogbor confirmed that the procedure remained the same. “You need a letter of consent. That is how it should be... we assume men are in charge of the family.” His colleague, a female whose name tag identified her as Ayodele A.O, said in reply to NEXT’s protests: “You don’t know you are under your husband, you are asking why? We have had this law since we have been doing passport in Nigeria. You need a consent from your husband so that you do not run away to marry another man!”
Ms. Ayodele further advised NEXT to, instead “beg him (Ogbor) to help you”, as he agreed his service offerings included writing a letter of consent “in your husband’s name” and even marriage certificates, all for a fee.
Established in 1953, the NIS’ requirement that only females require written consent for passports regardless of age or status, finds company; Nigerian women by law cannot confer nationality on their foreign husbands, unlike their male counterparts.

Whilst Nigeria’s government agencies struggle with the rising need to unravel the red-tape that shackles its administrative obligations to its citizens, it is apparent that others further down the line will constantly benefit from the unfortunate turn of events. Right before this NEXT reporter, perhaps for reasons of convenience and most likely due to helplessness, many took Ogbor’s N18, 000 route.

‘The law is against discrimination of women’
Excerpts of interview with Busola Olagunju, counsel to Dr. Priye Iyalla-Amadi

This case is a landmark one. When was it filed by your client?

We filed the case in April 2008. She felt it was very wrong to go to a government agency and ask for something that should be rightfully distributed to all Nigerian citizens and then to have a condition placed on it simply because of her gender.

She was asked to go and get a letter... and she felt that it was wrong to ask one group of Nigerians and not others to get a letter, she felt it was not right. She is also involved in women’s rights movements and she deals with women and she knows that these kinds of little pieces of discrimination create practical problems in the lives of women.
For example if she didn’t get along with her husband or he was a domineering sort, she wouldn’t be able to get the passport, so she didn’t feel it was right.

Did the long-drawn trial adversely affect your client’s travel plans?

Not really, because she did get her husband’s consent, but I do deal with women all the time whom I know would not have gotten their husband’s consent. So for her personally, she was okay, although she wasn’t very happy that her plans were delayed and having to go back and go and ask, get the letter, and so on and so forth. But I know that for a lot of women, that requirement would have had a very negative consequence.

What were the highlights of this case for you?

It’s mostly the judgement... that there’s been another pronouncement. This case takes the law a little bit further... it talks about the administrative policies of government agencies; official discrimination. This is a clear pronouncement that it is no longer acceptable for government agencies to discriminate against women. That was the main satisfaction for me. The pronouncement states that it’s no longer acceptable, it’s not constitutional.

What were the challenges you faced in this case?
There were no particular challenges. It was a very clear law... except that they (the NIS) dropped out in the middle of things and they were trying to get them to participate... but that wasn’t particularly a challenge.

How soon do you think this pronouncement can be put into law, technically?
My client, the claimant is not here. I am sure when she does come back we will deliver the judgement to the NIS and if somebody else comes and says that they have been compelled to comply with this requirement, we’ll take it from there. They need to know that the Law is the Law and a Judge has made a pronouncement and they have to change that.

Back to the judgement, they can continue doing it as long as male applicants are required to fulfil the same requirements. That was the little twist in the judgment. So if you are going to ask for letters of consent for some reason, like say you want to protect the institution of marriage, fantastic!

But it’s not just one group of Nigerians that have to do that, but also the male applicants, married men also need to get a letter of consent... so we need to look at that, if women are still being made to get letters of consent, we’ll find out whether men fulfil the spousal consent requirement. If they don’t, we’ll know what to do.

As a lawyer, does this tie in with the fact that women cannot confer nationality rights on their foreign husbands?

Yes it’s the same sort of thing, but that’s constitutional.

‘There is hope for the women’
Excerpts of interview with Dr. Priye Iyalla-Amadi:

What did you experience at the Port Harcourt office of the Nigerian Immigration service that led to your filing a suit against them?

It was very chauvinistic to say the least... what I mean by that is, you want your passport, they said go and get a letter from your husband! And I said, ah! Are the husbands also asked to get (letters) from their wives? And he was like, Madam do as you are told. It was a male official.
When was this? Because your counsel confirmed to us that you filed a case in April 2008.
It happened in late February 2008... I was about to travel to Britain.

What part of the court proceedings did you find discouraging?
Fortunately for me, the lady lawyer who represented me was very much moved by my case. She felt the way I felt, when I told her my experience. But please take note! Throughout the proceedings, Immigration never deemed it fit to make a presentation; they weren’t attending.
They just defied the court and they were not attending! They had (lawyers), but sometimes, they would get there late. They did not care, really. I was out in London however, when the judgment was finally given. I feel there is hope for the female folk in Nigeria. There is hope... these kinds of things continue and persist because we only complain, we don’t take action. This has been on for a long time. We really should speak up, we shouldn’t just grumble and let it be or they will continue to treat us like children.