NIGERIA: Jonathan Returns State of the Nation Address Bill to National Assembly

0 0
Read Time:4 Minute, 12 Second

President Goodluck Jonathan  Tuesday, returned the ‘State of the Nation Address Bill’ passed by the National Assembly on May 13 and accused the parliament of using threat or coercive language, which he said, contravened the principle of separation of powers.

The president also asked the parliament to incorporate some proposals into the bill if at all it wants his assent on the bill.
However, the Senate  Tuesday said it would devote all its plenary sessions next week to deliberate and vote on the recent recommendations of the committee on the review of the 1999 Constitution as the upper chamber resumed legislative activities after two weeks of recess.

President Jonathan, in a letter addressed to the Senate President, Senator David Mark, and read on the floor of the Senate yesterday, described the bill as unnecessary, saying its intention had already been addressed in Section 67 of the 1999 Constitution.

Section 67 of 1999 Constitution (as amended) provides that “the president may attend any joint meeting of the National Assembly or any meeting of either house of the National Assembly either to deliver an address on national affairs including fiscal measures or to make such statement on policy of government as he considers to be of national importance.”

According to him, enacting a law on a subject matter that already exists in the constitution amounts to duplication of activities adding that the bill only sought “to circumscribe the president’s discretion regarding whether or not he should attend the joint meeting of the National Assembly or of any meeting of either House of the National Assembly.”

He also said the bill was too prescriptive because it fixed the time of the address, determined the policy of government that was of national importance “in addition to the threat of the use of coercive powers in the event of non-compliance.”

“This in my view is inconsistent with the doctrine of separation of powers and the spirit and letters of the constitution,” he stated.

President Jonathan suggested that if he was expected to assent to the bill, the lawmakers ought to incorporate clauses, which would allow him to present the address within 30 days of the commencement of the legislative year, as against the provision compelling the president to present the address at the beginning of every legislative year in July.

He also asked the parliament to amend Clause 3 of the bill, which empowers the National Assembly to summon the president should he decide not to present the address as at when due and equally rules out the possibility of the president delegating the assignment to any of his subordinates.

Based on this, the president, therefore, proposed a new amendment to the clause that would state that “where for any reason, the president is unable to present an address in accordance with Section 1 of the Act, the president shall in writing inform the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives and either  designate the vice president to present the address on his behalf or transmit to the president of the Senate and the Speaker of House of Representatives, the text of the address.”

He also sought amendment to clause 5 of the bill which states that “the National Assembly shall have powers to regulate its procedure as regards the provision of this bill including the procedure for summoning the president to address the state of the nation,” stressing that it should rather read thus: “The National Assembly shall have power to regulate its procedure with respect to the provisions of the Act.”

Meanwhile, Mark, while encouraging his colleagues to brace up for the forthcoming debate, restated that voting on the report would not be done by voice vote but “every man will answer his father’s name.”

The Senate President also listed issues that would top legislative agenda this session to include the Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB), review of the Electoral Act 2010, consideration and passage of Pension Reforms Act (Amendment) Bill as well as moves to avert flooding during this rainy season.

Mark, who also said the escalating oil theft in the country, which according to him, had had an adverse effect on the economy, stated that the issue would be addressed through the prescribing of capital punishment for anyone found culpable in the act.
He said tackling these issues “calls for renewed devotion, commitment and statesmanship.”

Mark said: “I have no doubt that the seventh Senate will be judged by how well we have tackled the items on the present legislative agenda. If we get it right and I am sure we will, we shall succeed in turning adversity into profound opportunity for our countrymen and women and fundamentally alter our collective destiny. We pledge to stand by the Nigerian people at all times and in all circumstances. This is the least we can and must do.”

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %

NIGERIA: FG, Senate Express Displeasure over UK Visa Bond

0 0
Read Time:8 Minute, 22 Second

The federal government and the Senate have registered their strong displeasure with the planned visa policy of the United Kingdom which would require first time visitors from Nigeria to deposit a £3,000 bond which they would forfeit if they do not abide by the terms of their visa.

This is just as the United States Government has confirmed that security challenges bedevilling the nation are to blame for Nigeria’s exclusion from President Barack Obama’s three-nation shuttle to Africa.

The federal government also requested that the discriminatory policy be reconsidered, as it was inconsistent with the strong relationship built over the years between the two countries.

Britain, however, said no final decision has been reached on the yet-to-be-implemented policy, which also targets nationals of India, Pakistan, Ghana, Bangladesh and other “high risk countries” as the plan was leaked to the media.

Nigeria’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador Olugbenga Ashiru, met with the British High Commissioner to Nigeria, Dr. Andrew Pocock, at the ministry’s headquarters in Abuja yesterday and pointed out that the people-to-people relationship between the two countries would be jeopardised.

He emphasised that the federal government has the responsibility to protect the interest of Nigerians who may be affected by the policy if it is introduced.

In a statement released after the meeting, Ashiru noted that the proposed policy would negate the joint commitment by Prime Minister David Cameron and President Goodluck Jonathan to double the volume of bilateral trade between the two countries by 2014.

Ashiru, according to the statement, also pointed out that the decision was being taken at a time when the Commonwealth Foreign Ministers had unanimously recommended the adoption of a proposal to waive visa requirements for holders of official and diplomatic passports from member states at the upcoming Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in Colombo, Sri Lanka, later this year.

“The minister recalled with nostalgia, the times when nationals of the Commonwealth travelled freely to the UK and to other member states. This, no doubt, deepened the strong historical bonds between the peoples of the various countries who were all regarded at that time as Commonwealth citizens.

“He further recalled that this time-honoured practice was unilaterally jettisoned by the UK government in 1985, thereby weakening the bonds of the Commonwealth family,” the statement read.

But the British High Commissioner to Nigeria, Pocock, in a statement issued by the High Commission, said no final decision had been taken as details of the pilot scheme of the policy, which would be undertaken on a very small scale, were still being worked out.

Pocock, however, noted that if the policy were to go ahead in Nigeria, it would affect a small number of the highest risk visitors and most applicants would not be required to pay the bond.
“Those who pay the bond would receive their money back if they do not abuse the terms of their visa,” he clarified.

“The British government has announced that it intends to undertake a very small scale trial of the use of financial bonds as a way of tackling abuse in the immigration system (which occurs when some people overstay their visa terms).

“Let me put this in perspective.  Over 180,000 Nigerians apply to visit the UK each year. About 70 per cent or around 125,000, of those applicants are successful.
“Travel between our two countries is a key part of our strong cultural and business relationship. Financial bonds would be focused on only a tiny minority of potential abusers.

“It would NOT be a ‘£3,000 visa charge’ as some media reporting has alleged,” Pocock added.

The envoy said the Nigerian government and the public would be fully informed as soon as more details on the policy have been decided.

The proposed policy has generated a lot of anger from Nigerians, many of who took to the social media to express their disgust at what they consider the disdainful regard for Nigerians in spite of the longstanding historical, cultural and business ties between the two nations.

A highly-placed government official, in an off-record discussion with THISDAY, said Britain was simply looking for revenue to keep its economy afloat and was now looking to immigration, which is a source of revenue owing to the high number of visitors that the country receives each year.

The UK recently increased its visa applications fees and fees for all immigration status.

“The UK makes a lot of money from Nigerian visitors alone, add that to what they make from Indians and Pakistanis who also travel a lot, that is a lot for their economy.

“Imagine if they collect that bond from 500,000 people every six months, they would put it to good use for their own economy and of course, they would not refund it with any interest after the owner has returned to his country without exceeding his stay,” the source said.
The source derided the policy, which he described as exploitative, as a visitor may have his bond automatically seized if he decided to leave Britain on the last day of his visa and suddenly encountered unforeseen circumstances.

“If they go ahead with this and all the mentioned countries gang up against them and shun travel to their country, or even shun studying in their country, the country stands to lose a lot.

“They treat us with disdain, but they vigorously advertise their schools and offer various study incentives to our people, because they need our money.

“It would encourage Nigerians to seek out other holiday destinations; imagine having to deposit  £3,000 per person by a family of four that wants to go on holiday. There are more pleasurable and less expensive holiday destinations,” he said.

In the Senate’s reaction to the proposed policy, Senate Leader, Senator Victor Ndoma-Egba, yesterday said Nigeria had the option of reciprocating the UK’s plan to place a £3,000 bond on Nigerians seeking entry into the country.

“Reciprocity is not an option lost to us (Nigerians),” Ndoma-Egba said.
He said if the UK insists on implementing the plan, Nigeria might be left with no option than to also compel travellers from Britain to do the same.

He also disclosed that the Senate leadership had written the president requesting “areas of priority” in the 2013 Budget Amendment Bill that was submitted to the National Assembly on March 14.

He, however, said the Senate was yet to receive any response from the president, a factor, which he said, contributed to the delay in legislation on the amendment.

“The Senate leadership has written President Goodluck Jonathan and we are waiting to receive areas of priority in the amended 2013 budget,” he said.

In the meantime, the United States government has confirmed that security challenges bedevilling the nation were to blame for Nigeria’s exclusion from President Obama’s three-nation shuttle to Africa.

But the exclusion will not affect bilateral relations between the US and Nigeria.
The US government said the trip would focus on trade and investment, democratic institution-building, young people, and unleashing economic growth.
The clarification was made at a briefing by the US Deputy National Security Advisor, Ben Rhodes.

The briefing was addressed jointly by the Senior Director for African Affairs Grant Harris and Senior Director for Development and Democracy Gayle Smith, on President Obama’s upcoming visit to Senegal, South Africa and Tanzania.

The text of the briefing was made available to journalists in Abuja yesterday by the Information Office of the Public Affairs Section of the U.S Embassy.

Rhodes said: “With respect to Nigeria, we certainly believe that Nigeria is a fundamentally important country to the future of Africa. We’ve put a lot of investment in the relationship with Nigeria through their leadership of ECOWAS, through the significant US business investment in Nigeria and through our security cooperation.

“Obviously, Nigeria is working through some very challenging security issues right now. And in that process, they’re going to be a partner of the United States.

“We certainly believe we’ll have an opportunity to further engage the Nigerian government through bilateral meetings going forward. But at this point, we just were not able to make it to Nigeria on this particular itinerary.

“I will say that we purposefully designed the itineraries to be able to reach West Africa, South Africa and East Africa, and in West Africa, to visit Senegal, a French-speaking, Muslim-majority democracy that is an important partner of the United States and also provides a platform for the president to speak to the broader region.

“We are also looking at ways, at the president’s town hall meeting in South Africa with young African leaders, to draw in through technology young people in Nigeria and in Kenya, among other places, so that the president is using this trip to speak to the broader African audience. We recognise we’d like to go to as many countries as possible.

“Time only permits us to go to these three. But we want to make sure that in each country we’re speaking to the broader region. And we’re going to make use of technology and other means to do so.

“And to the middle question, the Africans who have been frustrated — look, I think it points back to Andrea’s first question. This is a region that, frankly, has been underrepresented in our travel.
“And for all these questions of why the president is going to Africa, I think the question that we’ve been getting is why hasn’t the president been in Africa more?”

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %

NIGERIA 2015: INEC Presents Draft Guidelines to Political Parties

0 0
Read Time:2 Minute, 21 Second

As preparations for the 2015 general election gather momentum, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)  Tuesday presented the draft guidelines for the conduct of the elections to the registered political parties.

The draft guidelines stipulated that it is only national chairmen and national secretaries of political parties that would have the right to sign the nomination forms of the candidates for elections.

Speaking at the quarterly meeting between INEC and the representatives of the registered political parties in Abuja, the commission’s chairman, Prof. Attahiru Jega, said the early presentation of the document to the political parties was for them to go through and point out observations where necessary ahead of the final copy which would be duly signed and becomes operational for the smooth conduct of the polls.

Jega said the draft guidelines was the product of the input received from the representatives of the registered political parties and those of the commission all put together towards organising the best elections come 2015.

He said the meeting was summoned to brief the political parties till the steps being taken on the production of permanent voter cards and the innovations the commission was introducing to authenticate genuine voters during the elections time.

According to him, “it is important to continue to brief you as the journey progresses so that you can in turn enlighten your members and the general public at large, as we hold the meeting regularly, we will take inputs from you to be included in the agenda of discussions."

While assuring stakeholders that the commission would continue to be transparent in all its dealings towards making the 2015 more credible and acceptable to all and sundry,  Jega promised that the commission was committed towards improving upon its activities.

He promised to unveil the sample of the permanent voter cards to the representatives of the political parties during the course of the meeting
Commenting on the INEC draft guidelines, the APGA national chairman, Victor Umeh, said that the meeting summarized the rules and procedures between INEC and the political parties and other details regarding the 2015 general election like the release of the Permanent Voters Card (PVC).

For instance, Umeh said the sample of the PVC shown to the political parties has an automatic finger system that will make rigging and multiple voting impossible.

Under the draft guidelines, Umeh said that INEC made it mandatory that it is only the national chairmen and national secretaries of political parties that would nominate candidates for the general election. The other aspect of the draft guidelines, he is how to train the polling agents during the election.

The APGA national chairman explained that INEC will today unfold the other strategic plans that would make the 2015 general election to be transparent, free and fair.

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %

Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF) : Lawyers Clash over Jang’s Representation

0 0
Read Time:3 Minute, 44 Second

The crisis over who is the de facto chairman of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF) took a new dimension  Tuesday, in the courtroom when senior lawyers disagreed over who was actually briefed by the clients.

The disagreement among lawyers over who should represent Governor Jonah Jang of Plateau State and two others eventually stalled proceedings in the suit filed by Lagos State Governor, Mr.  Babatunde Fashola, seeking to stop Jang from parading himself as the chairman of the NGF.

Fashola had sued Jang following the crisis generated by the NGF's election in which the Rivers State Governor, Chibuike Amaechi, defeated Jang after polling 19 votes as against Jang’s 16 votes.

Fashola is seeking among others, an order restraining Jang from parading himself as chairman of the forum on the grounds that Amaechi won the election.
He is also asking for an order restraining Osaro Onaiwu from acting as the forum's sole administrator.

The defendants include Jang, Asishana Bayo Okauru, the forum's director general, Onaiwu and the forum’s registered trustees.

However, when the matter came up yesterday, two Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) Paul Erokoro and Tayo Oyetibo, disagreed over who should represent Jang and Onaiwu.

A similar disagreement between Awa Kalu (SAN) and F.N. Nwosu, on who should represent the registered trustees stalled proceedings.

At the mention of the case, Professor Yemi Osinbajo (SAN), accompanied by Mr. Femi Falana (SAN), announced appearance for the plaintiff.

Oyetibo, accompanied by Matthew Burkaa, announced appearance for Jang and Onaiwu. Erokoro also announced for the same parties.

While Kalu announced for Okauru and the trustees, Nwosu also announced appearance for the trustees.

But the claims by Oyetibo and Erokoro as appearing separately for Jang and Onaiwu, and Kalu and Nwosu appearing separately for the trustees, sparked an argument that lasted about 30 minutes, with each lawyer claiming to have been validly instructed.

At some point, Osinbajo opposed the suggestion that the case be stood down for sometime to enable the lawyers sort themselves out.
He urged the court to strike out the processes filed for Jang and the trustees because the filing of two different processes for a party amounted to an abuse of the court process. “This is the same confusion in the governors' forum,” he noted.

However, the trial judge, Justice Peter Affen, said it had not reached the stage where the documents filed separately by the two sets of lawyers for Jang and the trustees would be struck out. He advised the lawyers to resolve the disagreement amicably.

The judge said: “We are in the spotlight again, both the bar and the bench. We should not allow acts that will further erode our credibility.

“Let us not be caught by the problem of the governors' forum. They did not resolve their problem amicably, that is why we are here. We should amicably resolve ours.”
In a short ruling afterwards, the judge held that there was an obvious conflict in the representation of the first (Jang), third (Onaiwu) and the fourth (the trustees) defendants.

“I will grant an adjournment to enable the counsels resolve this conflict,” the judge held and adjourned to July 3.
However, it was learnt that Oyetibo and Erokoro would team up to represent Jang and Onaiwu.

Impeccable sources within the Jang-led faction said the confusion in legal representation was caused by some loyalists to the Plateau governor, who briefed Erokoro on behalf of Jang.   
       
The source said the matter had been resolved with Oyetibo as the lead counsel.   
Jang and Onaiwu have filed preliminary objections and statement of defence to the suit.

They had asked the court to dismiss the suit on the grounds that the court lacked the jurisdiction to hear it, that the suit was frivolous, and that the plaintiff lacked the necessary right to sue.

Jang, who gave details of what transpired at the May 24 meeting of the NGF, insisted that he remained the forum’s true leader.

Jang had argued that since Fashola did not contest the election for the NGF chairmanship, he lacked the legal right to institute or sustain the action.
According to him, Amaechi whom Fashola claimed won the election had not complained to the court that his mandate had been usurped neither was he joined as party to the suit.

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %

APC: Akande, Masari, el-Rufai, Others Emerge Interim National Officers

0 0
Read Time:1 Minute, 47 Second

The Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) has confirmed that its national chairman, Chief Bisi Akande, will serve as the interim national chairman of the yet-to-be-registered All Progressives Congress (APC), while Alhaji Lai Muhammed and Dr. Muiz Banire will serve as the acting national publicity secretary and acting national legal adviser for APC respectively.

In the list of nominees adopted Monday night by the merging opposition parties, other positions yet to be filled by the ACN include the deputy national treasurer, deputy national youth leader, two vice-chairmen and two ex-officio members.

Meanwhile, the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) has nominated a former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Alhaji Aminu Masari, to serve as the interim deputy national chairman (north) for APC.

Similarly, CPC nominated former Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Mallam Nasiru el-Rufai, as the acting deputy national secretary, while James Ocholi got the position of deputy legal adviser.

THISDAY gathered that the case of Mrs. Sadiya Farouq whose nomination as the national treasurer almost pitted her against the national chairman of the CPC, Chief Tony Momoh, was amicably resolved in her favour.

Other officers nominated as APC interim leaders include, the National Women’s Leader, Mrs. Sharon Chiazor; National Youth Leader, Mr. A. Lado; National Vice-Chairman (North-central), retired General Abdullahi Aboki; and National Deputy Auditor, Captain Bala Jibril.
Apart from the national secretary of All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP), Alhaji Tijani Musa Tunmsa, who has been chosen to serve in an interim capacity for the merging party, ANPP is yet to formally fill the remaining slots allocated to it.

It was further learnt that the factions of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) and the Democratic Peoples Party (DPP), which are also parties to the merger arrangement, got the posts of national organising secretary and national auditor respectively.

Apart from the national organisisng secretary, APGA also got the post of deputy national chairman (south), deputy national financial secretary, deputy national women’s leader, one vice-chairman, and one ex-officio member; while DPP got the posts of deputy national secretary and national auditor.

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %

Gay Marriage Ruling Forces Pastor into Disagreeable Choice

0 0
Read Time:2 Minute, 4 Second

COMMENTARY | I love this country. I love my faith. I relish the principles of freedom Americans share. I also love the fact we can peacefully coexist in an environment of individualism. Presenting ideas and ideologies, winning each other to opposing views is what freedom is all about.

California's Proposition 8 and the federal DOMA law are two such examples. As late as 2008, the majority of Americans agreed with these measures. However, according to Gallup, that support has eroded. Ideologists have successfully changed the minds of many Americans.

Apparently, the Supreme Court has chosen to agree.

I'm a 55-year-old minister of a small evangelical church in Southern California, specifically Placentia, right in the heart of a conservative bastion. With my faith and beliefs, one would think I'd be at home living in this part of the country, but the Supreme Court's decision changes that. A cornerstone of my faith is the foundation of my church's belief system — the Bible. And while I acknowledge there are countless disagreements over interpretation of the Bible, my faith tells me marriage is defined as union between a man and woman — not just two consenting adults — essentially agreeing with Proposition 8. My congregation follows and adheres to the judgments of the same faith.

I am at a crossroad: Do I preach on my faith's traditional definition of marriage or do I conform to the modern evolution mandated through the courts? I'm pressed to choose between love for my faith and my love for my country — a simple, but difficult choice.

In fact, the issue can get even more complicated in the future. Since the courts have chosen to define a same-sex union as marriage, there's been some question in California as to whether public opposition from the pulpit is considered to be "hate speech," according to SB 1234, legislation passed 2004. If a pastor cannot legally voice his concerns on a moral subject, it makes it all the more difficult for ministers to win back the hearts of the populace.

Freedom of speech has the potential of being lost in the land of equality. And the quandary for pastors becomes greater in regard to speaking on the convictions of their faith. The Supreme Court's ruling favoring same-sex marriage forces pastors like me to make a disagreeable choice: love of faith or love of country?

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %

Pope names commission of inquiry into Vatican bank

0 0
Read Time:5 Minute, 27 Second

VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Francis' new commission of inquiry into the troubled Vatican bank has a brand new money-laundering case to look into: How a Holy See monsignor withdrew more than a half-million euros in charitable donations from the bank without any flags being raised, walked out of Vatican City with the cash, and then used the money to pay off his personal mortgage.

The case of Monsignor Nunzio Scarano is just one example of how lax norms and incompetence, if not more serious shortcomings at the Institute for Religious Works, or IOR, have sullied the Vatican's reputation in international financial circles and made it a target for Francis' clean-up and reform campaign.

Francis on Wednesday announced the creation of a commission of inquiry to look into the IOR's activities and legal status "to allow for a better harmonization with the universal mission of the Apostolic See," according to the legal document he signed creating it.

It was the second time in as many weeks that Francis has intervened to get information out of the IOR, a secretive institution best known for the scandals it has caused the Vatican. On June 15, he filled a key vacancy in the bank's governing structure, tapping a trusted prelate to be his eyes inside the bank.

Francis named five people to the commission, including two Americans: Monsignor Peter Wells, a top official in the Vatican secretariat of state, and Mary Ann Glendon, a Harvard law professor, former U.S. ambassador to the Holy See and current president of a pontifical academy.

American cardinals were among the most vocal in demanding a wholesale reform of the Vatican bureaucracy — and the Vatican bank — in the meetings outlining the priorities for the new pope in the run-up to the March conclave that elected Francis. The demands were raised following revelations in leaked documents last year that told of dysfunction, petty turf wars and allegations of corruption in the Holy See's governance.

Francis, who has made clear he has no patience for corruption and wants a "poor" church, has already named a separate commission of cardinals to advise him on the broader question of reforming the Vatican bureaucracy as a whole.

The Vatican bank was founded in 1942 by Pope Pius XII to manage assets destined for religious or charitable works. Located in a tower just inside the gates of Vatican City, it also manages the pension system for the Vatican's thousands of employees.

The bank commission's members have authority to gather documents, data and information about the bank's legal status and activities, even overriding normal secrecy rules to do so. Members can receive information from anyone in the Vatican bureaucracy as well as people who spontaneously volunteer information, and the commission can refer to outside advisers if necessary, according to the terms.

The commission will report back to Francis — presumably with both information and recommendations — and then will be dissolved, the document states. No timeframe was given but the commission is to start working soon.

The bank's daily management and activities continues unchanged.

The announcement came as the Vatican faces a new embarrassment involving the bank: Prosecutors in the southern city of Salerno have placed Scarano, an accountant in one of the Vatican's key finance offices, the Administration for the Patrimony of the Apostolic See, under investigation for alleged money-laundering stemming from his IOR account.

Scarano's attorney, Silverio Sica, told The Associated Press that the investigation concerns transactions Scarano made in 2009 in which he took 560,000 euros ($729,000) in cash out of his personal IOR bank account and carried it out of the Vatican and into Italy to help pay off a mortgage on his Salerno home.

To deposit the money into an Italian bank account — and to prevent family members from finding out he had such a large chunk of cash — he asked 56 close friends to accept 10,000 euros apiece in cash in exchange for a check or money transfer in the same amount, Sica said in a telephone interview. Scarano was then able to deposit the amounts in his Italian account.

"The money came from the Vatican. He wanted to bring it into Italy. He was advised to do it in this way," Sica said.

The original money came into Scarano's IOR account from donors who gave it to the prelate thinking they were funding a home for the terminally ill in Salerno, Sica said. He said the donors had "enormous" wealth and could offer such donations for his charitable efforts.

He said Scarano had given the names of the donors to prosecutors and insisted the origin of the money was clean, that the transactions didn't constitute money-laundering, and that he only took the money "temporarily" for his personal use.

The home for terminally ill hasn't been built, though the property has been identified, Sica said.

"He declares himself absolutely innocent," Sica said.

The Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, confirmed Wednesday that Scarano had been suspended temporarily from his job and that the Vatican's financial watchdog agency, known by its acronym AIF, was "aware of the case and is taking — if and where appropriate — the necessary measures."

Italian daily Corriere della Sera reported over the weekend that the Bank of Italy had flagged the case to the AIF, seeking information about Scarano's IOR account as part of the Salerno probe. Lombardi didn't respond when asked why the IOR itself didn't flag such unusually large cash withdrawals back in 2009.

There have long been questions about just what the IOR actually is and does — questions which the commission presumably will try to iron out for Francis. Vatican officials have long insisted it's not even a bank, since it doesn't perform key banking activities like making loans.

It does however take deposits, transfer money and invest for its clients, who include Vatican officials, members of religious orders and diplomats accredited to the Holy See. The bank performs asset management services that in 2012 helped earn it 86.6 million euros in profit on 7.1 billion euros in total assets under management.

Follow us at www.twitter.com/codewit

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %

Prince Jackson Testifies in Court, Opens Up About Dad Michael Jackson’s Death

0 0
Read Time:2 Minute, 27 Second

On Wednesday, June 26 — four years and one day after Michael Jackson's sudden, shocking death — the late singer's eldest son, 16-year-old Prince, took the stand to testify in his family's wrongful death lawsuit against AEG Live. During his testimony, the teen recalled often seeing his father upset and in tears after conversations with AEG Live CEO Randy Phillips.

"He would get off the phone, [and] he would cry sometimes," Prince, who was 12 when Jackson passed away at age 50, told jurors in the Los Angeles courtroom, per Reuters. "He would say, 'They're gonna kill me. They're gonna kill me.'"

PHOTOS: Michael Jackson and his kids

The teen added that his dad was unable to stand up for himself during these disagreements. "He was like my grandma," Prince explained. "He was too kind to fight anybody."

According to Reuters, Prince showed little emotion on the stand until he was asked to recall the day of Jackson's death. He testified that he and his siblings — sister Paris, 15, and Blanket, 11 — were at home in L.A. when they heard a scream from the second floor.

PHOTOS: Michael Jackson's most unforgettable moments

"I ran upstairs and I saw Dr. Conrad [Murray] doing CPR on my dad on the bed," he said. "My dad was hanging halfway off the bed, and his eyes were rolled back in his head. My sister was screaming the whole time, saying she wants her daddy. I was waiting at the bottom of the stairs, crying, waiting for the ambulance."

The teen went on to talk about the emotional toll that his father's death had taken on him and his brother and sister. "I have a hard time sleeping," he explained. "I became emotionally distant from a lot of people."

PHOTOS: Michael Jackson through the years

His sister Paris — who was recently hospitalized after an apparent suicide attempt — took it even worse. "I think out of all of our siblings, she was probably hit the hardest because she was my dad's princess," Prince testified. "It hurt a lot, and she definitely is dealing with it in her own way."

The lawsuit — in which Prince, Paris, and Blanket are all plaintiffs alongside their grandmother Katherine Jackson — alleges that AEG Live (the concert promoter for Michael's final This Is It tour) is liable in the singer's death because it hired and ultimately supervised Dr. Conrad Murray, the doctor who is now behind bars for involuntary manslaughter. Now in its ninth week, the trial is expected to last until August.

This article originally appeared on Usmagazine.com: Prince Jackson Testifies in Court, Opens Up About Dad Michael Jackson's Death

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %

Supreme Court finds Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional

0 0
Read Time:1 Minute, 20 Second
I

n a historic decision, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that the federal Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional.

By a tight 5-4 vote, the court struck down the law, which since 1996 has barred the federal government from legally recognizing and extending benefits to same-sex couples.

"DOMA singles out a class of persons deemed by a State entitled to recognition and protection to enhance their own liberty," the court wrote in the majority opinion.

Justice Anthony Kennedy joined Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsburg, and Breyer in voting to strike down the law. Chief Justice John Roberts, as well as Justices Alito, Thomas, and Scalia voted against.

In a sweeping ruling, the court said that the federal government could no longer discriminate against same-sex couples. In his majority opinion, Kennedy framed the issue as one of liberty and equality, saying that to deny same-sex couples equal protection under the law was a violation of the Fifth Amendment.

"The power the Constitution grants it also restrains," Kennedy wrote. "And though Congress has great authority to design laws to fit its own conception of sound national policy, it cannot deny the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment."

This is a huge victory for gay rights activists, and in particular for Edith Windsor, the New York woman who brought the initial lawsuit that challenged DOMA's constitutionality.

Windsor, who challenged the federal government's refusal to recognize her 42-year marriage to her late wife, Thea Spyer, celebrated outside the Supreme Court Wednesday.

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %

Mandela’s Family Vows to Continue His Treatment

0 0
Read Time:2 Minute, 59 Second

Former South African president, Nelson Mandela's eldest daughter, Makaziwe Mandela, said  Tuesday her family would continue to give medication to the former president, who is now in a critical condition in hospital.

The 94-year-old has been in hospital in Pretoria for 18 days and his condition has worsened in the past 24 hours.

Makaziwe Mandela revealed her father was still fighting on, and said: “In our culture, the Tembu culture, that I know, the African culture that I know, you never release the person unless the person has told you please my children, my family release me.

“My dad hasn’t said that to us. So these people who want to talk about, you know, release him, he hasn’t said we should release him and we haven’t come to the end yet.
“It is only God who knows the end,” the express.co.uk quoted her as saying after a family meeting.

In another interview with CNN, Makaziwe said: “Yes, I believe he is at peace. He is at peace with himself. He has given so much to the world; I believe he is at peace.”
South African President Jacob Zuma said Mandela is being made “comfortable” by doctors, after he paid a visit to the former president in hospital.

Zuma called on South Africans to pray for Mandela, and told journalists the former president was asleep when he saw him.

Tensions between the South African government and the media have escalated in recent days after the government's belated acknowledgement that an ambulance carrying Mandela to the hospital on June 8 broke down.

As a result, Zuma refused to give details of Mandela's condition, but said: “Madiba [Mandela's clan name] is critical in the hospital, and this is the father of democracy.
“This is the man who fought and sacrificed his life to stay in prison, the longest-serving prisoner in South Africa.”
Mandela, who became South Africa's first black president after the end of apartheid in 1994, was hospitalised for what the government said was a recurring lung infection. This is his fourth hospitalisation since December.

Mandela was jailed for 27 years under white racist rule and was released in 1990. He then played a leading role in steering the divided country from the apartheid era to an all-race democracy.

“Nelson Mandela, for me, is like my father,” Alex Siake, a South African, said in Pretoria. “Every day, I just pray that he can recover quickly and be among us again.”
The Democratic Alliance, South Africa's main opposition party, said in a statement the news that Mandela was in critical condition came “as a blow to all South Africans.”

Asked why none of Mandela's doctors had not been made available for a news briefing, presidential spokesman Mac Maharaj said an arrangement had been made in consultation with Mandela's family whereby information would be provided through a “single source in an authoritative way.

“We've come to that arrangement on the basis that we need to respect the privacy of the family, we need to adhere to doctor-patient confidentiality.
“You can be assured that what we are saying is based on an agreement with the doctors.”

Doctors approve the text of announcements on Mandela's health, and believe some media reporting has transgressed professional ethics, he said.

About Post Author

Anthony-Claret Ifeanyi Onwutalobi

Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Happy
0 0 %
Sad
0 0 %
Excited
0 0 %
Sleepy
0 0 %
Angry
0 0 %
Surprise
0 0 %