Our Reporter, Abuja
Human rights activist and constitutional lawyer, Abdul Mahmud, has knocked back the Bill aimed at barring Nigerian-trained medical and dental practitioners from travelling to foreign countries, describing it as “unconstitutional” and “discriminatory.”
The Bill, which passed for second reading on Thursday is sponsored by a member representing Oshodi Isolo II Federal Constituency in the House of Representatives, Ganiyu Abiodun Johnson.
It was titled, “A Bill for an Act to Amend the Medical and Dental Practitioners Act, Cap. M379, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 to mandate any Nigeria-trained Medical or Dental Practitioner to Practise in Nigeria for a Minimum of Five (5) before being granted a full licence by the Council in order to make Quality health Services available to Nigeria; and for Related Matters (HB.2130).”
The Bill according to its sponsor, Hon. Johnson, was proposed as part of effort to reduce the increasing number of doctors leaving Nigeria in search of better opportunities abroad.
He argued that it was fair for medical practitioners who had benefited from taxpayer subsidies to undergo mandatory service for a minimum number of years in Nigeria before taking their skills abroad.
But the former President of National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS) and human rights lawyer, Abdul Mahmud has objected to the bill, describing it as unconstitutional.
According to the rights activist, the bill seeks to not only compel doctors into a dehumanising arrangement but also violates their rights to dignity.
“Firstly, that the Bill is unconstitutional as it seeks not only to compel doctors into an arrangement that dehumanises them but also violates their right to dignity. Section 34 (1)(c) of the Constitution 1999 proscribes forced and or compulsory labour. To impose a five years rule on doctors is to compel them into an arrangement that’s akin to forced or compulsory labour.
“Secondly, It is also my view that the Bill is discriminatory as it singles out the medical profession. And it is against Section 42(1) (a) and (b) of the Constitution 1999,” he said.
The Lawyer further said the Bill was unnecessary as what it seeks has been addressed already by an existing law.
“Finally, the Bill is superfluous as it seeks to address something an existing legislation has already addressed.
“Sections 24, 36, 36, 37, 38, 38 and 40 of the Labour Act, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 already granted power to the National Council of Ministers to issue permit to Nigerians who are desirous to work overseas. The National Assembly cannot restrict trade and labour in the age of the regional and international labour conventions on the freedom of employment contract. It is ridiculous, Mahmud fumed.
He, however, said doctors and medical students can either challenge the Bill in court as “restrictive and discriminatory,” or appear at the public hearing of the Bill and oppose it.
