The recent decision by the Rivers State Waste Management Agency (RIWAMA) to reintroduce the monthly sanitation exercise has stirred a wave of mixed reactions among legal practitioners, activists, and residents.
RIWAMA Chairman, Dr. Samuel Nwanosike, recently announced that beginning this month, sanitation will hold from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. every last Saturday, with restrictions placed on both human and vehicular movement. The directive, however, has drawn sharp criticism from some lawyers who argue that it infringes on citizens’ rights.
Legal practitioner Chizi Ehi faulted the agency’s directive, insisting that both the High Court and the Court of Appeal have ruled against such restrictions. He questioned RIWAMA’s authority to issue movement passes even to essential workers.
“An issue of sanitation exercise ought not to be restricted. You can’t restrict people’s movement. Apart from the fact that there is no law permitting such, there are also judicial interpretations forbidding it. The High Court has given judgment, which was upheld by the Court of Appeal. So, what is the justification for restricting people’s movement?”
Similarly, another lawyer, Nnamzi Ekulo, described the directive as unconstitutional and unlawful, citing past judgments of the Federal High Court. He reminded RIWAMA of Justice Omotosho’s ruling in Barrister Prince Azubuike vs. Attorney General of Rivers State, RIWAMA, and Commissioner of Police, which declared the restriction of movement for sanitation purposes as illegal.
“The RIWAMA Act 2014 cannot be superior to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The Federal High Court has already ruled that such restrictions are unconstitutional. We should be guided by the law in whatever we do.”
On the other hand, environmental activist Onyekachi Okoro welcomed the reintroduction of the exercise, stressing that Rivers people must be reminded of their responsibility toward environmental cleanliness.
“It is important that people understand how vital a clean environment is. If the government has to enforce it, let them enforce it. The protection of the environment begins with individuals—from our compounds, quarters, and waste bins. I think the reintroduction of the sanitation is a welcome development.”
Okoro, however, advised RIWAMA to adopt a “human face” in enforcing the exercise. He argued against the use of plastic bags for waste disposal and instead suggested community-based enforcement, awareness campaigns, and fines for non-compliance.
“Enforcement of sanitation in households and compounds is very important. There should also be community involvement. If compounds fail to carry out sanitation, they should pay a little fine. With awareness and fair enforcement, participation will improve in subsequent exercises.”
The directive, therefore, continues to spark debate between those questioning its legality and those welcoming it as a much-needed measure to restore cleanliness in Rivers State.
