Connect with us

News and Report

JOHESU AND NIGERIAN GOVERNMENT VS NMA HEALTH BATTLE: THIS IS THE CONCLUSION OF THE MATTER

Published

on

 

By: Fejiro Oliver

The equal right of all citizens to health, education, work, food, security, culture, science, and wellbeing – that is, the same rights we proclaimed when we began our struggle, in addition to those which emerge from our dreams of justice and equality for all inhabitants of our world – is what I wish for all.

Fidel Castro

This is a long write-up for intellectuals who can research and not those who dwell in shallow arguments.
For two years, I purposely stayed away from writing as an individual on issues that bothered about the health sector in Nigeria, to enable me research on the true international best practices and come out with an informed and none bias position.
Apart from education and defense, the most important aspect of a country is its health sector. Sadly enough, the sector in Nigeria has been bedeviled by animosity and fierce battle between the two prominent groups, namely; Joint Health Sector Union (JOHESU) and the Nigerian Medical Association (NMA).
JOHESU consists of all workers in the hospitals apart from Physicians and Dentists who make up NMA. I have decided to skip the word ‘doctor’ for a reason, which will be explained later. Nigeria is currently shut down with death toll rising every twenty four hours since JOHESU embarked on their strike last week. Despite the Federal Government refusal to pay them April salaries, they are bent on not going to work, until their demands are met.
The argument from both sides is reasonable, depending on the prism through which one views it. JOHESU is insisting that the FG honors all the agreement it reached with them, especially as it has to do with allowing their members to reach consultancy level, upward review of the CONHESS salary as agreed with FG, retirement age at 65 and few others. NMA on the other hand believes that the increment in salary for JOHESU will place them at par. They have also fought some JOHESU professionals from attaining consultancy status as well as using the prefix ‘Doctor’ before their name.
First of all, who is a Doctor? The word was never a medical word from origin. It is a Latin word from 1300, which means “Church father,” from Old French doctour, from Medieval Latin doctor “religious teacher, adviser, scholar,” in classical Latin “teacher,” agent noun from docere “to show, teach, cause to know,” originally “make to appear right,” causative of decere “be seemly, fitting,” from PIE root dek- “to take, accept”, as defined by etymonline. When the art of healing came into serious practice, the word ‘Doctor’ was used to replace the word ‘leech’, which they were initially called.
It therefore brings us to the argument on those entitled to use the suffix ‘Dr’ before their names in the health sector. First of all, it’s an acceptable fact that no one went to school to study ‘doctoring’. Unlike Engineers who derived their title from their course of study, this is not entirely so in the health sector. In the school of health or school of medicine, as it’s called in different universities, the courses are Medicine, Pharmacy, Dentistry, Nursing, Medical Rehabilitation or Physical Medicine, Radiography, Medical Laboratory and Optometry. None of these courses is called Doctoring.
The word Doctor came to be associated with the art of healing in the medieval period and were initially called Physician and still called so till date. With the advent of Doctor of Philosophy which is the highest level associated with teaching, it later became ascribed to those saddled with the art of healing. The question now bothers to who is a healer in the health profession and who is a paramedic; a degrading word that has been used many times by Nigerian Physicians to spite other medical workers, who retaliates by calling them Allopathic officers.
In line with international best practices, only the World Health Organisation (WHO) not World Medical Association and International Labor Organisation (ILO) can define the meaning of every profession. In listing structures for each worker, all professionals were listed as ‘Health Professionals’ and not ‘Medical Professionals’. They were divided into two health groups for easy recognition. The first group listed:
Medical Doctors (Generalist Medical Practitioners and Specialist Medical Practitioners), Nursing and Midwifery Professionals, Traditional and Complementary Medicine Professionals, ***Paramedical Practitioners and Veterinarians
The second group listed Dentists, Pharmacists, Environmental and Occupational Health and Hygiene Professionals, Physiotherapists, Dieticians and Nutritionists, Audiologists and Speech Therapists, Optometrists and Ophthalmic Opticians and Health Professionals Not Elsewhere Classified.
Note that Dentists which is a member of NMA is in the second category and Paramedics in the first category, according to International best practices that we like to flout.
Let us take a look at WHO definition of these core workers in the health sector.
According to WHO, ‘a Generalist medical doctors (including family and primary care doctors) diagnose, TREAT and prevent illness, disease, injury, and other physical and mental impairments and maintain general health in humans through application of the principles and procedures of modern medicine. They plan, supervise and evaluate the implementation of care and treatment plans by other health care providers. They do not limit their practice to certain disease categories or methods of treatment, and may assume responsibility for the provision of continuing and comprehensive medical care to individuals, families and communities’.
Same WHO notes that ‘Nursing professionals provide TREATMENT, support and care services for people who are in need of nursing care due to the effects of ageing, injury, illness or other physical or mental impairment, or potential risks to health, according to the practice and standards of modern nursing. They assume responsibility for the planning and management of the care of patients, including the supervision of other health care workers, working autonomously or in teams with medical doctors and others in the practical application of preventive and curative measures in clinical and community settings’.
Going down to traditional level, WHO was direct when it stated that ‘Traditional and complementary medicine professionals examine patients and prevent and TREAT illness, disease, injury and other physical, mental and psychosocial ailments by applying knowledge, skills and practices acquired through extensive study of the theories and experiences originating in specific cultures. They research, develop and implement treatment plans using applications such as acupuncture, ayurvedic, homoeopathic and herbal medicine’.
For Dentists, the world body noted that ‘Dentists (including dental surgeons and related) diagnose, TREAT and prevent diseases, injuries and abnormalities of the teeth, mouth, jaws and associated tissues by applying the principles and procedures of modern dentistry. They use a broad range of specialized diagnostic, surgical and other techniques to promote and restore oral health’.
According to its supreme definition, ‘Pharmacists store, preserve, compound and dispense medicinal products. They counsel on the proper use and adverse effects of drugs and medicines following prescriptions issued by medical doctors and other health professionals. They contribute to researching, testing, preparing, prescribing and monitoring medicinal therapies for optimizing human health’
For Physiotherapists, WHO didn’t mince word saying that ‘Physiotherapists assess, plan and implement rehabilitative programs that improve or restore human motor functions, maximize movement ability, relieve pain syndromes, and treat or prevent physical challenges associated with injuries, diseases and other impairments. They apply a broad range of physical therapies and techniques such as movement, ultrasound, heating, laser and other techniques. They may develop and implement programmes for screening and prevention of common physical ailments and disorders. ILO in classifying their job stated that “Physiotherapists and related associate professionals TREAT disorders of bones, muscles and parts of the circulatory or the nervous system by manipulative methods, and ultrasound, heating, laser or similar techniques, or apply physiotherapy and related therapies as part of the treatment for the physically disabled, mentally ill or unbalanced.

For Optometrists, the world body says Optometrists and ophthalmic opticians provide diagnosis, management and TREATMENT services for disorders of the eyes and visual system. They counsel and advise on eye care and safety, and prescribe optical aids or other therapies for visual disturbance.
While this may sound as a thesis, I will leave out what the sacred definition of WHO and ILO gave to the two eyes of medicine, notably Radiography and Medical Laboratory. The reader can Google it up.
By this definition, five professions TREAT sicknesses and disorders and one provides the drugs or body gel they prescribe, while two gives a clearer picture of the diagnosis through tests and imaging.
They are General Practitioner called Medical Doctor, Traditional or complimentary medicine practitioners/Homeopathy, Dentists, Nurses, Optometrists and Physiotherapists. Nursing being a unique and distinct profession cannot be called Doctors, but the rest whose primary duties is to diagnose treat and certify fit can be called Doctor if their regulatory body so wish.
On consultancy status, it is criminal for a profession to demand for such almighty position simply because of the years spent in service and not by merit. It’s akin to saying a lecturer can rise to the level of Professorship without studying to get PhD. This is where I disagree with JOHESU. Medical Doctors who are consultants didn’t jump the rope. They went through the rigors of residency training, became fellows and merited it.
Medical practice is not law that is determined by the years of practice. It is study, quest to break medical grounds and solve the everyday health challenges that the world faces. No amount of experience can totally give clinicians that except devotion to knowledge, which is gained through the appropriate postgraduate school or colleges.
It is however unjust for the current disparity in salaries of the two warring groups. Whoever separated the salary structure into CONMESS and CONHESS is the common enemy that we should be fighting today. It’s absurd and ridiculous that a House Officer will earn higher than a working class Nurse or any other core medical practitioners, when the difference in study is one year. Only a specialist GP should be allowed to earn more than any other clinician, who refuses to also specialize in his/her own field.
The FG should as a matter of urgency make all health workers one salary structure, and their wages determined by level of qualification and specialty. The Ministry of Health should be headed by hospitals administrators and not physicians, just as the hospitals should not also be headed by a Dentist or Nurse. For heaven sake, it’s a profit making venture and not a professional body that the Medical Doctors heading it have turned it to. Only the Chief Medical Advisory Committee (CMAC) head should be a Physician while the Deputy CMAC should be from other clinical department like Medical Laboratory or Pharmacy.
International best practices that we scream always have proven that the top countries in medical field do not have any health worker as their Minister or Head of health sector. Oh, what about the almighty WHO that defines health, the head is not also a medical doctor, but a biologist. If WHO was a Nigerian union, it’s crystal clear that there would have been strike if a Nurse is appointed the head. What then are we saying?
As for JOHESU, calling off the strike now will forever bring your union to doom. Let the government stop salaries till next year, but do not give in to threats and blackmail. Your requests apart from ‘consultancy by years of service’ are just, and Nigerians are solidly behind you, even though we are the ones that ultimately feel the pain. There’s unity in strength and this is the time to be united. The battle is not against NMA but the Federal Government who reserves the right to implement your demands. Every profession is independent of each other and this right to decency of work cannot be taken from you, not now, tomorrow or in the future.
To be continued…
These little things matter…
Fejiro Oliver, an Investigative Journalist, Media Consultant and Human Rights Activist is also the Co-Convener of Coalition of Human Rights Defender (CHORD) and can be reached on +2348022050733 (SMS ONLY) or secretsreporters@gmail.com. Engage him on twitter on @fejirooliver86.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

News and Report

Alleged 76bn, $31.5m Fraud: EFCC Arraigns Ex AMCON MD, Ahmed Kuru, Four Others in Lagos

Published

on

By

 

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on Monday, 20 January, 2025 arraigned a former Managing Director of Assets Management Corporation of Nigeria AMCON, Ahmed Kuru and four others for allegedly defrauding Arik Airline N76 billion and $31.5 million, respectively.

 

Other defendants are former Receiver Manager of Arik Airline Ltd, Kamilu Omokide, Chief Executive Officer of the airline, Captain Roy Ilegbodu, and Super Bravo Ltd and Union Bank PLC.

 

The defendants were arraigned before Justice Mojisola Dada of the Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja, Lagos on a six-count charge bordering on theft, abuse of office and stealing by dishonestly taking the property of another.

 

The defendants, however, pleaded not guilty to all the six-count charges when they were read to them.

 

Count one reads: “That you, Union Bank Nigeria Plc, sometime in 2011 or thereabouts, in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, with the intention of causing and/or inducing unwarranted sale of Arik Air loans and bank guarantees with Union Bank, made false statements to the Assets Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON), regarding Arik Air Limited’s performing loans, following which you transferred a bogus figure of N71,000,000,000.00 (Seventy-One Billion Naira) to AMCON.”

 

Count two reads: “That you, Ahmed Lawal Kuru, Kamilu Alaba Omokide as Receiver Manager of Arik Air Limited, and Captain Roy Ilegbodu, Chief Executive Officer of Arik Air Limited in Receivership, sometime in 2022 or thereabout, in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this honourable court, fraudulently converted to the use of NG Eagle Limited the total sum of N4,900,000,000.00 (Four Billion Nine Hundred Million Naira only), property of Arik Air Limited”.

 

Count five reads: “That you, Kamilu Alaba Omokide, Ahmed Lawal Kuru and Capt. Roy Ilegbodu, on the 12th day of February, 2022 or thereabout, in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, being public officers, directed to be done in abuse of the authority of your office and with intention of obtaining undue advantage for yourself and cronies an arbitrary act, to wit: intentionally authorizing the tear down and destruction of 5N-JEA with Serial No. 15058 valued at $31.5million (Thirty One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars), an arbitrary act, which act is prejudicial to the economic stability of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Arik Air Limited”.

 

The counsel to the first and third defendants, Prof Taiwo Osipitan, SAN, informed the court of a motion for bail application dated November 28, 2024 and November 29, 2024 for the two defendants.

 

Osipitan prayed the court that the defendants be granted bail on liberal terms.  According to him, the first defendant had no criminal records and that the EFCC granted him administration bail  which he didn’t jump.  “We pray the court grants bail to the two defendants on the same liberal terms given to them by EFCC,” he said.

 

EFCC Counsel, Wahab Shittu SAN, filed counter-affidavits dated December 2, 2024 against the first defendant and also another counter affidavits dated December 22, 2024 against the third defendant.  Shittu prayed the court to dismiss their bail applications.

 

According to him, the two defendants are facing serious offences of economic sabotage. However, he agreed with the second and third defence counsel that they are presumed innocent pending the determination of the court. Shittu , however, added that the temptation of the defendants leaving the country was very high. He thereafter prayed that accelerated hearing be granted and the defendants’ international passports be seized by the court.

 

“But if my lord decides to be magnanimous to grant them bail, we shall be praying for stringent conditions because we are particular about their attendance in court. “We urge that they should submit their international passports with the court in order to ensure that they come for trial,” he said.

 

The counsel to the second defendant, Olasupo Shasore, SAN in his motion for bail dated December 6, 2024 and filed on the same day, urged the court to also grant bail to his client on self recognition.

 

The prosecuting counsel in his counter affidavits dated January 17, 2025, opposed the bail application of the second defendant.

 

He said the application for bail was incompetent and should be struck out. Shittu cited relevance laws to buttress his argument. “My lord, the record of this court is to the effect that the second defendant, at one point, absconded in which your lordship had to issue a bench warrant. “The learned silk for the second defendant is not the defendant on trial and it is very unhealthy for a counsel to stand as a surety for a defendant.

 

“I urge my lord, in exercising his discretion, to take all this into consideration because our concern is the appearance of the second defendant in court so that he does not abscond.”

 

After listening to the arguments from all the parties, Justice Dada granted bail to the defendants in the sum of N20 million Naira each with two sureties in like sum.   The sureties must be gainfully employed and deposed to means of identification.

 

She also directed that the defendants must submit their international passports with the registrar of the court.

 

Justice Dada adjourned the matter till March 17, 18, and 19, 2025 for commencement of trial.

Continue Reading

News and Report

Absence Of Oba Otudeko, Bisi Onasanya, Others Stalls Arraignment Over N12.3Billion Fraud As Otudeko’s Lawyer Protests In Court

Published

on

By

The counsel for Oba Otudeko, Chairman of Honeywell Group, who is facing charges of a N12.3 billion fraud, appeared before a Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday to protest the charge.

Mr. Bode Olanipekun (SAN) informed the court that he was protesting because the charge had not been served on Otudeko or the two other individuals charged alongside him, the News Agency of Nigeria reports.

Olanipekun informed the court that, despite not being served with the charge, the defendants were shocked to learn about the planned arraignment through the media when the story broke last Thursday.

The 13-count charge was filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against Oba Otudeko, former Managing Director of FirstBank Plc. Olabisi Onasanya, and former Honeywell board member Soji Akintayo.

Olanipekun is the counsel for the three defendants.

They were charged alongside the company, Anchorage Leisure Ltd.

 

The EFCC alleges that the defendants obtained the sum under false pretenses.

 

According to the EFCC, the four committed the fraud in tranches of N5.2billion, N6.2billion, N6.150billion, N1.5billion and N500million, between 2013 and 2014 in Lagos.

 

The 13-count charge, filed by EFCC counsel, Bilikisu Buhari, on January 16, 2025, further claimed that the defendants used forged documents to deceive the bank.

Specifically, count 1 accused the defendants of conspiring “to obtain the sum of N12.3Billion from First Bank Limited on the pretence that the said sum represented credit facilities applied for by V-TECH DYNAMIC LINKS LIMITED and Stallion Nigeria Limited, which representation you know to be false.”

 

In Count 2, it was alleged that the defendants, on or about 26th day of November, 2013 in Lagos, “obtained the sum of N5.2 billion from First Bank Limited on the pretence that the said sum represented credit facilities applied for by V TECH DYNAMIC LINKS LIMITED which representation you know to be false.”

 

The 3rd count alleged that the defendants, between 2013 and 2014 in Lagos, obtained N6.2billion from First Bank Limited on the pretence that the said sum represented credit facilities applied for and disbursed to Stallion Nigeria Limited, which representation you know to be false.”

 

In the 4th count, they were accused of conspiring to spend the N6.15billion, out of the monies.

According to the Commission, the offences contravened Section 8(a) of Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act 2006 and was punishable under Section 1(3) of the same Act.

Counts 5 reads: “That you, Chief Oba Otudeko, Stephen Olabisi Onasanya, Soji Akintayo and Anchorage Leisure Limited on or about 11th day of December, 2013 in Lagos, procured Honeywell Flour Mills Plc to retain the sum of N1.5 billion, which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of proceeds of your unlawful activities to wit: Obtaining by False Pretense and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18(c), 15 (2) (d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as amended) and punishable under Section 15(3) of the same Act.”

Meanwhile, Otudeko had reportedly fled Nigeria ahead of his scheduled arraignment on fraud charges.

 

According to TheCable Newspaper, Otudeko’s exit from the country is linked to the mounting legal pressures and financial disputes he is facing.

The newspaper reported that the businessman left the country via one of the land borders.

Continue Reading

News and Report

Loan controversy: Bisi Onasanya’s lawyer condemns media trial….Judge adjourns case to February 13

Published

on

By

In line with his resolve to defend himself and clear his name, Dr. Bisi Onasanya through his lawyer, Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika, SAN, at a session at the Federal High Court Lagos on Monday, January 20, 2025, demanded the service of proof of evidence and summons.

Onasanya, a chartered accountant and a former Group Managing Director of First Bank is defending himself against a controversial loan that allegedly occurred at First Bank 12 years ago. The retired banker is refuting the allegations alongside three others namely former Chairman of the bank, Chief Oba Otudeko, a former board member of Honeywell, Soji Akintayo, and a firm, Anchorage Leisure Ltd.

At a hearing at the Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday, Fusika condemned the media trial his client had been subjected to, saying he was not formally invited by the EFCC or served a notice of the charge.

He expressed surprise at seeing news stories in major newspapers linking Dr Onasanya to a trial on loan controversy during his time as First Bank Group Managing Director without prior notification.

“My Lord, it is concerning that my client has been unduly exposed to media trial without being formally served. This is a procedural anomaly that undermines his right to a fair hearing and personal dignity,” Olumide-Fusika said.

The prosecuting counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo, denied any involvement by the EFCC in the media coverage of the case.

He stated that the commission had not issued a press statement and suggested that journalists may have obtained information through other means.

“My Lord, we disassociate ourselves from any media reports,” Oyedepo said.

The EFCC also applied for an ex parte motion to issue a bench warrant for the defenders’ arrest and sought permission to serve them through substituted means, alleging they had evaded service.

Olumide-Fusika opposed the motion, arguing that his client had always been available and had not evaded service. Demonstrating his determination to clear his name, the senior lawyer prayed to the court to have the EFCC serve the charge and the proof of evidence in the open court.

“This application is unwarranted and speculative. My client has neither avoided service nor absented himself from this matter. The claims of the prosecution are baseless. Since I am here and my client is ready to go ahead with this case, I ask to be served the charge and the proof of evidence here in the court,” Olumide-Fusika argued.

Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke, who presided over the case, dismissed the EFCC’s motion for substituted service on Onasanya since he has accepted to be served in the open court.

The judge consequently ordered that the EFCC serve Olumide-Fusika the charge and proof of evidence in open court.

The EFCC complied with the directive, and Olumide-Fusika who confirmed the receipt of the document extracted a confirmation from the prosecution counsel that the proof of evidence submitted is exhaustive and there wouldn’t be an addendum. The defence counsel said EFCC’s confirmation should be on record, insisting that his client was ready to defend himself and clear his name.

Justice Aneke adjourned the case to February 13, 2025.

It will be recalled that Onasanya, through his Communication Advisor, Mr Michael Osunnuyi, had earlier dismissed allegations, describing the claims as baseless and an attempt to tarnish Onasanya’s stellar reputation for professionalism, integrity and humaneness.

Continue Reading

Trending