What is your view on hate speech law
I think that living in a plural society such as Nigeria where opinions are different and often driven by ethnic leanings or geographical locations, we do have to be mindful that people often get suspicious of the differences. So, anything to curtail hate and propagate issues responsibly in the environment, is welcomed in my opinion. And, I think that what is more important is the reorientation towards nationhood rather than personal issues that bring about hatred. Won’t the law conflict with freedom of speech?
Well, we say in law that your freedom ends where the other man’s rights begins. Your freedom to say what you want to say must be that which is well ordered in such a manner that it would not harm or hurt another person. So, when one goes about expressing his freedom in a way that now ends up causing disaffection and violence leading to death, it is possible to know that the freedom has been abused or applied in a wrong way. It becomes an exercise funneled in a destructive way. We must always be careful not to cause incitement through our manner of speaking. Sometimes, you find out that people by virtue of the position they occupy say things that cause or create a feeling of insecurity in an otherwise peaceful situation. And, never forget that some of these people have followers, who carry out instructions rather sheepishly. We must avoid that kind of situation.

Do you subscribe to operating two legislative chambers as currently the case in Nigeria?
We have a broad based representation in terms of law making. I believe that law making should not be a full time work. I think the cost of such broad based representation is overwhelming on the republic with the few resources that we have. The argument is not necessarily upper and lower chambers, it is about whether both houses should have full time engagement. I think we need both houses because they cater for different sets of things and one is higher level representation and the other more closer to the grassroots. So, my own advocacy is on how to reduce the cost of that representation.

Should states be granted full autonomy?


There is a nonentity tag with the word restructure. It is unfair that whenever a system requires some form of restructuring, re-organisation, reflection to make it look better, some people take it for going backward. Nigeria from day one, has been made up of different sets of people and that diversity can turn to sources of wealth of a competitive advantage. The way we are configured makes it such that everybody fold their arms especially at the state level, and wait for their allocations. There is nothing wrong in empowering the states or regions to function as an economic unit and compete like they did in the 60s and 70s. I believe that when we do so, we will then be able to say after all our name is Federal Republic of Nigeria. What it means is making it federal in the true sense of the word. To say true federalism and that include fiscal, down to revenue generation and expenditure. So, in this arrangement, the centre can mind common issues that concern everyone. At the regional level, there should be independence to grow at your pace and to pursue your aspiration. So, I am for attaining true federalism.

What about judicial autonomy?

I think the discussion of judicial autonomy in itself is some sorts of misnomer. There are three arms of government, in the sense that the judiciary ought to be autonomous just like the Executive and Legislative arms.The three arms are like trinity and, non should be subjected to the other. Each checks what the other does. The Executive makes appointment to the Bench. The Judiciary can be associated with Presidential system in the United States where we copy. We restrain the implementation of an executive order. And, then the Law makers make the laws that the executive will have to execute and the judicial interpret. Non is superior to the other. So, when we talk of judicial autonomy, it is almost like we are going back to the time to subjugate the third arm, the judiciary to the other two and beg for its freedom. Our constitution in its letters intended the three arms to be working in the way they exist, and to exercise the needful checks and balances.