Activists Speak Ahead Of Judgement In Suit By Unmarried Policewoman Dismissed For Getting Pregnant

Human Right Activists have reacted to the dismissal of Miss Olajide Omolola from the Nigeria Police Force for getting pregnant while being unmarried.

Omolola is an indigene of Ekiti State and the state government has sued on her behalf.

Her case, which is awaiting a verdict by a Federal High Court sitting in Ekiti on October 6, was instituted as a Fundamental right application by the Attorney-General of Ekiti State, Olawale Fapohunda.

Meanwhile, civil society activists have spoken out against what they considered a discriminatory police regulation.

Aisha Yesufu, a co-convener of the BringBackOurGirls movement, Frank Tietie, Executive Director of Citizens Advocacy for Social and Economic Rights(CASER) and human rights lawyer, Femi Falana, SAN, have expressed their views about the development.

Recall that police authorities had on January 20, said that Omolola was sacked because she violated Section 127 of its regulations which states that “An unmarried woman police officer who becomes pregnant shall be discharged from the Force and shall not be re-enlisted except with the approval of the Inspector-General.”

But Fapohunda described her disengagement from the police as unconstitutional while urging the court to make an order “nullifying Section 127 of the Police Act and Regulations as well as an order of perpetual injunction restraining the Inspector General of Police, the Ekiti State Commissioner of Police and the Police Service Commission from implementing the regulation.”

The Police Counsel, CSP Femi Falade, had also argued that the Attorney-General of Ekiti had no “locus standi” (no right to appear in court) to file the application.

However, Yesufu told THE WHISTLER, in an exclusive chat, that so long as the regulation does not apply to male folks in the force, it is discriminatory.

“When you talk about dismissing a policewoman because she is unmarried and she is pregnant, how many other police men have been dismissed because they got other people pregnant?

“There are even some policemen that have gotten girls pregnant, who were underage which is more or less akin to rape and nothing was done to them. So this thing keep going on, this is the kind of institutional discrimination that women talk about, and everything is being done to put a woman down.

“Yes, she has had a child, it’s her child; if the same thing is not done to men, why then is it being done to a woman? But this is a law that is targeted at one gender and not all the gender; and so, that is something that is not fair, that is something that is discriminatory and that is something that should be taken out of our laws, it’s not something that should be within the Police Act,” she said.

She also advocated for the entry of more women into governance and decision-making so as ensure gender-balance in the various policies that drive the society and institutions.

The activist added that “there is a need to have more women in law making, because a lot of laws are lopsided against women and there is a need for women to be in the law making process and be able to point this out even when others do not want to see all of this things going on. As far as I’m concerned, that’s a law that shouldn’t have a place.

“That regulation should be taken out and If they do not want to take it out, then it should be applied to all the gender. How many policemen that have gotten women pregnant, out of wedlock, have been sacked? There are a number of them; there are some of them who have even committed crime by getting young girls pregnant, and yet they’re still in that police force. So if they say its their regulation, it’s part of their regulation, part of their own Act, fine and good! Do it across board, do it against all gender, when you now target one gender, that is discrimination and that is not something that should be allowed anywhere.”

For Tietie, the human rights lawyer told our correspondent that Section 127 of the Police Regulation runs contrary to Section 47 of the Nigerian Constitution which guarantees every Nigeria’s right to freedom from discrimination.

“On that issue of the dismissal of that (unmarried) police woman for getting pregnant , that was an obnoxious and highly insensitive act on the part of the police. It is an illegal act that contravenes the position of Section 42 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

“It is utterly discriminatory and disgusting to think that a policewoman for being a woman, and for answering the natural call of sexual union that has led to a pregnancy, she will be dismissed from the police force.

“A country, especially, Nigeria, should never tolerate such forms of hideous discrimination against the female gender; we must do everything possible to accommodate the female gender wherever they want to work, whether it is in Army or in the police. And then considering their status, whenever they are pregnant , they should be given protection and not be dismissed,” he said.

He recommended that rather than discharging an unmarried woman for getting pregnant, the police authorities should engage them in administrative roles and also apply the regulation on maternity leave for them too.

“So if a woman in the police force happens to be pregnant, she should be withdrawn from very serious duties and be given administrative roles in the police where she can oversee her pregnancy and bring it to term.

“It is such a barbaric way to think, to discriminate against the female gender in that manner. I can be very sure and certain that the High Court before which fundamental right procedure have been filed, will do the needful by setting aside the dismissal and further reinstating the woman, fully with compensation for the embarrassment and the time she has wasted being out of work. She should be paid maternity leave for six months,” Tietie said.

Concerning the regulation, Tietie added that “it is a mere regulation by the police authorities which must be subject to the Police Act and the Constitution and I am telling you that based on the provisions of Section 42, you don’t have to be married to enjoy the benefit of being pregnant, you don’t have to be married to enjoy the associated benefit that go with maternity.”

When our correspondent called the human rights lawyer, Femi Falana, SAN, over the matter, he said “Has court giving judgement? You cannot get my expert view. If a matter is adjourned for judgement, I cannot preempt the court; that’s contempt… as a Senior lawyer.”

Our correspondent also contacted the Chairman, Senate Committee on Police Affairs, Haliru Jika Dauda, to get his reaction but he was yet to respond to our text message and phone calls, as of the time of this report.