On June 22, 2015, (Page 32) THISDAY newspaper reported that the National Identity Management Commission (NIMC) would, from September 1, 2015 mandate that “all transactions involving the identification of individuals must be done with the National Identification Number.” This means that it would not be possible for Nigerians to conduct transactions “offered by applicable government institutions” (for example,
opening a bank account, applying for a license, participate in social welfare programs) unless they acquired the agency’s ID card and a National Identification Number (NIN), “which is the single version of truth and the foundation identity”.
Does the NIMC have the authority to impose such a diktat? Section 27 (1) and (2) of the NIMC Act, 2007 appears to provide the undergirding for this fiat. And it cannot be gainsaid that identity is the strong pillar that underpins security, banking, credit, social welfare, civic participation, etc. Thus, the Commission’s case for its authority is rather convincing. But as we discover in Logic, what is convincing is merely convincing, not necessarily true. A different picture emerges upon closer examination showing that this authority is a contingent one. The aim of the NIMC being the creation of “Foundation Identity”, the sine qua non for such an undertaking is primary data, specifically, Births and Deaths registry. This registry is required to first exist because it constitutes the “Trusted Process” that must undergird a “National ID.” Data that is at present available to the NIMC can be considered secondary data (defined as any data set with dependency on another more basic set for validation – for the purposes of illustration, for your passport enrollment (2) you need proof of citizenship (1)). This type of data set (secondary data) is never used as the basis of a national identity program. In fact, nowhere in the world are identities established on the basis of secondary data. When we are talking about “National ID”, i.e, “Foundation Identity” it must be based on primary data – births and deaths – because only this data set is acceptable as the basis for determining eligibility (the right to a passport, the right to vote, the right to participate in social welfare programs, etc can only be conferred by this record only).
Primary data – births and deaths registry – is the absolute condition precedent (and every banker knows about “the condition precedent”) for any national ID system. Such a registry does not yet exist in Nigeria. This is the crux of the matter.
To be sure, the NIMC process of data acquisition was designed to ensure that its database is tightly coupled and interoperable with other data sources necessary to vouchsafe enrollment records. Indeed, one of the most important requirements in identity management technology is creating interoperability between many identity records systems. The entire process is not meant to simply pass a document from one point to another, but rather, to create an interoperable system that ultimately would aggregate data from any and all sources. Once this data is aggregated from any source, the need exists to then integrate that data, normalize or refactor that data into useful views based on specific requirements and then distribute the data to wherever it may be needed. By adding layers of business functionality and interface components on top of an extensible aggregation framework, NIMC can deliver the much-needed identity management system.
So, who is responsible for creating the births and deaths registry? The National Population Commission (NPC) is constitutionally mandated to undertake vital registration activities all over Nigeria. A universal system of registration of births and deaths was first established in Nigeria in 1979 with the promulgation of the Births and Deaths Compulsory Registration Decree (Now Act) 39 of 1979 that provided for the establishment of a uniform system of vital registration nationwide. This was followed by the ‘Births, Deaths, etc (Compulsory) Registration’ Decree (Now Act) No. 69 of 1992. The law gave the sole authority to register these events nationwide to the NPC. These provisions were further reinforced by Section 24 of the Third Schedule of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, wherein Section 153 established the NPC as one of the country’s Federal Executive Bodies. Registration activity is currently carried out by the NPC in 3,539 registration centers using manual operations and some technological innovations such as ‘Vital Rek’ and RapidSMS. It has also partnered with, and enjoyed the support of international agencies. But coverage still remains low, as statistics for 2013 indicate that 43% of under-5 children remain unregistered in Nigeria and in legal terms do not exist.
Efforts are presently underway at the NPC to build the infrastructure necessary to create a truly national births and deaths registry. When such a system is deployed, NPC will have to deal with decades worth of paper records, archived in storerooms or other facilities. The data contained in those records is most valuable but, up until now, it could not be mined in any practical manner as live analytical data. The organization aims to build the capacity to apply advance high speed scanning to those records and not just scan into electronic images, but to scan into extractable and usable analytic data that can be inserted into the proper assigned field mapped to any existing identity management system.
The NIMC records are very valuable but it is no different from others in its class. In addition to the NIMC, biometrics data exists at the NIS, FIRS, FRSC, INEC, N-SIM, NHIS, and the CBN (BVN). Indeed, there is every reason to support the contention that the Bank Verification Number (BVN) is superior to the data captured by the NIMC because the banks require a higher threshold of proof in the establishment of personal identities – opening a bank account involves due diligence, aka “KYC”. All the data sources above are sufficient for their various purposes. When we mean a “National ID” however, the essential building block is births and deaths data. NIMC is not in possession of this record. In an earlier press release the Commission posited, “Functional Identities established pursuant to various organizations’ databases such as the Bank Verification Number (BVN), the Taxpayer Identification Number, etc., are not substitute for the NIN”. The implication is that the MINC ID is superior and occupies a higher plane of “Foundation identity”. This is an immoderate claim. Its ID card, like all the other biometric data sources above is based on secondary data. Its data set is therefore not superior by any stretch of the imagination.
Without a doubt, the thinking that informs the September 1 deadline is fundamentally flawed. And I daresay the organization is simply being presumptuous in proposing to enforce rules that it is not in any practical position to execute. But I suppose facts are hardly of any consequence for us as a people used to happenstance arrangements in our governance. In the premise, NIMC is simply acting in a manner to which we have become accustomed. That is to say, the rigorous dictates of its own brand of organizational dysfunction and lack of purposiveness.
To preserve things in their proper context, it is necessary to share the history of the organization in the briefest possible compact. And the PREMIUM TIMES has attempted to do this with fair aplomb. (See Over N121 billion wasted, Nigeria’s National ID Card Scheme In Fresh Controversy ) Among other underwhelming facts, the publication has revealed that,
“since 1981 when the first contract was signed by the Shehu Shagari administration, the project has been a prime waster of taxpayers’ money. It is a financial black hole that consumes everything thrown at it without a trace. Like a compromised slot machine, it consumes but never regurgitates. From then to date, more than ?121 billion has been spent on the project, meant to authenticate the true identity of every Nigerian, with nothing to show for it” … “the project has been repeatedly torpedoed by executive high-handedness, mind-boggling corruption, sheer irresponsibility of government officials and asinine abuse of power.”
Wallowing in the ooze of such dysfunction, the NIMC is without an iota of doubt one of the vectors of the social ills in which the country is indulgently mired. It is an institution at odds with itself and the times and its stupendous failure of purpose makes it ultimately a symbol of our collective underachievement and larceny.
It is not the subject of this disquisition to delve into the sordid history of NIMC; to unravel the skein, as it were. Suffice it to say that its appetite for graft has remained undiminished by the effluxion of time. One of the most well funded government institutions in recent times (in the 2012 budget, it was allocated the total sum of ?30billion or $150M), the Commission remains a handy-dandy tool in the hands of the cabal that has so uninhibitedly pillaged the country.
Let us be clear about this: it is an absolute necessity to first establish a trusted process of births and deaths registration before we can ask Nigerians to subscribe to a national ID scheme. Therefore, the NIMC’s proposal to compel Nigerians to register or face sanctions amounts to putting the cart before the horse.
On a practical note, despite its gratuitous humble brag of having “404 Enrolment Centers nationwide” (NPC and INEC have more) NIMC is not ready to register the tens of millions of Nigerians that would have to be prohibited from carrying out economic transactions from September 1 (and this includes acquiring passports, opening bank accounts, accessing credit, etc) unless they registered for the ID card. A great number of Nigerians who have already enrolled have not been issued cards – some up to 1 year. In any event, the task that it has set for itself is not solely dependent upon the quantum of physical infrastructure available (everyone remembers how INEC, a more organized institution with massive financial resources struggled to register voters) but more importantly, on the availability and validity of the basic data set indispensable to establishing “Foundation Identity.” If we must insist on a National ID card, we must wait for the NPC to put in place the basic support infrastructure in order to avail the prerequisite for such enrollment – births and deaths registry data.
More disturbingly, it is worthy of note that the NIMC’s right to conduct the proposed ID card registration scheme under its current arrangements has been challenged in court by the leading ICT company Chams. This litigation has a fair chance of success in view of the aphorism that sunlight is always the best disinfectant.
Apart from these pertinent issues, the definitive question becomes the relevance of a “National ID” to our age. The idea of national ID card is a 20th Century concept. And with its bloated staff roll and a myriad of intractable labor problems, the NIMC is truly an anachronism; a sort of vestigial anomaly, like the Appendix organ that has lost much of its original function.
One suspects however that the current Sept 1 deadline is designed, in popular phraseology, “for show.” This is by way of saying that it probably wants to put a meritocratic gloss on a discredited process. Properly harnessed, such an exercise might help in portraying the NIMC as doing something valuable. Consequently, our attention would be deflected from an overdue probe, which ought to be the proper recompense of its management.
Ultimately the question is, “what should the government do with the NIMC?” The government should act like a good businessman and immediately cut its losses by commencing the process of dissolution of the NIMC – sell off its assets to recover whatever it could. The naked truth is that the organization’s mandate, which was based on what was undoubtedly once a noble idea, has been overtaken by events in consonance with the course in which life advances. Its presence now superfluous it chooses, rather than fading away, to skulk the neighborhood like a debauched geriatric dandy importuning ever-younger victims and breaching propriety.
As a nation, we can no longer afford to peddle the pernicious myth of the indispensable National ID. The NIMC ID card is just another form of ID, not “the ID”. There is no such thing as a “National ID”. Passports, Drivers licenses, Voters cards, etc; these are all National IDs – as long as eligibility for such enrollments has been irrefragably established by NPC’s primary data. If we must be a nation, we must learn to do things the way they ought to be done. There are no half pregnancies. One is either pregnant or not. Nigeria is a great country, not a Banana Republic.
In conclusion, the NIMC September 1 deadline is misguided and represents an unnecessary burden on an already over-burdened people. The government should call an immediate halt to this spurious mandate.
Haven’t we had enough of this charade of national identity??
Aloy Chife, Ph.D.
No comments:
Post a Comment