Strength of a regulatory regime could be discerned from progress in a concept(s) it seeks to implement and govern. Islamic banking (IB) is a concept practiced in Nigeria under conventional banking regulatory laws. The conventional laws are however not particularly meant for Islamic banking, a fact that leaves much to be desired for Islamic banking practice. A large Nigerian muslims population desirous of Islamic banking services has provided Islamic banking with supportive client base in the country. Regulatory laws have provided for Islamic banking and finance to be integrated into existing conventional system in countries with less muslims population like the UK and US. In light of this, the establishment of Islamic banking under the Nigerian conventional banking laws is critically examined in the light of Malaysian jurisdiction. Banks and other Financial Institutions Act (BOFIA) 1991, the principal Nigerian banking legislation, merely provides for non-interest banking to operate across the country which a non-interest bank known as Jaiz Bank International Plc was licensed. This study examines BOFIA and other regulations applicable to Islamic finance business and institutions in Nigeria. The study adopts a narrative review approach to deduce and examine lacunae inefficacious to successfully drive IBF practice. Thus, suitable establishment and regulatory laws are needed to enhance IB practice, ensure its equal treatment like the conventional banking system and sustain its operations and institutions in Nigeria. Accordingly, it is recommended that extant laws and institutions be appropriately amended borrowing a leaf from Malaysian and align Nigerian legal regime on IB with global and standard best practice.

Article 135(2) of the Federal Constitution provides a right to be heard to any public servants in case of dismissal or reduction in rank by adopting the term ‘reasonable opportunity of being heard’. Meanwhile, the Privy Council in Najar Singh’s case in 1976 established a principle that the right to be heard under Article 135(2) does not imply the right to be heard orally. Despite this precedent, the term remains contentious in the courts of law as to whether the term includes the right to the oral hearing. Recently, in 2018 the Federal Court in Vijayaroa’s case inclines in favor of affording a right to be heard orally to an officer facing disciplinary proceedings. This article examined the scope of the term ‘reasonable opportunity of being heard' under Article 135(2) and analyzed the development of the cases law on the right to an oral hearing in disciplinary proceedings against public servants. The finding shows that the statutory term ‘reasonable opportunity of being heard’ has been interpreted inconsistently by the courts. Thus, the law on this issue remains unsettled.

No abstract

The Farmers’ Rights concept is part of an international treaty of which Malaysia is one of the signatory parties. The International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (FAO Treaty 2004), articulated four core rights under the Farmers’ Rights concept – namely the right to traditional farming knowledge, the right to seed, the right to equitable benefit sharing and the right to participate in the decision-making process. Article 9.2 (b) of FAO Treaty 2004 stipulates that farmers should be given equal opportunity to equitably participate in sharing benefits from the use of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture. The right to equitable benefit sharing legally justifies among others, the rights of smallholder farmers who have been breeding seeds for generations to receive benefits; either monetary or non-monetary from any commercialization of the seeds that have been developed by them. Non-monetary benefits include access to seeds for their farm. This paper investigates to what extent the existing legal provisions of plant variety law in Malaysia has integrated this right to equitable benefit sharing to small farmers as compared to similar legislation in India and under African Union (AU Model Law for the Protection of the Rights of Local Communities, Farmers and Breeders, and for the Regulation of Access to Biological Resources). These two legal frameworks aimed to protect their small farming communities are cited as legislation with the best practices on implementing Farmers’ Rights core rights.  The aim is for Malaysia to learn from these countries in order to ensure legal protection for small farmers’ right to equitable benefit sharing of their plant genetic resources.

Abstract-Generally