Former Senator Shehu Sani has voiced strong disapproval of the recent decision by the Enugu State government to implement a mortuary tax, declaring that this policy implies that individuals cannot truly “rest in peace.” Sani’s remarks were made via a post on the social media platform X, highlighting his discontent with the state’s approach to managing deceased individuals’ remains. According to the announcement made by the state revenue agency, this tax is set at N40 and applies to corpses that are not buried within 24 hours of death. In his brief but impactful statement, Sani emphasized the absurdity of taxing deceased individuals, suggesting that it reflects a disturbing trend in the way death is treated administratively in Nigeria.
The controversy surrounding the mortuary tax has prompted officials from the Enugu State government to provide clarification on its intentions. They assert that the tax was never meant as a means of generating revenue for the state but rather to address the issue of prolonged storage of corpses in mortuaries. Emmanuel Nnamani, the Executive Chairman of the Enugu State Internal Revenue Service (ESIRS), articulated this stance, insisting that the measure aims to encourage timely burials and reduce the burden on mortuary services. Through the circular issued to mortuary attendants, the state authorities reinforced the legal backing for the tax, invoking the Birth, Deaths and Burials Law, which underscores the need for compliance in such matters.
According to the government’s directive, the N40 mortuary tax will accumulate daily for corpses not buried within the designated 24-hour period. This formal requirement emphasizes the urgency placed on the disposal of the deceased, ensuring that families understand their responsibilities. In practical terms, relatives or owners of a corpse must settle this tax before the remains can be released for burial. The government has indicated that payments should be made to authorized commercial banks designated for this tax, thus establishing a structured process for collection and compliance.
Critics, including Senator Sani, have raised ethical questions about the appropriateness of levying a tax on deceased individuals, suggesting that it reflects a lack of sensitivity toward families grieving their loved ones. This sentiment echoes broader concerns about the commodification of death in society. Stakeholders argue that the tax could place an additional financial burden on families during an already difficult time, with calls for the state government to reconsider its position and adopt strategies that prioritize compassion and respect for the deceased and their families.
The introduction of such a tax raises important discussions about governance, public policy, and the intersection of financial regulations with cultural practices surrounding death and mourning in Nigeria. While the government insists that the tax is a regulatory measure rather than a purely financial one, it may inadvertently intensify the grief experienced by families forced to navigate bureaucratic obstacles after the loss of a loved one. The challenges posed by this new regulation may compel families to weigh their financial capabilities against traditional burial customs, which can vary significantly across different cultures and religions in the country.
As the debate continues, it remains to be seen whether the policy will be met with widespread acceptance or resistance. Public sentiment could influence future decisions regarding the mortuary tax and similar regulations. Lawmakers and government officials must balance the practicalities of managing public health and resources with the need for dignity in death and mourning. Ultimately, the response to the mortuary tax will reflect broader societal attitudes toward death, grieving, and the responsibilities of government agencies to uphold the dignity of individuals and families during their most vulnerable moments.
