LEGAL ANALYSIS OF THE SHAREHOLDERS’ RIGHTS AND INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY IN NIGERIA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study argues that deploying Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in corporate governance will strengthen the rights of shareholders and promote their effective participation in the affairs of the company in Nigeria. Nevertheless, the present corporate law on the right of shareholders in Nigeria are largely defective and inconsistent in creating enabling environment for shareholders to take the benefits of ICT in the exercise of their rights. For instance, section 240(2) of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) 2020 promoted electronic meetings for private companies, but restricted public companies that would have needed electronic meetings the most. Besides, there are no rules for determining the specific electronic means that is suitable for the shareholders, thereby allowing company to provide electronic means that may be beyond the reach of the shareholders. Also, the Securities and Exchange Commission established e-dividend regime in 2015, but it is limited to companies listed on the Nigerian Stock Exchange. Therefore, this study analyzed comparative lessons from Canada and Europe, and recommended that the Nigeria’s Corporate Affairs Commission should, as a matter urgency, introduce standard guidelines for ICT and shareholders’ rights in Nigeria.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".