It is certainly incongruous and unacceptable in a country ravaged by corruption and impunity for public officials to act as if they are above the law. It is disheartening that the Buhari Administration has so early given Nigerians reasons to cast it in the mold of a regime without respect for the rule of law. This has further compounded the president’s befuddled thinking that betrays his predilection for running a one-man show. This messianic approach to governance ought to have gone with the inglorious past of official rascality and lack of direction, and the nation needs to break this cycle of perfidious leadership if Buhari really wants Nigerians to take him seriously on his much-touted promise of change.
The rule of law is essential for order and stability and is one of the canons of liberal democracy. The observance of the rule of law nudges the polity away from authoritarian trappings. More importantly, it enhances democratic consolidation. Therefore, rule of law is a norm to be mainstreamed in a democratizing society. That the law speaks different languages to different persons in Nigeria is a serious aberration that reduces it to a respecter of persons. At a time Nigeria is groaning under the suffocating grip of ravaging corruption which has festered because culprits are hardly punished, the need to entrench the rule of law and the willingness of all, regardless of status or standing in society, to submit totally to it for the public good is overwhelming.
With the long delay in appointing his cabinet, the president should stop inflicting further pain on the nation’s psyche by failing to internalize the rule of law in the governance process. Buhari gaffed when he told foreign journalists that he would not give all his ministers portfolios because Nigeria was broke. Although he back-pedaled from the obnoxious idea, there is need to situate it within the context of what the president previously said about ministers and his scant regard for collegiate governance. Before submitting his nominees to the Senate, Buhari had stated that he did not really need ministers, as they were nothing other than noise-makers as against civil servants who, according to him, do the real work. Therefore, the necessity imposed by the constitution that a government must have ministers was the primary reason Buhari appointed them after months of dithering.
Going by subdued complaints over the president’s appointments, it would appear the regard for such propriety was rather scanty. Rumblings in the Senate indicated some presidential nominees assumed office before screening. The seriousness of such violation is underscored by the fact that, it impugns directly on democracy. The public officers in breach of the Senate’s confirmation included the Executive Chairman of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS); Ahmed Kuru, who was named to head the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON). Others are; Kola Ayeye, Eberechukwu Uneze and Aminu Ismail, who were named executive directors of AMCON; and Professor Umaru Danbatta, nominated as the Executive Vice-Chairman of the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC).
With the tacit support of the presidency, and in ways that deepen the irregularity of their assumption of duty, the nominees initiated policies and disbursed funds from the parastatals they are supposed to head even before they were screened by the Senate. In the context of the expectation of change, the rule of law should rank high in the arsenal of the Buhari administration. Therefore, violation of basic parliamentary procedures by the president and his appointees, especially the extant provisions of the 1999 Constitution, will continue to remain a source of worry. The laws setting up the institutions in reference provide that their appointees by the president must be confirmed by the Senate before they can assume office. Moreover, since Buhari sought confirmation of the senate for the appointments, it was only proper that the process be pursued to fruition. It was a dangerous precedent and a costly oversight for the said appointees to assume office in clear violation of the statutory procedure.
It is worth recalling that the former DG of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Arumah Oteh, waited for over three months for Senate confirmation, before assuming office under the Yar’Adua administration. Any violation of this procedure is disrespect of the Senate by the President that can set the two branches of government on a collision course. To avoid this unpleasant scenario, nominees to positions where public officials expend public funds must be confirmed by the Senate, in line with the provisions of extant laws and the 1999 Constitution. Therefore, the presidency must not only respect the rule of law and follow due process; it should be seen to do so judiciously.
It bears emphasizing that democracy and its institutions are strengthened if the rule of law is observed by custodians of state institutions. The executive must be diligent and the legislature, as the gut of democracy, must exercise their independence for the good of the country. The tragedy of Nigeria is that its leaders are yet to imbibe the essential attributes of the rule of law. For them, law is no more than a modern tool of fulfilling their political dreams and aspirations. Once due process is jinxed, rule of law takes a back seat. It gives way to an obnoxious philosophy, negative as it were, that makes holders of public office unaccountable and beyond reproach. This pernicious concept inures for all time and purposes with the result that a leader and his cronies invariably get away with atrocities committed while in office. The result on the society is a pandemic of corruption and impunity.
What is now clear in words and in deed is that Nigerians are more at home with corruption and are willing to condone it. This is evident in the way the society at large, including religious institutions, accommodate corrupt leaders and provide safe havens for them. Almost every title in the land is reserved for the corrupt. This is how much Nigerians have aided and abetted corruption, forgetting that in the final analysis, it translates to poverty and underdevelopment for them. A society that openly identifies with corrupt leaders as obtains in Nigeria and celebrates them as its best and brightest is basically doomed and consigned to the hell of political and economic failure. The tragedy of such a country is that it is a place where only the corrupt thrives.
Yet, more than any other country, Nigeria needs due process and rule of law for there to be a new lease of life and for corruption to be curbed. Only a strong leadership can ensure that, by giving the rule of law a chance and sentencing impunity to the dustbins of history. The leaders who have promised change must chart a trajectory of values in sync with the promise. They must acknowledge that nations fail or succeed because of leaders and that if Nigeria must develop, it is up to them.
