The point needs to be made as the year 2016 hits full swing that, whatever is their motivation, there is no compelling need for lawmakers to embark on an elaborate review and amendment of the 1999 constitution, ostensibly to whittle down the powers of the President of the Federal Republic. In a country beset with multidimensional antediluvian and pedestrian problems such as power failure, decrepit infrastructure, poor health care, insecurity, grueling poverty, deteriorating education standards, unemployment and receding fortunes which have forced its best brains to flee the country, what on earth is the justification for the inauguration of another Constitution Review Committee by the House of Representatives? The home known as Nigeria is burning and its lawmakers are fiddling! Any such distraction as constitutional review is some fiddling too much.
It is worth-recalling that the previous attempt by the 7th Assembly to curtail the President’s powers was vetoed by former President Jonathan, who argued that the National Assembly does not have the authority to undermine his powers. Specifically, Jonathan questioned the rationale behind the amendment curtailing his power by allowing the National Judicial Council (NJC) to appoint the Attorney-General of the Federation, separating the office of the Accountant-General of the Federation from that of the Federal Government, and limiting the period when expenditure can be authorized in default of appropriation from six months to three months, among others.
In a letter entitled “Re: Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Fourth Alteration Act, 2015,” Jonathan accused the lawmakers of acting ultra vires, lamenting the usurpation of powers of the executive by the legislature. The former president noted that both legislative chambers failed to meet the requirements for altering Section 9 (3) of the 1999 Constitution. Section 4 of the Fourth Alteration Act, 2015 sought to alter Section 9 of the 1999 Constitution by inserting a new subsection 3A, which dispenses with the assent of the president in the constitution amendment process. However, this can only be valid if the proposal was supported by four-fifths majority of both Houses and approved by a resolution of at least two-thirds of all 36 State Houses of Assembly as provided by Section 9 (3) of the 1999 Constitution. “This is a fundamental requirement of the constitution and in the absence of credible evidence that this requirement of the constitution was met in the votes and proceedings of the National Assembly, it will be unconstitutional for me to assent to this Bill,” Jonathan explained in his veto.
But House speaker, Yakubu Dogara who described the former president’s veto as unfortunate, noted that the initiative by the 7th Assembly could not be thrown away considering the efforts and resources expended on the exercise. He argued that the National Assembly is vested with the power and authority to override the president as stipulated under Section 58 of the 1999 Constitution, and urged the panelists to re-gazette the bill and subject it to the appropriate legislative processes required by the Standing Orders of the House and the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Speaker Dogara needs to reconsider his position, because in range of vision and depth of conception, this issue is ill-proportioned to the end it seeks to achieve. This is a ludicrous misconception and a lamentable misrepresentation of Sections 58 of the Constitution. It is clear the section does not say expressly or impliedly nor intend what the Speaker ascribed to it.
Attempting to waste time on any effort to curtail the president’s power serves no purpose at all and qualifies perfectly as too much ado about nothing. It is simply safe to say it speaks to nothing in the myriad of problems bedeviling Nigeria. Of course, debating the bill has its own collateral damage. Apart from being a waste of precious time that can be spent on more beneficial things to the country, it portrays the so-called honorable members of the House as indolent and not familiar with the basic provisions of the 1999 constitution, the organic law of the land. What makes the Speaker believe that any such bill will win the support of a majority in two-thirds of the 36 State Assemblies?
Again, the National Assembly has proven that it can hardly be trusted in its claim as representatives of the people. It is highly unlikely that a National Assembly that feels the pulse of the nation would see whittling down the President’s powers as important at a time when the economy is in free-fall. In fact, every critical sector of the country needs a lifeline; an obligation government has found difficult to discharge. Regrettably, lawmakers are interested only in their own unwarranted indulgences, whereas projects that will impact on the lives of Nigerians like the Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB) or even the budget, are begging for attention. It is indeed unfortunate that Nigerian lawmakers have specialized in flaunting with eternal relish, the provisions of Section 88 (1) of the constitution which it often deploys to arm-twist the executive and its agencies in the name of oversight functions. This is not a good image for the lawmakers.
It is not in doubt that the relationship between the presidency and the National Assembly has been anything but cordial, owing partly to the controversial circumstances under which the present leadership emerged. It appears the lawmakers are trying to rail-road the president for opposing their plan to spend a whooping N4.7 billion on exotic cars. What this means in the final analysis is that it is not the interest of Nigerians that hold sway in the determination of what bills lawmakers embark upon. But can a government that lavishes so much money on the welfare of its members to the exclusion of its ordinary citizens genuinely claim to be a “government of the people, by the people and for the people”, which is the simple definition of democracy or what it stands for in practical terms?
Nigerians are waiting for the change promised by the APC and pondering their journey to where the nation is and what they should do to turn things around. It is lamentable for members of the National Assembly, the highest law making body of the land, to give the impression that they are oblivious to the general misery of the people. It is a brazen display of insensitivity in a country embroiled in governance anomie and blatant moral bankruptcy by leaders, whose ostentatious lifestyle speaks directly to the impunity and disregard for the suffering masses. By no stretch of imagination can the 50-member panel charged with revisiting the efforts at constitution reform of the immediate past Seventh Assembly with a view to facilitating its passage, be considered a national priority. With the national conference report yet to be debated, does it make sense to create another constitution review committee with members from all 36 states plus the FCT? Isn’t this another legislative profligacy to earn sitting allowances?
While it is the general consensus that the 1999 Constitution is far from being ideal and requires some review, many Nigerians accept that the business of tinkering with it or making it reflective of the peoples’ desire is too serious to be left to legislators. This stems from the fact that many in the Legislature are products of flawed electoral processes. A good number of them, having been imposed on the electorate, cannot in good conscience claim to represent the people. Undoubtedly, leaving the constitution amendment to the legislators can hardly lead to the radical transformation that the country needs. In order to free the constitution from the afflictions that necessitated the amendment in the first place, the generality of Nigerians must be involved in the process through a referendum. The present effort, like previous attempts, will end up as mere motion without movement.
Normal.dotm
0
0
1
1163
6630
huhuonline
55
13
8142
12.0
0
false
18 pt
18 pt
0
0
false
false
false
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
