The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Lawmakers

  • Lawmakers and good governance

    SIR: After much pressure and criticisms from virtually all quarters, Akwa Ibom State Governor, Godswill Akpabio has finally sent a bill to the Akwa Ibom State House of Assembly, requesting that the controversial Pension Act revert to status quo ante. The u-turn by the governor is nothing but a serious indictment on the legislators and the legislature as an institution.

    The bill, which was initially sent to the state House of Assembly, was hurriedly and unprofessionally passed despite public outcry that greeted it. Titled: “Akwa Ibom State Governors and Deputy Governors Pension Act, 2014”, it provides that the governor and his wife should access annual medical services at a sum not exceeding N100 million or an equivalent of $600,000 and for the deputy governor and his/her spouse N30 million or an equivalent of $200,000. While the governor gets a mansion, the deputy gets an accommodation allowance of 300 per cent of his/her annual basic salary, among other bogus provisions.

    The excuse given by the Speaker, Rt. Hon. Sam Ikon that “the bill seeks ways to motivate the governors and deputy governors to stay focused and not loot public funds, bearing in mind that a provision has been made for them to still access a comfortable life after many years of selfless service” is unconvincing. No matter how rich a person is, he/she could still be corrupt if he/she chooses to, because those accused of graft cannot be said to be poor.

    Approving such unjustifiable and colossal sums of money for a few persons from the public purse is not only unfair but a destructive path to depleting the state’s finances. I am sure that if the legislators had subjected the Pension Bill to a thorough debate during the public hearing process, it would have been logically dissected and most likely, dumped. This was never allowed.

    Over the years, the astronomical increase in the remunerations of political office holders has been a subject of concern with the loud call for a drastic cut in such jumbo package amid the country’s fragile economy. Apart from fat salaries, all sorts of allowances are packaged for the political class under the guise of severance allowance. It is this lucrative nature of Nigerian politics that encourages the do-or-die mentality. ThAs rich as the United States of America coupled with the fact that its constitution makes room for its President to enjoy life pension, Americans are beginning to complain of the huge cost of implementing such welfare provision in the midst of many, pressing national demands. For us, we do not seem to be too keen in copying what is good from other nations like America that we fashioned our federal constitution after.

    We should collectively appreciate that the essence of democracy would be defeated if our law makers continue to act like lawbreakers. As the arm of government that defines democratic rule, intense searchlights – which are mostly beamed on the executive, and occasionally on the judiciary – should be redirected at the legislature.  It is due to these unpleasant complaints that have spurred the renewed call that the country should adopt part-time and unicameral legislature. Our parliament should sit-up and really be the hallowed chamber that is truly independent of the tempting, over-bearing and manipulative influence of the executive.

     

    • Adewale Kupoluyi

    Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta

  • Speakers seek pension for lawmakers

    Speakers seek pension for lawmakers

    The Conference of Houses of Assembly Speakers has called for the payment of retirement benefits to lawmakers at the state and federal levels.

    The Chairman of the Conference and Gombe State House of Assembly Speaker Inuwa Garba spoke yesterday in Akure at the Ondo State House of Assembly during a valedictory session for the late Speaker Samuel Adesina.

    Garba said the retirement benefits of lawmakers in state assemblies would sustain them when they leave office.

    The Gombe Speaker described the late Adesina as an epitome of humility and a lover of people.

    He urged the Ondo State Government to name an edifice after the late Adesina, adding that this was a deserved recognition for his contribution to the development of the state.

    Garba advised Ondo State lawmakers to fill the vacuum the late Speaker left and work harmoniously in the interest of the people.

    Governor Olusegun Mimiko said the late Adesina would be remembered for his peace-loving attitude.

    The governor said the late Speaker brought and sustained sanity to the Assembly.

    Mimiko, who was represented by his Chief of Staff, Dr Kola Ademujimi, noted that late Adesina built the bridge between the Legislative and the Executive.

    The governor promised that the state government would not abandon his family.

    Dignitaries showered encomiums on the late Speaker.

    The late Adesina, a three-time lawmaker who represented Odigbo Constituency, died on February 25 after a protracted illness.

    He was 53.

    His colleagues, political associates, former Speakers of the fifth and sixth Assemblies, members of the Conference of Speakers and friends eulogised him.

    The late Adesina’s widow, Funke, his children and family members and the 25 legislators wore black suits to the session.

    Two members of the fifth Assembly, Oluwasegunota Bolarinwa and Kingsley Kuku, recalled memorable moments with the late Speaker.

    Dr Bakitta Bello and Igbekele Bolodeoku, both of the sixth Assembly, also eulogised the late Adesina.

    They described him as a lover of peace, a bold and courageous lawmaker.

    Kuku, the Special Adviser to the President on Niger/Delta Affairs, urged members of the Assembly not to abandon the family of the deceased.

    The former Minority Leader of the Assembly said the state government and the lawmakers should not fail to assist the Adesina family in their times of needs.

    Speakers from various Assemblies described the late Adesina as a bridge builder and lover of peace.

    Ogun, Osun, Lagos, Abia and Ekiti states’ Speakers attended the session.

    The late Adesina will be buried today at his home town, Oniparaga, in Odigbo Local Government Area.

  • Court orders defecting lawmakers not to join move to alter leadership

    Court orders defecting lawmakers not to join move to alter leadership

    Federal High Court in Abuja yesterday granted an order of perpetual injunction, restraining the 41 former Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) lawmakers in the House of Representatives, who defected to the All Progressives Congress (APC), from either initiating or participating in an effort to alter the leadership of the House.

    This is one of the four reliefs granted by Justice Adeniyi Ademola in his judgment in a suit by the PDP against the House of Representatives, its principal officers and the defecting legislators.

    The party sought primarily to frustrate the alleged move by the defecting lawmakers to initiate changes in the leadership of the House.

    Justice Ademola restrained “the 12th to the 53rd defendants (the defecting lawmakers), their agents, privies and servants from taking any step or further steps, or sitting, starting or doing anything to alter or remove or change the leadership of the 1st defendant.”

    He also granted an order of perpetual injunction, restraining the defecting legislators from “altering or participating in the altering or changing the leadership of the 1st defendant”.

    The judge declared that in view of the provision of Section 68(1)(g) of the Constitution and the case marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/621/2013, filed by the defecting lawmakers (which was decided by Justice Ahmed Mohammed last Friday and in which they admitted defecting) they “cannot lawfully vote and contribute to any motion for the removal or change of any of the principal officers” of the House.

    He also declared that the defecting lawmakers, who are plaintiffs in the earlier suit decided by Justice Mohammed, “are not competent to sponsor, contribute or vote on any motion calling for the removal or change in the leadership of the House or the removal of any principal officer of the House, or removal of any of the principal officers of the 1st defendant”.

    The judge held that in view of the mandatory provision of Section 68(1)(g) of the Constitution, they (the defecting legislators) can participate in any proceedings to remove the House’s principal officers.

    He also held that in view of the provision of Section 68(1)(g) of the Constitution, they (the defecting lawmakers) cannot lawfully alter the composition or constitution of the House’s leadership.

    Section 68(1) provides: “A member of the Senate or of the House of Representatives shall vacate his seat in the House of which he is a member if ; (g) being a person whose election to the House was sponsored by a party, he becomes a member of another party before the expiration of the period for which that House was elected; Provided that his membership of the latter party is not as a result of a division in the party of which he was previously a member or of a merger of two or more parties or factions by one of which he was previously sponsored.”

    Justice Ademola, after analysing evidences before the court, observed that there were undisputed facts that the defecting lawmakers were sponsored by the PDP; that the period of their membership had not expired, but that the contention among parties was whether there was a division in the party as contemplated in the provision of Section 68(1)(g).

    Relying on the definition of “division” in the Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary (8th edition of the International Student edition), the judge held that from the evidence before him, including the October 2013 judgment by Justice Evoh Chukwu of the same court, there was no division in the PDP to have allowed the lawmakers to retain their seats.

    “The court finds, as an undisputed fact, that the period for which the 12 to the 53 respondents were sponsored by the plaintiff has not expired in the 1st defendant (House of Reps). And as earlier stated, there is no division in the plaintiff, and they, that is, the 12th to the 53rd respondents, have defected to another party – the APC.

    “And as such, they either vacate their seats or resign honourably and relinquish their constituents’ mandates. They have no basis, morally and legally, in staying in the 1st defendant (House of Reps) a day longer,” the judge noted.

    He, however, did not order any of the lawmakers to yield their seats, as that was not part of the four relief sought by the plaintiff.

    Before deciding the substantive suit, the judge dismissed the preliminary objections by the defendants. He held that the suit was well instituted; that it was justiciable; that it was not an abuse of court process; that the plaintiff possessed the locus standi to institute the action and that the originating summons filed by the plaintiff was competent.

    Reacting to the judgment, the plaintiff’s lawyer, Yunus Ustaz (SAN) claimed that by the court’s orders, the affected lawmakers ought to vacate their seats. He argued that they were no longer qualified to sit in the House any more.

    He praised the judge for what he described as “an analytical and well considered judgment.”

    Lead defence lawyer, Mahmoud Magaji (SAN), said the court’s orders did not affect the continued participation of the defecting lawmakers in the business of the House. He said his clients have authorised him to appeal the judgment.

    “The court is not a Father Christmas. It does not give what you did not ask for. They did not ask the court to order my clients to vacate their seats. So, the court has not done that. We are going to test this decision in the higher courts. We are filling our appeal any moment soon,” Magaji said.

  • Defected lawmakers: Court strikes out suit against PDP

    A Federal High Court in Abuja on Friday struck out a suit filed by 79 lawmakers who defected from the PDP to the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    The plaintiffs, Sen. Abdullahi Adamu, 78 Senators and Reps members, had prayed the court for an order restraining the defendants from declaring their seats vacant following their defection.

    Joined as co-defendants in the suit, filed in September 2013, are the PDP National Chairman, Senate President, House of Reps Speaker, the PDP and Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

    Delivering judgment, Justice Ahmed Mohammed held that the suit was an `academic exercise’ which the court would not adjudicate upon.

    He said that the PDP, being the fourth defendant in the instant case, had similarly filed another suit before him asking the court to declare the seats of the defected legislators vacant.

    “In the final analysis, the lawmakers’ suit is based on the threat of declaring their seats vacant, and the PDP has submitted itself to the court pursuant to Section 68 (2) of the 1999 Constitution.

    “The PDP cannot declare their seats vacant, having submitted itself in other pending suits seeking to compel the Senate President and Speaker, House of Reps to declare the seats vacant.

    “This suit is an academic exercise. It has no life of its own, so there is no adjudication and is, hereby, struck out,’’Mohammed said.

    Justice Mohammed had, before delivering the judgment, also struck out an application by the plaintiffs seeking an indefinite adjournment of proceedings in the case when it was slated for judgment.

    The judge frowned at the timing of the plaintiffs’ application, especially coming after hearing had been concluded and the matter was reserved for judgment.

    “I cannot find any reason why the application was not brought before the matter was reserved for judgment.

    “In the final analysis, I find no merit in the application and, hereby, dismiss it,’’ Mohammed ordered.

    Mr Joe Gadzama, SAN, counsel to the respondents, had opposed the plaintiff’s application, arguing that the

    application was a plot to arrest the judgment of the court.

    He had prayed the court to throw out the application and deliver its judgment.

    Gadzama had, also via a preliminary objection, asked the court to strike out the plaintiffs’ originating summons for “lacking in merit and locus standi to initiate the case.

    He had argued that it was a few individuals who defected, describing the circumstances of their defection as “friction,

    fiction and fraction due to mere in-house disagreement in the PDP”.

    “In suit FHC/ABJ/CS/605/2013, (PDP and others against INEC and others), Justice Evoh Chukwu of the Federal High Court Abuja, on Oct. 18, 2013, decided there was no division or faction in PDP.

    “This suit is our magic wand and we, therefore, urge the court to dismiss the plaintiffs’ suit,’’ Gadzama had argued.

  • Court stops delay in lawmakers’ suit against PDP, others

    Court stops delay in lawmakers’ suit against PDP, others

    Following the House of Representatives Speaker Aminu Tambuwal’s refusal to participate in a case against his party – the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) – a Federal High Court in Abuja yesterday moved to ensure that his absence does not stall hearing in the case.

    Justice Ahmed Mohammed ordered parties in the suit filed by some PDP lawmakers, to hand all “processes (court documents) yet to be served on the third defendant (Tambuwal) to the court’s bailiff, who shall ensure that he is served between now and Friday.”

    The judge’s order was informed by complaints from most lawyers in the case, including the plaintiffs’ counsel, Mahmud Magaji (SAN), that they had difficulties serving Tambuwal.

    Ken Ikonne, the lawyer to Senate President David Mark (second defendant), frowned at Tambuwal’s failure to either attend court or send a representative, even after he (the lawyer) effected the service of processes on the speaker.

    The inability of other parties, particularly the plaintiff, to serve Tambuwal, stalled the move by Joe Kyari Gadzama (SAN), lawyer to the PDP and its former National Chairman, Bamaga Tukur, to argue his application.

    The lawyer’s application sought the reversal of the defection of some former PDP lawmakers to the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    Gadzama’s application is hinged on the argument that the defection took place after the court had ordered the parties to maintain the status quo, pending the determination of the case.

    The lawyer argued that the application he filed in December was to protect the court’s dignity because its order was flouted by the PDP members in the House of Representatives, who defected to the APC after the court allegedly ordered the parties to maintain the status quo.

    He averred that the constant threat by some senators, who are parties in the case, to defect, was because the court failed to take action against those who defected after its order to maintain the status quo.

    But Magaji objected to the hearing of Gadzama’s application on the grounds that his inability to serve Tambuwal with his motion for extension of time denied him the opportunity to properly respond to Gadzama’s application.

    The plaintiffs’ said he filed a counter-affidavit and a motion for extension of time, having filed out of time, but that his inability to serve the third defendant (Tambuwal) made it impossible for the court to hear Gadzama’s application.

    Justice Mohammed upheld Magaji’s submissions, noting that should the court hear Gadzama’s application without hearing the plaintiffs’ motion to extend time, they would be denied the right to respond to the application.

    He held that the court could not deny the plaintiffs’ right to respond.

    The judge also held that the court could not proceed without the parties being properly served.

    Justice Mohammed, who ensured that one of the court’s bailiffs was in court to hear his pronouncement, ordered the parties to hand the processes for Tambuwal to the bailiff, who shall serve the speaker between now and Friday.

    He adjourned till February 5 the hearing of Gadzama’s application.

  • APC directive to lawmakers ‘fruitful’

    APC directive to lawmakers ‘fruitful’

    The All Progressives Congress (APC) defended yesterday its much criticised directive to its lawmakers on the Presidency’s bills and proposals.

    The directive to block all proposals from the Executive in already yielding results, the party said in a statement issued in Lagos by its spokesman Lai Mohamed.

    According to the APC, the directive has started yielding results, with the Save Rivers Movement (SRM) holding a peaceful rally – for the first time – on Saturday.

    In the party’s view, the critics are either ignorant of the working of democracy or just playing to the gallery for pecuniary gains.

    “Either way, these critics have rushed to judgement without even taking time to study the directive, without understanding that governance is about people, and without caring about the principles of fairness, justice and equity, and they should cover their faces in shame,’’ the Interim National Publicity Secretary said.

    ‘’We hereby reiterate the directive, which is a product of deep thinking and robust debate within our party’s NEC to save our democracy, and we commend our members in the National Assembly for their unequivocal support for our stand, and for understanding that filibustering or legislative non-cooperation are veritable tools of democracy,’’ it said.

    When the SRM organised a rally in Ogoni on January 19, ex-militants stormed the place, shooting. They injured people and vandalised vehicles. The police did not stop them. Saturday’s was peaceful, because the Inspector-General of Police directed the police to provide protection for the rally, the APC said.

    ‘’This is exactly what we are saying, that Nigerians, irrespective of their party leaning, who wish to stage a peaceful protest anywhere in the country must be able to do so without the police looking away while hired goons attack them. It is all about justice, fairness and equity, without which democracy will not thrive. We will be watching to see if what happened on Saturday represents a paradigm shift in Rivers or it is just a flash in the pan,’’ the party said

    To the APC, there is nothing anti-democratic, anti-people or inciting about the directive, which is aimed at ending the reign of impunity in Rivers State before its spreads to other parts of the country and truncates the nation’s democracy, wondering why it is so difficult for the President to act, for almost a year, as a part of the country he was elected to govern goes up in flames.

    The party said already, copy cat attacks and intimidation of APC members had been launched by the government and the police in Gombe, because they have been watching the impunity being committed in Rivers.

    ‘’All over Gombe, our party flags, billboards and posters are being vandalised by hoodlums aided and abetted by the police. Our youth supporters are being arrested while our members are being threatened by the police and the state government officials.

    ‘’From Rivers, this reign of impunity has spread to Gombe. Who knows where the train of impunity is heading to next? Yet, some so-called fickle analysts, some chameleonic activists who willingly pit their tents with the highest bidder, some increasingly irrelevant organisations and some political parties who are content with the crumbs that fall off the table of the ruling party have the temerity to condemn a directive they do not understand.

    ‘’They say the non-approval of the 2014 budget will pauperise Nigerians, as if the yearly ritual of budget passing since 1999 has benefitted anyone but the fat cats. In any case, of what use is a budget when the lives of citizens are at stake? Are budgets not made for the people? Do they understand that even the budgets are based largely on earnings from oil, which we cannot even produce if the violence in Rivers escalates and spreads to other oil-producing states?

    ‘’They say our directive is anti-people without understanding that those who are being daily intimidated, beaten and shot in Rivers are also Nigerians. They say we are anti-democratic without understanding that democracy cannot thrive in an atmosphere of impunity, the like of which we have in Rivers.

    ‘’Where were these same critics when the impudent police commissioner in Rivers, egged on by a conniving Presidency, thumbed his nose at the Constitution by turning himself to the de facto governor, of the state and refusing to subordinate himself to the elected Governor who is the chief security officer of his state? Where were these critics when a serving Senator was shot perhaps by the police? Where were these critics when women and children were teargassed and innocent civilians beaten black and blue? Did they raise any voice against the attack on journalists whose offence was that they went to cover a rally?

    ‘’The APC, as a party, cannot be intimidated by the antics of those who will have no qualms elevating self interest above public interest, by those who believe their cheap criticism will help insert their snouts into the nectar of filthy lucre.

    ‘’Therefore, while we acknowledge the so-called critics’ right to express their opinions on our directive, we disagree with them, in the exercise of our own rights, and here reiterate the directive, which goes thus: ‘In view of the joint resolutions of the National Assembly on Rivers State, and other constitutional breaches by the Presidency, the APC hereby directs its members in the National Assembly to block all legislative proposals, including the 2014 budget and confirmation of all nominees to military and civilian positions to public office, until the rule of law and constitutionalism is restored in Rivers State in particular, and Nigeria in general’,’’ the party said.

  • Why Ondo lawmakers shunned 2014 budget presentation

    Why Ondo lawmakers shunned 2014 budget presentation

    For the first time since the inception of the present Labour Party (LP) administration in Ondo State, the annual ritual of budget presentation to the House of Assembly was devoid of pleasantries and exchange of banters by the party stakeholders.

    At the hallowed Chambers, only nine out of 26 lawmakers were on seat to receive Governor Olusegun Mimiko and some of his colleagues in the State Executive Council.

    The Speaker, Samuel Adesina (Odigbo Constituency) was conspicuously absent, though on ground of ill-health according to sources.

    His deputy, Dare Emiola from Akoko Southwest 1 presided over the session.

    Three members were also said to be on official assignment outside the state during the budget presentation, but this was however denied by a source within the Assembly.

    One of the lawmakers representing Ose constituency, Mrs Fola Olaseinde has been on suspension for over five months over alleged misconduct.

    Therefore, 17 out of the 26 lawmakers that make up the Assembly were not on seat to receive the N162billion budget estimate by Mimiko. The Assembly is dominated by the Labour Party (LP) with 25 members while the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has only one seat.

    It was gathered that the most of the lawmakers who shunned the presentation were aggrieved over the failure of the executive to consult with the Assembly on the budget presentation and also on what they described as poor implementation of the 2013 budget.

    The only principal officer at the session apart from Emiola was the majority leader, Ifedayo Akinsoyinnu (Ondo West 11).

    Others like chairman, House Committee on Finance and Appropriation, Mr Fidelis Akinwolemiwa (Ondo East), his vice, Akindele Adeniyi (Akure North), chairman, House Committee on Information,  Oyebo Aladetan from (Ilaje I) and the minority leader,  Akpoebi Lubi (Ese-Odo) were absent at the event.

    Though, the majority leader, Akinsoyinu blamed the poor turn out  on  official assignment, but the aggrieved lawmakers said no member was on any official assignment as they were celebrating the New Year festivities with their families within the state.

    They maintained that they ignored the sitting because they were not properly informed by the governor on the annual exercise.

    Though, many of the lawmakers refused to speak with reporters but one of them who spoke in confidence said members of the Assembly were dissatisfied with the level of implementation of the 2013 budget by Mimiko’s government.

    He said: “We are not happy with the level of development in Ondo State. Projects have been moving in a snail speed and the governor has failed this year.

    “What is happening in the state is unfortunate, since the inauguration of the present administration for second term tenure on February 2013, the wheel of progress has stopped”.

    Unconfirmed report said the issue on ground goes beyond shunning budget presentation.

    It was learnt that majority of the lawmakers, though members of the ruling party were not comfortable with the pace of development and are now contemplating dumping the Labour Party for any of the opposition parties.

    But another source said what happened on the floor of the House on December 31, 2013 was not enough to cause a crack in the Assembly to the point of some members defecting to other political parties.

    He, however, admitted that the executive arm was overriding the State Assembly powers, because there is no virile opposition to the government.

    “For now, we can tell you categorically that the leadership of the House is not contemplating on any option of its members defecting to other political parties as being rumoured.

    “What actually happened at the Assembly during the 2014 budget presentation was to tell the Executive arm that we are no fools and we know our rights under the law of the land”.

    According to him, “the tension is now over as efforts are being intensified to settle the disagreement permanently with Governor Mimiko. We have been meeting to find amicable resolution to the misunderstanding”.

    Also, the minority leader, Hon. Lubi said, the lawmakers are not satisfied with the implementation of the 2013 budget which was rated at 30 percent.

    Lubi revealed that the lawmakers had on December 24 rejected a re-ordering budget of N1.5billion sent to the House by the state governor.

    He described the budget presentation ceremony as illegal, adding that the governor needed the two-third majority of the members of the House before he could present a budget.

    A chieftain of All Progressives Congress (APC) who begged for anonymity commended the lawmakers for standing against illegality being perpetrated by the present government.

    He alleged that Mimiko has been mismanaging the state funds and urged the lawmakers to begin the impeachment process of the government.

    His words: “Ondo State people are regretting that the governor still retained the seat after October 20, 2012 poll, we are not happy, and our people are suffering.

    “I will like to commend the lawmaker for standing against continuous illegality which this present administration-led by Mimiko build its foundation upon”

    Also, the former state secretary of the defunct Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), Mr. Adegboyega Adedipe expressed fear over what would be left of the state after the exit of Mimiko’s administration in 2016.

    Adedipe challenged Mimiko to tell the people what he has achieved with the implementation of last year’s budget.

    He said, “We are not surprised that the 2013 budget was scored 30 percent by the lawmakers, we are aware about how he had been mismanaging the funds.”

    However, Mimiko described the 2014 budget tagged “Caring Heart Phase 5”, as the consolidation of the modest gains achieved by his administration in the last five years with the expected delivery of most of the ongoing projects already initiated.

    According to him, the budget is N9.5billion higher than that of 2013 which was N152.5billion.

    He said the budget consists of N69.681billion allocated to recurrent expenditure, while the capital expenditure was put at N92.319 billion.

    The projection of the budget he said was predicated on some of the assumptions contained in the 2014-2016 fiscal strategy document of the Federal Government which include the assumption on oil benchmark price of $77.5 per barrel.

    Mimiko said the budget would be financed from statutory allocation which was put at N43billion, Internally Generated Revenue N15billion, Value Added Tax N10billion, rolled over fund N7billion, mineral derivation fund N20billion, SURE-P N5billion.

    Others are NNPC fund N2billion, Bond N23billion, loans/leases N15billion, grants/credits from development partners N6billion, refund from Federal Government on repair of federal roads N2billion, excess crude account N10billion, education endowment fund N3billion and sundry income/divestment N1billion.

    He explained that out of the N69.681 allocated to recurrent expenditure N35.371billion had been earmarked for personnel cost, while overheads would gulp N5.184billion, recurrent grant to parastatals and tertiary institutions N7.457billion  and special programmes N13.469billion.

     

  • Oshiomhole sends supplementary budget to lawmakers

    Governor Adams Oshiomhole of Edo State has sent a supplementary budget estimate to the House of Assembly for consideration.

    This was contained in a letter to the Assembly dated October 21.

    The letter, read by the Clerk, Egbe Evbuonmwan, at plenary, did not mention which sector of the economy the supplementary budget would address.

    About N149.447.798.805 billion was passed and signed into law for the 2013 fiscal year.

    The Speaker, Uyi Igbe, however, directed the Committee on Rules and Business to slate the budget estimate for first reading at the next sitting.

     

  • Lawmaker praises govt’s delegation to the UN

    Lawmaker praises govt’s delegation to the UN

    The Chairman, House of Representatives Committee on Justice, Hon. Ali Ahmad, has commended the Federal Government’s delegation to the United Nations (UN) for its presentation of the country’s report at the 17th Session of the Universal Periodic Review of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, Switzerland.

    He said the delegation, led by the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Mohammed B. Adoke (SAN), reflected on Nigerians’opinions on issues, such as death penalty and same-sex marriage.

    He said Nigeria is sovereign, noting that once laws are made in accordance with the constitution, no gcountry,however, powerful, can blackmail it. If death penalty is abhorred by these agenda-setting countries at the United Nations, they should convince Nigerians and seek amendment or abrogation. But so long as the death penalty, which is reserved as a deterrent in protecting human life, is part of our law, no grand standing can deter Nigeria, he said.

    He continued: “Even more inconsequential is the pressure being mounted on Nigeria on same-sex marriage, a matter that is not recognised by Nigeria and many African countries as a human rights issue. We have gone past the pre-colonial era and Nigeria must have a voice in the comity of nations on new issues that should or should not emerge as second- or third-generation human rights. No nation can force it on our throat, not even through the United Nations. It is recalled that at this year’s International Bar Association conference held in Boston earlier this month, the powerful gay lobby was forced to admit that Africa was still hostile on same-sex, and that they would concentrate their energy on South America.”

    Ahmed added:  “No one should be left in doubt that so long as Nigerians detest same-sex marriage, the House of Representatives will continue to criminalise it. If by any stretch of imagination it becomes unconstitutional, the National Assembly will not hesitate to amend the Constitution in that regard.”

     

  • SAN seeks quick hearing of petitions by lawmakers

    SAN seeks quick hearing of petitions by lawmakers

    Speedy determination of public petitions before the Public Petitions Committees of the National will help to promote the cause of democracy and rule of law, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Mrs Funke Adekoya has said.

    However, matters which are pending in courts or before administrative panels are not among those the committees can treat, she said.

    Addressing a strategic retreat session of the Senate and House of Representatives committees on public petitions in Lagos, Adekoya said they also should not dabble into matters which citizens have agreed to resolve by arbitration.

    The lawyer, who is the immediate past Chair of the Nigerian Branch of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (UK), said committees’ jurisdiction does not extend to “situations in which parties have already taken the matter to court for determination or where an action has been taken on the matter by an administrative panel”.

    She noted that most petitioners approach the National Assembly because they feel that they will not obtain redress in the courts or due to the slow or expensive process of litigation.

    Adekoya advised the committees to adopt ADR techniques in resolving the petitions, as they are usually written before redress is sought in the courts or administrative panels.

    “Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is a cheaper and a viable option for resolving disputes due to the speed at which decisions are made,” she said.

    Reviewing the recent Senate decision advising the disengaged staff of the National Identity Management Commission (NIMC) to approach the courts for redress, the lawyer said the impasse would have been more speedily resolved through conciliation and mediation.