Tag: Madaki

Aliyu Madaki is a member of the House of Representatives from Kano, representing Dala Federal Constituency under the platform of the All Progressives Congress. In this interview with Victor Oluwasegun, the lawmaker expresses his opinions on the messy budget padding allegation leveled against the Speaker of the House, Hon. Yakubu Dogara and other principal officers by the former Chairman of the House Committee on Appropriations, Hon. Abdulmumin Jibrin. Excerpts:

PEOPLE have said a lot of things since the budget padding controversy began. While some said that former Chairman of the Appropriation Committee, Abdulmumin Jibrin, is an angry man trying to drag the House of Representatives into disrepute, others are saying no, the allegations are grave and should be investigated by anti- graft agencies. What is your opinion?

My opinion is that we all know what is wrong and what is right. We know what is black and what is white and can easily distinguish between the two. If you do something that you know is right, then you have nothing to fear, but if you do something that is against the law or the constitution of this country, I believe you should be able to answer for it. Abdulmumin has been with the Speaker, they’re from the same group, the same camp. That is why when I read recently someone saying that it’s a fight between two factions of the National Assembly -those who won during the Speakership contest and those who lost out- I laughed. Maybe some people have a very short memory. Abdulmumin Jibrin was the one who nominated Dogara to be the Speaker of the House of Representatives. He is a staunch member of the Dogara group and now because they have fallen apart, somebody is trying to link one faction of the House to an internal problem of the Dogara group; I find that very amusing.

And what I will say on all these is, let the right thing be done. Abdulmumin has made weighty allegations, very weighty, and I think as a country and I’m sure as a government of change, these are not issues that can easily be swept under the carpet. These are issues that need to be investigated thoroughly. And if they are found to be false, then Abdulmumin Jibrin should be punished for bringing the name of the House into disrepute. But if they’re true, then I believe the Speaker has no option than to resign from his seat, or be removed.

What of the assertion by the Speaker at the Villa and other fora that “padding” or insertions is not a crime and hence he has not committed any offense?

It depends on your definition of padding. What I know happens in the House of Reps, which I don’t agree with, is that people insert certain amounts to certain projects that belong to them personally without the knowledge of the larger House. How these things happen, let me clarify a little because there have been so much controversy about padding. I believe as a legislature, as an institution, we have the right to reduce or increase the budget as submitted by Mr. President. I believe there is no controversy on that. What I don’t subscribe to, or what I believe is illegal, is where some four, five, seven, 10 or 15 people, after the House has passed the budget, will go and sit in one room and allocate certain figures to certain individuals…

Do you believe that actually happens?

It’s not about belief, I know it does happen. No member of this House can come here, look me in the eyes and tell me it is not happening. It happens every year, and it’s wrong. And it must stop. You go and sit; few people in a room, you allocate certain figures to your constituency, some of the jobs are done, some are not even done. My friend; that is corruption, that is illegal and an abuse of power. You allocate money to your own constituency, you allocate money to your own friends in the House of Representatives, people you like their faces you give them, people you don’t like, and you don’t give them anything. I’m from Kano, my constituency, Dala Federal Constituency, is the biggest in the whole of Nigeria. I have one ward in Dala Federal Constituency that is bigger than most local governments in Nigeria, but I’m getting N40 million for my constituency projects. And another member is getting N2 billion, N3 billion, N5billion. Then, in other states, some members can legally get, N150 million, N200 million, N250 million while I get N40 million, and you think that is right? And you think that is fair? See, this issue, most people don’t know, started before Abdulmumin issue began. Some of us sat and said this thing that has been happening must stop.

You went to court over the powers of the Speaker in the proposed new House Rules, what would be your opinion on the possibility of Hon. Abdulmumin being suspended under such a rule?

Let me first of all say that I went to court, not only myself alone, but with ten other members of this House because we felt the Speaker wanted to give himself so much powers than has ever been given to any Speaker in the history of the National Assembly. And we felt he was trying to do that for a purpose because he wants to have things his own way and wants to muzzle out all opposition in the House of Representatives. And we felt that it’s undemocratic and unconstitutional. That was why we went to court. The case is still in court. But to our utter surprise and dismay, the issue we took to court, the new House Rules have been brought out. As we speak, it is presumed, ” in quote”  to be the operative law of the House of Representatives; a case that is in court. You can see the kind of impunity we are talking about. Instead of the Speaker to allow this court case to be exhausted, either we win or we lose, we will know that we have gone to court, we’ll know the court has ruled on it. But now, a week before we went on recess, they brought out the new House Rules.

So, they have circulated the new House Rules; do you have a copy?

Yes, they have circulated it and I have a copy of the new House Rules which has all the allegations we made against the Speaker. They may want to use that and say they’re suspending someone for six months, one year because the man has given himself so much latitude to do whatever he wants. But we will not allow this, we will fight against it. We will challenge it in every way possible. I believe that the new House Rules is illegal. We will return to court and ask the court to enforce its power on the House of Representatives.

In terms of the constituency projects for members of the House, what would you want?

We want the huge amounts allocated to principal officers to be scrapped. We want to have equal amounts for all members. We have 360 members. For goodness’ sake, if someone close to my constituency has N500 million, one billion, two billion and I, with the biggest federal constituency in Nigeria in terms of population, has N40 million and you’re giving somebody from Bauchi, Bogoro, small local government, N5 billion, and we’re all here to represent our people. We’re all here to take something down to our constituencies. So, what am I going to tell my people? That I don’t know how to pad? That I don’t know how to insert illegally? The people might not even understand what is legal or illegal. What I’m saying is that it’s wrong and must stop.

So, as a member of the House of Representatives, how do you feel with the comments of Nigerians on the padding issue in the mainstream and social media?

Let me say, I feel very sad that most Nigerians now see every member of the National Assembly as somebody who just comes here in order to steal, in order to go and request that money be put for me to do this job and you go there and collect. That they do small job and the rest of the money goes into your pocket. Unfortunately, this allegation made against all of us is not true.

Some people believe if this issue of padding is not investigated by the Buhari government, the fight against corruption would be tainted and seen as sectional and selective. Is this correct?

I don’t think the President will look away. I’m sure the President will allow the law to take its course. I’m not the spokesperson for the President, but I know for one that the President is a man of integrity. I know the man is very honest. I know, for a fact, that what people are saying about him being selective is not true. And I’m sure, if he believes this is an issue that needs to be investigated, the President will not in any way do anything to hamper any lawful investigation into the activities of the House. And most of us support that.

Nigerians are of the opinion that padding in the National Assembly cannot be successful without the connivance of the executive. Do you agree?

That may be true because when you insert, as they do, you will have to find an ally in the executive who will help you arrange sometimes for the contractor and how the work would be done. If you’re getting some part of the money…I don’t know whether they do because I don’t have any evidence. Whatever you’re saying you should have evidence, but that is what people are saying in this place. Truly, there has to be somebody in the executive arm. We’re not talking of the Presidency, when we talk of Executive arm; all the ministries are part of the Executive arm of government. I’m sure there must be connivance with certain officials in the Executive arm.  It cannot be legislators alone.

It would seem that this padding is more of a House of Representatives thing?

This budget padding is not only in the House of Representatives, it is done in both chambers of the National Assembly, both the Senate and House of Representatives.

There were insinuations at a point that the House Leader, Femi Gbajabiamila, was not mentioned by Abdulmunin in the padding allegation  because the plan is for Gbajaniamila to become Speaker and Abdulmumin Deputy after Dogara might have been removed.

This is what I call tales by moonlight. Femi Gbajabiamila is the House Leader. Jibrin made accusations against four principal officers. I personally called Jibrin and asked him: why are you making allegations against four principal officers while the paper you brought contains the name of ten principal officers?  Jibrin stated, very clearly, that these four principal officers called him to a meeting; gave him that paper, the other six were not there, and they asked him this is what you should go and do. It was based on that that he imputed all the House budget.

Some people have said there are religious motives in the controversy, saying Muslim members are trying to oust Dogara because he is a Christian. They mentioned that former Speaker, Patricia Etteh, was given the same treatment, but that all other former Speakers, even Dimeji Bankole and Aminu Tambuwal, in spite of their issues, were allowed to finish their tenure.

I’m sorry for those imputing religious motives to this issue. Abdulmumin Jibrin is a Muslim. He, like I said before, nominated Dogara, a Christian, to be Speaker. He was Dogara’s number one warrior during the battle for Speakership.  Femi Gbajabiamila is a Muslim, Jibrin is a Muslim, but Jibrin did not support him. Is it because now Abdulmumin has come out to fight Dogara, the two of them for their selfish reasons, that people now will bring the issue of religion? Before, they forgot Abdulmumin was a Muslim? It’s laughable.

So, what would you be angling for when the House resumes?

Eleven members of the House of Representatives are so aggrieved over the New House rules that they have gone to court to challenge it. In this interview with Victor Oluwasegun, Hon. Aliyu Madaki (APC Kano), who spearheaded the move, speaks on the reasons that informed their decision.

What exactly is the reason you’re in court over the new rule book of the House?

There is no organisation, society or government body that will work without rules and regulations guiding it. In the House, we have our rules book. What we are contesting in court is that the rules were changed and it is our belief that the way and manner the rules were changed, the procedures of changing the rules were not followed. Not only that, it is also our contention that some undemocratic things have been put into the new rules. And if you recall, on the 8th of October when these rules were changed, I came through Point of Order, eight times, not once or twice, but eight times. I tried to draw the attention of the House that these new rules we are trying to pass are not only undemocratic, they are also unconstitutional. This is because I believe that the constitution of Nigeria in Sections 36 and 39 gives me freedom of expression, freedom of thought, freedom of religion and freedom of association, and it is my firm belief that with these new rules that the House has adopted, those constitutional rights given me by the people of Dala Federal Constituency will be infringed upon.

So what are the procedures that are wrong?

When I discover they will not heed my pleas, I called for a division. If you read our standing order section 77, says if the presiding officer rules on something if you’re not in agreement with what he ruled on, you can call for division…I don’t know, it’s as if I’m going into the substance of the case and I don’t think that is proper and the case is in court, but I believe there are so many procedures that have not been followed, even the changing of the rules.

But some people as laymen will look at it and say the new rules are laudable, especially because of some things that have happened in the parliament in the past, especially the snatching of the Mace and things like that.

Do you watch other parliaments in the world? I watched recently about two or three months, I saw a parliament in Asia, the president came and they were throwing eggs at him. In a democracy, there is bound to be disagreements. We’re not here to serve our personal interest, but to serve our constituents, but with the new law we have now, we cannot even do our work, because if I stood up to talk or contribute to a debate or to disagree with a presiding officer and he asked me to sit down based on the new rule and I refuse, I will be suspended for 30 plenary days. Do you understand what 30 plenary days mean? It means 30 days of sitting. If you count 30 days of sitting, it would give you about three months. In those months, that constituency will not be represented in the National Assembly. And in the new rule, the Speaker can suspend you for 6 months for approaching the Mace, or for intending to approach the mace. I don’t know how we can read intention.

Do you think you’re being victimized?

I don’t know. That was why I raised it on the floor. I said it that nobody on that floor can stop me from talking. That is what I’m here for. I don’t go to any government agency seeking for contract or favour, quote me. I do my job. I try to serve the interest of my people in the best way possible. And in this motion…Kano, we are traders, our airport was the first in the whole of Nigeria. But because of the economic situation in the country, things went so bad. But I thank God, in the 7th Assembly I raised between 7 to 8 motions on the airport. Now, go to Kano Airport, it has come back to life. It was through one of those motions that I raised that Emirate Airline was given permission to land in Kano.

What was the issue with Emirates and Kano and the BASA agreement?

The BASA, you know is Bilateral Air Service Agreement signed between Nigerian and United Arabs Emirate giving landing rights to Emirates Airlines to fly Abuja and Kano routes as one single route. After they were given the approval, after they have sold tickets to customers, they were about to start operations, just two weeks, the then federal government wrote a letter to Emirate informing them to suspend the Kano leg of the agreement, and that it would be for a very short period of time. And we all know what happened. After that, elections held and the government lost. They don’t have an interest in any airline going to Kano or anywhere in Nigeria because they were leaving office. I just brought the issue, that as an assembly let this resolution be passed that the suspension be lifted because the agreement has been signed and Emirates Airline is ready to go to Kano. That was all. And somebody now decided to keep it somewhere. And I went to him as a friend and begged. He said when we return from break. When we came back I didn’t see it.  I went to him again, said please this week put it. This week, I didn’t see it on the Order paper so, that was why I had to bring it to the floor.

So, are you satisfied with the Speaker’s ruling that it should be first come, first served?

What the Speaker did was the right thing by saying first come, first served because I’m aware that there was someone who brought his own last week and it is in this week’s Order Paper. So, I don’t want a situation where we will be staying in the Animal Farm where some animals are more equal than others.

There were eleven members that went to court on the new rules issue, are they all in agreement over the issue?

How would I put somebody’s name that is not in agreement? If you know me very well, I won’t put the name of someone who has not consented on the list. Let anyone on the list look me in the eye and tell me he has not consented. I won’t do that. I am not that kind of person. If you see me in the chambers, whatever is right, I will stand up and say this is right; if it is wrong, I will say this is wrong. I will never defend the un-defendable. I said it the day this new rule was passed that I would go to court. When I said it, I didn’t intend to carry anyone along with me. If I believe in my cause, if I’m the only one, 359 can be on one side and I will be on the other side. That is if my conscience tells me what I’m doing is right. And my conscience tells me in this case that I am right. This is not for me. I have said it that day, that tomorrow I can be the Speaker’s friend. And I’ve never seen in a democracy where members of parliament will sit and give one single person this kind of sweeping powers. I have never seen it.

But you are just eleven members, are you not in the minority in the House?

We are eleven that went to court, but we are not eleven that are against the rules. If you get the video of what transpired that day, I have it here, you will see I’m not in the minority, even when they took the voice vote, and that was why I asked for a division. When you request for a division, it means you did not agree with the voice vote. What we’re using here is the voice vote. And serious issues like changing the law, in my own sincere opinion, we shouldn’t use voice vote for changing the House rule. It is just like changing the constitution; we don’t use voice vote, it has to be crystal clear that this is what you’re voting for or against. But voice vote can be easily manipulated. Very easily. That is why I requested for a division that day. I have the tape.