The Nation Newspaper

Tag: national assembly

  • Death stalks National Assembly

    The death of Senator Mustapha Bukar (Katsina North), five days after the passing of House of Representative member Umar Buba Jibril, has set tongues wagging. The senator’s demise brings the death toll in the Eighth National Assembly to nine in about three years, reports RAYMOND MORDI Deputy Political Editor.

    THE passing away of Senator Mustapha Bukar, the lawmaker representing Katsina North in the upper chamber of the National Assembly last Wednesday has stirred the conscience of the nation. Bukar’s death has drawn attention to the growing number of lawmakers dying suddenly and others “after a brief illness”. Senate President Bukola Saraki said he was saddened by the development. His words: “I am saddened to learn about the passing of another friend and colleague, Senator Mustapha Bukar. As a first-time Senator, Mustapha stood out for the quality of his contributions on the floor, his pragmatism and his work to strengthen the institution of the legislature.”

    Bukar was the Chairman, Senate Committee on Capital Markets. Reports say he died in the early hours of the day at Nizamiye Hospital, Abuja. He was survived by two wives and and 12 children. The deceased was aged 63.

    The death of the lawmaker who represented President Muhammadu Buhari’s constituency in the upper house, otherwise known as the Red Chamber, brings the death toll in the Eighth National Assembly to nine in close to three years. It was felt because it came five days after the passing away of another lawmaker, Hon. Umar Buba Jibril, who represented Lokoja/Kogi Federal Constituency in the House of Representatives, on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    Jibril passed away on Friday, March 30, 2018, after “a long protracted illness”. The 58-year old lawmaker was a three-time member of the House and a former Speaker of the Kogi State House of Assembly.

    Two weeks earlier, another lawmaker, Senator Ali Wakili, had died suddenly. Wakili who represented Bauchi South in the Senate was suspected to have died from heart attack. The 58-year old senator took part in the high-society wedding of Fatima Dangote, the daughter of Africa’s richest man Aliko Dangote, to former Inspector General of Police, Mohammed Abubakar’s son, Jamil Abubakar on Friday March 16, 2018 in Kano.

    The next day, he was reported to have slumped at his Gwarimpa residence in Abuja, the nation’s capital. The 58-year-old lawmaker, until his death, was the chairman of the Senate Committee on Poverty Alleviation and a member of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). He was also a retired controller of the Nigeria Customs Service (NCS).

    In all, four senators and five reps have died in this dispensation. Speaking while mourning the death of Senator Wakili, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Hon. Yakubu Dogara, said: “It’s unfortunate that we have to do this time and time again, our prayer to God is that God should preserve all of us members of the National Assembly. I don’t think it’s ever happened like this before, where we’ve had to bury – to my quick recollection – about three senators and five members of the House of Representatives.”

    Five of the lawmakers who died during the period are in their 50s; four of them are above 60. Incidentally, none of them died from accidents, violence or disasters. All deaths were medically related; some coming after protracted illnesses, while others took place suddenly. The first death in the current National Assembly took place before it was inaugurated on June 9, 2015. That was the death of Ahmed Zanna, who had been re-elected to represent Borno Central in the Senate. But he died a month to inauguration.

    Zanna passed on after his re-election bid in April 2015, but did not live to witness his inauguration as a member of the Eighth National Assembly. The 59-year-old was said to have lost his battle to a terminal ailment. In 2012, Zana was linked to Boko Haram when a top leader of the sect, Shuaibu Mohammed Bama, was reportedly arrested in his house in Maiduguri.

    In February 15 last year, Hon. Bello Sani, who represented Mashi/Dvisi Federal Constituency, also passed away at the age of 51. Abubakar Adamu, an aide to the late lawmaker, said his principal had suffered protracted illness for several months leading to his death. He was a member of the APC.

    In April last year, Senator Isiaka Adeleke, who represented Osun West on the platform of the APC, equally died at the age of 62. Adeleke died on the morning of Sunday, April 23, 2017 at Biket Hospital in Osogbo, after suffering a heart attack, although there were controversies on the circumstances.

    Sen. Isiaka Adeleke had aspired to lead the people of Osun State in the next governorship election, which is scheduled for September 22, 2018. Little did he know that his dream will never be fulfilled. He died not long after he returned from a political outing.

    Adeleke’s death raised a loud controversy which led to riots in Ede, his hometown. Mr. Alfred Aderibigbe, a nurse, who was alleged to have administered an overdose of drugs on the late senator, denied the allegation before Coroner Inquest Panel, set up by the government, which was also suspected to have known something about his death.

    The death of Adeleke was eventually declared by Dr. Solaja Olufemi, the pathologist who conducted the autopsy examination on the late senator and who testified before the coroner inquest in Osogbo, to be linked to excessive dose of analgesics, sedatives and alcohol. Contrary to the claim of some people, who thought he was poisoned.

    The three-term senator and a former civilian governor of the state, was described by his colleagues as a calm, principled and responsible gentleman. He was eventually replaced by his younger brother, Ademola Adeleke, who contested on the platform of the PDP to win the senatorial bye-election.

    Three months after, Abdullahi Wammako, a member of the House of Representatives from Sokoto State, died at an Abuja hospital. He died on July 14, 2017, after a brief illness.

    A first term lawmaker, he represented Kware/Wammako Federal Constituency. He contested and won the 2015 parliamentary election under the platform of the APC.

    The 50-year-old deceased lawmaker was a younger brother to Aliyu Wammako, former governor of Sokoto State.

    In March 17, 2016, Hon. Musa Baba-Onwana, who represented Nasarawa/Toto Federal Constituency on the platform of the APC, passed away at the age of 50. The cause of his death was unknown.

    He was elected to the House of Representatives in 2011 and returned in 2015.

    Similarly, the member representing Ifako Ijaiye Federal Constituency, Mr. Elijah Adewale, popularly known as Jah, had also slumped and died at the early hours of Thursday, July 21, 2016 in his house in Abuja. Jah who was a member of the ruling APC was suspected to have died of heart attack.

    The 65-year-old lawmaker, who was reported to have attended the caucus meeting of the House of Representatives in the evening of the previous day, died very early on Thursday morning, the following day.

  • National Assembly in nation-building

    SIR: Democracy is based on the notion that a people should be self-governing and that the representatives of the people be held accountable for their dithering, actions and inactions. For stability and good governance to be achieved, some degree of cooperation and understanding amongst the three arms is expected. John Stuart Mill wrote that in a representative democracy, the legislature acts as the eyes, ears and voice of the people. According to him, “the proper office of a representative assembly is to watch and control the government; to throw the light of publicity on its acts, to compel a full exposition and justification of all of them which any one considers questionable, to censure them if found condemnable.

    Before the inauguration of the 8th National Assembly, there had already been calls for transparency and reduction in funding for the lawmakers who rank among the highest paid in the world. According to ‘The Economist’ magazine, our lawmakers earn around $160, 000 annually based on current exchange rates-more than British lawmakers. While the lawmakers earn so much, Nigerians survive on the N18, 000 monthly minimum wage. At a time most of the states could not pay that N18, 000, our senators reportedly take home N13 million as monthly allowance.

    How can we possibly justify this waste in an era when both the federal and state governments cannot pay their workers and when the country owes so much money both domestically and internationally? What is playing out in the National Assembly is certainly not the change Nigerians either wished or voted for. Nigerians did not expect that their elected representatives will perennially bicker over the passage of the budget. But here we are again confronted by the malfeasance and scandals that blighted past assemblies.

    For the legislature to play its roles effectively, its hands must be clean, and house put in order. A corrupt legislature will not have credibility and authority to carry out its role as the watchdog of the people. In analysing the basic roles of the legislature, vis-à-vis the law-making, representation and oversight functions, the question that readily comes to mind is, has the legislature in Nigeria done much in the promotion of welfare of the generality of Nigerians by providing quality representation and provision of basic amenities and enabling environments? They have a duty to represent the interests of their various individual constituencies rather than representing their personal interest, parties and family members.

     

    • Ademola Orunbon,

    Epe, Lagos State.

     

  • Buhari mourns Senator Mustapha Bukar 

    President Muhammadu Buhari has commiserated with the government and people of Katsina State and the National Assembly on the passing away of Senator Mustapha Bukar, who represented Katsina North constituency.

    The President, in a statement by the Senior Special Assistant on Media and publicity, Garba Shehu, described his death as a “great loss to Nigeria’s democracy and the engineering profession.’’

    President Buhari has also sent condolences to the family members, friends and professional colleagues of the legislator, who distinguished himself as an engineer before vying for political office to serve his people.

    The President recalled that as a young engineer the deceased used his ingenuity to proffer a lasting solution to the perennial water crisis in Katsina, working variously as a General Manager of the Water Board,  Director of National Water Rehabilitation Project and Director, Water Supply at the Federal Ministry of Water Resources.

    “Senator Bukar was so dedicated to his responsibilities and hardworking that he got an appointment with the Federal Ministry of Water Resources, where he also demonstrated the same dedication and passion for service,’’ the President said.

    He added: “I am always touched by the death of dedicated and creative public servants like Sen. Bukar. We should emulate such rare and hardworking Nigerians for the progress of our country.’’

    The President prayed that Allah will bless and forgive the soul of the deceased.

    Read Also: Saraki mourns late Sen. Mustapha Bukar

  • Debt recovery: National Assembly to review AMCON Act

    The House of Representatives has begun the process of amending the Act establishing the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON), eight years after it started operation, the Chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Banking and Currency, Jones Onyereri, has said.

    He said the proposed amendment would further empower AMCON to go after its debtors, especially those that exploit some loopholes in the Act to perpetually engage AMCON in court.

    AMCON, a creation of the National Assembly in response to the global financial crises of 2008/2009, acquired over 12,000 Non-Performing Loans worth about N3.7 trillion from 22 banks. Of this, AMCON injected N2.2 trillion as financial accommodation to 10 commercial banks to prevent systemic failure. This action helped stabilise the financial system.

    About N3.66 trillion of depositors’ funds were protected and approximately 14,000 jobs were saved as a result of AMCON’s intervention in the banking sector. The idea is to recover the debts either through structured repayment or disposal of transferred assets towards settlement of the bonds

    Onyereri spoke at a one-day technical session with financial sector stakeholders in Abuja where the challenges inhibiting AMCON from recovering debts were extensively discussed. The committee also used the occasion to hear presentations from representatives of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Nigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation (NDIC) and lawyers on  how AMCON could function optimally as well as meet its mandate before sunset.

    AMCON Managing Director/Chief Executive  Officer, Ahmed Kuru, described his assignment at AMCON as “very difficult,” but said there was need to change the recovery approach at the Corporation with the backing of the National Assembly, especially since the remaining crop of AMCON debtors are defiant, recalcitrant and business heavy-weights, who have the financial wherewithal to repay their debts, but have refused to pay by going to court to tie AMCON up.

    The AMCON boss said: “We have been doing this for the past seven years and we have realised that what we need now at this time in the life of AMCON is legislative help that would make it possible to recover these debts effectively and efficiently. At AMCON, we believe that the Act establishing the corporation can be amended as many times as possible by the National Assembly as long as they think it is appropriate to do so in the interest of the Nigerian economy. Given the difficulties we are facing presently, we are of the opinion that the Act establishing AMCON should be amended to reflect our sunset period.”

    He said the corporation has realised that some obligors have since established another lifestyle that are different from what brought them to AMCON so the best it can do as a law abiding agency of the government is take them to court.

    “But the wheel of justice grinds slowly in the country so something drastic must be done if we all want AMCON to meet its mandate at sunset. So, we suggest that the National Assembly amends the Act establishing AMCON in such a way that the assets of the obligor(s) are automatically transferred to AMCON. From what we know, some of the obligors are working hard to ensure that the cases they have with AMCON in different courts outlives the lifespan of AMCON,”he said.

    The National Assembly, which in the first place created AMCON in 2010, Kuru argued, must do everything within its constitutional powers to protect the Corporation and pay more attention to AMCON sunset to enable AMCON fully recover the debts from the hard-core obligors, who would stop at nothing to frustrate AMCON, the National Assembly and the Nigerians.

     

  • National Assembly ‘lacks power to fix election dates’

    Lagos lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) argues that going by the provisions of the Constitution, only the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) can fix election dates.

    Since the return to democratic rule in 1999, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has conducted the general elections on a two-tier or three-tier basis. Even though the national assembly had attempted in the past to use the Electoral Act to alter the sequence of elections fixed by the INEC it did not succeed. In spite of the ongoing controversy surrounding the sequence of elections our recent experience as a nation has shown that there is nothing sacrosanct about it. In 1999 and 2007 the presidential election came up last while it came up first in 2015.  In influencing the order of elections in 2015 the ruling party had thought that holding the presidential election first would have bandwagon effect on the outcome of the other elections. But the result was a disaster for the ruling party.

    It has equally been confirmed that when elections into the legislative houses were held before other election in the past majority of sitting legislators lost their seats.  So, there is no indication that President Mohammadu Buhari stands to benefit electorally from the decision of the INEC to retain the 2015 sequence of elections. But notwithstanding the reactions of the presidency and the national assembly to the sequence of elections announced by the INEC it is pertinent to review the relevant provisions of the Constitution, the Electoral Act and judicial authorities on the vexed issue.

    In preparations for the 2019 general elections the INEC recently released a timetable for party primaries and the elections into the various offices in exercise of its powers under Sections 76, 116, 132 and 178 as well as paragraph 15 of Part 1 of the Third Schedule made pursuant to section 153 (1) of the Constitution. Under the arrangement the presidential and national assembly elections will be held on February 16, 2019 while the governorship and house of assembly elections will take place on March 2, 2019.  But in the Electoral Bill 2018 recently passed by the national assembly the sequence of the general elections has been altered. The sequence of proposed by the new amendment is A. National Assembly Election, B. Governorship and State Assembly Elections and C. Presidential Election.

    No doubt, the matter has generated a needless controversy to the extent that little or no attention is paid to the other provisions of the Electoral Bill which have the capacity to promote internal democracy and enhance the credibility of the electoral process. Perhaps not aware of the state of the law the INEC has announced its intention to approach the Supreme Court to test the constitutional validity of the Electoral Bill 2018 if it is eventually signed into law by the President. Since there are indications that the President may withhold his assent in the circumstance, the national assembly has threatened to override his veto.

    Having watched the trend of the debate it is regrettable to note that the parties involved in the dispute have not studied the decision of the Court of Appeal in the case of National Assembly v. President (2003) 9 NWLR (PT 824) 104 at 143-144. In that case, President Obasanjo had refused to assent to the Electoral Bill 2002 which had been passed by both Chambers of the National Assembly and transmitted to him June 24, 2002. Subsequently, by a motion of veto-override the national assembly passed the bill into law. In an originating summons filed at the Federal High Court the INEC challenged the validity of the passage of the Bill into law and the constitutionality of Section 15 of the Act which had provided that general elections shall be held in one day.

    The trial court held that the Bill was properly passed into law but that Section 15 thereof was inconsistent with Sections 76, 116, 132 and 178 of the Constitution. Dissatisfied with the annulment of Section 15 of the Electoral Act, the national assembly filed an appeal at the Court of Appeal. On his own part, the Attorney-General of the Federation filed a cross appeal to challenge the passage of the Bill into law. In its judgment the Court of Appeal held that the manner of passing the bill into was unconstitutional but declined to set it aside on ground of public policy as the 2003 general elections were being conducted under the law. However, the Court of Appeal affirmed the decision of the Federal High Court on the illegality of Section 15 of the Electoral Act.

    In his contribution to the judgment of the Court, Oduyemi J.C.A (as he then was) stated that ”in so far as Section 15 of the Electoral Act, 2002 seeks to fetter that discretion and limit the 3rdDefendant to only one day in the year for all elections to the offices concerned, that provision of the Act is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution above referred to and is to that extent a nullity. Section 1(3) of the Constitution… All in all, I agree with the reasoning in the judgment of the lower court and with the conclusion in the judgment that Section 15 of the Electoral Act, 2002 is inconsistent with the specific provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 in Section 132(1), 76(1), 178(1), 116(1), 78, 118 and Item 15(a) of the 3rd Schedule: that it infringes upon the absolute discretion vested by the Constitution on the 3rdRespondent with regard to the fixing of dates for election into the various offices concerned.”

    However, the national assembly took advantage of the 2010 Alteration of the Constitution to attempt to overrule the judgment of the Court of Appeal in the case of the National Assembly v. The President (supra). Thus, in the first alteration made to the Constitution, the national assembly amended sections 132(1), 76(1), 178(1), 116(1), 118 and 178 of the Constitution by adding the phrase ”in accordance with the Electoral Act”. Although the power of the INEC to ”organize, undertake and supervise” the general elections conferred on it by paragraph 15 of part 1 of the third schedule made pursuant to section 153 of the Constitution was left intact, the national assembly members erroneously believed that they had conferred on themselves the power to fix the dates for general elections in Nigeria. Hence, in the 2018 Electoral Bill, the national assembly is alleged to have tampered with the discretion of the INEC to fix the dates for the 2019 general elections.

    Apart from the illegality of subjecting the provisions of the Constitution to the Electoral Act, the Alteration of the Constitution did not confer on the national assembly the power of fix dates for holding the general election in Nigeria. To that extent, the national assembly cannot use the Electoral Act to usurp the powers exclusively conferred on the INEC to appoint dates for holding the general elections in the country. Indeed, the Supreme Court has had cause, after the first 2010 Alteration of the Constitution, to confirm the discretionary power of the INEC to fix the dates for holding the general elections.

    In PDP V. SYLVA (2012) 13 NWLR (PT 1316) 85 the respondent challenged the decision of the INEC to cancel and reschedule the 2012 governorship election in Bayelsa State. In dismissing the contention the Supreme Court (per Rhodes Vivour JSC) held that ‘’INEC has the sole responsibility to fix dates for election and to my mind if INEC fixes a date for elections and for whatever reason, be it logistic, I do not think anyone has a cause of action against INEC for canceling an election (not held) and rescheduling elections for another day’’.

    Similarly, in NDP V INEC (2013) 20 WRN 1 at 45 the Supreme Court (per Ariwoola J.S.C.) held that ”It is not in doubt that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) that is, the respondent, has the sole responsibility to decide when elections are to hold. See Peoples Democratic Party v Timipre Sylva & Ors (2012) 13 NWLR (Pt 1316) 85 at 122. The respondent also reserves the prerogative to decide what Timetable to of Activities to publish for a General Election.”   Furthermore, in Hon. James Abiodun Faleke v INEC (2016) 50 WRN 1 the Supreme Court reiterated the view that by virtue of paragraph 15 of Part 1 of the Third Schedule made pursuant to section 153 (1) (f) and (i) of the Constitution, the Independent National Electoral Commission has power to organize, undertake and supervise all elections to the offices of the President, Vice President, the Governor and Deputy Governor of a State and the membership of the Senate, the House of Representatives and the House of Assembly of each state of the Federation.

    No doubt, the national assembly would have achieved its objective if it had incorporated the sequence of the general elections in the Constitution. But by providing that the INEC shall fix election dates ”in accordance with the Electoral Act” the interference in the exercise of the discretionary power of INEC’s constitutional power to fix the dates for the elections cannot be justified in law. As far as the Constitution is concerned, the power of the INEC to organize, undertake and supervise the elections which has been interpreted to include the power to fix the dates for the general elections or determine the sequence of the elections has not been altered in any material particular.

    It is the height of legislative absurdity to say that the power donated to the INEC by the Constitution shall be exercised in accordance with the provision of an inferior legislation. InAttorney-General, Abia State v. Attorney-General of the Federation (2002) 1 WRN 1 at 45 Kutigi CJN (as he then was) held that ”where the provision in the Act is within the legislative powers of the National Assembly but the Constitution is found to have already made the same or similar provision, then the new provision will be regarded as invalid for duplication and/or inconsistency and therefore inoperative. The same fate will befall any provision of the Act which seeks to enlarge, curtail or alter any existing provision of the Constitution. The provision or provisions will be treated as unconstitutional and therefore null and void.”

    From the foregoing, it is submitted that the interference in the exercise of the powers of the INEC to appoint dates for holding the general election in Nigeria is illegal as the provision of the Electoral Bill, 2018 is inconsistent with Sections 76,116,132 and 178 of the Constitution. To the extent of such inconsistency, the provision of the Electoral Bill is illegal, null and void as stipulated by section 1 (3) of the Constitution. In other words, since the INEC has been empowered to organise, undertake and supervise all elections the National Assembly cannot rely on the provision of the Electoral Act to usurp the powers of the INEC to fix the dates for the elections. In view of the settled position of the law the INEC should not waste public funds by rushing to the Supreme Court to contest its own constitutional duty to organise, undertake and supervise the 2019 general elections.

  • Election sequence: Accord, NASS, INEC know fate April 25

    The Federal High Court, Abuja, has fixed April 25 to deliver judgment in a suit filed by the Accord Party seeking an order of court, restraining the National Assembly from acting on the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill, 2018.

    It will be recalled that President Muhammadu Buhari had on March 13, refused to sign the bill into law, which sparked arguments as to whether or not, the National Assembly would use its powers to override the president’s decision.

    Justice Ahmed Mohammed fixed the date after listening to arguments of both the plaintiff and the defendants.

    Mr Joseph Daudu (SAN), counsel to the National Assembly, the first defendant, in his preliminary objection argued that the court lacked the jurisdiction to hear the matter on the grounds that its jurisdiction was not properly invoked.

    According to him, the court can only have jurisdiction over the matter if the bill has become an act.

    “No matter how it is construed, the Electoral Act Amendment Bill as at the day the originating summons was filed, up till date, is a bill, it becomes an act upon the happenings of two eventualities.

    “Where a president, acting under provisions of Section 58(4) assents to the bill, it then becomes an Act of the National Assembly.

    “Where he refuses to assent, under Section 58(5), the bill is returned to the National Assembly for use of their powers of  to override.

    “At that point, it remains a bill because there is no guarantee that they will muster the required two thirds majority to veto it.”

    Daudu argued that it was only where the National Assembly successfully used its power to over ride the President’s veto and transform the bill to an act that the jurisdiction of the court over it would be ignited.

    He further argued that there was no certificate of registration before the court to show that the Accord Party was indeed a political party as it was claiming to be.

    Arguing for the second defendant, the Attorney-General of the Federation, Mr Abubakar Malami (SAN) aligned himself with the submission of Mr Wole Olanipekun, (SAN), counsel to the Accord Party.

    Mr Femi Falana, counsel to the Independent National Electoral Commission ( INEC ), the third defendant, however, argued that the Accord Party was a political party duly registered by INEC.

    He submitted that the party contested in the last election in the country and won seats in the parliament.

    On his part, counsel to the Accord Party, Mr Wole Olanipekun (SAN) maintained that legislative powers began when a bill was introduced in parliament and ended when it was transmitted to the president.

    He said the court had the jurisdiction to hear the matter and urged the court to dismiss Daudu’s preliminary objection and grant the reliefs his client sought.

    Justice Mohammed adjourned the matter until April 25, to deliver judgment.

    The plaintiff, Accord Party, had approached the court with a motion seeking an order restraining the National Assembly from taking action or actions on the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill, 2018.

    The plaintiff is claiming, against the defendants, a declaration that INEC is the only body constitutionally vested with the powers to organise elections to the offices of the President and Vice President of Nigeria.

    It also has powers to organise elections to the offices of governor and deputy governor of a state, membership of the senate, the House of Representatives and the House of Assembly of each state including fixing or assigning dates for the said elections and the sequence of same.

    “A declaration that the legislative powers vested in the National Assembly by the constitution do not empower or imbue it with the right, liberty or authority to pass or purport to pass any bill into Law.

    “This is with regards to a bill which attempts to interfere with or undermine the independence of INEC as guaranteed by the content, spirit and tenor of the constitution.

    “A declaration that the legislative powers vested in the National Assembly by the Constitution do not empower or imbue it with the right, liberty or authority to control or dictate to INEC the way and manner it should organise, undertake and supervise elections.”

    NAN

  • Order of elections: Bribe claims rock National Assembly

    Lawmakers may have dumped their agreement with party chiefs to pull the brakes on their plan to override the President’s veto of the Electoral Amendment Bill reversing the order of elections, The Nation learnt yesterday.

    Unless the National Caucus meeting of the All Progressives Congress (APC) slated for today at the Aso Villa and the National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting billed for tomorrow can convince Senator Bukola Saraki and Speaker Yakubu Dogara to get their colleagues to back off; the Senate and the House of Representatives are likely to proceed with the plan, a source said.

    Supporters of the bill have alleged that “some powerful individuals sympathetic to the President” at the weekend perfected a plan to bribe National Assembly members.

    The allegation is that pro- executive senators might receive   $50,000 each. House of Representatives members sympathetic to the President will each receive $30,000 to “kill the amendment”, which was initiated by the lawmakers.

    This could however not be independently confirmed. Pro- Buhari senators described the allegation as “hogwash”, saying if there was any such move, those pushing that the National Assembly should override the veto were plotting to induce “ those in their camp financially.”

    “They are diverting attention from their plan, “a pro- Buhari senator said at the weekend.

    Lawmakers in support of the bill said the plot to bribe National Assembly members was perfected at “some high profile meetings “in Abuja at the weekend. The meeting was also said to have resolved that “anti-executive lawmakers who have cases with anti-corruption agencies should be threatened with prosecution in days to come”.

    Those said to have attended were some pro-Buhari governors from the Northwest , the Northcentral and the Northeast. A “minister from Southsouth” was also said to be present.

    They said they learnt that “some key members of the executive who have been spearheading strategies for President Buhari’s re-election in 2019 were unequivocal that the National Assembly must be stopped from going ahead with plans to veto the President on the electoral bill as amended by us, particularly the order of the 2019 national elections. “

    In withholding assent to the bill, the President argued that the amendment by the lawmakers infringed on the constitutional powers of INEC.

    The President also said that the passage of the bill could lead to a situation where the National Assembly would be seen as legislating for the states on local government management.

    The Legal Department of the National Assembly, however, faulted the points raised by President Buhari to withhold assent to the bill.

    It advised the lawmakers to go ahead with overriding the veto if they so wished.

    The President’s action has further polarised both chambers of the assembly, with those in his support claiming that 54 out of the 109 senators have indicated their intention to vote against overriding the veto.

    An anti – Buhari senator rejected the claim that 54 senators might vote against overriding the veto. “But for the death of Senator Ali Wakili (Bauchi South) the Senate would have voted on the veto last Thursday. And all this would have been laid to rest, “ he said.

    A source at the weekend insisted that the plan to override President Buhari’s veto was “still very much on”.

    The National Assembly has continued with mobilising for signatures in support of a possible override of the President’s veto.

    The source claimed that 67 senators had signed “a pro-Senate register to override the President’s veto.

    The number, said to have been in a register kept by a Northeast senator, the source claimed, swelled to 67 from last week’s 63.

    According to the source, “the number of senators might rise far beyond 80 if the more than 20 others said to be sitting on the fence sign up this week”.

    It was also learnt that pro-Buhari senators are unrelenting in their push to stall the plot to override the President.

    The source said: “The Pro-Saraki group has encouraged some of its members to infiltrate the rank of the Pro-Buhari group to give them a false sense of hope that they are greater in number. That makes the pro-Buhari group have a false sense of improvement but the senators know where they really belong.

    ”A meeting of the pro- Senate group held in Lagos after the wedding party of the daughter of Africa’s richest man, Aliko Dangote, at the weekend. The meeting afforded the Pro-Senate Senators the opportunity to review the register and it was affirmed that 67 senators have so far signed,” the source said.

    He noted that about 20 senators believed to be sitting on the fence who had been neutral in the meetings of the Pro-Senate and Pro-Buhari so far are set to sign the register.

    It was learnt that three Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) joined the Senators at the Lagos meeting.

    The Lagos meeting, it was gathered, adopted the interpretation of the law that the two-thirds majority required to override the President’s veto are “those present in each chamber and not two-thirds majority of all members of the Senate or the House”.

    The source noted that baring last-minute changes, “the plan to over ride veto may start this week because the Senate leadership is sure of sufficient number to act and get the desired results”.

    Senate Committee on Police Affairs, Senator Abu Ibrahim insisted that the Electoral Act amendment 2018 is Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) agenda aimed at frustrating the APC during the 2019 election.

    The Katsina South lawmaker, who spoke in Abuja, insisted that those plotting to override the President’s assent on the Bill will fail.

    To him, it is practically impossible for those plotting to override the assent of the President to secure two-third majority on the floor of the upper chamber.

    Ibrahim described the adoption of the conference report which placed presidential election last in reordered sequence of elections as an afterthought that will be defeated on the floor of the Senate.

    He said: “I am sure there is no way we can override the President on the floor of the Senate. They cannot get the two-third required to override Mr. President. I am against the Bill. You cannot just come now and say you want to change the election sequence. I will not for vote for it. I will stand up to oppose it even if it is only me alone. I will oppose it. I am from Katsina State. Whatever happens, I will oppose it.”

    “Even if the National Assembly has the power to reorder election sequence, it remained an afterthought coming when it did.

    “The PDP has no president, APC has. From the totality of the Bill, this Bill is working for the PDP, not APC. The Bill is PDP agenda.”

    On the legal advice which dismissed the premise upon which President Buhari withheld assent to the Bill, Ibrahim noted that whatever the legal advice might be, it will still come to the floor of the Senate for consideration.

    Ibrahim asked Nigerians not to worry about the Bill since “it will die a natural death”.

    Nigerians, he said, should rather worry about the inability of the National Assembly to pass the 2018 budget months after it was presented.

    He also said that Nigerians should be worried about the inability of the Senate to confirm many nominees forwarded to it for consideration and approval.

    On the insinuation that the leadership of the National Assembly is divided on the Bill, Ibrahim said that might not be far from the truth since the leadership has not spoken openly about the Bill.

    He said: “As an experienced senator, I can see there is a problem somewhere, which we have to address. Part of it is what the President did the other day by meeting the leadership of the two chambers to find a meeting point.”

    Ibrahim insisted that Senate President Bukola Saraki and House of Representatives Speaker Yakubu Dogara must, at all times, be mindful of what their members wanted “because we are the people who put them in office”.

    The lawmaker who described the National Assembly as the melting pot of different realities noted “everything we do, there will be differences because individual, ethnic, religious and political affiliations”.

    The differences, he said, remained the live wire of the National Assembly, which should not surprise anybody.

     

  • Debt recovery: National Assembly to review AMCON Act

    THE House of Representatives has begun the process of amending Act establishing the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) eight years after it started operation, the Chairman of House of Representatives Committee on Banking and Currency, Jones Onyereri, has said.

    He said the proposed amendment would further empower AMCON to go after its debtors, especially those that ride on some loopholes in the Act to perpetually engage AMCON in court.

    The AMCON, a creation of the National Assembly in response to the global financial crises of 2008/2009, acquired over 12,000 non-performing loans worth about N3.7 trillion from 22 banks.

    Out of this, AMCON injected N2.2 trillion as financial accommodation to 10 commercial banks in order to prevent systemic failure. This singular action, helped stabilise the financial system.

    About N3.66 trillion of depositors’ funds were protected; and approximately 14,000 jobs were saved as a result of AMCON’s intervention in the banking sector. The idea is to recover the debts either through structured repayment or dispose of transferred assets towards settlement of the bonds.

    Onyereri spoke at a one-day technical session with financial sector stakeholders in Abuja, where the challenges inhibiting AMCON from recovering debts were extensively discussed.

    The committee also used the occasion to listen to presentations from the representatives of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Nigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation and lawyers on how AMCON could function optimally as well as meet its mandate before sunset.

    Speaking at the forum, Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer of AMCON, Ahmed Kuru described his assignment at AMCON as “very difficult,” but said there was need to change the recovery approach at the corporation with the backing of the National Assembly, especially since the remaining crop of AMCON debtors are defiant, recalcitrant and business heavyweights.

    He said the debtors have the financial wherewithal to repay their debts but have refused to pay by going to court to tie AMCON up.

    The AMCON boss said: “We have been doing this for the past seven years and we have realised that what we need now at this time in the life of AMCON is legislative help that would make it possible to recover these debts effectively and efficiently.

    “At AMCON, we believe that the Act establishing the corporation can be amended as many times as possible by the National Assembly as long as they think it is appropriate to do so in the interest of the Nigerian economy. Given the difficulties we are facing presently, we are of the opinion that the Act establishing AMCON should be amended to reflect our sunset period”.

    He said the corporation has realised that some obligors have since established another lifestyle that are different from what brought them to AMCON. So, the best it can do as a law-abiding agency of the government is take them to court.

    “But the wheel of justice grinds slowly in the country. So, something drastic must be done if we all want AMCON to meet its mandate at sunset. So, we suggest that the National Assembly amends the Act establishing AMCON in such a way that the assets of the obligor(s) are automatically transferred to AMCON. From what we know, some of the obligors are working hard to ensure that the cases they have with AMCON in different courts outlive the lifespan of AMCON.”

  • APC, National Assembly raise 11-man inner caucus to end cold war with Buhari

    An end to the persistent feud between the presidency and the National Assembly appears to be around the corner with the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and the lawmakers setting up an 11-man inner caucus standing committee to deal with all such issues.

    The caucus comprises  President Muhammadu Buhari; Vice President Yemi Osinbajo; Senate President  Bukola Saraki; House of Representatives Speaker Yakubu Dogara; Secretary to the Government of the Federation  Boss Mustapha; Senate Leader Ahmad Lawan; and   House of Representatives Majority Leader Femi Gbajabiamila.

    The rest are   APC National Chairman , Chief John Odigie-Oyegun, Deputy National Chairman (North), Alhaji  Lawan Shuaibu; Deputy National Chairman (South), Engr. Segun Oni; and the National Secretary,  Alhaji  Mai Mala Buni, The Nation gathered last night.

    The committee is expected to be a proactive type and is charged with the responsibility of curbing friction between the two arms of government.

    It was learnt that the committee will be meeting from time to time on government policies, plans, bills, emerging issues likely to cause conflict, appointments for ratification and reservations by both arms, especially the National Assembly.

    Although the new plan is yet to be submitted to President Buhari, the party is confident that the presidency and the National Assembly will come to a “compromise” on the proposal.

    The establishment of an inner caucus committee was the major highlight of Wednesday’s closed-door session between the APC leadership and the party’s caucus in the Senate.

    Sources close to the meeting said APC Senators protested alleged unfair treatment by the presidency and the party leadership.

    Oyegun was said to have “managed the tension-soaked session.”

    The Senators recommended the adoption of  the inner caucus approach practised by the defunct National Party of Nigeria (NPN) in the Second Republic.

    It is to bridge the communication gap among the Presidency, National Assembly and APC leadership.

    One of the sources said: “We resolved to set up an inner caucus committee with membership drawn from the Presidency, National Assembly and APC.

    “It will be a standing committee not only for the resolution of the present crisis of confidence between the two arms, but to reunite and stabilize their relationship.

    “The 11-man caucus, which will be meeting regularly, comprises three representatives from the Presidency, four from the National Assembly and four from the APC.

    Another well-placed source said: “We want to return to the  model used by the defunct National Party of Nigeria (NPN), the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN), the Nigeria Peoples Party (NPP), the former Social Democratic Party (SDP) and even the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    “The inner caucus formula assisted ex-President Shehu Shagari in the Second Republic with the late Senate Leader, Dr. Olusola Saraki, playing a prominent role in facilitating a mutual working relationship between the Presidency and the National Assembly.

    “We were displeased that after winning election in 2015, the Presidency and the party did not care much about its caucus in the National Assembly. We did not know anything about policy direction of our government and the level of support needed.

    “Worse still is the fact that the Presidency took things for granted as if it is mandatory for all APC members in the National Assembly to dance to its tunes. When there were genuine criticisms on the floors of the Senate and the House, it was always easier for the Presidency to read meanings into these.

    A ranking Senator also said: “There had been poor communication between the Presidency and the National Assembly, resulting in what many have termed a cold war.”

    Responding to a question, the source said: “The decision to set up the inner caucus committee has not been communicated to the President. But we are hopeful that the proposal will be acceptable to both sides.”

    When contacted, the National Publicity Secretary of the APC, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, said: “The setting up of the inner caucus was agreed upon at the meeting between the leadership of the party and the Senate caucus.

    “It is like a standing committee which will assist in addressing issues between the Presidency and the National Assembly. It is not mainly on the present problem but as a long term solution.”

    Worried by the cold war between the Presidency and the National Assembly, Oyegun had met with Saraki and other leaders of the legislature.

    Some of the issues between the Presidency and the National Assembly are:

    • Alleged refusal by NASS to keep to agreement on early passage of 2018 Budget
    • Non-submission of 2018 Budget details by the MDAs, especially over 50 parastatals
    • Non-clearance of more than 50 nominees presented to the Assembly by the Executive
    • Alleged deliberate frustration of the administration of the President by the lawmakers
    • Stoppage of alleged hounding of Saraki and other National Assembly members by anti-graft agencies after glaring cases of acquittal
    • Compliance with the resolutions/ decisions/ summons of the National Assembly by the Executive
    • Dropping of the nomination of Mr. Ibrahim Magu as the candidate for the chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

  • National Assembly to pass budget April 24

    The 2018 Appropriation Bill will not be passed by the National Assembly until April 24, House of Representatives Speaker Yakubu Dogara said yesteday.

    Dogara, who gave the hint at plenary yesterday said a harmonised committee of the two chambers of the Parliament had proposed to lay the budget on April 19 to prepare for its passage on April 24.

    The budget has become a source of tension between the two arms of government.

    While the Executive claimed the lawmakers had arrested the budget, the lawmakers said Ministers and heads of Departments and Agencies (MDAs) were not coming to defend their budget estimates.

    President Muhammadu Buhari laid the budget estimates on November 7, before a joint session of the National Assembly. The executive urged the lawmakers to pass the budget by December so as to return to the normal January to December budget cycle.

    Dogara said yesterday: “We are proposing that we are laying the budget finally on the 19th of April 2018. Hopefully, we will be passing the budget on 24th April, 2018. This is harmonised calendar with the Senate”.

    The Senate yesterday listed 23 ministries allegedly frustrating the passage of the budget.

    Senate President, Bukola Saraki directed Chairmen of standing committees to submit reports of the 2018 budget to the Appropriation Committee without further delay.

    A document marked “Committees 2018 budget status as at 21st March, 2018” listed Ministries Works, Land Transport, Finance and Science and Technology among 23 ministries and agencies that have failed to appear before its committees to defend their 2018 budget proposals.

    Mr. Babatunde Fashola is minister of Power, Works and Housing, Mrs. Kemi Adeosun Minister of Finance, Chibuike Amaechi is minister of Land Transport while Ogbonnaya Onu is minister of Science and technology.

    Other ministries also listed in the document obtained by our reporter included Culture and Tourism, Education (Basic and Secondary), Foreign Affairs, Health, Housing, Privatization, Solid Mineral, Sports and Youth Development and Tertiary Institution and TETFund.

    Saraki asked the committee chairmen to take steps to submit their reports on 2018 budget to Senator Mohammed Goje led Appropriation Committee.

    The Senate President gave 29th March 2018 as deadline for the submission of the reports.

    He said, “This is to inform chairmen of all committees to as a matter of urgency, submit reports of their various committees on the 2018 budget to the chairman of the Senate committee on Appropriation.

    “The reports should be submitted beginning from Thursday, 22nd March 2018 to Thursday, 29th March, 2018. I urge lawmakers to take this assignment very seriously.”