The Nation Newspaper

Tag: national assembly

  • Joining issues with the National Assembly

    Femi Falana is one Nigerian that needs no introduction, from his days as an undergraduate in the then University of Ife, Ile Ife (now Obafemi Awolowo University), the lawyer and human rights activist who at a time was the former president of the National Association of Democratic Lawyers and former chairman of the West African Bar Association (WABA), has always been at the forefront in the quest for justice and fairness in society. Falana became a human rights activist as early as 1983 when he took bail of some university students who had been unlawfully remanded in prison custody; he is still in the fight to date. He is renowned for providing free legal services to the poor and disadvantaged, and as is often the case, he has been detained numerous times by the security agencies for his activism.

    He was the lead speaker at the just concluded 11th Coca-Cola/NBC sponsored Campuslife Correspondents Workshop with the theme “Building a drug-free and non-cultist generation” in partnership with The Nation. The legal luminary walked into the venue of the workshop right on time and after exchanging pleasantries and receiving a loud and standing ovation from the more than 50 undergraduates from tertiary institutions across the country he got busy with his blackberry phone. I thought he was replying a text message, but it was when he started his lecture that we got to know that he was busy writing his lecture notes there and then!

    He came right from the onset with a smoking gun and took a rather unusual route to treating the topic of discussion; nothing was projected on the screen behind him as expected of most lectures and there were no “handouts” to pass around and some of our students were a bit confused when he started because he took a historical route to tackling the subject which only started making sense as he progressed.

    The popular analogy of President Goodluck Jonathan that he had no shoes when he was growing up which elicited millions of sympathy votes that brought him into power was the starting point of his presentation. “But most of us in his generation had no shoes, and where we do, they were only meant for special occasions like Christmas and Easter celebrations.” But in spite of this, the Nigerian state invested massively in their future to ensure that poverty is banished from the land by investing in education. Leading the way was the Western regional government in 1955 which laid the foundation for the educational advancement of the region so much so that by 1976 the Western model was adopted as a National education policy.

    Walking down memory lane, he pointed out that the Federal Government provided loans to students while state governments provided bursary allowance to reduce the burden of quality education on the students who even had the luxury of having laundry departments that took care of their laundry needs. Employers often pay regular visits to campuses to recruit prospective employees before the completion of their studies.

    Vacation jobs were also readily available and students have no reason to be idle, even secondary school leavers then registered with the ministry of labour and whenever there were vacancies in any of the factories scattered around Lagos they were contacted and given employment, this was at a time when there were no mobile phones.

    But all these, as our speaker stressed, may appear like tales from another planet due to the gross mismanagement of the economy from 1980, when “the dreams and aspirations of our youth were shattered, things got worse by 1986 when the regime of General Ibrahim Babangida introduced the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP). Babangida told the nation that there was ‘no alternative to SAP’, but it was merely a tool by western imperialist to pauperise Nigerians. Attempts by late Gani Fawehinmi, I and others to challenge the legality of SAP were truncated by the military.”

    Confessing that he was up all night monitoring the political development in Egypt and the lesson therein, Falana said the crisis is merely a “street protest” and not a “revolution” as is being erroneously portrayed because it clearly lacked all the elements and strategy of a revolution like clear cut leadership and goal. He likened Egyptian scenario to the June 12 agitation which they undertook after the annulment of the June 12 1993 election, which eventually forced General Babangida from power. “We had a street protest, but no strategy on how to take over power”, he added. He berated the $1.5 billion military aid to the Egyptian military by the United States government. “This amount is enough to wipe out poverty in Egypt. The US government is pumping this huge amount to the military to stifle a real revolution of the people from actually taking place. This is the main reason the US could not even call what actually happened by its real name “a military coup” because of the repercussion it would have.

    Next on the chopping block is the lacklustre student unionism on campuses. Nigeria, he pointed out, used to have a vibrant student unionism in the universities, but the military, in their bid to nib any resistance to their rule in the bud, frustrated students and lecturers unionism and by so doing systematically destroyed the intelligentsia and by implication the entire society. Without vibrant unions on campuses voices from the ivory tower was muffled and has degenerated to the level where student leaders are now appendages of various government houses in the country.

    Since voices of reason are now scarce, the generality of the people choose the route of religious fundamentalism which often leads to the closing down of public highways and roads by various religious organisations in the country. Our penchant for “religiosity” is what has resulted in billions of Naira being spent to sponsor the elites to religious pilgrimages to Mecca and Jerusalem. Those who loot the treasury go to Mecca and Jerusalem to pray weekly. “This is why there is no money to fund education”. Since 1999 also unemployment has assumed a dangerous proportion with corruption taking a never to be imagined direction where billions are looted from the public treasury without recourse to decorum.

    All these, according to him, lead to drug addiction, gangsters on campuses, exam malpractice and cultism in this generation which was not prominent in earlier generations. Our corrupt system thus destroyed merit and paved the way for permanent students on campuses. To this the students concurred and started naming names of National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS) officials who fall under this category.

    But despite these gloomy postulations, Falana feels there’s hope for genuine change if the youths actually yearn for it. “If the youths want genuine change in the society, they must convince themselves that it requires a surgery and must be done through sacrifice and mobilisation. You should expose your friends who are criminals before they come into position of power,” he said.

    He challenged the youth to take advantage of their share size of over 60 million to cause a change in the history of the country by using the internet effectively to drive home the point that they want and desire genuine change. Raising a very vital point about being disconnected from the process of governance, he encourage them to “join issues with the National Assembly” by ensuring that corrupt officials do not find life easy. He reminded them that when N2.8 billion was declared missing in the 1980s, 600 students from then University of Ife surrounded the then National Assembly complex in Lagos and that action forced the Federal Government to set up a commission of inquiry to investigate the issue. Students, he pointed out, can still do the same today by compelling the National Assembly to pass laws that are favourable to educational development and stiff against corruption and outright impunity.

    The second speaker, Mrs. Ngozi Ngwoke of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA), handled the technical aspect of drug addiction which she said is difficult to separate from cultism because the two are intertwined, pointing out that there is no drug free society anywhere in the world. Anyone, she noted can fall victim of substance abuse with the most vulnerable being the 11-35-year bracket. At the end of the two-day workshop, the students were challenged to be change agents in their generation.

     

  • Senators and their unusual passion

    Senators and their unusual passion

    Of the two houses of the National Assembly, the Senate is the place where you are less likely to find unbridled passion. You can count the number of times when things threatened to spin out of control. One occasion was the ‘burial ceremony’ for former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s Third Term Agenda.

    The ‘officiating minister’ was then Senate President Ken Nnamani. Even in such heady circumstances, the best senators could come up with were comedy skits – like Adolphus Wabara’s speech mocking the then president before voting ‘no’. When the gavel finally came down it was to off-key chants of something akin to a football match victory song.

    But for pure, undiluted passion you have to go to the ‘Green Chamber’ where the House of Representatives sits. Over time, in their bid to resolve thorny issues, punches have been thrown and furniture hurled in all directions.

    Sometimes the passion in the House gets deadly. When the so-called Integrity Group decided in 2007 to overthrow then Speaker Patricia Etteh, the chamber was split down the middle. One legislator who opposed the insurrection was dragged on the floor and dumped outside the chamber. Dino Melaye, the Speaker’s most vocal advocate, had his expensive shirt shredded. For the late Aminu Safana, another loyalist of the embattled regime, it was all too much: he slumped and gave up the ghost.

    Many have sought to make sense of the difference in character of the two chambers and have come to a few plausible conclusions. Senators are fewer in number and tend to be older. The House, on the other hand, accommodates over 400, much younger individuals. The youth factor means there will be hundreds with very low boiling points – making for a very combustible chamber.

    Against this backdrop, you can imagine my surprise watching on television as two senators tugged at each other’s voluminous babanrigas – waiting to let fly with jabs and uppercuts. We were denied what was turning out to be quite superb entertainment by the spoilsport intervention of a couple of peacemaking senators.

    The day after the aborted senatorial boxing match I read accounts of what provoked the altercation, but came away even more confused. Some said the fight was triggered by the debate over President Goodluck Jonathan’s failure to sign a bill requiring him to deliver a state of the nation address yearly at the National Assembly.

    Another version blamed it on the charged discussion over plans by Zamfara State Governor, Abdulaziz Yari, to arm a local militia as part of his administration’s efforts to curb spiraling crime.

    For me, what was important was not legislators getting excited once in a while: we’ve seen them do similar things in places as far afield as Turkey and South Korea. What was great was that debate was shifting – even if for a day – from the ruling Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) agonies.

    It was great to see our lawmakers at work. But what work?

    Before the shoving incident, the legislative business on everyone’s lips was the amendment of the 1999 constitution. But of all Nigeria’s most pressing problems the highlight of that exercise from the Senate end was a proposal limiting executive tenure to a single six-year term. Now, we can add another priority item to the lawmakers’ list of achievements – a bill requiring the president to deliver one more boring speech.

    Not to be outdone, the House committee saddled with the same constitution-tweaking assignment has rolled out its own recommendations. One move guaranteed to generate much discussion is the proposal to strip executive office holders of immunity.

    The question I ask myself is: who cares about immunity? In a country of 160 million people those likely to be directly affected by this provision are less than 100. Even if you impeach and jail all of Nigeria’s governors it will not resolve our electricity crisis.

    How many government officials who don’t presently enjoy this constitutional protection from prosecution – be they in legislative houses or some parastatal – have been brought to book? Removing the immunity clause is no guarantee that there will be diligent prosecution, or that men would swear off crime, or corruption will suddenly plummet.

    I would feel much better if it is established that dueling senators nearly came to blows over the Zamfara security question. Insecurity is an issue for which the political establishment has not come up with anything that approximates an answer. Yari’s proposal may be unorthodox and even dangerous, but at least he’s come up with an idea.

    Boko Haram is the screaming advertisement of Nigeria’s crisis of insecurity. But far from the frontlines of terror in the North-East, the country lies prostrate before an army of armed robbers, kidnappers, pirates, illegal bunkerers, ethnic militias and sundry malcontents.

    National Security Adviser (NSA), Col. Sambo Dasuki (rtd), speaking at the National Civil-Military Dialogue in Abuja a few days ago painted a picture of the gravity of the situation. He said terrorism and other security challenges had thrust the armed forces into joint operations with the police and other para-military outfits in 28 states. That is all of Nigeria bar eight states!

    It is an unusual situation when soldiers get involved with internal policing; it is an emergency when an ad-hoc measure becomes the norm. Our embrace of the unusual is admission that the Nigeria Police as presently constituted cannot deliver on internal security.

    We should be asking why our police are so overwhelmed. At over 400,000 men ours must be one of the largest national police forces in the world. Yet the force is hobbled by its structure, underfunding as well as manipulation by political office holders.

    Those who are unnerved by Yari’s armed militia have not come up with a more creative alternative. Their solution is as lame as they come: post most policemen to Zamfara. The question is what difference have they made in the states where they are supposedly found in numbers.

    Nigeria is too complex to continue to operate one national force. Even the British who once ran the police here don’t have one national organisation, but city and community outfits like the London Metropolitan Police and others.

    The exchanges involving Rivers State Governor, Rotimi Amaechi and the Police Commissioner, Joseph Mbu, are further evidence that the present structure has long overshot its sell-by date.

    A situation where a supposed chief security officer of state cannot give instructions to the resident police boss is impractical. You can extrapolate and envision a scenario in which the Inspector-General of Police doesn’t take instructions from the president – but from some higher powers elsewhere.

    It all brings the state police solution front and center of the discussion. The Federal Government cannot fund the police adequately. The force is running in most states because of the benevolent intervention of governors.

    People say states are not sensible enough to manage their own police, yet they are mature enough to fund the force. Managing the police is no different from running any other human organisation. The fact that they bear arms is irrelevant. What is needed is definition of the parameters under which state police will operate.

    Yari’s proposal in Zamfara is a crude form of local policing. But rather than burying our heads in the sand and hoping that the Nigeria Police will suddenly become effective, let’s admit that times like these call for more radical solutions.

    Senator Victor Ndoma-Egba who understands what we’re saying nailed it in the senate last week when he said it was time to look again at the state police idea. Here’s hoping his colleagues can overcome their fears and embrace the future.

  • National Assembly and politics of policing Rivers State

    National Assembly and politics of policing Rivers State

    A situation where a Police Commissioner distorts facts does not augur well

    The National Assembly is not wanting when it comes to intervening in matters of governance within the jurisdiction of the executive branch of government. This is as it should be in a context of separation of powers. In both parliamentary and presidential systems, it is generally the responsibility of the legislature to monitor the use of executive power, in order to ensure that the citizenry is not shortchanged by wielders of executive power. It is, therefore, not surprising that some members of the House of Representatives are already mobilising others to get involved in preventing a crisis of governance looming in Rivers State, illustrated most graphically by the face-off or rivalry between the elected Governor of Rivers State and the Commissioner of Police deployed to the state by the federal government. As usual, the federal legislature is not departing from the tradition of scratching the surface of problems, as it chooses to cure rash instead of leprosy.

    The House of Representatives has set up a 14-person committee to liaise with the Police Affairs Commission, the Inspector-General of Police and the Rivers State Government to fashion out ways of improving relationship between the police posted to Rivers State and the state government. In a quick move to confirm that the goal of the Assembly’s intervention is to avoid the cause of the problem and focus on the symptom, the lawmaker who raised the motion said: “The motion was meant to find means of guaranteeing safety of the people of the state based on the prevailing circumstances because a former militant has raised the alarm that there is a build-up of arms in the state. This is not good for the state because both the governor and the police chief can guarantee their own safety but the safety of the masses is not guaranteed.” This statement was made after the lawmaker catalogued instances of altercations between the governor of Rivers State and the Commissioner of Police in the state, rather than between citizens and the police.

    It is conceivable for anyone who prefers to deal with the perfunctory aspect of problems to see the tension between Rivers State’s governor and the commissioner of police in the state as a personal matter. But a deeper look at what is happening in relation to law enforcement cannot but reveal the innards of the country’s flawed design of law enforcement. What the tension between GovernorAmaechi andCommssionerMbu suggests is that the same thing can happen to other governors. It may appear as if the issue emanates from personality conflicts between Amaechi and Mbu, but viewing the problem more analytically should reveal that it is not the persons of the two individuals that is at issue, it is the philosophy that a federation can have a state governor without powers to secure or enforce laws in his or her state that requires immediate and honest attention by federal legislators.

    As it is being speculated in the media, it is possible that what is at stake in the tension between the presidency and the governor of Rivers State over the matter of who won the recent election of chairman of Nigerian Governors Forum may have sparked uneasiness between the governor and the commissioner of police. To quote sections of the constitution, as the mover of the motion for legislators’ intervention in the tension in Rivers has aptly done: Meanwhile, Section 14 (1)b of the Constitution …empowers the governor to give directives to the Police Commissioner, but in this instance, the question is, ‘has the governor given such directive?’ appears to be more interested in quibbling than in solving the fundamental issue thrown up by the possibility of a police commissioner calling a state governor a dictator.

    What is the basis of the optimism that a police commissioner that has called a state governor a dictator should be expected to listen to directives from such governor? It is the kind of constitution that the country has which makes it possible for a police officer to call a governor a dictator. It is generally those who elect public officers that have the right to tell such officers that they are dictators when they have evidence for such claim. We have been witnessing that kind of right in Egypt in the last four days.

    A state governor in a democratic context has the mandate of his constituents to rule. Ordinarily ruling a state involves collaborating with lawmakers to establish laws and enforce such laws. In Nigeria, an elected governor only has a right to sign laws enacted by state lawmakers and no more than that. He or she is not in charge of enforcing such laws, even though he is the chief executive officer of the state. It is the police force under the monopoly of the federal government that is directly in charge of law enforcement all over the country. The police commissioner or even the police recruit in any of the states is responsible to the Inspector-General of Police, who, in turn, is responsible only to the president.

    The fundamental problem that should interest federal legislators, who also happen to be considering at present amending the 1999 Constitution that gives the federal government monopoly over policing in all the states of the federation, is what lawmakers should x-ray rigorously. If it is possible for a governor who is also a member of the ruling party at the federal level to experience the kind of frustration that Governor Amaechi has been reported to experience from the federal commissioner of police in his state, lawmakers need to embark on proactive legislation, capable of preventing other governors from having with police officers posted to their states, disagreements that can compromise security of citizens. If a fellow member of the ruling party at the centre that controls law enforcement nation-wide experiences any frustration from the hands of the commissioner of police in his state, then it is only God that can save governors from opposition parties.

    According to Sebastian Roche in a monograph on Federalism and Police Systems, democracy as a culture should have a space in the design of police systems. Democratic policing includes creating and supporting a police system that sees, as its primary duty, the protection of the freedom and human rights of citizens. A democratic police system cannot exist in a federal union in which only one tier of government monopolizes law enforcement, as it is in the current constitution.

    There is a Yoruba proverb: if you throw a cutlass down one million times, it will land only on its flat surface. The flat surface of the 1999 Constitution, which federal lawmakers have suggested several times since their one-day interaction with selected citizens over constitutional items slated for amendment, is the exclusive power given to the federal government over security and law enforcement. It is possible for Governor Amaechi to overcome what he sees as his present predicament, after reaching some understanding with members of the ruling party at the center. But what happens to him in relation to the commissioner of police in his state today can and may happen to other governors, for whatever reasons.

    And this will not happen just because the current president is less benevolent than he should be. It may happen because federal lawmakers appear not to be as concerned with creating benevolent institutions and structures of governance as they are about using their resources to act as fire fighters. What is more important is to prevent outbreak of fires. To do so requires that our lawmakers do more rigorous analysis of the constitution they claim they can amend to the satisfaction of all Nigerians, by giving Nigerians the freedom to determine the extent of powers they want to assign to states in a federation run by civilians. Our legislators need to come to terms with the fact that the federal and state governments are coordinates. As coordinates, no side should have the power to post police officers to either side, except in the situation of war. Contrary to the assumption of the 1999 Constitution, federal lawmakers need to realize that the federal government is not synonymous with the federation and thus cannot afford to continue to serve as the bouncer at the gate of the country’s security system.

  • Visa bond: Before casting the first stone

    Visa bond: Before casting the first stone

    Nigerian leaders should fix their country instead of blaming Britain for protecting its own interest

    Last Sunday, I had taken on Mr David Cameron, the British Prime Minister on this same page when he said that Britain plans to consult with its Nigerian counterpart to ensure that the anti same-sex bill passed by the National Assembly does not become law. I had said then that Mr Cameron and Britain should not turn Nigeria into Sodom and Gomorrah; and that we have values that run counter to what the Britons want us to embrace. In short, I had referred to them as interlopers. Then, I did not know I would have a return match this early.

    But here I am, and so soon, taking sides with the Britons today. Reports that Britain is planning a scheme that will force visitors from 18 years and above from Nigeria, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Ghana whose nationals are deemed to pose a “high risk” of immigration abuse, to provide a cash bond of three thousand pound sterling ($4,600; 3,500 euros) (about N750,000) before they can enter Britain have sent the Nigerian elite throwing brickbats at the British authorities. The scheme, according to The Sunday Times newspaper which broke the news, will take effect in November and covers a six-month visit visa. The weekly paper said the move by Home Secretary Theresa May is designed to show that Prime Minister David Cameron’s Conservative Party is serious about cutting immigration and abuses of the system. Cameron wants annual net migration down below 100,000 by 2015.

    May was quoted as saying that “This is the next step in making sure our immigration system is more selective, bringing down net migration from the hundreds of thousands to the tens of thousands while still welcoming the brightest and the best to Britain”. She added: “In the long run we’re interested in a system of bonds that deters overstaying and recovers costs if a foreign national has used our public services.” A Home Office official said the six countries highlighted were those with “the most significant risk of abuse”. Now, this is something that is still in the works; and many of our elites are already losing sleep. They cannot even wait for the policy to take off before taking on the British authorities.

    Well, unlike my position last week, that I did not see how our rejection of same-sex marriage could have affected Britain to make that country’s prime minister see in that decision a need to seek a change of position by the Federal Government, today, I say unambiguously that Britain is right in taking whatever measures it deems fit to protect its interest. If we do not know what our interest is, not to talk of how to protect it, we should not blame another country that is fastidious about its. As a matter of fact, my position is strengthened every minute by the fact that none of those who have criticised the proposed scheme has adduced any genuine reason why Cameron should not restrict the number of people coming into Britain, despite that country’s own serious economic challenges. Even the Federal Government that has also threatened to retaliate measure-for-measure has not given any convincing reason on how the proposed measure will affect it or affect Nigerians. The best everyone criticising the British has said is that the proposed measure is ‘discriminatory’. For God’ s sake, what does that mean? I don’t know how something that is only ‘discriminatory’ can jeopardise the interest of Nigerians or that of their government. It is a say-nothing reason that we are adducing.

    If you ask how many people are in a particular street anywhere here, it is unlikely you’ll get anything close to the appropriate number. This has been the way we run our own lives; unfortunately, this is not how things are done in better organised countries. At any time, they want to know how many people enter their country and how many people leave, at least for the purposes of planning. Here, we plan in a vacuum and because we fail to plan, or because we plan blindly, we keep experiencing a situation whereby we march forward to the past. Do we want Britain to become the way we are? A jungle where everything goes?

    If you like, you may brand me an unpatriotic citizen for taking this position; I have no apologies for that. But, before those who might want to cast the first stone at me do, they should sincerely ask themselves whether we would have been where we are today if successive governments in the country had been patriotic. When I was a child, I had relatives who travelled to Britain then and they never went with the intention of staying there permanently. They either went to study or they went on holiday; and they were always eager to return to Nigeria. I remember some of our musicians sang about the cold in London and about how and why our students who went there must face their studies in spite of the cold. One of such songs was ‘Ilu Oyinbo dara, ore mi o dun pupo’, etc.,(UK is good, my friend it is a sweet place, etc). Sweet as the UK was then, our people never went there with the intention of staying. As a matter of fact, even if they wanted to stay put there, there was another song to remind them about home, sweet home, where there is never a place like (Ile o labo sinmi oko)’.

    So, what is it that is now making Nigerians flee from their country to go stay and die abroad? In the good old days that I am talking about, the University of Ibadan, for instance, was recognised as a standard university worldwide. Our most sought-after universities can no longer find space among the first 1,600 in the world, according to the January 2012 report of Webometrics, a world tertiary education ranking institutions organisation, Those who ran the universities and other institutions aground are the ones now shouting that Britain should not ‘discriminate’ against Nigerians, even when that country has made it clear that Nigeria is one of the countries with. “the most significant risk of abuse” of British immigration laws. And this is a thing we all know.

    If you are in doubt, listen to Ambassador Patrick Olusola Onadipe, Deputy Chief of Mission in the Nigerian Embassy in China: “But I hope we will not be overwhelmed because a lot of Nigerians coming here have no business here, if I have to be very frank. This is because when they come they are misinformed.

    “A lot of them probably think they will get jobs here. But when they get here, there is no job. So, they don’t want to return home.

    “Less than 10 per cent of them have visible means of income; others don’t. So, they resort to anti-social activities, like pushing drugs, doing 419, yahoo-yahoo, Internet fraud, armed robbery, rape and even murder.” That is straight from the horse’s mouth and that is the way it is all over the world. Nigerian prostitutes are now hot cakes in Russia. That is how bad things have gone in the country.

    Rather than wish other countries should descend to our depth, we should aspire to their heights. If Nigeria feels sufficiently strong about the proposed British measure, it should reciprocate measure-for-measure when it takes off because I do not think the British should back down on this since it touches on their very soul. Let the legislators crying foul legislate truly for good governance; let the judiciary adjudicate professionally and let the government govern responsibly, such that 16 would not be greater than 19 in a simple arithmetic. When we all do our bit, Nigerians would find little cause to travel abroad in search of greener pasture. And whatever the British do with their immigration laws would not be our headache.

  • Laws to strengthen cultural industry underway

    The Chairman, Senate Committee on Culture and Tourism, Senator  Hassan Barata, has  said the National Assembly will deploy necessary legislative tools to strengthen the cultural industry in Nigeria.

    He spoke at the closing of the Sixth edition of African Arts and Crafts Expo (AFAC), organised by the National Council for Arts and Culture (NCAC).

    He said legislation would make AFAC a rallying point that is second to none among arts and culture events in Africa.

    “AFAC is part of the tools through which the culture sector has entrenched itself as a major contributor to the nation’s drive for jobs creation and youth empowerment towards economic transformation.

    “It is, therefore, significant to note that AFAC has shown improvement in all parameters when compared to the previous ones.

    “With 17 countries coming into Abuja with over 250 exhibitors and officials from Africa and beyond, especially China, South Korea and Pakistan, it is a positive omen for Nigeria’s cultural diplomacy for Africa economic integration,’’ he said.

  • State of the Nation Address

    State of the Nation Address

    Rather than foot-drag on the bill, the President should see it as God-sent to showcase his achievements 

    The altercation between the Presidency and the National Assembly over the bill on the State of the Nation Address 2013 that proposes to compel the president to present, annually, his scorecard before a joint session of the federal lawmakers is gratuitous. The Senate has threatened to over-ride the president’s veto if President Goodluck Jonathan refuses to sign the bill into law before the July date that he is expected to make the maiden edition of the address.

    The Senate and the House of Representatives in May passed the State of the Nation Address Bill 2013 into law and immediately transmitted it to the Presidency for the required assent to meet their projected first week of July date for this year’s maiden edition. Ita Enang, Chairman, Senate Committee on Rules and Business expressed the frustration of the upper legislative house regarding the perceived foot-dragging in presidential assent despite the fact that the president is still within the 30 days required to study the bill and append his signature or send it back to them. He said: “…. by the time we shall be resuming from the two-week recess, the 30 days must have elapsed and if by that time the bill has not been assented to, we are most likely to override him by way of veto, since the bill emanated from us in the first place, in the interest of the nation.”

    President Jonathan should endeavour not to unnecessarily delay this bill. He does not have to wait for the expiration of constitutional timeframe before signing it. If he has any objection (since he is allowed to have reasoned objections to aspects of any bill), he should do that in concert with his retinue of aides in diverse areas of specialisation in good time; and not necessarily wait for the cessation of the constitutional 30 days. The president can alter the bill’s modalities since there is nothing sacrosanct about the July date set by the National Assembly, but he cannot reject such an important bill. This Bill on State of the Nation Address is one that should have been in existence a long time ago.

    In our view, there is nothing wrong if the president is legally compelled every year to come before our law makers, foremost government functionaries in the executive and the judiciary and, more importantly, a big crowd of other credible Nigerians, to give account of his stewardship. To foster true democracy, the need to provide a platform to engender accountability, probity and transparency in governance is non-negotiable. Such a forum, to a large extent, will dissuade dangerous speculations within the polity because the needed light would have been shed on cloudy aspects of governance that Nigerians have misgivings about.

    At any point, the public should be certain of what is officially being done to fight corruption, minimise unemployment or ensure that elusive electricity is made constant, and whether the right steps are being taken to provide Infrastructure. At such crucial moments, the president can be challenged for not leading by example. More fundamental is the need for Nigerians to be more apprised of steps taken to nip insecurity in the bud.

    What the National Assembly is urging the president to do through this annual address of the entire country, using the instrumentality of the law, is good. It is a tradition that has endured in well established democracies. It should not be politicised or turned into an instrument of ego tripping by the executive and the federal legislature. We want the president to see the bill as one that is capable of goading the government to see social justice and preservation of fundamental rights of citizens as one salient ingredient of democracy. Former President of the United States, Bill Clinton, deployed the State of the Union Address to convince the Congress and the American public. President Barack Obama is using it to rally the American people round his presidency while Prime Minister David Cameron of the United Kingdom is doing same before the House of Commons.

    President Jonathan should sign the bill and grab the opportunity presented by it to enlighten Nigerians on his plans and programmes for them and to boost his approval ratings through his well touted but invisible transformation agenda. Otherwise, the National Assembly should go ahead to over-ride the President on this bill if he does not assent to it within the 30 days that he is expected to do that.

  • Senator rules out special media salary by Act of National Assembly

    Senator rules out special media salary by Act of National Assembly

    Sen. Ifeanyi  Okowa ( PDP- Delta North) said on Monday that it would be difficult for the National Assembly to legislate on the proposed special media salary in the country.

    Okowa said this in an interview with the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) in Abuja.

    He said that with the private nature of the ownership of most media houses, it would be difficult for the National Assembly to enact an Act that could compel the private media owners to pay a uniform salary scale for all media workers.

    “The media is actually being run more by the private sector, so it becomes difficult for us to have a special salary scale for them because it is not actually a government entity.

    “The government can only provide for a minimum living wage which everybody must keep to and we hope too that the media houses and everybody is keeping to that.

    “But enacting laws that will force special sections of the media to actually pay special salary scale will be difficult. “

    He, however, called on the various media unions to collaborate with the Ministry of Information to fashion out better remuneration for media workers in the country.

    He said the media was a special sector in the economy that required attention in terms of welfare.

    “I believe that you have unions, you have associations. They should be able to put some pressure on owners of media houses to actually pay better.

    “I hope that somewhere along the line it is possible to work with the Ministry of Information and see what they can do about it. “

    He noted that the media played very important role in every democratic dispensation and should be encouraged.

  • Emergency: National Assembly restricts Jonathan’s powers to security, public order

    TThe National Assembly has restricted the powers of President Goodluck Jonathan in states under emergency rule to maintenance of public order, peace and security only.

    This followed the harmonization and adoption of the conference report of the proclamation of state of emergency in Borno, Yobe and Adamawa states by the Senate and House of Representatives.

    According to the report of the conference committee of the Senate and House of Representatives on the state of emergency proclamation, 2013, clause 1 states that “duly authorized person” means any person designated or authorized to act on behalf of the President of the

    Federal Republic of Nigeria with respect to the administration of any emergency area on public order, peace and security only.

    This was the House version of the conference committee report which was adopted by the two chambers.

    The implication of this clause is that governors of emergency areas and local government chairmen would still handle general administrative functions in their respective jurisdictions.

    Also clause 2 (3) of the proclamation states that “the President may give direction to a state governor or local government chairman directly or through his designate or a duly authorized person with respect to the administration of the emergency area in matters of public order, peace and security only and it shall be the duty of the state governor or local government chairman to comply with the directive.

    The Senate and the House of Representatives adopted this version created by the House.

    Experts said yesterday that the insertion of the clause “in matter of public order, peace and security only” was meant to ensure that the President knows the limits of his powers in the emergency areas.

    In clause 3 (1) “Power of President to make orders” says that the President may make such orders as appear to him to be necessary or expedient for the purpose of maintaining and securing peace, public order and public safety in the emergency areas.

    On control of functions of certain authorities in the emergency areas, clause 5(c) states that “in the public service of the state in the emergency area with the meaning of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999; to exercise their functions in accordance with any direction given to them by the President, his designate or any authorized person as it relates to matter of public order, peace and security only.”

    The lawmakers explained that “these regulations make provisions for the general administration of the emergency areas in relation to security matters.”

  • National Assembly removes prison services from Exclusive List

    National Assembly removes prison services from Exclusive List

    APPARENTLY to tackle the persistent problem of prison congestion, the National Assembly has liberalised the funding, building and management of prisons.

    It has removed prison management, funding and control from the Exclusive List to the Concurrent List.

     Chairman of the Senate Committee on Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Matters, Senator Umaru Dahiru, spoke in Abuja yesterday.

    His counterpart in the House of Representatives, Rotimi Makinde, the Executive Secretary, National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), Ben Angwe and Ekiti State Attorney-General, Olawale Fagbohunda, regretted the inhuman condition in which prisoners are kept.

    They all spoke at the “Stakeholders validation meeting of the NHRC 2012 audit report.”

     Dahiru said: “With this arrangement, states can now build, fund and maintain prisons in their domains.”

     He regretted the inhuman condition and feeding pattern in the prisons, arguing that the current daily financial allocation of N200 to an inmate has become unfashionable.

     He expressed optimism that with the new move, the unpalatable conditions of prisons, prisoners and congestion would be greatly ameliorated.

     The senator appealed to states to take up the new challenge by accommodating building modern day prisons in their programmes of activities in order for meaningful prison reform to be achieved.

     Presenting the 2012 prison audit report to the gathering,  Angwe said Nigeria has over 53,000 inmates in the existing prisons in the country.

     Angwe noted that out of the 53,000 inmates, over 36,000 are awaiting trial, a development he said was largely responsible for the high congestion of prisons in the country.

     He said that 672 lunatics who have spent over 40 years were languishing in the prisons and appealed that pro—active approach be adopted in order to sanitise the prison system.

    Angwe said his agency would soon begin to sue state in order to enforce the rights of Nigerians unjustly clamped into the prisons.

     He expressed the hope that with the support of some legal practitioners, most of Nigerians languishing in prison on remand without trial would find their way out.

     Faponunda suggested a massive overhaul of the prison system.

     He suggested that as a way of decongesting prisons, convicts of 10 years, awaiting trial inmates of three years, and convicts who have attained 60 years and above should be granted pardon.

     ”Those on death row should be released because every stakeholder have agreed that there is fundamental flaws in the criminal justice system,” Fapohunda said.

  • National Assembly to establish Budget office

    National Assembly to establish Budget office

    The National Assembly is planning to establish a Budget and Research Office.

    A bill sponsored by the Senate Leader, Victor Ndoma-Egba, to that effect has already scaled first reading on the floor of the upper chamber.

    According to a copy of the bill, which was obtained by The Nation in Abuja, the National Assembly Budget and Research Office shall exist to “provide independent and continuous review of the Federal Government budgets including monitoring of existing and proposed programmes. (It shall also) Provide independent unbiased analysis of the budget of the National Assembly and assist all the committees of the National Assembly in developing their annual budgets.”

    Other functions of the proposed budget office include providing assistance to all committees in both chambers of the National Assembly including information with respect to budget and all bills relating to new budget heads.

    The office is also expected to furnish information with regards to estimated future revenue and changing revenue conditions.

    Other functions of the bill include to “provide analysis of the economic implication on the private sector, the budgetary and financial implication on states and local government of any proposed legislation when so required by any committee of the National Assembly.”

    The Budget Office would also be expected to prepare and present to the National Assembly, periodic forecasts of economic trends and alternative fiscal policies.

    It would also avail the Legislature of cost estimates including an analysis of the inflammatory impact of any proposed legislation.

    In addition, the office will report yearly to both chambers of the National Assembly all items funded in the preceding financial year for which no appropriation was made by the National Assembly and items contained in the Appropriation Act in the preceding financial year, but which were not funded by the Federal Government.

    According to the bill, the office will be managed by a governing board which will comprise a chairman and six members representing each of the six geo-political zones and a director-general and three ex-officio members.

    Chairman and members of the board will be appointed by the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

    Moreover, the chairman and members of the board, excluding the director-general and ex-officio members could be removed from office by simple majority votes of each house of the National Assembly.