The much awaited debate on the emergency rule declared by the President in Rivers state failed to hold on Wednesday even as members appeared charged and prepared to engage the issues in the Presidential broadcast.
The letter from the president which the House spokesman Akintunde Rotimi said has been transmitted to the House and will be read at plenary on Wednesday was also not read.
The atmosphere inside the chambers was charged as members gathered in group discussing the development before the commencement of plenary.
Two female members of the House Blessing Amadi (PDP, Rivers) and Marie Ebikake created a mild drama inside the chamber engaged in a shouting match over the constitutionality of the President’s decision before the commencement of plenary.
Members present, however, stepped between he two women to prevent further escalation of the shouting match while one members, Kama Nkemkanma was seen banging tables saying nothing will happen here today.
Some other members were charged expressing their disappointment with the development, while awaiting the commencement of plenary.
After approving the votes and proceedings of the day of the previous day, the Deputy Speaker who presided over plenary announced schools present on escortion before asking for submission of petitions from members, a clear indication that the letter from the President will not be read.
However, after taking petitions and motions or urgent public importance, the charged atmosphere became calm as it was evident that the issue of emergency rule in Rivers state will not be discussed.
Those who were poised for a show down as a result of the emergency rule left the chambers disappointed, but some expressed confidence that the issue will be tabled before the House during plenary on Thursday
In an interview, Nasir Adegboyega (APC, Ogun) said constitutionally speaking, the issue has to be tabled before parliament within 48 hours.
He supported the emergency rule declared by the President in Rivers State, saying “I think that as a responsible leader, a step has to be taken toward resolving that impasse.
“As we all see, it was becoming very worrisome and a threat to our democracy itself. So I think that the step the President has taken is to ensure that we put a halt to that. In my view, that is in order. But there are opinions that it is against the constitution. I am not a lawyer and I have not looked at that very deeplly.
“But whatever it is, that has to be tested. But a leader has to do what needed to be done and I think that is what has happened.
“In terms of coming to the House, we expected that it will come today, but it has not happened. I think the law also allows that it should be done within 48 hours and we are still within that window. So, let us see what happen tomorrow and we take it up from there.”
The Lawmaker said the decision of the President has brought down the tension in the state saying “from what I have heard so far, I think that this has brought down tension. The issue of whether somebody will be impeached or not is off the table now.
“Of course that cannot be the only solution because there are so many things that can be done. After that, we expect all those consultations and amend to be done. That is why we have a time frame of six months and within that period, we expect so many things to have been done and we also expect that some of the problems would have been resolved. By the time they are getting back, everything will be normal and that will douse tension.”
On whether the President has transmitted the letter to the parliament, he said “the law say it must come and I know that the President is a democrat and he will do what the law says should be done. The important thing is that the communication has not come.
“But for now, we have to wait till the letter is read and depending on how the debate goes, I think the President will get the required support from the House especially when considered against the backdrop that it was taken to prevent a situation. Those who felt that it was not proper will come and say why they think so and it will be debated”.
Deputy Spokesman of the House, Phillip Agbese (APC, Benue) said the parliament will not taken any decision on the letter until it is tabled before the House and debated by membere.
Agbese said “the letter from the President has not been debated and the parliament has not taken any decision. There is nothing we can do about it for now until it is debated. For us as a parliament, it is still the same way that Nigerians have seen it on the pages of newspaper even though the leadership of parliament was invited to parliament. But officially Mr. Speaker has not communicated that to the floor.
“Politics is about collaboration and partnership. This is about our democracy and I believe that there will be consultation across board. Nevertheless, as a people’s parliament, we will be guided by the dictate of the constitution. That has been our guiding philosophy and guiding principle.
“We will remain true to our oath of office to continue to represent our people. The constitution in his broadcast mentioned section 305, but because the parliament has not taken a position. I am going to be very careful because as the Deputy Spokesman of the House, I must be guided by what has been discussed by the institution.
“I am a member of the Benue state and Northern caucus. We are going to be having consultations to decide on what position to take when the matter is debated on the floor of the House.
Ikenga Ugochinyere (PDP, Imo) said the President asking the military to take over a democratically elected government after declaring a state of emergency was undemocratic.
He said “Is there crisis in Rivers now? Are people dying on the streets of Rivers? Is there any danger? Yes, we saw smoke from one pipeline that we dont know whether it was broken. Is that enough for Mr. President to rush into declaring a state of emergency?
“When the governor called for a peace meeting did those lawmakers come? When he went to present budget, did they open the gate? When he wrote them, did they respond to him? The President did not even mention those ones in his speech. He was busy lambasting the governor as if he is an appointee of the federal government. That made some of us believe that he is baise.
“Section 305 which gives the President power to declare a state of emergency is not in doubt. But the President has no powers to suspend a democratically elected governor and deputy governor or a constitutional House of Assembly.
“I may not like that House of Assembly, but the President has no power to suspend them and appoint a sole administrator. He has no power to say a democratically elected government should be out of office for six months. Why six months? Is there war in that place?
On whether the governor should challenge his suspension in court, Ugochinyere said “the governor should head to the courts. I am not going to speak for him, but some of us believe this should also be tested in court, it should also be resisted. Even with a gun to my head, I will not vote in support of that. Where does this leave us as lawmakers?
“Under section 11, if the state Assembly cannot function as a result of crisis in the Assembly, the power to make law in that state revert to the National Assembly.
“Yes, this might be an offer for peace and I will support anything that will bring peace to Rivers state, but we cannot lay the foundation for constitutional crisis in the country. Nobody can take over any section of this country without adhering to the constitutional provisions.
“There is no place where the constitution gave him power to remove a seating governor. In legislative business, consultation is key. If he consulted some people, that is fine. When you finish consulting, they will brief us as contained in our rule books.
“I believe that when we go into executive session tomorrow, they will brief us on what they discussed and then we can see it from their own angle and match it with the visions of the constitution. But before you can do that, the parliament must be properly constituted with two third of members. Anything below that will not work.
“There is no condition precedent for the emergency rule, but is this will led to peace we must act in accordance with the constitution and remove the issue of removing an elected officer. We believe that this is unconstitutional and unfair”.
