The Nation Newspaper

Tag: rowdy session

  • Rowdy session as 37 Reps defect from APC

    There was a rowdy session in the House of Representatives yesterday as 37 members left the All Progressives  Congress (APC).

    32 members aligned with the People’s Democratic Party  (PDP) four members from Oyo State moved to the African Democratic Party (ADC), and a member, the chairman of the House Committee on Rules and Business, Emmanuel Orker Jev (Benue) simply “resigned” from the party.

    They cited the division in the party among others as their reason.

    The Peoples Democratic Party ( PDP) also lost a member to the United Progressives Party ( UPP).

    But Aminu Suleiman ( APC Kano) and Umar Nasir (Niger APC) insisted there was no division in the APC and asked the Speaker to declare the seats of the defectors vacant.

    Dogara said he would not do so. According to him, when PDP members defected to APC he did not declare their seats vacant.

    The defection was met with victory songs from PDP members before APC members took over with victory songs of their own. This held plenary up for about 10 minutes.

    Minority Leader Leo Ogor, who has been away for a number of days for health reasons, was at plenary today. He was however quiet for most of the session.

    With the defection of 37 members from the All Progressives Congress members in the Green Chamber, the party still retain its majority status.

    The figures now is: APC 192, PDP 155, APGA 5, ADC 4. Accord 1, SDP 1, UPP 1, Vacant 1

    Speaking at a briefing with reporters on the  issue, the leader of the House Femi Gbajabiamila, said the defectors can return to APC when they realize “the errors of their ways.”

    He said: “Let me say it is always sad when people losing one member, those members were part of the family and I would say very quickly, they are also welcome at any point in time they realize the errors of their ways.

    But let me also say that I want to commend the reminder members of the APC in the house who have remained steadfast, who have remained committed to the party, for me that is what politics is all about particularly in a representatives democracy where people elect you on a particular platform for a particular reason.

    “We are all aware of the Supreme Court decision in Ameachi’s case, where the Supreme Court said and made it abundantly clear that in Nigeria today, it is not the person that is elected, it is the party that people elect.

    “We tried to build politics of ideology in this country and that is why I commend our members who have remained committed to the ideology of this party, if ideology was entrenched, we would not see the way people cross carpet in this country today. In advanced democracy, hardly do you hear about such a thing, so I commend our members for remaining in the party.

    “Unfortunately, that section ( under which they defected) has already  been interpreted by the Supreme Court of Nigeria in the case of PDP versus Adekunle who was a member of the House of Representatives and the meaning of division has been clearly stated by the supreme court and the so-called R-APC that everybody is chanting, does not fall within the interpretation of the Supreme Court.

    “Therefore, we would be encouraging the party to take the necessary steps not because we are against the members, but so that we can further entrench democracy. When people elect you to represent a particular platform, that seat does not belong to you, the seat belongs to the constituency, so it is important that this position is stated clearly, and that we put it to rest.

    “I want to say that in spite of the movement of about 36 members I think four went to ADC in Oyo State and 32 to PDP, I want Nigerians to know that not only does APC remains the majority of the House, APC is actually a clear majority in the House. I believe those who wanted to defect were expecting about 60 members.

    “I want to say once again that on behalf of all the APC members of the House of Representatives, we would continue to do the biding of the people, we would continue to do the biding of the country in spite of whatever shenanigans that may be going on in the country.”

    The defectors led by Rasak Atunwa ( Now PDP Kwara) in another briefing said the Muhammadu Buhari regime had derailed from the initial ideals of the party.

    According to him,  they left the APC “for the good of this country and for the good of the people of this country.”

    “Let me inform you that (those that defected)  constituted the first batch of those who signified that they would leave the APC and therefore you should expect in the next few days defecting members of the APC on the floor of the House of Reps.

    Tony Nwulu ( PDP Lagos) moved  from PDP to United Progressives Party ( UPP).

    Earlier, PDP lawmakers, from the House who had converged at the lobby of the National Assembly when the news of the siege in the House of the President of the Senate Bukola Saraki and Deputy President of the Senate, Ike Ekweremadu filtered in had vowed not to allow a leadership change in the Senate.

    They threatened to forcibly gain entry into the Senate  Chamber to truncate any attempt to change the leadership of the Red Chamber.

    But the members burst into jubilation when the news of the defection of 15 Senators reached them and started chanting various songs of victory.

     

     

     

  • Reps in rowdy session over June 12  public holiday 

    Opponents of the official declaration of the result of the June 12 as a public holiday mounted a serious obstacle to its actualization on the floor of the House of Representatives yesterday.

    Speaker Yakubu Dogara ruled that the issue be professionally examined by experts which will form the basis of whatever decision the House would take.

    This followed the stalemate on a motion by Wale Raji (APC, Lagos) on the declaration of June 12 as a national holiday.

    Raji, who applauded President Buhari’s initiative, noted that the annulled election was generally acknowledged to be peaceful and adjudged by the international observers as the freest, fairest and most credible in the democratic history of the country.

    He said: “It is saddening however that in spite of the commendable integrity of the election, it was annulled by the military government of General Ibrahim Babangida and the country was thrown into a serious political turmoil leading to another military ear which lasted till 1999 when the country returned to a democratic regime which has survived to date.

    “It is also worrisome that since 1999, successive governments at the federal level have failed to acknowledge and declare and celebrate June 12 as the real Democracy Day, rather continued to celebrate May 29 as Democracy Day in Nigeria”.

    Raji sought the support of the House to urge President Buhari to direct the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to release the full result of the June 12, 1993 presidential election and declare the winner, Chief Moshood Abiola, as president-elect posthumously with a view to resolving all issues relating to the election and complete the history of June 12, 1993 presidential election.

    The floor was, however, divided on the legality of the declaration of the holiday as opponents and proponents took turns to make their points before a rowdy situation developed.

    Most of the lawmakers agreed that June 12 deserved to be a public holiday though.

    Opponents of the motion said notwithstanding that Mr President has the powers to declare public holidays, Democracy Day becomes a constitutional issue when it has to be changed.

    They cited Section 2 (2) of Public Holiday Act where May 29 was declared Democracy Day.

    Nicholas Ossai (PDP, Delta) threw the floor into an overdrive when he accused President Buhari of usurping the powers of the National Assembly to declare a public holiday.

    He argued that the declaration of a public holiday is supported by an Act of parliament and not through public declaration.

    Before he could go on, Speaker Dogara referred him to sections of the Principal Schedule of the Act that confers the President with powers to appoint any day as public holiday.

    When the floor became rowdy and opponents of the motion could no longer be audibly heard, the Speaker conferred  with lawmakers after which he declared that expert opinion must be sought before the House could make its stance known.

    The Speaker added: “Whatever we do must be properly done so that we don’t subject ourselves to public interpretation of our actions.”

    He referred the motion to Committees on Rules and Business and Justice.

  • House in rowdy session as motion on oil firms’ relocation fails

    House in rowdy session as motion on oil firms’ relocation fails

    AN attempt to cause oil companies operating in the Niger Delta area to establish operational/ administrative offices in the area, where they engage in exploration failed yesterday.
    The motion, sponsored by Oprah Goodluck Nanah, caused rowdy session as it set members against themselves on the floor.
    Some of the lawmakers noted that the fundamental rights of the companies would be infringed on if they are denied the right of taking entrepreneurial and economic decisions.
    At a point, the Speaker, Yakubu Dogara, had to intervene.
    “There is no need for tempers to flare,” he said.
    Nanah, while moving the motion, had noted that exploration and exploitation of crude oil, which is the main source of the country’s revenue, are carried out in communities in the Niger Delta Area by oil companies that have their administrative and operational offices outside the communities.
    The lawmaker said though the companies have non-resident administrative officers, who purportedly report to their offices outside the host communities about their operational effects and complaints of the host communities, “it cannot be as effective as having administrative offices in the communities, thus leading to loss of confidence, crisis, conflicts.”
    He said if no urgent action is taken to ensure that the oil firms establish administrative and operational offices in the communities they operate, it will defeat efforts of the government to ensure peace in the Niger Delta area and peaceful co-existence between the host communities and the oil companies.
    Akpoattai Owoidighe Ime (PDP, Akwa-Ibom) described as unacceptable the practice, whereby oil companies operating in the Niger Delta, maintain offices outside the operational domain. According to him, some of them go as far as inciting the people against the government.
    Also in support was Randolph Iwona Oruene Brown (PDP, Rivers). The problem of the Niger Delta, according to him, “is that most of the oil companies are playing hide and seek game with the host communities.”
    He asked what stops other OIC’s from relocating to the Niger Delta, if the NLNG could have its operational headquarters in the region. “We fight, we quarrel but yet we stay together,” the lawmaker said.
    But the majority leader, Femi Gbajabiamila (APC, Lagos), was against the motion. According to him, it will be setting a bad precedence should the House allow the motion to pass.
    “We have to note that a business is a corporate entity and you can’t force me to operate here. You can’t change the goal post in the middle of the game. The PIB will take care of all these concerns,” Gbajabiamila said.
    But the Minority Leader, Leo Ogor (PDP, Delta), while citing different points of order, kept interrupting Gbajabiamila’s presentation.
    He said for companies to be operating in the Niger Delta with offices outside the region and paying taxes to authorities outside the area, was wrong.
    Aminu Shehu Shagari (APC, Sokoto) described the motion as “ill-conceived and inconsiderate”. Shagari urged the House to quickly conclude work on the Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB).
    Princess Funke Adedoyin (APC, Kwara), in her contribution, warned of the “need to make economic arguments and not sentimental arguments.”
    She said the House as a patriotic Parliament should let corporations make their own decisions.
    The Speaker, Yakubu Dogara had to intervene as the sitting became rowdy.
    “There is no need for tempers to flare,” he said. “I am looking at it from the point of business. I’m not joining the debate, but can you tell me as a businessman, where to locate my office?”
    Subsequently, the motion failed to pass after the Speaker called for a voice vote.

  • Plateau Assembly in rowdy session over Jang

    There was a stormy session in the Plateau State House of Assembly yesterday over a petition on alleged financial misconduct  against Governor Jonah Jang.

    The session became stormy when Speaker Titus Alam reportedly tried to frustrate the mentioning of the petition.

    A group, Plateau Patriotic Front, petitioned the House, alleging gross financial misconduct of over N20 billion.

    A copy of the petition, obtained by The Nation, titled: “Allegation of gross misconduct against Governor Jonah David Jang of Plateau State” contains allegations of extra budgetary spending, misappropriation, inflated contract sum and unauthorised bank loan.

    The group copied all the lawmakers.

    Alam, who started the debate, informed members about the petition.

    Wokdung Abbas (Dengi) said: “Having carefully read through the petition, the contents are too weighty to be ignored.

    “In the entire petition, the House was hit because the petitioner called us names and also alleged that we have been bribed by the governor not to check the executive.

    “The House must get to the bottom of this petition in the interest of the people. We also need to probe the allegations to clear our names, the petitioners said we are clueless, docile, bootlickers and praise singers, so we need to clear our names.”

    He was obstructed by the member from Jos South, Dalyop Mancha, who came up with a point of order.

    The Speaker recognised him but his action kicked off a storm.

    Hurriedly adjourning sitting, he said: “It is obvious from the point of order raised that some members have not been served copies of the petition and it will not be fair to talk about it, we have to adjourn sitting.”

    But some members insisted the petition must be mentioned even if the discussion does not take place.

    Istifanus Muansat (Pankshin North) said: “This attempt is not to discuss the petition against the governor, but at least let the House read the petition formally and we can postpone the discussion.”

    But Alam insisted the petition cannot be mentioned, until all members are served copies.

    Some lawmakers, who spoke after plenary, wondered why the Speaker adjourned.

    Abduallhi Ladan Garkuwa (Mangu South) said: “This petition is already a public document. Why is the Speaker frustrating our attempt to discuss it? The claims that some members were not served copies are attempts to frustrate the discussion of the issue.”

    Hassan Baba Ahmed (Jos North) said: “The missing N10 billion SURE-P fund mentioned in the petition is real.

    “I ‘m a member of the SURE-P committee of the House and I am not aware of the whereabouts of the fund. This is the fact the Speaker is running away from.

    “But whether he likes it or not anytime we reconvene we must discuss this issue.

    “We must probe the government over this huge financial scam because we are talking of public fund here.”

     

  • Senators in rowdy session over Rivers crisis

    Senators in rowdy session over Rivers crisis

    The Senate was thrown into turmoil yesterday over the unfolding crisis in the Rivers State House of Assembly.

    The confusion led to the division of the upper chamber to determine where each senator stood on a resolution on seeking to mandate the Inspector General of Police to address the issue of the broken relationship between Rivers State Governor Chibuike Amaechi and Commissioner of Police Mr. Mbu Joseph Mbu.

    The framing of the resolution did not go down well with the majority of the lawmakers who wanted outright call by the Senate for the removal of the Rivers State Commissioner of Police.

    The stalemate continued for over one hour as the plenary became rowdy.

    The Senate had held a closed session that lasted over one hour immediately it resumed for plenary.

    The unscheduled secret session turned out to be an indication that all was not well.

    The contentious resolution followed a Point of Order moved by Senator Magnus Abe (Rivers Southeast).

    Abe moved Order 43, which deals with personal explanation, and told his colleagues that there was an incident at the Rivers State House of Assembly, Port Harcourt on Tuesday.

    He noted: “What happened was that since May 6, 2013, the Rivers State House of Assembly has not sat because the State’s Police Command withdrew police protection from the House of Assembly.

    “However, after about 63 days that the Assembly could not sit, the Assembly received a communication from the Governor that he wanted to come and make some alterations in the state budget.

    “The Assembly wrote to the police and decided to reconvene after not sitting for 63 days.

    “When they met in the premises of the Assembly, a faction of the House, five members out of a total of 32 members, came into the Assembly and tried to impeach or destabilise the House.

    “They beat up the Speaker, the Majority Leader and other members of the Assembly who were forced to run out of the Assembly and they tried to impeach the speaker with five members.

    “Rivers State House of Assembly has 32 members and a quorum of the House should be 11 members.

    “Be that as it may, the majority members were able to come back and then, the House sat, but before that happened, there was fracas, there was a fight and several members were injured.

    “Surprisingly, this was happening at the House of Assembly, which is directly opposite the Rivers State Police Command Headquarters.

    “At the time this was going on, because of the letter the Speaker had written to the Commissioner of Police, the assumption was that the policemen were there to protect the Speaker and all members of the House of Assembly but, unfortunately, that was not the case.

    “We all know that in the Constitution, the impeachment of a speaker or a governor, two/third of the members of the Assembly is required.

    “Even as we speak, the incident has continued to generate tension in the state. This (yesterday) morning , I heard there was shooting of tear-gas even into the Government House.

    “It is clear that the Rivers State Police Command under the command of the present commissioner is incapable of controlling the situation in the state.

    “This Senate needs to save, not just the House of Assembly but to save Rivers State and to save our democracy.”

    Senate President David Mark did not allow contributions from the floor.

    He noted: “Clearly, what is happening in Rivers State is an embarrassment to legislators across the length and breadth of this country.”

    “It is in the interest of the State House of Assembly not to do anything that will portray legislators as irresponsible because that is not what we are.

    “Clearly also, what is happening is totally unacceptable and it must be condemned in its strongest possible term in its entirety irrespective of who is directly involved or who is behind it.

    “It is not a situation that we expect and we would not want it to continue beyond this point where it has reached.

    “Because of the urgency, I also believe that this Senate must take urgent step to protect democracy and to protect this country and to ensure that democracy continues to grow and improve in the country.”

    Mark directed the Senate Leader, Senator Victor Ndoma-Egba, to read already written resolutions for affirmation of the Senate.

    Ndoma-Egba moved that in pursuant to the Point of Order raised by Senator Abe, and the guidance Mark offered, that the Senate should condemn in strong terms the crisis in the Rivers State House of Assembly which portents danger for the country’s democracy.

    The resolution was unanimously adopted.

    Ndoma-Egba also moved that the Senate mandate the Committee on States and Local Governments to investigate the remote and immediate causes of the crisis in Rivers State House of Assembly and report back to the Senate within one week.

    It was also unanimously adopted.

    The resolution that in the interim, all parties to the crisis should maintain the status quo and refrain from any action capable of jeopardising the security of lives and property in Rivers State, was also adopted.

    The Senate also resolved that “this Distinguished Senate should at all times uphold the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria”.

    Mark explained that the resolution was for the sake of emphasis.

    Trouble started when Ndoma-Egba read the fifth resolution for adoption.

    It states: “The Senate further resolves that the Inspector General of Police should take immediate steps to address the issue of the broken relationship between the Governor of Rivers State and the State Commissioner of Police.”

    When Mark put the question, there was a thunderous “nay” in the chamber.

    Mark said it was important that members understood the limit they could go in taking resolutions.

    He put the question the second time and it was not clear whether the “ayes or nays” carried the day.

    There was confusion in the chamber as Senators were observed canvassing in groups in the chamber.

    After about 30 minutes, Mark read what he called amended version of the resolution.

    The slight amendment did not go down well with some Senators as the confusion continued.

    Not satisfied with the turn of events, Senator Babajide Omoworare, who represents Osun East, raised a Point of Order.

    He quoted Order 73 (1)(2)(3) of the Senate, which deals with division of the Senate in the event of uncertainty in voting and called for division.

    Omoworare said, “There is equality of votes. I am of the opinion that the nays had it. I call for division. The Rivers State House of Assembly has been taken over by militants. We cannot stay here and watch helplessly.”

    Mark directed that the gallery be cleared and all the doors leading to the chamber be locked as required by the rule.

    When the gallery was cleared and the doors locked, Mark again proceeded to put the question once again as required by the rule.

    He ruled that the ayes had it. The disorder in the chamber intensified.

    Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu raised Order 73 (2)(3).

    Ekweremadu said that according to the Order, the Senate President could only proceed to the next stage of division of the Senate if his ruling was challenged.

    Omoworare promptly challenged the ruling and said that he felt that the “nays” carried the day.

    Mark mandated the Clerk to call Senators one by one to vote.

    “For the first time let us state where we stand on an issue,” he said.

    After the voting, Mark announced that three Senators abstained, seven were absent, 47 voted “no” and 50 others voted “yes.”

    Some Senators felt that the announcement of the result did not reflect the voting.

    Mark, who was visibly agitated by the disposition of some senators over the result, said they collectively condemned what happened in the Rivers State House of Assembly.

    He said he announced the authentic figure while any other figure by any senator could not be valid.

    He noted that those who disagree with the figure could go to the tribunal to challenge his ruling.

    Mark added, apparently for emphasis that the implication of the result of the division is that the resolution mandating the IG to take steps to address the broken relationship between Amaechi and Mbu remains.

  • Senate in rowdy session over State of the Nation Address Bill

    Senate in rowdy session over State of the Nation Address Bill

    Senate President David Mark intervened yesterday to stop a breakdown of law and order in the Senate.

    The upper chamber was thrown into confusion for over 35 minutes due to sharp disagreement over the consideration of the State of the Nation Address Bill 2013.

    Mark laboured to calm frayed nerves as two senators attempted to go for each other’s jugular.

    Senator Kabir Garba Marafa (Zamfara Central) and Senator Paulinus Igwe Nwagu (Ebonyi Central) attempted to throw punches at each other. Other senators quickly stopped them.

    As Marafa attempted to pull off his agbada in preparation for a brawl, other senators moved swiftly to stop him from the unparliamentary action.

    Nwagu was murmuring as he walked away.

    Tempers continued to rise as senators formed groups to decide what to do with the amendments suggested by President Goodluck Jonathan on the controversial bill.

    Mark, who was apparently taken aback, said: “We will solve all the problems by talking, not by boxing.

    “In any case, for the first time in 14 years, I have seen an effort for people to pull out boxing gloves. That is not necessary, we must never do it. We are distinguished Senators and we are statesmen. We can do all the talking but we should never resort to boxing.

    “I want to appeal once more that we should suspend the debate on this bill for today, if for nothing else because of the way tempers have risen. We are all on the same wave length and we will do what is best for this country. We don’t need to fight to do it.

    “I think on this subject matter we are all on the same wave length.

    “Please, I want to appeal to you that we suspend the debate on the subject.”

    President Jonathan returned the State of the Nation Address Bill 2013 passed by the National Assembly and requested that some amendments be made on the bill to enable him assent to it.

    Jonathan described certain provisions of the bill as inconsistent with the doctrine of separation of powers and the letter and spirit of the Constitution.

    Many senators wanted the Senate to override the Presidential objections, but others said the upper chamber had no such power since the letter the President sent to the National Assembly did not say that he withheld assent to the bill.

    Senator Abdul Ningi (Bauchi Central) traced the origin of the bill and posited that contrary to the President’s position, the National Assembly has never passed a bill that is inconsistent with the constitution.

    He said the State of the Nation Address Bill 2013 did not in any way contradict the Constitution.

    Ningi added that Bill was an attempt to deepen democracy and make leaders responsible and accountable.

    He said: “The letter from Mr. President has no basis; it has no merit. It should be returned to him for assent or to reject it and when he rejects it we will override the President, for the first time.”

    Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu, said the Senate had never had the situation where the President returned a bill passed by the National Assembly with a comment.

    In his view, there are three options for the President when a bill is passed by the two chambers. One option is for the President to accept and assent to the bill; the second is for the President to return it and request for amendment. The third option is for the President to withhold assent and return the bill.

    He suggested that the bill should be referred to the conference committee of the two chambers to advice whether to accept the requests of the President or to override the President.

    Senator Smart Adeyemi (Kogi West) said the President is not against the spirit of the bill.

    Adeyemi noted that if the President proposed amendments, it is left for the Senate to either consider the proposals or override the President.

    He added that Jonathan simply articulated challenges to his office.

    “As democrats, we should consider what the President sent to us,” Adeyemi said.

    To Senator Heineken Lokpobiri, the President is not against the bill; he merely pointed out salient constitutional issues the Senate should consider.

    He noted that the law will be null and void if certain provisions of the bill are inconsistent with the constitution.

    Mark cautioned that since what the Senate wanted to do is important, efforts must be made to get it right.

    Senator Ahmed Lawan said the bill aimed to give the President opportunity to talk to the people.

    He noted that Jonathan had shown that he was not interested in the bill.

    The only option open to the Senate, he said, is to override the President.

    Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe said that the question before the Senate was to answer whether the bill is inconsistent with Section 67 of the Constitution.

    Abaribe recalled that the President recently gave a mid-term address.

    He asked: “What is the difference between what the bill is asking and the mid-term address given by Mr. President?”

    He noted that Jonathan could as well have called the mid-term address State of the Nation Address.

    Abaribe said that there was a window for the Senate to consider what the President proposed.

    But Senator Ganiyu Solomon said the President was calling to question the judgement of 469 members of the National Assembly.

    Senator Ita Enang quoted several Sections of the Constitution to support his position that the Senate should not accede to any amendment proposed by the President.

    Enang said that the option left for the President was either to assent or withhold assent.

    Senator Gbenga Ashafa said that the President was only making excuses on a bill that requires him to address the people.

    He said the Senate should override the President.

    Senator Olufemi Lanlehin (Oyo South) noted that the position the Senate found itself is well provided for by the Constitution.

    Lanlehin quoted Section 58(4)(5) of the Constitution and insisted that it was clear that the President could only assent to a bill or withhold assent.

    Mark recalled the suggestion by Enang that the Senate should approach the Supreme Court for interpretation and asked: “How do we go about it?”

    With no end in sight to the debate, Ekweremadu moved that it should be adjourned to consult with the House of Representatives on the way forward.

    The motion did not go down well with most members.

    When Mark put the question on the motion, it was not clear which side – those who wanted the matter concluded yesterday and those who wanted the debate adjourned – carried the day.

    Intense lobbying ensued on the floor of the Senate.

    After the adjournment of plenary, the Chairman, Senate Committee on Information, Media and Public Affairs, Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, rushed to the press centre to explain what happened between Marafa and Nwagu.

    Abaribe said that the altercation between the two lawmakers had nothing to do with the State of the Nation Address Bill

  • Senate in rowdy session over terrorism Bill

    Senate in rowdy session over terrorism Bill

    The consideration of the report of the Conference Committee on the Terrorism Act Amendment Bill turned rowdy yesterday in the Senate.

    The issue at contention was a recommendation by the Conference Committee, which made the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) the coordinating office in the fight against terrorism.

    The committee comprising lawmakers from the Senate and the House of Representatives had harmonised the position of both chambers on a Bill for an Act to amend the Terrorism (Prevention) Act, 2011 and for other related matters.

    Adoption of the report was deferred last week by the Senate, following claims by some senators that the report was not signed by members of the House of Representatives.

    The committee adopted the recommendation of the House, which recommended the NSA’s office as the coordinating office for the fight against terrorism.

    This provision deals with national coordinating bodies in counter-terrorism offences, designates specific institutions and vests specific powers and functions, “that is- the office of the National Security Adviser, the Attorney-General of the Federation and relevant law enforcement and security agencies.” The Senate later adjourned plenary for two hours.

    When the lawmakers came back, the Chairman, Senate Committee on Appropriation, Senator Ahmad Maccido, laid the report of the Joint Committee on Appropriation and Finance on the 2013 Appropriation Bill.

    There is a strong indication that the upper chamber may pass the Appropriation Bill today.