The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Senate

  • Too hot for Senate to handle

    Too hot for Senate to handle

    The Senate drew the flak over its planned amendment of the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) and Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) Act and related laws. It quickly dropped the plan – which coincided with the ongoing trial of its president, Senator Bukola Saraki, at the CCT for alleged false assets declaration – following public outcry. To lawyers, the plan was ill-conceived. ADEBISI ONANUGA sought their views.

    The Senate drew the flak over its decision to amend some anti-corruption laws. No fewer than 28 civil society organisations marched on Abuja against the plan.

    Sought to be amended were the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) and Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT); Money Laundering and the Administration of Criminal Justice (ACJ) laws. Following public outcry, the Senate suspended the exercise last Wednesday.

    Many Nigerians saw the move as a bid to whittle down the powers of the anti-corruption agencies, help Saraki escape justice or in the alternative create a soft landing for him, if convicted.

    They were worried about the haste and timing of the exercise. The bill for an amendment of the CCT and CCB Act, sponsored by Peter Nwaoboshi (PDP-Delta State), scaled the second reading two days after it was first read before it was referred to the committees on Judiciary and Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions.

     

    CCB/CCT ACT

     

    The bill seeks to amend Section 3 of the Act to give every public officer appearing before the Bureau a fair hearing provided for under Section 36 (2)(a) of the 1999 Constitution. It seeks to bar the tribunal from trying criminal cases and reduce its powers to try civil cases.

    The bill in addition provides “for an opportunity for the person whose rights and obligations may be affected to make representations to the administering authority before that authority makes the decision affecting that person”.

    This is in contrast to the law which the sponsor of the bill said does not provide for the CCB to take written statement from concerned public officers before referring a matter of alleged non-compliance to the CCT.

     

    Money Laundering Bill

     

    The Money Laundering Bill is the first of the two executive bills sent to the Senate by President Muhammadu Buhari. They are: ”The Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Bill”  and “The Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Bill, 2016.”

    The first bill seeks to repeal the Money Laundering Prohibition Act 2011, and re-enact a more comprehensive legislation.

    The bill seeks to divest the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) of its powers to probe offences of economic and financial crimes and to vest it on a separate agency.

    The bill,  in addition, seeks to prohibit money laundering and criminal activities in the country, expand the scope of money laundering offences.

    The second bill seeks to facilitate international assistance in criminal matters.  Among others, it also seeks to provide protection for employees of various institutions, bodies and professions who may discover money laundering.

    The Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Bill 2016, seeks to get relevant international assistance in cases of money laundering. It  is expected to provide framework for other countries to assist in provision of and obtaining of evidence, making of arrangements for persons to give evidence.

     

    EFCC rejects amendment

     

    The EFCC in a position paper presented to the National Assembly, rejected the proposed amendments to the Money Laundering Act.

    “The bill appears complex and difficult to decipher as it is riddled with complex web of cross references,” EFCC said.

    The commission spotted 12 gaps which it believes could impede the government’s anti-corruption agenda. It said passing the bill into law would affect Nigeria’s application for the membership of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF).

    To the agency, if the Bill is passed into law, it will give the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) some discretion which may be abused.

    The commission also faulted plans to establish a Bureau for Money Laundering Control (BMLC) for a service which is already being rendered efficiently by the Special Control Unit against Money Laundering (SCUML).

    It said: “Clause 15(4) (c) is unconstitutional as it is retroactive because it is designed to subject persons to prosecution under this bill for offences committed before its enactment into law.

    “Clauses 18(5), (6) and (7) are in conflict with Section 7(2) of the EFCC Act as they seek to divest EFCC of its powers to cause investigation into economic and financial crimes offences and, by extension, attempt to transfer the statutory powers of the EFCC to an unknown and non-existent agency—Proceeds of Crimes Recovery and Management Agency.

    “Clause 14(2) of the bill provides that Financial Institutions (FIs) and Designated Non-Financial Businesses and Professions (DNFBPs) are competent but not compellable to give evidence in criminal proceedings arising from the report which they make under the bill.

    “The effect is that there will be challenges in the successful prosecution of money laundering related offences.

    “Moreover, this clause is contrary to the provisions of the Evidence Act as the issue of competency and compellability of witnesses are settled principles of a law under the Evidence Act and judicial authorities.”

    The EFCC also faulted discretionary powers given to the Attorney-General of the Federation on reporting of money laundering cases and the amounts payable by offenders saying, such powers may be abused if any AGF is not well-intentioned.

     

    ACJA

     

    Amendment to the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) seeks to exclude CCT from its application.  It is intended  to whittle down powers of CCT by stripping it of powers to hear criminal cases. If the  amendments scales through, then all asset declaration matters before CCT would be deemed to be civil cases rather than criminal cases.

     

    Lawyers react

     

    The bid to tinker with the CCT and the ACJA drew the most ire of Nigerians who saw it as a move to frustrate Saraki’s trial.

    The National Coordinator, Legal Defence & Assistance Project (LEDAP), Chino Obiagwu, described the attempt to amend the ACJ as self-service and contrary to paragraph 1 of the Code of Conduct for Public Officers.

    He said the desperation with which the Senate President and his supporters sought to amend the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act and the ACJA, simply for the purpose of seeking ways to frustrate his trial of the Tribunal, raises the impression that he is guilty of the offence charged and they are only working to stop his trial.

    The lawyer said by amending the ACJ Act, the Senate would end up frustrating the good intentions of the Act simply because of the pursuit to stop Saraki’s trial.

    The group noted that the bill to amend the ACJ Acts seeks to revise section 2 (2) of the Act by substituting the subsection.

    The proposed amendment reads: “The provisions of this Act shall not apply to a Court Martial and such other Courts or Tribunal not being courts created and listed under section 6(5) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended”.

    The provision of this section 2 of the Act, which is sought to be amended, provides: “(1) Without prejudice to section 86 of this Act, the provisions of this Act shall apply to criminal trials for offences established by an Act of the National Assembly and other offences punishable in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja. (2) The provisions of this Act shall not apply to a Court Martial.”

    LEDAP stated that by  removing the application of the ACJ Act from courts other than the Federal and State High Courts, Court of Appeal and the Supreme, which are the only courts with criminal jurisdiction listed under section 6(5) of the Constitution, the proposed amendment would narrow the application of the very laudable legislation. Besides, it said it would restrict its application to many courts and tribunals.

    LEDAP drew the National Assembly’s attention to their oath of office, adding that they were elected by the people to make laws for ‘order and good government of Nigeria’ and not for self-serving interests.

    “By pursing the amendment of the Acts in this manner, the legislators are simply abusing the privilege of law making,” Obiagwu said.

    Chairman, Nigerian Bar Association, Ikorodu Branch, Lagos State, Mr Dotun Adetunji, said the amendment of the CCT Act at this point was a “shameful act ’’.

    He said any amendment to a law based on vested interest was contrary to the rule of law and the ethics of good governance.

    “This action of the Senate while its president is undergoing trial at the CCT is a shameful act. It is also a slap on the generality of Nigerians that voted them into office and a breach of the trust expected of them.

    Former Secretary-General, NBA Ikeja branch, Adesina Adegbite, said there was no need or justification for the amendment of the Code of Conduct Bureau &Tribunal Act. According to him, it was a misplaced priority by the Senate and most suspicious.

    “The Bill also exposed the ignorance of the sponsor about the Nigerian laws and particularly the Constitution. Section 18 (1) & (2) of Part 1 of the 5th Schedule of the 1999 Constitution as amended is very clear on the powers of the CCT to impose punishment.

    “It is, therefore, amusing and indeed worrisome that a Senator could attempt to amend the Constitution through a private Bill. Certainly, the promoters of the Bill realised that they goofed and probably due to the public outcry, hence, their decision to suspend further action on the Bills.”

    Director of Prisoners’ Rights Advocacy Intitiative (PRAI), Ahmed Adetola-Kazeem, said the attempt made by the Senate to amend the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act was very suspicious, tainted with malice and done in bad faith givenbthe circumstances.

    “It would be very difficult to argue that the proposed amendment was not connected to the travails of the Senate President before the Code of Conduct Tribunal and likelihood of same happening to other members of the Senate in the nearest future.

    “It is impossible to have perfect laws, but there are laws which serves the purpose to which they are enacted. The ACJA has been lauded by many as a fantastic innovation for the speedy and effective dispensation of criminal justice in Nigeria.

    “In my view, no criminally minded person will like the ACJA as it is presently, since the Act frowns at delay tactics employed by legal practitioners in the conduct of their cases.

    “For example, Section 221 stipulates that objections shall not be taken or entertained during proceeding or trial on the ground of an imperfect or erroneous charge.

    “Section 306 of the ACJA also prohibits the entertainment of an application for a stay of proceedings in respect of criminal matters.”

    On the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act, Adetola-Kazeem said: “It is adequate for the purpose for which it was enacted. Though some retired Justices of the Supreme Court have criticised the CCT on the bases that it does not have criminal jurisdiction and therefore the ACJA does not apply, however the decision of the Supreme Court is to the contrary and remains the Law.”

    An activist, Ikechukwu Ikeji believes a clarification is needed.

    “It is somewhat confusing to see the Tribunal as an executive body while at the same time exercising powers under the judicature.

    “It is important that the National Assembly as the law making organ of government steps in to clearly say whether the Tribunal is a court under the contemplation of Section 6 of the Constitution or not,” he said.

    Ikeji believed the anti-corruption laws, in their present state,  are not inadequate but they allow for a lot of openings that may lead to confusion in the administration of justice. It is imperative that any ambiguity in the law be cleared by the National Assembly through their law making powers.

    In his contributions, Mr Wale Ogunade, a lawyer and public affairs analyst, said: “The Senate is required by law to amend laws. However, in the case of the amendment of the CCT Act by the Senate, the question to ask is: does the Senate have an honest intention or an ulterior motive.

    “My opinion is that the recent moves by the Senate to amend the CCT Act were designed to frustrate the trial of Saraki. “It is designed to water down the Act making it worthless, useless and of no effect whatsoever.”

    Another lawyer, Mr Ataene Spurgeon, said although the National Assembly was empowered by the statute books to make laws for the country, the amendment of the CCT Act might be a “coincidence.’’ “The amendment of the Code of Conduct Tribunal Act is a `coincidence’ with the trial of the Senate President, Bukola Saraki.’’

    If the laws establishing the Code of Conduct bureau and the Code of Conduct Tribunal are faulty, it becomes necessary for the sake of the good governance to amend the same.

    “For Mr Ola Ogunbiyi, the amendment should not affect the trial of the senate president.The trial can only be affected if the trial is stalled till after the amendment. The Senate can at any point amend the law, that it is being amended at this point in time is not an issue.”The law begins to take its course the day it is signed into law; it is not going to be retrospective.

    An Abeokuta-based lawyer, Mr Emmanuel Olu-Alade, said there was no law forbidding amendment of an Act because someone was on trial.

    “The question is, what are the paragraphs that are currently being amended and what would be the effect of the amended paragraphs considering the ongoing trial of Bukola Saraki.

     

    What should be done?

     

    Adegbite advised members of the National Assembly to adhere to their duties as spelt out in the Section 4 of the 1999 Constitution which is to make law for the good and wellbeing of the people. What they are presently doing is totally not in the interest of the people.

    Adetola-Kazeem maintained that there is no need to amend any of these law at this time and whenever it will be auspicious to do it,  there must be sincerity of purpose on the part of those amending the laws.

     

  • Senate in Search for Redemption

    It is apparent that the 8th Senate of the Federal Republic is on a redemptive mission to salvage whatever is left of its battered image. The legislative chamber late last week ate the humble pie and reversed itself on some of the giddy measures it had set onto, which reeked of legislative brigandage. The coming days will show whether the chamber’s back-pedalling was sincere enough, and not too little too late in the day.

    The Senate had carried on, to the consternation of many Nigerians, as if the weighty task of lawmaking was a gutter fight motivated by the ongoing trial of Senate President Bukola Saraki before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT). On the heels of a ruling early last week by the chairman of the tribunal, Justice Danladi Umar, that he would henceforth hold day-long sittings everyday to try the Saraki case that had dragged forever since last year, the Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions Committee of the Senate issued a summons on the same judge to appear before it “unfailingly” by 2p.m. on Thursday. Well, seriously?! The time scheduled for Umar’s appearance before the Senate committee conflicted flagrantly with the trial routine he had already made public. And so, the timing and coincidence of that summons were obvious even to a nincompoop as retaliatory against the tribunal judge and targeted at frustrating the Senate President’s trial. Discerning citizens and interest groups, of course, tackled the Senate over the summons and counselled that the tribunal judge should ignore it. Not that anyone thought it was it was helpful for our emerging democracy that legislative authority should be defied. But the legislative chamber, by the summons, undermined its own legislative dignity. It was thus in enlightened self-interest that the Senators, two days later, stepped down the invitation to Umar.

    The chairman of the summoning Senate committee, Senator Samuel Anyanwu, was reported as saying the legislative chamber reconsidered because the tribunal judge wrote in to officially ask for an extension of time. But, trust me, the legislative chamber is better off letting the matter lie, because it cannot at this time conduct any probe the tribunal judge that would have any shred of credibility. Isn’t there something generally known as ‘conflict of interest’? In any event, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) was in the news late last week as having cleared the judge of the N10million bribery allegation pending against him. That clearance, from all indications, has made nugatory any plan by the Senate to proceed with its investigation of Justice Umar. A caveat though: EFCC is an interested party in the trial of the Senate President before Justice Umar, and I would personally have nursed serious reservations against the timing of its clearance of the tribunal judge, just like one did against the Senate summons on him. But the latest clearance was said to be reinforcing an earlier one issued under the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan by the former leadership of the EFCC under Ibrahim Lamorde, and that minimizes the chances of sinister motivation regarding the Saraki case.

    Besides the sudden summoning of the tribunal judge, the Senate had earlier on set onto a fast track legislative process to amend the Code of Conduct Bureau and Code of Conduct Tribunal Acts, as well as the Administration of Criminal Justice (ACJ) Act. Notice that the Conduct Bureau is the Senate President’s accuser even though he is being prosecuted by the EFCC, while the Tribunal is the trial court; and a major plank of the proposed ACJ Act amendment was to exclude the Conduct Tribunal from the application of that Act, such that the tribunal would no longer have jurisdiction to try criminal matters as it is doing now in the case of the Senate President.

    The legislative chamber, of course, justified the proposed amendments and argued that persons accusing it of aiming to benefit the Senate President thereby were just ill-informed. The chairman of the Senate Committee on Media and Public Affairs, Aliyu Abdullahi, was reported as saying since the Saraki case commenced in 2015, any amendment of the law in 2016 could not retroactively affect an ongoing case.”The proposed amendment would still take a minimum of six months, given the long process that law-making requires. This process includes committee hearing, public hearing, reporting back to Senate Committee of the Whole, the concurrence in the House of Representatives, and assent by the President as the final stage. There is no way we will even complete the process of finally effecting the amendments before the completion of the Saraki case. So, those who read selfish or ulterior motives to this ordinary legislative activity are either mischievous or ignorant of legislative procedures,” he told journalists last week.

    All that may well be true. But again, the timing of the amendments was indiscretionary in the extreme, as some members of that legislative chamber had cared to counsel; and the haste that attended the first two readings of the amendment bills was spurious and uncharacteristic of the notoriously sticky legislative process. Really, what was the rush for? Even if the Senate truly had noble intentions with the proposed amendments, its timing and haste were irremediably suspect; and it was redeeming for the chamber to have decided last week to suspend further legislative action on the bills. The proposed amendments had looked like a legislative foundry to fashion spanners that could be thrown at the ongoing tribunal trial of the Senate president, and no alchemy of whitewash by the legislative chamber could have altered that perception.

    I am a firm believer in the presumed innocence of an accused person until proven guilty by a court of competent jurisdiction. But the Senate President must submit himself to trial and prove his innocence, if he is indeed innocent of the charges against him. So far, he has exerted judicial energy more on stalling the trial than in putting up a robust defence against the charges, and that does not add up to the profile of someone who really has a defence.

    Still, it is good that the 8th Senate is in search of redemption. While at it, the legislative chamber would need to get Nigerians to terms with its decision to procure a fleet of foreign-made exotic vehicles amidst severe drought of foreign exchange and dire economic difficulties facing this country. It had last week confirmed taking delivery of 36 units of Land Cruiser VXR V8 model, at N36.5million unit price, and not a few consider the procurement as insensitive and affronting to public sensibility. The chairman of the Committee on Senate Services, Senator Abdullahi Gobir, told journalists last week that the 36 units were all that would be acquired in view of the harsh economic conditions. “We bought 36 cars because each senator in each state is either a chairman or a vice-chairman and we gave one car to each state. We don’t have money to buy 108 cars, “he said.

    Well, the question arises as to how the number of states became a determinant factor for the Senate in acquiring those vehicles. If they were operational vehicles and not mere patronage items, how come the vehicles were not assigned on the basis of Senate committees or committee clusters, but rather on the basis of states? And if they were given in patronage, then the procurement of even one unit of the vehicle was a mindless rape on the national treasury. There is need for more explanation.

  • With a Senate like this

    SIR: Under our own eyes, we have seen Senate President Bukola Saraki go to Code of Conduct Tribunal with 90 lawyers and more than 60 senators although the number of Senators has since reduced to 30 and then 10. We have seen the day to day proceedings in the Senate disrupted as a result of Saraki’s travails.

    The Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria has attempted to amend the Code of Conduct Tribunal law. The Senate has also tried to invite Justice Danladi Umar of CCT to the Senate in an attempt to scuttle Saraki’s trial. In the National

    Assembly (both Senate and House of Representatives), the 2016 Budget has suffered lots and lots of mutilations and balkanization all in the bid to favour themselves, and not Nigerians and this has led to delays in giving Nigerians what APC promised.

    The crisis in the National Assembly especially the Senate has slowed down the business of governance; it has affected every Nigerian. It has proved to us that majority in the National Assembly are there to help themselves and not Nigerians.

    If more than 60 Senators can muster the courage to follow Senator Saraki to the CCT in the name of solidarity for a purely criminal trial, what are we talking about in this country?

    Can President Buhari fight corruption with these senators in the Senate building?

    Can our courts function with this kind of criminal conspiracy and gang-up? Can the government deliver the change mantra under this criminal gang up?

    Few years back somebody said “Nigeria was governed by two kinds of leaders – a fool surrounded by idiots or an idiot surrounded by fools”.

    Today we have moved away from this. President Buhari is no fool or idiot and those around him are no idiots and neither are they fools.

    Those who still think it is still business as usual in Nigeria cannot get it and mark my word they will burn their fingers.

     

    • Usman Mohammed,

    IBB University, Lapai, Niger State.

  • The 8th Senate

    The more I read his subsequent responses, the more I saw a public servant who considers himself beyond, and above,  being questioned by citizens from whom he, and his other colleagues, earn grotesquely more than a fair share of the national patrimony

    I wish to start off this article with an honest caveat, which is, that Professor Sola Adeyeye, a senator of the Federal Republic, is a man I respect very much. That affirmation made, I shall proceed to write about Senator Adeyeye, not as the Omoluabi I  thought I know, but rather as a typical member of the 8th senate given the fact  that the rodomontade, the arrogance, the bluster and the haughtiness Nigerians now see daily  oozing from that hallowed chamber, must surely  have gotten to  this  otherwise respected academic. Even as disreputable as the 8th Senate has turned out to be, with its members absconding from the duties for which they earn disproportionately, in droves, daily following its president to a tribunal defending a barrage of  truly horrendous charges apart from  mercilessly mutilating the  annual budget and making it completely inoperable, I had naively believed that we still had some exemplars  there, amongst  them, Senator Adeyeye. But no more; not with the incident I shall proceed to painstakingly report here. A socially responsible Dokun Adedeji, a Medical Doctor, and dye in the wool Buhari supporter, had felt so serially mentally assaulted by  the shenanigans  of  this senate that he decided to intellectually engage with its members. In groups, he wrote to them as follows and the subsequent dialogue between him and Senator Adeyeye ensued: “Are you with your constituents on the matter of CHANGE for our country? You sold your majority to reactionaries for immediate advantage. You have betrayed us! We regret”. It was to this very simple question and observation  to which, completely out of sync, an otherwise distinguished Professor Sola Adeyeye who, as a result  of his education, long sojourn within that hallowed chamber of supposedly elder statesmen  as well as  his having logged decades, living and working in the U S,  one had come to see far beyond falling victim of the Yoruba wisecrack: ‘aguntan to ba ba aja rin … – a sheep found in the colony of dogs eating dung, responded in this  thoroughly unexpected  manner even though he must have realised that  the  question  was not addressed to him in his  personal capacity: “I have stood steadfastly with my party and constituents because there is neither enough weapons in Nigeria to frighten my soul nor enough money to buy my conscience,” a line I once heard him say on television. “Only Liars and bastards accuse the innocent. May God forgive you, Dokun Adedeji.”

     Still eager to have a decent dialogue rather than some haughty insults, Dr Adedeji replied: “Prof, I understand your anger but your response is inexcusable.  You belong to this Senate and I have no barometer of assessment save your statements and reports of your dissension, if any. Prof, I know, for instance, that you lived and lectured in America. Were you in doubt at any time as to where Senator McCain stood on any issue? Is that question too much to ask of you? I am not an Internet noise maker like your colleague- the Common Sense Senator – but I ask that you try to Google me if you have the time! Our nation is in dire need of leaders who care and love her!  If you allow the reactionaries to hold sway, your coming back is a waste.”

    Rather than soberly interrogate the dire issues raised by Dr Adedeji as both an academic, a professor to boot, as well as a member of that otherwise respected chamber from whom much is expected, Senator Adeyeye behaved, true to type, like one of Nigerians’ new ‘bosses’ at the National Assembly from where the likes of Hon. Abdulmumin Jibrin usually talk down to us. He furiously wrote back: “Unfortunately, I do not know you enough to say that I am equally disappointed in you. Suffice to say that I am disgusted at anyone who would do no fact finding before lying against me and hauling needless accusation on the innocent.”  Conversely, a much calmer Adedeji wrote back: ‘Prof, did u truly write this? I am thoroughly disappointed to know that a ‘Distinguished’ Senator of Nigeria would descend this low with such language! Very sad.”

    It must be said that Senator Sola Adeyeye is, indeed, the Senate leader, if that will tell us anything about this red chamber.

    When I saw the earlier exchanges, as the senator’s responses were meticulously served on our web portal, the Ekitipanupo, I assumed they came out of an exasperation with a senate  that has become famous for  all the  wrong reasons  which  could, in turn, enervate any decent member. The more I read his subsequent responses, the more I saw a public servant who considers himself beyond, and above,  being questioned by citizens from whom he, and his other colleagues, earn grotesquely more than a fair share of the national patrimony. All these would have been funny were we not talking here of an otherwise, sober and respected member of the senate  who had popped up many times in that chamber to, unlike most of his colleagues, show that he has a place in his heart for the poor masses of this country.  In this respect, he had many times been literally about the lone ranger. However, this below par performance, which saw a senate ranking member resort to absolutely repugnant words in answer to a responsible and politically aware citizen, is one reason the senate must very quickly  re-examine itself lest Nigerians give it the ‘Senegal treatment’ at the next available opportunity.

    While at this, it may not be out of place to observe that the shenanigans of Senate President Bukola Saraki may not abate until the entire Nigerian judicial system is brought into complete disrepute.  He has not only been lawyer- shopping – he currently has as his lead counsel, Kanu Agabi, the alleged mentor of not only the chief prosecution counsel but that of the tribunal chairman as well – and as we saw this past week at the Code of Conduct Tribunal where he was asking the judge to disqualify himself, he may yet be back asking the Supreme Court to reverse its earlier decision in this very case. Now it seems to me like the problem with this country is no longer just the National Assembly, repugnant as it is, but Nigeria itself. What exactly is it with Nigeria? Are we now reaping the whirlwind of the winds sown by the likes of IBB and OBJ? One was the father of what was called New Breed politicians but which Nigerians regard more as New Greed politicians or is it Obasanjo’s unremitting impunity that has come back to haunt us? A study of the dramatis personae on our political spectrum today will show that a greater preponderance of those presently in our political life have their roots in the Babangida -Obasanjo era; a period during which the Nigerian moral fibre suffered its greatest diminution as epitomised by an increase in corruption and election rigging beyond anything we ever knew in this country. If in 1999, Obasanjo exposed budget padding by the National Assembly leadership and ensured they had their day in court, today budget padding has become the norm; not just with the leadership  but just about anybody in those chambers can insert billions in the name of his/her ‘constituency’ where he most probably has no office. Heading to courts, like our 99 SANs or accompanying the wife of their boss to EFCC offices has become the norm in preference to making laws for the good governance of the country. Indeed, our legislators would now rather bring down the house, the way they rushed their CCT amendment bill through the first and second readings, even when the PIB bill, unattended, has taken a permanent residence in their custody. And in the particular case of the Senate President, I think the time has come to plead with him to spare that distinguished chamber the ordeal and low esteem it has ominously attracted to itself. Senator Bukola Saraki, scion of the redoubtable Saraki family of Ilorin, should be told by whoever loves him, that there is life after Senate Presidency. He should also be informed that, sans being able to dispense patronage as he had generously done in that chamber, he would hardly find a quarter of his so-called supporters behind his back. I think they should realise that it is time Nigerians stopped asking: what a senate? What manner of senators?

    Enough is enough.

  • Senate: President should sign budget before review

    Senate: President should sign budget before review

    The Senate has said President Muhammadu Buhari should sign the 2016 budget into law before reviewing the contentious areas.

    The resolution was one of the highpoints of what an insider described as a “stormy and rancorous” closed session by senators yesterday.

    Most senators were said to have canvassed their opinions about the way forward for the controversial budget.

    Senators were angry at the way and manner the budget was handled by the leadership of the National Assembly.

    Some senators, it was gathered, sought changes in the leadership of the committees as part of the way forward.

    Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu, who presided over the closed session, said after the session that “the Senate in a closed session deliberated on issues relating to the 2016 Appropriation Bill and the way forward for the quick resolution of all matters related to the early implementation of the budget in the best interest of our nation.”

    Though he did not go into details, a source described the meeting as “stormy and rancorous”.

    Ekweremadu noted that the resolution to implore President Buhari to assent to the budget before the review was informed by the need to beat time.

    He said: “We took cognisance of the fact that time is ticking and to beat time we decided to approach Mr. President to implore him to sign the budget and bring it back to us for any corrections he may desire.”

    The deputy Senate president explained that the need to implore the President to sign the budget was necessitated by the fact that the National Assembly could no longer alter the budget after it was passed and transmitted to the President for his assent.

    He said they were also “trying to avoid a situation where after 30 days, if the President failed to assent to the budget, it will be assumed that he has withheld assent”.

    “If that happens, the National Assembly may have no other option than to over ride the President’s assent,” Ekweremadu said.

    A source said the senators took cognisance of Section 59 of the Constitution to arrive at their resolutions.

    Section 59 (4) says: “Where the President, within 30 days after the presentation of the Bill to him, fails to signify his assent or where he withholds assent, then the Bill shall again be presented to the National Assembly sitting at a joint meeting, and if passed by two-thirds majority of members of both Houses at such joint meeting, the Bill shall become law and the assent of the President shall not be required.”

    The budget was transmitted to the President for assent on April 7.

    On changing the chairmanship of the Appropriation Committee, the upper chamber was said to have resolved that there was no need since the National Assembly was ready to correct identified anomalies in the budget.

    Besides, the lawmakers were said to have reasoned that changing the committee’s chairmanship might breed more trouble for the Senate.

    Senate leader Mohammed Ali Ndume confirmed that the Senate was talking with President Buhari on ways to resolve grey areas in the budget.

    The Borno South lawmaker told reporters that the National Assembly was prepared to address areas of concern to the President in the Budget.

    He said: “Nobody should expect me, on my honour, to disclose details of what we discussed in the closed session. It is not true that we asked the Chairman of the Senate Committee, Senator Danjuma Goje, to resign. That is not what we discussed. Goje was appointed and he could only be removed by a vote of no confidence. We can only ask elected officers of the Senate to resign not chairmen of committees.”

  • The Nation to CJ: refuse Senate’s plea to withdraw fiat

    The Nation to CJ: refuse Senate’s plea to withdraw fiat

    Vintage Press Limited (publisher of The Nation) has urged the Federal High Court Chief Judge, Justice Ibrahim Auta, to refuse a request by the Senate to withdraw the fiat directing Justice Mohammed Yunusa to deliver judgment in its suit against the lawmakers.

    Justice Yunusa had adjourned for judgment before he was transferred to Enugu Division.

    A new judge, Justice Jude Dagat, took over the case, but the plaintiffs applied to the chief judge for a fiat to enable Justice Yunusa return to Lagos to deliver the judgment rather than the case starting de novo (afresh).

    The applicants (Vintage Press, The Nation Editor Gbenga Omotoso and a Correspondent, Imam Bello) are praying for an order of perpetual injunction restraining the Senate from summoning them or compelling their appearance over a story.

    The Senate, last August 4, invited Omotoso and Bello over the story: Motion: 22 APC Northern senators ‘working against Buhari’, published last July 30.  It wrote again last August 11 threatening to invoke Section 89 (1) (D) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) to compel the applicants to appear.

    But Justice Yunusa made an interim order of injunction restraining the respondents from issuing a warrant to compel the applicants’ attendance before a Senate committee set up to investigate the publication.

    In the fiat issued on February 10 and signed by the CJ, he directed Justice Yunusa to return to Lagos to deliver the judgment.

    But, the Senate, in an April 7 letter to the CJ through its lawyer, Offiong Effiong Offiong (SAN), asked Justice Auta to withdraw the fiat on the basis that the plaintiffs “failed to duly effect service of the originating processes” on his client.

    Besides, he said when the court adjourned the case for hearing of the plaintiffs’ interlocutory application, no hearing notice was ordered to be issued and served on the defendants, who were not represented.

    Offiong said the Senate had a pending application in which it asked, among others, for extension of time within which it might apply for an order setting aside the adjournment for judgment.

    “Our interlocutory application, which undoubtedly raises fundamental legal issues is still pending to be heard and determined before the court and ought to be heard and determined before judgment could be delivered in the applicants/respondents’ suit,” the SAN wrote.

    According to him, his client’s rights to justice would be “seriously compromised”, if Justice Yunusa went ahead to deliver the judgment, adding that it must have “escaped your lordship’s attention to ask for comments from the other parties” before the fiat was issued.

    Asking that the case starts afresh, Effiong said it was possible that Justice Yunusa must be saddled with other cases in his new division and “would have lost the benefit of the freshness of the issues in the case.”

    But, in their April 20 response to the CJ through their lawyer, Mr. Wahab Shittu, the plaintiffs urged Justice Auta not to withdraw the fiat.

    Shittu wrote: “It is untrue that the respondents were not served in the proceedings before argument was taken and the matter adjourned for judgment. The record of the court would confirm that the respondents (Senate and National Assembly) were duly served by a bailiff of this court with proof of service filed in court and evidence available in the records of the court.”

    According to the proofs of service exhibited before the court, the service was received by the Office of the President of the Senate last September 1.

    The National Assembly was served last August 27 through the Office of the Deputy Clerk to the National Assembly.

    According to Shittu, Justice Yunusa fixed the judgment, having adjourned for an appreciable time to enable the respondents file relevant processes, which they did not comply with.

    “The respondents’ application, ostensibly filed to reopen the case and arrest the judgment, already reserved, was premised on the erroneous assumption that the respondents were never served – a fact that is untrue from the records of the court.

    “Based on the foregoing, the request of the respondent to commence the matter de novo does not reflect the justice of the case in the circumstances,” Shittu wrote.

    Besides, he said Justice Yunusa was entitled to examine the Senate’s pending applications and proceed in whatever manner he deemed fit without the case having to start anew.

    “In the circumstance, we urge your lordship to retain the fiat already issued to Justice Yunusa to finalise the matter…,” Shittu wrote.

    The case was adjourned to May 5.

  • Senate inaugurates reconciliation committee

    The Senate on Thursday inaugurated a 12-member reconciliation committee to address issues affecting the smooth running of the upper chamber.

    The committee which has two Senators from each geopolitical zone was inaugurated by Senate Leader, Senator Mohammed Ali Ndume.

    Deputy Senate President, Senator Ike Ekweremadu, had on Wednesday named “12 wise men” charged with the responsibility to reconcile Senators in order to move the Red Chamber forward.

    Senator Godswill Akpabio and Senator James Manager were named to represent South –south, Senators Sani Yerima and Senator Suleiman Hunkunyi were chosen for the North West and Senator Bukar Abba Ibrahim and Senator Joshua Lidani were picked from the North East.

    The South East has Senator Sam Egwu and Senator Hope Uzodinma, Senator Barnabas Gemade and Senator Abdullahi Adamu were named for the North Central and for South West, Senator Monsurat Sunmonu and Senator Gbenga Ashafa were picked.

    While inaugurating the committee, Ndume said that they resolved to pick two Senators each from the six geo-political zones to address issues confronting the Senate.

    The Senate leader said he was charged with the responsibility of inaugurating the committee.

  • Senate suspends amendment of Code of Conduct Act

    Senate suspends amendment of Code of Conduct Act

    Senators yesterday bowed to public pressure as they pulled the brakes on the controversial amendment of the Code of Conduct Act.

     The upper chamber, after over three hours’ closed session, announced that a 12-member reconciliation committee had been set up to address the smooth running of the Senate.

     Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu, who presided over plenary in the absence of Senate President Bukola Saraki, announced the suspension of the investigation of Senator Kabiru Marafa (Zamfara Central).

     The suspension of the amendment of the Code of Conduct Act proposed by Senator Peter Nwaoboshi (Delta North) may have been informed by the groundswell of opposition against it.

     Those opposed to the amendment, which has passed second reading, reasoned that the timing of the amendment was suspect since the Senate president was on trial at the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).

    On Marafa, Ekweremadu said the Senate suspended consideration of the report of the Senate Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions on the investigation of the Zamfara Central lawmaker.

    The upper chamber had asked its Ethics committee to investigate Marafa for allegedly maligning the Senate by aligning with former President Olusegun Obasanjo on his claim that the National Assembly was corrupt.

     Ekweremadu said the Senate asked senators, who filed cases in court about the running of the Senate, to consider withdrawing them.

     He said they would stand by the Senate president until he was proved guilty by the court in line with the constitution.

    Ekweremadu said: “We agreed to suspend further deliberation on the amendment of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal’s Act and the Criminal and Administration of Justice Act.

     “We agreed that this Senate should stand and we do stand by the Senate president in his trial until proved guilty by the court in accordance with our constitution and democratic practices all over the world, including South Africa, Brazil and Russia.

    “We also agreed to set up a committee, two from each geo-political zones to address the remaining issues and as part of the reconciliation, those in court should consider withdrawing the cases.

    “Further to the agreement to set up the committees, the geo-political zones sent names of their representatives.

     “For Southsouth, we have Senator Godswill Akpabio and Senator James Manager; for Northwest, we have Senators Sani Yerima and Senator Suleiman Hunkunyi; for Northeast, we have Senator Bukar Abba and Senator Joshua Lidani; for Southeast, we have Senator Sam Egwu and Senator Hope Uzodinma; for Northcentral, we have Senator Barnabas Gemade and Senator Abdullahi Adamu, and for Southwest, we have Senator Monsurat Sumonu and Senator Gbenga Ashafa.

    Uzodinma, who moved the motion for a closed session, said the Senate should discuss issues perceived wrongly by the public.

    He said some of the issues were listed in the Order Paper and should be discussed in the interest of the Senate.

    Informed sources said the closed session was “stormy” as senators voiced their grievances against the running of the Senate.

  • Chibok girls: Service Chiefs absent at Senate meeting

    The National Security Adviser (NSA) and other Service Chiefs invited to brief the Senate on their efforts to rescue the abducted Chibok girls failed to honour the invitation on Wednesday.

    Only the Inspector-General of Police (IGP), Mr. Solomon Arase and the Director-General of the Department of State Security (DSS), Mr. Lawal Daura, attended the briefing.

    No explanation was given for the absence of the Service Chiefs at the end of the session.

    Deputy Senate President, Senator Ike Ekweremadu, presided over the session.

    The DG, DSS and the IGP were said to have briefed the lawmakers on efforts being made to rescue the abducted Chibok girls who had been in captivity for over two years.

    After the closed session, Ekweremadu announced: “The Senate was briefed by the Director-General, State Security Service and the Inspector General of Police on the abduction of the Chibok school girls and efforts to rescue them in the last two years.

    “We urged them to continue and should leave no stone unturned to achieve the rescue of the Chibok girls.

    “Thereafter they answered questions bothering on topical national security issues from very distinguished senators.”

    The Senate had last Thursday invited the Service Chiefs to brief it on efforts at rescuing the Chibok girls.

    This followed a motion by Senator Dino Melaye on the issue.

  • Senate suspends amendment of CCB Act

    Senate suspends amendment of CCB Act

    The Senate after a lengthy closed session emerged to announce the suspension of the investigation of Senator Kabiru Marafa.

    Senator Marafa is being investigated by the Senate Ethics and Privileges Committee for allegedly granting interviews aligning with former President Olusegun Obasanjo that members of the National Assembly are corrupt.

    The upper chamber also asked Senators in court over issues involving the running of the Senate to consider withdrawing such issues.

    Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu who announced resolutions at the closed session also said that they resolved to suspend the consideration of the bill which seeks the amendment of the Code of Conduct Act and the Administration of Criminal Justice Act.

    Senator Ekweremadu also announced that they resolved to back Senate President, Bukola Saraki in his trial until he is proven guilty.

    He said their support for Saraki is in line with democratic practice all over the world including South Africa, Russia and Brazil.