Tag: Senate

The Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is a sacred institution, which deserves the respect of every citizen. But when its actions or attempted actions elicit screaming and scary headlines from the media, caution is warranted.

In the matter of Senate versus Kabiru Marafa, one of its own, the following are recent sample headlines: “Planned suspension of anti-Saraki senator heightens tension at Senate” (The Punch); “Unity Forum Senators’ speaker in trouble” (Nigerian Observer); “Senate mulls suspension of Senator Marafa, 10 others” (Daily Post); “For allegedly disrespecting the Senate, read what will happen to Senator Marafa”, (NAIJ.COM); “Row in Senate over move against anti-Saraki senator” (The Nation); “CCT trial: Team Saraki moves to silence opposition in Senate” (The Eagle Online); and “Senate moves against top anti-Saraki senator, Kabiru Marafa” (Premium Times).

While it took quite a bit of patient Internet surfing to fish out the original Marafa interview itself, news and comments about Senate reaction comes to live pretty fast and they are more embarrassing to that distinguished body than the interview.

Here’s a sampling of the readers’ comments on the Senate-Marafa news in various media outlets:

“Why should he be punished for saying his views”? (NAIJ.COM); “Very shameless Senate and senators” (Premium Times); “As far as am concern (sic) I see nothing wrong with Sen. Marafa’s interview granted by (sic) Punch. He’s entitle (sic) to that constitutional right, so let him express the more…” (Premium Times); “Senator Kabiru Marafa stand your ground. We want many like you to populate the house…” (The Punch); “Thought we are in a democracy. Free speech is the heart and head of democracy…” (The Punch); “What sort of privilege leaves out decorum and probity?””Truth is the only constant thing that stands the test of time…” (The Punch)

One of the commentators had a direct hit on the nail head. It makes a huge difference that we abandoned monarchical and feudal systems. Many subjects had their heads chopped off in the dungeons of kings just for disagreeing with their imperial majesties. It also makes a huge difference that we are no longer a colony. Recall that one of the grandfathers of modern Nigeria, Herbert Macaulay, was a regular in the colonial jail because he regularly “embarrassed” the colonial government. And we are the better for the victory over military dictatorship and its various decrees, which constrained the freedom of thought and discussion.

We opted for liberal democracy and it comes with identifiable freedoms all of which are entrenched in our grundnorm, the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. One of them, the fundamental foundation of liberal democracy is the freedom of thought and discussion. This freedom supersedes any institutional rules that may conflict with it and no institutional privilege can be canvassed against it. That our distinguished senators appear to ignore this important principle is itself an embarrassment.

The foremost defender of the liberty of thought and expression in the history of liberal democratic governance is John Stuart Mill. It is always wise to remind ourselves of the principle at such a time as this:

“It is not in constitutional countries to be apprehended, that government, whether completely responsible to the people or not, will often attempt to control the expression of opinion, except when in doing so it makes itself the organ of the general intolerance of the public. Let us suppose, therefore, that the government is entirely at one with the people, and never thinks of exerting any power of coercion unless in agreement with what it conceives to be their voice. But I deny the right of the people to exercise such coercion, either by themselves or by their government. The power itself is illegitimate. The best government has no title to it than the worst…..If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.”

And there you have it from the High Priest of Liberalism. A progressive party in government cannot forget its distinguishing mark as the protector of human freedom in all its manifestations, including in the expression of personal opinion. Even if the whole country rejects the opinion expressed by Senator Marafa in his Punch interview, it is the responsibility of the Senate of the Federal Republic to not only accommodate him, but to protect him from the coercion of the public. That is what senators swear to do when they took their oath of office.

Assume that the senator’s opinion is indeed wrong, all that is available to the rest of the public or the Senate is to expose his error and let the two or more opinions enter the market place of ideas for contest. The truth will thereafter prevail because the erroneous opinion will have been exposed.

It follows that citizens will be able to examine the views expressed by Senator Marafa along with the corrections put out by other members of the Senate who feel that he is wrong. As intelligent human beings, it should be assumed that citizens will make up their mind about who is right or wrong.

After the controversy broke out and those headlines screamed at me in every media resource that I accessed, I decided to check out the record of the senator’s interview. What I found was amazingly benign. Indeed, at many points and in many junctures in the course of the interview, the senator defended the Senate as an institution, including in the matter of its budget.

The reporter asked Senator Marafa if he agreed with former President Obasanjo’s allegation of corruption against NASS. Marafa responded that he didn’t see Obasanjo’s letter and didn’t want to speculate. But from what he read in the papers, Obasanjo wanted NASS to make its budget public and he Marafa considered it “a genuine call” and the Senate President equally agreed with the President’s suggestion.

On whether the budget of N120bn to N150bn for NASS can be justified, Marafa observed that “sharing of money should not be the basis of the performance of legislators. Maybe the less they earn the better.” But he quickly added that this was another good reason for laying bare the budget because just looking at the numbers is not sufficient for accusing legislators of corruption.

With regard to the controversial budget of N4.7bn for cars, Marafa responded that he didn’t think that “it is the right thing to do” and called for its abandonment. “That is my opinion and I stand by it”, he stated. On whether NASS is doing enough about austerity measures, the senator objected to the question and suggested that the problem with some Nigerians was that they “tend to just say things without properly looking at the implication of everything.” He added: “If you want me to function, you have to equip me very well.” He then went into a lively discussion of how much the United States invests in its senators and congressmen and congress women.

On the issue of whether the jostle for power in the 8th NASS was justification for Obasanjo’s allegations, Marafa countered again that it was not jostling for power as such, but that there is “abuse of the laws of the Senate and the laws of the country. And when the reporter pressed further concerning the length of time some senators have served in the Senate, including those who have been there since 1999, Marafa argued that experience matters, again comparing the United States where there is no term limit with Nigeria where legislators are changed at will on the grounds that the privilege must go round. He saw the limitation on experience as a drawback.

Overall, I do not see what is subversive to the Senate as an institution in Marafa’s publicised views. And if some senators feel otherwise, what they ought to do is to call him out by exposing his errors. Threatening suspension on account of a senator’s public expression of opinion is an unfortunate example of the much dreaded tyranny of the majority.