Politics
National Assembly And Over Sight Functions
The National Assembly under the Nigerian presidential system
of government is a bicameral legislature with two chambers, namely the Senate
and the House of Representatives.
The 7th National Assembly was inaugurated on June 6, 2011,
with the Senate having 36 re-elected members and 73 elected for the first time,
making the 109 Senators of the upper chambers; House of Representatives with
360 members had 100 persons re-elected while 260 were first timers.
The 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as
amended provides that the National Assembly is the highest elective lawmaking
body of the country. It has vested in it the power to enact laws for the peace,
order and good governance of the federation.
No doubt, the National lawmakers had made relevant laws for
the betterment of society and corporate existence of the nation as well as
undertaken oversight functions to the best of their ability in line with the
principle of checks and balances.
Just recently the lawmakers intervened in the Central Bank
proposal for the introduction of N5,000 note and other denominations requesting
that the plan be kept in abeyance. President Jonathan also accepted the
resolution and subsequently directed the Central Bank to put the idea on hold.
This move was applauded by Nigerians for government being sensitive to
perceived negative impact of the proposal for the wellbeing of the common man.
In the words of Mr. Gary Hamel, author and research fellow
at the Harvard Business School, “The real challenge for leaders is not to seek
perfection in all issues but to set up structures that allow institutions to
thrive with their less than perfect leadership and the key strength of
democratic institutions are the capacity to adapt and evolve peacefully.”
There is no gainsaying the fact that members of the National
Assembly are political leaders in their own right, they represent the interests
of their constituencies whose mandate they carry and it behoves on them to make
justifiable laws for the benefit of the people.
Shortly after the proclamation of the National Assembly, the
issue of leadership structure created some challenges because the ruling
People’s Democratic Party (PDP), was alleged to have zoned major political
offices with the emergence of Dr Goodluck Jonathan as president from the
South-South region.
It was rumoured that the presidency have endorsed Senator
David Mark to continue as Senate President while the exit of former speaker
Oladimeji Bankole left a vacuum. Jonathan was said to have favoured a candidate
from the South-West but the odds weighed against her as majority of House
members preferred the incumbent speaker from the North.
Barrister Innocent Sunday, a political analyst and pundit,
fingered these initial scenarios as the contaminating blood in the political
vein of the house and the presidency.
“Otherwise how can you fathom the quick alliance with the opposition in a House
dominated by the President’s party members to issue impeachment threat for
below average implementation of the 2012, budget barely five months after its
passage.
Although, the constitution provides that any law passed in
any chambers must have a concurring response from the other and the state House
of Assembly are equally empowered to deliberate on such issues especially on
the impeachment of the commander-in-chief.
Simply put, if the plot was probably to attract the
attention of the president, then they have succeeded, otherwise, the effect was
like water poured on the back of a duck.
In a presidential system of government lobbying of lawmakers
by the executive and other interest groups, is a necessary pastime to either
support or discourage the passage of a bill into law, depending on which side
of the divide.
In America, President Barak Obama’s Health bill generated
controversy among citizens, Republicans and Democrats but it has since been
passed into law because the government utilised the instrument of lobbying.
This process which engages persons with oratory prowess and knowledgeable in
government affairs have been degraded in the Nigerian system misunderstood,
misrepresented and even given the colouration of bribe.
However, there is nothing that demoralises people more
effectively than the belief that other persons are being rewarded or favoured
for reasons that has nothing to do with talent, effort and results.
Without mincing words, President Jonathan and the National
Assembly have enjoyed cordial working relationship particularly for allowing
each arm performs its duties without interference. To this end, several laws
have been passed and assented to, some were inherited proposed laws improved
upon and given the green light like the Freedom of Information Law (FOI).
Worthy of note and rightly too is for the legislature to
discharge its oversight function on the executive arm to ensure that
appropriations approved in the budget for implementation were carried out.
Regrettably, such exercise has attracted misdemeanor consequences on the
lawmakers.
As earlier mention, the motion which was adapted by the
House on the non-implementation of the 2012 budget was sponsored by Chairman
Committee on Business and Rules, Hon. Albert Sam-Tsokwa, and 20 others. Opinion
is divergent on the rational for the hasty impeachment threat on the president
even when the Senate had not peeped into the matter, considering the time
frame.
Perhaps, the achievement of the House radicalism has
necessitated the need for early presentation of the budget and in compliance
with the perceived lapses Dr. Jonathan has concluded arrangements to present
the 2012, appropriation bill to the joint session of the National Assembly soon
to allow ample time for legislative inputs and approval.
Infact, under the current 7th Assembly, the Senate appears
to have demonstrated more maturity in debates, motions and resolutions to
justify their distinguished status as against the House that ventured into
critical sectors of the economy, raised hopes and aspirations of Nigerians
towards sensitizsing the system but unfortunately ended up debasing the very
essence of such endeavour.
The lawmaker began the oversight function journey that
brought dishonour to the honourable members with the Independent Power Project
(IPP) of the federal government, otherwise called Power probe headed by Hon.
Elemelu and the outcome of the engagement ended in scandalous circumstances.
As Speaker, Hon. Aminu Bello Tambuwal puts their duty in
proper perspective when he said “the act of law making is crucial to the
success of our nation in all sphere, however, the legislature does not work in
isolation but places great emphasis on its cooperation with other arms of
government.”
Again, in the spirit of patriotism to the father land, the
House in a motion brought before it resolved and indeed set up a probe panel
for the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC), with the intention to redeem
the organisation. Sadly enough, the effort was marred by accusations and
counter accusations of alleged demand of bribe from the SEC boss Ms Arunma
Oteh. The rest of the issues can be confined to our political history as the
rife led to some level of ego and muscle flexing by the stakeholders.
Certainly, not done with controversies, the mother of them
all was unveiled in the now popular Faroukgate scam. Kudos must be given to the
House for its vibrancy and concern for the masses but having probably suffered
credibility questions in previous attempts, went into its arsenal and assigned
the petroleum subsidy probe to the litherto respected Hon. Farouk Lawan as
chairman with other equally ace lawmakers to dive into the hydra headed
downstream sector of the petroleum industry.
Hon. Lawan failed to learn from the mistakes of others and
literally urinated on his trousers. The courageous outburst of an oil merchant,
Chief Michael Otelola to expose corruption has today diminished the flourishing
political fortune of the once vibrant lawmaker.
Nigerian leaders must learn the key skills in achieving
balance in the onerous task of developing the country by engendering the
communality of interest and doing away with personal egocentrism. It has
therefore become pertinent to appreciate that despite individual differences,
the nation’s founding fathers worked together, devoid of rancour, bickering and
acrimony to secure. Independence.
The state chairman of the party, Dr Babandi Gumel, disclosed this in a statement signed and made available to journalists on Saturday.
According to the statement, the Jigawa PDP received news of Alhaji Lamido’s suspension with “profound shock and disappointment”.
The statement added that the suspension, which was reportedly based on allegations that Alhaji Lamido attended meetings capable of undermining party unity, amounts to an affront to justice, internal democracy and the reconciliation efforts recently championed by the PDP leadership.
The party stressed that the exercise of legal and constitutional rights within the party should not be interpreted as an act of disunity. It recalled that Alhaji Lamido approached the court after he was allegedly denied the opportunity to purchase a nomination form to contest the position of National Chairman of the PDP.
The statement further noted that the Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Peter Lifu, ruled in Alhaji Lamido’s favour by restraining the PDP from proceeding with its national convention until his right to contest was determined.
The Jigawa PDP argued that the suspension appeared to be a punitive action against Alhaji Lamido for seeking judicial redress over an issue on which the court had already found merit.
The party also faulted the decision of the BoT for contradicting recent public statements by its chairman, Senator Adolphus Wabara, who had emphasised reconciliation within the party, admitted past mistakes and appealed to aggrieved members to return fully to the PDP fold.
However, it maintained that suspending a founding member who sought justice through legal means runs contrary to the spirit of reconciliation and healing publicly advocated by the party leadership.
The chairman said the suspension was premature and prejudicial, as the matter remains before the courts. He also described Alhaji Lamido as one of the few founding fathers of the PDP who has remained loyal to the party without defecting, warning that punishing such loyalty sends a negative signal to other committed members.
The party further argued that the action undermines party unity at a time when the PDP requires cohesion to effectively challenge the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). It also insisted that there is no provision in the PDP constitution that allows for the suspension of a “life member”.
The party called on the BoT to immediately and unconditionally withdraw the suspension of Alhaji Lamido.
It also demanded that the BoT publicly affirm the right of all party members to aspire to leadership positions in line with the party’s constitution and the laws of the country, without fear of victimisation.
It further urged the BoT to retrace its steps, align its actions with its reconciliation agenda, and tender an apology to Alhaji Lamido.
The Jigawa PDP reaffirmed its commitment to a united, democratic and law-abiding Party.
In a statement signed by its Executive Director, Comrade Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, CISLAC warned that if proven, such actions would amount to a serious breach of constitutional order, legislative integrity, and public trust.
The organisation noted that Nigeria’s law-making process is clearly defined by the Constitution, stressing that any alteration of a bill after parliamentary passage undermines democratic governance and the principle of separation of powers.
CISLAC further emphasised that taxation has direct implications for citizens, businesses, sub-national governments, and the overall economy. It stated that uncertainty or a lack of transparency in tax legislation could erode investor confidence and raise concerns about accountability and the possible abuse of executive power.
The organisation described the situation as particularly troubling given the rare inclusive, and thorough public consultation that shaped the law’s final provisions prior to its passage.
“This process brought together taxpayers, civil society groups, professional organisations, the private sector, labour unions, local governments, and technical experts, ensuring that diverse viewpoints were considered and carefully balanced.
“Any unilateral changes to these agreed-upon provisions, made outside the established legislative process and without renewed public engagement, not only breach public trust but also violate the fundamental tax principle of representation, which holds that citizens must have a meaningful voice in shaping the laws that govern how they are taxed. Such actions undermine democratic accountability, weaken the legitimacy of the tax system, and risk eroding public confidence”, it noted.
CISLAC expressed particular concern that uncertainty surrounding the authenticity of the tax law, coming at a time when a new tax regime is expected to take effect, could exacerbate the economic hardship already faced by many Nigerians.
It observed that citizens are contending with rising living costs, inflationary pressures, declining purchasing power, and reduced access to basic services, warning that implementing a disputed tax framework under such conditions, risks deepening inequality, discouraging compliance, and fuelling public resentment.
The organisation stressed that tax reforms must be anchored in clarity, legality, fairness, and social sensitivity, cautioning that any tax system introduced without full transparency, adequate public communication, and legislative certainty undermines voluntary compliance and weakens the social contract between the state and its citizens.
As part of its recommendations, CISLAC called on the Presidency to urgently publish the exact version of the tax law assented to, alongside the authenticated copy passed by the National Assembly, to allow for public and institutional verification.
It also urged the leadership of the National Assembly to promptly exercise its oversight powers to determine whether the assented law reflects the will of the legislature, including a review of the enrolled bill process.
The organisation maintained that any discrepancy discovered should be treated as unconstitutional and addressed through lawful means, such as the re-transmission of the correct bill or judicial interpretation where necessary. It further called for an independent review of the process by relevant institutions, including the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and, where required, the judiciary, to establish the facts and assign responsibility.
CISLAC noted that the controversy highlights the urgent need to strengthen safeguards at the legislative and executive interface. It recommended measures such as digital tracking of bills, public access to enrolled legislation, and more transparent assent procedures.
CISLAC emphasised that the issue is not about partisan politics but about safeguarding the integrity of Nigeria’s democratic institutions. It warned that allowing any arm of government to unilaterally alter laws passed by another sets a dangerous precedent and weakens constitutional democracy.
The organisation urged all parties involved to act with restraint, openness, and fidelity to the Constitution, noting that Nigerians deserve laws that reflect due process, the public interest, and the collective decisions of their elected representatives.
CISLAC added that it will continue to monitor developments and engage relevant stakeholders to promote accountability, transparency, and the rule of law in Nigeria’s governance processes.
