Politics
Still On Senate Ministerial Nominees’ Screening
Revisiting the “Take a Bow and Go” approach
to the Senate screening of the 43 ministerial nominees on July 24 is sufficed for the purpose of more understanding of the roles of the Senate and political intrigues among the lawmakers.
It will as well give insights to the position of the law and clear the air on the critics’ arguments on whether or not the Senate has abused the privilege provided by Section 147 (2) of the 1999 Constitution on the screening of the nominees.
Political analysts note that explaining some issues on “Take a Bow and Go” approach to the screening as it is applied will give a mindset on how the future screening can be managed within the precinct of the law.
The contention has been that Nigerians did not expect the number of nominees that were exempted from screening in a “Take a Bow and Go” approach to their screening going by the provision of the law.
Analysts observed further that “Take a Bow and Go” approach started in 2003 and it was introduced as a courtesy and privilege for any nominees who had been elected to the Senate or House of Representatives in the past.
According to them, although the 1999 Constitution that gives Senate the power to confirm appointments in that regard does not make a provision for the “Take a Bow and Go” policy.
Further to this, they note that the policy has been extended to all persons with previous legislative experience even at state levels.
Irrespective of the Senate interpretation of the constitutional provisions in that regard, analysts insist that the policy can prevent nominees from answering some important questions bordering on national concerns, competence and accountability.
They note that Nigerians have witnessed a lot of screening of ministerial and other executive nominees who were asked to recite the National Anthem, or explain their master plan or agenda for their offices.
However, a source within the National Assembly who pleads anonymity, observes that there were some political intrigues on the application of “Take a Bow and Go” policy during the screening.
He links the “Take a Bow and Go” approach in the screening to some interests of the Senate leadership in the nominees that the leadership knows if they are subjected to serious screening, they may not sail through.
According to him, supporting the screening in that method will pay back for the lawmakers in the appointment of the committees, especially those that crave for “juicy committees”.
He observes further that this explains why the appointment of committee chairmen and their deputies had to be delayed until shortly after the screening.
The nominees that enjoy “Take a Bow and Go” privilege are Chris Ngige, Hadi Sirika, Muhammad Bello, Gbemisola Saraki, Pauline Tallen, Sharon Ikeazor, Lai Mohammed, Rotimi Amaechi, Timipre Sylva, Zainab Ahmed, Godswill Akpabio, Sa’adiya Umar Farouk and Otunba Adeniyi Adebayo.
Similarly, Ramatu Aliyu, George Akume, Olorunnimbe Mamora, Tayo Alasoadura, Maryam Katagum, Abubakar Aliyu, Mustapha Shehuri, Zubairu Dada, Emeka Nwajiuba and Maigari Dingyadi, enjoyed the method.
But some lawmakers have expressed concerns on the method, including Senate Minority Leader Eyinnaya Abaribe, who raised a constitutional point of order that the screening had turned out to be a mere endorsement of some nominees.
He stated that in global parliamentary practices, confirmation hearings are conducted for nominees to access their competence and qualification for their appointments as ministers, explaining that confirmation hearings ought to be different from endorsement.
In the same vein, Senator Dino Melaye said, “I will tell you categorically that Nigerians are not happy, especially with the way the proceedings of the screening have been conducted and I can tell you that it is more of adoption than a screening.
“I am not a presiding officer of the National Assembly, I cannot speak for either of them but as long as some of us remain there, our voices will be heard and we will always insist on doing the right thing.”
In a controversy, Malam Muhammed Bello, a nominee and a former Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, also requested to be granted the same privilege extended to former lawmakers who skipped the screening, insisting that he had been a public office holder and had been close to the National Assembly members.
But Mr Femi Akinwumu, a public affairs analyst, also insists that it is wrong for the Senate to allow ministerial nominees facing corruption charges to take a bow and leave without asking any question.
He expressed concern about the screening of some nominees, citing the case of Mr Rotimi Ameachi, former Minister of Transportation, who had never been a member of the Senate but was asked to “take a bow and go”.
In response to this, Senate President Ahmed Lawan, noted that Ameachi was screened in that manner because he was a former member of Rivers State House of Assembly and a Speaker for eight years.
Some civil society organisations have similarly expressed dissatisfaction with the Senate for the method, suspecting that the Senate could become a rubber stamp and stooge of the executive.
In a statement by Executive Director Citizens Advocacy for Social and Economic Frank Tietie, the organisation said that checks and balances which would have improved the performance of government would suffer when legislative scrutiny appeared to be lax.
He called on the Senate to show a sense of seriousness and change of approach towards the future screening.
Similarly, Director of Centre for Democracy and Development Austin Aigbe, said that senate “is charged with the duty to engage the nominees on topical issues that will liberate the country from challenges.
`What we see now is that you are former senator, former house member so you bow and go; the funny one is that your brother used to be a member of the National Assembly and you come from the area where the senate president is from and because of that, you take a bow. What does that add to the Nigerian state?” he asked.
Irrespective of arguments for or against, analysts described the “Take a Bow and Go” approach to screening as a farce and charade, observing that the trend won’t help the country.
Ogunshola is of the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN)
Femi Ogunshola
The event, jointly organised by LP and ADC to publicly acknowledge the movement of party members, was first scheduled to hold at the LP secretariat in Idimu.
However, chaos erupted when more than 100 suspected thugs reportedly stormed the premises, forcing party members and officials to flee.
Eyewitnesses said the attackers, some armed with knives, canes and other dangerous objects, assaulted individuals they encountered during the invasion.
The assailants were also heard chanting hostile slogans, declaring that LP and ADC were not welcome in Lagos State.
Several party members sustained injuries in the process, while party property, including furniture and flags, were vandalised.
Despite the disruption, officials of both parties quickly relocated the programme to an alternative venue, the Eco Centre Event Hall in Egbeda, in a bid to continue the ceremony.
Speaking on the incident, the LP Chairman in Alimosho, Mr Olanrewaju Olushola, popularly known as Heritage, condemned the attack, describing it as unprovoked and alarming, especially with the 2027 general elections approaching.
“What is most painful is that most of my members sustained varying degrees of wounds. This is in spite of the hoodlums going into our party secretariat in Alimosho and destroying our furniture and flags,” he said.
Mr Olushola clarified that the defection itself had already taken place, stressing that Saturday’s gathering was merely a symbolic ceremony to inform the public of their decision.
According to him, nearly all LP members in Alimosho, including the party’s leadership structure, had collectively agreed to move to the ADC.
Also speaking, the party’s Secretary in Alimosho, Mr Moses Akujuobi, explained that plans for an open defection ceremony had earlier been halted by the police, who cited the absence of formal approval.
He said the organisers had reached out to the Area M Commander, ACP Abaniwonda, who reportedly informed them that only the Commissioner of Police could authorise political events in the state.
“Incidentally, we could not reach the CP, but we informed the DSS, after which we went ahead since it wasn’t a rally but a quiet ceremony,” Mr Akujuobi said.
He added that the situation became more tense upon arrival at the initial venue.
“When we got to the venue this morning, we were shocked to see police vans with heavily armed policemen. They informed us that we cannot hold the event and referred us to the police commissioner.
“While we were at it, the hoodlums besieged the place and began to beat people, leading to our deserting the venue,” he explained.
Mr Akujuobi said party officials subsequently contacted members by phone to proceed to the second venue in Egbeda, where the programme resumed briefly.
“We, however, began to contact our members through phones to move to the second venue, which is the Eco Event Centre, and everyone witnessed what took place here.
“The hoodlums got wind of our second venue and equally attacked us, beating up our members again,” he added.
He noted that the decision to defect to the ADC was driven by internal leadership challenges within the Labour Party and protracted legal disputes affecting the party.
Shortly after the hoodlums vacated the second venue, several police vans carrying armed officers reportedly arrived at the location.
The Pentecostal Fellowship of Nigeria (PFN) has strongly rejected calls by the Supreme Council for Shari’ah in Nigeria seeking the removal of the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Joash Amupitan, over comments he allegedly made on genocide.
The Fellowship described the demand as unjustified and a threat to constitutional freedoms.
In a statement signed by its National Secretary, Bishop David Bakare, the PFN insisted that Prof Amupitan, like every Nigerian, has the constitutional right to express his views on matters of national concern, irrespective of the public office he occupies.
According to the PFN, the comments attributed to the INEC Chairman were made in his personal capacity and had no link whatsoever with his official responsibilities or electoral duties.
The Fellowship stressed that elections and electoral activities were not involved in the matter, arguing that there was no basis to connect the alleged comments to Prof Amupitan’s role as INEC Chairman.
“We strongly oppose such calls because Prof. Amupitan, as a Nigerian, has the right to make comments on what he observes to be happening in the nation, regardless of his appointment or assignment,” the statement read.
The PFN said it condemned “in every ramification” the suggestion that the INEC Chairman should be removed from office on the basis of his personal views, warning against attempts to punish public officials for expressing opinions outside the scope of their official duties.
The Tide source reports that the Fellowship also cautioned against what it described as a growing tendency to interpret national issues through religious lenses, noting that such an approach only deepens divisions and undermines peaceful coexistence.
“We must resist the temptation of profiling or judging people based on their religious beliefs or positions. Prof. Amupitan has a right to bear his mind, and this should not be at the cost of his job,” the PFN added.
The PFN called on all stakeholders to exercise restraint, understanding and mutual respect in national discourse, particularly on sensitive issues.
It emphasised that unity and peace must remain paramount in addressing national challenges.
The Fellowship reaffirmed its commitment to fairness, justice and mutual respect, urging that these values guide public engagement and responses to issues affecting the country.
In A Statement Issued On Saturday, Mr Obiorah Ifoh, The Factional Spokesperson, Described The Decision Of The Electoral Body As Strange.
Mr Ifoh Also Said The Sacked Factional Leadership Of The Party Will Protest The Action Of INEC.
Stating That Judgment Of The Court And The Decision Of INEC Will Not Stop Its Members From Putting Up A Strong Appearance In The Forthcoming 2027 General Election, Mr Ifoh Noted Legal Redress Would Be Sought By LP.
He Said, “Some Persons Who Are Applauding The Impunity By Some Politicians Should Retrace And Do Some Introspection, Because This Was How In The Past They Applauded Injustice In Our Democracy Because They Were Beneficiaries.
“At The End Of The Day, When Their Enthroned Leaders Began To Abuse Power, They Started Complaining.
“For Us In Labour Party, Our Faith Is Strong That The Appellate Court Will Do The Right Thing And Therefore We Advise Our Members To Remain Calm. We Will Continue With The Struggle To Take Our Party From The Godfather,” Mr Ifoh Said.
He Also Stated That The Labour Party Is A Party Formed On The Basis Of Social Democracy Where No One Man Is Permitted To Appoint Everybody.
According To Him, It Is Against The Party’s Principles For “One Man To Sit At A Place And Gather Everybody And Appoint Everybody From The National Working Committee To The State.
“That Is Impunity Of The Highest Order. This, I Believe, Negates The Principles Of The Party.
“If We Say There Is No Party Ideology In Nigeria, This Is How It Starts. We Are Very Sure That It Will Be Quashed On Appeal,” He Added.
Mr Ifoh Also Described The Celebration And Excitement Showcased By Senator Nenadi Usman And The Abia State Governor, Dr Alex Otti As Temporary.
He Said Dr Otti, Senator Usman And Their Cohorts’ Names Which Were Already Listed On INEC’s Portal Will Be Short-Lived.
“It Is For A Short Time. Their Victory Is Pyrrhic And There Is Nothing To Celebrate Because Doomsday Is Closer Than They Will Imagine; Which I Believe Will Be Very Catastrophic For Them.
“Moreover, It Is Very Clear That The Appointment Of The Caretaker Committee Did Not Go Through The Normal Procedure. Proper Notice Was Not Given In Line With The Party Constitution And The Electoral Act,” He Said.