Politics
Yar’Adua: The Politics, The Debate
Many people are worried about the president’s absence which is already having negative effect on state matters. The new President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Ayo Isa Salami, and Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Katsina Alu were supposed to be sworn-in by the president after the confirmation of their appointments by the Senate.
Also, the annual National Merit Award list which was due at the end of last year, was also delayed due to the absence of the president.
Apart from this, the National Assembly last November, passed the N353.6 billion supplementary budget, which includes capital spending of about N253 billion. Part of the money is for the rehabilitation of the ex-militants and other post amnesty intervention programmes in the Niger Delta.
However, when it became apparent that the nation may not have a substantive chief justice, the Minister of Justice, Michael Aondoakaa, had to come out and state that the out-going chief justice Idris Kutigi could perform the swearing in on behalf of the president.
Despite protest from some lawyers and civil rights activities; Kutigi had justified the action by saying that the Oath Act of 2004 provides for the swearing-in of the CJN, justices of the Supreme Court, president of the Court of Appeal and justices of the Court of Appeal, among others by the president or the CJN.
Surprisely, Barrister Ibimina Kelechi a legal practitioner based in Port Harcourt, never concurred with this argument, as he said he had already proceeded to the Federal High Court, Abuja to fault the swearing-in of the CJN.
According to him, with the swearing-in of Justice Alloysius Katsina-Alu as the CJN, a constitutional vacuum has been created. Kelechi said, “Nigeria political and constitutional history would never be the same again.”
But Hon. Justice C.J. Okocha does not seem to agree with his learned colleague, as he said the swearing-in and the administration of oath on Justice Katsina-Alu was in order.
Okocha also the former president of NBA admitted that the out gone CJN does not lack the power to administer oath on the present CJN, but noted that there would have been chaos if one arm of government did not have a leadership.
In spite this development, controversies have continued to trail all the executive functions performed in the absence of the president, for example, the off-shore signing of the supplementary budget by the President ran into the fire storm of public discourse. Some were skeptical over whether it was true that Yar’Adua actually signed the budget, whether or not the signature on the N353.6 billion supplementary budget was that of President Umaru Yar’Adua.
A release from the Presidency had stated that the president actually signed the budget in the hospital in Saudi Arabia, five weeks after it was passed by the National Assembly.
Some were cynical whether it was true that his Principal Secretary, David Edebvie, actually took the budget to him in Saudi-Arabia. The pen with which President Yar’Adua allegedly signed the off-shore supplementary budget hardly dried up before the Ijaw National Congress (INC) called for the photograph of the President in action as usual or the signature for forensic verification.
However, the Attorney-general of the Federation, Chief Michael Kaase Aondoakaa (SAN), while contributing to the debate said that President Umaru Yar’Adua “can perform his functions as President from any where in the world”.
According to him, Yar’Adua was not suffering from infirmity of body or mind as to render him permanently incapable of discharging the functions of his office from any where in the world. He noted that the Federal Executive Council, (FEC) which is a creation of the Nigerian constitution, had on December, 2 invoked its powers under section 144 (1) (a) of the 1999 constitution to pass a resolution and declared Yar’Adua fit to continue in governance.
The minister argued that there was no need for Yar’Adua to inform the National Assembly on exercising the functions of his office through the vice president and his ministers as enshrined in section (5) (1) and section 148 (1) of the 1999 Constitution.
Section 5(1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria reads: “subject to the provisions of this constitution, the executive powers of the federation
(a) shall be vested in the president and may subject as aforesaid and to the provisions of any law made by the National Assembly be exercised by him either directly or through the vice president and ministers of the government of the federation or officers in the public service of the federation and (b) shall extend to the execution and maintenance of this constitution, all laws made by the National Assembly and to all manners has, for the time being power to make laws, section 148 (1) of the 1999 constitution also reads:
(b) (1) The president may, in his discretion, assign to the vice president or any minister of government of the federation responsibility for any business of the government of the federation including the administration of any department of government. According to him, Yar’Adua has since been delegating the powers of his office to members of the FEC including the vice president.
He said the call by some Nigerians and the reliefs being sought in the pending suits before the court to compel the president to either resign his office or inform the National Assembly of his ill-health to allow Jonathan take over as acting president were unnecessary. The suit was filed by Lagos lawyer, Femi Falana. Aondoakaa argued that in the first place, the case of Yar’Adua’s health was not all that bad to necessitate the invocation of section 145 of the 1999 Constitution.
He said assuming without conceding that it was that bad, the invocation of the provision of section 145, which is one of the principal reliefs being sought by Falana is discretionary.
The section 145 of the 1999 Constitution reads: “whenever the president transmits to the president of the Senate and the speaker of the House of Representatives a written declaration that he is proceeding on vacation or that he is otherwise unable to discharge the functions, such functions shall be discharged by the vice president as acting president.”
But a right group, Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), has petitioned the UN Human Rights Council (UNRC), requesting the body to urgently consider the deteriorating economic and social rights situation in Nigeria due to President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua’s prolonged absence from duty, and his failure to empower the Vice President Goodluck Jonathan, to act as president to sign and effectively implement the 2009 supplementary budget, and the budget for 2010.
The petition dated 3 January 2010 and signed by SERAP’s Executive Director, Adekunbo Mumuni, copy of which was made available on line urged the HRC “to simultaneously hold a special session on the non-compliance by the Nigerian government with its obligations in relation to the realisation of economic, social and cultural rights; and to consider this petition under the HRC new complaint procedure established pursuant to resolution 60/251 of 15 March 2006”.
Similarly, a youth group under the aegis of Amalgamated Northern Political Forum and the South Elements Progressive Union, have warned that “Nigeria risks losing its democratic gains of the past years if the country continues to function without a president.”
The group, through their national chairman, Mr. John Yahaya and Joseph Ambakederimo, respectively insisted that those speaking against the president’s continued refusal to follow constitutional process since leaving the country about 42 days ago, should not be seen as hating the president.
The Conference of Nigerian Political Parties, the Action Congress and some prominent lawyers had opposed the legality of Yar’Adua’s signing of the Supplementary Budget in Saudi Arabia.
However, as Yar’Adua continues to stay in Saudi Arabia for medical treatment, his sudden departure “without formally handing over” political analysts say, “will continue to generate controversy among Nigerians, due to the obvious vacuum his absence has created in the act of governing the country at this critical period.”
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.