Savagery Of Legislative Greed …That Reps’ Move To Scrap Executive Immunity

When the Guardian, one of Nigeria’s foremost Newspapers, in an editorial described as legislative tyranny the refusal of the House of Representatives to approve appropriation for the Nigerian Stock Exchange (NSE) in the 2013 Budget, on account of the House’s insistence that its Director-General be sacked, I thought it was rather too condemning.
Being the lower chamber of the National Assembly, the House has the right to make laws for the peace, unity and good government of the country, among other duties. One of such includes the over-sight function of checking excesses of the Executive arm of government.
If in furtherance to that, it views the NSE as an impediment to good governance and insist on the removal of the DG, so be it. It was not right for the Guardian to tie that legislative resolution to an earlier face-off between the House Committee on Stocks and Securities and the DG, over demand of freebies.
Besides, Nigeria operates a bi-cameral legislature, in which case, the upper chamber, the Senate could still suggest differently, if indeed, it found the House’s position unacceptable. But the Senate didn’t but concurred.
In the end, a duly recognised federal institution, as vital as the Nigerian Stock Exchange, complete with its operational staff was denied budgetary allocation by the National Assembly, without a law to first proscribe the institution. That was to me, no worry that cannot be addressed behind closed-doors between the Executive and Legislative arms.
But recent legislative actions of the House of Representatives should give Nigerians a real cause for concern and if not checked could result in a back door replacement of the Presidential system of government with a parliamentary one, with the lower chamber, as the most powerful institution, in the land.
The power, many of its members insist near-frequently, arises from the fact that they represent the 339 federal constituencies, and as such, were elected by the people. Secondly, it could by its number over-ride the Senate at will, since, in the absence of concurrence, between both chambers, an issue in contention would only be resolved through the joint- committee of all members of the National Assembly where, each legislator enjoys one vote, a condition, House members believe would automatically translate in victory for the lower chamber on account of its high membership strength.
This is not the kind of National Assembly the framers of the constitution envisaged. The key reason for a bi-cameral legislature is, among others, to encourage a larger mindfield of quality ideas, representative of the yearnings of the peoples they represent, and also serve as a necessary check on the likely excesses of the executive. The three arms of government, the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary are meant to complement each other not to be in competition of wits.
But if recent happenings are any leads to judge by, the opposite is true of the actions of the House of Representatives and makes the keen observer to wonder if indeed, the House is acting out the script of those its members present or some demigods, playing a different drum.
Not too long ago, popular Human rights activist and Lagos lawyer, Femi Falana and others challenged the House leadership to make public, salaries of its members in the interest of transparency. Falana had argued that to expect of the executive arm, true transparency needed for successful performance of the House’s over-sight obligations, the legislature, especially the lower chamber should also be open to their constituents. Rather than heed that, the House resorted to legal action to shield itself and Falana emerged from that action a judicial ‘busy-body’ of sorts.
Next, some House members moved to grant themselves immunity, the kind enjoyed by leadership of the Executive arm, under Section 308 Sub-Section (1-3) of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution as amended. This is in spite of the fact that the legislature already enjoys its own measure of immunity, which is why nothing a law-maker says on the floor of the Assembly, is actionable against his person.
But the House of Representatives, some of them that is, wanted more. They wanted to be free from any form of civil or criminal action all through the duration of their tenure as lawmakers. That meant, if a law-maker remains in the National Assembly for five terms of 20 years, whatever litigations against any of his actions would wait until after his death except he lives beyond recent life-expectancy limits or of the coming years.
It took a loud opposition among Nigerians, especially the Senate to convince the Reps members of the needlessness of such extra immunity. That perhaps closed the matter of legislative immunity or so many thought.
But in a move reminiscent of the proverbial dog in a manger, ‘if I can’t have it, nobody else should’ the House has commenced the legislative process to amend Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, which provides immunity for the President and Commander-in-Chief of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the Vice President, Governors of the 36 States of the Federation and their deputies.
To actualise that, the House quickly adopted the report of its Constitution Review Committee overwhelmingly, with the explanation that the move was to check executive recklessness or acts of impunity. Impunity, is that what immunity is about? Was that why House members need it inter alia?
Let’s imagine the scenarios: “The Governor of ABC State Dr. DEF GHIJ was yesterday arrested by the Police, in Ibadan, in place of his younger brother, wanted in connection with the theft of a blackberry phone. Gov GHIJ was presenting the 2013 appropriation bill to the state House of Assembly when, a team of policemen led by an Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) whisked him away.
Imagine the second scenario; Nigeria’s President, Alhaji BYC XYZ was yesterday arrested by the Police in Abuja over the United Nations (UN) House bombing by the terror group, Boko Haram.
The President was at the Abuja National Hospital to commiserate with victims of the terror attack when, a team of policemen led by an Assistant Inspector-General of Police (AIG) handcuffed the president before shoving him into a patrol van.
It could be worse. But as bizzaire and laughable as it seems, in a country like Nigeria where all things are possible, there is no telling what would become of the symbols of Executive power, in a Presidential model that the country operates if the Reps succeed.
The move is not only unnecessary, it is indeed primitive and smacks of legislative savagery of the highest order and grounded in greed also.
Whether the House likes the face of the current occupant of Aso Rock or not,or the faces of the 36 state governors or not, the honourable members must realise that the set of Executive members and their deputies symbolise true leadership of government and should not be treated like ordinary citizens. The votes of the citizens forbid it.
The state governor is elected by the entire state as is the President, the entire nation, as a single constituency, including those, the Assembly members claim to represent. Therefore, House members should not continue to delude themselves with the fallacy that their election is bigger and more popular than those of Governors and the President. Infact, the reverse is true.
Removing the immunity clause to expose such key operators of the executive arm of government to all forms of civil and criminal litigations of personal nature, and over actions or inactions arising from their performance of their duties, is to over-simplify the constitutional responsibilities of the high offices.
The excuse that the move will also help check executive recklessness is also untenable because the same constitution provides for necessary safeguards for the removal of a President, his Vice or a governor or his deputy.
It is for that purpose, there is contained, the impeachment clause to help whipe in-line any executive, who abuses his office and acts out of tune  of his high office. If the House of Representatives have sufficient reasons to impeach the serving President or a state House of Assembly feel same about a Governor, neither needs to amend the rules to succeed. To do so, amounts to shifting the goal post in the middle of a soccer match.
The other day, the House moved to simplify the removal from office a President or state Governor and their deputies, by seeking to arrogate to itself the more powers to determine acts of gross misdemeanour, prosecute and also constitute the body of Nigerians that would confirm their actions. As far as some House members are concerned, the constitutional responsibility of the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) to assemble a team  of Nigerians of integrity to second-check the House’s allegations, impeachment should be  removed because, in their own view, since the CJN is usually appointed by the President, the officer could be compromised. How laughable!
But that’s the way the House views it and would stop at nothing  to allocate to itself all the necessary powers to become the prosecutor and judge in its own case. Laws are not made  for cheers of the moment or targets at individuals.
The grandstanding is not what the founding fathers and framers of the constitution envisage for good governance of the country, with the three arms, as safe-points for separation of powers and of checks and balances.
My Agony is that many of the actions of the House do not seem to reflect the true yearnings of the people they represent. Nigerians expect the House to help push the Executive to pursue  programmes that would create jobs for the teeming unemployed, not to scuttle the Sure-P intervention; legislate a proper take-home wage for the Nigerian worker; check corruption among the operators of government and also remain above ‘Lawan’ board; employ part of their constituency votes into viable partnership for manufacturing concerns that would ensure job creation and empowerment of the people and not compete with the executive for building of health centres and community markets.
Methinks the House of Representatives need to do more on over-sights that directly better the  lot of Nigerians and not seek to become alternative government or  another opposition party. What that offers is distraction and unnecessary bickering among the arms of  government , not progress.