The move by the House of Representatives to strip vice president, governors and their deputies of their immunity while sparing the president, has sparked debates among stakeholders who have faulted the logic of the proposed legislation by the Green Chamber.
The stakeholders including political scientists, civil rights activists and politicians, while speaking on the proposed amendments argued that both the president and the vice president are usually elected on a joint ticket, hence, should enjoy the same privilege.
Among those who spoke is a senior lecturer in the Department of Political Science, Bayero University, Kano, Dr Aminu Hayatu and former Kaduna senator cum human rights activist, Shehu Sani.
According to them, what is good for the president is also good for the vice president, hence, any proposal to remove immunity must affect both the president and the vice president.
On Wednesday, the House of Representatives passed for second reading, a bill seeking to amend the constitution to strip the vice president, governors and deputy governors of immunity.
The bill was among the 42 considered and passed through second reading during Wednesday’s plenary session, presided over by the Deputy Speaker, Benjamin Kalu.
The House had, on Tuesday, passed 39 constitution amendment bills for second reading and referred to the House Committee on Constitution Review for further legislative actions. The accelerated passage of 42 more bills on Wednesday increased the number of constitution amendment bills passed for second reading to 81.
Sponsored by Rep. Solomon Bob (Rivers PDP), the bill is seeking an amendment of Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution to guard against abuse of office and to ensure transparency in governance.
The long title of the proposed legislation reads, “A Bill for an Act to alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 to qualify the immunity conferred on the President, remove the immunity conferred on the Vice President, the Governors and their deputies, in order to curb corruption, eradicate impunity, and enhance accountability in public office and for Related Matters”.
The lawmaker said the bill seeks to “promote accountability in public office” by removing the immunity currently granted to the vice president, governors and their deputies.”
The draft bill states that it seeks to amend Section 308 of the principal Act by substituting a new subsection (3) as follows: “This section applies to a person holding the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the Vice President only when acting as President in line with Section 145 of this Constitution.”
In subsection (4), it proposes that “The foregoing provisions of this section shall be inapplicable where the person to whom this section applies is acting in an unofficial capacity or where the conduct of the person is beyond the powers of his office or the conduct is criminal in nature”.
Reacting, a senior lecturer in the Department of Political Science at Bayero University, Kano, Dr Aminu Hayatu, faulted the amendment bill seeking to strip vice president, governors and their deputies of immunity, describing the move as unnecessary.
He queried the rationale behind advocating for the removal of immunity for only the vice president while the president is allowed to retain immunity, adding that both of them are usually elected on a joint ticket.
“So, the question is, this is a joint ticket. So, why are you isolating someone that is also a party to the ticket? If you are doing that, do it to the governors alongside the deputies and the president with his vice president. I mean, that makes sense because it’s a joint ticket. They were not elected separately. So, all this is something that I think is unnecessary.
“What we need to focus on is whether the executive should maintain that privilege of immunity or not. That should be the subject of debate. Not that some individuals, you know, are being considered while others are being spared. The same reason the vice-president or the deputy governor is there is to assist the president or the governor. And then, it’s the same duty and function that they are performing as assistants to these executive positions; the number one position in the state or in the country.
“So, it is, I think, for me, an unnecessary exercise because we are battling with bigger problems that we should focus on. Constitutional amendment is something that should happen with deep insights, not like the one of immunity of the president or the deputy governor and what have you. So, I am opposed to this and I am a frontline critic of this.”
Also speaking on the matter, a rights activist and former Kaduna senator, Shehu Sani, faulted the removal of immunity for only the vice president while the president is allowed to enjoy immunity.
Sen. Sani in a post via his verified X (formerly Twitter) handle said: “The positive aspects of removing immunity for VP and governors is that nobody will be above the law; the negative aspect of it is that it can be used to witch hunt VPs and governors.”
He, however, argued that if the Vice President must lose his immunity as proposed by the amendment bill, the president must not be spared.
“If a VP should have no immunity, whoever is the President should not have it also”, he said.
Sen. Sani urged Nigerians to “show interest in it (the proposed amendment bill) before it’s too late.”