Connect with us

Politics

That Bayelsa Lawmakers’ Pension Bill

Published

on

One thing that is becoming very outstanding in Nigerian politics is the issue of insatiable lust for money which normally in sane societies will cost some people their jobs in elective offices.
If we take a look at the recent ignoble law passed by the Bayelsa State House of Assembly proposing life pension for members of the House or those who have been legislators since the creation of the state, the move does not only send a cold shiver down the spine but shows that there is sheer greed and accumulated grievances against the working class in the society.
How come that a group of legislators who probably have served for only four or eight years will arrogate to themselves the powers to fix pension for themselves without clearly thinking of the consequence. Are they also implying that those who served as commissioners and special advisers should also have life pensions in the scheme of things?
However, it was a cheering news that the state Governor, Seriake Dickson refused to assent to such a self-serving and anti-people bill. The request for such a law was not only nauseating but leaves a very bad odour in the political atmosphere in the country because, if that law had been signed into law, then, trust Nigerians with their copy-cat approach to issues of individual interest, other legislative assemblies nationwide would have started passing such laws. And even councillors at the local government level will have no alternative than to pass such laws too, making themselves and council chairmen to enjoy similar financial benefits.
When the 1999 Constitution was promulgated into law, it was only the office of the President and Vice President that were covered under this law but sadly, the first set of governors from 1999 to 2003 set a bad example by arm-twisting their legislative houses to pass favourable pension laws for them, and this is the genesis of what we are seeing today.
A House of Assembly is supposed to be a hallowed chamber where people-oriented laws are supposed to be made and it is also a place where problems that affect the people or even an individual can be addressed but today what we are experiencing is that it is a place to address only members’ welfare.
The legislators should note that their office is an elective one, they did not write a letter of application for the job and they don’t have any promotion examination to go to the next grade level. In short, they don’t have a retirement age limit but can re-contest for elections as they deem fit.
Please, someone should tell them that politics should not be left to jobless people or the idle minds but to those who have work experience and have something to do to earn a living before venturing into politics. If this notion of life pension…God forbid comes to stay in Nigeria with such huge sums of money approved, what signal then are we sending to the rest of Nigerians, … every Tom, Dick and Harry that is jobless and without any work experience will struggle either by hook or crook to venture into politics with the aim of contesting for the legislative assembly.
In the First and Second Republics, all the members of the legislative assembly including council chairmen and councillors were not lazy people but had well paid jobs before venturing into politics. The likes of Dr. Nwafor Orizu, the then President of the Senate, Rt. Hon Rosebury Briggs, Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly in the Second Republic was a successful lawyer in private practice for many years before he entered the murky waters of partisan politics.
All these people and their colleagues at no time advocated for free and easy money from government to take care of their youthful and productive age. If we take a careful look at the age bracket of members of most state houses of assembly, we will hardly see anyone that is above 60 years of age which is an indication that those who want to benefit from this largese are people mostly in either their 30s or 40s … what a tragedy.
Again, a cursory look at the productivity level of some members shows that they have not contributed anything meaningful by either initiating bills or intellectually debating issues affecting the state or their constituencies and sometimes even on television, we see some legislators dozing or sleeping while debates on serious matters affecting the society are going on, yet they want pension for life.
For democracy to grow, we need to elect into office people of substance, people with integrity, individuals who by their pedigree have something to offer society in the area of quality law making and selfless service that is worthy of emulation.
Why is it that when we as Nigerians borrow good ideas from foreign climes, our domestication of such ideas leaves a very bad example for future generations? If we say we are practising a presidential democracy modelled after the United States of America, what stops us from imitating the good sides of such democracy rather than making selfish laws that will only benefit us?
Even in America, legislative business cannot be compared to that of Nigeria. There, legislators pay house rent and do not live in staff quarters and are not chauffeured around in official cars but here in Nigeria, despite all the largese that is spread around such offices, they are still not satisfied but yearn for more. I think one of the solutions to such demands for life pension should be a review of the Constitution to make legislative duties part-time so as to make the offices less attractive to people who are not really cut out to serve the public.
It seems that the military interegnum between 1983 to 1999 really did a lot of damage to our psyche as a nation and that is why the quality of legislators the electorate have been sending to the houses of assembly especially in some states have been deteriorating every four years. The vibrancy and maturity we experienced between 1992 to 1993 and 1999 to 2003 are no longer there.
Our houses of assembly should sit up, look beyond members’ individual interest and learn once more to be honourable not just in name but also in their legislative duties. Nigeria or the various states are not an inexhaustible gold mine or crude oil field where free cash can be gotten to cushion the lavish lifestyle of an individual, what we need are people with ideas that can fashion out modalities of how to tackle the myriad of problems bedeviling our society like unemployment.
This is because if we keep quiet with the way things are going, our inactions will later turn to haunt us in future.
For rejecting that obnoxious bill on pension for legislators, the Bayelsa State Governor, Seriake Dickson has not only saved the people of the state from embarrassment but also people from other states from modern day financial recklessness.

 

Tonye Ikiroma-Owiye

Continue Reading

Politics

Obi Visits Atiku In Abuja Amidst 2027 Speculations

Published

on

The Labour Party’s (LP) presidential candidate in the 2023 presidential election, Mr Peter Obi, has visited his Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) counterpart, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, in a surprise move that may not be unconnected with the 2027 presidential poll.
Alhaji Abubakar, a former Vice President, announced Mr Obi’s visit in a tweet on Monday afternoon,
“It was my honour and privilege to host @Peter Obi today. – AA,” the post read, with a photo of both men exchanging a handshake.
Although Alhaji Abubabar did not reveal the details of their meeting, insider sources close to the candidates told The Tide source that the meeting, which lasted about one hour, was about a merger towards the 2027 election.
The sources also disclosed that Mr Obi initially met with Jigawa State former Governor and PDP chieftain, Sule Lamido, in Abuja before his private meeting with Alhaji Abubakar.
Before Mr Obi visited the opposition PDP leader, there were speculations that the duo may be plotting to form an alliance to unseat President Bola Tinubu in the 2027 presidential election.
Mr Obi was previously in the PDP, where he joined Alhaji Abubakar and served as his running mate in 2019. However, in the build-up to the 2023 election, he defected to the LP, where he contested the presidential race.
Mr Obi and Alhaji Abubakar lost their presidential bids to Bola Tinubu, the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate.

Continue Reading

Politics

Assembly Crisis: Court Strikes Out Suit As LP Withdraws Petition Against INEC

Published

on

A Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday struck out a suit filed by the Labour Party (LP) seeking an order compelling INEC to conduct a fresh election in the Rivers State House of Assembly to fill the seats of the defected lawmakers.
Justice James Omotosho struck out the suit after counsel for the party, F. I. Adariku, applied to withdraw the suit.
In the suit, the LP had sought the order of the court to compel the commission to conduct a fresh election to fill the seats of the lawmakers who defected from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC).
But INEC, through its lawyer, Victor Giwa, disagreed with the LP.
Giwa, in a preliminary objection filed on INEC’s behalf, prayed the court to dismiss the suit for being frivolous and incompetent.
According to the lawyer, the suit is an abuse of court process.
He urged the court to decline jurisdiction in the case as the plaintiff (LP) lacked the locus standi and territorial jurisdiction to institute the action.
Giwa, a human rights activist, argued that there was a pending case currently ongoing at a Federal High Court, Port Harcourt judicial division, with suit number: FHC/PH/CS/25/2024 before Justice E.A Obile.
He said the Port Harcourt suit had same parties and concerned same subject matter which was filed earlier before the instant suit in February.
However, after INEC filed its objection, the LP approached the court to withdraw the suit.
Adariku, who held the brief of Kehinde Edun, the party’s national legal adviser, sought to withdraw the suit, praying the court to strike it out.
A. S. Adisa, who held the brief of Giwa, did not oppose the application.
“It is hereby ordered as follows: that this matter having been withdrawn is hereby struck out.
“That the cost of 50,000.00 (Fifty Thousand Naira) is awarded against the plaintiff in favour of the 29th defendant (INEC),” Justice Omotosho declared.
The Tide source reports that other defendants in the suit were Gov. Siminalayi Fubara, Dumle Maol, Major Jack, Franklin Uchenna Nwabochi, Christopher Ofiks, Azeru Opara, and Enemi George.
It also included Granvill Wellington, Ngbar Bernard, John Iderima, Queen Uwuma Williams, Loolo Opuende and Abbey Peter.
Others are Igwe – Obey Aforii, Justina Emeji, Ignatius Onwuka, Hon. Chimezie Nwankwo, Lemchi Prince Nyeche, Barile Nwakoh, Emilia Amadi, Nkemjika Ezekwe, Davios Oxobiriari, Nwankwo Sylvanus, Gerald Oforii and Wami Solomon.

Continue Reading

Politics

Tribunal Reserves Judgment In Kogi Gov’ship Election Case

Published

on

The Kogi State Governor ship Election Petition Tribunal, sitting in Abuja, on Monday, reserved judgment in the petition filed by the Social Democratic Party (SDP) and its governorship candidate, Murtala Ajaka, against the election victory of Governor Usman Ododo.
At Monday’s proceedings, Ajaka’s lawyer, Pius Akubo, urged the tribunal to set aside the respondents’ submissions and uphold theirs.
Meanwhile, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), through its lawyer, Kanu Agabi, told the court that their final written address was dated and filed on May 2 as he prayed the tribunal sitting to dismiss Ajaka’s petition.
Likewise, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and Governor Ododo asked the tribunal to dismiss Ajaka’s petition in its entirety for being incompetent and lacking in merit.
Counsel to the respondents, Agabi, Joseph Daudu, and Emmanuel Ukala, while adopting their final written addresses and presenting their arguments against the petitioners, prayed the three-member panel of Justices, led by Justice Ado Birnin-Kudu to dismiss the petition.
Agabi contended that the Appeal Court had decided that if the grounds of a petition are inconsistent with one another and are not consistent with the reliefs, it should be struck out.
He also argued that the evidence of the petitioners were grossly insufficient, citing a Supreme Court decision in a case of Tonye Cole against INEC.
“It is our humble submission that your work in the determination of this petition is simplified in recent judgments by the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court.
“It is to the effect that once the evidence called is grossly insufficient, there is no evidence. In that case, the petitioner filed 305 witness depositions but only adopted 40 of them.
“The petitioner, according to the decision, only adopted about 13.1 per cent of the witness depositions. In this case, the depositions adopted represent just about 3.6 per cent of their witness depositions,” he said.
He said the petitioners only called 25 witnesses out of the scores listed.
Agabi, said in the mathematical calculation of evidence, 3.6 per cent of Ajaka’s witness deposition adopted in the petition amounted to a failure and therefore, ought to be dismissed.
He said the petitioners equally failed to file the witness deposition beforehand in contravention of the Supreme Court’s decision in Obungado’s case.
He argued that the petitioners’ witness who testified about the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) machines, clearly stated that he could not guarantee whether those were the BVAS used.
Governor Ododo’s legal representation, Daudu, while adopting his final written address dated and filed on May 1, argued that the petition was statute-barred (filed out of time).
He argued that the action of the petitioners was against Section 122(1) and (2)(a) of the Evidence Act, which empowers the tribunal to take judicial notice of the time of filing, service and response.
Although he clarified that the petitioners responded to their service, Akubo objected to Daudu’s citing of the section describing it as a fresh argument.
Daudu, in response, disagreed with Akubo that he was raising fresh issues after a final written address had been filed.
He said if the court found merit in his argument, Akubo had the right to respond because it bordered on issues of remittal procedure.
He also urged the tribunal to dismiss the allegations of forgery against his client, saying it bordered on a pre-election matter, which the apex court had decided in Gbagi’s case against INEC.
Daudu also argued that Section 137 of the Electoral Act cited by the petitioners on allegations of over-voting did not apply in the instant petition.
Similarly, Ukala, who represented APC, urged the court to dismiss SDP and Ajaka’s petition for lacking in merit while he adopted all the processes.
He informed the court that their final written address, dated April 30 was filed same date.
The petitioners’ lawyer, Akubo, told the tribunal that their final written address was dated and filed May 6 adding that their petition was not filed out of time.
He argued that the respondents themselves confirmed that the petition was filed on December 2, 2023, even by their own witness.
“I urge your lordship to hold that we filed this petition within time under our law,” he said.
After taking arguments from all parties, Justice Birnin-Kudu reserved judgment in the petition.
He announced that a date for judgment would be communicated to the parties.
Recall that the tribunal had, on April 25, fixed Monday, May 13, for the adoption of final written addresses after the parties closed their case in the matter.
SDP and Ajaka had approached the tribunal to challenge Governor Ododo’s victory in the Nov. 11, 2023, Kogi governorship election.
In the petition, INEC, Ododo and APC are listed as 1st to 3rd respondents respectively.

Continue Reading

Trending