POLITICS

Drama, Cheers, jeers when lawmakers said NO to Buhari

March 12, 2022

To many, it sounded very incredible that the Ahmed Lawan led Senate jettisoned President Muhammadu Buhari’s request to expunge section 84(12) of the electoral act. What happened? Saturday Vanguard reports!

The sniggers were the harbingers that heralded the doom’s day for the presidential request. Though he had an inkling of a sinister feeling in the murmuring voices, he however preferred to test the waters and allow the issue to pass through the whole gamut of legislative crucibles.

A day before, precisely on Tuesday, March 8, 2022, a court had issued an ex-parte order to stop the lawmakers from considering Buhari’s request.

But without prejudice and contempt, Senate President Ahmed Lawan disagreed, saying if such orders were allowed someday one would order them not to sit to make laws for the country. He based his position on the principle of Separation of Powers enshrined in the constitution.

In a nutshell, that was the story of the receipt of both the request of President Muhammadu Buhari to amend the recently passed electoral act to expunge section 84 (12) from it and the caveat emptor ruling of Justice Iyang Ekwo on it hereupon the Senate President, Ahmed Lawan debated with his colleagues and won.

Essentially, the controversial section states thus “No political appointee at any level shall be voting delegates or be voted for at the Convention or Congress of any political party for the purpose of the nomination of candidates for any election”.
Recall that President Muhammadu Buhari gave his assent to the bill on February 25, 2022 and picked holes in the section.

The Debate in Senate/Reps

The debate was louder in the Senate than in the House. In fact, there was no debate in the House. What sufficed was a reminder of the subsisting order by Hon. Herman Hembe (APC, Benue).

On a point of order, he said that they were barred from amending the Act to which Gbajabiamila said he’s aware of the court injunction.

“I’m aware of the court process that was served on us, I’m aware of the injunction but I’m still obligated to read the President’s communication”, the Speaker said.

The drama in the Senate

But on Wednesday, March 9, 2022 came the real debate and the voting in the Senate. And it was louder and mesmerizing.

Conscious of the court order, an APC Senator, Adamu Aliero asked that the bill be stepped down after the Senate Leader, Yahaya Abdullahi had moved for its second reading.

Citing Rule 52(5) of the Senate Standing Order which provides that, “Reference shall not be made to any matter on which a judicial decision is pending, in such a way as might in the opinion of the President of the Senate prejudice the interest of parties thereto”, Aliero said it would be subjudice to proceed with the amendment.

“Going ahead to consider the bill obviously will mean that we are disrespecting that order, and this is an institution of the Senate – the symbol of Nigeria’s lawmaking body.

“We should not be seen to be disobeying the court order. No matter how bad that court order is, we should respect it. So, I’m of the opinion that we should stop considering this bill pending the time the court set aside that order, and I think I’m speaking the opinion of my colleagues here”, he said.

But a convincing explanation ensued from the Senate President.

He said: “To be specific to this particular request, for us in the Senate, it is to look at the request and follow our due process.

“Looking at the request does not mean granting the request. Members of the National Assembly are at liberty to review the request to see if the arguments by the Executive arm of government are convincing enough.

“If the arguments are not convincing enough, the National Assembly can deny the request, and that is how it is. We have no encumbrance from that order.

“So, it is for Senators here to decide to vote for this amendment or vote against it. I think we are not breaching any law, in fact, we are trying to promote democracy because to do otherwise may mean that one day someone will go to court and say that the Senate of the National Assembly should not sit.

“I want to appeal to all of us, that we are on the right course and my ruling remains that we are going ahead to consider the proposal which the Leader of the Senate is leading the debate.

“At the end of the debate, we are going to vote, and the vote will decide the fate of the bill. I’m sure all of us know that whatever we do here is to protect democracy and the sanctity of the upper chamber”.

Having opened the floor for the debate, the sagacious Minority Leader, Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe (Abia South) bared his mind.

“There are certain things that we see which we think we don’t even have to come here to debate. One of those things is the fact that in every democracy, all over the world, there are certain rules which we don’t need to be told about. One of those rules is the fact that you cannot be a referee and a player on the same field. It is either you’re a referee or a player.

So, every other place in the world where democracy is practiced including Nigeria, we don’t need to be told that if we want to run for office, we have to resign. That is a sine qua non that we don’t even need to debate.

“Yet here we are today in Nigeria, and people think they can sit in an office and contest an election and become candidates and continue to sit in that office until the date of election. So, how would we continue to debase democracy in this way?

“Mr. President, I think, a cursory look at this paper shows that this paper is dead on arrival. And I urge you, my colleagues, to help us to continue to deepen democracy by insisting that this bill not be read a second time in any manner whatsoever.”

After Abaribe came another rejection call by another APC Senator, representing Kogi West, Smart Adeyemi.

“One of the hallmarks of democracy is justice, fairness and equity. Indeed, Mr. President, it is a settled matter in law that you cannot be a judge over you own case. In any election, where people have the added advantage of holding executive power, either by proxy or directly or by appointment, for such people to have access and compete with others who came from the street, I think is an unjust society.

“Therefore, Mr. President, I disagree with all the arguments on the need to consider a decision that has already been settled”, he said.

But the Deputy Senate President, Ovie Omo-Agege won’t give up and so, he opened a window which however refused to let in some light rays. He fought through jeers and cheers as he spoke.
He said “The framers of the constitution, knew that a day like this will come. And notwithstanding, it clearly stipulated in the constitution those provisions with qualification and disqualification on running for political office.

“If it was their intent that for holding a political office, you should not contest election, they would have so provided.

“There were some provisions some of us voted for at the beginning of section 84(2) that says no political party shall seek to disqualify anybody by importing into the process a provision for qualification or disqualification not otherwise provided for in the constitution.”

The Voice, Vote/The Laughter

Done, Lawan now intoned “I have listened enough. I will put the question. And everyone of us is at liberty to voice his conscience.”

He did put the question. First for those in support. And there was a pin-drop silence.

Surprised and laughter, nay, sniggers swiftly hugged the deafening, irritating silence.

“May be you didn’t hear me. I will be more audible now”, the Senate President said.

Again, more laughter followed. This time, infectious, providing some comic reliefs even to Lawan.

“No, no, Leader”, he called, laughing in kicks.

At this juncture, some noise had ensued on the floor and so, Lawan hit the gavel continuously to get the attention of his colleagues.

Just then, an unidentified voice shouted “O-r-d-e-r”, in an elongated manner.

Then Lawan put the question again “Those in favor that this bill be read the second time, say “aye”? He asked.

A lone voice came on in response and then, silence reigned.

“Those against say nay”, he asked.

Of course, thunderous shouts of nay, very long stressed nays filled the air. And jubilation followed.

Then, a voice clamoured for a repeat of the questions.

But the Senate President said “No, I will not put the question again because in the first time I put the question, there was an aye and there were nays and I say the nays had it”.

With that the Senators jettisoned Buhari’s request to amend the electoral act.

The birth of a new Senate?

Not a few Nigerians expressed surprise on the unanimity of the Senators’ voices. Many doubted if that was still the Lawan’s Senate that has played the rubber stamp since its inception in 2019.

From expeditious screening of appointees to express loan approvals, the Lawan Senate has been doing the bidding of the President with gusto and celebratory air, however, unabashedly so.

Recall his infamous lines: ‘We will approve whatever the President brings’. So, what has now happened to the electoral act amendment request? What changed? Maybe, it’s just waking up from years of long slumber. Truly, the action was uncanny and novel but good for democracy.

The implications/Lastline

The implication of the rejection is simple: that all those political appointees both at the federal and state levels, entertaining one form of ambition or the other will have to choose between enjoying their present office or taking the risk of chasing their dreams with no assurance of certainty.

That’s it. And without a name tag, they all know themselves. But at the moment, all options are in the rejection.

Resign and contest or stay put and continue to enjoy the pecks and paraphernalia of office until May 29, 2023 when a new government will be birthed. That’s it. Meanwhile, the belief amongst keen political observers and analysts is that perhaps, a new National Assembly is here. But it came very late!.