New Telegraph

Electoral Act: How Senate stunned naysayers

CHUKWU DAVID reports that the Senate’s rejection of the bill seeking to amend the 2022 Electoral Act, as requested by President Muhammadu Buhari seems to have removed the toga of rubber stamp, which the 9th National Assembly has worn in the perception of most members of the public since its inception

The Ninth National Assembly is seen by many Nigerians as a rubber stamp parliament, particularly by analysts, whose perception is that the nation’s highest lawmaking body has abandoned its constitutional responsibilities to Nigerians, to do the biddings of President Muhammadu Buhari.

This negative perception of the Ninth National Assembly as a rubber stamp is over comments earlier made by the President of the Senate, Ahmad Lawan that the Red Chamber will always support and approve anything brought before it for consideration by President Buhari. Ever since he made that statement, many segments of the country’s population have held it against the federal lawmakers, tagging them “rubber stamp” and always expressing fears of tendencies to betray Nigerians whenever there are contentious issues for the parliamentarians to debate and take decisions on.

Apart from the rubber stamp status which the apex legislative Assembly has been known for, it is also evident from some of the decisions taken by the lawmakers that ethno-religious sentiments usually influence outcomes of their legislations and resolutions.

However and surprisingly too, the Senate, last week Wednesday, unanimously demonstrated that it could take decisions for the good of the greatest number of the citizens devoid of ethnicity and religious biases, which are widely viewed as the dominant cogs in the nation’s wheel of progress. Accordingly, the senators in one voice threw out the bill seeking to amend Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act 2022.

The President of the Senate had the previous day, Tuesday March 8, boasted that the ruling by the Federal High Court Abuja, on the matter would not stop the National Assembly from amending the Electoral Act, He described the judgement as a judicial interference in the constitutional powers of the parliament.

Furious over his perceived judicial interference in the statutory powers of the legislature to make laws, Lawan turned deaf ears to professional advice of some of his colleagues, who are lawyers and insisted that the Act must be amended. The court in a ruling delivered last week Monday by Justice Inyang Ekwo, on an ex-parte application by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), barred President Buhari, the Attorney-General of the Federation and the President of the Senate from tampering with the Electoral Act 2022. The judge pointed out that the Electoral Act having become a valid law could not be altered without following the due process of law.

President Buhari, in a letter dated February 28, requested the National Assembly to amend the Electoral Act, drawing the attention of the legislators to the provisions of Section 84(12), which according to him, constitutes a “defect” that is in conflict with extant constitutional provisions. Reacting to the ruling by the Federal High Court on Tuesday March 8, after the Electoral Act Amendment Bill scaled first reading, Lawan said that the ruling violated the provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as amended). This provoked a disagreement between the President of the Senate and a former Deputy President of the Senate, Senator Ike Ekweremadu as well as Senator Gabriel Suswam. Speaking from the points of law, Ekweremadu and Suswam urged the Senate to respect the judgement of the High Court, while advising that another court should be approached to vacate the judgement.

Defiant to the legal advice of the two lawmakers, a bill seeking to amend the Act was presented for second reading but unfortunately, it was unanimously rejected by the senators in a voice vote. The move to kill the bill was first made by Senator Adamu Aliero (APC, Kebbi Central), who sought that it be stepped down, after the Senate Leader, Yahaya Abdullahi, moved a motion for the bill to be read a second time. Raising a point of order, Aliero drew the attention of the lawmakers to the provision of Rule 52(5) of the Senate Standing Orders, which states 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.” He, therefore, advised his colleagues to step down consideration of the bill pending the vacation of a court order.

“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 am of the opinion that we should stop considering this bill pending the time the court sets aside that order, and I think I am speaking the opinion of my colleagues here,” Aliero said. The Senate President, while ruling on Aliero’s point of Order, insisted that the move by the Senate to amend the Electoral Act was in line with exercising its Constitutional duties amid following due process.

“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 govern-ment 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 incumbrance 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 votes will decide the fate of the bill. I am sure all of us know that whatever we do here is to protect democracy and the sanctity of the upper chamber,” Lawan said.

The Senate Leader, was then given the floor to lead the debate on the Electoral Act Amendment Bill, a task he performed trying to persuade his colleagues on the need to see reason to pass the bill. Contributing to the debate, Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe (Abia South), kicked against the deletion of Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act Amendment Bill as requested by President Buhari.

He said: “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. How can we continue to debase democracy in this way? “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 should not be read a second time in any manner whatsoever.”

Senator Smart Adeyemi (APC, Kogi West), who also opposed consideration of the bill, said: “The hallmarks of democracy are 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, I disagree with all the arguments on the need to consider a decision that has already been settled.”

A move by the Deputy President of the Senate, Ovie Omo-Agege, to sway his colleagues failed. Consequently, the bill, when eventually put to a voice vote for second reading by the President of the Senate, after its consideration, received a resounding “nay” from the senators across party lines and ethno-religious divides.

Read Previous

Osun: Twists and turns of PDP governorship primary

Read Next

AGs’ forum elects Onigbanjo executive c’ttee chair

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *