APC’s directive to members: In whose interest? Ahead of next year’s general election, the political atmosphere in Nigeria is increasingly getting charged. Many are afraid that the situation may boil over if the political gladiators do not apply caution in their desperation for power. As politicians engage one another in the struggle, the fear is that the masses would be the ultimate loser at the end of the power game. And for those conversant with the trend of politics in this clime, with about one year to the general election, the nation has already relapsed into a fresh period of fears of the unknown. As it appears, not even a soothsayer can predict what happens next as the clock ticks toward the election. For instance, there has been increased tension over the directive by the All Progressives Congress (APC) to its members in the National Assembly to block consideration of this year’s budget and clearance of the recent ministerial and top military appointments. It also threatened to direct its members nationwide, especially, those in Rivers State to resort to self-help to protect themselves if the situation in the state was not immediately brought under control by the presidency. The APC members were directed by the hierarchy of the party to stick to their guns until the Federal Government halts the escalating violence in Rivers State. Part of the resolutions reached by the Interim National Executive of the party reads thus: “The National Executive committee of the APC commended the courage, maturity and political sagacity of Governor Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers State in the face of serial unprovoked and unwarranted assaults on his person, his constitutional rights and those of the government and people of Rivers State. The conduct of Amaechi represents our party’s maturity and compliance with the rule of law in response to escalating impunity. “Following the foregoing and in view of the joint resolutions of the National Assembly on Rivers State, and other constitutional breaches by the presidency, the APC hereby directs its members in the National Assembly to block all legislative proposals including the 2014 budget and confirmation of all nominees to military and civilian positions to public office until the rule of law and constitutionalism is restored in Rivers State in particular and Nigeria in general”. Since the directive, many have continued to ask questions on the consequences of the action by the opposition party. There are those who believe that the development is still part of democracy as it will help to balance power which the PDP has dominated since 1999 when Nigeria re-embraced democracy. However, there are others who argue that the action of the APC is ‘carrying politics too far’. As expected, the ruling party, the PDP, reacted to the development, saying it was a confirmation of its assertions that the opposition party was determined to destroy the nation’s democracy. The PDP said: “in asking that service chiefs should not be confirmed by the Senate, the APC has revealed its devilish plot to undermine the nation’s security system, create a state of anarchy and pave way to unleash mayhem on the people. “In trying to frustrate the passage of the 2014 budget, the APC has also exposed its plot to cripple the nation’s economy and plunge the people into untold hardship. Many Nigerians interviewed by Daily Sun reacted angrily to the development even though few people argued that the action by the APC would check the excesses of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). In his reaction, former Anambra State governor, Chukwuemeka Ezeife said the development is in line with the antecedents of the APC to be anti-President Goodluck Jonathan without consideration of the consequences. He said that the directive of the opposition party is bad, repugnant and should be condemned by all right-thinking citizens of Nigeria. “If the 2014 budget is not worked on by the National Assembly, who are the people that would suffer from that action? “If the APC blocked the consideration of the budget as the party directed, who will be blamed for the consequences. It is Jonathan and the present administration and that is all the APC wants. “It is in line with the antecedents of the opposition to resist to be ruled by those who were not born to rule”, he said. Dr Ezeife said the APC is carrying the issue of opposition too far, describing President Jonathan as a tool in the hands of God to lift Nigeria to where she is destined to be. For former Secretary of National Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG), Frank Kokori, the APC directive came as a good development. He said that the nation now has an alternative party that can check the excesses of the PDP unlike before when it was a one way affair. He argued that the directive by the APC does not mean that they are not patriotic but as a signal to the PDP to sit up in the administration of the country. “Look at the pain the Rivers State governor is going through! It will deepen democracy. People like us who think objectively are happy that the PDP is being put on check. It happened in America and when people felt Obama was becoming too powerful, he was called to order”, he said. He cautioned that rather than call the bluff of the APC, the PDP-led government should try and sit at a roundtable with the opposition to chart the way forward. But Chief Maxi Okwu who recently emerged the Chairman of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) via a High Court in Abuja described the development as tantamount to political blackmail. He said it was taking opposition practice too far, arguing that the method being deployed by the APC was out of tune with democratic practice. Okwu acknowledged that the APC has a genuine case with regards to events in Rivers State but reasoned that one cannot cure impunity with impunity. He called on the Federal Government to discipline the Police Commissioner in Rivers State for compromising his responsibility to the people and observed that the Public Order Act which he is using to address the situation in the oil-rich state is unconstitutional, null and void. Also, a Lagos lawyer and human rights activist, Frank Agbedo condemned the directive by the APC, saying it constitutes a threat to the peace of the nation. His words: “My view on the directive of the party to its elected members in the NASS, if true, is that such a directive is not only illegal, unconstitutional, vexatious and undemocratic but also constitutes a brazen and wanton threat to the peace and corporate existence of Nigeria under a civilian democracy. “APC has no powers under the law to issue such a directive to its elected members in the National Assembly, as once elected and sworn in, they have become the representatives of the people and not the political party. It would be foolhardy for their members to heed such a mockery of parliamentary democracy. “It is the height of hypocrisy and paradoxical for a party of so called progressives to threaten shutting down the economy and government of the country for their selfish political interest to the detriment of the nation and utter disdain and anguish of the electorate and the poor masses. This is totally unacceptable and must be condemned by all right-thinking citizens of Nigeria”. The Conference of Nigeria Political Parties (CNPP) also joined in the cacophony of voices trailing the APC directive. Secretary General of CNPP, Willy Ezugwu faulted the position of the APC on grounds that it is the masses that would ultimately bear the consequences. He said that the development showed that the APC has no good intentions for Nigeria but only interested in usurping power from the PDP. “They are playing politics against the people and not for the people. If they want to govern Nigeria, they should not be desperate about it. The ultimate goal of any party is to better the lives of the people. They are playing politics beyond the boundaries of decency and the action is certainly not for the common good”, he said. So, as it is, while many thought that the directive by the APC would deepen democracy, others think otherwise. There is a school of thought that believes that such action by the APC is not uncommon even in advanced democracies. A common example is what happened during the present administration under President Barack Obama. With universal healthcare as one of the stated goals of the Obama administration, it will be recalled that congressional Democrats and health policy experts had argued that guaranteed issue would require both community rating and an individual mandate to ensure that adverse selection and/or “free riding” would not result in an insurance “death spiral”. They convinced Obama that it was necessary, and persuaded him to accept congressional proposals that included a mandate. The approach was taken because the president and congressional leaders had concluded that more progressive plans, such as the (single-payer) Medicare for All acts, could not obtain filibuster-proof support in the Senate. However, following the adoption of an individual mandate as a central component of the proposed reforms by Democrats, Republicans opposed the mandate and threatened to filibuster any bills that contained it. Republican Senators, including those who had supported previous bills with a similar mandate, described the mandate as “unconstitutional”. Public opinion polls indicate that the United States public generally supported healthcare reform, but the public views became increasingly negative in reaction to specific plans discussed during the legislative debate over 2009 and 2010.
Posted on: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 09:50:17 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015