Child Marriage controversy: How Senate was blackmailed – Mark …Says Senate to revisit section 29(4)(b) LEGISREPORTS NG – The Senate President, David Mark, has said that the senate was blackmailed into the recent child marriage scandal that has smeared the reputation of the upper chamber following reactions and controversies that trailed last week’s voting on the report of the Constitution Review Committee seeking to amend section 29 clause 4.The Senate President stated this on Wednesday when a delegation of the Women’s Right Advancement and Protection Alternative (WRAPA) stormed the National Assembly to call for a deletion of section 29(4)(b). Mark said the section which was amended to cater for a specific legal age for the renunciation of citizenship was twisted out of context by Senator Ahmed Yerima to assume a religious dimension, thereby blackmailing the upper chamber in a manner that conveyed it as attempting to short-change the Islamic religion by proposing an anti-Islamic piece of legislation. The Senate President further explained that Yerima’s position coerced lawmakers who were Muslims, and had earlier voted in support of the proposed amendment, to make a turnaround by voting against it. Mark noted that the upper chamber had been unnecessarily castigated for the religious connotation and misunderstanding attributed to the amendment of section 29. He said: “Why we voted public was so that everybody will know the stand of every senator on every issue. I think the problem is not whether we can delete this section 29(4) (b) or not. That is not the issue; it is whether we can get the number to be able to delete it. ”With all due respect, the entire Senate is being castigated because there was and there is still a complete misunderstanding of what the Senate had tried to do. “We are on the side of the person that was why we put it that we should delete it, which was what the people wanted. We, infact, are the first people that put the step in the right direction of deleting it. According to the Senate President, section 29 (4)(b) “didn’t go through because of other tangential issues that were brought in on the floor of the Senate. ”We wanted to remove it but it failed; we were a total of 101,85 voted and I think about six or so abstained. There was hardly any dissenting vote, but once it got mixed up with so many other issues, it didn’t get the required 73 votes anymore. ”So, first of all, I think the castigation outside is done out of misunderstanding but because a religious connotation was brought into it, which is a very sensitive issue and you must agree with me that in this country, we try as must as possible not to bring issues that involves faith to the floor of the Senate and indeed the chamber. We keep religion completely out of it because what is good for a Christian is also good for a Muslim. The good of the country is for everybody and not for a particular religious sect. Mark added that the Senate would reconsider visiting section 29(4)(b) whenever it felt strongly that people had been sufficiently enlightened and educated enough on the intent behind the proposed amendment of the section as it concern citizenship renunciation. ”I think the bottom line is, when people get more educated, then we can do a re-think and probably, if the Senate agrees, go back and see whether we can get the required number once more, because that is the solution. He further made a case for lawmakers who turned around to vote down on the section, saying had they done otherwise, doing so may have spelt the worst consequence for their respective political careers and individual security. Let me also talk to my own brothers and sisters who are senators, who were probably blackmailed. ”That is the fact, because it is in the open that I cannot also hide it and nobody can hide it. They were simply blackmailed, and on that day, if they didn’t do what they did, nobody knows the outcome or how the consequences will be today, because the people outside can say this man, you are Muslim and didn’t vote for something that is of Islamic interest, because if we don’t hit the nail squarely on the head, we may never get it right,” he said. Earlier, Secretary General of the Women Rights Advancement and Protection Alternative (WRAPA), Mrs. Sa’adatu Mahdi, in her speech called on the Senate to revisit and delete section 29(4)(b) as proposed in the report of the Senate Committee on Constitution Review. ”Nigerians deserve to be protected by their constitution and so we call for the deletion of section 29(4)(b). According to her, “The Senate must remain impervious to emotional, religious reasoning, and focus on the aggregate social good which will protect and enrich the lives of half of the nation’s population. ”Mahdi therefore enjoined the senate leadership to use every avenue within its rules of procedure to cause a revisit of the vote on section 29(4)(b). She added that “The overwhelming reaction of Nigerians against the outcome of the vote on 16 July, 2013 is a clear and equivocal indication that women, and indeed diverse and significant constituencies of Nigerians have concerns for the specific and general implications of the decision of the Senate to retain section 29(4)(b).
Posted on: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 06:17:38 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015