National Assembly must save democracy BY DURO ONABULE The invasion of National Assembly by armed policemen in an attempt to prevent House of Representatives Speaker Aminu Tambuwal from his duties surprised and shocked Nigerians. Hence, the speculation of impeachment move against President Goodluck Jonathan. Any such move will be in line with the provisions of Nigerian constitution. Impeachment move is a serious political/constitutional development rather than a tea party or an exercise for petty motives. An imperative for any impeachment move is that it must comply very strictly with the procedure stipulated in the constitution, especially the time frame of at least a week to be completed rather than hours (not even 72 hours) later. And of course, even a sitting President on trial for impeachment by the National Assembly, more than anybody else, given the circumstances, is entitled to right of fair hearing to defend himself as provided under the constitution. These points are noteworthy not only because the battle-line has been drawn between the executive and National Assembly over the police gangsterism but also almost the entire 36 state houses of assembly have variously trivialised the serious business of impeachment at the whims and caprices of overbearing state governors getting rid of their deputies or even Speaker of the House of Assembly concerned. What therefore is unacceptable is the blackmail and mob reaction aimed at once again stifling the constitution from being operated by the National Assembly as if, in consequence, Nigeria will go to pieces. The speculation or even reality of impeachment move against Jonathan did not come from the blues. Alarming, unconstitutional and obviously criminal political actions took place to the shock and anger of the nation. The punitive action against such acts as provided in the constitution is impeachment. The very idea of impeachment move does not mean easy passage. It all depends on available evidence to substantiate the charges of impeachment. Section 143 (2) stipulating conditions for impeaching a President or Vice President is not meant for decoration. Rather it is meant to be invoked to stabilize the polity if and when it is necessary to contain an incorrigible President. Questions then arise. Is there any case to impeach President Jonathan? If so, on what grounds. The House of Representatives, indeed the National Assembly must be careful not to take off on a wrong footing. Despite the poisonous air of negativism blown around Jonathan on personal record – Chibok girls, Boko Haram, corruption, brazen theft of public funds, unemployment, collapsing economy etc – there is no provision in Nigerian constitution empowering National Assembly to impeach him (Jonathan) on that score. Such power is vested, even under the constitution, in the Nigerian voters to exercise in an election every four years. In the instant case, only a matter of months. Why then all the hullabaloo on impeaching Jonathan? The case for impeaching him rests solely on Jonathan’s serial even if inadvertent self-confession or the advocacy of his political bouncers on what the man (Jonathan) knows or does not know about blatant unending gross misconduct in violation of his oath of office, to which so far, he has sworn twice. Jonathan violates the constitution or the constitution is violated on his behalf (a la police criminal subversion all over the place) only for him not just to deny or be denied being involved in the gross misconduct, while at the same time, he (Jonathan) condones those violating the constitution in his official status as President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Meanwhile, there should be no sentiments on the present political/constitution crisis. Last time, former President Olusegun Obasanjo, while in office, undermined the then House Speaker Ghali Na’Abba by offering five hundred thousand naira bribe to each of seven members who displayed the money at a press conference in the House. Obasanjo initially dismissed the consequent move to impeach him as a joke stretched too far. By the time the “come came to become,” (K.O. Mbadiwe is not disturbed in his grave) Obasanjo desperately enlisted the support of General Yakubu Gowon, former President Shehu Shagari, General Ibrahim Babangida and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar. The country was thereby subjected to the blackmail that so soon after the June 12, 1993 political crisis, nothing should be done to upset Yoruba race again. Nigeria therefore lost the opportunity to allow the constitution to operate. Had we allowed the impeachment of Obasanjo to proceed, whatever the outcome, any Aso Rock tenant would henceforth have been cautious that he could be impeached on violating the constitution. That is why National Assembly must make President Jonathan (to) explain himself on the invasion of National Assembly by the police acting on instruction from above. Such an explanation can only come from impeachment notice served on Jonathan detailing all the charges. Whatever the outcome, never again would President Jonathan or anybody in his position in future embark on or allow a situation to render him impeachable. The bitter truth is that till now, Jonathan does not know he cannot employ police mercenaries to overawe the National Assembly or any state governor with whom there are political differences. This is not a PDP or Ijaw affair. There is no law in Nigeria stipulating that if PDP or Ijaw or Yoruba or APC or Igbo or Labour Party or Fulani breaches (his) oath of office, such should not be impeached. When America’s ex-President Bill Clinton misconducted himself in office, both Republicans and Democrats in Congress united in national duty to commence impeachment proceedings against him. For adequate grasp of the gravity of the gross misconduct of President Jonathan in regular employment of police for self-serving political purposes, the same Jonathan swore on oath among others that “… I will not allow my personal interest to influence my official conduct or my official decisions, that I will to the best of my ability PRESERVE, PROTECT and DEFEND the constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria… that I will do right to all manner of people according to law, without fear or favour, affection or ill will…etc.” Police is under the direct control of the President. Nigerian constitution clearly secures the independence and authority of each of the Presidency, the National Assembly and the Judiciary. The Presidency cannot under the constitution employ the police or the army to overawe the National Assembly. Obviously all of them were ignorant of this guarantee until it dawned on them that the police invasion of National Assembly rendered Jonathan impeachable. Hence, the series of denial that President Jonathan knew about the invasion. Unfortunately, even if for purposes of argument he did not authorize the invasion, under the constitution Jonathan is responsible for all police acts. The buck therefore stops on his (Jonathan’s) table. The fact is that such a sensitive treasonably criminal act of police invasion of National Assembly would not be embarked upon by any responsible Inspector-General, without informing or even being authorized by the Commander-in-Chief (Jonathan). The duty of the police Inspector-General is to maintain existing law and the more any law is certain to exacerbate atmosphere in society, the more a responsible IG would involve his Commander-in-Chief. The IG is not competent to interprete legal/constitutional matter. He is even not to judge such issues, a sole prerogative of law courts. Inspector General of Police withdrew aides of Speaker House of Representatives. Nigerians were told President Jonathan did not know about that decision. Aminu Tambuwal did not help matters by withdrawing his suit challenging the IG’s decision in court. That was part of our notorious compromise. Now, the National Assembly was overawed by armed policemen and Jonathan told Nigerians (through Doyin Okupe) that he knew nothing about that treasonable act. Police invaded a state governor’s lodge at Abuja to disrupt a lawful meeting of a faction of (19) state governors’ forum. We were told Jonathan was not involved. Police stopped Rivers State governor, Chibuike Amaechi from flying out of Port Harcourt. Nigerians were told Jonathan knew nothing about that police official misconduct. Police stopped Rivers State governor Amaechi from addressing newly-recruited teachers at Port-Harcourt stadium. Even if a political rally. Nigerians were told Jonathan was not involved in that police misconduct. Police restricted the right of movement of Rivers State governor Chibuike Amaechi within official quarters in Port Harcourt – office and residence. Again, Jonathan knew nothing about it. That is, he was not involved. National Assembly budgeted less than three hundred billion naira as fuel subsidy three years ago. Over that amount, the national oil corporation, NNPC released over two trillion naira (repeat over two trillion naira). Nigeria’s national treasurer, President Goodluck Jonathan told a national magazine interview panel that the money was paid without his knowledge. World media were told that Chibok girls in Boko Haram captivity had been released, a claim which turned out to be false. Jonathan’s bouncers said Jonathan was not part of that claim. As if that was not disastrous enough, Nigeria also announced the clinching of a ceasefire agreement with Boko Haram. When that claim turned out to be a lie, Jonathan’s official advocate exonerated his man of any involvement. Who is in charge? What control does Jonathan have over his security personnel? The sequence of events leading to the armed invasion of National Assembly by an agency fast emerging as Nigeria’s Gestapo, makes the frightening development all the more ironical. House of Representatives was on recess, to resume on December 3. President Jonathan wrote National Assembly to renew the emergency power in operation in Yobe, Borno and Adamawa states. Speaker Tambuwal then recalled the House to debate Jonathan’s request on the emergency. He arrived National Assembly premises only to discover police had taken over, and blocked him from entering to perform his duties. Imagine the police lie that the agency acted on a concocted intelligence alerting imminent invasion of the National Assembly by hoodlums. Questions. In that situation, did police accordingly inform Senate President David Mark? If not, why? If David Mark was informed, he would have informed his House counterpart, Aminu Tambuwal. In case, did police inform Speaker Tambuwal whose office was allegedly to be invaded by hoodlums? If not, why not? Or was Speaker Tambuwal one of the hoodlums expected to invade the House? If police withdrew Tambuwal’s security aides, was he expected to move about especially to the National Assembly without private security? Did Senate President David Mark or House Speaker Aminu Tambuwal ever complain to the police about fears of their insecurity within the National Assembly complex? The three arms of Nigerian government are separate and equal under the constitution. When therefore any group or agency, even a security agency overawes another arm, it is criminal subversion. National Assembly and the Judiciary must correctly read the message of these events. For National Assembly in particular, this is the time for a firm and decisive action. Should that twin chamber develop cold feet, such will be at their peril, which lies ahead. Next time, a stronger and better armed force, the army, may be sent to block National Assembly members. The coup, which one of the National Assembly members suspected during their debate on the police invasion would have been complete with the abolition of National Assembly. The judiciary might be lucky to be suspended if the law courts are also taken over by the police. By the way, nobody should believe all the lies absolving President Jonathan of responsibility for series of breaches of the constitution by a police force commanded by him. Otherwise, Jonathan himself should be the most worried. It is simple sense that were the police acting bilaterally without Jonathan’s knowledge, by the time Nigeria police completely usurps Jonathan’s power and none of his political opponents was available for the latest harassment, the next victim will be President Jonathan himself. Is he not worried? On their part, members of House of Representatives deserve their plight. Where were they when the same Nigeria police was unlawfully subverting Rivers State governor? Police invasion of National Assembly is a violation of Nigerian constitution which President Jonathan swore to uphold and preserve. There should be consequences to halt such gross misconduct. One of such is the impeachment notice to Jonathan demanding explanation for the serial misconduct of the police under his command. Where else in the democratic world would the police be employed by the Executive to overawe the Legislature as is currently done with impunity in Nigeria? Certainly not in Ghana, South Africa, Sierra Leone, Malawi, Ethiopia, France, Britain, Germany, United States e.t.c The choice is Nigeria’s National Assembly’s.
Posted on: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 21:16:15 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015