Legislating litanies of inanities

The Nigerian National Assembly, NASS, while earning one of the highest incomes in the world, has one of the lowest qualities of any parliament in the universe.   Lawyers are wont to   submit that he who alleges must prove. So, let me submit my proofs on both claims, and you judge if they are true.    

One of the best kept secrets I know, is the income of the Nigerian legislator.   But now and again, there are slips right inside the NASS. Senator Shehu Sani in March 2018 revealed that his total income in the Senate was N14,250,000 per month. On August 14, 2024, Senator Sumaila Kawu, Kano South gave an update: his total income as a Senator was N22 million monthly .

Apart from the official income, parliamentarians collect huge sums of money annually as     “Constituency Projects”. These monies are not subject to standard accounting procedures, transparent contract awards or proper supervision.     The NASS budget records show that in 2024, N20 billion was allocated to Senate President Godswill Akpabio for projects.   Senator Agom Jarigbe, Cross River State, South, revealed on the floor of the Senate that each ranking Senator was paid N500 million as Constituency Project.

There is also the tradition of the NASS padding the annual budget of the country. Former President Muhammadu Buhari used to cry out annually about this blatant short-changing of the Nigerian people.

In 2024, Senator Abdul Ningi   revealed that the budget had been padded by N3.7 billion. For making this revelation, his fellow Distinguished Senators suspended him.

But the income of NASS members is not my primary focus here. Rather, it is that despite the humongous     appropriation by the NASS for itself, the country does not get quality legislation. In fact, in some cases, the bills raised by parliamentarians are subversive of the country.

I will restrict myself to bills by the   Speaker of the House of Representatives, Abbas Tajudeen, Ph.D and, Deputy Speaker, Benjamin Kalu   which respectively sought to violate the fundamental rights of the Nigerian people, and cause political conflagration in the country.

Before addressing the counterproductive bills of the House leaders, let us consider a subversive and incendiary one from the Senate. Moved by Senator Simon   Bako Lalong, former Speaker and   ex-Governor of Plateau State, and onetime   Minister of Labour and Employment, it   seeks to create   a National Council of Traditional Rulers of Nigeria.  

First, I do not see what   business   the Senate has   in a club of unelected persons. But more importantly, the bill seeks to impose two of such persons: the Ooni of Ife and Sultan of Sokoto as joint permanent chairmen of the club.

  In a multi-ethnic, multi-religious and large population like Nigeria with diverse languages, customs and traditions, the attempt to elevate two unelected leaders above all others is an invitation to chaos.

  How did the Distinguished Senators supporting the bill reach the conclusion that the Sokoto Sultanate established in the 19th Century is senior to the Benin Kingdom created in the 11th Century? Who told them that the Sultan is superior to the Shehu of Borno, or the Ooni   to the Alaafin of Oyo?   How is the Sultan of Sokoto   or Ooni of Ife superior to the Attah of Igala whose rulership   in pre-colonial times extended to parts of current Enugu, Anambra and Delta states?

How did the Distinguished Senators reach the conclusion that the Sultan of Sokoto is a traditional ruler? If he is, whose traditions does he rule over? Fulani, Gbagyi, Hausa, Bachama, Jukun or Tiv or, a combination?   On the other hand, if he is not a secular, but religious leader as his Sultanate title or that of Sarkin Musulumi may suggest,   why would he be included in a bill of traditional rulers? Why would a religious leader be placed as the leader of   the   Och’ Idoma, or Pere of Kabuowei Kingdom which spreads across Bayelsa and Delta states? What informs the Senators that the Ooni must preside at meetings over the Amayanabos of Rivers State or the Shehu of Borno?

I have raised these questions not because the bill is worthy of debate, but to let the Senators know that they are igniting unnecessary rivalries and fires in the country.

Another incendiary bill is the one on Indigene-ship     by Deputy Speaker Kalu. It seeks to amend Section 31 of the Constitution by adding that any Nigerian citizen   can become an   indigene of any   state if he were born in that state, and had lived there for at least 10 years, or had   lived in any part of the state for at least 10 years, or had been married to an indigene of that state for at least five years.

It means that if an Ikwere marries a Kanuri for five years, he becomes an automatic indigene of Borno State. If an Ijebu were married to a Zuru lady for five years, he qualifies as   a Kebbi State indigene, or an Hausa man marries an Ijesha, after five years he becomes an automatic indigene of Osun State. The bill, if passed, would   create commotion in the country, including claims of land grabbing by some ethnic groups. Ironically, Kalu claims the bill’s aim is to promote national unity, equity and inclusiveness.

Speaker Abass had his own controversial bills which like that of his Deputy he has been forced to withdraw. On July 23, 2024, he tabled the “Counter Subversion and Other Related Offences Bill” under which Nigerians who do not sing the National Anthem were to be sent to jail for ten years or fined N5 million, or both!

Also under the bill, he proposed jail for persons   who embarrass or disrespect government officials. This is similar to the draconian Decree 4 of 1984 by the Buhari-Idiagbon regime. Under that discredited   decree, persons or journalists whose report, be it true or not, embarrassed a public official,   were sent to jail.

The second Abass bill was titled: ‘A Bill for an Act to Amend the Electoral Act 2022 to Make It Mandatory for all Nigerians of Majority Age to Vote in All National and State Elections and for Related Matters’. It sought to jail for six months or impose a fine of N100,000 on any registered voter who fails to vote in any election. The bill sought   to violate the right to freedom of choice. It did not matter to Abass whether the votes count, there is good governance, trust in the electoral system or if the voters were even safe.

In all of these, the law makers have not deemed it fit,   since 1999, to make the constitutional provisions of the “Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy”, which guarantee   the basic rights of Nigerians, justiciable.

The post Legislating litanies of inanities appeared first on Vanguard News.