Newspaper reports indicate that the President has rejected the amendments made to the 1999 Constitution by the National Assembly; demanding credible evidence that the requirement prescribed in Section 9(3) of the Constitution was met. That is, approved by the votes of not less than four-fifths majority of all the members of each House, and approved by resolution of the Houses of Assembly of not less than two-thirds of all the States. Also, reports have it that the President raised other issues that bordered on the principle of separation of powers between the three arms of government namely; the legislature, executive and the judiciary. “There are a number of provisions in the Act that altogether constitute flagrant violation of the doctrine of separation of powers enshrined in the 1999 Constitution and an unjustified whittling down of the executive powers of the federation vested in the President by virtue of Section 5(1) of the 1999 Constitution.”
By withholding assent to the Constitution (Fourth) Alteration Bill 2014, the President has demonstrated incredible knowledge of issues of good governance. Indeed, this action has exposed the legislators as not conversant with the provisions of our constitution that guides and directs governance in Nigeria. The politicians were advised severally during public hearings on the proposed alteration to consider the in the interest of the people above all considerations. Regrettably, group interest seems to be the overriding consideration in some of the proposed alterations hence the President has withheld assent.
Section 68(1)(e) of the 1999 constitution states that a member of the Senate or of the House of Representatives shall vacate his seat in the House of which he is a member if-…he becomes a member of a commission or other body established by this constitution or by any other law. The implication of the above constitutional provision is that a member of the National Assembly cannot be a member of any executive body unless he or she resigns his or her seat in the Senate or House of Representatives. A new provision was sought to prevent a member of the National Assembly from vacating his or her seat if he or she becomes a member of a parliamentary body or any similar body by virtue of his or her position. This provision is a smoke screen and continuation of illegality and impunity as exhibited in the last 16 years by the political class. It is an attempt to cover up the illegality that is being perpetuated by members of Council of the National Institute for Legislative Studies (NILS). In line with Section 68(1)(e) members of the Council ought to have vacated their seats in the National Assembly having breached the above constitutional provision. A Constituent of the President of the Senate David Mark had taken him to court on the matter, urging the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to declare his seat in the Senate vacant by virtue of occupying the position of Chairman of the Council. In reaction to the court case Senator Mark averred that the Constituent was seeking to get to the Senate through the back door. The case was never heard of thereafter. Indeed, members of the Council ought to have vacated their seats in parliament and refunded all salaries and allowances paid to them from the date they became members of the Council. It is even more surprising that the Bill establishing the National Institute for Legislative Studies (NILS) received presidential assent when certain provisions were clearly in breach of the 1999 Constitution. It is an attempt to evade justice that Section 68 is being altered to cover up the illegality. The Council is not a parliamentary body as the lawmakers would want Nigerians to believe. It is not on the same footing with parliamentary bodies such as the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) or the African Parliamentary Union (APU).
The oversight of the National Institute for Legislative Studies (NILS) to expose corruption, inefficiency or waste… is now hampered because members of the National Assembly are also members of the Council of the Institute. Where therefore is the doctrine of separation of powers between the three arms of government as enshrined in the 1999 Constitution? Where also is accountability and transparency in the conduct of public affairs?
The President’s refusal to assent to the Constitution (Fourth) Alteration Bill is in the best interest of the country. The executive is indeed teaching the lawmakers the art of lawmaking. The National Assembly is advised to take a critical look at the cogent observations made by President Jonathan and not to override the President’s veto . After all, the mandate of the National Assembly is …to make laws for peace, order and good government…and not to create disorder. However, should they go ahead to override the President’s veto, in order to justify the huge amount of money spent on the exercise, then the incoming government is advised to revisit the matter.