NEWS

July 4, 2013

Uproar in Senate over state of the nation bill

 

Senate Leader, Victor Ndoma-Egba

There was  confusion in  the Senate on Wednesday as some  members engaged one another in a shouting match.

At a point, one of them, Senator Kabir Marafa (Zamfara Central),  threw a punch at another lawmaker, Senator Paulinus Igwe (Ebonyi Central).

 Although it was believed that the cause of the uproar was  the State of the Nation Address Bill which was presented by Senate Leader,  Victor Ndoma-Egba,  for reconsideration, the Senate leadership blamed it on a request by another Senator, Bashir Lado (Kano Central), to be allowed to introduce a motion.

The bill, which  hitherto was passed by the National Assembly on May 16, 2013,   was   returned  by   President Goodluck Jonathan, who  proposed some amendments to it (the bill).

But Senators were divided on whether  to  override the President’s veto on the bill or consider his proposed amendments to it.

Some  argued that the President had no power  under the  1999 Constitution to propose amendments to a bill passed by the National Assembly.

Others, however, argued that he could. They  relied on Section 88 of the Senate Standing Orders allowing the President to send observations back to the National Assembly where he had misgivings on any bill already  passed.

The plenary initially    went on smoothly with intermittent muffled voices,  but  confusion began when Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu,   raised a point of order for a motion for an adjournment of the debate on the matter.

Ekweremadu relied on Order 70(1a) of the Senate Rules, which reads, “The following matters not open to debate, shall be moved without argument or opinion offered, and shall be forthwith put from the Chair without amendment: motion for adjournment of debate.”

He  argued that since the matter had become controversial  and would need the concurrence of the House of Representatives to be able to sail through, there was  the need to adjourn the debate and confer with the lower house for a common position.

While agreeing with Ekweremadu, Senate President, David Mark, sought to rule on the motion by putting the question to the Senators. When the nays appeared to  have it,  Mark  delayed ruling, thus creating a stalemate which lasted for about 25 minutes.

During  the stalemate, a shouting match  ensued among Senators  Marafa,  Igwe and Lado. As their voices rose, Marafa threw a punch at Igwe, narrowly missing  his face before other senators quickly  intervened. Igwe did not retaliate.

Reacting to the uproar, Mark noted that disagreements  had always been resolved amicably by senators  and not through fisticuffs.

He said, “We are distinguished senators. We have ways of resolving issues not by boxing.

“We   are elder statesmen;  we can do all the talking but we should never resort to boxing. I want to appeal once more that we suspend the debate on this (State of the Nation Bill) for today (Wednesday) if nothing but, because of the way tempers have risen.”

On the strength of Mark’s  admonition, the Senate adjourned the debate and indeed the session to another legislative date.

After the plenary, Senate Spokesman, Enyinnaya Abaribe,  said the incident  involving  Marafa, Igwe and Lado had nothing to do with the debate on the State of the Nation Address.

He   said  the quarrel was caused by  an earlier request by  Lado to be allowed to bring a motion to the Senate on Thursday (today) to protest the proposed arming of vigilance groups by  Zamfara State Governor,  Abdulazeez Yari.

According to Abaribe, Marafa was opposed to the move by Lado  to bring  the  motion.

He said, “In the course of that discussion,   Igwe   said since   he is the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Police Affairs,  he would be part of the  sponsors of the motion. This led to that row.”

During the debate on the bill, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Rules and Business, Ita Enang, cited Sections 58(4&5) and 100(4) to state that the 1999 Constitution did not contemplate the President making amendments to any bill passed by the National Assembly.

According to him,  what the law says is that the President shall  within 30 days indicate whether he will  assent to a bill or not and that is all and not to propose amendments to it.

He said, “The Senate should set a legislative precedent not to accede to President Jonathan’s amendments.”

Mark, in his remark , explained the genesis of the problem, stating that the issues which attended the passage of the NDDC Act necessitated the inclusion in the Standing Rules, allowing the President to bring an amendment to a bill he had issues with.

He said, “We have our standing orders, Section 88. It clearly has a problem, but it is our Standing Orders. I think in a way we have boxed ourselves into a corner as it stands. Because we have this rule and as Ita Enang rightly pointed out, any Act that is against the Constitution, is null and void, but it is not as simple and straightforward as  that.

“If we go by Section 58(4),  it shows that the President can only assent or refuse to assent but our Standing Orders has said that he can bring an amendment. Now the question that I will like to ask is if the bill becomes an Act can the President bring an amendment?”

To this, the Minority Whip, Senator Ganiyu Solomon, answered yes, arguing that the President could bring an amendment after a bill already signed. But he   stated  that  the President   could not propose an amendment to a bill  awaiting his assent.

 The President, in his amendment proposals, rejected the section that makes it mandatory  for him to present the address before a joint session of the National Assembly on an annual basis. He chose    to rely on Section 67 of the Constitution, which makes it optional.

He also sought an amendment to allow him delegate the responsibility to the  Vice-President, an amendment that the lawmakers rejected.