Introduction
Last week, we started our discourse on this issue rocking the Edo State House of Assembly before and after its inauguration the legislative duties of the Assembly, and the role of the House of Representatives, at its plenary, to have declared as null and void all actions presumed to have been taken by the 7th Edo State House of Assembly “pending proper inauguration.” Today, we shall continue to x-ray the action of the House of Representatives viz-a-viz the provisions of the 1999 Constitution.
THE ACTION TAKEN BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON THE CRISIS VIZ-A-VIS THE PROVISIONS OF THE 1999 CONSTITUTION OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA, AS ALTERED (continues)
From the events so far disclosed in the Edo House of Assembly in Edo State, could it rightly be said that the House was unable to hold its meetings and transact business? The answer is a resounding “NO.” The House as presently constituted (albeit indecently) can meet and carry out its legislative duties as required by law. It indeed screened the nominees for commissioners as sent by Governor Godwin Obaseki.
The steps by both the Senate and the House of Representatives to use brute force would most likely lead to the escalation of the already tense political environment in Edo State and create constitutional crisis of immense proportions in the long run. Already, there are insinuations that, before the plenary during which the recommendations were announced, there existed certain pronouncements by the judiciary granting injunctions restraining the NASS from taking any steps to interfere with the legislative duties of the newly constituted House.
Agreed that the judiciary cannot stop the legislature from performing its functions, or from taking over a House in crisis and which is unable to make laws for that state (see the cases of TENDE & ORS v. A-G FEDERATION & ORS (1988) LPELR – 20517 (CA) and WABARA & ORS v. NNADEDE & ORS (2009) LPELR – 4247 (CA)). But, there must be genuine constitutional reasons for the intervention of the National Assembly in the first place. In the present circumstances, there is absolutely none. For the records, the singular act of the lower chamber in dishing out orders alone pertaining to the crisis in Edo State House of Assembly has further compounded the crisis.
One is not ignorant of the grave allegations made against the present governor to the effect that he made the present proclamation against the strict provisions of the Constitution, and that it was done in a clandestine manner, thereby denying the majority of the members-elect the knowledge of the date and time of inauguration. These allegations are, to say the least, quite weighty and should be subjected to thorough investigation and resolution.
However, the House of Representatives as an institution created by law and which is subject to the Constitution must, as Caesar’s wife, be above board and try as much as possible to comply with laid down constitutional provisions while carrying out its legislative functions.
It is my considered view and opinion that it is the whole NASS, and not just the House of Representatives only, that can take over the Edo State House of Assembly, if the House can NO LONGER CONDUCT the business of the House. For instance, if only seven members or less than 1/3 of 24 members are available to conduct the business of the House, the NASS, and not just the House of Representatives, can intervene to prevent a vacuum and properly run the activities of the House.
Consequently, so long as eight members, in addition to the Speaker, are available, the House can continue to conduct its legislative functions and neither the whole NASS nor the House of Representatives alone can take over the Edo State House of Assembly.
As already stated above, no one chamber of the National Assembly (in this case, the House of Representatives) can validly take any steps within the contemplation of the Constitution as it concerns the Edo State House of Assembly, more so when the said House of Assembly is by no means incapacitated. The Constitution refers to the National Assembly, and the House of Representatives is just a part. It is a part of a whole. Without the Senate, the National Assembly is incomplete, and it is NOT empowered to act alone in this matter.
The governor has already made a proclamation for the members of the House of Assembly to be sworn in and the ones who were accredited have done so (rightly or wrongly). The House of Representatives has no such constitutional powers to compel the governor to make a second proclamation. Section 105(3) of the Constitution deals with one proclamation, not two.
There is nowhere a provision is made in our corpus juris for RE-PROCLAMATION. Furthermore, you cannot swear the same person into the same office TWICE within the same period or tenure. The proclamation has been executed by the Clerk of the House before the Mace and oaths administered on the said members in accordance with Section 94 of the 1999 Constitution.
The way out of the legal and constitutional landmine created by the unfortunate crisis
It is my candid view and opinion that it is ONLY a court of competent jurisdiction that can interpret and possibly upturn or annul all that has been done by the governor and or the Speaker, as far as the inauguration of the Edo House of Assembly is concerned. Consequently, the purported resolution of the House of Representatives, (and later that of the Senate), it is submitted with respect, is unknown to our laws. It is at best an opinion. The Constitution states clearly in Section 105(3) “that the person elected as the Governor of a state shall have power to issue a proclamation for the holding of the first session of the House of Assembly of the state concerned immediately after his being sworn in, or for its dissolution as provided in this section.”
Interestingly, the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has expectedly joined the fray, calling on the National Assembly (especially the House of Representatives) to tread with caution on the issues concerning the crisis in the Edo State House of Assembly. The party further cautioned the leadership of the House of Representatives to desist from actions that violate the provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as altered) and could trigger a constitutional crisis in Edo State and the nation at large.
For the police and the Department of State Services (DSS) to shut down the Edo State House of Assembly is completely unconstitutional, provocative and has no place in a democratic dispensation.
I must, even at the risk of sounding repetitive, say there is no section of the 1999 Constitution or any law for that matter operative in Nigeria at the moment that confers the House of Representatives or the entire NASS with the powers to simply issue orders to a state governor or direct the shutdown of a sitting state House of Assembly. The Edo State House of Assembly is not an appendage of the National Assembly.
Ours is a constitutional democratic government governed by laws and not by the whims and caprices of individuals and/or institutions. Though our democracy is still at its infancy stage, institutions of state must be careful not to do things that may jeopardise the corporate existence of the state, no matter how partisan the operators might be. Section 11 of the 1999 Constitution, upon which the House of Representatives anchored its decision, does not in any way empower the House of Representatives to shut down a functioning state legislature.
The House of Assembly is the symbol of the sovereignty of the people of Edo State and any attack on it is a direct attack on the good people of Edo State. This might have far-reaching implications or repercussions, which might be an avenue open for the forces of darkness to unleash unwarranted attacks and possibly undermine our hard-earned democracy.
This is particularly so as there are already apprehensions across the country that this shutdown order is orchestrated by the ruling APC, using the NASS, in order to cause confusion in the House of Assembly of Edo State and take over its functions, or even declare a state of emergency. After all, it is an open secret that the governor of the state is no longer friends (politically) with the national chairman of the party in power. In other words, the House of Representatives and Senate are seen by many Nigerians as fighting a proxy war. It could be the voice of Jacob but the hand of Esau!
No arm of the federal government is permitted under our laws to take actions that undermine our Constitution and encourage unconstitutional actions against democratic institutions and the essentials of personal freedom and rights of citizens in our nation.
This issue, if not well managed, is capable of dragging our nation into a constitutional crisis of immense proportions.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I would proffer a two-way solution to the Edo State House of Assembly crisis.
First, I call on the factions in the House of Assembly to, as a matter of love and in the interest of the people of Edo State who elected them, bury their personal egos and make concessions where necessary. This would make room for the accommodation of the aggrieved parties in the scheme of things in the House of Assembly. The members-elect would be sworn in thereafter and join the inaugurated members as there cannot be double proclamations.
Second, should the above suggestion fail, the Government of Edo State, through the office of the Attorney-General of the state, may approach the Supreme Court for the interpretation of both the actions taken by the governor in making the proclamation for the inauguration of the House of Assembly and those of the House of Representatives and Senate regarding the crisis. The Supreme Court has such original jurisdiction.
I rest my case.
Thought for the week
“Every man, every woman who has to take up the service of government, must ask themselves two questions: ‘Do I love my people in order to serve them better? Am I humble and do I listen to everybody, to diverse opinions in order to choose the best path?’ If you don’t ask those questions, your governance will not be good.”
(Pope Francis)