By Omoniyi Salaudeen
There is now a strong contention as to whether or not the National Assembly has the right to tamper with the list of items in the budget proposal as presented by the executive. In this interview, Professor Itse Sagay, Chairman, Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption, declares the action of the lawmakers on the approved 2017 appropriation bill illegal and unconstitutional, insisting that Acting President Yemi Osinbajo must adhere to the original document.
What is your take on the position of the Acting President, Prof Yemi Osinbajo, saying that the National Assembly does not have the right to tamper with the items of the budget submitted by the executive?
I am not going to give you a yes or no answer. We have three arms of government and division of labour. The duty of the legislature is to pass laws. The executive is to implement laws and implement governance, including projects and developmental programmes. And, of course, we know what the judiciary does. When a budget bill which is the estimate of revenue and expenditure is presented to the National Assembly, it is the executive that presents it. And it states what the executive wants to do as a government and the amount of money that will be required to implement the programmes.
The business of the National Assembly or state House of Assembly is to approve or disapprove. But unfortunately, what we are now having is a National Assembly that is considering itself as co-executive. So, as the executive is proposing and laying down the expenditure they need, the legislature/co-executive is also proposing and then diverting funds for projects to their own proposals, which is totally an abuse of power. They are not supposed to be proposing things to be done. So, this is a confused legislature wanting to play a dual role. The confusion it causes is this: There are over 400 legislators. Each one of them has one project or the other at the backyard of his constituency that he wants to do. So, everybody is slotting in one irrelevant personal selfish item or the other, but the executive’s constituency is the whole country. The President is elected by the whole country. So, his plan and programmes are for the whole country. These people in the legislature now see everything from their own different angles and begin to put things haphazardly, removing from the budget proposal for national projects and diverting it to their constituencies or just simply increase their budget for their personal enjoyment. In other words, they have turned a national assignment to their personal aggrandizement. And the result of that is going to be chaos and confusion because they are not ready to accept their role.
My conclusion is that if they are so keen to play the role of the executive, why don’t they contest as president or plead with the president to appoint them as minister because that is the job they are now trying to do. What they are doing now is causing chaos. You will recall last year, the proposal of the Federal Government to build a railway line from Calabar to Lagos was completely eliminated. N60 billion assigned to the project was grabbed by these legislators and divided it among themselves for their backyard projects as if this country does not have a government, as if this country doesn’t have a programme. And, of course, we had the budget padding in which they put a lot of money for dubious purposes, which only themselves understand.
I think the Federal Government has to put its foot down and insisted that legislature should stick to its legislative duty while the executive concentrate on its job.
I am not saying they cannot contribute. There is nothing wrong with members of the National Assembly or state House of Assembly wanting specific project included in the budget. But it is not for them to include it. They should go to the ministries that have oversight powers over the relevant projects and propose to them so that it can be included in the budget. They have to go to the relevant ministries and then let the Federal Executive Council approve it. It is not for them to make proposals which run contrary to the budget, forgetting that that is the duty of the executive and not their duty. But they should go to the ministries involved to make their proposal part of the budget.
Would they not be seen as rubber stamp legislators, if they have to approve every item in the budget proposal without making their own input into it?
Definitely, they can question some of the proposals of the executive. They can raise questions on a particular project and even call the minister in charge to explain. But what I am saying is that they cannot introduce their personal projects into a national budget. That is not only unconstitutional, but also criminal in certain cases. There cannot be two executives.
What would you now suggest as a way out?
The acting president signed the bill into law based on an agreement between himself and the National Assembly. That agreement is that all those illegal and unconstitutional projects they have been infused into the budget will be removed. And then sometimes later, a letter will come from the acting president for virement so that they can vire the whole thing back to what it was and then abandon their personal projects which have nothing to contribute to the national interest of Nigerians.
If the budget is not implemented the way it is signed, don’t you think it may also cause face-off between the executive and the legislature?
I have just told you that there was an agreement that whatever they have illegally infused into the budget would be removed and the executive will now implement it in accordance with the way it was presented to them. But that doesn’t stop them from monitoring what has been put there. Even after they have done the virement, they should monitor and track the implementation. In fact, we, as Nigerians should encourage them to monitor the projects and how money is being expended towards them to ensure that there is no waste, to ensure that there is no fraud, to ensure that there is no misappropriation. That is why they have oversight power. But they do not have power to draw their own budget and put in their own projects. That is illegal and unconstitutional.
There is this argument in some quarters that the anti-graft agencies are doing media prosecution. This is coming on the heels of the CCT’s dismissal of the celebrated case of false asset declaration leveled against the Senate President, Senator Bukola Saraki. What advice would you give to the agencies?
As Professor Osundare said in his recent interview, there is no anonymous looting, and therefore, there should be no anonymous looters. If you loot public funds, you should be publicly identified, regardless of the outcome of prosecution because a lot of people commit crimes and still get away for technical reasons. So, since you did not loot anonymous funds, you will not be anonymous. Nigerians will know you, even if you get away. When they see you in that car, they will know that it belongs to them. They will know that you looted public funds to buy it. You can call it media trial but identification of people who have looted will no longer be hidden. It will be made public. Let Nigerians know who their enemies are.
What if the court declares a person innocent?
That fact that court declares a person innocent does not mean he is innocent. That is a legal decision which may not be consistent with the truth. If such a person feels aggrieved, let him go to court and sue for libel. And in that case, he has to proof his innocence. Let us see how far he can go.
But do you agree that the agencies don’t do enough home work in terms of evidence.
There may be some cases in which there might be procedural errors or where evidences are not properly marshalled together. That may be true. But for me, that is not the reason why cases are failing. There is the Nigerian factor. And it is more relevant to this issue than the poor marshaling of evidence. Nigerian factor is responsible. Many people are getting away because of the Nigerian factor. I won’t say more than that.