Ekweremadu, Stop this Manoeuvre

Ekweremadu, who is the chairman of the Senate’s constitution review committee, re-presented the clause last Wednesday after he was forced to step it down when he first presented it on April 2, this year. The controversial clause was embedded in the constitutional amendment bill but when many senators strongly objected to it, Ekweremadu withdrew it, […]

Ekweremadu, who is the chairman of the Senate’s constitution review committee, re-presented the clause last Wednesday after he was forced to step it down when he first presented it on April 2, this year. The controversial clause was embedded in the constitutional amendment bill but when many senators strongly objected to it, Ekweremadu withdrew it, only to resurface with it again last week.
Senator Ekweremadu, who presided over that day’s sitting, told senators to get ready to vote on the bill which required four-fifth of the 109 Senators to scale through. He said during the last constitution amendment voting in July last year, the Senate mistakenly voted with a two-thirds majority (73 votes) to approve the bill instead of four-fifth or 87 votes as required by the constitution, hence the decision to re-introduce it for a fresh vote. However, Senator Ahmed Lawan [APC, Yobe] said his privilege as a Senator had been breached by the committee for refusing to circulate copies of the bill before the sitting. This was a nasty manoeuvre indeed, to call for a vote on a serious bill such as constitutional amendment when senators were seeing the bill for the first time with a controversial clause smuggled into it.
The controversial clause is embedded in section 9 subsection (3G) of the bill. It states that, “The Joint Constitution Drafting Committee shall produce a draft constitution which shall be submitted to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.” The clause, which deals with the “procedure for drafting a new constitution” did not expressly mention the President as one of those that could initiate a new constitution. It however stated that any member of the National Assembly can do so through the Joint Constitution Review Committee. Some senators quickly observed that this was a ploy to enable President Jonathan achieve his desire to table an entirely new constitution before the National Assembly, all the while pretending that the new draft constitution did not emanate from the President but from a legislator.
 Another ugly aspect to Ekweremadu’s manoeuvre was that this controversial clause was not voted in exclusion during the last constitution amendment exercise almost one year ago. To say therefore that it was being represented for a vote to correct a mistake was disingenuous. Senator Babafemi Ojudu (APC, Ekiti) also opposed the bill strenuously, saying senators must be allowed to study the whole bill before they vote, as is the convention in the parliament. Ekweremadu’s spirited efforts to save the smuggled clause was roundly rejected by his colleagues and at a point, after the chamber dissolved in confusion, Senate President David Mark intervened to say votes won’t be taken on clause 9. He however appealed for a vote on the non-controversial clauses, which was done.
The clauses that were voted on include the one mandating the National Assembly Clerk to notify the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) of the existence of a vacancy in the National Assembly; another clause empowering INEC to de-register political parties that fail to fulfil constitutional provisions, and another clause that confers jurisdiction on electoral offences on the Federal High Court. Yet another clause that makes former Senate Presidents and former Speakers of the House of Representatives to be members of the National Council of State was approved, as was a clause to extend the time for the conduct of rerun elections from 7 to 21 days. Left in the cold was Ekweremadu’s suspect clause.
What is it that the Deputy Senate President and the Jonathan Presidency are trying to achieve with these manoeuvres on the Senate floor? Many Nigerians suspect that the president’s sudden conversion to the idea of convening the National Conference was pregnant with personal motives of the kind that impelled President Obasanjo to convene a similar conference in 2005. The government may or may not get the National Conference to adopt all or most of its dream constitutional reform ideas but since in the end it is free to do what it wishes with the report, it could well try to fashion them out plus some others and package them as a new constitution.
These issues include a desire to abolish the country’s 774 local government areas as a third tier of government. A second one, related to the first, is a wish to stop allocating revenue from the Federation Account to the local governments. A third one is to increase the derivation component of the Federation Account allocation to state governments from the current 15% to 50%. Yet another wish item in the dreamed-for new constitution is to create an additional state in the South East region. The last, probably most desired wish item is to provide a six-year single term for the president, something that Jonathan began campaigning for in 2011.
Given the desperation to achieve these goals, it will not be very long before Senator Ekweremadu or someone else retries to re-smuggle the controversial clause into the Senate or the House of Representatives. We strongly advise them to stop these crude manoeuvres. Senator Ekweremadu, who is otherwise well regarded for his diligent and mature work in the Senate, should remember the sad record of his predecessor in this office Senator Ibrahim Mantu, who tried in 2006 to ram through a constitutional amendment to enable then President Obasanjo to achieve his ambition for a third term in office. The effort ended in ignominy. There is no reason to believe that this one too will not end in a similar fashion.