HOUSE SPOKESMAN ESEME EYIBO ON JUMBO PAY ALLEGATION: CBN Governor, Sanusi, revealed to us massive fraud in PPPRA

The National Assembly has been involved in very controversial and interesting incidents in recent times. Honourable Dino Melaye and his group who got a court injunction against their suspension wanted to return to the House but they were severally prevented. You claimed to have gone on appeal and have sought a stay of execution of […]

The National Assembly has been involved in very controversial and interesting incidents in recent times. Honourable Dino Melaye and his group who got a court injunction against their suspension wanted to return to the House but they were severally prevented. You claimed to have gone on appeal and have sought a stay of execution of the Abuja High Court judgment. Later, they were admitted. What actually transpired in this case?

First and foremost, I want to begin by saying that Dino Melaye and his group’s issue was not a personal one as some people want to make it sound. It is an issue of law and regulation. First, it is no longer in doubt that the full course of the process was on before they went to court. I appreciate the fact that they went to court, because that is the submission of themselves to the rule of law. The outcome of any case in court will help to enrich jurisprudence and promote our case law. To that extent, that is appreciated.

The court came up with a judgment that the process was illegal; the action was illegal. That same date, December 2, 2010, the National Assembly’s legal retainer, Wole Olanipekun, filed a notice of appeal and a motion for stay of execution. Generally, a motion for stay of execution is intended to preserve the subject-matter. The judge has the discretion to exercise whether to grant the stay of execution or to decline. But while the motion is on, all the parties are expected to return to the status quo ante. In this case, the position the parties were before going to court was the suspension of some members of the House of Representatives. Now we are finding a political solution to thsi case. The strength of an institution is determined by its ability to manage crisis. There is no victor no vanquished and to preserve the integrity of the institution, we now wanted to find a political solution to it.  What we are doing now is to allow the transition to be smooth. We don’t allow ourselves to be distracted by unnecessary intrigues, and we try to advance the course of democracy, raising the ante of legislative practice.

Did your lawyer get any stay of execution from court?

No, it has not yet been argued.

So, it was wrong for you to have prevented them from entering the National Assembly?

It is not wrong…

But you didn’t get a stay of execution; why would you prevent them from taking their seats in the chamber?

Usually, a notice of appeal is filed and a stay of execution is filed, all the parties are expected to return back to the status quo ante, pending the determination of the motion on notice, which the judge has the discretion to exercise; whether to grant the stay or decline. But as far as that motion has not been granted or declined, status quo ante must be maintained.

You talked about a political solution which you are fashioning out in this case. What is that political solution?

The political solution is this, if we had wanted to follow the law strictly-speaking, they wouldn’t have been in chamber, they would have maintained the status quo ante, the state they were before going to court.  That’s why I’m saying what is on ground now is the exigency.

At what point did you decide on this political solution, because twice you blocked them from entering the National Assembly and created an embarrassment that attracted open condemnation?

The gates of the National Assembly were not closed because of these gentlemen. It was a security measure because some people came on a protest, not even on the Dino Melaye issue.

But why didn’t the House of Representatives investigate the issue of N9 billion expended in controversial circumstances, which was raised by Dino Melaye and his group? Why did you suspend them instead of clinically investigating the case and, if found to be false, putting them to shame?

How was it raised? You sit down and speculate that I have stolen. You’ve not gone to the police to report, you go to town and address press conferences and say I had stolen. What ordinarily ought to have been done in this case was, if they had any allegation, as it were, they should have allowed us to have resumed from holidays and come up under privileges  to raise this issue. It would have been sent to the appropriate committee. It was while they started threatening anarchy that the House decided to take that decision. It’s a very sad thing that I don’t want to go back to, and anything that could be done in the circumstance to enable us have law and order so that we focus on our primary assignment, that’s what I will so appreciate.

Honourable, do you think it is not expedient for the House to clear its name on this N9 billion allegation? Many would believe Dino Melaye and his group were persecuted for saying ‘the truth’.

What is the N9 billion? The so-called N9 billion is existing in the realm of speculation. If it is real, it was a budget item. Then, from what point to what point was it transferred? They were talking about N9 billion from 2008 capital budget. I don’t want to go into it, because I am one of those persons who are in a hurry to ensure this issue is put behind us. It doesn’t give a good account of us as an institution and as individuals. I don’t understand how N9 billion from a capital vote will go into a vacuum in 2008 budget; then 2009 came, nobody talked about it, then in 2010 somebody is raising the issue. We should begin to look at this politics of self-destruct again and begin to deepen our democracy by introducing elements of mind-power into the things we do.

Have you met Melaye since he returned?

Yes, we have met.

How did he approach you? Was he confrontational?

(Laughs). We exchanged banters yesterday (last Wednesday). He wouldn’t have done that. It’s not a personal issue. I am making representations on the basis of facts available to me as a spokesman of the House. Even if my wife or my father were to be the persons involved, I would still have taken the position as it were.

Cont’d on page 7