The Speaker, police boss and executive insolence

While some commentaries have been reasonable, others have been clearly asinine. The most incomprehensible is the public fixation on scenes of men jumping over gates rather than focusing on what instigated those actions. The media seems to have been most vehement in its portrayal of these House members as examples of the sense of lawlessness […]

While some commentaries have been reasonable, others have been clearly asinine. The most incomprehensible is the public fixation on scenes of men jumping over gates rather than focusing on what instigated those actions. The media seems to have been most vehement in its portrayal of these House members as examples of the sense of lawlessness that typifies our legislature. However, while it continues to portray the members’ actions as bestial, it fails to see that its own portrayal of events on that day speaks to the fickle nature of our perceptions. One would naturally assume that we would not expect less from our legislators when our democracy faces a flagrant threat.
At first we are informed of a deliberate attempt by the police to usurp the functions of the courts and interpret the constitution; the National Assembly premises are sealed without prior knowledge of members; a large contingent of policemen and men in baklavas, without identification tags, are deployed to stand guard at the entrance into the Assembly office complex; the speaker arrives and is prevented from entering the premises by the policemen, even after he identified himself and asked for an explanation for the reasons behind the cordon.
Now, I may not be an expert on the workings of Nigeria’s political instruments and I doubt, judging from the asinine statements being made, that many others are, but I believe it is well within logic to infer from previous events.
A day after the Speaker of the House, Aminu Tambuwal, announced his defection to the All Progressives Congress (APC), the Inspector General (I.G) of Police, Suleiman Abba, announced the withdrawal of his security details, claiming that, by his understanding, he (Tambuwal) had ceased to be the Speaker and a member of the House as a result of his defection. The I.G acted arbitrarily by exclusively interpreting and implementing constitutional provisions without seeking legal interpretation. Even the fact that there were cases in court to give legal interpretation to the provisions did not deter him.
It is only natural to insinuate that the decision to lock up the legislature and place hundreds of policemen on the premises were part of a clandestine impeachment plot against the Speaker. The events in Ekiti, where seven People’s Democratic Party (PDP) members, in a House of twenty six, claimed to have impeached the Speaker, strengthen these suspicions. This appears to be the climax in a series of legislative coup d’etats.
In 2013, five members of the thirty two member Rivers state House of Assembly commenced attempts to impeach the Speaker under Police protection. The attempts had almost succeeded until other members stormed the House and regrettable acts of violence played out on our TV screens. Macabre as the scene was, those who coordinated the plots to impose their whims should have expected the reactions. In Edo state, a similar event unfolded as five members, in a House of twenty four, stormed the Assembly complex with a separate mace and a Sergeant at Arms, in an alleged attempt to commence impeachment proceedings against the Speaker as part of greater scheme to impeach the governor. That attempt was resisted violently. As with all the previous cases mentioned, the police were out in force at the Assembly and watched, without even attempting to stop the invasion, as these men broke into the supposedly sealed premises to commence sitting.
These events reveal a sinister pattern that seems to have become the defining method by which Nigeria’s democracy functions today. When a state Assembly does not toe the line of the Federal Executive, or its servile state arm, then the police are blind to all attempts to remove the erring members, no matter how unconstitutional the process is. Sadly, this has reached the national assembly.
The attempt by the police to hide behind the claims of intelligence reports suggesting potential threats from hoodlums is farcical and it disparages the quality and respectability of our intelligence agencies. First, no member of the House had been informed beforehand about such a threat- not the Speaker nor the Senate President, to alert them of the apparent danger; secondly, when the Speaker arrived, there was no attempt to even acknowledge his presence by the most senior police officer present, neither was there any effort to veil this despotism by offering an explanation to the Representatives. We watched as the Speaker was ignored when he sought explanation from the policemen present.
As it turns out, all pretensions to serious intelligence on a possible invasion of the National Assembly as reason for the police action were tossed out the window with the I.G’s naked display of insolence towards Tambuwal when he faced the House Investigative Panel, spurting canards. If his constant claims that Tambuwal had arrived at the premises with thugs was not confirmation enough, then his outright refusal to address Tambuwal as Speaker, and claiming he would not do so because of a subsisting court case, was barefaced proof. The I.G makes a mockery of his understanding of the legal process by insisting on not flouting a subsisting court case as reason for his stance even as his refusal to recognise the Speaker before a substantive court judgment on the issue clearly disregards the legal proceedings he claims to respect.
During a recent meeting with southwest leaders in Ife, President Jonathan made a statement that seemed to suggest executive endorsement of Abba’s actions. Speaking about the current leadership composition in the House of Representatives, he said “Last time, it was difficult for me because I insisted that South West must get Speaker but some of us within South West didn’t want that because of personal ambition and I am still suffering for that till today”. The statement is self explanatory.
Nigeria has obviously carved out its own unique governance system; call it whatever you will, the point remains that a group of insidious political gluttons have held Nigeria’s democracy hostage and no one seems capable of changing the rules of the game. This new democratic math that recognises the superiority of a minority seems to have caught on at all levels and may prove to be the prevalent strategy for securing votes in 2015. Many of us may not like it, but the reality stares us in the face with its unpleasantness and yet many Nigerians have joined these people in celebrating this pseudo-democracy. I think it is instructive of the deception in this system that our political leaders have rather chosen to sell democracy as the display of anarchist and despotic attitudes rather than the expression of popular will.
As one writer puts it; “Posterity will judge whether we are willing to swim with the tide of anarchist attitudes or swim against it.”
Jude Obaro is a public analyst living in Benin City, Edo State.