Words as eggs

The National Assembly resumed sitting on Tuesday last week from its recess only to find itself in a muddle over the comment made by Senate President David Mark on a motion entitled “Threat to National Sovereignty and territorial integrity of Nigeria by insurgents,” in which a segment of it read …’’there is no question of […]

The National Assembly resumed sitting on Tuesday last week from its recess only to find itself in a muddle over the comment made by Senate President David Mark on a motion entitled “Threat to National Sovereignty and territorial integrity of Nigeria by insurgents,” in which a segment of it read …’’there is no question of election, it is not even on the table now. We are in a state of war.’’ He further came out immediately after the media report of the comment to deny that he had called for the postponement of the 2015 elections.
It should be noted that the National Assembly, the Senate in particular, has enjoyed an enviable stability under the tenure of its current president. Under David Mark’s watch legislative business has been conducted businesslike without the rowdiness and commotion that greeted those of his predecessors, many of whom were removed unceremoniously through impeachments. To survive the intrigues and the malicious machinations of a chamber where personal advantage overrides national interests, as David Mark seems to have done is no mean feat. What is more, he seems to have pacified the unruly and riotous spirits of the men and women over whom he superintends and the result is a more purposeful senate, even if a little obsequious of the executive branch than its more uncompromising lower chamber that gives the executive branch indigestion and peptic ulcer, literally! Hence, unlike chambers in many countries where disputes on legislative matters are settled with fisticuffs, and turning chairs and tables into missiles when verbal arguments fail, the Nigerian senate under David Mark has continued to remain a respectable chamber that conducts business in a lawful manner.
Except this unfortunate one, I cannot recall any recent utterances made by the senate president that went against the grain of popular expectation and grated many people on the wrong side.  But that is not to say it has not happened before. Who would forget his comment as Minister of Communication several years ago when he was quoted to have said words to the effect that everyone cannot have access to telephone.  At that time the comment was seen as elitist, but with the GSM having made communication so accessible, it would be a wonder what the Senate president would be thinking now.
It may well be that the senate president’s remark was meant to be taken in the spirit of the objective situation on the ground. The insurgents have upgraded their activities from senseless slaughtering, bombings and maiming into making a slice of Nigeria’s territory their own to serve not only as a launch pad for mounting assaults on other places, but also to impose their ‘‘rule.’’ In this sense the remark can just be taken as a well meant off the cuff one, meaning simply that with what is going on in the Northeast, every other matter, including the 2015 elections should take the backseat. It is akin to the well known adage of the pointlessness of asking the old man what happened to his beards when the whole house has burnt down. Senator David Mark’s denial and clarification almost immediately suggest that may be his intention.
If that is a plausible argument to make then it was an unfortunate remark indeed. The straight linkage of the violence in the Northeast to the 2015 elections invites a number of observations. The first being the possible danger it poses to the sustenance of democracy, which should have been uppermost on the minds of the those governing the polity now to make them treat the insurgency for what it is-an implacable scourge bent on undoing so many years of nation building effort, therefore requiring a more decisive and surgical response to root it out. That this was not done at the onset of the insurgency until it grew from being an irritant into something more destructive that now poses a veritable danger to democracy and the corporate existence of Nigeria should be blamed on those in power.
Official inability to squelch the insurgency at the initial stage has given credence to all manner of allegations. The current one is that the whole sordid incident was created by people in power, which was why it was allowed to fester and become unmanageable.  Yet the government that at one time shouted from the roof top that it had Boko Haram sympathisers in its midst, has said and done nothing about the information, making many wonder what really is going on. A number of notable individuals have stated that the insurgents and those in their pursuit may very well be wearing the same face. The point being made is that the linkage between the insurgency and election would not have arisen had government done away with the insurgency when it began way back 5 years ago. After all, wiping out illegal and extremist opposition groups should be the cardinal function of the government.
It is for all these reasons that people read meanings into the Senate president’s remark other than what he perhaps meant. They see his comment as the beginning of an orchestrated attempt at invoking constitutional provisions to elongate the tenure of the current dispensation, which may well be untenable, but then it is the duty of government to prove that is not its intention.  
So much has been made of the constitutional provision that says that if the country is at war involving part of its territory, the National Assembly can extend the duration of a sitting government through postponement of elections. Still, I believe it is an issue that has to be taken along with that of the legitimacy of the government of the day.  After all of 5 years and the sitting government has not been able to decisively put out an uprising, is that not a matter the voters should have a say on? In other words, the insurgency itself and the way it has been handled so far should rank high on matters the people must decide on. Rather than being the subject of postponement of elections, it should be the reason for election when it is due.
People have said the Senate president’s comment amounts to testing the ground for an eventual elongation of the tenure of the current government. It is as well that he has denied it. In my own view, the continuing democratic dispensation, warts and all, remains one of the few advantages going for Nigeria as a nation. When everything is considered-insurgency, corruption, impunity in high places etc–Nigeria still remains a democracy whose refinement is being worked at, but a democracy all the same.  Any attempt at turning the hand of the clock back through the subterfuge of postponement of elections could bring unintended outcomes. The continuing observance of democratic tenets that allow Nigerians to have their say on how they are governed should not be a matter for self serving debates or political games.