You erred on constitution review, Reps tell Jonathan

Jonathan had in a letter dated April 13, 2015 told the lawmakers that he withheld his assent to the constitution amendment bill due to inconsistencies, lack of clarity and evidence to show that four-fifth of the 360 members agreed on their decision on certain clauses.Jonathan had already dragged the National Assembly to the Supreme Court […]

Jonathan had in a letter dated April 13, 2015 told the lawmakers that he withheld his assent to the constitution amendment bill due to inconsistencies, lack of clarity and evidence to show that four-fifth of the 360 members agreed on their decision on certain clauses.
Jonathan had already dragged the National Assembly to the Supreme Court on the matter.
Addressing a press conference yesterday in Abuja, Minority Whip, Samson Osagie who spoke on behalf of the House ad-hoc committee on the review said there were ample evidence that the lawmakers met the constitutional requirements on the process.
He said on the amendment to Section 9, which seeks to veto the president power on assenting an amendment bill, Osagie said based on the House proceedings of Wednesday July 24, 2013, a total number of 338 were in attendance, while 317 voted “ayes,” 6 lawmakers voted “nays” as 15 abstained from voting.
On Jonathan’s argument for a new sub-section in Section 12, which is on free education for all, Osagie said the issue should be interpreted by the courts if there is any dispute.
He said the amendment to Section 58, which seeks to veto presidential powers on signing of bills into law after 30 days, “was made to cure the current practice whereby bills are sent to the president for assent, but he neither assents nor indicates withholding of assent, sometimes months after.”
On a review of Section 82, which is on money bill that seeks to reduce the period when expenditure can be authorized in default of appropriation from 6 months to 3 months, he said the amendment was intended to cure the recent practice of executive arm not presenting appropriations bill on time, which delays its passage. Jonathan had equally argued that the amendment in Section 84, which seeks to have an Accountant-General of the Federation and that of the Federal Government separate was done in bad taste as there was no provision for funding requirements.
Meanwhile, some senators have called on the Justices of the Supreme Court to give accelerated hearing to the suit instituted by President Jonathan on his decision to veto the fourth constitution amendment bill.
Jonathan had two weeks ago written to the National Assembly rejecting the entire constitution alterations clauses passed by the two chambers and endorsed by the state houses of assembly. However, the senate replied the president asking him to return the original copy of the amendment bill as transmitted to him.
Instead of returning the document, the Federal government approached the Supreme Court seeking its intervention on the matter.
In an originating summons filed on behalf of the Attorney General of the Federation by Chief Bayo Ojo (SAN) the Federal Government asked the apex court to make an order nullifying and setting aside Sections 3, 4, 12, 14, 21, 23, 36, 39, 40, 43 and 44 of the Fourth Alteration Act, 2015 purportedly passed by the Defendant.
Senators who spoke in separate interviews with reporters at the National Assembly yesterday urged the apex court to give speedy hearing to the matter.
Chairman, Senate Committee on Rules and Business, Senator Ita Enang (APC, Akwa Ibom), noted that the Jonathan’s action was normal but urged the Supreme Court to expedite action on the suit.
Chairman, Senate Committee on Judiciary, Human rights and legal matters, Senator Umaru Dahiru (APC, Sokoto), said that the action of the president was normal and should be expected in a democracy.