To this extent, the leadership may convey a special meeting on or before the resumption of the Senate on Tuesday, to provide an opportunity for lawmakers to exchange frank talks on how to stop the growing negative trend of resorting to violence, based on political affiliations.
It was learnt that issues relating to alleged non-remittance of funds as well as the crisis created by defection of some Senators last week, have been isolated for serious discussion. Many senators are worried about the rapid manner in which the Senate had treated sensitive matters in the past.
The investigation being conducted by the Senate Committee on Finance into the allegation of no-remittance of funds to the treasury, had contributed to the growing tension in addition to the defection. While the allegations by the CBN Governor, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, had attracted applause from the All Progressive (APC) Senators; their Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) counterparts had always called for caution until the full details were revealed through the probe.
Also, heated controversy generated by the intrigues and game of wits playing out in the Senate over attempts by some PDP Senators to formalise their defection to the APC has thrown up key issues of sentiments and interests arising from growing opposition or even a two-party system in the nation’s apex law making body.
The heated argument among Senators last week over the matter, as well as the pressure mounted on the President of the Senate, David Mark, to read the letter sent to him by the group of eleven defecting Senators, was interpreted by many Senators as a direct withdrawal to the dark days of “Banana peels” in the Senate.
Indeed, the argument was made during the heated debate that was said to have overtaken the Senate last Wednesday at a closed door session, when it took a final decision that forcing Mark to read the letter in violation of senate standing rule, would amount to setting a dangerous trap for him.
There was also the case of deep suspicion and mutual distrust among the 11 Senators to the extent that a few of them were reported to have gone to tell Mark not to read the letter even though they had appended their signatures to the document.
The list comprises Bukola Saraki, Adamu Abdullahi, Shaba Lafiagi, Ibrahim Gobir, Aisha Al-Hassan, Magnus Abe, Wilson Ake, Jibrilla Mohammed Bindowo, Danjuma Goje, Ali Ndume as well as Umar Dahiru.
One of the Senators reportedly told Mark that he suspected foul play in the desperation attached to the whole issue and would want to be counted out.
The strongest obstacle, which frustrated the bid by the defecting senators from getting their defection formalised and recognised by the Senate, is a provision in the Senate Standing Rule, which states that, “reference shall not be made to any matter on which a judicial decision is pending in such a way as might in the opinion of the President of the Senate prejudice the interest of parties thereto.”
Mark also harped on a court order asking parties to the suit to maintain the status quo until its final determination. But this position did not go down well with the aggrieved senators as well as members of APC caucus, who described the issues as two matters that were not related.
After the session, both the aggrieved senators and their APC counterparts wore long faces as they converged on the lobby of the National Assembly, prepared to express their anger on the matter through a press conference. But never did.
Briefing reporters later on how the matter was resolved behind closed doors, Chairman, Senate Committee on Information, Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, said the parliament resolved to seek legal advice in relation to the provisions on defection in the 1999 Constitution as well as the Standing Rules.
He also added that the resolve was compelling because the senate observed that both the defecting senators and Mark needed more time for consultation as he argued that why issues evolving on the matter could be variously interpreted, the case of the Senate Standing Rules differs because it is only subject to the senate president’s interpretation.
Asked why the provisions in the Standing Rules were not cited as the basis to stop senators who had previously defected to other parties, Abaribe said there was no case in court militating against such defections, explaining that Saraki and others compounded their case by going to court.
He also added that this current instance was compounded by a court order asking the Senate President and other stakeholders to maintain the status quo, noting that status quo in this matter implies that there should be no action whatsoever until the matter in court is dispensed with.
He said: “In the past, defected senators did not go to court against the principal officers of the Senate. The matter has to be suspended until court issues are resolved. But discussion was fruitful. Everybody saw the issue from another person’s point of view.
“Under Order 25, only the Senate President can interpret the rules. We are lawmakers and can’t be lawbreakers. You can’t go to court and be unable to wait for the ruling.”
Source: Guardian
No comments:
Post a Comment