Features
Nigerians expecting much from an ineffective Legislature
A legislature that is alive to its roles and responsibilities is a symbol of hope, a shield and a voice for the people. It is marked by robust debates, strict commitment to checks and balances, and deliberate accountability to the people. Also, it confers legitimacy on the government because governance is productive and the citizens are fulfilled.
However, in developing nations, the legislature is defined by weak institutional capacity. It faces the challenges of executive dominance, public trust deficit, poor democratic culture manifesting as a weak electoral system and disrespect to democratic tenets and then disruptions through elections, leading to a high turnover of legislators.
And, central to all these issues are a weak constitution, a low level of morality in politics as well as poor knowledge of the duties of the parliament.
To begin with, Nigeria’s situation validates the assertion that any constitution midwifed by the military is as faulty as it is anti-democracy. It does not offer the legislature the necessary support for true independence and effective supervision of the executive.
For example, mere legislative refusal of consent cannot stop the executive from borrowing and or engaging in non-budgeted expenditures. Equally, the much-touted powers to override the presidency on critical issues exist merely on paper in the same manner that executive appointees can hold offices without legislative confirmation. And again, legislative summons and resolutions are brazenly ignored because the legislature does not possess the instruments to effectively enforce compliance.
So evidently, the executive is already empowered by the constitution to dominate the legislature. And as noted earlier, institutional capacity is the missing link between an effective parliament and the rest. It is a product of a trained and motivated workforce supported by a favourable operating environment which in turn is a function of adequate funding.
But in Nigeria, the legislature is incapacitated and depends on the executive for operational existence. Beyond executive dominance and disrespect, lack of financial autonomy chiefly erodes overall legislative effectiveness. Among others, capacity building is stunted, the work environment is unconducive, representation suffers and legislative committees majorly rely on MDAs for logistics in the discharge of oversight functions. Meanwhile for over two years now, the national assembly chambers are closed down for repairs, restricting the lawmakers to a temporary arrangement for plenary.
Similarly, most bills passed by the legislature, especially the ones it originates are not accented to and the resolutions arising from motions are utterly disregarded. Even the legislative agenda, despite how fantastic, would always remain a dream except the executive offers the needed impetus. Yes, the executive determines the dimension of budget implementation which explains the perceived lop-sidedness in infrastructural development across the country.
Additionally, there are interferences in the affairs of the legislature by the political party. Either by way of promises of reward or threats of sanction, the legislators are readily blackmailed to influence their actions and conduct.
Buoyed by the weak electoral system, the state governors decide the political fates of the legislators using the party structures and deployment of mob rule. Any lawmaker whom the governor does not endorse is as good as gone because the party will not nominate them as candidates for future elections. Re-election tickets, developmental project locations as well as appointment of relatives and loyalists into positions are employed as baits to keep the legislators in line. Also, despite the popularity of laws made by the national assembly regarding the matters on the concurrent list, the governors railroad the state assemblies into undermining the federal legislature, for political expediency.
Hence, when a legislator is confronted with the grim prospects of political extinction, they helplessly ‘play along’ to survive. And inferentially, the executive influences the choices of legislative leadership through this strategy. Now with these, why would ineffective parliaments not thrive?
Then again, the withholding of public support and cooperation which also undermines the effectiveness of the legislature, is traced to two major factors. While one is the personality of some lawmakers the other is misplaced public expectations sequel to limited understanding of the preserves of the parliament.
Whereas legislators are expected to be morally upright and beyond reproach, the actions and conducts of some account for the huge public trust deficit plaguing the legislature. There are those lacking in character, the ones reputed for underperformance and the others who embody politics with bitterness or bad-loser syndrome. This last category adopts desperation in their quest for power and would always seek to undermine every electoral outcome that does not suit their expectations, despite established credibility. In political contests, they ‘must’ either have their way or rock the boat.
Yet unfortunately, the legislature is corporately subjected to collective labelling and the individual liberties of the entire legislators are serially violated, thus deepening the institutional ineffectiveness.
Furthermore, and exploiting the limited public knowledge of the workings of the legislature, the vulnerable are manipulated against the legislators. Driven by a self-seeking agenda including a narrow political mentality, the elites orchestrate subjective narratives aimed at lowering the public esteem of the parliament. The impression roundly created is that the legislature does little or nothing to justify its expenditure. Also, smear campaigns are sponsored against the legislative leadership of which the executive arm is principally complicit. Because they control the media, they determine what the people know. The media is made to focus mainly on the downsides to generate negative perceptions of the legislature. Again, the parliamentarians are visited with varied demands that are motivated by the sense of entitlement wherein the constituents assume that their personal needs must be met by the representatives irrespective of the magnitude. And instructively, this is sustained because the less informed masses rate the legislators based on projects or contracts attracted and the amount of money doled out among other direct socio-economic benefits.
Equally, there are assessments informed by the quantity of legislation rather than the quality, but factually, the advent of the internet has had a diminishing effect on legislative outputs. It has drastically affected policy formulation processes such that the core legislative duties are now shaped by external dynamics. Global trends, rather than the legislature, now determine governance policies. What happens in one country affects other countries. Borrowing and international trade agreements today dictate the pace of development. Consequently, there is a prevailing dearth of home-grown socio-economic legislation, especially for a country like Nigeria that ‘must’ borrow to fund its budget. And by this again, the legislature is unarguably anything but effective.
Therefore in building our expectations, convinced that an effective parliament is fundamental to the legitimacy of government, we have to recognize the peculiar challenges confronting the fledgling legislatures. In our craving for a democratic institution that truly represents the interests of all citizens, there should be a corresponding clamour for a viable constitution drafted through an all-inclusive process. Again, there should be a reawakened consciousness for a long-term commitment to building a culture of democracy and political tolerance. We should acknowledge that past mistakes occasioned by bad leadership account for our present socio-economic and political predicaments. The problem of Nigeria is certainly not the legislature alone. Particularly, we should realize that a fair assessment of the overall performance of the legislature is achieved only when one considers the rate at which the executive respects legislative resolution and summons. A legislature that is roundly disparaged cannot be effective or deliver optimally.
Then importantly, if we cannot resist the temptation to compare, we should be objective by always acknowledging that the human and financial resources available to the executive far exceed those of the legislature. We should also admit that for each arm of government, there are statutory allowances, including vehicles, yet there is always an orchestrated public outcry trailing that of the legislature. We should be persuaded that de-marketing the legislature hurts the country and again that sensational reportage is a threat to democracy the world over. Rather, we should cultivate good relationships with our representatives to truly guide them towards serving the national interest.
And now specifically, the legislators should be seen to be above board by truly representing the people and also shunning every unethical conduct notably traits of politics with bitterness. They should not take the people’s mandate for granted. They should purge themselves of mutual suspicions and divisive tendencies. Every lawmaker should think of Nigeria first. Above all, they should realize that one does not need to hold a leadership position or be on a particular committee before one can make an impact in governance. It is not about ego or special recognition but about sacrifice and contributions to national development.
Thankfully and verifiably, the president of the senate, Godswill Akpabio, by his blueprint and actions so far has made firm statements of covenant about his passion for a regenerated Nigeria that works for all. A diligent review shows his clear understanding of Nigeria’s immediate challenge. By his agenda, the arms of government should collaborate in the overall interest of the citizenry. Beyond his age-long sense of humour and friendly disposition, Akpabio demonstrates that it takes a united and bipartisan legislature to heal the country and oversight the executive without feeling that the government is being undermined.
Hence, with open minds, may we accept his extended hands of fellowship by giving him the right opportunities to walk the talk. May we champion strong institutional capacity in favour of the parliament and through our representatives, consciously shield it against any form of derailment. Otherwise, it is the height of hypocrisy to expect much from this 10th national assembly.
Egbo is a parliamentary affairs analyst
Features
Bruno Fernandes: Mikel Arteta credits ‘smart’ Man Utd captain for free-kick as Gary Neville says wall ‘too far back’
Mikel Arteta says Bruno Fernandes was “smarter” than referee Anthony Taylor over his free-kick that gave Manchester United the lead against Arsenal in 1-1 draw on Sunday; referee moved defensive wall 11.2 yards back; Gary Neville criticised Arsenal over incident
Mikel Arteta refused to criticise Anthony Taylor for sending Arsenal’s defensive wall too far back for Bruno Fernandes’ free-kick in their 1-1 draw but said the Manchester United captain had been “smarter” than the referee in taking advantage to net his fine strike.
Broadcast technology found Taylor marched the Arsenal defensive line 11.2 yards back, further than the minimum 10 yards required in the Laws of the Game, before Fernandes curled a dead ball inside the near post shortly before half-time.
“At the end of the day the referee is pushing them back too far, which is a mistake, but ordinarily you would sense you’re too far away and creep forward,” said Gary Neville on the Gary Neville Podcast.
“They didn’t do that and it ends up that Bruno Fernandes has the ability to play it over the wall.”
The United captain’s technique was superb but, like Neville, the Super Sunday pundits questioned whether his goal would have been possible had Arsenal’s five-player wall been closer.
Arteta refused to be drawn over the incident, only to congratulate Fernandes for making the most of the advantage he had been given.
“He’s been smart and he took advantage, that is football,” he told Sky Sports. “He’s been smarter than the ref. That’s OK, they allowed him to do it.”
Player of the match Declan Rice, who netted Arsenal’s equaliser after half-time, took the blame for the goal on himself and the other members of the Gunners wall, though he also felt it had been pushed too far back.
“It felt like a couple of us jumped and some of us didn’t, but I’ve not seen it back,” he told Sky Sports. “It felt like the ball flew over us at quite a low height so, from the wall’s perspective, we could have done a lot better.
“The wall did feel far back. Even on our free-kick, when Martin [Odegaard] took it, they felt far back as well, more than usual. But the referee makes that decision.”
After half-time, another free-kick from Martin Odegaard was being lined up when Taylor again appeared to exceed 10 yards when marking out where Man Utd’s defensive wall could stand.
As Neville had suggested Arsenal should do, Noussair Mazraoui questioned Taylor over the distance, while the wall itself crept forward before Odegaard’s strike – and did its job when his effort rebounded away to safety.
Manchester United head coach Ruben Amorim told Sky Sports he had noticed the issues with both free-kicks but had no intention of helping Arsenal out ahead of Fernandes’ opener.
He said: “It was clear, both free-kicks. So when it’s your free kick, you don’t say anything. When it’s the opponent, you try to push because it’s a big difference.
“It was fair, one for us, one for them. We had Bruno and he solved the problem.”
Man Utd midfielder Christian Eriksen, who has scored eight Premier League free-kicks, explained after the game the sizeable difference even 1.2 yards extra would make for a dead-ball specialist.
“It makes a very big difference,” he told Sky Sports. “When the ball is over the wall you don’t need to hit it as high – going down to statistics and how far they are back and how many metres and how they jump. So it’s easier and it gives Bruno a bit more space to put it over the wall.
“It was very good. It helped that the wall was about 15 metres away, so it was perfect for him to put it over.
“I saw it early [that the wall was a fair way back]. Even before the kick you could see how far back they were, and it was the same when they had it in the second half – obviously we were a bit angry with the ref [at that point] for putting us so far back after we saw that Bruno scored.
“But I think it was just beneficial to us.”
Alhaji Sule Lamido was born August 30, 1948. He is a native of Bamaina village, Jigawa State, and is known for his wide-level exposure in leadership. He attended Birnin Kudu school, for his primary education in 1955 and proceeded for his secondary education at the prestigious Barewa College, Zaria, Kaduna State.
Lamido embarked on a course in Railway engineering at the Permanent way training school, Zaria, Kaduna where he gained knowledge on the rail transport operations. Upon graduation from the Permanent Way Training School, Lamido started his career as a Quality Control officer at the Nigeria Tobacco Company in Zaria. He also worked in Bamaina Holding Company, amongst other companies in the country.
He also worked in Bamaina Holding Company, amongst other companies in the country. In 1992, Lamido ventured into politics, first in the second republic as a member of the Peoples Redemption Party (PRP) where he was an active member. Lamido was also active in the third republic, as a member of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), and played a key role as the National Secretary in the party. The seasoned politician was also a delegate of the 1995 National Constitutional Conference in Abuja the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).
During the military regime of the late Gen Sani Abacha, Lamido was a member of the G-34 political movement which was a notable and powerful opposition group that shaped Nigeria’s fourth republic. After several years of the Military junta in Nigeria, Sule Lamido returned back to active politics in the fourth republic under the platform of the People’s Democratic Party.
He was appointed the Foreign Affairs Minister in the first four years of President Olusegun Obasanjo (1999-2003) at a time Nigeria had to reposition and redeem its image in the international community. As Foreign Minister he travelled with Former President Obasanjo across the globe, restoring broken relationships with the western bloc nations and opening new frontiers with countries like Japan, Russia, Brazil, China and Australia.
Other roles he played as foreign minister was representing Nigeria in the United Nations, G77 bloc of nations, Commonwealth of nations, Organization of African Unity and Economic Community of West Africa States. In November 2001, at the United Nations , Lamido described the corrosive impact of corruption on new democracies such as Nigeria, and called for “an international instrument” against transfer of looted funds abroad.
As Governor of Jigawa, Sule Lamido put the State on national scale with significant investments in infrastructure, healthcare, agriculture, housing & urban development, empowerment programmes, education, rural development and industrial projects. The elder statesman is also known for his capacity to build consensus across the nation.
By Abiodun Komolafe
It is a settled fact that Anthony Eromosele Enahoro (July 22, 1923 – December 15, 2010) was an outstanding product of Nigeria’s pre-independence era. Enahoro moved one of the motions for independence and there’s a lot for us to look at in the context of the life he lived and the political firmament that brought him up. Therefore, remembering this Father of Nigerian Nationalism is to reminisce about an era where courage and conviction were the
currencies of change.
As a pioneering journalist, politician and champion of independence, Enahoro’s unwavering commitment to Nigeria’s self-rule has left an enduring legacy that continues to inspire generations. His remarkable story is a testament to the transformative power of leadership, perseverance and the unrelenting pursuit of freedom.
Building on his legacy as a champion of independence, Enahoro went on to serve in various capacities, including as Minister of Information and Labour. He was later tried alongside Obafemi Awolowo and others for treasonable felony, a trial that became infamous in Nigerian history. Although convicted, Enahoro was later released and continued to play a significant role in shaping Nigeria’s political landscape.
Enahoro was an outstanding nationalist and a principled person, and this was evident in his involvement with the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO). Of course, there was no need for him and Alfred Rewane to have been involved in the struggle for the enthronement of democracy, particularly in the aftermath of the annulled June 12, 1993 presidential election won by MKO Abiola as they had too much to lose!. But they risked everything to fight for popular democracy, Although Rewane ultimately lost his life in the struggle, Enahoro was fortunate to have escaped the same fate.
Despite the risks and challenges, Enahoro remained unbending in his convictions, refusing to waver even in the face of adversity. As a gifted individual, he recognized that the issue at hand was not just about the violation of an individual's rights, but an affront to democracy and national sovereignty. He, along with Alfred Rewane and others fought for principles, not personalities. This commitment to principle was evident in their diverse backgrounds: Enahoro was a Christian from Uromi in Edo State, with Esan extraction; Rewane was a Christian of Urhobo descent from Delta State; and Abiola, whose rights they fought for, was a Muslim Yorubaman, from Ogun State. Unlike some NADECO members who howled with the wolves and bleated with the sheep for convenience, Enahoro was not
duplicitous. Unlike the crop of Janjaweeds who now populate our political landscape, he remained steadfast, refusing to compromise his values.
Olajumoke Ogunkeyede, a close ally of Enahoro, described him as “a man with a seriously fantastic sense of humour; Ogunkeyede, fondly called JMK, shared several instances of Enahoro’s ability to bring joy to those around him. His humorous takes on serious issues, such as the demons in Abuja, showcased his wit. Moreover, his clever commentaries, including his defence of now-President Bola Tinubu’s aspirations, and his ingenious use of allegories and analogies, like; Ogbuefi; and; Ogbueniyan’, collectively attested to the capacity of his wit and charm.
When writing about individuals like Enahoro, Rewane, Herbert Macaulay, Awolowo, Aminu Kano, Maitama Sule, and others, it’s essential to consider the context in which they lived. This context is bittersweet, as they represented an era where political activism was rooted in philosophical positions and guided by principles.
People during this time held strong convictions and were willing to make sacrifices for their beliefs. That’s why society was more orderly in their time, and it achieved proper sustainable development, unlike today where what we have is largely ‘growth without development’, to be polite, or, if we want to be impolite, ‘the development of underdevelopment’. Amidst this, our leaders continue to sing the same old, worn-out refrain while satiating a vacuous idolatry that elevates an ego bereft of substance, a hollow monolith that stands on feet of clay.
If we look at people like Enahoro and Adegoke Adelabu, their lives exemplified a paradox that underscored the tenuous relationship between knowledge and credentials. This was because, despite lacking university degrees, they possessed a profound intellectual depth that eluded many of their contemporaries who boasted an array of impressive certifications, forgetting that it is not the parchment that confers wisdom, but the depth of one's inquiry, the rigour of one's thought and the breadth of one’s understanding.
Enahoro became the youngest editor of Nnamdi Azikiwe's newspaper, the Southern Nigerian Defender, in 1944 at the age of 21 while Peter, his younger brother, became the editor of The Morning Star at the age of 23. The older Enahoro also worked with other publications, including Daily Comet and West African Pilot before parting ways with Azikiwe, whom he always referred to as his chairman, while Awolowo was his political leader. The reasons behind this preference are intriguing, but that’s a story for another time.
These early experiences laid the foundation for Enahoro’s later involvement with the Action Group (AG), a political party that shared his vision of ‘making life more abundant.’ Enahoro and the AG represented an understanding that the process of economic development must be structured and based on a philosophical thrust. In contrast, what is absurdly described as ‘politics’ today is terribly bad and basically transactional; and it’s driven by a cash-and-
carry mentality, where individuals seek to outdo one another in a chop-and-quench; political economy! No unity! No discipline! No structure! For them, any goose can cackle and any fly can find a sore place!
Looking at the plane, Enahoro’s life and career epitomized the complexities of Nigeria’s struggle for
independence and democracy. His life and work embodied the intersection of individual agency and structural forces that steered the trajectory of nations. As a prominent anti-colonial and pro- democracy activist, he played a pivotal role in the country’s transition from colonial rule to independence. The Adolor of Uromi and the Adolor of Onewa was a vocal critic of authoritarianism and a strong advocate for human rights. His perseverance in the face of resistance, setbacks and imprisonment demonstrates the dedication required to bring about
transformative change.
In moments of emotions and situations, we often discover our true strength and resilience. Enahoro has gone to the ages but his legacy continues to inspire, much like Abraham Lincolns. In simpler terms, he was a brave soul who dared to challenge the colonial powers. So, his legacy should serve as inspiration and role model for future generations, demonstrating the potential for excellence that exists within individuals and communities. In fairness to fate, Enahoro and his contemporaries were well-prepared for the liberation movement, thanks to their involvement in the West African Students Union (WASU) and their time at King’s College, Lagos. This institution, attended by Enahoro and Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu, was a hotbed for political activism and discourse. To truly reboot, Nigerians must remember the personal histories of pioneers like Enahoro.
Today, we remember Enahoro, a pioneering figure who dared to dream of independence for Nigeria. We honour not only his significant contributions to Nigeria’s history but also his untiring commitment to democracy, self-determination and human rights. As we remember him and his dogged commitment to federalism and the quest for social justice, it is in our best interest to recreate the ethos and the spirit which created him and people like him.
May Anthony Enahoro’s spirit soar on the wings of eternal peace!
May his memory continue to serve as a testament to the enduring impact of individual agency
on the course of national history!
May the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, grant us peace in Nigeria!
*KOMOLAFE wrote from Ijebu-Jesa, Osun State, Nigeria (ijebujesa@yahoo.co.uk)
BREAKING: Key contact details missing in petition to recall Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan – INEC
Natasha’s case to be assigned to another Judge as Egwuatu recuse himself, citing Akpabio’s petition
Kogi: CP Dantawaye engage stakeholders in Ijumu, emphasises security, community policing
-
News1 week agoBill to establish National Cashew Production and Research Institute in Kogi passes first reading in Senate
-
News1 week agoReport of attack on Wike’s Port Harcourt residence false, misleading – Police
-
News1 week agoShehu Sani debunks Governor Uba Sani’s alleged diversion of LG funds, challenges El-Rufai to publicly tender evidence
-
News1 week agoPlateau gov’t expresses concern over violence in Shendam LGA, calls for calm
-
Sports1 week agoMerino gives Arsenal win over Chelsea
-
Politics6 days agoOpposition leaders announce coalition to challenge Tinubu in 2027
-
Interview1 week agoSenators Natasha-Akpabio saga should have been resolved privately – Rev. Mrs Emeribe
-
News1 week agoNatasha uncovers arrest plot after reported Akpabio to IPU in New York