Akpabio, Abbas: Democracy defenders or rubber-stamp duo?
As Nigeria’s political landscape shifts with the emergence of Godswill Akpabio as Senate President and Tajudeen Abbas as Speaker of the House of Representatives, citizens and experts alike are left pondering the implications for the nation’s democracy.
The recent events have raised questions about the principle of separation of powers among the executive, legislative, and judiciary branches of government, as well as the place of women in Nigerian politics.
Less than 24 hours after the election into the leadership of the two chambers of the National Assembly held, the senator representing Borno South District, Ali Ndume, said Tinubu, as an “experienced” politician, convinced many lawmakers to ensure the emergence of his preferred candidates. Ndume who made the disclosure in an interview with Channels Television, said Tinubu deployed his “foot soldiers” to deliver his preferred candidates. He also revealed how President Bola Tinubu allegedly “sneaked out” to persuade some lawmakers to support his preferred candidates for the 10th National Assembly leadership positions.
Although, section 50 (1) (a) (b) and section 92 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria provide that the leadership of legislative houses (Federal and state) shall be elected by its members, the executive which is not assigned any role in the exercise by the constitution as it did in the case of the judiciary however, influences, to a large extent, those that emerge as leaders of the legislative houses.
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s endorsement of both candidates has drawn mixed reactions. For instance, while anchoring the ‘Morning Show’ on Arise TV last Wednesday, popular broadcast journalist Rufai Oseni expressed his concerns, saying, “I can’t see them (Akpabio and Abbas) not being a ‘rubber-stamp’ legislature.”
Oseni’s words echo the fears of many who witnessed the tumultuous 9th National Assembly, plagued by controversies such as the Senate’s amendment of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Act. This amendment allowed for a raise of the apex bank’s Ways and Means advances from the current 5 per cent to 15 per cent of the previous year’s actual revenue of the Federal Government, which occurred two days before the end of former President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration. This was to pander to President Buhari as was their trademark throughout that administration.
Additionally, the red chamber gave speedy approval of the ex-president’s request to pay the judgement debt in the sums of $567m, £99m, and N226m, barely five days before the end of his term. Moreover, the executive’s unauthorized purchase of arms worth $1 billion raised concerns as it bypassed the normal legislative process and unilateral decisions were made to buy the arms, using administrative measures.
There are reports that the Executive used its resources and influence to support the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC)’s nomination of Akpabio and Abbas to federal lawmakers-elect.
To better understand the potential implications for Nigeria’s democracy, Saturday Vanguard reached out to several lawyers and civil rights activists for their insight on the situation that played out, wherein both Akpabio and Abbas were anointed by President Bola Tinubu.
Those who viewed the situation as a threat to Nigeria’s democracy argued that it undermines the democratic principles of separation of powers and checks and balances. They said the interference was not only a precarious warning sign but damaging to the nation’s democracy. They strongly suggested that the Legislature should hold its grounds and conscientiously protect its independence as guaranteed by the Constitution.
It is democratically wrong for the executive to influence election of leaders of legislative houses but…
—OCJ Okocha (SAN)
“It is not right. But you see, it is not done openly. Of course, every governor will be interested in who is heading the legislative arm of his government. The belief is that if you have your own man there, you can be sure that things will flow as you want them to flow. It is in the interest of the executive to secure the candidates of his choice for those positions. But democratically, it is wrong. The house should be independent of who should be their heads. So should the Senate which is the other chamber in a bicameral legislature.
So, it is a human factor. The appointment of heads of court and judges, the truth of the matter is that the roles and functions relating to the appointment of judges and heads of the court like Chief Judges, President of the Customary Court of Appeal, President of the Court of Appeal, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, are all well analysed in the constitution. The NJC does not appoint.
NJC recommends persons for appointment to such an office. And this was really a well-thought-out decision that was taken a long time ago. They used to have what they called Advisory Judicial Committee (AJC). But now, we have an NJC which is like the recommending authority and when they recommend it, the executive—President, governors— will now make the appointment which will eventually have to be confirmed by the various concerned legislative houses.
So, this was built into the constitution to secure a measure of independence and also to ensure that all three arms of government are working in synchronization. They synchronize themselves so that no particular arm of government can claim entire power or sole authority for the appointment or removal of those judicial officers mentioned. So long as matters are handled with objectivity and altruism, things will not go bad. And that is the hope that all of us have”. But it has always been abused.
The legislature, president horse trading people’s destinies —Dr Akpo Mudiaga Odje, Constitutional lawyer, Facilitator of the Centre for the Advancement of the Rule of Law
“On influencing the leadership of the legislature by the President, it has been a very regrettable new trend, which is a fratricidal infraction into the supremacy of the constitution and the ideological separation of powers. It is not unusual for a President to lobby for the election of a person he can have a seamless working relationship with; however, what obtains in Nigeria today is anything but lobby.
On the contrary, the legislative leadership is foisted on that supposed independent arm of government by the President. It is so overbearing, if not over abrasive on the independence of the legislature. The matter even becomes worse, when both the sponsored leadership and the President hail from the same party. Here, the citizens and democracy suffer a distorted and contorted leadership as both the legislature and the president, are horse-trading the people’s destinies.
It is a product of negotiated personal interests, and harmonization of greed and zest for power, between the legislature and the executive. However, one must not put the entire blame on the President or the political party, I would instead indict the legislature more because it always fails to assert its independence in electing its leadership, lucidly protected by the Constitution. The most asinine of these acts of political shenanigans and callous pasturing is for an elected legislator to proceed to present his certificate of return to the head of another arm of government, headed by the President.
This is a comprehensive advertisement of an overdose of endemic ignorance. It is no doubt in our view that these very shameful practices have taken their toll on the political fabric of the country, whilst at the same time, seriously stultifying our democracy. We, therefore, suggest strongly to the legislature to hold its grounds and jealously protect its independence as pungently guaranteed and cocooned, under our constitution, for Nigerians to, for once, also witness a flourishing and unadulterated democracy”.
Growing influence of money, political patronage in Nigerian politics— Deji Adeyanju, Activist, law graduate
“This is evidence of the growing influence of money and political patronage in Nigerian politics. Anointing both the Senate President and the House of Reps Speaker gives President Bola Tinubu undue control over the legislative branch of government, which could lead to a concentration of power in the hands of a few individuals and ultimately set the nation on the path to becoming a one-party state. Such a concentration of power could threaten the independence of the legislature and undermine its ability to act as a check on the executive branch.
Situations like this are what make the legislature a ‘rubber stamp’ and could potentially set the nation on a dangerous path towards a one-party state and once a one-party state is established, it becomes much more difficult to reverse course and restore democratic governance.
Therefore, it is important for citizens, civil society organizations, and the 46 Senators who voted for Abdulaziz Yari in protest over Akpabio’s endorsement by the President to remain vigilant and hold those in presiding authority in the 10th National Assembly accountable for their actions.
Any attempt by the executive to exert undue influence over the legislative branch, limit opposition activities, or bypass the normal legislative process should be met with resistance and scrutiny”.
Disquieting affair— Fegalo Nsuke, lawyer, President of the Movement for Survival of Ogoni People, MOSOP
“These are some of the consequences of a system that weaponizes government, it is very disturbing to see legislators at that level, seemingly without independent minds. People want to align with the executive for protection. Those in government do not see an opposing view as an opportunity to look at another approach to doing things. They rather take it personally and unleash the powers of the state on the opposing side.
Eventually, the society starts drifting towards an oligarchy where some people are above the law, and others face persecution for having divergent views, sometimes critical. This affects every aspect of society, including elections; forcing the legislators who are desperate to keep their positions in future elections to align and sacrifice the crucial role of checking executive excesses.
They become and prefer to be a rubber-stamp legislature. Consequently, the system is deprived of good governance and places corruption and personal interests above national goals. The independence of the different arms of government is the bedrock of democracy and good governance. And when government fails to protect fundamental freedoms, the system begins to be coercive and lawless.”
Why we have puppet legislative leaders appointed —Zik Gbemre, social justice advocate, Coordinator, Niger Delta Peace Coalition
“There is no constitutional peculiarity about the President of Nigeria appointing heads of the judiciary or meddling in the choice of the Legislative heads.
In the United States, all federal judges have no mandatory retirement age. The president appoints them with confirmation by the Senate. Even in the US, the appointment of Supreme Court judges is more politicized and partisan than we have in Nigeria. The difference with the Nigerian situation is that despite appointment by the President, a US judiciary or legislative head would not compromise his integrity or the law to support abuse of power, impunity, or excesses of the President.
We saw it in the era of President Donald Trump when he had to be changing Supreme Court judges rapidly because after appointing them, they refused to be manipulated by the President to do his bidding against their consciences and the law.
The reason we are having puppet judiciary and legislative leaders appointed by the President in the Nigerian situation is that our democracy today is too expensive it induces extreme greed among officeholders. Those not in the good books of the President are sidelined. Nigeria cannot grow under this system where the government has become a conspiracy of a few to appropriate the commonwealth.
The way out is to return to the Parliamentary system practised in the United Kingdom. It is cheaper and much easier to manage.
Law skewed in favour of executive — Clarkson Amaebi, legal practitioner, former national spokesperson of Movement for the Survival of the Izon Ethnic Nationality in the Niger Delta, MOSIEND
“The doctrine of separation of power in Nigeria’s democracy is a facade. It is only evidenced on paper but in reality, the three arms of government are fused together and supervised by the executive arm. I think our laws are partly responsible for this. The executive arm has the resources to muscle the other arms. For instance, a governor, who is the head of the executive controls the security vote, which is not subject to any scrutiny.
In the same vein, he is the chief security officer of his state and deploys directives the way he deems fit. The legislature is a lame duck in terms of executing its resolutions, particularly where it concerns resolutions that are against the interest of the executive.
It is in recognition of this tilted balance that makes the legislators and legislative arm always subservient to the executive. This is not in the best interest of our democracy. The executive arm should respect the doctrine of separation of power”.
Dictatorial tendencies in democracy — Chief Festus Ogwuche, constitutional lawyer, human rights activist
“The finality or immutability of constitutional provisions is what gives it that organic colouration. However, the Nigeria case gives an insight into the possibility of tyrannical tendencies in a constitutional democracy. Principal constitutional items appear almost non-existent. The referendum, power balance, inconsistency rule, popular sovereignty, federal character principle, social, political and economic objectives of the state and other fundamental objectives are seen more in the breach than in their compliance.
The matter had got to a particular head that the Constitution is battling not only for its supremacy but also its survival. That explains why the executive appears to have subsumed all structures of power to itself and the age-old theory of separation of powers appears to have dwindled into insignificance.
That is also why Justice Walter Onnoghen could be removed from office in a rather bizarre manner that defied logic and constitutional sense simply because Buhari wanted him out of the way. The Constitution, as it is, is only as potent and effective as the executive wants it to be and the judiciary is always there to give an interpretation that will not only suit these individual whims but also massage their over-bloated egos.”
Why president, governors dictate who heads legislative houses in Nigeria —Emmanuel Onwubiko
“On the choice of leaders at the National Assembly, the Constitution is very explicit in Section 50(a) and (b). But, I think what we should rather address at both ends (state and national) is the recruitment process or rather party primary elections that make way for candidates for elective positions into the state and national assemblies to emerge. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and political parties are heavily compromised which is why all kinds of things happen during primary elections allowing governors and the president to dictate who heads the Legislative Houses thereby violating the constitutional principles of checks and balances or separation of powers.
INEC must never be made up of persons of shady characters or with political loyalties like that polluted and morally reprehensible INEC is at the moment. There’s also the need to allow an independent body of recruiters drawn from the best of the Nigerian society reflecting all shades and opinions such as youths, elders, students, CSOs, Religious organisations, public interest lawyers and other experts to handle the appointment of INEC Commissioners and the head to reduce criminal compromise. This body shouldn’t be controlled in terms of funding or operations by the executive arm or legislative arm but infractions committed by any of them can be investigated and prosecuted by the EFCC or ICPC. The current practice has allowed for the massive infiltration of persons who lack relevant temperament in terms of ethical behaviour”.
The controlling nature of the executive has negative effects on the roles of the judiciary, legislature —Barrister Adesoji Peters
“The penchant in Nigeria for the executive to have a controlling and determinant say on who becomes the head of the judicial and legislative arms of government has been seen as an anathema to our political and democratic development as a nation.
The theory of separation of powers presupposes that there are three arms of government and that the three arms are headed and manned by three different types of people. This is to allow for what is called checks and balances so that no one arm of government is so powerful as to circumscribe the other arms of government and more so the will of the people. The controlling nature of the executive on the other arms of government in Nigeria has impacted the roles of the judiciary and the legislature. In many cases, these two arms of government act as if they are appendages of the executive.
The judiciary and legislature have, in many cases, behaved as rubber stamps of the executive. The judiciary and judicial officers are mostly subservient to the agents of the state. The root cause of this grave danger to our democracy comes from the executive posture to always influence the appointment to the leadership of the other arms of government. For the betterment of the nation and our democratic advancement, this practice should be discouraged.
We can learn from more advanced democracies like the US. There, the executive and the other branches of government work together not by influencing the appointment of the leadership but by deepening the political culture, and party allegiance, and articulating the policies and positions of the executive. These make it easier for the arms of government to work together based on well-defined parameters and not according to the whims of who is the head of the executive.
Uwemedimo Nwoko, SAN, Former Attorney-General of Akwa Ibom State
“There are checks and balances among the three arms of government. However, in terms of the selection of their leadership, it is a major issue of concern. Apart from the formal constitutional involvement, the executive is not supposed to interfere with the process of the emergence of the Legislature; neither should the Legislature also interfere with the process of the selection of the President. But you find out that the executive headed by the President always tries to manipulate the leadership of the Legislature.
There is no interference in the case of the judiciary because it is according to seniority. The executive is always interfering with that of the Legislature and that is not healthy for our democracy. Where the president is involved in the process of emergence of the leadership of the legislature, you may end up having a legislature that is practically a rubber stamp. It is even worse at the state level and goes beyond the selection of the leadership, as some governors go as far as nominating who runs for constituency seats”.
On his part, human rights lawyer, Tunde Olawale Raheem argued that the current trend of overt presidential influence over the National Assembly, and to a suspicious degree the judiciary, is detrimental to Nigeria’s democracy. “When the executive can effectively choose the leadership of both the judiciary and the legislature, it undermines the very foundation of a democratic system built on checks and balances,” Raheem said.
Activist Gabrielle Ifezue, the Convener of an Abuja-based civil society group, Free Agents of Democracy, agreed, emphasizing the need for an independent legislature. “Elected lawmakers should not be seeking the President’s approval. Their loyalty should lie with the people they represent, not with the executive branch,” she said.
However, some experts believe that the newly elected leaders could still bring about positive change.
“While the circumstances of their election raise concerns, it’s important to remember that these individuals have their own beliefs and principles. They could very well defy expectations and work towards a better Nigeria,” said legal scholar, Wale Ogundele.
On her part, Chinwe Uzonna, a gender activist, expressed her concerns about the lack of women in high-ranking political positions. “Where does this kind of presidential endorsement leave our women legislators? We need more women in positions of power to ensure that our democracy is truly representative of all citizens,” she said.
However, Maryam Ayange is hopeful that the newly appointed leaders, Akpabio and Abbas, will bring positive change to the 10th National Assembly by promoting policies that empower women and create a more inclusive society. “As a Tiv woman, I am hopeful that the election of Akpabio and Abbas as Senate President and Speaker of the House of Representatives will bring about positive change in the 10th National Assembly. Despite President Tinubu’s public support for their emergence, I believe that their leadership positions present a unique opportunity to address the challenges facing our country and create a more inclusive and equitable society for all. It is my hope that they will use their influence to champion the cause of gender equality and pave the way for more women to take on leadership roles in the future,” Ayange said.
In the meantime, as the dust settles on the recent elections, the nation watches with bated breath to see how the 10th National Assembly unfolds.
Will Akpabio and Abbas act as rubber stamps for the executive, or will they rise to the occasion and prove their commitment to progress and change? Only time will tell, but for now, Nigeria’s democracy hangs in the balance.
