Nigeria Content Online

There is apprehension in the National
Assembly over the rejection by state legislatures of the some aspects
of the 1999 constitution recommended by the federal legislature for
amendment.

Members of the ad-hoc committees of the
two chambers, which reviewed the document, are worried that the rate at
which the state legislatures are rejecting the recommendations
contained in the report presented to the Speakers last month may
endanger the process of producing a brand new constitution for the
country.

The committees are particularly worried
that getting the two-thirds majority of the state legislatures to
approve the document may be a mirage, thereby, scuttling the process
which has consumed time and resources in the last two years.

About 12 state Houses of Assembly have
rejected some key amendments contained in the report presented to them
at a ceremony in Abuja. Among the key issues that have been dumped by
assemblies is the provision for independent candidacy.

The states that have reportedly
concluded work on the report forwarded to them included: Adamawa, Imo,
Ogun, Zamfara, Edo and Enugu. Others are Jigawa, Kaduna, Osun, Gombe,
Plateau, Benue, Ebonyi and Rivers. Others are still conducting public
hearings on the amended constitution.

Among the aspects rejected by the state
legislatures are independent candidacy, financial autonomy for the
legislature, raising of educational qualification for candidates for
National Assembly elections and cross carpeting.

A source in the committees said last
Friday that the federal lawmakers are particularly unhappy over feelers
that the rejection of some aspects of the amended constitution was
instigated by the state governors and, therefore, not in the national
interest. They are said to have expressed sadness that those aspects
were rejected even though the ad-hoc committees of the Senate and House
were always in touch with the Speakers of the State Assemblies while
the review lasted.

It was learnt that the governors, who
want to second terms in office, are behind the rejection of the
independent candidacy clause in the amended document because it will
increase the competition for their positions during next year’s general
election if the constitution comes into operation.

The federal lawmakers, the source said,
are also worried that their state counterparts are tampering with the
document even though the constitution only requires them to approve.

“We have it on good authority that the
governors are tele-guiding the lawmakers in their states to do their
bidding. The issue of independent candidacy, for instance, is one of
those aspects the governors are asking them not to approve because that
will narrow the competition during the elections.

“The failure or even delay in approving
the document by the state may pose a great danger to the entire
exercise. It may mean that the job the National Assembly did was in
vain, especially as the general elections approach. This is worrisome,”
the source said.

Some of the federal lawmakers are
already brainstorming on what to do to check the development, which in
their thinking could derail the whole process of reviewing the
11-year-old constitution.

Apart from convening a meeting with the
Speakers, the leaderships of the Senate and the House of
Representatives are also considering dispatching all the principal
officers and influential members of both chambers to their states to
lobby for the approval.

“Yes, they are already thinking of what to do, like lobbying the Speakers in many ways,” said the source.

The chairmen of the Senate ad-hoc
committee on the constitution review and Deputy Senate President, Ike
Ekweremadu and his House counterpart, Usman Nafada, could not be
reached for comments. Their spokespersons, Paul Odenyi and Hammeed
Bello, refused to comment, saying their principals have not briefed
them, especially since it is the lawmakers’ affairs.

Also, attempts to speak to the
consultant to the National Assembly on the review on Friday were also
rebuffed, as they said they are not competent to speak.

“Go to the lawmakers,” one of them told our reporter.

Not preempt the states

Speaking on the
issue, Senate spokesperson, Ayogu Eze, says the National Assembly will
not preempt the report of the State Assemblies because they are yet to
submit them.

“It is not for us
to comment on what we read in the newspapers. That will amount to
preempting the report of the state legislatures. They are yet to
forward their reports to us and so we cannot begin to say this is their
position or this is what we will do,” Mr Eze said last Friday.

His House
counterpart, Eseme Eyiboh, who spoke in the same vein said it is only
when a formal report is submitted to the National Assembly that an
action can be taken. He said he cannot predict what will happen.

Mr Eyiboh also
denied that there is apprehension among his colleagues over the
positions of the state lawmakers, saying, “That cannot be true. What
you are saying cannot jeopardize the process because it is already on
course. Everything the National Assembly did in the course of the
amendment was done taking into consideration the national interest.”
The lawmaker also denied claims that the State Assemblies were given a
deadline for reporting back to the National Assembly.

On June 15, the
National Assembly, at an elaborate ceremony in Abuja handed over the
amended constitution to the State Assemblies. The chairman of the
Conference of the Speakers of the State Houses of Assembly and the
Speaker of the Taraba State House of Assembly, Sylvanus Gbana, received
the document on behalf of his colleagues.

Besides, the Clerk of the National Assembly also transmitted a copy of the document to the state legislatures.

However, about
eight days later, there was a controversy over the document, as the
House of Representatives, at its plenary session on June 24, complained
that the clean copy forwarded to the states was the Senate version and
not the harmonised version of the conference committee set up by both
chambers and subsequently approved by the two chambers on June 2 and 3,
respectively. It, therefore, directed the Clerk of the House to liaise
with the Clerk to the National Assembly with a view to withdrawing the
document.

The matter has
since been settled. The chairman of the House ad-hoc committee on the
review of the constitution, Usman Nafada, who is also the Deputy
Speaker, said in a statement that the mistake had been rectified.
According to him, the cover of the harmonised version sent to the state
legislature carried the imprint of the Senate but with the right
contents, instead of the imprint of both chambers.

That controversy was just one of the many that followed the amendment of the constitution in the last two years.

The very first
controversy was over the actual position of Mr Nafada in the National
Assembly Joint Committee on Constitution Review (JCCR). While senators
said the Deputy Speaker should merely be deputy chairman of the joint
committee, members of the House insisted he should be a co-chairman
since both chambers are equal.

The disagreement led to both Houses conducting the amendment separately until they reached the harmonization stage.

Earlier in June,
members were at a loss over whether the amended document should be sent
to Goodluck Jonathan for his assent just like he does to other laws
made by the National Assembly.