THE constitutional aberration on Thursday in which
indeterminate numbers of the National Assembly ousted the provisions of the
Constitution to please President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is a reckless step in
democracy worsened by the intentionality of its execution.
Section 305 of the Constitution interprets a state of
emergency as a situation of “national danger, disaster or terrorist attacks in
which a government suspends normal constitutional procedures to regain
control.” There are parts of Nigeria that meet these conditions. Did the
President impose a state of emergency?
The President has the constitutional power to declare
a state of emergency in any part of Nigeria. However, this proclamation must be
published in the official government gazette and ratified by the National
Assembly, requiring approval from two-thirds of its members.
The President exceeded his powers and knew his men at
the helms of the National Assembly will pass the proclamation suspending
elected officials in Rivers State.
What stopped the President, who gloats about his
democratic credentials, from building on the sound democratic and
constitutional examples former Goodluck Jonathan laid when confronted with
terrorist attacks in North East and North Central Nigeria?
President Jonathan on 31 December 2011 declared a
state of emergency in Borno, Niger, Plateau, and Yobe States without removing
elected officials. On 14 May 2013, Jonathan imposed emergency rule in Adamawa,
Borno, and Yobe States with the elected government structures still intact.
President Tinubu should have used these most recent
examples of interpreting the Constitution which aimed at heightening security
in the affected States to regain control of the areas and stop the insecurity
from spreading.
Tinubu's reaction when Jonathan declared state of
emergency without removing elected officials:
“It is a display of unpardonable mediocrity and
diabolic partisanship geared towards 2015. Borno and Yobe States have been
literally under armies of occupation with the attendant excruciating hardship
experienced daily by the indigenes and residents of these areas,” Tinubu had
said in 2013.
“This government now wants to use the excuse of the
security challenges faced by the Governors to remove them from the States
considered hostile to the 2015 PDP/Jonathan project.
“No Governor of a State in Nigeria is the Chief
Security Officer. Putting the blame on the Governors who have been effectively
emasculated for the abysmal performance of the government at the centre, which
controls all these security agencies, smacks of ignorance and mischief.”
The same Tinubu 12 years on blames Governor Sim Fubara
for not maintaining security in Rivers State as if there had been
constitutional amendments awarding Governors such powers.
Godswill Akpabio, Senate President, and Tajudeen
Abass, Speaker, House of Representatives were more interested in approving the
declaration than following constitutionally stated procedures.
They would not allow debates. They did not permit
"reminders" that members present needed to be counted to ensure,
first that two-thirds of them was in attendance, and a count of those who voted
for or against the declaration was needed to reach a decision, according to the
Constitution.
An uncertain number of legislators in both houses of
the National Assembly passed the declaration by voice vote.
How many members were present? Did the numbers reach
the two-thirds required for the proceedings to continue? Where are the records
of the attendance?
Akpabio and Abbas should explain to Nigerians what volume of voice votes represents the two-thirds of members which the Constitution requires. They may also need to tell us which Constitution they used or when they amended the Constitution to give them powers to opt for two-thirds of voice votes.
MultiChoice as FCCPC's choice
THE Federal Competition and Consumer Protection
Commission, FCCPC, established by the Federal Competition and Consumer
Protection Act, FCCPA, in 2018, is a very powerful Commission that should be
working for the interests of Nigerians, all Nigerians, and residents of
Nigeria.
Grand expectations from the Commission include to
develop and promote fair, efficient and competitive markets in the Nigerian
economy, facilitate access by all citizens to safe products, and secure the
protection of rights for all consumers in Nigeria.
If one is to make a list of goods and services that
benefit Nigerians, they would run into hundreds of thousands and their
producers and providers could run into millions. What does FCCPC do about them?
It does something.
The story was about recently of the Vice President
calling Mr. Olatunji Bello, Chief Executive Officer/Executive Vice-Chairman of
FCCPC, to re-open a shop that belonged to the Vice President's friend. Whatever
the offence was, the FCCPC clampdown on the shop was lifted.
Other times one hears about FCCPC are when it takes on
MultiChoice, apparently its service provider of choice to exercise its
regulatory authority which is still at most vacuous. What is so special about
MultiChoice to elicit such attention? The question is pertinent because other
providers of the services as MultiChoice do not undergo the same scrutiny.
The issue is always about price adjustments. Once
MultiChoice announces a change in the rates for accessing its services, FCCPC
bares its regulatory fangs as if its researches do not capture the increases in
prices of goods and services across all sectors. Government agencies have been
increasing from travel documents, cost of filings in court to petroleum
products.
One never heard a whimper from FCCPC. Even shops that
it insisted should display prices of goods, determine the mode of compliance
which is not in the interest of consumers. FCCPC’s silence may be related to
the Vice President's calls and the fact that market forces are sometimes
political forces - most big businesses know who to call.
Rising energy costs, whether petroleum products or
electricity, and insecurity are driving high prices of goods and services.
FCCPC knows this but maintains a grave silence about these service providers
whose services are more critical to the survival of the economy and Nigerians
than digital television.
Cost of financial services has gone up. Merely keeping
a bank account comes with new costs. Medications and health services have
higher prices daily. School fees are continously on the rise, including in
government institutions. These are goods and services that are very important
for the survival of the society.
How many million Nigerians subscribe to MultiChoice
which keeps millions of Nigerians employed through the value chain of its
service? Why is FCCPC not concerned about the providers of other services and
goods that affect more millions of Nigeria?
Every organisation is also blaming the high exchange
rate for high prices of goods and services. Is MultiChoice exempt from high
foreign exchange costs when it pays for most of its programmes in foreign
exchange?
How does FCCPC "promote fair, efficient and
competitive markets in the Nigerian economy" which its mandate prices?
Competition is supposed to propel market forces to deal with service providers
whose services are beyond the reach of consumers.
Does FCCPC have the powers to determine the prices and
services? What has it done with the airlines operators, producers of alcoholic
and non-alcoholic beverages, who increase their prices, particularly when
demand is high?
FCCPC should stretch its attention to goods and
services that are essential. Digital television is not an essential service.
Those who can afford it should pay, others can go elsewhere.
Essential as foods are, many Nigerians are dropping
some items from their menu. They cannot afford them. FCCPC should know about it
or it does not matter.
FCCPC has gone to court to enforce its orders on digital television rates. When will FCCPC go to court over the rising prices of essential goods and services?
Finally...
TWO sets of Nigerians have to be commended for
lessening the burden of an extraordinarily sad week of constitutional
vandalisation, deaths from accidents and bandits:
Senators Seriake Dickson, Enyinnaya Abaribe, and Aminu
Waziri Tambuwal who finally walked out as Akpabio pursued his determined
outcome. Representatives Obi Aguocha and Fred Agbedi had their calls for
constitutional procedures ignored. Abbas too was on a mission. There were
others in both houses, who worked hard to rescue the Constitution.
And the Super Eagles who turned in a 2-0 defeat of
Rwanda in a World Cup qualifier, when they were hardly given a chance to win.
Comments:
Leave a Reply