A REQUEST from President Goodluck Jonathan for the removal of Alhaji Muhammadu Ari Gwaska, as a member of the Federal Character Commission (FCC) representing Nasarawa State, yesterday created some disquiet in the Senate with some senators insisting that due process must be followed.
President Goodluck Jonathan, last November, wrote to the Senate seeking confirmation of the removal of Gwaska as member of the FCC. He was accused of gross misconduct, consistent refusal to respect lawful directives, absenting himself from duty without authorisation, unlawfully retaining two official cars and some strategic officials of the Commission in his private custody and has remained unwilling to subject himself to constituted authority, thus, creating an uncondusive atmosphere for the Commission, which may encourage rancour in the system with its attendance negative effects on the efficiency and service delivery.
Contributing to the debate in the Committee of the Whole House, senators, while saying that the President’s letter to the Senate was in order, however disagreed over his request with some demanding that the alleged misconduct of Gwaska be investigated by the Chamber to ascertain the veracity or otherwise.
Ita Enang (Akwa Ibom North East) commended the President for the letter, noting that the Executive had started fulfilling the provisions of the 1999 Constitution.
“The President has done well to have provided reasons for his request. I support his request and urge other colleagues to do the same thing in order to approve the request”, he stated.
Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu, while commending the President for the communication, however, pointed out that subsequently, the responsibility of supervising public office holders through oversight functions and initiating removal of erring officials should begin with the Senate as enshrined in the 1999 Constitution.
“We practise bi-camera parliament and, there are additional powers given to the Senate. We are beginning to take up some silent aspects of our Constitution. The President has just called our attention to this misconduct but we should be the people to initiate the move for the person to be removed. It is not for us to confirm the request; rather, Mr. President is to act on our directives. It should have come as a result of our oversight functions.
“ Section 157 states that subject to the provisions of Section 3, a person holding any of the offices may only be removed by the President acting on the address of the two-thirds majority of the Senate. I support that this request be approved but subsequently, we should initiate the process ourselves”, he said.
The flow of events was however disrupted as some senators opposed the tradition of the Senate to always confirm presidential requests without giving fair hearing to indicted persons.
Chris Ngige (Anambra Central) and Kabiru Gaya (Kano South), who led opposition to the request, argued that the accused be given an opportunity of fair hearing by listening to him. They maintained that the President ought to have forwarded to the Chamber a copy of the report of the committee that investigated the alleged misconduct.
“People can hate a person and refer him to the President for removal. It is better for the Senate to do the needful for history purpose. There is nothing stopping the office of the President from attaching ;the report of the disciplinary committee indicting the candidate. Let us exercise caution and ask for a copy of a disciplinary committee report that probed the man.
“We do not doubt our President but we should do what is right so that history will vindicate us. We participate in the appointment; we must also participate in the discipline fully. As such, we should not be in a hurry to execute this exercise”, they stated.
Barnabasa Gemade (Benue North East) urged the Senate to endorse the request of the President, cautioning that arms of government should not lose faith in one another.
“It was not proper for us to assume that the due process was not followed before the President sent the letter to the Senate. It is more reasonable to believe that every arm is carrying out its duties in a proper way. I am not speaking on aspect of discipline but nomination to this commission is from the state and for the President to have considered the report and sent it to the Senate for approval, the state would have been in conformity, otherwise, they would have come forward to oppose the removal.”
Senate President David Mark, after listening to the debate, asked for the interpretation of Section 157 of the 1999 Constitution which provides for the endorsement of the Senate on the removal of members of FCC and after some lawyers in the chamber had spoken, he advised that the issue be referred to the Committee on Federal Character for investigation.
“There are two basic issues – whether the Senate supports the action of the President but needs to confirm it or whether the report was enough and should suffice. It was not whether the candidate should be removed or not but whether due process was followed.
“They should call him and give him the opportunity to give his own side of the story. But the House must learn to trust each other and believe that what they are doing is just and fair. We should not say that because it is coming from the Executive, that we must doubt it”, he said.
He subsequently put the question and the matter was referred to the Committee on Federal Character with a mandate to report back in one week.
No comments:
Post a Comment