NATIONAL ASSEMBLY CRISIS: BLAME MR. PRESIDENT

Shaba Ibrahim 

These are indeed trying times for the majority of Nigerians many of whom voted out the ruling P.D.P largely for the personality of Gen. Muhammadu Buhari and the need to shove off the clueless Jonathan rather than for any special love of his party, the APC, a fact I believe Buhari knew or had reasons to know. I shall be back to this point shortly. For the average Nigerian, the no-nonsense disposition of the APC Presidential Candidate (now President) it was believed, is capable of reigning in the insurgents and taking on corruption head-on. Little did they reckon with a new version of insurgency in the mould of the crisis in the national assembly. Ordinarily, it is the party with the majority of members in the legislature that is expected to fill in the positions of the principal officers in both houses of the national assembly.

Senators Abubakar Bukola Saraki, George Akume and Ahmed Lawal were candidates vying for the position of President of the Senate while Hons. Yakubu Dogara and Femi Gbajabiamila were candidates for the position of Speaker of the House of Representatives. The APC had its preferred candidates for both houses though  Ahmed Lawan for Senate and Femi Gbajabiamila for the House of Representatives. Yet the duo of Saraki and Dogara in defiance of their partys position contested and won elections as President of the Senate and Speaker of the House of Representatives respectively. Ordinarily and as is expected in civilised democracies, that should be that. But not here in Nigeria.

The Senates position seems even more precarious with the emergency of Senator Ike Ekwerenmadu of the PDP as Deputy Senate President in a Chamber dominated by the ruling APC! The party would have nothing of such. Saraki and Dogara thus stood accused of subverting the APCs interest in pursuit of personal agenda. Things in both chambers have since taken a turn for the worst and as with crisis of this nature, unseen hands outside both chambers are pulling the levers of conflict. Now the party is enmeshed in an avoidable political cul-de-sac with solution seeming so far off with each passing day. Before proceeding further, and as a prelude to appreciating the culpability of the respective combatants, it is necessary to attempt an isolation of facts in dispute from those that are settled. It can hardly be disputed that Abubakar Bukola Saraki and Yakubu Dogara nursed ambition to be President of the Senate and Speaker of the House of Representatives respectively and worked for it, neither is it in dispute that that President Muhammadu Buhari had expressed a desire to be neutral in the election in furtherance of his principle of non-interference in legislative matters.

The only arguable issue that is germane to situating the blame and is yet to be clearly defined is the extent of neutrality Mr. President, taken not essentially from his expressed position but his body language. Saraki and Dogara emerged winners in the election and since their election, both have come under severe attack and threat from the APC leadership. If one may ask, what exactly is the crime of the duo to merit this unprecedented onslaught by a party against its own principal members? One “sin” that reverberates each time this issue crops up is that their emergence is an unpardonable affront to party supremacy. Senator Ali Ndume on AIT on the 8th of July, 2015 opined that Ekweremadus election as Deputy Senate President was abnormal but concedes that no senate rules were breached in the process. With due respect to the Senate leader, nothing can be abnormal which is done in accordance with laid down rules. I think history is only repeating itself in an uncanny way here.

Recall that former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Rt. Hon. Aminu Tambuwal also emerged Speaker in defiance of his partys (then P.D.P) expressed preference for Hon. Mulikat Akande who later became House Leader. Tambuwal could not have dared the P.D.P but for the active support of the ACN (now APC) members in the House of Representatives, buoyed on by their leader, Senator Bola Tinubu in a manner calculated to spite the ruling P.D.P. Now the same scenario has played out and APC is crying foul. Prudence would have dictated that a party with such reputational hangover would be more circumspect in its handling of a situation so delicate as the election of principal officers of the national assembly. Not so with the APC.

I have listened to arguments suggesting that what happened on the floor of the Senate on the 9th of June 2015 went beyond the “provocation” offered the P.D.P by the ACN in the build up to the 7th National Assembly. I find it amusing that APC leaders would attempt to prescribe to the P.D.P. the proportionality of retaliation! What the P.D.P gave back is in my view an improved variety of the bitter pills forced down its throat during the Tambuwal saga.

The APC ought to have been careful in its handling of the situation that has regrettably seen a victorious party crying out like the vanquished. How the APC lost sight of the fact that the P.D.P. could cash in on any opportunity to deliver a retaliatory blow surprises me. This crisis unfortunate as it seems presents a litmus test to the Buhari presidency on its capacity to steer the ship of this nation aright thenceforth. I hope Mr. President realises the fact that nigerians are anxious for results.

Therefore to allow this crisis to continue under the guise of reigning in the renegades in the name of party supremacy will not augur well for the APC. Yes party decisions may be supreme but this is not without qualification. No party decision can be supreme in an area where it lacks jurisdiction to make rules. The last time I checked the senate standing rules, there was no provision calling for input of political parties in the election of principal officers. Such election is guided by rules outside the jurisdictional competence of any political party. From the moment a person gets elected, his conduct and affairs are now regulated by extant laws superior to those of the party on whose platform he was elected. I therefore hold strongly to the view that the question of party supremacy as it relates to election of principals officers of the national assembly is clearly misplaced. In the entire scenario, I see a failure of leadership. But then, who is to blame for all these? Is it Saraki and Dogara? Let me enter a verdict of not guilty for the duo because they did exactly what 95% of the nigerian politician would do in the circumstance.

I had earlier stated that Mr. Presidents principled position of non-interference in legislative affairs is commendable but given the peculiarity of the nigerian situation, I see some naivety in this. How can the president be neutral in the election of principal officers of the national assembly? Given that the APC gladiators were sharply divided on choice of candidates, was it not incumbent on Mr. President to provide necessary leadership and reconcile the warring factions? If he was truly “neutral” and could work with anybody that emerges from the election as claimed, why try to intervene by convening the I.C.C. meeting of legislators same day as the scheduled convening of the national assembly? Why should the APC decide on candidates when the president has expressed a preference for neutrality?  Was the APC unaware of the presidents position and vice-versa? What is the APCs position on the situation in Benue State House of Assembly where a minority APC member is speaker? If Benue is acceptable why not this? Why would the president now intervene after the conclusion of the process rather than advice the maintenance of the status-quo? What exactly was the president thinking? I could go on and on but for space constraints.

I submit that an essential characteristic of leadership is the ability to reconcile opposites. I had earlier stated that nigerians voted out Jonathan and the P.D.P. more because of Buharis personality than their love of the APC. If the president realises this, I expect him to be more proactive. He must be ready to provide leadership not just to nigerians but APC as well. To do otherwise would be a tacid endorsement of the politics of “anointing” which the APC has gained some notoriety for. It cannot be business as usual. For the records, the fight for the control of the national assembly is a fight for vested interests and by extension 2019 and not for the nigerian masses. The earlier Mr. President realises this, the better for us all. After a forensic examination of the crisis bedevilling the 8th national assembly, I have come to the irresistible conclusion that the failure of President Muhammadu Buhari to rise up to the occasion when it mattered most is fundamental to the crisis. Adopting what I call curious neutrality in a matter so focal to his partys change philosophy was clearly an abdication of fatherly responsibility. The situation seems further aggravated by his belated attempt to intervene when so much water has passed under the bridge.

I believe that given the kind of respect Buhari enjoys amongst nigerians, this matter would have been settled if he had taken a position at the onset. For this singular omission to act, President Buhari is at least vicariously liable for the entire crisis. My advise to the APC leadership is to talk less and return to the drawing board to see how situations like this can be averted in future rather than crying over spilt milk. Make no mistake about this; the PDP is lying in ambush like a trojan horse waiting to cash on any major slip by the APC; that is the duty of an opposition party. And for those who still underestimate the P.D.Ps capacity for mischief please be reminded that while the APC may have succeeded in chasing away Alibaba, the forty thieves are still very much alive and active.