The bill of the Parliament seeking to
reorder the sequence of elections which intriguingly hit the brick wall remains
a pandemonium. President Muhammadu Buhari recently withheld his assent over
purported conflicts and interference in the administrative duties of the
Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Statutorily, powers to make
laws for the federation are vested in the National Assembly; nonetheless, the
powers are relative and not absolute.
Some argue that if the legislature has
powers to make laws, it can also amend the laws. No doubt, this is factual but
also largely systematic. It is trite that acts of a parliament have a red line.
Thus, the reordering bill if vetoed will
prima facie become laws, though defective. However, the position may likely be altered
by a judge’s gavel on account of independence of the electoral body as provided
in Section 158 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as
amended.
Generally, democracy is a game of
numbers and the same principle guides legislative tasks. Nonetheless, the benchmark
of quality in lawmaking is the repugnancy test. For example, a bill albeit endorsed
by majority as required may in the end not see a green light if convincingly
repugnant to social justice, equity and good conscience, as the ultimate
lawmaker is the court. Hypothetically, a barbaric law seeking to eliminate newly
born-twins as in the olden days though may have been successfully passed and
vetoed with two-thirds majority will inevitably be knocked out by the court. It
is therefore imperative to underline that legislative matters go beyond numbers
but alongside prudence, realism and reasonableness. By the controversial bill,
it implies that where a particular election is postponed over critical unpredictable
circumstances or annulled for a repeat over fundamental flaws by the court, all
other elections will be annulled since elections must hold as ordered. What a
blunder!
The second element is the object or
purpose of a bill. A bill that is deficient in goals and objectives is good-for-nothing.
It is insufficient to hit the gavel over numerical strength in support of a
bill. Emphatically, bills must be devoid of conflicts with existing laws. Where
such occurs, even if overwhelmingly endorsed alongside all ECOWAS parliaments,
the court will notwithstanding, inevitably set it aside. Primarily, a bill seeking for amendments must
show clearly the mischiefs it intends to remedy. Incidentally, the contentious reordering
of elections, perceptibly, lacked any clear objectives. Above all, it is conventionally
the administrative duties of the electoral umpire to plan and conduct elections
globally. The Constitution repetitively, generally guides INEC on the salient
issues vis-à-vis time of elections in Sections 132, 76, 178 and 116 for
President, National Assembly, governors and House of Assembly respectively. The
powers vested in the National Population Commission (NPC), a comparable body to
make appointments in Section 158(2) supra commonsensically extends to INEC by
rules of ejusdem generis, that is; same
classification in the preceding subsection. Literarily, appointments include
schedules and arrangements of events.
As a matter of fact, even if INEC elects
to review the draft-timetable over and over, perhaps to schedule National
Assembly election as the last in sequence, it is absolutely within its powers
and no institution can query it. Electoral umpires are strictly independent and
any attempts to interfere into its affairs will be ultra vires. INEC has
unfettered powers to present any timetables approved by the commission apart
from complying with the above cited necessary minimum period prior to elections
as no harm is done to any candidate or political party on who contests first,
middle or last. Certainly, the court cannot allocate its precious times to aimlessly
sit over who contests first or last. The National Assembly (NASS) for example,
by act of parliament established federal universities whilst National Universities
Commission (NUC) accredits academic programmes and provides course-contents and
guidelines. However, neither NASS nor NUC has powers to produce examination
timetables for students but university’s management. This is how administrative
laws played out. Similarly, the act of Parliament only provides the legal
framework for the establishment of INEC and its structures but not to delve
into its administrative or managerial duties.
Under Public law, there are acts of
the parliament and administrative laws by way of delegated legislation. The
lawmakers demagogically, incautiously reordered the election of the President
to be the last in sequence but retained National Assembly’s as the first;
believably, actions strategically designed to exploitatively utilize the party’s
machinery to win their elections first. Unfortunately, the powers to register
political parties alongside voters, plan and conduct elections are exclusive
duties of electoral umpires all over the world. To sum, the legislature
provides a broader framework of the law with necessary objectives and
directions whilst the technical details are left to the executive to fill in.
This is also referred to as subordinate legislation. A legislature that will encroach
into duties of an executive body is unconsciously displaying incompetence and
superciliousness. Administrative bodies proficiently understand the
nitty-gritties involved in carrying out its tasks. The essential review that
INEC should keenly ruminate irrespective of financial implications is to
conduct elective positions distinctively rather than merged elections to enable
electorates liberally decide and vote accordingly.
Commendably, the lawmakers this time
acted astutely and displayed maturity by firstly opting to deliberate extensively
on the reasons adduced for rejecting the bill rather than hurriedly invoking actions
to veto the President as attempted earlier. It’s also important that the
lawmakers should always embark on researches and possibly consult professionals
in specific fields prior to sensitive actions to reduce numbers of defective
bills suggestive of recklessness and unskillfulness. Legislative tasks always
require holistic considerations beyond mere political bullying. Again, over the
years, lawmakers mistake the oversight functions as active duties and thereby
abuse it. Oversight function is a supervisory right to interfere for explanations
or examinations over activities in other sections and not to take over their
administrative duties.
Umegboro, public affairs analyst and an associate of The Chartered
Institute of Arbitrators (UK) (07057101974 SMS only)
No comments:
Post a Comment