Xenophobic: Reps urges Jonathan to recall Nigeria envoy

In response to the continuous xenophobic attacks on Africans in South Africa, President Goodluck Jonathan Has been advised by the House to, as a matter of urgency, recall Nigeria’s High Commissioner to the country pending when the attacks will stop.
The lawmakers warned that Nigeria will no longer tolerate killings of its citizens.
The resolution followed the adoption of the prayers (as amended) of a motion of urgent matter of public importance by the Chairman, House Committee on Diaspora Matters, Abike Dabiri-Erewa.
It is sad that the recent attacks that has left many dead, businesses and shops vandalised, many beaten up, was incited by a statement by the South African Zulu King, Goodwill Zwelithini.
The King was alleged to have ordered African migrants to return their country as they are no longer welcome in South Africa.
In their resolution, the lawmakers also appealed to the federal government to apply the diplomatic principle of reciprocity in dealing with South Africa.
The lawmakers added that if South Africa continues to frustrate Nigeria businesses, Nigeria must also do the same to South Africa businesses in the country.
In addition, the lawmakers stated Nigeria frowns at the attacks and will no longer tolerate the killing of its nationals in South Africa.
President Goodluck Jonathan must immediately convey this to President Zuma as a matter of urgency.

Senators shocked over Jonathan’s refusal to okay constitution amendment bill

THE build up to the looming face-off between President Goodluck Jonathan and the National Assembly over the former’s refusal to endorse the fourth alteration of the 1999 Constitution gathered momentum yesterday.

Senators were furious after Senate President David Mark read a letter containing Jonathan’s refusal of assent to the constitution alteration.

Already, the Senate Ad-hoc Committee on Constitution review has summoned emergency meeting to discuss the development.

The meeting was scheduled for yesterday and today.

Apart from the emergency meeting, Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu-led committee will also hold a retreat.

Some of the senators angered by the president’s withholding of assent on the Bill are already up in arms, threatening to mobilise their colleagues to override the veto.

The senators, who felt that they did the right thing in the alteration of relevant Sections of the constitution, said that one option open to them was to mobilise members of the two chambers of the National Assembly and the required number of state Houses of Assembly to override the president.

One of the senators said there were salient alterations made in the constitution that were aimed at moving the country forward.

“The work we did painstakingly for months cannot just be thrown to the waste bin with a stroke of the pen. We know how to overcome this sweeping rejection of the work of 109 senators, 360 members of the House of Representatives and over 23 Houses of Assembly.

There was pin drop silence in the Senate chamber as Mark read the seven page memo entitled: “Re: Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (Fourth Alteration) Act 2015.”

For effect, Mark took his time to read the lengthy document, ensuring that he placed emphasis where Jonathan stressed.

Immediately the Senate president was done with the memo, Senator Sadiq Yar’Adua (Katsina Central) raised a motion to urge his colleagues to set aside relevant Senate rules to enable them to discuss the presidential memo.

Yar’Adua said the president’s memo was so weighty that its discussion should not be delayed.

Mark, however, countered.

The Senate president, who agreed that Jonathan raised weighty issues in the memo, said first thing should be done first.

The first thing, he said, was to circulate the memo to senators to study it with the hope of enabling them make informed decisions on the issues raised by the President.

Mark also said the appropriate committee, in this case, the Senate Committee on Constitution Review, should consider the presidential memo.

He said the committee had already scheduled to meet. He then referred the memo to it.

It was learnt that aggrieved senators have started mounting pressure on Senate leadership to allow the chamber to override the President’s veto.

But the Presidency is insisting that any override of the veto could only become applicable if there is a legal threshold for the amendments to the constitution.

According to a source in the Senate, Ekweremadu and members of his committee from both chambers were shocked by the rejection of the amendments.

They said the 12 issues raised by the President were “legal technicalities”, which can be mutually addressed.

Some of the senators alleged that the “errors” spotted by the President might have been the handwork of the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Mohammed Bello Adoke (SAN).

They vowed to deal with Adoke by invoking the power to override the President’s Veto.

A top source said: “The mood in the Senate and the House of Representatives was shocking and glooming. Ekweremadu and his team were just unhappy that the amendments were thrown away by the President.

“Senators are threatening fire and brimstone to stop the President from vetoing the amendments. Some of them are pushing for the invocation of the power to override the President’s veto as enshrined in the constitution.

“The anger of the senators stemmed from the fact that time is no longer on the side of the National Assembly to meet the thresholds in Section 9(3) of the 1999 Constitution to make the Fourth Alteration Act 2015 legal.

“They are unhappy that all their efforts have been wasted. As it is now, only the 8th National Assembly can complete the process for the ongoing amendments to the constitution.

The source added:  “The Senate leadership is calling for calm to open up talks with the Presidency.”

Another source said: “We told the Ekweremadu’s Committee that there was no basis rushing to pass the amendments into law. We said they should be careful, but they did not follow due process.

“There must be legal basis for amendments to the constitution. If there was no compliance with due process, do you want the President to assent to it?”

The power of the National Assembly to override the President on any bill is contained in Section 58 (1-5) of the 1999 Constitution.

The section says: “The power of the National Assembly to make laws shall be exercised by bills passed by both the Senate and the House of Representatives and, except as otherwise provided by subsection (5) of this section, assented to by the President.

“A bill may originate in either the Senate or the House of Representatives and shall not become law unless it has been passed and, except as otherwise provided by this section and section 59 of this Constitution, assented to in accordance with the provisions of this section.

“Where a bill has been passed by the House in which it originated, it shall be sent to the other House, and it shall be presented to the President for assent when it has been passed by that other House and agreement has been reached between the two Houses on any amendment made on it.

“Where a bill is presented to the President for assent, he shall within 30 days thereof signify that he assents or that he withholds assent.

“Where the President withholds his assent and the bill is again passed by each House by two-thirds majority, the bill shall become law and the assent of the President shall not be required.”

But the position of the presidency, however, yesterday was that the veto had no personal undertone.

Jonathan had said he would not assent to the alterations because they did not satisfy the strict requirements of Section 9(3) of the 1999 Constitution.

Rivers election won't stand says Peterside Dakuku

The candidate of the All Progressives Congress in the Rivers State governorship election, Dakuku Peterside, has expressed confidence that the electoral fraud allegedly perpetrated by the Peoples Democratic Party during the elections will not stand.

Dakuku, who spoke on Tuesday, explained that it was too early for the PDP to celebrate because the era of people getting away with electoral fraud was over.

He also described claims by the PDP campaign that media organisations, civil society groups as well as foreign observers who issued reports based on their observation were induced.

Dakuku said, “Are they saying that the European Union, the Embassy of the United States in Nigeria and several well-meaning friends of Nigeria who witnessed the sham in Rivers were induced?

“You cannot cover the sun with one finger. Everybody who witnessed what happened in Rivers knew what happened. What about our party leaders and members that were murdered?

“The blood of these innocent Nigerians and the tears of their widows and orphans will surely speak. On our part, we are going to court to seek justice for the Rivers people.”

He spoke against the backdrop of a statement by his PDP rival, Chief Nyesom Wike, who was declared winner of the election by the Independent National Electoral Commission.

Wike had in a statement issued by his media assistant, Simeon Nwakaudu, described statements issued by monitors condemning the polls in Rivers as sponsored.

Olanusi sue Olusegun Mimiko for salary stoppage

Ondo State Deputy Governor Ali Olanusi yesterday sued Governor Olusegun Mimiko for alleged stopping his allowances and benefits.
Olanusi is seeking an order of the court restraining Mimiko from stopping his allowances and salary of his aides.
There has been friction between the two top public officers over the defection of the deputy governor from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC).
Olanusi’s counsel Oluwole Kehinde argued that the deputy governor is still constitutionally empowered to enjoy all his allowances and benefits. The governor allegedly gave a directive to stop the salaries and allowances of all political aides of the deputy governor.
A source said Mimiko took the decision to witch-hunt all those who are loyal to Olanusi because of his defection.
It was learnt that the governor had given an order to the Commissioner of Police, Isaac Eke, to withdraw all the deputy governor’s security aides and also prevent him from having access to his official vehicles.
Justice Sanmi Isaq ordered that the respondents should be put on notice.
He said all the respondents, including Mimiko, Eke and the State Director of the Department of State Security (DSS), should be served with the notice.
The case has been adjourned till April 23.

Jonathan refuse assent on Constitutional amendment bill

In what appeared a last-minute face-off, President Goodluck Jonathan has rejected amendments to the 1999 Constitution by the National Assembly. He said he would not assent to the amendments because they do not satisfy the strict requirements of Section 9(3) of the 1999 Constitution. He queried the decision of the National Assembly to whittle down some Executive powers of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
He also faulted some amendments which will give Executive powers and duties to the Legislature and the Judiciary. Jonathan made his position known in a seven-page letter to Senate President David Mark and House of Representatives Speaker Aminu Waziri Tambuwal. The return of the Constitution Amendment Bill jolted Senators and members of the House.
The President listed 12 errors in the amendments. They are as follows:
 •Non-compliance with the threshold specified in Section 9(3) of the 1999 Constitution on amendments;
•Alteration to constitution cannot be valid with mere voice votes unless supported by the votes of not less than four-fifths majority all members of National Assembly and two-thirds of all the 36 State Houses of Assembly;
 •Right to free basic education and primary and maternal care services imposed on private institutions •Flagrant violation of the doctrine of separation of powers,
 •Unjustified whittling down of the Executive powers of the Federation vested in the President by virtue of Section 5(1) of the 1999 Constitution;
 •30 days allowed for assent of the President; and
 •Limiting expenditure in default of appropriation from 6months to three months The others are: •Creation of the Office of Accountant-General of the Federation distinct from the Accountant General of the Federal Government
•Empowering National Economic Council to appoint the Accountant-General of the Federation instead of the President;
 •Allowing NJC to now appoint the Attorney-General of the Federation rather than the President; •Unwittingly whittling down the discretionary powers of the Attorney-General of the Federation.
 The President said he has no choice than to veto the amendments to the constitution as forwarded to him by the National Assembly. He said: “In view of the foregoing and absence of credible evidence that the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (Fourth Alteration) Act 2015 satisfied the strict requirements of Section 9(3) of the 1999 Constitution, it will be unconstitutional for me to assent to it.
“I therefore withhold my assent and accordingly remit Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (Fourth Alteration) Act 2015 to the Senate /House of Representatives of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.” The letter reads: “May I draw Your Excellency’s esteemed attention to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (Fourth Alteration) Act, 2015 that has been passed by the National Assembly and transmitted to me for assent. “I have accordingly examined the substance of the provisions and the procedure adopted by the National Assembly to pass the Act and wish to observe as follows: “Section 4 of the Fourth Alteration Act, 2015 seeks to alter Section 9 of the 1999 Constitution by the insertion of a new subsection 3A, which dispenses with the assent of the President in the process of constitutional amendment. “However, this alteration can only be valid if the proposal was supported by the votes of not less than four-fifth majority of all the members of each House of the National Assembly and approved by a resolution of the House of Assembly of not less than two-thirds of all the States as provided by Section 9 (3) of the 1999 Constitution.
 “ This is a fundamental requirement of the Constitution and in the absence of credible evidence that this requirement was met in the Votes of Proceedings of the National Assembly, it will be unconstitutional for me to assent to this Bill. “In light of the above, I am of the respectful view that I should withhold assent until it can be shown that the National Assembly has complied with the threshold specified in Section 9 (3) of the 1999 Constitution. “However, assuming without conceding that the necessary thresholds were met by the National Assembly, there are a number of provisions in the Act that altogether constitute flagrant violation of the doctrine of separation of powers enshrined in the 1999 Constitution and an unjustified whittling down of the executive powers of the federation vested in the President by virtue of Section 5(1) of the 1999 Constitution. The said Section 45A of the Fourth Alteration Act 2015, which guarantees the right to free basic education is too open ended and should have been restricted to government schools. He added: “This is because, a right unless qualified or restricted must be observed by all. It follows therefore that the right to free basic education under this provision if taken to its logical conclusion, will invariably apply to private schools, which could not have been the intendment of the legislature. “This same argument applies to Section 45B, which guarantees unqualified right to free primary and maternal care services. The implication of this is that private institutions will be obliged under Constitution to offer free medical services since it is a right and this is not only impracticable, but also could not have been the intention of the law giver. “ There is therefore the need for these provisions to be redrafted to restrict the enjoyment of these rights and place the obligation to provide the conditions necessary for the enjoyment of the rights on the government.” Jonathan also queried the limitation of the power of the President to withhold assent to bills to 30 days. He said 30 days might not be sufficient for a President to go through such bills. He said: “The power vested in the President to withhold his assent to Bills passed by the National Assembly is part of the checks and balances contained in the Constitution. “Withholding of assent therefore constitutes a check on the exercise of legislative powers in a constitutional democracy especially as the Executive Branch has the responsibility of enforcing laws passed by the National Assembly. However, some of the Acts of the National Assembly emanate from Private Members’ Bills, which in many cases, the Executive may not have had sufficient input. “ It is also instructive to note that in some cases, more than one Bill is transmitted to the President for assent and that the President requires the advice of relevant agencies of government before he can assent to the Bill. “Against this background, the 30 days allowed for assent of the President may not be adequate in some cases for the President to make a decision as to whether or not to assent.” The President disagreed with the lawmakers for restricting the President’s right to spend funds in default of appropriation to three months instead of six months. He said the amendment by the lawmakers does not take into cognizance unforeseen circumstances the nation might go through any time. He added: “This alteration seeks to limit the period when expenditure can be authorized in default of appropriation from the 6 months provided in the Constitution to 3 months. “I am of the view that this provision has the potential of occasioning financial hardships and unintended shutdown of government business particularly where four unforeseen reasons and exigencies in the polity, the National Assembly is unable to pass the Appropriation Act do not justify the reduction of the six-month time limit in the Constitution. I am of the respectful view that the current position should have been maintained.” He blamed the National Assembly for recommending that the National Economic Council(NEC) should henceforth appoint the Accountant-General of the Federation. He said: “The provision of section 84A that creates the new Office of Account-General of the Federation distinct from Accountant- General of the Federal Government has not addressed the funding requirement for the establishment of the office. “ It is necessary to clarify for instance, who staffs and funds the office of Accountant General of the Federation and from whose budget he will be paid since he serve the three tiers of Government. “ It is also important to state who will exercise oversight powers over the office. Furthermore, the National Economic Council, which is mainly an advisory body, is now charged with the responsibility of recommending those to be appointed to the Office of Accountant General of the Federation.” Jonathan described the amendment on the separation the Office of Attorney General of the Federation from the Minister of Justice as ambiguous. He said: “These alterations encapsulate wide-ranging provision that seek to separate the Office of Attorney General of the Federation from the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General from the Commissioner for Justice in the respective States of the federation. They also provide for the independence of the Office of Attorney General by guaranteeing tenure and funding. “However, as desirable as the separation is, there are some provisions that validate the doctrine of separation of powers and also negate the age-long independence and absolute discretion that the office has enjoyed for centuries since it creation in middles ages. The potential challenging provisions are discussed below: “The first noticeable set back is that the Fourth Alteration Act 2015 is silent on who is the Chief Law Officer of the Federation/State. This is serious lacuna, which may create implementation challenges. “It will be recalled that the Attorney- General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice and the Attorney General and Commissioners for Justice in the respective States of the federation are under sections 150 and 195 of the 1999 Constitution, the Chief Law Officers respectively.
 “Apparently, it is the fact that the AGF is the Chief Law Officer has the power to guide the MDAs on legal issues by way of legal advice and represent the Government on other legal matters including civil litigations, contract, treaty obligations, legal drafting, etc., is derived. “With this amendment, which limits the power of the AGF to criminal prosecution and silent on whom who is the Chief Law Officer, it appears to erode the constitutional and legal basis for the current structure and functions of the Ministry of Justice and the Law Officers employed therein, in the absence of a Statute that provides for the exercise of these powers and functions. Consequently, if it is the intendment of the National Assembly to make the Minister of Justice, the Chief Law Officer, it should be expressly stated. This will enable these functions to continue to be traditionally performed by the Ministry under the supervision of the Minister of Justice while the Office of the AGF, which is to be independent and separated from the Ministry, concentrate on prosecutions.”

Nigeria glory will be restore by God says Prof Osinbajo's mum

Madam Olubisi Osinbajo, the mother of the Vice President-elect, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo, said on Tuesday that God had revealed to her that Nigeria’s lost glory would be restored.
Mrs Osinbajo, 80, told the News Agency of Nigeria in Lagos that God also revealed to her that the successful and positive change of government would guarantee peace and tranquility in the country.
She said, “I give God all the glory for the success of the elections. It came to me that God said he will restore Nigeria and everybody in the world will rejoice with Nigeria.
“Today, when I was praying, I saw this, ‘do not sorrow, for the joy of the Lord is your strength’. That is what God said to Nigeria.
“So, I don’t want to say anything than to thank God for what is happening in Nigeria now, because it is just too marvelous.
“So, we have nothing to say than to thank God. We are proud to be Nigerians now.’’
Madam Osinbajo was born at Ibadan, the Oyo State capital, on February 16, 1933, to Mr Thomas Aiyegbayo, from Osun State, while her mother hailed from from Ilaro, Ogun State.

Rivers Election: ‘I weep for Nigeria’

An ally of the Rivers State Governor, Rotimi Amaechi, Chief Andrew Uchendu, is weeping for Nigeria, especially for the massing rigging in Rivers during the general elections. He expressed shock that candidates of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Rivers state, who did not allow elections to hold, could in-turn be declared winners by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), with the backing of the police.
Uchendu, the All Progressives Congress’ (APC’s) candidate for Rivers East Senatorial District, who currently represents Emohua/Ikwerre constituency in the House of Representatives, stated these Tuesday in Port Harcourt, in an interactive session with reporters. Amaechi’s ally said: “During the elections (of April 11), neither my people nor I voted. The situation took place across my Senatorial District and indeed the entire Rivers State.
 “Since you did not vote and INEC has released the results of elections that never held, my advice to you (his teeming supporters) is to keep calm and be law abiding, because anything built on a faulty foundation will surely collapse. “You are not alone in this. Both national and international observers have independently condemned the elections in Rivers State, which according to them, even fell below the guidelines which INEC set for itself. “As a Rivers man, I wonder how those who fraudulently got themselves into power will claim to represent the people or run any legitimate government. Surely, the Rivers society will outlive this charade.” Uchendu also lauded Rivers people, especially those of the Rivers east senatorial district, who believed in him and were prepared to vote for him, but were prevented by the PDP’s thugs, INEC officials and policemen.