GRPolitics
NASS, PDP, SANs kick as Buhari declines assent to electoral bill again
The National Assembly, Peoples Democratic Party, over 45 opposition political parties under the aegis of the Coalition of United Political Parties, and some prominent Senior Advocates of Nigeria on Friday kicked as President Muhammadu Buhari finally withheld his assent to the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill 2018 passed by the National Assembly.
The President had earlier on Friday announced his decision to withhold his assent to the crucial electoral bill which the National Assembly transmitted to him on November 7.
The controversial bill has been returned to the National Assembly after the President refused to sign it the fourth time.
The President had earlier rejected it for the third time and returned it to the legislature on August 30.
Confirming Buhari’s latest decision in Abuja, his Senior Special Assistant, National Assembly Matters (Senate), Senator Ita Enang, said the President gave his reasons in a letter to the National Assembly.
Enang, a member of the All Progressives Congress from Akwa Ibom State, merely said, “President Muhammadu Buhari has taken decision on the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill 2018 in accordance with his power under the 1999 Constitution and has communicated that decision to the Senate and the House of Representatives in accordance with the law.”
He added that Buhari acted within the law, which compels him to communicate his decision to the National Assembly.
Enang noted, “The President has taken a decision in accordance with the powers vested in him by the constitution. And by convention that decision contained in the communication can only be revealed by the person to whom that decision is addressed.
“But the electoral bill has left Mr President because he has taken a decision and has remitted it back.”
PDP, CUPP, SANS urge NASS to override Buhari
But the PDP Presidential Campaign Council on Friday urged the National Assembly to immediately override the President’s refusal to assent the bill.
The Director, Media and Publicity of the council, Kola Ologbondiyan, in a statement said overriding Buhari would save the nation’s democracy
He added that the legislative action had become imperative as Buhari’s decision was a calculated attempt to inject crisis into the electoral process.
According to him, Buhari’s refusal to sign the Act could ultimately scuttle the conduct of the 2019 general elections.
Ologbondiyan said, “President Buhari’s repeated refusal to sign amendments passed to check rigging in the election, raises issues of his sincerity of purpose and has the capacity to trigger political unrest and violence, which can, in turn, truncate our hard-earned democracy.”
According to him, Buhari is afraid of the amendments because they essentially checked the APC’s alleged rigging plans.
He also charged all political parties, other critical stakeholders and Nigerians in general, to rise in the interest of the nation and demand the entrenching of rules and processes that would guarantee the conduct of free, fair and credible elections.
Rejection invitation to anarchy –CUPP
Meanwhile, the CUPP said Buhari’s decision not to sign the bill was an invitation to electoral anarchy.
The coalition in a statement by its first national spokesperson, Imo Ugochinyere, said Buhari’s latest action portrayed him as a jittery President who was afraid of electoral defeat.
The statement read, “President Buhari has expectedly failed again to take advantage of the rare opportunity of the Electoral Amendment Bill to write his name in gold as the President that signed the laws that guaranteed electoral credibility in Nigeria.
“But yet again, as usual of him, he failed to rise to the occasion, being blinded by ambition and the love of the perks of office.”
Meanwhile, renowned Senior Advocates of Nigeria have advised the National Assembly to evoke its constitutional powers to override the President’s assent in respect of the electoral act.
The SANs include Olisa Agbakoba, Mike Ozekhome, Femi Falana and Ifedapo Adedipe.
Agbakoba, who is a former President of the Nigerian Bar Association and a member of the CUPP, said without the signing of the bill, some of the challenges experienced in the 2015 elections would repeat themselves.
He expressed the expectation that the Senate would override Buhari’s decision to pave the way for a smoother electoral experience in 2019.
Agbakoba said, “The 2018 Electoral Bill is clearly better than the 2010 (Electoral Act) as it removed all the constraints and challenges that marred the 2015 elections.
“So, retaining the weaknesses of the 2010 (Electoral Act) on whether the card reader and transmission of results electronically are allowed is going to make the 2019 elections a lot more difficult and challenging. So, I expect the Senate to override the presidential veto.”
Ozekhome also said the National Assembly had the power to override the President’s decision.
He said, “The National Assembly can go ahead with two-thirds majority to overturn the President’s decision. If after 30 days he (President) declines his assent, the National Assembly can meet and by two-thirds majority counteract his decline of assent and the bill becomes a law automatically.”
Adedipe, in his remarks, said, “Any democrat who believes in a free, fair, credible and transparent election will be concerned. This is because the earlier Electoral Act was found to have some inadequacies and that was what gave rise for the need for an amendment.
“But now that the President, in his wisdom, clearly aided by his supporters, has refused to assent to the amendment, my worry is that before this government came on board, the various individual respected Nigerians were rather very vociferous in their request for a transparent election. And so, if the National Assembly dominated by members of your own party is trying to amend the law, it is curious that the President will refuse to assent, then you’ll begin to suspect that perhaps there’s more than meets the eye in the refusal. It is probably because the ruling party is afraid of transparent elections.
Falana recalled that he had warned relevant stakeholders to expedite the process of passing the new bill as passing a law within a period shorter than six months to the election had been prohibited under Article 2 of Protocol on Democracy and Good Governance of ECOWAS.
Falana said, “Once the President withholds his assent, the choice the National Assembly has is to override his assent.
Buhari finally declines assent after speculations
Buhari’s decision confirmed speculation that became rife after the bill spent nearly one month on his desk, that he would reject it.
By the provision of the constitution, the President is to either sign or write the National Assembly within 30 days of a piece of legislation being transmitted to him, conveying his decision/reasons to withhold his assent.
Buhari had thrice rejected the bill, the third time being August 30, when he returned it to the National Assembly.
The lawmakers quickly incorporated the areas the President raised objections to and sent the bill back to him for his assent on November 7.
The new bill has provisions to improve on the country’s electoral process ahead of the 2019 general elections, including the use of the card reader as the sole means of accreditation of voters.
In rejecting the bill on August 30, Buhari raised objections to 11 sections, all of which the National Assembly addressed in the latest version pending on his table.
The Chairman, House Committee on Electoral and Political Party Matters, Mrs. Aisha Dukku, had while briefing members on the bill shortly before it was passed on October 24, stressed that all the areas Buhari queried had been amended appropriately by the Senate/House joint committees.
Dukku, a member of the APC from Gombe State, had stated, “All the issues raised by Mr President have been captured and addressed.
“Both the Senate and the House worked on these amendments and all the issues have been addressed.”
The controversial sections that were corrected included 9,18, 27, 30, 34, 36, 44, 87,112,151.
For example, in Clause 87(14), one of the areas raised by Buhari on deadline for primary election, Dukku said the legislature addressed it by inserting “the date of the primaries shall not be earlier than 150 days and not later than 120 days before the date of election to the elective offices.”
The original provision that Buhari rejected captured 120 days and 90 days.
When the President called to inform me of his decision to magnanimously confer on me the the National Award of Commander of the Federal Republic, CFR, on account of my much advertised role in the struggle for the validation of the June 12th election and affirmation of Chief MKO Abiola’s mandate, my first reaction was why only me and not all those unsung heroes.
Those officers and men who actively participated in that struggle, risking their careers and even lives.
Although I was one of the leaders of that movement within the military, my contribution was by no means bigger than theirs.
While I have been recognised and celebrated, including this National Honour by the President, they have remained anonymous.
It is therefore incumbent upon me to reveal the identity of these patriots if only to acknowledge and commend their contributions to the emergence of the current democratic dispensation.
The fact that Chief Abiola, the presumed winner of the June 12th election won over 80% of the Armed Forces votes, clearly demonstrated the contribution of the other members of the military. I should add that this list is by no means exhaustive.
There are a lot more participants who have remained unknown to me since they served under others.
I apologise to all those whose names I must have missed. May God recognise and reward your sacrifice.
Top on my list is my deputy at the Armoured Corps Centre and School, Col MA Garba, whose commitment was so strong that he continued with the execution of our plans after some of us were arrested, detained and mercifully retired in October, 1993. He went on, as he should, to attain the enviable rank of a Major General in the army. Others are:
Others are:
-Lt col Lawal Jaafaru Isa.
-Lt col UF Ahmed.
-Lt col MS Dasuki.
-Lt col ML Gwadabe.
-Lt col J. Temlong.
-Lt col Musa Shehu.
-Lt col Chris Eze.
-Lt col HM Dzarma.
-Lt col Isa Jibrin.
-Lt col JOS Oshanupin.
-Lt Col A Oloruntoba(kabiesi Olugbede of Gbede kingdom).
-Lt col Moke.
-Lt col Happy Bulus.
-Lt col Olagunsoye Oyinlola.
-Col J Okai.
-Col E. Ndubueze.
-Lt col Yakubu Muazu.
-Lt col Yahaya Abubakar ( current Etsu Nupe).
-Major Saad Abubakar (current Sultan of Sokoto).
-Maj Abba Maimalari.
-Maj Jamil Tahir.
-Maj Buzugbe.
-Maj LP Aprezi.
-Maj MK Yake.
-Maj J Dawah.
-Maj Suleiman Wali.
-Maj Dauda Komo.
-Maj Lucky Torrie.
-Maj JS Zaruwa.
-Maj M Sumaye.
-Maj Sani Bawa.
-Maj Ndaliman.
Maj Ahmed.
-Maj M Bawa.
-Lt col JB Ahmadu.
-Capt Junaid Bindawa.
-Capt Lar.
I therefore accept this award with all sense of humility on behalf of all these officers and men. Obviously, it goes without saying that this award will be doubly more meaningful if the democracy we all fought for delivers the real dividends.
This can happen only if leaders at all levels govern with the fear of God and in accordance with the tenets of democracy.
It remains the hope and prayers of all patriots that nothing is done to derail this infant democracy.
To achieve the stability and progress of our democracy, leaders must prioritise good governance over politicking for self aggrandizement.
The three co-equal branches of government must operate independently while cooperating with each other.
One enduring lesson from the conduct of the officers and men is their decision to operate above sycophancy but to hold their superior officers to account.
Sadly, this does not appear to have a positive impact on our political leaders. Sycophancy everywhere has become the scourge of selfless and accountable leadership. It is the reason for the arrogance and vanity we see in our leaders at all levels. Men of straw are widely and falsely being elevated to the position of icons by self seeking sycophants.
Mr President must lead in a war against sycophancy in all its forms. This must allow for no exceptions including the rapidly growing trend of naming and renaming public institutions, facilities and other infrastructure after a President or State Governor while in office.
The other day, the Senate President was reported to have predicted that President Bola Tinubu will win the 2027 election with 99.9% of the votes! Even allowing for the fact that this Senate President is widely known for his humorous incitement, Mr President will do well to shun such oracles.
God bless Nigeria.
Abubakar Dangiwa Umar, Colonel (Rtd)
The Kogi State Government has commended Hon. James Abiodun Faleke, Member Representing Ikeja Federal Constituency in the House of Representatives, for his unbending commitment to the security and wellbeing of his home state, describing him as “a patriotic Kogite who leads by example.”
Faleke, an indigene of Kogi State, recently donated a brand-new Hilux patrol vehicle to support the operations of the newly commissioned Smart Police Divisional Headquarters in Ekinrin-Adde, Ijumu Local Government Area.
The high-tech facility which was facilitated by the Nigeria Police Trust Fund in its collaboration with the Government of Kogi State to ensure security at every corner of the state by modernizing and digitizing security operations in the state.
Speaking with journalists on Sunday, the Kogi State Commissioner for Information and Communications, Kingsley Femi Fanwo, conveyed the appreciation of Governor Ahmed Usman Ododo to the federal lawmaker, stating that Hon. Faleke has demonstrated what it means to place security above politics and people’s well-being above personal ambition.
“The Government of Kogi State wishes to reecho the open commendation earlier given by His Excellency during the commissioning of the Smart Police Divisional Headquarters,” Fanwo said.
“As a Government, we appreciate the demonstrative contribution of Hon. James Faleke to the security architecture and infrastructure of the state. This is how to lead the people with emphasis on security above politics, patriotism above scheming with the lives of our people.”
Fanwo added that Hon. Faleke has played key underground roles in support of intelligence, logistics, and coordination with security agencies, working quietly but effectively with the State Government to ensure lives and property are better protected in Kogi State.
The Commissioner expressed confidence that Faleke’s latest intervention would significantly strengthen security not only in Ijumu but across Okunland, Kogi West, and the entire state.
“This is one intervention that we are sure will improve the security of Ijumu, Okunland, Kogi West, and Kogi as a whole. This is how to make an impact without playing to the gallery. What the people need are concrete interventions that can save lives, not selfish arrangements that protect personal interests at the expense of the people.
“The people know those who are genuinely working for their security, those working closely with the State Government to achieve lasting peace in Kogi State. They also know those who are merely playing politics with the lives of the people.”
The Government urged political and business leaders of Kogi origin to emulate Hon. Faleke’s sense of responsibility and selfless service to the people.
“Hon. James Faleke has set an example for others to emulate. He has shown that the lives of his people matter. He is not doing all of these to protect a personal interest or his investment or the investment of his friends. He is doing it to protect the Kogi people, his people”, he said.
Fanwo also disclosed that the Government is closely monitoring the activities of illegal miners and their collaborators, vowing that those compromising the security of the state through economic sabotage will face stiff consequences.
“We are aware of the activities of illegal miners and their enablers. Let it be known that the state will not tolerate any action that puts the lives of our people at risk. We are taking bold steps to ensure that criminal actors do not jeopardize the peace we are working hard to build.”
The Kogi State Government reaffirmed its commitment to partnering with patriotic stakeholders like Hon. James Faleke in its mission to secure every corner of the state and preserve the gains already made in law enforcement and public safety.
GRPolitics
The Intellectual Sins of June 12: A Reckoning with Nigeria’s Democratic Conscience
Article Written by Professor Ojo Emmanuel Ademola
Every June 12, Nigeria observes a significant date that embodies both the aspirations for democracy and the painful betrayal of that dream. This day commemorates the 1993 presidential election, celebrated as the most free and fair in the country’s history but ultimately annulled by the military regime led by General Ibrahim Babangida.
While the focus has often been on the political and military figures involved, there has been less emphasis on the intellectual shortcomings that contributed to this democratic failure.
These shortcomings—the “intellectual sins” of June 12—include silence, complicity, and ideological failures that continue to impact Nigeria’s pursuit of democracy.
The Election That Could Have Changed Everything:
On June 12, 1993, Nigerians came together to vote for Chief Moshood Kashimawo Olawale (MKO) Abiola, a well-known southern Muslim celebrated for his wealth, philanthropy, and political acumen. His electoral victory was more than just a tally of votes; it became a powerful symbol of national unity and a collective longing for civilian governance following years of military rule.
The military’s annulment of the election results, based on vague security concerns and claims of irregularities, was profoundly disappointing. This decision was not merely a political manoeuvre; it represented a significant betrayal of the democratic values that the election was meant to uphold.
The Silence of the Intellectual Class:
One of the most troubling aspects of the June 12 crisis was the widespread silence—or, even worse, the rationalizations—by many in Nigeria’s intellectual elite. University professors, public commentators, and thought leaders, who should have served as the nation’s moral compass, largely failed to speak out against the annulment. Some even justified it, wrapping their arguments in legal jargon or appealing to national stability.
The silence in this situation was not neutral; it was an act of complicity. During times of national crisis, when the intelligentsia chooses to remain silent, this absence is not merely a lack of comment—it is an endorsement of the status quo. Nigeria’s intellectual class’s failure to provide a strong defence of democracy in 1993 highlighted a more profound issue: a lack of genuine commitment to democratic governance.
Ethnic Chauvinism and the Failure of National Integration:
The annulment highlighted the fragility of Nigeria’s national identity. Although Abiola had widespread appeal across the country, the decision to invalidate his victory was perceived mainly as influenced by northern political elites who were uneasy about a southern Muslim becoming president. This perception, whether accurate or not, strengthened the belief that Nigeria’s democracy is held captive by ethnic and regional interests.
Once again, the intellectual class fell short. Instead of confronting the ethnicization of politics, many scholars and commentators either overlooked it or contributed to it. The chance to use June 12 as a catalyst for national integration and civic nationalism was missed.
The Legal and Constitutional Vacuum:
The events of June 12 highlighted Nigeria’s fragile legal and constitutional framework. The annulment of the election exposed the country’s institutions as inadequate in preventing executive overreach and safeguarding the electoral process. At that time, there was a lack of an independent judiciary capable of contesting military actions, an ineffective legislature to oversee government activities, and a civil society that was not sufficiently strong to mobilize in response.
The Institutional weakness in Nigeria was not a coincidence; it stemmed from years of intellectual neglect. The country’s legal scholars, constitutional designers, and policy thinkers did not create a system robust enough to resist authoritarian tendencies. Consequently, the annulment of electoral processes directly resulted from this inadequacy.
The Myth of Transition Without Transformation:
The military’s commitment to transitioning Nigeria to civilian rule was fraught with inconsistencies. The annulment of the June 12 elections exposed the illusion that democratic governance could be realised without a fundamental change in the country’s political culture. The transition program itself was characterized by a top-down approach, a lack of transparency, and a focus on maintaining the interests of the elite.
Many intellectuals were drawn into the myth surrounding a purportedly democratic transition process. By actively participating in advisory roles, they inadvertently lent credibility to a system that lacked true democratic principles. Their failure to critically examine the underlying foundations of this transition program represents a significant intellectual oversight.
The Repetition of History:
The aftermath of June 12 has had lasting repercussions for Nigeria, as the country seems trapped in a cycle of repeating past mistakes. Key issues such as electoral malpractice, the dominance of elites over democratic institutions, and the suppression of dissent are still prevalent in the political landscape. Unfortunately, society has not fully grasped or embraced the vital lessons from June 12, indicating a failure to learn from history.
The recurring failures In Nigeria’s democracy highlight a deeper intellectual shortcoming, as there is a reluctance to engage in critical self-reflection and necessary institutional reform. It is simpler for leaders to honour June 12 through ceremonies and speeches rather than address the uncomfortable realities that emerge from this historical moment.
A Path to Redemption:
Nigeria needs to initiate a new democratic renaissance to address the intellectual shortcomings highlighted on June 12. This revival should focus on enhancing civic education, implementing institutional reforms, and reaffirming a strong commitment to democratic values.
1. Enhancing civic education within society is essential to ensuring the vitality of democracy. This involves prioritizing the teaching of democratic principles, critical thinking, and active citizenship in schools, universities, and media outlets. By doing so, citizens will become more aware of their rights and responsibilities, thus fostering a more engaged and informed populace.
2. Strengthen Institutions: A functioning democracy requires that the judiciary, electoral commission, and legislature operate without political interference. Achieving this necessitates legal reforms and a significant cultural shift in how power is exercised and contested within society.
3. Empower a New Generation of Public Intellectuals: Nigeria requires independent thinkers who prioritize democratic values over ethnic or political affiliations. These intellectuals should courageously challenge authority and advocate for democratic principles, unafraid of potential repercussions.
4. Confront the Past Honestly: The June 12 crisis serves as an important historical event that should be incorporated into school curricula and discussed in public forums. It carries significant moral lessons that are essential for understanding the past. By acknowledging and confronting this history, Nigeria can work towards establishing a more just and democratic future.
Conclusion: Democracy as a Moral Imperative
June 12 serves as a powerful reminder of Nigeria’s complex democratic journey, highlighting both its potential and challenges. Rather than merely marking the date with hollow statements, engaging in a genuine reflection on the past is essential. The mistakes of that time—characterized by silence, complicity, and ideological failures—should not be repeated. As we honour this day, we must recommit ourselves to the ideals embodied by Abiola’s victory, including justice, unity, and the empowerment of the people.
Democracy transcends being merely a system of governance; it is fundamentally a moral obligation. Every citizen, particularly those influential in shaping public opinion, has the responsibility to uphold and defend democratic principles with bravery, clarity, and firm conviction.
FORPS Donates Boreholes to 2 Bwari Communities in Abuja
Nigeria Doesn’t Need Applause—It Needs Access
A Joyous Milestone: Pamela Iweze Celebrates Daughter’s Graduation with Pride, Purpose, and a Message of Hope
LASG Acquires New Outboard Engines For Optimum Boat Performance
Elon Musk builds Hotel in Mars, Sets to launch soon at $5million per night – Photos
