The National Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG) Monday commenced a three-day warning strike to protest alleged inhuman treatment on members by management of Chevron, Agip and Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC).
The strike is also to protest the refusal of National Association of Road Transport Organisation (NARTO) to implement the signed collective bargaining agreement with the petroleum tanker drivers and the sorry state of roads across the country.
To ensure the effectiveness of the strike, the union Sunday directed all its members in the depots to stop loading petroleum products for the next three days, with members in all its branches across the country to follow suit.
The union had on June 6, issued a 14-day strike notice to the federal government over disputes with SPDC, Chevron and Agip accusing management of the multinational companies of inflicting inhuman treatment on Nigerians.
The federal government had two weeks ago intervened through the Minister of Labour and Productivity, Chief Emeka Wogu, who summoned a meeting with management of Chevron and SPDC to resolve the lingering dispute with Labour.
However, the union in a statement issued by its Acting General Secretary, Isaac Aberare, said it was disappointed that the agreements reached at the meeting was yet to be implemented, stressing that nothing concrete had been done on the part of Chevron and SPDC to address the issues raised.
The union called on the Nigerian public for understanding, stressing that the oil multinationals have failed to implement the agreement reached for a truce in the meeting brokered by the labour minister.
The union stated that its call for a stakeholders meeting in the oil and gas sector to address the situation had also been ignored.
It stressed that if after the three-day warning strike, nothing was done to address the situation, it would be forced to embark on an indefinite strike nationwide.
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
The Academic Staff Union of Polytechnics (ASUP) has declared that it is not about to renege on the nation-wide strike it embarked upon two months ago, adding that until the federal government meets its demands, its members will not go back to the classrooms.
The union also observed that it is the nonchalant attitude of government towards exercising the political will to meet it demands that prompted the strike in the first place.
ASUP position was contained in the resolution of the 74th National Executive Council (NEC) meeting of the union held at the Federal Polytechnic, Oko, Anambra State, and signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Mr. Clement Chirman.
The union also frowned at the leadership crisis rocking the Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF) and called on the governors to conduct themselves in line with democratic principles in order to safeguard the political future of the nation.
Condemning the burden of dichotomy against polytechnic graduates at entry and in career progression in public service, ASUP called for a level-playing ground for graduates from the various tertiary sectors.
It also demanded that polytechnic education be properly and adequately funded by government, urging it to stop paying lip-service to the technical education sector in the country.
The resolution also rejected the discriminatory cut-off points for candidates seeking admission into Nigerian Universities, Polytechnics and Colleges of Education and called for harmonisation of the cut-off points into tertiary institutions in the country.
While frowning at the dictatorial attitude of some rectors, urging them to refrain, ASUP also condemned the growing level of corruption in the country’s public service and called on government to be more proactive in handling the challenges.
The union, however, commended the steps so far taken by government in curbing the security challenges in some states of the country and called for more efforts to be made to safeguard lives and properties of the citizenry.
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
A Germany-based Nigerian medical doctor, Dr. Onuoha Onyeukwu, has petitioned President Goodluck Jonathan over the refusal of a German company, SIEMENS to pay him the sum of N63, 244, 060.00 as commissions due to him for assisting the company to obtain lucrative transactions in Nigeria.
In the petition which was written on his behalf by his lawyer, Ernest Annie Nwoye, from the chambers of E-Law and Company, the 76- year-old medical doctor said he entered into an agency agreement on July 16, 1986, with SIEMENS as its agent for some contracts in Nigeria and the company agreed to pay five per cent of the net contract price for his effort.
The terms of agreement between Onyeukwu and SIEMENS on July 18, 1987, said: “Dr. Onyeukwu will receive as consideration for his effort five per cent of the contract price pro rata of the instalment actually received by INTERATOM, and all foregoing arrangements, agreements and the like on this subject.”
Onyeukwu, who has resided in Germany for about 40 years, said SIEMEN had reneged on its own terms of the agreement, after securing several contracts in Nigeria, despite the fact that he bore the cost of flights and hotel accommodation between Germany and Nigeria, while pursuing the contracts for the company.
In the petition dated June 1, 2013, which was captioned ‘Refusal of SIEMENS to pay my agreed fee for promoting nuclear technology project in Nigeria and other contracts executed by SIEMENS (INTERATOM) in Nigeria since 1985 to date totalling 307,010,000 Euros (N63, 244, 060,
000.00),’ the medical practitioner pleaded with President Jonathan to intervene and assist him in the matter.
According to his lawyer, Onyeukwu is a respected resident in Germany with unblemished record who, because of his love for his country, Nigeria, started making moves to see how he could attract any reasonable development to Nigeria in the 1980s.
“One of his efforts worked out in 1985 or thereabout when he met with the German Government and by his personal efforts, convinced the German Government to establish links (investment) with Nigeria who later introduced our client to a German company called SIEMENS, to liaise with them and see areas of interest at the time when the
company was about leaving Nigeria because of non-award of contracts by Nigerian Government.
“Our client single handedly promoted and introduced SIEMENS to Nigerian government through SIEMENS representative, Dr Roegler and his team from the Dept of Energy and Technology (INTERATOM).
“At the end of series of meetings with the Nigerian government, the following were agreed on as the areas of interest for Nigeria:
‘Nuclear technology, building of electric power stations, construction of telephone network (wireless and landline) and construction/introduction of new railway system’.” Onyeukwu was said to have travelled from Germany to Nigeria to meet top government officials while pursuing the contracts on behalf of the German company.
“He travelled to Nigeria over 40 times, most often with Roegler, attending meetings with the then Head of State, Gen Ibrahim Babangida (rtd). In all the visits in respect to those projects, our client paid all his expenses.
While listing several projects executed by SIEMEN through Onyeukwu’s intervention, his lawyer complained that “Our client is worried that SIEMENS has refused to pay him the agreed five percent for his efforts, resources and time spent with respect to promoting SIEMENS in Nigeria.”
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Governor Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers State has said neither the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) nor anybody can give him order or condition on the dissolution of the Obio/Akpor Local Government Area. Amaechi who was speaking yesterday at the 60th birthday church service of former President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Chief O.C.J Okocha (SAN), held at the Emmanuel Anglican Church, Okoro-Nu-Odo Deanery in Port Harcourt, at the weekend, noted that it was the state House of Assembly that suspended the chairman and councillors of the council over allegations of corruption, stressing that it was within the right of the Assembly to do what they did.
Amaechi who was responding to some issues raised by the officiating priest, Bishop of the Niger Delta Diocese, Archbishop Ignatius Kattey, while delivering his sermon, said he is patiently waiting to hear the final determination of the court on whether the Assembly should be allowed to perform their legitimate, constitutionally enshrined functions or not.
“It is within the powers of the Rivers State House of Assembly to suspend the Chairman of Obio/Akpor Local Government Area. The same constitution gave me the powers to dissolve Obio/Akpor, but, I have not done that. The Rivers State House of Assembly suspended the Obio/Akpor council chairman and the councilors, which is within their lawful functions… The reason for which they were suspended was corruption, so allow the Assembly to investigate.
"If they investigate and the chairman and councilors are not corrupt, they will call them back. And no court can say the Assembly members have no right to carry out their lawful functions. However, whatever the court says, the Rivers State Government will obey the court. But outside that, PDP or anybody cannot give me any condition on Obio/Akpor council, we will continue to struggle for our rights, and that includes our oil wells," Amaechi explained.
Amaechi also called on the people of the state to choose credible candidates during elections, reminding them of the incidence of 2005 to 2006 where militancy and kidnapping metamorphosed into breakdown of law and order in the state.
Amaechi further maintained that he would remain committed to the vision of his administration to provide accountable and transparent stewardship anchored on integrity and good governance.
“I have done a road to Opobo and if I drive to Opobo, will the people pursue me? I have also constructed a road to Andoni, will they pursue me for putting a road to Andoni? What about the road from Port Harcourt to Owerri road and from Eleme to the boundary between Abia State, will they pursue me? What about the schools. I met a school with 100 to 200 students in a classroom. But now, you have standard structures and conducive learning environment with only 30 students per class, and we are still building.
Similarly, Amaechi has congratulated Professor Alabo Dagogo Fubara, a native of Opobo Town in the state on his 75th birthday. At a birthday reception in honour of Fubara, the governor described Fubara as a strong man who contributed immensely to the development of Rivers State.
Speaking on Wike, (who is leading a small faction of the State PDP against Amaechi) the governor said Wike was too small for him (Amaechi) to discuss.
Amaechi also said majority of those, who betrayed him severally were from his Ikwerre ethnic group, whom he nominated for positions at various levels, including Wike (who has now turned himself to be the chief opponent of Amaechi) and former Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives, Austin Opara.
Amaechi said: “His grace, this will be the first time I will be talking about my former Chief of Staff in public. My former Chief of Staff is too small for me to talk about, I don’t want to discuss him and I have never done that before. Today will be my first and last day.
“You know, there are different types of men. I hope you know that there are men with character and there are men without character. And you know I have character. I don’t believe that money can solve all problems and i don't worship money, my greatest fear is that where am I going to, after here on earth… Let me also tell you that I have been betrayed severally in politics and majority of those who betrayed me are from my Ikwerre ethnic group.
“Before I became a Speaker, can we look back at Ikwerre history? We were crying, we wanted Governor, we wanted this and that and the last ministerial appointment was Chief Emmanuel Aguma, a long time ago, and that was the last Ikwerre Ministerial appointment. I became Speaker and through the Grace of God I got the Deputy Speaker seat in the House of Representatives to an Ikwerre son (Austin Opara), all with my sweat, I struggled for it.”
Amaechi stated that when it was time for Opara to support him, he, instead, betrayed him
“Again, you can ask Mr. President, I submitted his name (Nyesom Wike) as Minister, where is he now? I Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi submitted his name (Nyesom Wike) as Minister to President Jonathan. But where is he now?… You must have character, you must be known for something…”
Meanwhile, reacting to claims by the governor that he has joined the Abuja politicians to run down his administration, Chibudum Nwuche, said he could not have jettisoned the possibility of securing another term for a South-south Presidency in 2015.
Nwuche, who was recently appointed the PDP Deputy National Chairman to replace Dr. Sam Sam Jaja, said the stance of Amaechi against President Goodluck Jonathan, was against the aspiration of the South-south people.
His words: “What I have sought to do is to urge our governor to govern in a more competitive manner, and to also understand that our people, the entire people of South-south will prefer to have Jonathan run for another term as our president.”
Nwuche said Jonathan embodied the hopes and aspirations of the people of the region, adding that nobody should distract him or undermine his government.
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
The Minister of State for Agriculture and Rural Development, Alhaji Bukar Tijani, has ordered the immediate release of agricultural inputs to farmers in Adamawa, Borno and Yobe States despite imposition of emergency rule by the federal government.
According to a statement signed by Deputy Director Information in the ministry, Mr. Ben Goong, the directive was to ensure that the emergency rule did not affect agricultural production in the states during the 2013 planting season.
The ministry denied reports that the distribution of agricultural inputs to farmers in the affected states had been suspended due to the disruption of telecommunications services in the states.
“Arrangements have been concluded for the registration of farmers which now has an updated register. We will personally go round to monitor the roll-out of the Growth Enhancement Support (GES) scheme in these parts of the country in the coming days until the exercise is completed,” he said.
The minister instructed state directors in the affected states and relevant stakeholders to partner GES Scheme officials in the distribution process.
He also enjoined the directors to deploy the use of media platforms, especially radio stations to alert local farmers, so as to ensure their responsiveness to the gesture.
Bukar charged federal directors in the ministry to use details of the recent nationwide farmers registration exercise to effect the distribution of the inputs without relying on text messages on off-line basis since the ban on the use of telephone in the three states was still in force.
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
More facts have emerged on why former President Olusegun Obasanjo may have assumed an anti-President Goodluck Jonathan stance, even as the 2015 intrigues continue to gather steam.
A source privy to a recent meeting where Obasanjo had expressed his displeasure to some close allies on how President Jonathan has been relating with him, said it all started when Obasanjo indicated his intention to resign as the chairman, Board of Trustees (BoT) of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in April last year, a situation President Jonathan allegedly handled poorly.
According to the source, the former president had expected the president to engage him in order to seek clarification on why he was leaving the office beyond the excuses he had advanced.
Commenting on the Obasanjo/Jonathan grudge, the source said the former president was shocked when about a week after serving the notice of his intention to resign, he received a letter from Jonathan, accepting his resignation without either an attempt to persuade him against it or give personal attention to the plan. Obasanjo was said to have described President Jonathan's action as both insensitive and a display of poor understanding of the nuances of power.
"Baba had expected that given his place in the party and especially the role he played in his emergence, the President would have prevailed on him not to go but stay back and help moderate things at the highest level in the party," the source said.
Another source, however, said such a stance by Jonathan should not have been taken seriously because he probably didn't understand that an Obasanjo quitting as BoT chair would come with any implication and so, "he just acted naively."
But the THISDAY source, who gave a rundown of Jonathan's alleged many infractions against Obasanjo confirmed that a presidential emissary had been constantly dispatched to him (Jonathan) and added that the former president was also not happy with the way the Jonathan groups were going about his re-election bid.
According to him, he (Obasanjo) had put a lot at stake by brokering a one-term deal that is now being vehemently denied, adding that even if there was plan to seek re-election, the brazen approach is certainly counter-productive in the light of the prevailing political developments in the country.
Obasanjo was also said to have frowned at the electioneering deal Jonathan allegedly struck with the opposition party in the 2011 election in the South-west, a move he believes could undermine the chances of the remaining PDP governors in the South-west states.
Also, by moving against him at the party level, both at the state and national levels, was considered a clear move by President Jonathan to tell Obasanjo that he was no longer needed at whatever capacity, either in the government or party.
The source recalled that apart from easing out former governor Olagunsoye Oyinlola of Osun State as national secretary, Bode Mustapha, as auditor-general and former Ekiti State governor, Segun Oni, as vice-chairman of the party in the South-west zone, the PDP in his Ogun State had also been taken away from him and handed over to someone regarded as "unrepentantly anti-Obasanjo", Mr. Buruji Kashamu.
Worthy of note, the source mentioned, was that Obasanjo didn't take kindly, the way Jonathan took his position on the issue of insecurity, especially when the President was reported as saying he would not handle the issue of terrorism the military way, alluding to Obasanjo's invasion of Odi and Zaki Biam.
Another instance deemed condescending, according to the source, was that Obasanjo sometime ago visited one of his farms in Cross River State and observed that the road to the farm was in deplorable state and immediately moved to address it.
"So, Baba expressed his disappointment to the Cross River State governor on the state of the road but the man replied and said it was the President that had not approved of it being a federal road.
"Right there, Baba called the president and narrated his encounter with the governor and told the president that he had appealed to the governor to go ahead with the road and that he'll be reimbursed by the president, to which Jonathan was said to have replied in the affirmative.
"But Baba was later shocked to hear that the president had sent for the governor and dressed him down for what he considered 'reporting him to Baba'. So, these are some of the things that people do not know that are annoying Baba.
"It is important to note that Baba had thought that as a former president, he would have been given the honour of nominating a successor as BoT chairman even if he was not going to reverse his position. But he was technically edged out. But for these infractions, the source said, “Baba was not and never would have been against the president because of the role he played in his emergence.
"It is therefore depressing for Baba that those who opposed his choice as vice-president to the late President Yar'Adua but craved for Dr. Peter Odili and even frustrated his coming onboard as acting president are now the ones he relies on.
“At what point can you say Baba has gone wrong?", he asked, adding: "The degree of Baba's bitterness is so high now and he has decided to keep quiet and watch."
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
DELTA STATE MINISTRY OF INFORMATION SUMMIT ROAD, ASABA SENATOR EWHERIDO’S DEATH A RUDE SHOCK
On behalf of the Government and people of Delta State, we condole with the entire Deltans, especially the people of Delta Central Senatorial District, over the passing of Senator Pius Akpor Ewherido, a distinguished Senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Before his election into the National Assembly in 2011, Senator Ewherido was a Deputy Speaker of the Delta State House of Assembly and also acted as Speaker.
A man of calm mien, Senator Ewherido distinguished himself as a lawmaker in Delta State, a record that won the admiration of his constituents who proceeded to elect him into the National Assembly. Even at the federal level, his youthful vigour and passion for the upliftment of the Niger Delta region defined his contributions to the National Assembly.
We pray to God to grant the late distinguished senator eternal rest and his family, friends and associates the fortitude to bear the loss.
Adieu, Distinguished Senator.
Signed CHIKE C. OGEAH Esq Honourable Commissioner for Information
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
The Chairman, Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Attahiru Jega, yesterday said the commission had taken delivery of over 20 million voters’ cards from the supplier in preparation for the 2015 elections, adding that efforts to get the rest were on.
Jega made this disclosure yesterday as a guest speaker of the national old students association, Olivet Baptist High School's night of excellence dinner held in Ikeja, Lagos and hosted by the President of the association, Mr. Olusegun Ahmadu.
While speaking, Jega revealed the modalities for the 2015 elections which include the use of card readers, serial numbering and colour coding of ballot papers to vary from constituency to constituency and unique result sheets for each and every polling unit.
Stressing that the commission had been making additional efforts for the 2015 elections, on the strength of the lessons learnt from the 2011 elections, Jega added that unless elections were reformed and citizens votes truly made to count, good democratic governance would continue to elude the nation.
Since assumption of duty in 2010, he said the commission had assiduously worked to improve the electoral process and incrementally satisfy citizens' desire for their votes to count and for democracy to be deepened.
Also, he said other achievements recorded in 2011 were made realisable through the new biometric register of voters, a re-modified open ballot system (REMBOS), serial numbering and colour coding of ballot boxes and papers, would be reacted in the next election.
He added that there would be a revised framework for results collation and returns and engagement of ad hoc staff, more open and transparent procedures, modalities and processes on the election day.
But prominently, Jega said the commission would ensure closer collaboration and partnership with a range of critical stakeholders including political parties, security agencies, civil society and media organisations, as well as ensure increased and improved voter education and citizen enlightenment with re-training of INEC staff.
He said: "We are using card readers unique to every eligible voter and fashioned in such a way that only the owners can use it, because it would stop politicians from buying the citizens voters card and vote.
"Again, all ballot papers, result sheets and ballot boxes would be serially numbered and the colour will vary from constituency to constituency in order to prevent situations where the ballot papers will be moved around.
"We will also make sure that the result sheets will be unique for every polling unit. All these measures are geared towards striving to improve our electoral process and after the 2015 elections, INEC would be adjudged the best electoral body in the world."
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Kayode Fayemi, in this speech, notes the importance of making the courts functional in the interest of an efficient criminal justice system Let me start by appreciating the Ministry of Justice for organising this retreat. I am advised that this is the first time in Ekiti State that a retreat of this nature is being organised for Magistrates.
This is, indeed, a welcome and important development in our efforts to prioritise the administration of justice the state. I have severally stated that the administration of justice in Ekiti State is in need of review; not review for the sake of it but because our people desire a more effective and open system of justice.
Indeed, the eight-point programme of action of my administration challenges us to support a system of justice that moves away from a rigid law and order paradigm, towards one based on greater efficiency, professionalism and effectiveness. There is no doubt that in order to achieve this in concrete terms we need to recognise and value the importance of the magistracy in justice administration in the state.
At the inauguration, the Attorney- General and Commissioner for Justice, identified six key result areas for transformation. These are the areas that I asked the ministry to concentrate on in the next 12 months. These are: · An integrated, efficient and professional Ministry of Justice · Effective and efficient provision of legal and legislative services to the state. · Strengthening Courts and the other structures administering justice without compromising their independence · Safety, security and freedom from crime for everybody in Ekiti State
· Human resources development · Fair and equal access to justice for all, taking into account the diversity of the needs of all those who live in Ekiti State. I have since then received and approved the implementation plan of the ministry and I note that the process of implementation has begun in earnest. I am particularly pleased that the approach of the ministry has been consultative and inclusive, recognising the relevance of all those who work in justice sector in the state.
The theme of this retreat is apt and relevant to the current concerns of my administration. Achieving safety, security and freedom from crime for everybody in Ekiti State is an important priority for my administration. I know that this requires that we strengthen the legal framework for dealing with crime and criminality as well as support all our courts without compromising their independence.
It is for these reasons that the State executive Council approved the administration of criminal justice bill. I want to urge the House of Assembly to support the speedy passage of this legislation. I am convinced that this progressive legislation will promote the efficient administration of criminal justice in Ekiti State. I note that the criminal justice bill is one of the topics for discussion at this retreat; I ask that you make concrete recommendations that will further assist the House of Assembly in the consideration of the bill.
Enabling an appropriate legal framework for the administration of criminal justice is important but no less important is the need to ensure that our courts are suitably endowed to enable them administer justice effectively. I believe that the environment in which or judicial officers work is as important as the work they do. The need for a new building for the Ekiti State judiciary is long overdue.
My vision is for a judicial complex that is modern, functional and responsive to the needs of the people of Ekiti State. I hope that my office and the chief judge can agree on the architectural design of the proposed court to enable us move to the next stage. I am also aware of the unsatisfactory physical state of many of our magistrate courts. I have directed that the Ministry of Justice to prepare an infrastructural audit of these courts to enable us commence a phased rehabilitation where necessary and in other cases, explore options for relocation.
Aside from experience, training is the most important way of acquiring skills and knowledge. But, it is also an effective way of changing attitudes and of increasing personnel motivation. It is important that training programmes are designed on the basis of systematically identified training needs. I want to use this opportunity to announce that I have directed the Ministry of Justice to urgently prepare for my consideration, a proposal for the establishment of the Ekiti State Judicial Institute.
This is in furtherance of the Ekiti State Judicial Institute Law 2010. I am persuaded that the institute will provide a sustainable framework for the continuous education of our magistrates and similar judicial officers. In my view, the institute is best suited to ensure that training programmes are designed on the basis of systematically identified training needs. The institute when operational will also complement the efforts of the National Judicial Institute.
Today, my administration will be presenting new cars to all magistrates in this state. This we have done even in the face of our limited resources and the many developmental needs of this state. This is an important phase of our resolve to improve the conditions of service of our judicial officers. The Attorney-General has informed me of his desire to convene a discussion with all judicial officers in the state on what more we can do in this regard. I look forward to receiving his proposals.
I wish you all a fruitful deliberation and I hope that the outcome of this retreat will contribute to ongoing efforts of my administration to deliver effective, efficient and speedy dispensation of justice for the people of Ekiti State.
-Fayemi, the Ekiti State governor, delivered this speech at a retreat for magistrates in Ekiti State on improving the administration of criminal justice, held at the Ikogosi Warm Springs Hotel, Ekiti
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
President Goodluck Jonathan, last Tuesday, returned the State of the Nation Address Bill to the National Assembly and proposed fresh amendments to the bill. Omololu Ogunmade, in this report, gives insight into the underlying factors behind the returned bill and how the move triggered the rejection of the 2013 Budget Amendment Bill
The test of relationship between President Goodluck Jonathan and the National Assembly came again to the fore last week when the president returned the State of the Nation Address Bill passed by the parliament on May 13 and asked the legislature to re-draft it in accordance with his fresh proposals if it cares for his assent. The president accused the lawmakers of using threat or coercive language in contravention of the principle of separation of powers.
Developments between both arms in recent times have shown that all is not really well with the two arms of government as they seem to be relating with each other based on mutual suspicion. On the surface, both arms often pretend that there exists a relationship between them. But underneath the veneer of cordiality is a frosty relationship characterised by mutual suspicion.
While the House of Representatives always shows its dislike for the executive’s way of handling issues openly by employing the tool of confrontation, the Senate on its own, employs the tool of diplomacy. Yet both arms have continued to step on each other’s toes as they proceed in the course of jointly running the government.
Against this background, memory of the cold war between both arms on the 2013 budget amendment bill is still fresh as the House formally killed the bill last week after three months of foot-dragging. It is suspected that whereas the House had opted to continue to merely play along by hitherto giving excuses for delaying legislation on the bill, it finally opted to pass a death sentence on it last week in an apparent retaliation for the return of the State of the Nation Address Bill.
The War of Attrition The House’s action appeared to be a rekindling of the spirit of “if you Tarka me, I go Daboh you,” a very popular slogan which defined the unhealthy rivalry between the late Joseph Tarka and Godwin Daboh in 1974, when Daboh, like Tarka, who hailed from Benue State, were locked in war a of attrition to besmirch each other's reputation.
This phrase came into Nigeria’s political lexicon when Tarka, a federal Commissioner for Communications in the then military government of General Yakubu Gowon, advised the Nigerian public to summon courage to report any government officials known to be corrupt.
But in a reaction, somewhat and a seeming fulfilment of the axiom, “he who lives in a glass house does not throw stones,” Daboh, a hitherto relatively unknown businessman, exploited the opportunity of Tarka’s pronouncement to tell the whole world that Tarka was “as bent as every other six-bob in the government.”
This finger pointing of corruption by Daboh to Tarka eventually forced the latter out of the government, thus giving birth to the phrase, “if you Tarka me, I go Daboh you.” It was, however, a common knowledge that Daboh didn’t make his accusation against Tarka for any altruistic purpose or because he was on a higher moral ground because his entire life was full of controversies.
Therefore, the current cold war between the National Assembly and the executive is better encapsulated in the Tarka and Daboh experience as the National Assembly is bitter that the president appears to have little or no respect for the lawmaking institution, having allegedly cultivated the habit of rejecting some of its decisions.
The parliament on the other hand, seems prepared now to meet the president’s action by equal force even when the public may be unable to attest to the altruism of the actions of both arms.
It is pertinent to note, for instance, that the Senate still holds a grudge against the president for allegedly shielding former Chairman of Pension Reform Task Force, Abdulrasak Maina, who led a body that allegedly squandered whopping N195 billion pension funds belonging to retirees, from being punished and for treating with disdain, the Senate summons.
In the same vein, the House is still angry with the president over his persistent refusal to accede to its demand to sack the Director General of Security and Exchange Commission (SEC), Ms Arunma Oteh. This is also coupled with the perceived attitude of the president to ignore the bills emanating from the National Assembly instead of assenting to them.
The killing of the 2013 Budget Amendment Bill, barely a day after the president returned the State of the Nation Address Bill to the National Assembly and asking members to do it his own way, was believed to be instrumental to the death knell passed on the bill. But the Senate in its own case does not usually adopt the House’s way of open confrontation with the president. However, its attitude to contentious issues between it and the executive is encapsulated in the word of a late playwright, Professor Ola Rotimi, who said “the water in the well, deep but silent beware of such water.”
This was what it did when after issuing a warrant of arrest on Maina without effect for several weeks, on February, 13, 2013, it decided to read a riot act to the president, asking him to choose between the chamber and Maina.
That is also its approach to the handling of the budget amendment bill when it has till date kept it in the cooler without presenting it for consideration even once. The only day it listed it on its Order Paper, it quickly stood it down and proceeded to other issues.
Kernel of the Conflict Nevertheless, in Jonathan’s letter dated June 10 and addressed to both the Senate President, David Mark, and Speaker of the House of Representatives, Aminu Tambuwal, the president did not mince words to describe the State of the Nation Address Bill as unnecessary as he cited Section 67 of the 1999 Constitution which according to him has already addressed the intention of the bill.
The section provides that “the president may attend any joint meeting of the National Assembly or any meeting of either house of the National Assembly, either to deliver an address on national affairs, including fiscal measures or to make such statement on policy of government as he considers it to be of national importance.”
Further, Jonathan noted that enacting a law on a subject matter that already exists in the constitution amounts to duplication of events, remarking further that the bill only sought “to circumscribe the president’s discretion regarding whether or not he should attend the joint meeting of the National Assembly or of any meeting of either House of the National Assembly.”
He also argued that the bill was too prescriptive by deliberately authorising him to carry out provisions in the bill without options. By Jonathan’s analysis of the returned bill therefore, he was more or less accusing the lawmakers of being guilty of not only fixing the time of the state of the nation address but also choosing to determine the policy of government that is of national importance and proceeding further to employ the tool of “threat or coercive powers in the event of non-compliance.” The president therefore remarked thus: “This in my view is inconsistent with the doctrine of separation of powers and the spirit and letters of the constitution.”
Without any fear of equivocation, the president suggested that if he was expected to assent to the bill despite his reservations, the lawmakers must revisit it and take cognisance of his own prescriptions in the course of re-drafting the bill.
Nevertheless, the president’s prescriptions include allowing him to present the address within 30 days of the commencement of the legislative year as against the provision compelling the president to present the address at the beginning of every legislative year in July; amending clause 3 of the bill which rules out the possibility of the president delegating the assignment to any of his subordinates. He then proposed an amendment to the clause to state that “where for any reason, the president is unable to present an address in accordance with Section 1 of the Act, the president shall in writing inform the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives and either designate the vice-president to present the address on his behalf or transmit to the president of the Senate and the Speaker of House of Representatives, the text of the address.”
He also sought amendment to Section 5 of the bill which states that “the National Assembly shall have powers to regulate its procedure as regards the provision of this bill, including the procedure for summoning the president to address the state of the nation. His amendment reads thus: “The National Assembly shall have power to regulate its procedure with respect to the provisions of the Act” and not involving summoning of the president.
To that extent, the president’s decision to return the bill perhaps fulfilled the fears of the National Assembly which had passed it on May 13 for the second time. The bill which has been one of the roaming legislative works in the National Assembly since 2004 when it was first initiated by the incumbent Deputy Senate President, Senator Ike Ekweremadu, was passed by the sixth Assembly but Jonathan withheld his assent from it. This prompted the seventh National Assembly to re-introduce the bill and eventually passed it after both chambers harmonised their differences.
Entitled: “A Bill for an Act to Enshrine an Annual State of the Nation Address and Other Matters Connected Thereto,” the bill among others, authorised the president to address a joint session of the National Assembly on the state of the nation on the first legislative day in July. Section 3 of the bill provides that whenever the president fails to live up to this responsibility in any legislative year, the National Assembly through a resolution supported by two-thirds of the votes of each chamber shall summon the president to address the nation pursuant to provisions of the bill.
It provides that “the National Assembly shall have powers to regulate its procedure with respect to the provisions of this bill, including the procedure for the summoning of the president to address the nation.
Where the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria fails, neglects or refuses to render account of his stewardship within the time stipulated by Section 1 of this bill, the National Assembly may by resolution supported by two-third majority votes of members of each House of the National Assembly summon the president to address the nation pursuant to provisions of this bill.” But among others, Jonathan is not comfortable with this section as in his own thinking, signing it would amount to someone signing himself into a bondage and probably creating problems for subsequent presidents.
Proponents of the bill had reasoned that the bill was aimed at “making the president accountable to the Nigerian people as represented by the National Assembly and to render account of his stewardship to the nation and allowing for input from members of the National Assembly towards the good governance of the federation.”
According to the bill, the president shall present an annual state of the nation address without prejudice to the annual presentation of budget for every fiscal year. The lawmakers argued that the president, according to the 1999 Constitution as amended, is only duty bound to appear before the joint session of the National Assembly once a year to present the annual budget in accordance with Section 81 (1) of the 1999 Constitution.
This section of the constitution states that “the President shall cause to be prepared and laid before each House of the National Assembly at any time in each financial year estimates of the revenues and expenditure of the federation for the next following financial year.”
But the president attempted to prove the lawmakers wrong by drawing their attention to Section 67 of the same constitution which he said had already stipulated that the president might attend any joint meeting of the National Assembly or any meeting of either of the two houses of the National Assembly “to deliver an address on national affairs.”
Section 4 of the bill provides that the presidential address to the parliament shall be duly debated and resolution of the National Assembly arising from such debate shall be communicated to the president within 60 days from the date of the address, Section 6 emphasises “that the National Assembly shall have powers to regulate its procedure as regards the provision of this bill, including the procedure for summoning the president to address the state of the nation.”
The president, however, asked the lawmakers to completely delete this section because in his own view, it “will no longer be consistent with proposed amendment to clause 3 above.” In the proposed amendment, the president wants the bill to provide him with the opportunity either to delegate the presentation of the address to the vice president or merely send text of the address to the parliament without his physical presence or any formal presentation.
The returned bill had ruled out the option of delegating the assignment to any other government official by the president. It also stated that the two houses of the National Assembly should separately deliberate on issues raised in the address within 14 days of the presentation.
Upon the passage last month, Senate President Mark, who said the law would take effect from July, had implored Jonathan not to treat the bill like the previous one by duly signing it into law.
The State of the Nation Address Bill was first introduced in the parliament by Ekweremadu in 2004 but legislation on it could not be concluded before the end of that session of the National Assembly. It was later introduced in the House of Representatives in 2008 and again in the Senate in 2009 and eventually passed by the sixth National Assembly in 2010.
In this current seventh National Assembly, the bill was first passed by the House of Representatives on December 20, 2011 and transmitted to the Senate for concurrence. But following its passage by the Senate on March 13, 2013, both the Senate and the House constituted conference committees on March 19 and 21 respectively to harmonise all differences on the bill. The final passage on May 13 was therefore a result of the successful harmonisation.
State of Nation Address in History The move to entrench the state of the nation address into the current democratic dispensation in Nigeria is not a new phenomenon. It is a common trend in various parts of the word. In the United States of America for instance, the state of the nation address, known as State of the Union, is a constitutional matter. Article 11, Section 3 of the US Constitution provides that, “the President shall from time to time give to congress, information of the State of the Union and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.”
Also, Article VII Section 5 of 1935 Constitution of the Philippine Islands provides: "The President shall from time to time give to the congress, information on the state of the nation and recommend to its consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient."
Consequently, the first state of the nation address in Philippine was delivered by President Manuel Quezon on June 16, 1936 at the Legislative Building in Manila. Initially, dates of the state of the nation address were fixed for June 16, of every year at the start of opening session of Congress in accordance with Commonwealth Act Number 17.
But Commonwealth Act 49 changed the date of the opening of the Congress to October 16. Later, Article VII, Section 23 of the 1987 Philippines’ Constitution as amended, states that "the President shall address the Congress at the opening of its regular session. He can use the opportunity to make certain proposals for legislation that he believes is necessary.”
THISDAY findings show that because October 16, 1937 was a Saturday, this forced the opening of Congress to be moved from October 16 to 18, when Quezon gave the second address. The opening date of Congress was later changed that year by virtue of Commonwealth Act 244, making it the fourth Monday of every year and Quezon delivered his final address on January 31, 1941, prior to World War II. Since then, the state of the nation address has become a norm in the Philippines.
Other countries which observe the state of the nation address include Mexico, Micronesia, Luxembourg, Arroyo, Ghana, South Africa, Russia and Zimbabwe. In these countries, the address is used to “advance good governance and the well-being of their people.”
The US Example Records show that the late American President George Washington was the first American president to deliver the State of the Union address at the federal hall in New York before a joint session of the United States of America parliament, comprising the Senate and House of Representatives.
Findings also show that because of limited technological development then, the address could not be transmitted beyond the congress hall. But the advent of electronic media in subsequent years soon paved the way for state of the union address in the US to be transmitted beyond the congress.
Against this background, in 1923, President Calvin Coolidge’s address was the first to be broadcast on radio while that of Harry Truman in 1947 was the first to be broadcast on television. Till date, state of the union address has become an avenue for US presidents to communicate with the people of America.
The African Experience Notable African countries such as South Africa, Ghana and Zimbabwe have gone beyond merely enacting a legislation to authorise the state of the nation address. Instead, these countries have entrenched the address in their respective constitutions. In South Africa, the state of the nation address was kick-started by President De Klerk on February 2, 1990 in the apartheid era.
He delivered the second version of the address just before the April 27, 1994 elections. This trend continued upon the advent of the Nelson Mandela presidency, when he delivered the first address before a democratic parliament on May 24, 1994. Mandela sustained the yearly tradition up till 1998 when he left the seat of power.
South African state of the nation's address usually focuses on the current political and socio-economic state of the nation. This yearly tradition was continued by Mandela’s successor, Thabo Mbeki and sustained by the incumbent president, Jacob Zuma, who delivered this year’s address on February 14 while debate on that state of the nation address took place on February 19 and 20.
In Ghana, the tradition of state of the nation address which began from the administration of President John Kuffuor continued during the era of his successor, John Atta Mills, who passed on last year. Incumbent Ghanaian President, John Mahama, accordingly delivered state of the nation address on February 21, 2013 before the sixth parliament of the Ghana’s Fourth Republic. The address was titled: “Advancing the Better Ghana – Opportunities for Growth.”
An extract from the address states thus: “In my first term as president, I will focus on delivering on the following, which constitute the vital pillars underpinning our national development programme: Putting people first, a strong and resilient economy, expanding infrastructure, and transparent and accountable governance. Nigeria Not Ready
The president’s decision to return the bill last week as well as his reservations seemed to show that Nigeria is still not prepared to join the league of nations using the state of the nation address to advance its political and economic benefits in various parts of the world. However, the Senate may deliberate on the president’s letter this week and simultaneously decide whether it will reconsider the bill in accordance with the president’s proposals or finally lay it to rest.
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
