Follow Us on Google
From Fred Itua, Juliana Taiwo-Obalonye, Ndubuisi Orji, Abuja and Henry Uche
Senators may today draw battlelines with President Muhammadu Buhari over the veto of the Electoral Amendment Bill 2021.
Majority of them want to press for the overriding of the president’s veto, in exercise of the National Assembly’s power to overrule the president on passed bills.
President Buhari had withheld assent to the Electoral Amendment Bill, which the National Assembly sent to him on November 19, 2021.
As exclusively reported by The Sun on December 9, the president, in a letter to the National Assembly leadership, said he was withholding assent over the provision on direct primaries by political parties as the only means of selecting candidates for election.He said its adoption would increase the cost of elections as well as infringe on the rights of citizens.
He also cited insecurity as another reason for withholding assent to the bill, which has as its major highlight the electronic transmission of election results.
Competent sources at the Senate told Daily Sun that senators were not happy that President Buhari vetoed the Electoral Bill and want the upper legislative chamber to override his veto and pass the bill into law with two-thirds majority as required by the constitution. The Senate needs the “Yes” votes of 73 lawmakers to override the veto and pass the Electoral Bill into law.
It was gathered that the aggrieved senators said they would not discuss the 2022 budget, which was to be passed yesterday, except the senate took a final decision on the Electoral Bill by allowing them to vote for the overriding of the president’s veto.
Daily Sun gathered that between yesterday’s morning and evening, 81 senators had signed for the overriding of the president veto. These included senators who attended plenary and those absent but who sent in their positions via phone messages.
Seventy-one senators signed the document, while 10 sent phone messages to support the plan to override the President’s veto, it was gathered.
It was learnt that Senate President, Ahmad Lawan, was not comfortable with the move to override President Buhari’s veto and is believed to be devising strategy to frustrate the plot.
One of the strategies he may adopt, it was learnt, is open voting on the floor today, believing that such process may make senators to chicken out of the plan.
The senators, however, are insisting that there would be no need to vote on the floor since they had already signed a document on their position to override the president’s veto.
It was,however, learnt that the Senate president has rejected the “vote” via phone messages by senators who were absent in yesterday’s plenary, insisting that only the position of those present would be considered.
Sources told Daily Sun that the Senate could not close plenary for the year yesterday as earlier scheduled because of senators’ insistence that President Buhari’s veto of the Electoral Bill must be discussed before they go on recess. They senators also refused to discuss and pass the 2022 budget as earlier scheduled.
It is believed that the Senate would go on recess today after discussing and perhaps taking a vote on President Buhari’s veto of the Electoral Bill. The House of Representatives has already gone on recess till January next year.
•Reps’ll revisit electoral bill next year – Gbajabiamila
However, Speaker Femi Gbajabiamila, has said the House of Representatives would revisit the Electoral Act Amendment when it resumes from Christmas vacation on January 2022.
He stated this while addressing members at the last plenary for this year.
Gbajabiamila said the House when it resumes would continue efforts to reform the electoral process, saying that is what Nigerians expect from the parliament.
“This year, despite the differences of opinions, all of us in the House of Representatives and indeed the entire National Assembly, worked to pass the Electoral Act Amendment Bill. We included in that bill, provisions we hope will significantly enhance the conduct of our national elections and improve public confidence in our electoral outcomes. As it is now, that bill has not received presidential assent, and it falls on parliament to decide the best way forward.
“When we return in the New Year, we will resume our efforts to reform the electoral system in our country. And we will do it together. That is what the Nigerian people expect of us, and we will do our duty for God and country. Whichever way it pans out, we must not throw out the baby with the bath water and must deliver a credible and enduring electoral system to Nigerians. Every law is a living document and as long as it has breath, it must survive,” he said.
Minority Leader, Ndudi Elumelu, speaking under matters of privilege, had implored the House to immediately remove the contentious clause and resend it the president for assent.
Elumelu had argued that time was of essence in the quest by the National Assembly to give the country a new electoral law ahead of the 2023 general elections.
Gbajabiamila, in his response, said since the country operates a bicameral legislature, whatever the House intends to do must be in sync with Senate for it to be effective.
• We’re not scared of direct primaries – NGF
Meanwhile, Chairman of the Nigeria Governors Forum (NGF) and Governor of Ekiti State, Dr. Kayode Fayemi, has said contrary to perceptions, neither President Buhari nor governors were scared of direct primaries.
Fayemi, who was responding to questions from State House Correspondents after a meeting with the president, dismissed suggestions that the president had succumbed to their pressure by declining assent to the bill, noting that governors do not care whether the mode of primaries is direct or indirect.
When told that governors were happy because President Buhari did not sign the bill over the mandatory direct primaries, Fayemi argued: “Okay, well, I don’t know what you mean by governor’s being happy. At least as the governor who has gone through a series of elections, my election to office during my first term was via a direct primary that took place in all the 177 wards in my state. And my election to my second term in office was via an indirect primary.
“So, I’ve tasted both and I can tell you that it really doesn’t matter to any governor whether you have primaries via direct mode or an indirect mode. What is governors’ interest and concern is that opportunities are given for an inclusive process. And I think that is what Mr. President’s letter has brought out.
“Mr. President has not objected to direct primaries, neither has he endorsed indirect primaries. He has only said, be fair to all, let all options apply and what you decide should be determined by your own local and peculiar circumstances. Being mindful of questions of security, finances, and internal democracy.
“So, I think we all should commend the courage of Mr. President to stand with the people. And the President, you know, just like me, is not afraid of whatever mode you you decide to use.
“When I chaired the primaries, the historic primaries that brought him in as a presidential candidate, I was the chair of that primaries in 2014, it was an indirect primaries.
“But in 2019, when he was coming back, he came back via a direct primary. So, Mr. President has also tasted both. And I don’t think he’s somebody to be lectured about the pros and cons of either processes.
“What is important is to ensure that whatever process you choose in your particular circumstance still provides a process that is as free a manner as possible.
“It’s not completely free process, but at least there is something that is called substantial compliance in electoral law. And if it meets substantial compliance, I think all of us should be happy with that. We shouldn’t really dwell too much on…there’s been this exaggerated expectation that direct primaries is going to provide all answers to whatever electoral challenges that we have faced.
“And we all know that that is false. Direct primaries has its own challenges, indirect primaries has its own challenges, a consensus approach is also not without challenges but options should be provided.
•CUPP tasks NASS
The Coalition of United Political Parties (CUPP) has charged the National Assembly to expunge direct primaries from the Bill and return same to President Buhari for his assent.
Its spokesman, Ikenga Ugochinyere, appealed to members of the National Assembly to cancel their Christmas break so as to enable them rework the Bill, immediately, in the interest of the country.
“If the issue of direct and indirect primary is why the president failed to sign the electoral law, let parliament expunge that area and retransmit the remaining one to him. Let us see the reason he would use in not signing it again.
“If the parliament was responsive, there is no need of going on recess at a time like this. All that is required to do is just one or two sittings and the amendment would be made and transmitted back to the president for assent. I can tell you that what the president is running away from is not the argument of direct or indirect primary but the president is scared that if he conduct an election with electronic voting system, his party would lose election.”
•Override veto or leave in perpetual shame, Ozekhome to NASS
Senior lawyer, Mike Ozekhome, also threw a challenge to the National Assembly to override the president’s veto and pass the bill into law, using section 58 (5) of the 1999 constitution.
In a monitored interview, Ozekhome said he was not surprised that the president declined his assent to the bill. He said he had earlier challenged the president in a public forum to surprise him and many other Nigerians who knew ab initio that he would not sign the bill, saying his expectation in this regard was not dashed.
Ozekhome said history beckons on the lawmakers in both the Senate and House of Representatives to give Nigerians a Christmas present by getting two-third majority in a joint session to pass the bill into law in the interest of Nigerians. He warned that Nigerians would hold the lawmakers responsible if things deteriorate politically, economically and otherwise in the years ahead as a result of the non-passage of the electoral amendment bill.
