The proposal by the House of Representatives to expunge the immunity clause from the constitution is generating mixed reactions among lawyers and politicians in the country.
Section 308 of the 1999 constitution (as amended) stipulates that no civil or criminal proceedings shall be instituted or continued against the President during his period of office.
But the House of Representatives' Committee on the Review of the Constitution has proposed the removal of immunity clause which protects the President, vicepresident, governors and their deputies from civil or criminal court proceedings while in office.
The proposal has, however, attracted divergent reactions from some Senior Advocates of Nigeria.
Speaking with National Mirror yesterday, a constitutional lawyer, Chief Mike Ahamba (SAN), said immunity for the president and governors was not the problem confronting the nation, stressing that the bane of our society was in its weak institutions.
Ahamba said: "Removal of immunity will not solve the problem because those who are no longer with immunity have not been dealt with by anybody.
"Rather, removing immunity clause will be counterproductive; our problem is not immunity but breakdown of institutions that should supervise activities of public officials."
Lagos-based lawyer and member of the inner bar, Chief Emeka Ngige (SAN), applauded the plans by the National Assembly to expunge the immunity clause.
Ngige, who was an advocate of the retention of the immunity clause because it could distract them before, now said that its removal would make the beneficiaries rule conscionably and with caution.
He, however, added that if the clause must be removed, heavy damages must be slammed against litigants who maintained frivolous case against them.
Another member of the inner bar, Mr. Nathaniel Oke, said although striping of immunity could cause distraction from governance, in the Nigerian context, it was being abused.
"However, I support its removal as the occupier of the affected offices will be more careful, more committed to governance and cautious," Oke added.
Mallam Yusuf Ali (SAN) advised that rather than a wholesale removal, it should be "limited immunity, which will allow the executive officers concentrate on purely governance issues."
Mr. Paul Erokoro (SAN) stressed that removal of immunity "can create a lot of chaos. Immunity is required in order not to put the governors under pressures."
He said: "If it is the immunity that is the problem, how many former governors have been prosecuted apart from James Ibori and Lucky Igbinedion, who got a slap on the wrist conviction?
"I don't think removal of immunity is going to achieve anything. After all, civil servants, who are perceived to be the richest people in the country today, do not have immunity and have not been prosecuted."
The Publicity Secretary of Afenifere, Yinka Odumakin, however, expressed support for the removal, saying it would check corruption.
He said: "It is good for our democracy, we should not subscribe to leadership by criminals.
"We saw what the likes of the former governor of River State, James Ibori did while in office. He got the immunity for eight years, even after office the court could not try him until the London court sentenced him on corruption.
"We are all witness to the drama of Peter Odili because of the immunity he got while in office. After that, he acquired perpetual injunctions that no court could try him.
"I think the immunity clause should go; anybody who commits crime should face the music.
"In America where we copied the presidential system of government, there is no immunity.
"We have many criminals in government who want to protect their crime, we have certificate forgers, thieves, murderers and all kinds of crooks in power that they want to cover their tracks and hide under immunity clause.
"Ironically the immunity clause has been the saving grace for them, therefore, it should go."
The Publicity Secretary of the Action Congress of Nigeria, ACN, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, said removing immunity would only serve to distract people who were protected by the clause.
He said: "The issue of immunity clause is not the problem of Nigeria. Immunity does not mean impunity. Removing it will be an error. Immunity is just to protect the governor and the President from being distracted.
"After four or eight years as the case may be, such governor or President can be investigated and prosecuted.
"But we cannot afford this at this time of our democracy, not to allow our governor not to have been immuned.
"Guess what could have happened to Governor Rotimi Amaechi if he is not covered by immunity in the tango between him and the people at Abuja. We all know what happened to Ngige, despite immunity, he was kidnapped."
However, the National Publicity Secretary of the Congress for Progressive Change, CPC, Rotimi Fashakin, disagreed with the notion that removing immunity clause would cause unnecessary distraction in governance, adding that the party supported its total removal because that was what the majority of Nigerians wanted.
National Mirror