State of the Nation Address Bill: Jonathan, lawmakers on collision course

[Mirror]

President Goodluck Jonathan last week returned the state of the nation address bill to the National Assembly after its earlier passage and transmission to him for his assent. This development signals a possible confrontation between the President and the parliamentarians, writes GEORGE OJI.

The mood of the Senate was visibly opposed to the action of the President last Tuesday. As was the usual practice with the Red Chamber, the day had begun with the filing-in of the presiding and principal officers with the accompanying banters. Some senators, who had some issues had gone to see and brief the presiding officer. Consequently, the Chief Whip called the Senate to order and informed the presiding officer. The votes and proceedings of the previous sitting was read and adopted. Thereafter, the Senate President David Mark proceeded with the reading of the letters to the Senate. That Tuesday, as was the usual practice, Mark began with the letter from Mr. President.

It was entitled, "Re: State of the Nation Address Bill 2013." There was initial silence when Mark began to read the letter as the lawmakers listened most attentively to assimilate the contents of the communication. But down the line as the President's message began to sink and as he marshalled out his reasons for objecting to the draft bill one after another, the lawmakers began to chuckle.

Some were even murmuring, while yet some others kept saying No! No!! No!!! and Ah! Ah!! Ah!!! in muffled tones. Immediately the Senate President finished reading the letter and before senators could raise hands to state their observations to the letter, Mark quickly put the letter aside and proceeded to the next ones.

On Thursday of the same last week, the bill was listed for debate in the day's order paper. Unfortunately, the bill was stood down for another legislative day.

Mark's reason for his action was that the bill was very important and needed to be discussed on a day the Senate would be in fuller number. Watchers of the National Assembly believe that the return of the bill by President Jonathan was significant in many ways. For instance, that was the first time President Jonathan was taking such an action since he became the elected President of the country, including the brief period he acted as the President following the death of the late President Umaru Yar'Adua.

Before now, the practice, which had infuriated the lawmakers so much and had accounted in part to the altercation between them and the President was that after the lawmakers would have gone through the whole hug of rigorous lawmaking process, including extensive debate on bills and public hearing too and passed the bills, and forwarded same to the President for his assent, he (President) will simply hold onto the bills without assenting to them or even communicating to the lawmakers to state his reasons for holding unto the bills. At the last count, there were over 16 of such bills unattended to still in the kitty of the President.

But if the truth must be told, the action of President Jonathan last week regarding the state of the nation address bill, even though considered very resentful by some lawmakers, is a sign of better relationship to come.

What was more important was that the President did not out rightly reject the bill, but merely stated his observations with aspects of the bill. He made the point very succinctly that if the lawmakers effect the amendments, which he suggested, he would go ahead to append his signature to the bill for it to become law.

However, the observations and concerns raised by the President regarding the bill, no doubt, are critical and farreaching enough to generate broad and robust debate on the bill by the congress and the general public.

Such debates will no doubt enrich the legislative process and further strengthen the principles of separation of powers in Nigeria. Against this background, what needs to be done now is for the issues raised by the president regarding the bill to be thrown open for debate by both the lawmakers and the Nigerian public, particularly those versed in areas of constitutional law.

The state of the nation address bill, makes it mandatory for any sitting president to periodically address a joint sitting of the National Assembly on issues including but not limited to national security, the economy, foreign policy and social justice.

The bill also provides that the president shall be compelled to present such periodic address by the National Assembly through summons should he fail to do as required by the bill. It, in addition, provides that such address must be delivered in the first week of July after the commencement of every legislative session.

The draft bill states in part: "The National Assembly shall have powers to regulate its procedures for this bill, including the procedure for summoning the president to address the state of the nation address."

But the President in the letter to the two chambers of the National Assembly said he had examined the bill and the objectives for which it is being proposed and drew the attention of the lawmakers to section 67 of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, which provides as follows: "The President may attend any joint meeting of the National Assembly or any meeting of either House of National Assembly, either to deliver an address on national affairs, including fiscal measures, or to make such statement on the policy of government as he considers to be of national importance."

In view of the said section 67 of the constitution, Jonathan said he was of the considered opinion that the 1999 Constitution has made ample provision for the kind of address contemplated by the bill and that it will amount to a duplication to enact legislation on the same subject matter.

This, the President further reasoned, would amount to circumscribing his (Jonathan, or indeed any other president's for that matter) discretion, regarding whether or not the President should attend the joint meeting of the National Assembly or of any meeting or either House of National Assembly; the time to present the address; his determination of which policy of government is of national importance for the purpose of an address; in addition to the threat of the use of coercive powers in the event of non-compliance. In view of the foregoing, the President submitted that his humble opinion was that, the bill as presently couched was not only inconsistent with the doctrine of separation of powers but also the letter and spirit of the nation's constitution.

To demonstrate his intentions and lack of opposition to the bill, Jonathan stated in the letter to the Senate that: "The foregoing notwithstanding, I am inclined to accede to the bill subject to the incorporation of some fundamental amendments proposed to bring the bill in conformity with the dictates of the constitution, especially the discretion conferred on the President by section 67 of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999."

Some of the suggested changes the President made included clause 1(20) which he opined should be re-drafted to make it more flexible by substituting it with the following words: "The state of the nation address shall be delivered to a joint sitting of the National Assembly within 30 days of the commencement of the legislative year."

In the draft bill, the lawmakers specified that the address shall be made on the first week of July of the commencement of the legislative year.

Regarding clause 3 of the draft bill, which purports to empower the National Assembly to summon the President where he decides not to make the address, Jonathan proposed that that clause should be substituted with the clause that accords with the language of the constitution.

Consequently, the wording should read as follows; that, "Where for any reason the President is unable to present an address in accordance with section 1 of this act, the President shall in writing, inform the President of the Senate or Speaker of the House of Representatives and either; (a) designate the Vice President to present the address on his behalf; or (b) transmit to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the text of the address."

The President further suggested that to ensure symmetry with the above proposed changes as well as give effect to their general intendment, clause 5 of the draft bill should be amended to read: "The National Assembly shall have power to regulate its procedure with respect to the provisions of this act."

Finally, the President suggested that clause 6 of the draft, which talks about summoning the President should be deleted, as the provision will no longer be consistent with the proposed amendment to clause three above. As the Senate, albeit, the National Assembly opens debate any time soon on the President's proposed changes to the state of the nation address bill, it can only be subject to speculation, how the lawmakers would react to the suggestions put forward by the President on the bill.

National Mirror