Al Makura: Impeachment is exclusive legislative business –Senator Adokwe Senator Suleman Adokwe is an interested party in the impeachment politics playing out in his home state of Nasarawa. In this interview, Senator Adokwe, who chairs the Senate Services Committee, advises Governor Tanko Al-Makura to stop looking for help outside the state, and rather concentrate on working in harmony with members of the state House of Assembly. ADETUTU FOLASADE-KOYI presents the excerpts. What’s your reaction to the decision by the Nasarawa State House of Assembly to petition the National Judicial Council against the state’s Chief Judge? Impeachment, in my opinion, and as provided in the Constitution, is entirely the business of legislators in the country either in the local council, state or national. I am not a member of the Nasarawa State House of Assembly, (and so), if they chose to impeach their governor, perhaps they have a good reason for doing so and if they are following due process, as provided for in the Constitution and there is a hitch somewhere on the road for them and they can no longer go forward, they would be duly guided by the same Constitution. If they have new avenues within which to pursue their impeachment agenda, they are still at liberty to do so. It is not for me to say whether they should go ahead or not. They are the ones that should fashion that out, and in accordance with their legislative duties and oversight functions, they are the ones who found impeachable offences against the governor and the Constitution has clearly stipulated the roadmap for them to achieving that. If somewhere along the line, it is clear that they could not go any further as it were, especially since the Constitution said if the panel says they could not find any offence committed, then the matter is concluded. There is no court of law that can en quire into it as it were, but it has not precluded the legislators from starting another impeachment proceeding if they have found new offences. That is strictly speaking as per the Constitution. it is neither here nor there. I have not sat down with them, I dont know their new agenda. If it is that they are starting another proceedings again, they are the ones who have the powers and duties to do so. But is impeachment of the governor the way to go now? Why petition the NJC? I want to state categorically that impeachment is the last political resort.That is why those who drafted the Constitution laid an elaborate roadmap on how to achieve it. As it were, it was supposed to be a political weapon to readjust the art of governance in any jurisdiction between the lawmakers and the executive. For that reason, as an exemption to the general rule, the Constitution made it in such a way that there there should be minimal interference of the Judiciary by even ousting the jurisdiction of the court to enquire into the outcome of the panel’s decision or the legislators’ decision. Anything the court can do probably will be to interpret some of those provisions but not to look into the substance of the actions of both parties as they were. All actors should engage in political dialogue to understand themselves. Where ever there is a strong indication of impeachment proceedings, it is a failure of communication between the executive and the legislature. There could be a lot of nuances among them that nobody is emphasizing. Anytime our brothers there bring to our notice, intention for impeachment, we always persuade them against it, because nothing is beyond dialogue. But this time around, they went underground and did not consult anybody. It is entirely their own business and they have the right to do so because they are the legislators of the state who work daily with the governor. They know what he does and what he omits to do. Both parties should do the needful to give peace a chance to reign in the state. No amount of going outside would solve the problem. It is like husband and wife quarreling….They petitioned the National Judicial Council because they claim that the Chief Judge constituted a panel that was not consistent with the provisions of the Constitution which stipulates that members of that panel must be of good character, not work ing in public service, non members of a political party, among others. They alleged that some of the panel members failed in that categor.So they thought the CJ would reconstitute the panel by removing those people that they had identified. But does the CJ have that power? As a lawyer, it is arguable whether the CJ has the power to do so, or not. The Constitution gives the legislators powers to ask the CJ to constitute a panel. Whether that can be interpreted to mean that it if it does not comply with what was provided for in the Constitution, he can again reconstitute,that is left to the court to interpret. Certainly, where ever there is cause, there must be a remedy. If something has happened that is not consistent with the provisions of the Constitution, it stands to reason that certain measures must be taken to correct it. Now that they have petitioned the NJC, we hope that the legal body will look into it, with a view to finding out whether the judge acted wrongly or rightly. This will be an opportunity for the CJ to clear himself because the matter is in the public domain, and there are bound to be people who will look into it with an eye of doubt; whether he was biased or not. Let me say that the impeachment is a political weapon, and the provisions for impeachment in the constitution are weighted heavily in favour of politics more than legalism. It is something that people, politically use, in order to checkmate each other in the democratic process. Take as an example, as soon as some governors and legislators in National Assembly defected to the All Progressives Congress ( APC) from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), even before they achieved majority in the National Assembly, they started compiling impeachment offences against Mr President, including plotting to impeach presiding officers of the National Assembly. As soon as the APC started gaining more numbers in the National Assembly, they even issued out directives to their members to frustrate legislative process. All these are grand strategies to remove President Jonathan. They are not even waiting for him to even stand or not in the 2015 poll. I want to assure you that if APC had the kind of advantages that PDP had in Nasarawa state, and the table was turned round, they would have removed the PDP governor there long time ago. From day one, the governor came to power with only four APC members in the House, while there are 20 PDP members in the House. It goes to show that going by the nature of Nigerian politics, within a spate of four years, he would have worked hard enough. His failure to lure the lawmakers to APC, or to live in harmony with them, says a lot about his political naivety. That he’s been there up till this moment is because PDP’s mature and tolerant. If the PDP leaders in the state, and some of us have not been contributing to the peace moves in the state, Al-Makura would have been removed long ago, and indeed the PDP stalwarts at the national level stood by him, otherwise, he would have been removed. So, it would be total ingratitude for them to allege that PDP wants him out. If we want him out, it is very easy for us. But we feel that impeachment should be the last resort until things are so bad. In this case, the PDP is not out for him.It is just the problem between him and the state House of Assembly. Instead of running round the country and weaving sentiments from the APC, the APC cannot save him in Nasarawa State. It’s actually the PDP that saved him from the first impeachment, and the sooner he knows that and live peacefully with members of the Assembly the better for him, than to start running around to meet people who are not the real actors, because the real actors are the lawmakers in the state. No arm of government can rule alone. On alleged moves by the PDP to impeach APC governors in order to weaken the opposition ahead of the 2015 polls, what do you say on that.? They are speculations. Once Mr. President was liberal enough to allow people to do whatever they like, they should be ready to pay the prize for his liberalism, because if the President was operating in a Machiavellian manner, like others in the past, no governor would have dared to defect to the APC. Jonathan has allowed the rule of law to play out so much so, that he suffered internal political hemorrhage by his own strong members leaving, and he didn’t clamp down on anybody. If the governors cannot manage their own states well, and they are being impeached, why should they accuse the wrong persons? The president suffered that too. He lost five governors and lawmakers to the APC. It was a nightmare for him at a certain time, because he could see clearly that the opposition was planning to take over the National Assembly. However, he didn’t force anybody to stay or to go. It is possible for Jonathan to stop the defection with a wave of hand. Nobody would have dared try that during the Obasanjo administration. It is not true that the PDP was trying to impeach any governor. Let me state at this juncture that all the governors in this country need to work hard. In my state, the local government has completely been broken down. This is typical of many states; the governors have stifled the growth and development of local councils which is a government at the grassroots. If you have a good rapport with the legislators, he won’t be impeached.
Posted on: Sun, 24 Aug 2014 05:00:05 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015