THE DISHONOURABLE OR POLITICALLY SAVVY Hon. Tambuwal. Let me quckly lend my voice to the raging debate over the defection of the Speaker of the House of Reps from the PDP to the APC. The argument mostly has been that the Speaker should cease to be speaker on the score that only the Party with the majority can produce the Speaker. Without doubt, the PDP has a slim majority in the House and the argument is logical but far from legal or constitutional, hence only rational arguments have been advanced therefor. Section 50(1)(b) of the constitution provides inter alia that the members are to choose the speaker from among themselves. The draftsman in his wisdom has shrewdly excluded partisanship in the selection of the speaker. Little wonder Hon. Tambuwal contested for it notwithstanding the PDPs endorsement of Mulikat Akande. Now, for me, the foregoing provision underscores the exclusive right of the House to pick who presides devoid of partisan leaning. Some have said its a lacuna, others have said the minority cannot lord it over the majority. The fallacy in that seemingly logical argument is that the majority status of the PDP is not diminished by virtue of who presides. The potency of its majority lies in its ability to push debates its way. That is the majority that the framers of the constitution consider vital. The saying holds true that no man is good enough to lead another except by the consent of that other. The House clearly demonstrated this when it rejected across party lines, the candidature of Akande. We should learn to respect the view of the members until they do otherwise-remove their speaker. If one was to stretch the beleaguered jibes about the tyranny of the minority, where does that leave even our President who is from a minority tribe? Some have contended that Tambuwal should do the Honourable and resign apparently given the near impossibility of mustering a two-thirds of the House to remove him as Speaker as prescribed by Section 50(2)(c). I ask, what is dishonourable in holding on to an office that was willingly given to one by his colleagues? Would not the colleagues remove the Speaker should they so desire? Finally, the act of withdrawing the Speakers security details by the IG is rash, illegal and an invitation to anarchy. The courts where there even in the military days, why is our democracy so Court shy?
Posted on: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 07:42:56 +0000