Constitution review: Theintrigues in the Senate

By JOSEPH ERUNKE
REVIEW. Some landmark changes were adopted and some other very
critical proposals were dropped. The ball is now in the court of the
House of Representatives and the 36 State Houses of Assembly.
A RECORD101 out of the 109 senators assembled last Tuesday to take a
decision on critical issues slated for amendment in the on-going
constitution amendment exercise. It was a day the Senate went through
clause-by-clause voting on the proposed amendments.
Before the voting exercise, Senate President David Mark enjoined
senators to cast their votes according to their conscience as
according to him, the outcome of the day's exercisewould impact
considerably on the country.
"We are on the threshold of history. I want all of you to vote
according to your conscience because how you votetoday would be
reflected.
Clause-by -clause consideration would be taken. Because of the
seriousness of this, we will not resume another debate unless there is
a correction to be made. We have gone pass that stage now. A minimum
of 73 votes are required for any of the clauses to be passed into
law," he said.
Mark, who had informed his colleaguesthat the exercise would be
carried out electronically, turned out as their tutor, given that it
was not only the first time electronic voting would be adopted in the
Seventh Senate but due largely to the fact that majority of the
senators were serving their first term in the legislature. And all the
votes done in the chamber were through voice votes which they are
either expected to shout 'Aye' or 'Nay,'signifying yes or no to any
issue they are considering.
Stages of the exercise
Although, it wasn't easy for the lawmakers in the first three votes
made as they were seen making mistakes, but with Mark's continued
intervention, they got it right from the fourth voting stage. So, it
became fun for them as they progressed to other stages of the
exercise.
Out of the 101 senators who were present to vote on the 31 clauses of
the constitution slated for amendmentby the Deputy Senate President,
Ike Ekweremadu-led Senate Committee on the Review of the Constitution,
73 votes, representing a two-third majority, were required to get any
clause passed, otherwise, it remained in the extant law book without a
touch.
David Mark presiding over Senate plenary
Among the 31 classes slated for amendment were: Six year single
termfor president and state governors, financial autonomy for local
governments, Nigerian Police, Nigeria Prisons, stripping the president
the power assent to any amendment of the constitution, and outright
power ofthe legislature to make any bill passedinto law irrespective
of presidential assent.
There were also inclusion of former Senate President and Deputy Senate
President as well as former Speaker and Deputy speakers of the House
of Representatives in life-time pension, separation of the office of
Attorney-General of the Federation from the Office of Minister of
Justice, Labour, Railways, Youths, Aviation, Arbitration, Environment,
Public Complaints, Road Safety and Healthcare, among others.
As the voting progressed, some senators drew the attention of the
senate president to the implication of allowing some clauses, which
had earlier been passed, to stand, saying they portended danger if not
revisited.
Senate Leader, Victor Ndoma-Egba, PDP, Cross River Central,
particularly drew the attention of the Senate to the non-passage of
clause 30 (vi), which sought to remove prisons from the Exclusive
Legislative List to Concurrent Legislative List. He argued that since
state governments were constitutionally empowered to own their law
courts, there was nothing wrong if at the same time, they were given
the constitutional mandate to own prisons, saying federal prisons were
always congested due largely to inmates brought from state courts.
Following this development, the senate president obliged his request
that another vote be taken to change the situation, but in spite of
this, the issue suffered a setback, as the votes garnered were not up
to the required 73.
Another issue that was revisited was pension, following observation
by Deputy Senate President Ike Eweremadu, PDP, Enugu West, that since
Labour had been move from Exclusive Legislative List to Concurrent
Legislative List; it would be unfair to allow Pension to remain in the
Exclusive List. But in the second votes taken, at the instance of
Mark, unlike the Prisons, Pension scaled through and was moved to the
Concurrent List.But the development caused a stir on the floor of the
Senate Chamber and almost disrupted the whole exercise as emotion
became high following religious and ethnic sentiments displayed by
Senators Ahmad Sani Yerima, ANPP- Zamfara West and Danjuma Goje, PDP,
Gombe Central, that the Senate President Mark played double standard
in the voting process.
Senator Ahmad Sani, particularly, accused the Senate President of
allowing second votes on two issues raised by the Ekweremadu and
Ndoma-Egba but refused to call for a second vote on an issue he
raised, and threatened to storm out of the chamber if not recognised,
which according to him, infringed on the rights of adherents of Islam
regarding marriage.
He said the Senate voting to delete Section 29 (4b) was against
Islamic laws, insisting that the Constitution forbids the National
Assembly from making laws that go against Islamic injunction.
The clause specifically provided that any citizen of Nigeria of full
age who wishes to renounce his Nigerian citizenship shall make a
declaration in the prescribed manner for the renunciation.�It further
stated that full age�means 18 years, adding: �'Any woman who is
married shall be deemed to be of full age.'
He argued that considering 18 years as maturity age for a woman was
against Islamic injunction, citing a section of the Constitution,
which states that the National Assembly could not make any law that
would go against Islamic religion.
The Ekweremadu committee recommended that the second definition of a
woman of full age be deleted. When the voting was taken on that
recommendation, 75 senators voted that it be deleted, a development
which attracted a protest from Yerima, who argued that the balloting
violated Islamic law, which according to him, provided that any
married woman is of full age.
Demand for repeat voting
He claimed that it was not fair for the senate president to have
ignored his demand to repeat voting on the matter. Supporting Yerima,
Danjuma Goje of Gombe State accused Mark of being unfair. This
attracted expression of serious concerns by Mark, who took exception
to the use of the word �'double standard' by Goje, pointing out that
it was not a personal matter.
Mark later allowed the demand for a repeat of the voting and the
result showed that senators voted in supportof the retention of the
definition that any married woman is deemed to haveattained a full
age.
The amendment which sought to remove the Chief Justice of
Nigeria,CJN,and other serving judicial officers as the chairperson and
members respectively of the Federal Judicial Service Commission was
also rejected by the Senate, following a plea letter from the CJN,
Justice Aloma Mukhtar, through Deputy Senate President Ekweremadu, to
the effect that the amendment was inappropriate and unnecessary.
Mark congratulated his colleagues for indeed making history through
their voting. He announced that consequently, a joint committee
comprising senators and members of the House of Representatives (to be
known as Joint Constitution Drafting Committee) would be set up to
harmonise whatever differences that might exist in the versions of the
amendments passed by both chambers.