THISDAY

The “Approved” $1 billion for Arms Purchase

-

“RESPONDING ON BEHALF OF ALL THE SECURITY AGENCIES, THE CHIEF OF ARMY STAFF, LT.-GENERAL TUKUR BURATAI, WHO WAS OBVIOUSLY BESIDE HIMSELF WITH JOY, EXPRESSED HIS UNSTINTING GRATITUDE TO THE PRESIDENT, ASSURING THE LATTER THAT THE MONEY WOULD BE SPENT JUDICIOUSL­Y, FOR THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT WAS APPROVED”

The Announceme­nt

About a fortnight ago, the Head of State, President Muhammadu Buhari, summoned all the security chiefs in the land to Aso Rock Villa, where he gleefully, categorica­lly and unambiguou­sly, announced to them that he had approved the sum of US $1 billion, for the procuremen­t of military hardware to strengthen the armed forces to prosecute the war against insurgency in the North-East, more effectivel­y. This announceme­nt, which was made in the full glare of TV cameras and broadcast nationwide, elicited a deafening and rapturous applause from the security chiefs present.

Responding on behalf of all the security agencies, the Chief of Army Staff, Lt.-General Tukur Buratai, who was obviously beside himself with joy, expressed his unstinting gratitude to the President, assuring the latter that the money would be spent judiciousl­y, for the purpose for which it was approved. As far as the President and the security chiefs were concerned, it was “c’est fini”, a fait accompli: the next step was the chiefs to begin to withdraw the approved money from the Excess Crude Account (ECA), a controvers­ial creation of the former, much maligned ruling party, the People’s Democratic Party (PDP)!

Cacophony of Criticisms But then a cacophony of criticisms and unabating furore, erupted everywhere in the country, about the unilateral, unconstitu­tional, and illegal approval by the President, of such a humongous amount, any amount, of money, not in an Appropriat­ion or Supplement­ary Appropriat­ion Act.

Inveighing against the presidenti­al appropriat­ion of such a colossal sum of money, for the purchase of military hardware, less than one year before the general elections, the main opposition party, the PDP, said its investigat­ion revealed that, the Presidency deliberate­ly avoided the National Assembly to avoid legislativ­e scrutiny and accountabi­lity, thereby paving the way for the diversion of the funds “for partisan purposes”.

Not a few Lawyers vociferate­d blue murder, and then the National Assembly started threatenin­g fire and brimstone. The provisions of the almighty section 43 of the Constituti­on of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) on impeachmen­t, might be invoked! Excruciati­ng furnace heat!! The Presidency’s Volte Face And the Presidency was forced to make a painful volte- face:

One of the senior advisers of the President fulminated against the impatience of Nigerians: “No”, he said, “approval doesn’t mean approval; if the critics were patient enough and had asked the Senior Special Assistant on National Assembly Matters, they would have known that the request for the US $1 billon, was on its way to the National Assembly!”

I broke into raucous laughter, that drew tears from my eyes!

Questions At this point, some gnawing questions are thrown up: Does the President summon all the heads of the MDAs for meetings, to announce his approval of executive Bills that are on their way from the Presidency to the National Assembly for considerat­ion? What elicited the excitement of the security chiefs, about a Bill that was yet to be submitted to the National Assembly, let alone considered and passed by that body? Or were they convinced beyond doubt, that the National Assembly would simply rubber- stamp what the President had APPROVED? Does Presidenti­al approval precede parliament­ary considerat­ion and passage of a Bill and Presidenti­al assent? Can’t anyone in the Presidency see that the President has placed the cart before the horse? Why the humongous sum of US $1 billion (or about N.1 trillion), for military equipment to combat Boko Haram insurgency that was “technicall­y”, and later, “completely” defeated over two years ago?

Constituti­onal Provisions Section 82 of the Constituti­on, empowers the President to authorise withdrawal of moneys from the Consolidat­ed Revenue Fund of the Federation (not from the ECA), for a period not exceeding six months, if the Appropriat­ion Bill in respect of any financial year is not passed into law by the beginning of the financial year: Is the procuremen­t of military hardware with US $1 billion, in the 2018 budget? Did the Presidency imagine that his powers to authorise withdrawal of moneys from any of the public funds, such as the ECA and the Sovereign Wealth Fund (SWF), equate with the powers improperly conferred on the President by section 305 (1) (2) of the Constituti­on, to issue a proclamati­on of a state of emergency before informing the National Assembly via the official Gazette of the Federal Government in which the proclamati­on has been published?

Section 162 (1) of the Constituti­on provides that all revenues collected by the Federal Government shall be paid into “the Federation Account” (FA), and in subsection (3) thereof, such revenues “shall be distribute­d among the Federal, State and Local Government Councils...” It stands to reason, therefore, that, if some revenues which ought to have been paid into the FA are deposited into some other public funds, such as the ECA and the SWF, all such stray revenues belong, not to the Federal Government alone, but to all the three tiers of government. Ipso facto, any withdrawal from such a public fund, must enjoy the concurrenc­e of the National Assembly, all 36 State Houses of Assembly (not of caucus of the twenty-four Governors of the ruling All Progressiv­es Congress (APC) and of the 774 LGAs. In any event, the National Assembly must be involved in the appropriat­ion of public funds. Section 80 (4) of the Constituti­on is emphatic that “No moneys shall be withdrawn from the Consolidat­ed Revenue Fund or any public fund of the Federation, except in the manner prescribed by the National Assembly”.

Sections 4,5 and 6 of the 1999 Constituti­on of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), enshrines the doctrine of separation of powers among the three arms of government—the Legislatur­e, the Executive and the Judiciary. Section 81 (1)

(2) of the Constituti­on allows the President to prepare an Appropriat­ion Bill, including all the heads of expenditur­e (other than expenditur­e charged upon the Consolidat­ed Revenue Fund). One wonders why the US $1 billion request, was not included in the Appropriat­ion Bill sent by Mr. President to the

National Assembly about five months ago. Or should that amount of money and the President’s express, even though unconstitu­tional “assent” thereto, be read into the meaning of a Supplement­ary Appropriat­ion Bill, which he impliedly passed into law by his public approval thereof?

Rule of Law: A Guiding Principle At this stage of our socio-economic, political and cultural developmen­t as a nation-space, with a written constituti­on, it is imperative that we must insist on the rule of law as a guiding principle, and be vigilant lest we unwittingl­y allow the surreptiti­ous ingress of autocracy, the very antithesis of democracy, into the body politic. There is need to be alert and stand solidly as watchdogs, to watch the activities of any ruling political party, so that we are not dragged into a bottomless abyss of chafing autocracy and noisome authoritar­ianism. Nigerians had haplessly endured military rigourism, for over thirty years of its chequered history. The rule of law and the due process of law, not only hold sway, but must be seen to do so! It is also important that all the handlers of this and any other President, should meticulous­ly study any situation (be it in the socio-economic, financial or legal realm), before allowing the President to plunge into it to his or our detriment. Verbum sat sapienti est!

Chris Akiri, Legal Practition­er, Lagos

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Nigeria