CONSTITUTION AMENDMENT: SENATE DROPS MOVE TO OVERRIDE JONATHAN'S VETO

on May 7 because the order was given exparte without the representation of the National Assembly in court.

The parliament had for the second time in two days listed the bill for first reading without any action only to emerge from a closeddoor session yesterday and announced its decision to suspend the move. 3.00 8.10 0.05 0.02 0.03 0.20 0.18 0.10 0.35 0.15 33.00 179.10 1.05 0.52 0.81 3.80 3.43 1.92 6.79 3.11 10 5.0 5.0 4.0 3.8

5 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.6

While announcing the decision yesterday, Senate President David Mark said the parliament had resolved to halt the process of overriding Jonathan's veto because members were willing to be law abiding in view of the suit before the Supreme Court on the matter.

He however warned the executive to avoid treating the National Assembly with disrespect but should rather accord it the dignity it deserves.

"As we finished our discussion, I think it is proper for me because of the importance of the issue, make a very simple, straight forward unambiguous statement. We are lawmakers and we will not be lawbreakers. We are not just lawmakers, we are very senior, responsible citizens and very senior lawmakers and this is the apex of law making in this country.

"Therefore, on the issue of the current constitution review that is before the Supreme Court, we want to assure Nigerians that we will not break any law in this country.

"We will take appropriate action that will ensure that democracy survives but I will also want to warn that we should not be taken for granted by the executive but once more, let me assure Nigerians that as lawmakers, we will not be lawbreakers," Mark insisted.

Briefing journalists after the plenary, Senate Leader, Victor Ndoma-Egba, said the parliament would vigorously pursue the court case, adding however that the decision of the court would determine what becomes of the bill in the end.

Ndoma-Egba, who said the executive action was in bad faith, faulted the claim by the executive that the National Assembly failed to observe four-fifths majority requirement for some amendments, adding that the records are there for all to see.

"The issue of four-fifths is not correct. Our record is there. The Hansard is there. We met the constitutional requirement. The AGF who said we didn't have the requirement has not shown any document to support it," he said.

Ndoma-Egba also said the Senate believed that the president's refusal not to return the original amendment bill sent to it despite the demand for it heightens suspicion that he had earlier signed it before he was prevailed upon to change his mind.

"Since we passed that resolution, we have got the original. We have our reservation," he said.

He however, declined to disclose the exact amount spent on the amendment, claiming he didn't know it.

However, the decision to halt the move to override the veto appeared to have marked the end of a threeyear review exercise which reportedly gulped a whopping N4 billion from the national treasury without adding any value to the lives of Nigerians nor making any impact on the nation’s law book.

It is even more futile going to court as whatever the court decides would have been overtaken by time, given that the seventh assembly will be over on June 6, 10 days before the court will revisit the case again.

The National Assembly had gazetted the bill on Monday to mark the commencement of its decision to override the president's veto. Consequently, the Senate listed the bill for first reading on Tuesday but was stood down because of poor attendance.

Thereafter, the Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu, who presided over Tuesday's sitting, announced that the Senate would hold an executive session on the matter before yesterday's sitting.

Both the National Assembly and the federal government have been at daggers drawn over the constitution amendment since April 13, when the president wrote both Senate President David Mark and Speaker of the House of Representatives, Hon. Aminu Tambuwal, announcing his decision to withdraw his assent from the constitution amendment.

In the letter, the president accused the lawmakers of whittling down presidential powers and failing to strictly adhere to constitutional provisions on the amendment to Section 9 of the constitution by observing four-fifths majority support in each chamber before it could amend it.

The president had argued that the National Assembly only observed two-thirds majority support for the amendment instead of four-fifths stipulation in the constitution before amending the section. The amendment to the section strips the president of the power to sign an amendment bill before becoming effective.

Following the president's letter, the Senate on April 15 demanded the return of the bill to the National Assembly by the president. The demand was the fallout of a belief that the president had earlier signed the bill before he was prevailed upon by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) Mohammed Adoke to withdraw his assent.

Suspecting that the National Assembly might move to override the president's veto as a result of the demand, the federal government proceeded to the Supreme Court to stop the National Assembly from further carrying out any legislation on the amendment bill with the intention to render it handicapped.

Consequently, the Supreme Court eventually ruled on the suit on May 7, asking the National Assembly to maintain the status quo ante on the amendment until the final determination of the suit.

It also described the suit as incompetent, observing that it should have been between the president and the National Assembly and not the AGF and the National Assembly as the case had been.