Who’s a Minister without Portfolio?
President Muhammadu Buhari’s idea of ministers without portfolios is in national interest, writes Adams Abonu
When strong indications emerged that President Muhammadu Buhari had resolved not to allocate specific ministries to some persons already confirmed as ministers of the federation by the Senate, a constitutional requirement, a wave of reactions was expectedly generated.
According to reports (by THISDAY), the president had, while receiving the list of confirmed names earlier sent to the Senate from Senate President Bukola Saraki at the presidential villa told his audience that while the constitution stipulated that a minister must be appointed from each of the 36 states of the federation, it was his presidential prerogative to assign ministries to the ministers and went on to decry the bogus number of ministries in a time of national austerity.
“If I can remember, there must be a member from each of the 36 states. That was why I limited the number of my nominees to 36. The constitution certainly said there must be one member of the cabinet from all the states but the constitution did not say I must have 36 ministries,” President Buhari reportedly told his guests at the Villa.
Though Presidential spokesman, Femi Adesina had tried to justify the explanation the next day, the speculations have become rife within the populace. As it is mandatory for the president – and indeed all organs of government – to abide by the dictates of the constitution, a cursory look at the preposition could give the rightly concerned public a better light to the issue and possibly suffice President Buhari some benefits of the doubts.
To set the record straight, a minister without portfolio, according to the Wikipedia, is “either a government minister without specific responsibilities or a minister who does not head a particular ministry.”
This sinecure is commonplace in governments formed through coalitions or governments of national unity as the case may be and holds that the cabinet is the highest decision-making authority of the executive wherein a minister without portfolio, while he or she may not head any particular ministry, does have the mandate to be part of the executive power.
Agreeably, the contraption is uncommon in the nation’s presidential system, since these are not ordinary days for Nigeria, extraordinary measures must be evolved to keep the ship of state sailing.
This is a novel approach towards cutting cost of governance and saving for development in a time of national economic quagmire.
While the hints for ministers without portfolio is seen by many Nigerians as a “deliberate ploy” by President Buhari to circumvent a constitutional provision, - PDP dismissed it as “ridiculous and unfortunate”- it has been a role that numerous political notables have played overtime in other climes like former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien, who filled the role under PM Pearson’s cabinet and former Indian Prime Minister Indira Ghandi, who also “kept a seat warmed while serving as cabinet member.
While the proposition could be controversial in Nigeria, the country has allowed the near equivalent of “minister of state” to take roots without equal consideration. A minister without a specific ministry but who executes special responsibilities for the government in a bid to serve the people could be more viable than a minister of state, who arrogates disproportionate power to the position and in the process over-bloat the government.
Buhari’s disclosure evokes memories of the “Doctrine of Necessity” that comes handily, when the nation trotters towards a brink. Unarguably, Nigeria is going through a dire economic crunch brought upon it by a culture of waste and malfeasance, which only novel approaches must be evolved to meet the current challenges to national development.
However, there could be other avenues to resolve the issue of an oversized cabinet that 36 ministries could bring with. While the number of ministries could be reduced considerably to a little above a dozen, some other cabinet members could serve as “superjunior” ministers who would assist the ministers in carrying out state functions. But a caveat here is that Nigeria cannot afford to return as a people to the days of hays when to be a minister of the federal republic – be it senior or junior minister – is a highway to executive recklessness.
According to Sebastian Hon, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, “The president took the oath of office to defend the constitution and provide good governance for Nigerians and he has taken this decision to navigate through these hard times for Nigerians.
He is the president and the buck stops at his table.
“He has taken this risk in particular and why can’t we wait to see how it works. I believe the president might change his mind when conditions improve and we must give him the benefits of doubts. I urge Nigerians to take this in good faith as we are facing abnormal times in this country.
“India is more populous than Nigeria and we have seen Indian Prime Ministers appointing ministers without portfolios because of peculiar circumstances and it has worked. There should be no interpretation politically to the president’s plan and it is high time ministers went to serve Nigeria than their states of origin.”
Hon’s position resonates with a host of other Nigerians, who have said the president has the wherewithal to and the requisite political will to effect durable change for the common good of Nigerians.
It is a demonstration of President Buhari’s sense of austerity to propose a reduction in the cost of governance through a reduction in the size of the federal cabinet with its attendant toll on the commonwealth.
For the incoming ministers, it beckons on them to appreciate the enormity of national responsibility before them and uphold the confidence reposed in them by an administration that has been perceived rightly as disposed to national revival. This crop of ministers would define the trajectory of the “change” mantra of the incumbent administration. What the cabinet would lack in brightness and radiance could be complemented in substance and a sense of purpose.
When the late Lee Kuan Yew, founding father and first premier of Singapore stepped down after a long and fruitful thirty years, he was appointed a minister without portfolio in successive governments but he was the real power behind all thrones in the Asian peninsula.
Whoever is considered for a ‘minister without portfolio’ in our present circumstance could well be among the most senior ministers, the kitchen cabinet, like the kind of role Buhari reportedly reserved for respectable personalities like Ogbonaya Onu, a former governor of old Abia State and strong APC apparatchik.
Nigerians obviously hold their breaths in expectations of what the new ministers without portfolios, would deliver in a time of national apprehension.
It is a demonstration of President Buhari’s sense of austerity to propose a reduction in the cost of governance through a reduction in the size of the federal cabinet with its attendant toll on the commonwealth… For the incoming ministers, it beckons on them to appreciate the enormity of national responsibility before them and uphold the confidence reposed in them by an administration that has been perceived rightly as disposed to national revival