IMMUNITY IN THE LEGISLATURE WILL CHECKMATE DICTATORSHIP
The com
mencement of constitutional amendment by the National Assembly has thrown up a lot of issues of national importance. The proposal to give presiding officers of national and state assemblies immunity and life pension is generating ripples in the polity. Of utmost importance and worthy of discussion to this writer is the proposal for immunity for presiding officers of national and state assemblies.
Under constitutional democracy, we have three arms of government— executive, legislature and the judiciary. The executive arm is made of president, vice-president, governors and deputy governors. The legislative arm comprises of the National Assembly and State Assemblies, while the Judiciary is composed of the bench and bar. Out of these three arms of government, only the leadership of the legislature as presently constituted does not have immunity protection from the constitution. Ironically, the legislature whose primary duty is to amend the constitution periodically has been made vulnerable by the same constitution like the proverbial potter becoming a victim of his clay.
I have listened to both sides of argument with keen interest. Those against the proposal said that it would create impunity and promote corruption.
For the purpose of clarity and objectiveness, the proposed immunity for presiding officers of the legislative arm will not promote impunity as being speculated by sympathisers of the executive arm of government, rather it will entrench the principle of separation powers, checks and balances in the polity. The legislature will live up to its constitutional roles as watchdog to the executive. The current trend where the legislative arm is being treated as extension of executive arm of government is not good for the growth of our nascent democracy.
It is almost impossible to juxtapose the fact that the Senate President and Speaker of House of Representatives who are third and fourth citizens of Nigeria, respectively, in hierarchy of political power, have no immunity while governors enjoy same, simply because they are part of executive arm of government. Opponents of this proposal should also remember that the 1999 Constitution was a creation of the military. Nigerians were not given the privilege to formulate a people-oriented constitution. The 1999 Constitution was handed down to us just to further entrench the interests of the military in supposed democratic dispensation.
The military purposely weakened the legislature by denying it fair share of constitutional protection just to sustain the pre-1999 military structure in the political system—where president and governors lord it over other arms of government. This is one of the manifestations of hatred of the military for the legislative arm of government. This is also the major reason the legislature becomes the first victim in a military coup. Apart from the fact that the military cabal who scripted the 1999 Constitution ensured that one of its own became substantive civilian president, they ensured that similar overbearing powers of a military dictator was arrogated to the office which makes the Nigerian president the most powerful in the world.
I would like to pose some thought provoking and mind-renewing questions to ardent critics of this proposed immunity for presiding officers of national and state assemblies. Is it a coincident that there is always instability in the National Assembly any time Nigeria has a former military head of state as civilian president? Is it not a factoid to believe and insinuate that the proposed immunity will create impunity in the system while absence of it has done it already? How will a weakened leadership of the legislature checkmate the all-powerful executive arm of government with all the state apparatus at its beck and call? Will there be true separation of powers without balance of political powers? Can a sitting president in Abuja threaten a Speaker of State Assembly into instituting impeachment proceedings against supposedly disliked governor, if the Speaker has immunity against arrest and persecution? Answers to the above questions will elucidate the nitty-gritty cum merits of the proposed immunity which critics of this novel democratic proposal failed to understand.
As a result of ignorance and insufferable hypocrisy of those terming this legislative masterstroke as anti-people and pro-corruption, so many Nigerians have not only unconsciously joined the bandwagon of criticising this proposal even without weighing its merits and demerits. This proposed immunity for presiding officers of the national and state assemblies, is not for Senate President Saraki, Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu or House Speaker, Dogara but for survival and sustainability of our young democracy. It will not only strengthen legislative arm of government but will embolden it to perform its constitutional functions without fear of persecution from the executive.