Nigeria’s Presidential System: An Unruly Bull in a China Shop (Part 4)
“....UNDER A PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT TODAY, THE OFFICIAL HEAD OF STATE, IS SPARSELY INVOLVED IN THE BUSINESS OF ACTUAL GOVERNANCE. MAJOR DECISIONS ARE TAKEN BY A LEGISLATIVE BODY, WHICH COMPRISES PERSONS WHO ARE KNOWN COLLECTIVELY AS THE PARLIAMENT”
Introduction
Last week, and in the weeks before, we thoroughly discussed the presidential system of government, its definition, structure, advantages, and disadvantages. We concluded that, the view of majority of Nigerians is that it is too expensive to run. It drains the nation of its meagre resources, to develop. Today, we shall commence our discourse on the parliamentary system of government to decide if Nigerians’ newfound love and nostalgia for it, after it failed us in the sixties, is misplaced or well informed. Why the sudden yearning for the parliamentary system of government? Let us start analysing this concept.
The History and Structure of the Parliamentary System of Government
A parliament is a legislature, especially in countries whose system of government is modelled after the Westminster system that operates in the United Kingdom. Parliament emanates from the French word, ‘parlement’, the act of parler (to speak). A ‘parlement’ is a discussion. It later came to represent a congregation or a meeting, at which such a discussion took place. In modern terminology, it is now used for the entire body of people (in an institutional sense) who regularly meet to discuss state affairs, as one of the three arms of government.
The parliamentary system is touted as the first ever form of representative government, which accommodates common subjects (not necessarily from the nobility) in the decision-making forum of the State.
Origin
Most governments that existed in ancient times were autocratic, and limited representation to only members of the nobility. No direct representation by the common people, was ever countenanced.
There emerged agitation by the common people, to have a greater say in the decision-making process of their societies. Rulers incrementally and by installments, reluctantly acquiesced to these genuine demands, thus, allowing commoners’ representation. This has so expanded that, in modern times, in various democracies, the authority to rule now rests on a Legislature, rather than on a single ruler.
Modern parliamentary system of government, originated in England in the late 19th century. It was later formalised by King Edward I of England at a meeting held in 1295. At the said meeting, representatives of rural landowners and common townsmen were invited as members of commons, to participate in the King’s Council (Curia Regis).
A Modern Theory of the Parliamentary System
Consistent with its historical antecedents discussed above, under a parliamentary system of government today, the official Head of State, is sparsely involved in the business of actual governance. Major decisions are taken by a legislative body, which comprises persons who are known collectively as the Parliament. Individually, such persons are members of Parliament (MPs).
The structure of a parliament itself, may take different forms. It may be composed of two chambers, or just one. The MPs are persons elected, to represent various delegations of the electorate. In consequence of the vast representation of interests by the MPs, the authority who shall be identified as the Head of Government, is often extracted from their numbers. Accordingly, executive powers are vested in the leader of the Parliament, in many cases a ‘Prime Minister’. The Prime Minister, in turn, sets up a cabinet (usually comprising members of his/her party), to be responsible for the day-to-day administration of the government. In this way, the Prime Minister and his/her cabinet members, form the de facto executive arm of government.
This unique harmonisation of the Parliament on the one hand, and the Prime Minister and his cabinet on the other, tends to blur the dividing line between the executive and legislative arms of government. To the naked eye, it would often appear that, the decisions are taken by the same set of persons.
In order to prevent an abuse of powers and tyranny, most parliamentary democracies incorporate certain methods checks and balances, such as fixing term limits for Prime Ministers, and the system of passing a vote of no confidence.
Parliamentary System in Nigeria
On 1st October, 1960, Nigeria broke free bonds of British colonialism and was formally rebranded as a sovereign, independent State. In the same manner as the French colonisers, who bequeathed their own system of government to their former colonies at their independence, the British, in 1960, handed down to our newborn nation, a Westminster-modelled Parliamentary system of government.
Under this system of government, the Executive and Legislative arms of government, are in a close relationship. The former invariably enjoys the endorsement of the latter, demonstrated by a vote of confidence. I use the word ‘invariably’, because the members of parliament, the legislative arm, usually double as members of the executive arm of government. So, the relationship between the Executive and Parliament is almost always cordial, for as Jesus Christ once said, a house divided against itself cannot stand.
The doctrine of separation of powers, may therefore, become a bit blurred under a parliamentary system of government. That is not to say that the system is devoid of any checks and balances. On the contrary, unique methods are employed as countermeasures, to prevent against one arm of government from overreaching the other.
In most cases, there is an authority identified as the ‘Head of Government’, who exercises the real executive powers, as distinct from a merely emblematic and ceremonial ‘Head of State’. In Britain, the Head of Government is the Prime Minister, while the Head of State is the royal British monarch, the Queen or King, as the case may be. The British parliamentary system, sometimes referred to as cabinet government, revolves around Members of Parliament (MPs) who are the elected representatives of the people, and exercise sovereign powers on behalf of the people.
Similarly, under the parliamentary system that was practiced in Nigeria, the Prime Minister was the Head of Government. The Head of State was an elected president. The Prime Minister and his cabinet (constituted mostly by leading members of the majority party), oversee the actual governance.
The Ministers are usually individually and collectively held responsible to the parliament, for the activities of the government, which is referred to as “the doctrine of ministerial responsibility and accountability,” a fundamental part of the British parliamentary system.
It is this system of government that the British colonial masters bequeathed, on the emerging Nigerian State at independence in 1960. However, perhaps, because of the peculiarities of the new born nation, certain aspects of the system she inherited from her colonial masters, were abandoned along the way. For example, between 1960 and 1965, the Nigerian parliament sat for only about 38 days per annum, as against the British parliament which sat for average 160 days per annum. This simply implied that, unlike their British parliament, the Nigerian parliament no doubt preferred other preoccupations other than the one they pledged to, and for which the Nigerian citizens entrusted their mandate to them.
Parliamentarianism in Nigeria was replete with history of ethnic squabble, conflict and confusion, until it was suddenly terminated in January 1966.
The Western region comprising of present day Lagos, Ogun, Oyo, Osun, Ondo, Ekiti, Edo and Delta states, was later dismembered with the carving out of the Mid-Western region in 1963; the Northern region comprises of the present 19-State structure of the North East, North West and North central geopolitical zones, while the East was populated with the present day Abia, Akwa Ibom, Anambra, Bayelsa, Cross River, Ebonyi, Enugu, Imo and Rivers States.
The North adopted the Westminster parliamentary system, with a Premier as head of government and chief executive, while there was also a ceremonial Governor and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. It also had a bicameral legislature, made of the Northern Region House of Assembly, comprised of elected representatives, and the House of Chiefs, made up of Emirs and Chiefs.
The Western Region, which seemed the only homogeneous region with predominantly the Yoruba people and was granted self-rule in 1957, also had similar structure of government to the Northern region; also with an elected Premier, who was the Head of Government and Chief Executive Officer overseeing the day to day running of the government of the region. There was also a ceremonial Governor, who was more or less a figure head in charge of ceremonial functions. It was the same story for the Eastern region, which also had an elected premier, who was also the head of government and Chief Executive Officer in charge of the running of the affairs of the region; with a Governor who was also ceremonial like the Northern and Western regions Governors. Both the West and the East, also had bicameral legislatures, like the North, but the East did not have strong and influential traditional institutions like the North and the West.
The regional governments of the early 1960s, laid the foundations for the developmental strides of the respective regions, and it has been argued in many quarters that, the country would have fared better, if the regions had not been dissolved and the country balkanised into the present States system.
At Independence, there were three dominant political parties, founded along regional and ethnic lines: the Northern Peoples Congress, NPC; the Action Group, AG in the West and the National Council of Nigeria and the Camerouns, NCNC, which was predominantly peopled by the East. By 1962, the NPC was in control of the Federal Government, with Abubakar Tafawa Balewa as the first Prime Minister and Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe emerging the second and third Governor-General of Nigeria, first from 1960 to 1963 and again from 1963 to 1966. Chief Obafemi Awolowo opted to be the leader of opposition, when the NCNC teamed up with the NPC to form a coalition government. The faulty foundation of the First Republic, characterised by ethnic chauvinism and rivalry, led to the death of that Republic on January 15, 1966, when Nigeria experienced the first military incursion into her political journey. This military interregnum, lasted till October 1, 1979, when Nigeria returned to democracy with the United States of America’s presidential system of government, as the adopted model. Recall that, there are basically two systems of government, the parliamentary, which has been tested in the First Republic and the presidential system, which has since October 1999, to date, been the system of government in operation, except for a period of another military interregnum between December 31, 1983 and May 29, 1999.
Advantages of Parliamentary System of Government
The parliamentary system of government, has the clear advantage of speed and efficiency in passing legislation. The reason is simple. It is the same persons, who make up both the executive and legislative arms of government. (To be continued)
THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK
“It is impossible to practice parliamentary politics without having patience, decency, politeness, and courtesy.” – Khaledia Zia