TheNewsGuru

Tag: Senate

  • Sen. Ovie Omo-Agege appears before Senate in plenary

    Senator representing Delta Central Senatorial District Sen. Ovie Omo-Agege on Wednesday appeared before the Senate in plenary.

    The News Agency of Nigeria correspondent reports that Omo-Agege was seen signing the attendance register within the upper chamber.

    The Senate on April 12, suspended Omo-Agege (APC-Delta) over a “dissenting comment’’ on decision of the Upper Chamber on adoption of conference report on Electoral Act (2010) Amendment Bill.

    Omo-Agege, however went to court to challenge his suspension and the court in its ruling, declared the action unconstitutional, saying that the Senate could not suspend a member beyond 14 days.

    The Senate appealed the ruling but said in a statement that while it was waiting for a stay of execution, it would not stop the lawmaker from resuming plenary.

    Justice Nnamdi Dimgba, of Federal High Court on May 10, held that while the National Assembly had the power to discipline its erring members, the premise on which Omo-Agege’s suspension was anchored was illegal.

    Although the court refused to grant any of the seven prayers sought by the senator, ‎it held that the suspension could not hold on grounds of the “violence” it did to the Constitution.

    The judge noted that from the wording of the report of the Senate’s Ethics and Privileges Committee which recommended Omo-Agege’s suspension, he was punished for filing a suit against the Senate after apologising to the legislative house over the allegation leveled against him.

    “Access to court is a fundamental right in the Constitution, which cannot be taken away by force or intimidation from any organ,” the judge ruled.

    The judge also added that the Senate’s decision to punish Omo-Agege for filing a suit against the Senate and for punishing him while his suit was pending constituted an affront on the judiciary.

    He added that even if the Senate had rightly suspended the senator, it could only have suspended him for only a period of 14 days — as prescribed in the Senate rules.

    He also ruled that the principle of natural justice was breached by the Senate’s Ethics and Privileges Committee by allowing Senator Dino Melaye, who was the complainant, to participate in the committee’s sitting that considered the issue and also allowed him to sign the committee’s report.

    The judge therefore nullified Omo-Agege’s suspension “with immediate effect.”

    He also ordered that the senator be paid all his allowances and salaries for the period he was illegally suspended.

     

  • Breaking: Court floors Senate’s Stay of Execution on Omo-Agege

    The Federal High Court, Abuja has declined the Senate’s application for Stay of Execution of its judgment quashing the suspension of Senator Ovie Omo-Agege.

     

    Details shortly…

     

  • Why Omo-Agege will be allowed to resume plenary today – Senate

    The leadership of the Senate on Monday night explained why it will allow senator representing Delta Central Senatorial District (APC), Ovie Omo-Agege resume plenary in accordance with the recent court ruling in Omo-Agege’s favour.

    Recall that the embattled senator had earlier been suspended for 90 days.

    In a statement by its spokesperson, Sabi Abdullahi, the Senate said it has been briefed by lawyers on the court judgement nullifying Mr Omo-Agege’s suspension.

    Justice Nnamdi Dimgba of the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court nullified the suspension of Mr Omo-Agege last week Thursday.

    Dimgba said the Senate’s decision regarding the suspension, as well as the pattern adopted by the National Assembly, was constitutionally defective.

    Following the judgement, an aide to Senate President Bukola Saraki, said the Senate has approached the court to appeal the ruling and institute a stay of execution.

    Omo-Agege in reaction on Monday said the appeal will not hinder his resumption as the stay of execution which the Senate applied for has not been granted.

    In its statement late on Monday, the Senate said it would allow the senator resume in obedience to the court order.

    “The Senate leadership has been briefed by our lawyers on last Thursday’s judgement of the Federal High Court, Abuja, on whether the Senate has the legal authority to suspend a member for certain misconduct or not.

    “We have equally filed an appeal against the judgement of the court and a motion for stay of execution of the judgement at the Court of Appeal.

    “As an institution that obeys the law and court orders, the Senate has decided that it will comply with the judgement of the Federal High Court and do nothing to stop Senator Ovie Omo-Agege from resuming in his office and at plenary from tomorrow May 15, 2018, pending the determination of the application for stay of execution.

    “The Senate has been advised that since the motion for stay of execution of the Thursday (May 10, 2018) judgement shall be heard and possibly determined on Wednesday, May 16, 2018, we shall therefore respect the subsisting High Court judgement and await the appellate court’s decision on the pending motion.”

  • Senate versus IGP: A Dissection Of The Law, By Inibehe Effiong

    Senate versus IGP: A Dissection Of The Law, By Inibehe Effiong

    By Inibehe Effiong

    The Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria summoned the Inspector General of Police (IGP) on three different occasions, namely: April 25, 2018; May 2, 2018 and May 9, 2018. The IGP failed to honour the summons.

    The reasons for the summons as indicated by the Senate are twofold: the first reason was for the Police Chief to address it, and answer questions on the “undignified” manner the Police treated their colleague Senator Dino Melaye. The second reason was for the IGP to answer questions on the killings perpetuated across the country by armed herdsmen and other militias. Recall that the Senate previously debated the unabated killings by herdsmen and other armed groups in Nigeria during it plenaries on January 16 and 17, 2018 and resolved inter alia: that the IG should arrest and prosecute the suspects within Two weeks (14 days).

    The facts as stated above are already in the public domain and verifiable. My intervention in this piece is to dissect the law on the matter.

    As a preliminary point, the power of the Senate to summon any person in Nigeria is derived from Sections 88 and 89(1)(c) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) (subsequently referred to as ‘the Constitution’) as reproduced infra:

    Section 88 (1) “Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, each House of the National Assembly shall have power by resolution published in its journal or in the Official Gazette of the Government of the Federation to direct or cause to be directed investigation into – (a) any matter or thing with respect to which it has power to make laws, and (b) the conduct of affairs of any person, authority, ministry or government department charged, or intended to be charged, with the duty of or responsibility for – (i) executing or administering laws enacted by National Assembly, and (ii) disbursing or administering moneys appropriated or to be appropriated by the National Assembly.”

    88 (2) The powers conferred on the National Assembly under the provisions of this section are exercisable only for the purpose of enabling it to;

    (a) make laws with respect to any matter within its legislative competence and correct any defects in existing laws; and

    (b) expose corruption, inefficiency or waste in the execution or administration of laws within its legislative competence and in the disbursement or administration of funds appropriated by it”.

    89 (1) For the purpose of any investigation under Section 88 of this Constitution and subject to the provisions thereof, the Senate or the House of Representatives or a committee appointed in accordance with section 62 of this Constitution shall have power to – (c) summon ANY PERSON in Nigeria to give evidence at any place or produce any document or other thing in his possession or under his control, and examine him as a witness and require him to produce any document or other thing in his possession or under his control, subject to all just exceptions.” (Capitalize for emphasis).

    It is beyond contention that the IGP can be summoned by the Senate to give evidence on any of the matters listed in Section 88 (1) for the purposes envisaged under Section 88 (2) of the Constitution. In essence, the real issue in controversy here is not whether the Senate can summon the IGP, but for what purpose?

    Two reasons were adduced by the Senate for summoning the IGP. The first reason was for him to address it and answer questions on the travails of Senator Dino Melaye. The second reason was for the IGP to explain the wanton killing of innocent Nigerians in Benue State and other parts of the country.

    On the issue of mass killings across the country, by the combined effect of Section 214 (1)(b) of the Constitution and Section 4 of the Police Act Cap. P19 LFN 2004, the responsibility for the maintenance of law and order and security of lives and property is vested in the Nigeria Police Force. Therefore, the Senate acted within the scope of its oversight powers under Section 88 of the Constitution by summoning the IGP over the killings in Nigeria since the Police Act that vests the duty of security on the Police is a law made by the National Assembly; of which the Senate is an arm as provided in Section 47 of the Constitution.

    On the issue of Senator Dino Melaye, some of my learned friends have contended that the Senate cannot summon the IGP over the manner the Kogi Senator was treated by the Police. With the greatest respect to them, that argument can be faulted for the reasons canvassed below.

    The powers to search, arrest, detain and or prosecute any person are donated to the Police by an Act of the National Assembly, specifically Part 4 of the Police Act. When the Police exercise its powers of searching, arresting, detaining or prosecuting any person in Nigeria, they are merely executing a law made by the National Assembly. Note that by virtue of Section 88 (1)(b)(i) of the Constitution reproduced supra, the Senate is imbued with the power to carry out investigation into “the conduct of affairs or any person, authority, Ministry or government department charged, or intended to be charged, with the responsibility for executing or administering laws enacted by the National Assembly.”

    If it is conceded that the police was executing a law made by the National Assembly when it arrested Senator Dino Melaye for alleged sundry offences, it follows that the Senate can investigate the conduct of the affairs of the IGP and the Police relating to how it executed its powers in arresting and detaining Dino Melaye, provided that the purpose of such investigation by the Senate is to expose corruption, inefficiency or waste in the execution of the powers of the Police under Part 4 of the Police Act.

    I agree that the Senate cannot investigate a matter which is a subject of litigation based on the sub judice rule. Admittedly, this rule is cognizable under Order 53(5) of the Senate Standing Orders 2015, (as amended) which states that ‘’Reference shall not be made to any matter on which a judicial decision is pending in such a way as might in the opinion of the President of the Senate prejudice the interest of parties thereto.’’ Interestingly, IGP Idris relied on this very provision to evade probe by the Senate over the allegations made against him by Senator Misau when he appeared before the Senate ad-hoc committee on the matter.

    In the present case, Dino Melaye was first arraigned on May 2, 2018 in Abuja which coincided with the second summons. As at April 25, 2018 when the IGP was first summoned to appear, there was no pending litigation on the Melaye’s case. If the IGP is now relying on the sub judice rule to ignore the Senate summons, which should be properly raised when he appears before the Senate, which court case is preventing him from honouring the summons to explain the ongoing wanton killings across the country?

    There is nothing unprecedented or unusual in the decision of the Senate to investigate the actions of the Nigeria Police Force. Indeed, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of cases of alleged abuse or misuse of power and human rights violation by the police pending before the Senate and the House of Representatives Committees on Human Rights and Public Petitions. These are cases brought by Nigerians of diverse economic, social and political standing to seek redress against various forms of reckless and unlawful exercise of power by the police and other law enforcement agencies. It will be to the collective disadvantage of the people of Nigeria if the National Assembly was not empowered by the Constitution to investigate the conduct of affairs of the police. The law cannot be changed overnight merely because the Senate has decided to invoke its oversight powers for the benefit of one of its member. The right of Melaye or any other Nigerian to seek redress in court does not operate as a bar to the oversight powers of the National Assembly.

    It is also my considered view that the IGP cannot delegate other officers to represent him when the Senate has expressly indicated that it wants the IGP to appear before it in person. Section 89 (1)(c) of the Constitution empowers the Senate to summon ANY PERSON. It is also unhelpful to posit that the Inspector General of Police is an office and can be represented or that the occupant of the office can delegate his functions. The Police Act, which authorizes the IGP to delegate his functions, is subservient to the Constitution which empowers the Senate to summon ANY PERSON. The IGP cannot rely on his power of delegation under the Police Act to challenge the power of the Senate under the Constitution to summon him to appear in person.

    The Senate is empowered by Section 89 (1)(d) of the Constitution to issue a warrant to compel the attendance of the IGP since the excuses given by the IGP are not satisfactory to the Senate. Unfortunately, it is the same Nigeria Police Force headed by the IGP that has the duty under Section 89 (2) of the Constitution to enforce and execute the warrant. This is why the conduct of the IGP must be deprecated and viewed not just as a flagrant disregard for the rule of law, but a despicable attack on our nascent democracy.

    I further submit that it is not within the powers of the IGP to determine whether the reasons proffered by the Senate for summoning him are within the scope of Section 88 of the Constitution. That is for the courts to determine. Only a court of competent jurisdiction can interpret or limit the constitutional powers of the Senate under Sections 88 and 89 of the Constitution. If the IGP genuinely believed that the Senate acted ultra vires by summoning him, he ought to have sought redress in court.

    I am conversant with the decisions of the Court of Appeal in the cases of Senate of National Assembly v. Momoh (1983) 4

    NCLR, 269 and Mallam Nasir Ahmed El-Rufai v. The House of Representatives, National Assembly of the Federal Republic of Nigeria & Ors. (2003) 46 WRN 70, where the appellate court pronounced on the limits of the investigative powers of the National Assembly under the Constitution. However, a case is only an authority for what it decides. The facts of those cases are not on all fours with the present case. If the Senate in their letter of invitation (summons) to the IGP had clearly indicated that the summons was for the IGP to explain the killings in the country and the manner Melaye was treated, the Senate is in order as those reasons are within the scope of the Constitution. The IGP is not a private citizen but a public officer.

    Last month, the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory presided over by Justice Abba Bello Mohammed, dismissed a suit instituted by this same IGP, Ibrahim Idris, against the Senate when he was summoned over the damning allegations leveled against him by Senator Isa Misau. The Court upheld the powers of the Senate under Sections 88 and 89 of the Constitution to summon the IGP. The IGP is yet to honour that summons despite losing in court.

    This same IGP has continued to flout the subsisting orders of two different courts of competent jurisdiction for him to unseal the office of the Peace Corps of Nigeria. We are dealing with an IGP who flouted the directive of the President and Commander-in-Chief for him to relocate to Benue State. The contemptuous conduct of the IGP towards the institution of the Senate is intolerable. This unbridled impunity by the Chief Law Enforcement Officer should not be allowed to stand.

    Let it be known that I am neither a fan of Senator Dino Melaye nor do I share in his political idiosyncrasy. I also have strong reservations about the present crop of members of the Senate and its leadership. However, we must never condone the destruction of our institutions. Senate President Bukola Saraki and Senator Dino Melaye will not be in the Senate forever. We should resist the temptation to play to the gallery by trivializing the offensive, unlawful and arrogant conduct of the IGP, Ibrahim Idris, simply because we disagree with the Senate leadership or membership.

    This is about the survival of our nascent democracy.

    Thank you.

  • Senate appeals court ruling nullifying Omo-Agege’s suspension

    The Senate has filed a notice of appeal and a stay of execution on a High Court judgement nullifying the suspension of a senator, Ovie Omo-Agege.

    Olu Onemola, an aide to the Senate President, Bukola Saraki, made this known Thursday evening.

    “The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, Coram Nnamdi Dimgba .J. in a judgment delivered today, the 10th May, 2018 in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/314/18 between Sen. Ovie Omo-Agege V. Senate & 2 Ors held that the Senate and the Senate President who where the 1st and 2nd Defendants in the suit filed by Sen. Ovie Omo Agege can punish erring members of the Senate. The Court also held that all reliefs of the plaintiff are not grantable as they could not be supported by the processes filed by the plaintiff.

    “However, relying on Relief 8 which is the Omnibus prayer, the Court held that the suspension was not in accordance to law, the Senate and the Senate President promptly filed a Notice of Appeal and a Motion for Stay of Execution of the same Judgement on the 10th of May, 2018,” he wrote.

    A stay of execution is a court order to temporarily suspend the execution of a court judgment or another court order.

    Justice Nnamdi Dimgba of the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court gave the ruling nullifying the suspension on Thursday.

    Dimgba said the Senate’s decision regarding the suspension, as well as the pattern adopted by the National Assembly, was constitutionally defective.

    He said the Senate has no power to suspend a senator for more than 14 days.

    Omo-Agege was suspended for 90 days by the Senate after he accused his colleagues of working against President Muhammadu Buhari by amending the electoral act.

    The Senate said the suspension was not because of Omo-Agege’s comments on the election re-oreder but for his move of approaching the court over the matter.

    That was also frowned at by the judge who said it was an abuse of the Senate’s powers.

    “Access to court is a constitutional right which cannot be taken away,” Dimgba said.

    Meanwhile, the embattled senator in a reaction to the ruling said it is victory for Nigeria’s nascent democracy and not necessarily against the senate or its leaders.

  • Senate can’t summon Buhari, IG, others – Falana

    A human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) on Thursday said the Senate don’t have the constitutional powers to summon President, or the Inspector General of Police to appear before it.

    He said this when he appeared as a guest on Channels Television’s breakfast programme, Sunrise Daily, on Thursday.

    Falana quoted sections of the Constitution to explain that the President or the governor of a state cannot be summoned by the National Assembly.

    He said, “There is no such power given to NASS by the Constitution to summon everybody.

    “It has given the President the discretion to address the National Assembly either jointly or separately on any matter of national importance.”

    “The Senate didn’t get it right this time around. By virtue of Section 67 of the Constitution, the National Assembly or either chamber can summon a Minister when the affairs of his or her ministries are under consideration.

    “The only other occasion where a public officer can be summoned by the National Assembly is when proceedings are ongoing to expose corruption (Section 88) and when a law is being debated either with a view to amending it or to have a new law entirely.”

    However, the senior advocate stated that the lawmakers can fix areas of the Constitution perceived as weak, rather than going beyond its limits as such actions can subject the institution to ridicule.

  • BREAKING: Court nullifies Omo-Agege’s suspension by Senate

    The Federal High Court in Abuja has nullified the suspension of the Delta Central Senator, Ovie Omo-Agege, by the Senate, describing the action as unconstitutional.

    Justice Nnamdi Dimgba, in a judgment that lasted one hour on Thursday, held that while the National Assembly had the power to discipline its erring members, the premise on which Omo-Agege’s suspension was anchored was illegal.

    Although the court refused to grant any of the seven prayers sought by the senator, ‎it held that the suspension could not hold on grounds of the “violence” it did to the Constitution.

    The judge noted that from the wording of the report of the Senate’s Ethics and Privileges Committee which recommended Omo-Agege’s suspension, he was punished for filing a suit against the Senate after apologising to the legislative house over the allegation leveled against him.

    “Access to court is a fundamental right in the Constitution, which cannot be taken away by force or intimidation from any organ,” the judge ruled.

    The judge also added that the Senate’s decision to punish Omo-Agege for filing a suit against the Senate and for punishing him while his suit was pending constituted an affront on the judiciary.

    He added that even if the Senate had rightly suspended the senator, it could only have suspended him for only a period of 14 days — as prescribed in the Senate rules.

    He also ruled that the principle of natural justice was breached by the Senate’s Ethics and Privileges Committee by allowing Senator Dino Melaye, who was the complainant, to participate in the committee’s sitting that considered the issue and also allowed him to sign the committee’s report.

    The judge therefore nullified Omo-Agege’s suspension “with immediate effect.”

    He also ordered that the senator be paid all his allowances and salaries for the period he was illegally suspended.

    The Senate had, on April 13, suspended the senator for 90 legislative days over his comment that the amendment to the Electoral Act 2010 seeking the re-ordering of the general elections was targeted at President Muhammadu Buhari.

    Meanwhile, Omo-Agege had filed his suit on March 26, 2018, earlier before he was suspended by the Senate on April 13.

    He sought, among other prayers in his suit, a declaration that his referral by the Senate and the Senate President’s referral to the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions “for trial for expressing his opinion on the purport” of the bill “is an act calculated to interfere with or likely to constitute a breach” of his fundamental human right to freedom of expression without interference.

    He claimed that his rights allegedly breached by the Senate were guaranteed by Section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution and Article 9(2) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Right (Ratification and Enforcement) Act.

    He also sought an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants and their agents from interfering with his rights and or privileges as a senator and preventing him from entering “or remaining within the precinct or chamber of the Senate or National Assembly or attempting to forcibly remove him from the chamber or precinct of the National Assembly or in any way impeding or undermining the plaintiff’s ability to function as a senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

    He joined the Senate, its President, Dr. Bukola Saraki; and the AGF as the first to the third defendants respectively.

  • PDP blasts IG for snubbing Senate invitation

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has criticised the repeated snub of Senate’s invitation by the Inspector-General of Police (IGP), Ibrahim Idris, and described the attitude as “an assault on Nigeria’s democracy”.

    Recall that Idris, who was expected to appear before the Senate on Tuesday, failed to show up. It was the third time the Police boss was failing to honour such invitation.

    Irked by that behaviour, the Senate on Tuesday passed a vote of no confidence on the IGP and declared him unfit to hold any public office.

    The PDP, in its reaction to the development, said that it was “very wrong” for the IGP to ignore the invitation, saying that he had missed a chance to share ideas with the lawmakers on ways to tackle the insecurity in the nation,

    “His (IGP)’s refusal to honour the invitation is a deliberate assault on Nigeria’s democracy; it is a willful denigration of the National Assembly and a recourse to totalitarianism,” the party said in a statement signed by Kola Ologbondiyan, its National Publicity Secretary.

    The PDP said that it was “unfortunate” that Idris had, for the third time, shunned the Senate invitation over the worsening security situation in the nation.

    “Never in our democratic history as a people and as a nation, has a service chief treated the National Assembly with disdain like the current IGP.

    “All over the world, the legislature is a bastion of democracy and our constitution, in recognition of this, provides a special place for our National Assembly, as the representatives of the people, to serve as a check on the executive arm.

    “We, therefore, condemn this offensive on our democracy by IGP Idris. We also condemn the deliberate insult being heaped on each of our legislators by appointees of President Muhammadu Buhari,’’ the party said.

    The PDP urged the President of the Senate and other senators to protect the institution of the legislature and the country’s democracy by not limiting their action only to finding Ibrahim Idris as “unfit” to hold public office.

    “The Senate should take the next step within their legislative instrument and powers to restore the respect and dignity which the generality of Nigerians and the 1999 Constitution (as amended), bestowed on them,” the statement said.

  • IGP’s Summons: Senate acting out of order – Carl Umegboro

    By Carl Umegboro

    The Senate’s newest action over the failure of the Inspector General of Police, Ibrahim Idris to appear in person is again reducing the red chamber to disdain. In the first place, it tantamount to undue influence to summon the head of a security agency for arresting and prosecuting a suspect it believed to have committed crimes. As long as the arrest is followed by arraignment in the court of law, the Police have no case to answer.

    Secondly, it is out of order for the Senate to interfere with operations and investigations of the Police for whatever reasons. It is important to equivocally state that oversight functions of the Senate do not transcend to interferences with criminal investigations. Police do not convict suspects but merely investigate, arrest and arraign before the court of law for trial.

    Thirdly, it is absurd that the senate made the Police Act and Regulation that empowers the IGP to be represented by a DIG in any functions, yet rejected a DIG assigned to duty at its chamber in line with the Police Act and Regulation. The act itself is disrespect to the institution and Nigerian constitution.

    Without a doubt, Section 88(1) and 89(c) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended gives the Senate powers to summon any public officeholders. However, Section 312(1) of Police Act and Regulation specifically provides that “all the functions, duties and responsibilities of the IGP as listed in Section 215 of the Constitution can be carried out by a senior officer of the Force of the rank of Deputy Inspector General of Police (DIG) and Assistant Inspector General of Police (AIG) who, if permitted by the Inspector General of Police to act on his behalf or represent him in official capacity at any function, event or programme within and outside Nigeria, can do so in consonant with the provisions of the Police Act and Regulation”. Hence, Police Act endorsed DIG to represent IGP at any functions including at the Senate.

    In other words, the Senate turned a blind eye to the provisions of the Police Act and Regulation it enacted which guides Police personnel in their duties. Emphatically, Section 24(a) of 1999 Constitution provides, “It shall be the duty of every citizen to – abide by this Constitution, respect its ideals and its institutions, the National Flag, the National Anthem, the National Pledge, and legitimate authorities”. Thus, if the Police Act permits IGP to be represented by a DIG in any functions, it is unambiguous.

    To sum, senate should not heat up the polity over frivolities. The Police are under no obligations to give reasons to anyone for carrying out its statutory duties. If the Senate requires official information on the Police, certainly, any senior officers assigned in line with the Police Act and Regulation can fittingly represent the Force. However, if the Senate is uncomfortable with the provisions of the Act, the appropriate thing is to amend the Police Act. Incidentally, the nation has numerous challenges that require urgent attentions rather than allocating such times and energy on mere politics.

    Umegboro, a public affairs analyst writes from Abuja. (07057101974-SMS only

  • Senate adjourns plenary till Tuesday, fails to pass 2018 budget this week

    The report by the joint Senate and House of Representatives’ Committee on Appropriations on the 2018 Appropriation Bill was not laid at the Senate before the chamber adjourned plenary to Tuesday next week.

    The Senate cancelled today’s (Thursday) plenary to allow members of the All Progressives Congress caucus to prepare for the local government area congresses of the party holding on Saturday.

    Recall that President of the Senate, Bukola Saraki, on Monday after a meeting with President Muhammadu Buhari, in company with Speaker of the House of Representatives, Yakubu Dogara, said the report would be laid this week, while the passage of the budget would be done later in the week or by next week.

    “Hopefully, it should be laid this week. If it can be laid this week and passed early next week. We are hoping it will be laid this week,” Saraki had said.

    Corroborating Saraki, the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Media and Public Affairs, Senator Aliyu Sabi-Abdullahi, while featuring on the breakfast current affairs show of Channels Television’s Sunrise Daily, on Tuesday, said the report would be laid this week.

    Briefing journalists after the plenary on Wednesday, Sabi-Abdullahi, however, said, “It was supposed to be laid this week but they are putting finishing touches. They are being careful not to make mistakes. The report will be laid on Tuesday and by Wednesday, we will approve it.

    “The good thing is that it is the harmonised version (that will be laid). So, whatever is laid in the Senate will be laid in the House of Representatives, and it will be considered and passed the same time.”

    The House of Representatives had defended the National Assembly’s failure to pass the 2018 Appropriation on Thursday as earlier planned.

    The House stated that some details of the N8.612tn budget had yet to be fine-tuned by the Joint Committee on Appropriations.

    The Chairman, House Committee on Media and Public Affairs, Mr. Abdulrazak Namdas, had last Thursday said the budget was scheduled for passage last week but had to be shifted to this week.

    The joint Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives was expected to present the report on the budget in the two chambers on April 19 but the report has since not been laid.

    In another development, the lawmaker representing Kaduna Central Senatorial District, Senator Shehu Sani, raised a point of order at the plenary on Wednesday to urge the Senate to lift the embargo on executive appointments and confirm President Muhammadu Buhari’s nominees for the Board of the Central Bank of Nigeria.

    The Senate had imposed an embargo on consideration and confirmation of appointments not listed in Section 171 of the Constitution. This was to protest against the retention of Ibrahim Magu as the acting chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission despite the rejection of his appointment by lawmakers.

    Sani said, “Nigeria’s central bank is the only central bank in the whole of Africa without a board. And when there is no board, there is a limit to the ability and capacity of the management of that institution, which has a pivotal role to play in our economy, to manage the affairs of banks and function properly.”