Ministerial Screening And The Senate Hurdles

SINCE 1999, the members of Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria have been screening, confirming and rejecting ministerial nominees.

This is in line with some of the provisions of Section 147 of the 1999 Constitution as amended which says (1) There shall be such offices of Ministers of the Government of the Federation as may be established by the President. Subsection (2): Any appointment to the office of Minister of the Government of the Federation shall, if the nomination of any person to such office is confirmed by the Senate, be made by the President.

Obviously in the past, the screening exercise has generated a lot of controversies and scandals that have tainted the image of the hallowed Upper Chamber. Such scandals were the allegations of bribery for confirmation between the nominees and the senators. A typical example of such was that between the former Minister of FCT and governor of Kaduna State, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai and the then deputy Senate president, Ibrahim Mantu. It took the intervention of the then President, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo for El-Rufai to be confirmed.

Throughout the 16 years of PDP’s rule, despite that the party had majority members in the Senate, there has always been cases of senators being lobbied to confirm ministerial nominees. Such lobby which is often in form of financial gratification usually comes from the Presidency or the ministerial nominees, depending on the circumstance and interest.

Ahead of Tuesday commencement of the screening of the list of ministerial nominees submitted by President Muhammadu Buhari to the 8th Senate, the Upper Chamber has on Thursday released the criteria for the exercise.

On top of the demands from the nominees is: come with a proof that you have declared your assets.

According to the Chairman Senate ad hoc Committee on Media and Publicity, Dino Melaye, the senators agreed and insisted that each nominee must submit proofs of their asset declaration; must have their nomination approved by two senators from their states; and must have a clean bill of health from its public petitions committee, among other conditions.

“The first criterion is using constitutional provisions as stipulated in the 1999 Constitution (as amended) as a fundamental procedure for the screening of ministerial nominees.

“Section 120 of the Standing Rules of the Senate states that the Senate shall not consider the nomination of any person, who has held any public office as contained in Part 2 of the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution prior to his nomination unless there is a written evidence that he has declared his assets and liabilities as required by Section 11(1) of Part 1 of the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

With these conditions, many are of the view that the senate is arrogating to itself, the power it does not have under the country’s 1999 constitution.

A Lagos-based lawyer, Mr. John Amadu told The Guardian that the provisions of the 1999 Constitution on Senate’s confirmation of ministerial nominations is very clear and unambiguous.

He said: “The constitution says the Senate only needs to ‘confirm.’

According Black’s Law Dictionary, ‘confirm’ means “To complete or establish that which was imperfect or uncertain; to ratify what has been done without authority or insufficiently.” Boggs v. Mining Co. 14 Cal. 305; Railway Co. v. Ransom, 15 Tex. Civ. App. 689, 41 S. W. 826.

The same dictionary defines ‘Screening’ as ”Evaluation of a number of subjects to determine which have the right characteristics or attributes you are looking for.”

From the foregoing, the process by which ministerial nominations are subjected to screening is not with the true intents and purposes of its enabling law. Screening, as it has always been used, is illegal and does not conform to the intents of the draftsmen of the constitution.

Others believe that the senate’s criteria such as proof of assets declaration, nominee to be approved by two senators from her state, and clean bill of health from the senate petition committee and others are unconstitutional, but good for deepening the country’s democracy.

In the past, some ministerial nominees like Prof. Babalola Borishade (Ekiti), Bode Augusto (Lagos) and Dr. Obadiah Ando (Taraba) were completely denied confirmation by the Senate for one reason or the other.

Also, some ministerial nominees like Senator Musiliu Obanikoro who was rejected by the three APC senators from Lagos was confirmed by the Senate with the assistance of the then Senate President, David Mark.

On the issue of petitions against the nominees, such has been a tradition whenever ministerial list is submitted to the Senate. During Obasanjo’s administration, petitions were written against the likes of Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Dr. Iyorchia Ayu, Funke Adedoyin and others.

It is not surprising to many political observers that petitions have flooded the Senate since the list of the ministerial nominees was submitted to the upper chamber.

Finding reveals that not less than 25 petitions have been submitted to the office of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions by various individuals and groups seeking to stop the clearance of some of the 21 ministerial nominees.

Apart from the petition against former Rivers State Governor Rotimi Amaechi which was submitted by the three senators from Rivers State to the senate president on Wednesday, another senator representing Kaduna South Senatorial District, Danjuma La’ah, submitted his on Thursday against the nomination of Mrs. Amina Mohammed from Kaduna State. La’ah wrote on behalf of the Southern Kaduna Coalition, an amalgamation of all the pressure and public interest groups of Southern Kaduna extraction. Mohammed’s accusers said she was not from Kaduna.

The petitions against Amaechi are not unexpected considering the lingering soured relationship between him and his successor, Chief Nyesom Wike.

It would be recalled that ahead of the unveiling of the list, there were consistent and orchestrated media attacks against the trio of Amaechi, Babatunde Fashola and Dr. Kayode Fayemi, which many believed was a ploy by their opponents to ensure they were not nominated. With their nominations, the high-wired politics has now shifted to the Senate Chamber. Fayemi seems to be lucky, having secured the support of his successor, Mr. Ayo Fayose.

On the petition against one of the ministerial nominees, Mrs. Amina Mohammed questioning her state of origin, it is not new in the polity. Such petition was written against Okonjo-Iweala by a group in Abia State when she was nominated for ministerial post in 2003 on Abia slot. But the petition did not stop her from being confirmed minister by the senate.

Also some years ago, Justice Ifeoma Jumbo-Ofor, the then Acting Chief Judge of Abia State was denied being sworn-in as Justice of Appeal Court by the then Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Justice Mariam Aloma Muhktar following a petition challenging the state of origin declared by her.

The petitioners had contended that Justice Jombo-Ofor who was serving under the Abia State judiciary then lacked the requisite locus to take a slot meant for the state since she was originally from Anambra State, notwithstanding the fact that she is married to a man from Abia State.

Following public outcry and the intervention of the Abia State government that confirmed the indigeneship of Justice Jumbo-Ofor who had served in the State Judiciary for 14 years and also affirmed that her name was indeed sent by the government as one of the state’s candidates for elevation to the appellate court, the CJN later swore her in.

It was revealed that the decision not to swear in Justice Jombo-Ofor is said to have been based on Official Gazette No. 74, Volume 84, with heading: Guiding Principles and Formulae for the Distribution of all Cadres of Posts.

It was created in pursuance of the Federal Character Commission (Establishment, etc) Decree No. 34 of 1996.

Its Clause 11, Part 11, which deals with definitions, among others, states: A married woman shall continue to lay claim to her state of origin for the purpose of implementation of the Federal Character formulae at national level. Criticisms have continued to trail this provision since then even as it is rearing its ugly head again in the case of Mrs. Mohammed. Even the Senate then faulted the principle and urged the CJN to swear in Justice Jombo-Ofor forthwith. This was after a resolution which followed a motion by the Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu.

According to him, the implication is that “Nigerian women have lost all they have struggled for over the years and Nigeria will be taken 100 years back.

“It also shows that once a woman is married outside her community, local government area or state, she cannot aspire to any position (appointive or elective) in her husband’s community. It is also very unlikely that she will secure such position in her place of origin since she has been married out.”

Senate President David Mark said the CJN, by not swearing in Justice Jombo-Ofor, was crying more than the bereaved since the Abia State Government was not complaining.

A public affair analyst, Mr. Ochie Jonathan advised the Senate to restrict itself to the constitutional provisions during the screening exercise to avoid overheating the polity.

Ochie said: “We understand senators’ disposition, but they have to tread with caution, because with Buhari’s anti-corruption posture, there will be no money for confirmation syndrome.’

“Those with genuine and frivolous petitions should forward them to the anti-graft agencies. Those with personal political differences should not use it to draw the country back again.

“Enough of the ongoing political intrigues because Nigerians cannot afford to wait for too long to have their ministers in place. The leadership of the Senate should not exploit the new relationship with the Presidency to do the needful.”