Constitutional stakeholders in the country must be greatly relieved at the reversal of the summons issued by the House of Representatives Committee, on Speakers of two Houses of Assembly. The reversal order and apology that followed certainly prevent a possible eruption of a needless constitutional crisis.

Recently, the Committee on Public Petitions of the House of Representatives summoned the speaker of the Benue State House of Assembly on account of a petition relating to the crisis elicited by the suspension of 13 members of the state legislature. In a similar development, the Committee also summoned the Speaker of Zamfara House of Assembly with respect to the suspension of 10 members of the state legislative body. However, following strident condemnation of the summons widely believed to be unlawful and absurd by well meaning Nigerians, the leadership of the House of Representatives, in a letter addressed to the Chairman, Conference of Speakers of State Legislatures of Nigeria, recanted and expressed regret over the development. In the letter signed by Professor Jake Dan Azumi, the Chief of Staff to the Rt. Honourable Speaker, Tajudeen Abbas, the leadership of the House of Representatives reaffirmed commitment to the sanctity of “autonomy of State Legislatures as guaranteed under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).”

The remedial action of the House of Representatives is instructive and timely. It is worth emphasising that the National Assembly should be guided by the federalist principle upon which the 1999 Constitution is founded; regardless of the constitution’s inherent imperfections. State legislatures are by no means subordinate to the national assembly and anything contrary is unacceptable.

It is, indeed, a welcome development that the leadership of the House of Representatives has allowed reason to prevail by backtracking on the summons of the leadership of Benue and Zamfara States’ Houses of Assembly. Nevertheless, the blunder by the Committee of the House on Public Petitions portends a litmus test for Nigeria’s quest to deepen constitutional democracy amid the prevailing fragile federal system. It thus appears there should be no letting off the guard by critical citizens’ platforms for democratic engagement. Sustained civic vigilance against legislative absurdities that constitute threats to the consolidation of democracy is increasingly coming across as patriotic duty in the light of recent excesses of state actors that seek to supplant the supremacy of the constitution. We are in agreement with the Conference of Speakers of State Legislatures of Nigeria that the summons by the House of Representatives was blatant overreach that undermined the autonomy of state legislatures as guaranteed under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Therefore, it is pertinent to counsel that the national assembly should not be seen to act in excess of its mandate under whatever guise so as not to unwittingly incite constitutional crisis capable of jeopardising the overriding essence of governance.

It should be worrisome that such constitutional aberration could have emanated from the national assembly considering the nature of the issue involved; and the fact that the National Assembly is supposed to be the chief custodian of Nigeria’s democratic principles and doctrine of separation of powers. The issues ought to have been entertained with caution considering that there was no implicit breach of the powers of state legislature to have warranted a controversy on account of the intervention of the national assembly.

There is no doubt that each house of the national assembly has enormous powers under sections 88 and 89 of the Constitution to conduct examinations, compel evidence, summon any person to give evidence, and to even issue warrants. Such powers should however be exercised with caution. It is possible that the House committee relied on section 89(1)(c) for its aborted action on the state houses of assembly. The section provides that each house of the National Assembly, or their duly appointed committee, may, for the purpose of investigation: “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…”

Nevertheless, the House of Representatives committee’s action is embarrassing, more so because state houses of assembly or their appropriate committees also have similar powers of investigation and summon, under section 129(1)(c) of the same constitution. Therefore the attempt to lord it over the states’ houses of assembly is controversial and needed to be remedied. For such matters in future, the legislators concerned should explore readily available avenues for legal opinions at their disposal. Established norms of democracy require that independence of legislative assembly of federating units should be deemed sacrosanct except in situation where the constitution explicitly prescribes contrary provisions. Without doubt, the conduct of internal affairs of the legislative assembly at the state level ought not to be subjected to undue interference by the national assembly. Otherwise, politicians with vested interest will exploit the situation for undue advantage; particularly in situation where partisan divide makes exercise of incumbent power and federal might attractive.

More importantly, it should be imperative to caution the national assembly to be wary of meddling in the affairs of state legislature on account of external pressure which became manifest with respect to the situations in Benue and Zamfara State. The national assembly should refrain from allowing its platforms to be exploited by aggrieved individuals who ordinarily should be at liberty to explore legal options to seek redress. The national assembly as a creation of the constitution should take serious exception to anti-democratic demands that tend to subjugate the independence of state legislatures. The insidious impression by a group of protesters demanding that legislative duties at the state level be taken over by the national assembly as witnessed with respect to Benue and Zamfara should be deemed utterly objectionable by the national assembly. It should be curious that individuals with vested political interests are desperate to catch on external intervention to demanding the suspension of state legislatures and usurpation of the functions by the national assembly. The best interest of democracy would be served if the independence of the legislature at the state level is preserved; particularly with respect to the conduct of internal affairs which must be exercised in line with the rule of law without hindrance or interference by external forces.