Part-time legislature will only work with selfless lawmakers
In a poverty-inducing economy crying for government intervention in many areas, calls are expectedly rife for the government to cut governing costs. One such advocacy is that of Senator Orji Uzor Kalu, seeking a part-time legislature at the federal and state levels. He explained that this measure could significantly reduce government expenditure and enhance public trust in the political system. He urged his colleagues to consider amending the Constitution to accommodate part-time legislative sessions of four sittings a year with provisions for emergency sessions where necessary. He lamented that contrary to public perception, senators earn pittances and hence should be constitutionally permitted to engage in other productive activities.
Describing the proposal as apt and a show of patriotism, Prof. Jonah Onuoha, a senior lecturer in the Department of Political Science, University of Nigeria, Nsukka (UNN) asserted that a part-time legislature in the country would help cut down the cost of governance as well as achieve robust legislation in the common good of all. He opined that with a part-time legislature, only persons with genuine intentions to offer effective representations would vie for legislative seats as obtainable in most Western countries.
Without gainsaying, the current full-time structure of a bi-cameral federal legislature (comprising 109 senators and 360 representatives) and unicameral legislature at federating units with several aides and multiple allowances greatly inflates the cost of governance in Nigeria. A part-time legislative structure may lessen the country’s financial burden, but only if there is a change of heart by the legislators to eschew greed and personal aggrandisement at the expense of the Nigerian masses.
Adopting a freelance parliamentary system without first putting in disincentivising mechanisms to discourage professional politicians and promote legislative fiscal transparency and accountability would be imprudent. The prevailing burgeoning cost of governance is chiefly driven by the profligacy and unaccountability of the political class. Accordingly, a part-legislature will make an inconsequential economic difference if the lawmaking bodies countrywide are not constituted with patriotic Nigerians of good conscience, impeccable character, demonstrable integrity, proven track record, competence, and self-discipline.
Since the restoration of democracy in 1999, lawmakers have not sufficiently demonstrated serious commitment and preparedness for national duty. They have failed to effectively deliver on their core responsibilities of lawmaking, quality representation, and oversight. Further, they have failed to unselfishly exercise oversight authority over their executive counterparts.
It is difficult to identify any national problem touching the lives of common Nigerians that the National Assembly has solved. Not only are all the pre-1999 problems still prevalent, but also the country is worse off than it was 25 years ago!
As enunciated by the National Institute for Legislative and Democratic Studies, “The legislature as First Estate of the realm represents citizens and sovereignty. It makes the law, serves as checks on the activities of the Executive (oversight) and represents the citizens in constituencies. The responsibility of the Parliament is to guarantee that accountability and transparency of government activities are maintained to curb misuse of public funds, and corruption while effecting good practices. It also scrutinises the nominees for top government positions by the executive arm while ensuring that the requests sent by the Executive are properly examined in order to avoid inefficiency and non-performance. However, limited political will by legislators, pressure from the Executive, predominance of inexperienced legislators in the art of lawmaking and the tendency to place a higher premium of personal and pecuniary interests at the expense of public interests are antithetical to the effective legislative power of the National Assembly.”
The Constitution mandates the National Assembly and State Houses of Assembly to sit for a minimum of 181 days in a year. It also obligated lawmakers not to put themselves in a position where their interest conflicts with their duties and responsibilities; and completely barred them from engaging or participating in the management or running of any private business, profession, or trade except farming. This indicates that the constitution contemplates a full-time lawmaking business. Therefore, the fundamental question to answer is whether Nigerian legislators are running the legislature as a full-time job?
The National Assembly has repeatedly breached the minimum sitting requirement. The 9th Assembly, in its first legislative year, sat for 149 days. Similarly, in the whole of 2021, Nigerian senators held plenary sessions for just 66 days. Earlier in 2016, Femi Falana, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), lamented the dereliction of duty by some federal parliamentarians. In his words, “Some of the senators who had to attend criminal courts where they are standing trial for corrupt practices did not sit for up to 70 days throughout the legislative year. The Senate was shut down on many occasions to enable the then Senate President to attend the proceedings of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) where he was standing trial for false declaration of assets. And in solidarity with him, some senators abandoned their duties to accompany him to the tribunal.” Despite not meeting the minimum sitting threshold, legislators always enjoy a year’s worth of jumbo emoluments at the detriment of Nigerians who are denied adequate representation.
In defence, some lawmakers have retorted that ‘no sitting’ does not translate to ‘not working’ as their oversight functions at their respective constituencies sometimes account for their inability to meet the minimum sitting requirement. As Senator Ireti Kingibe puts it: “Senators are overworked. I work all the time and I’m constantly tired. I thought it was easy to govern, I thought senators were lazy, now I know that it is cheaper to talk when you are outside.”
The Constitution pegged the minimum sittings to 181 days in a calendar year of 355/356 days because it expects lawmakers to carry out non-legislative assignments on the non-sitting days. Except for compelling circumstances, such as acts of God, there is no justification for any legislative house not to meet the sitting requirement. Again, how can one of the highest-paid lawmaking bodies in the world claim to be underpaid?
Whilst the actual take-home remains shrouded in controversy, the remuneration package of lawmakers consisting of basic salary; motor vehicle fuelling and maintenance allowance, personal assistant allowance; domestic staff allowance, entertainment, utilities, newspapers/periodicals, wardrobe; house maintenance, constituency allowance, sitting allowance, vacation ‘token’, etc., is unarguably robust. Pray, what are they bringing to the table to validate these multifarious perks? For a country with 133 million poor people and 20 million out-of-school children, it is unconscionable for the government to continue to disburse (borrowed) public money to the legislative arm with such largesse.
It is exigent for the funding of the legislature to be reviewed in alignment with the prevailing economic hardship ravaging the entire nation. Needless to say, there must be open budgeting, fiscal responsibility, financial transparency and accountability in the legislature. Also, their income and expenditure must be made public and accessible to all Nigerians, to the last kobo. Additionally, the policy of ‘no work, no pay’ should apply to all public officers without exceptions.
Related
Latest
Get the latest news delivered straight to your inbox every day of the week. Stay informed with the Guardian’s leading coverage of Nigerian and world news, business, technology and sports.
0 Comments
We will review and take appropriate action.