The bill of the Parliament seeking to reorder the sequence of
elections which intriguingly hit the brick wall remains a
pandemonium. President Muhammadu Buhari recently withheld his
assent over purported conflicts and interference in the
administrative duties of the Independent National Electoral
Commission (INEC). Statutorily, powers to make laws for the
federation are vested in the National Assembly; nonetheless, the
powers are relative and not absolute.
Some argue that if the legislature has powers to make laws, it
can also amend the laws. No doubt, this is factual but also largely
systematic. It is trite that acts of a parliament have a red line.
Thus, the reordering bill if vetoed will prima facie become
laws, though defective. However, the position may likely be altered
by a judge’s gavel on account of independence of the electoral body
as provided in Section 158 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal
Republic of Nigeria, as amended.
Generally, democracy is a game of numbers and the same principle
guides legislative tasks. Nonetheless, the benchmark of quality in
lawmaking is the repugnancy test. For example, a bill albeit
endorsed by majority as required may in the end not see a green
light if convincingly repugnant to social justice, equity and good
conscience, as the ultimate lawmaker is the court. Hypothetically,
a barbaric law seeking to eliminate newly born-twins as in the
olden days though may have been successfully passed and vetoed with
two-thirds majority will inevitably be knocked out by the court. It
is therefore imperative to underline that legislative matters go
beyond numbers but alongside prudence, realism and reasonableness.
By the controversial bill, it implies that where a particular
election is postponed over critical unpredictable circumstances or
annulled for a repeat over fundamental flaws by the court, all
other elections will be annulled since elections must hold as
ordered. What a blunder!
The second element is the object or purpose of a bill. A bill
that is deficient in goals and objectives is good-for-nothing. It
is insufficient to hit the gavel over numerical strength in support
of a bill. Emphatically, bills must be devoid of conflicts with
existing laws. Where such occurs, even if overwhelmingly endorsed
alongside all ECOWAS parliaments, the court will notwithstanding,
inevitably set it aside. Primarily, a bill seeking for
amendments must show clearly the mischiefs it intends to remedy.
Incidentally, the contentious reordering of elections, perceptibly,
lacked any clear objectives. Above all, it is conventionally the
administrative duties of the electoral umpire to plan and conduct
elections globally. The Constitution repetitively, generally guides
INEC on the salient issues vis-à-vis time of elections in Sections
132, 76, 178 and 116 for President, National Assembly, governors
and House of Assembly respectively. The powers vested in the
National Population Commission (NPC), a comparable body to make
appointments in Section 158(2) supra commonsensically extends to
INEC by rules of ejusdem generis, that is; same
classification in the preceding subsection. Literarily,
appointments include schedules and arrangements of events.
As a matter of fact, even if INEC elects to review the
draft-timetable over and over, perhaps to schedule National
Assembly election as the last in sequence, it is absolutely within
its powers and no institution can query it. Electoral umpires are
strictly independent and any attempts to interfere into its affairs
will be ultra vires. INEC has unfettered powers to present any
timetables approved by the commission apart from complying with the
above cited necessary minimum period prior to elections as no harm
is done to any candidate or political party on who contests first,
middle or last. Certainly, the court cannot allocate its precious
times to aimlessly sit over who contests first or last. The
National Assembly (NASS) for example, by act of parliament
established federal universities whilst National Universities
Commission (NUC) accredits academic programmes and provides
course-contents and guidelines. However, neither NASS nor NUC has
powers to produce examination timetables for students but
university’s management. This is how administrative laws played
out. Similarly, the act of Parliament only provides the legal
framework for the establishment of INEC and its structures but not
to delve into its administrative or managerial duties.
Under Public law, there are acts of the parliament and
administrative laws by way of delegated legislation. The lawmakers
demagogically, incautiously reordered the election of the President
to be the last in sequence but retained National Assembly’s as the
first; believably, actions strategically designed to exploitatively
utilize the party’s machinery to win their elections first.
Unfortunately, the powers to register political parties alongside
voters, plan and conduct elections are exclusive duties of
electoral umpires all over the world. To sum, the legislature
provides a broader framework of the law with necessary objectives
and directions whilst the technical details are left to the
executive to fill in. This is also referred to as subordinate
legislation. A legislature that will encroach into duties of an
executive body is unconsciously displaying incompetence and
superciliousness. Administrative bodies proficiently understand the
nitty-gritties involved in carrying out its tasks. The essential
review that INEC should keenly ruminate irrespective of financial
implications is to conduct elective positions distinctively rather
than merged elections to enable electorates liberally decide and
vote accordingly.
Commendably, the lawmakers this time acted astutely and
displayed maturity by firstly opting to deliberate extensively on
the reasons adduced for rejecting the bill rather than hurriedly
invoking actions to veto the President as attempted earlier. It’s
also important that the lawmakers should always embark on
researches and possibly consult professionals in specific fields
prior to sensitive actions to reduce numbers of defective bills
suggestive of recklessness and unskillfulness. Legislative tasks
always require holistic considerations beyond mere political
bullying. Again, over the years, lawmakers mistake the oversight
functions as active duties and thereby abuse it. Oversight function
is a supervisory right to interfere for explanations or
examinations over activities in other sections and not to take over
their administrative duties.
Umegboro, public affairs analyst wrote in from Abuja
via: umegborocarl@gmail.com
(07057101974 SMS only)
The bill of the Parliament seeking to reorder the sequence of
elections which intriguingly hit the brick wall remains a
pandemonium. President Muhammadu Buhari recently withheld his
assent over purported conflicts and interference in the
administrative duties of the Independent National Electoral
Commission (INEC). Statutorily, powers to make laws for the
federation are vested in the National Assembly; nonetheless, the
powers are relative and not absolute.
Some argue that if the legislature has powers to make laws, it
can also amend the laws. No doubt, this is factual but also largely
systematic. It is trite that acts of a parliament have a red line.
Thus, the reordering bill if vetoed will prima facie become
laws, though defective. However, the position may likely be altered
by a judge’s gavel on account of independence of the electoral body
as provided in Section 158 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal
Republic of Nigeria, as amended.
Generally, democracy is a game of numbers and the same principle
guides legislative tasks. Nonetheless, the benchmark of quality in
lawmaking is the repugnancy test. For example, a bill albeit
endorsed by majority as required may in the end not see a green
light if convincingly repugnant to social justice, equity and good
conscience, as the ultimate lawmaker is the court. Hypothetically,
a barbaric law seeking to eliminate newly born-twins as in the
olden days though may have been successfully passed and vetoed with
two-thirds majority will inevitably be knocked out by the court. It
is therefore imperative to underline that legislative matters go
beyond numbers but alongside prudence, realism and reasonableness.
By the controversial bill, it implies that where a particular
election is postponed over critical unpredictable circumstances or
annulled for a repeat over fundamental flaws by the court, all
other elections will be annulled since elections must hold as
ordered. What a blunder!
The second element is the object or purpose of a bill. A bill
that is deficient in goals and objectives is good-for-nothing. It
is insufficient to hit the gavel over numerical strength in support
of a bill. Emphatically, bills must be devoid of conflicts with
existing laws. Where such occurs, even if overwhelmingly endorsed
alongside all ECOWAS parliaments, the court will notwithstanding,
inevitably set it aside. Primarily, a bill seeking for
amendments must show clearly the mischiefs it intends to remedy.
Incidentally, the contentious reordering of elections, perceptibly,
lacked any clear objectives. Above all, it is conventionally the
administrative duties of the electoral umpire to plan and conduct
elections globally. The Constitution repetitively, generally guides
INEC on the salient issues vis-à-vis time of elections in Sections
132, 76, 178 and 116 for President, National Assembly, governors
and House of Assembly respectively. The powers vested in the
National Population Commission (NPC), a comparable body to make
appointments in Section 158(2) supra commonsensically extends to
INEC by rules of ejusdem generis, that is; same
classification in the preceding subsection. Literarily,
appointments include schedules and arrangements of events.
As a matter of fact, even if INEC elects to review the
draft-timetable over and over, perhaps to schedule National
Assembly election as the last in sequence, it is absolutely within
its powers and no institution can query it. Electoral umpires are
strictly independent and any attempts to interfere into its affairs
will be ultra vires. INEC has unfettered powers to present any
timetables approved by the commission apart from complying with the
above cited necessary minimum period prior to elections as no harm
is done to any candidate or political party on who contests first,
middle or last. Certainly, the court cannot allocate its precious
times to aimlessly sit over who contests first or last. The
National Assembly (NASS) for example, by act of parliament
established federal universities whilst National Universities
Commission (NUC) accredits academic programmes and provides
course-contents and guidelines. However, neither NASS nor NUC has
powers to produce examination timetables for students but
university’s management. This is how administrative laws played
out. Similarly, the act of Parliament only provides the legal
framework for the establishment of INEC and its structures but not
to delve into its administrative or managerial duties.
Under Public law, there are acts of the parliament and
administrative laws by way of delegated legislation. The lawmakers
demagogically, incautiously reordered the election of the President
to be the last in sequence but retained National Assembly’s as the
first; believably, actions strategically designed to exploitatively
utilize the party’s machinery to win their elections first.
Unfortunately, the powers to register political parties alongside
voters, plan and conduct elections are exclusive duties of
electoral umpires all over the world. To sum, the legislature
provides a broader framework of the law with necessary objectives
and directions whilst the technical details are left to the
executive to fill in. This is also referred to as subordinate
legislation. A legislature that will encroach into duties of an
executive body is unconsciously displaying incompetence and
superciliousness. Administrative bodies proficiently understand the
nitty-gritties involved in carrying out its tasks. The essential
review that INEC should keenly ruminate irrespective of financial
implications is to conduct elective positions distinctively rather
than merged elections to enable electorates liberally decide and
vote accordingly.
Commendably, the lawmakers this time acted astutely and
displayed maturity by firstly opting to deliberate extensively on
the reasons adduced for rejecting the bill rather than hurriedly
invoking actions to veto the President as attempted earlier. It’s
also important that the lawmakers should always embark on
researches and possibly consult professionals in specific fields
prior to sensitive actions to reduce numbers of defective bills
suggestive of recklessness and unskillfulness. Legislative tasks
always require holistic considerations beyond mere political
bullying. Again, over the years, lawmakers mistake the oversight
functions as active duties and thereby abuse it. Oversight function
is a supervisory right to interfere for explanations or
examinations over activities in other sections and not to take over
their administrative duties.
Umegboro, public affairs analyst wrote in from Abuja
via: umegborocarl@gmail.com
(07057101974 SMS only)
Read more https://nairalaw.com/inec-and-election-reordering-bill-by-carl-umegboro/