Headlines
Bill Seeking Immunity for Lawmakers Passes Second Reading in House of Reps
A bill that would grant immunity to the presiding officers of the National and State Assemblies narrowly scaled second reading in the House of Representatives on Tuesday.
The bill seeks to amend Section 308 of the 1999 constitution.
Section 308 of the Constitution shields the quartet of the president, the vice president, state governors and their deputies, for their period in office, from all forms of civil and criminal prosecution.
The sponsor of the bill, Odebunmi Olusegun of Ogo-Oluwa/Surulere federal constituency (APC, Oyo), wants the presiding officers of the federal and state houses to enjoy similar privilege for them to shrug off “frivolous suits while in office.”
Mr Olusegun argued that the bill is targeted at avoiding distraction for the leadership of the legislative arm. He said it is his aim to “protect, stabilize the house” and ensure “our democracy continues to flourish at national and state levels.”
Proponents
Toby Okechukwu (PDP, Enugu) pitched his tent with the bill’s sponsor. He said, if passed, the bill would shield presiding officers from the prying eyes of witch hunters.
He argued that once the leadership of the legislature is protected from possible blackmail while in office, then they can do their job without fear. He urged his colleagues to give their nod to the bill and allow Nigerians to decide during its public hearing.
Nkem-Abonta Uzoma (PDP, Abia) took off from where Mr Okechukwu stopped. He argued that the bill is not about the sitting speaker but the office itself. He said any criminal blemish ascribed to the office of the Speaker would cast the entire House in a bad light.
If the president, his deputy, state governors and their deputies can enjoy immunity, why can’t the leadership of the National Assembly, he asked.
“Let us protect the (legislative) institution from institutional embarrassment with suits, arraignment from the EFCC, CCB, ICPC,” he said after which the Speaker, Femi Gbajabiamila, cut in.
The Speaker buttressed this by saying potential lawsuits against a presiding officer can come not only from agencies of the executive but also from individuals.
Opponents
Minority Leader Ndudi Elumelu (PDP, Delta) begged to differ. He said the bill should not be allowed as it is coming at the wrong time because “people should be held accountable for their actions.”
He called for the bill to be jettisoned and that attention should be redirected to tackle insecurity ravaging the country.
Also, Sergius Ogun (PDP, Edo) frowned at the bill. He said if he had his way, he would “remove the immunity the president and the governors enjoy.”
“As parliamentarians, I do not believe this is what we need today. We should lift the immunity that presidents and the governors enjoy. There is no reason why a sitting president or governor should not go to jail,” Mr Ogun noted.
As Mr Ogun rounded off, House Speaker Femi Gbajabiamila asked: “Is the head of the executive covered by immunity? And directly or indirectly, is the head of the judiciary covered by immunity?”
To that, he got a response in the affirmative. He then said he asked to weigh the various angles to the debate at hand. He called for equity in terms of privileges enjoyed by the each arms of government.
While the debate lasted, Mr Gbajabiamila said he was against the bill and was not willing to benefit from the privileges the bill might bring. He, therefore, suggested that the bill, should it be passed and assented to, would not take effect while the current leadership is in office.
In 2016, the same bill was read on the floor of the lower house. It came in the wake of the charges filed against former Senate President Bukola Saraki by the Code of Conduct Bureau during the eighth assembly. It was, however, thrown out, having divided the House over whether or not it should be passed.
Mr Gbajabiamila, then Majority Leader, was one of the fierce opponents of the bill.
The bill, however, still has a long way to go to become law. It will still pass through a public hearing and is expected to be included among the issues to be debated by a National Assembly committee to review the Constitution. The Senate is also yet to debate the bill.
Group Condemns Bill
The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has condemned Tuesday’s passing of the bill.
Responding to the development, SERAP deputy director Kolawole Oluwadare said: “Providing immunity for presiding officers against crimes of corruption is tantamount to ripping up the constitution. It’s a blatant assault on the rule of law and breach of public trust.”
SERAP said: “The leadership of the House of Representatives must immediately withdraw this obnoxious bill. We will vigorously challenge this impunity.”
The statement read in part: “It’s a huge setback for the rule of law that the same privileged and powerful leaders of parliament that regularly make laws that consign ordinary, powerless Nigerians to prison for even trivial offences yet again want to establish elite immunity to protect themselves from any consequences for serious crimes of corruption and money laundering.”
“Whereas countries like Guatemala has voted unanimously to strip their president of immunity from prosecution for corruption our own lawmakers are moving in the opposite direction.”
“The message seems to be that in Nigeria, powerful and influential actors must not be and are not subject to the rule of law. It’s simply not proper for lawmakers to be the chief advocates of immunity for corruption.”
“It’s a form of political corruption for the parliamentarians to abuse their legislative powers, intended for use in the public interest but instead for personal advantage. This is an unacceptable proposition as it gives the impression that both the principal officers of the National Assembly are above the law.”
“If the House of Representatives should have their way, this will rob Nigerians of their rights to accountable government.”
“Public officials who are genuinely committed to the well-being of the state and its people, and to the establishment of an effective and functioning system of administration of justice, should have absolutely nothing to fear.”
Premium Times
The Senate quickly confirmed Marco Rubio as Secretary of State on Monday, voting unanimously to give President Donald Trump the first member of his new Cabinet on Inauguration Day.
Rubio, the Republican senator from Florida, is among the least controversial of Trump’s nominees and vote was decisive, 99-0. Another pick, John Ratcliffe for CIA director, is also expected to have a swift vote, as soon as Tuesday. Action on others, including former combat veteran and Fox News host Pete Hegseth for defense secretary, is possible later in the week.
“Marco Rubio is a very intelligent man with a remarkable understanding of American foreign policy,” Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, the senior-most Republican, said as the chamber opened.
It’s often tradition for the Senate to convene immediately after the ceremonial pomp of the inauguration to begin putting the new president’s team in place, particularly the national security officials. During Trump’s first term, the Senate swiftly confirmed his defense and homeland security secretaries on day one, and President Joe Biden’s choice for director of national intelligence was confirmed on his own Inauguration Day.
With Trump’s return to the White House, and his Republican Party controlling majorities in Congress, his outsider Cabinet choices are more clearly falling into place, despite initial skepticism and opposition from both sides of the aisle.
Rubio, who was surrounded by colleagues in the Senate chamber, said afterward he feels “good, but there’s a lot of work ahead.”
“It’s an important job in an important time, and I’m honored by it,” Rubio said.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune moved quickly Monday, announcing he expected voting to begin “imminently” on Trump’s nominees.
Democrats have calculated it’s better for them to be seen as more willing to work with Trump, rather than simply mounting a blockade to his nominees. They’re holding their opposition for some of his other picks who have less support, including Tulsi Gabbard for director of national intelligence and vaccine skeptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for health secretary.
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said his party will “neither rubber-stamp nominees we feel are grossly unqualified, nor oppose nominees that deserve serious consideration.”
Rubio, he said, is an example of “a qualified nominee we think should be confirmed quickly.”
Senate committees have been holding lengthy confirmation hearings on more than a dozen of the Cabinet nominees, with more to come this week. And several panels are expected to meet late Monday to begin voting to advance the nominees to the full Senate for confirmation.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee unanimously advanced Rubio’s nomination late Monday. The Senate Armed Services Committee and Senate Intelligence Committee, respectively, voted to move the nominations of Hegseth and Ratcliffe. And the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee advanced nominees Kristi Noem as homeland security secretary and Russell Vought as director of the Office of Management and Budget, but with opposition.
Rubio, a well-liked senator and former Trump rival during the 2016 presidential race, has drawn closer to the president in recent years. He appeared last week to answer questions before the Foreign Relations Committee, where he has spent more than a decade as a member.
As secretary of state, Rubio would be the nation’s top diplomat, and the first Latino to hold the position. Born in Miami to Cuban immigrants, he has long been involved in foreign affairs, particularly in South America, and has emerged as a hawk on China’s rise.
During his confirmation hearing last week, Rubio warned of the consequences of America’s “unbalanced relationship” with China. While he echoes Trump’s anti-globalist rhetoric, Rubio is also seen as an internationalist who understands the power of U.S. involvement on the global stage.
Rubio cultivated bipartisan support from across the aisle, both Republicans and Democrats. He takes over for outgoing Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who has said he hopes the Trump administration continues Biden’s policies in the Middle East to end the war in Gaza and to help Ukraine counter Russian nomination.
The Senate is split 53-47, but the resignation of Vice President JD Vance and, soon, Rubio drops the GOP majority further until their successors arrive. Republicans need almost all every party member in line to overcome Democratic opposition to nominees.
Objection from any one senator, as is expected with Hegseth and several other choices, would force the Senate into procedural steps that would drag voting later into the week.
The first hostages freed from Gaza under a long-awaited ceasefire agreement are back in Israel. The news sparked jubilant scenes in Tel Aviv where large crowds gathered ahead of their release.
The three freed Israeli hostages – the first of 33 to be released over the next six weeks – are Romi Gonen, Doron Steinbrecher and Emily Damari. They are said to be in good health and are receiving treatment at a medical center in Tel Aviv.
In exchange, 90 Palestinian prisoners and detainees are set to be released by Israel from Ofer Prison in the occupied West Bank.
The Israeli military withdrew from several locations in southern and northern Gaza after the truce began earlier on Sunday, an Israeli military official told CNN.
Displaced Gazans have started returning to their homes, while the aid trucks laden with much-needed supplies have crossed into Gaza. Here’s what we know about how the ceasefire deal will work.
Hamas, despite suffering devastating losses, is framing the Gaza ceasefire agreement as a victory for itself, and a failure for Israel.
One of Hamas’ main goals for taking some 250 people during its brazen October 7, 2023, attack on Israel was to secure the release of Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails. As Israel pounded Gaza in response, Hamas vowed not to return the hostages until Israel withdrew its forces from the enclave, permanently ended the war, and allowed for rebuilding.
Source: CNN
1 Comment