The National Assembly’s push to give legislators authority to summon the president over security or other national issues has sparked debate among analysts, raising questions on what real impact the new legislative oversight would have in addressing security that has bedeviled the country for decades.
The National Assembly has advanced a bill that seeks to amend the 1999 Constitution (as amended) to grant to the two Federal Legislative Chambers and States’ Houses of Assembly powers to summon the president and the governors of States respectively to answer questions on issues of States respectively.
It is one of the dozens of constitutional amendment bills that scaled second reading at the House of Representatives, sponsored by Ikenga Ugochinyere, representing Ideato Federal Constituency.
Political and security experts are split on the bill’s potential impact. While some believe it could enhance accountability and improve oversight regarding security matters, others argue that the proposal is poorly conceived and unlikely to make any meaningful difference.
Read also: Reps rescission on immunity bill seen as shield for corrupt leaders
They contend that summoning the president and governors is not a solution to the country’s insecurity, particularly given the failure of the legislature to exercise its oversight over years.
Jide Ojo, a public affairs analyst, criticised the bill, stating that “it is unlikely to succeed.” He argued that “summoning a president is not feasible within Nigeria’s presidential system of government.”
He further criticised the proposal as a waste of resources, suggesting that “lawmakers are merely attempting to create the illusion that they are working.”
According to Ojo, the bill is unlikely to gain approval from the president or the State governors, who would resist such a measure.
He highlighted the financial implications of constitutional amendments, which he believes is the attraction for many lawmakers.
“The proposed law is dead on arrival. You cannot summon a president because we are not running a parliamentary system of government.
“Lawmakers should not just bother themselves as the president will never assent to it. Tinubu or any future president or governors will not allow it.
“The ongoing constitutional amendments is just a money-making venture for them. By the last count, N1 billion was appropriated, and that is why both houses are the national assembly are not doing it jointly.
“They are also sponsoring these bills to add to the number of bills they have sponsored. They don’t really care if the bill becomes law; they just want to add to the number of bills they have sponsored for political campaigns,” he said.
Armsfree Ajanaku, executive director of the Grassroots Centre for Rights and Civic Orientation, argued that the National Assembly had failed to effectively use its existing oversight powers to hold the government accountable, stating that even if it were granted additional powers, it would likely fail to use them.
He suggested that a stronger and more committed National Assembly is needed to address the country’s insecurity, emphasising that political will and patriotism are essential for meaningful change.
Read also: Reps’ U-turn on immunity bill sparks public outrage
Chinedu Obi, director-general of the Inter-Party Advisory Council (IPAC), said the proposed law could improve Nigeria’s security, but expressed concern about the perceived lack of independence of the current legislature.
He suggested that the legislature is too closely aligned with the executive.
“Whatever the National Assembly would need to do to improve on our security is welcome. The bill can be a reality if they want it to. Remember they also have the veto power, but my challenge is just that this legislature is a rubber stamp. They show no sign of independence from the executive,” Obi said.
Chidi Omeje, a security analyst, also supported the idea of granting the National Assembly more powers, but he stressed that the issue is not merely about summoning the president.
Omeje argued that “it is crucial for lawmakers to go beyond symbolic gestures and take concrete action to ensure that the necessary measures are implemented to address the nation’s security challenges.”
