CCB/CCT ACT AMENDMENT: WHEN NASS DANCES MAKOSSA
The
last time I checked, the Red Chamber of the National Assembly (NASS) was at it
again. The said parliament on Thursday 27th October 2016 amended the
Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act (CCB/CCT Act). The amendment altered
the Section 18(1) and (2) of the extant law by transferring the Presidency’s
regulatory power over the bureau and tribunal to the NASS. This implies that,
if assented to, henceforth the NASS as against the Presidency will have the
power to determine the function of the CCB, and who should be exempted from
asset declaration or not.
The Senate equally reintroduced a clause
in the Act as contained in Section 3(e) of the bill that mandates the CCB to
invite anyone found culpable in asset declaration towards making necessary
correction as against being charged to the CCT for trial. The provision states
that ‘upon complaint(s) of any breach or where it appears to the Bureau that
there is a breach of provisions of this Act, the person concerned shall be
given particulars of such non-compliance or breaches to explain before any
reference to the Tribunal’. It’s noteworthy that this very clause had earlier
been expunged from the Act.
More so, the Chamber amended Section 1(4) of
the extant law, which stipulates that the chairman and members of the CCB shall
vacate their seats upon attaining the retirement age of 70. The amended clause
prescribes a renewable five-year tenure for both the chairman and members.
According to the clause, the appointment shall be subject to renewal for one
term only. Section 20(4) of the CCB/CCT Act authorizes the President to appoint
the chairman of the CCT based on the recommendation of the National Judicial
Council (NJC); the new amendment makes such recommendation and appointment
invalid unless it is approved by the Senate.
However, the Section 20(2) of the Act,
which states that members of the CCT shall consist of the chairman and two
other members, has been amended to provide that ‘the tribunal shall consist of
a chairman and four others, and three of the five shall form a quorum’. The
passage of the bill, which was at concurrence with the House of
Representatives’ bill that had earlier been passed, followed the adoption of
the report of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions.
Shifting
the regulatory power from the Presidency to the NASS is completely wrong, and
has no logical representation. Authorizing the NASS to determine the power of
the CCB, and who should be exempted from asset declaration or not, is a clear
indication that our highly revered legislators are up to something. Doesn’t it
sound ridiculous that the NASS was empowered by the amendment to determine the
individual/officer that’s supposed to be tried by the CCT? From all
indications, this is apparently a move to shield their dirty linens at the
expense of the people’s wish.
Another awkward and irritating aspect of
the so-called amended Act is the idea of mandating the CCB to wear a human
face. The amendment stipulates that anyone found culpable in asset declaration
should be invited by the CCB to enable the individual/officer make amends where
necessary. This is not just absurd, but laughable. The moment any extant law
start portraying a human face, its docility outrightly sets in. The human-face
part of any law/Act lasts only during the period when the concerned people or
officers are expected to adhere to it; at this period, the people are given the
opportunity to enjoy the privileges as provided by the law.
But, as soon as anyone violates the
stipulated privileges, s/he becomes culpable. And, no culpable or indicted
individual is meant to be given a chance to express him/herself, or the reason
the law was violated by him/her, except in a law court. It is only in the court
a culpable individual is required to tender any expression, if need be. This is
the reason whenever one is being arrested by the police or any law enforcement
agency, he would be advised to remain silent, otherwise any statement made by
him would be used against his person in the court.
Mind you; ‘ignorantia juris non
excusat’, meaning literally ignorance of the law is no excuse. It’s pathetic
and painful that our lawmakers whom are meant to understand this very clause
ended up abusing it. So, shall we tell our children that the set of persons we
entrusted our laws to has failed us? Let’s not get it twisted; the truth is
that, if the CCB begin to invite culpable individuals, or anyone suspected to
have breached any provision of its Act, for explanation cum correction before
any reference to the CCT, then no one would be arraigned consequently because
such provision would create an avenue for people’s sins to be forgiven by the
former.
If
I may ask; what are you to explain if found culpable? That you were not well
intimated on the CCB Act; that you were on steering when responding to any questionnaire
in the past; that you were bereaved, thus couldn’t concentrate while filling
the assets’ declaration form; that you filled the form under duress; or that,
you didn’t know the exact figure of the assets owned by you? I’m just wondering
what kind of correction is expected to be made by someone who has been found
culpable. This very clause doesn’t only seem weird and laughable but equally
smacks of mischief, hence, ostensibly targeted to satisfy a selfish desire.
As much as I compliment some of the
amended clauses of the Act such as the stipulated renewable five-year tenure
for any serving CCB chairman/member contrary to vacation of their seats upon
attaining the retirement age of 70 as well as the newly stipulated five-man
member of the CCT and forming of a three-man quorum, I equally wish to state
categorically and unequivocally that the bad-side of the amendment is far
greater than the good-side; thus totally unacceptable by anyone who means well
for Nigeria and Nigerians at large.
In
view of this observation, it would be advisable for us to pretend that the said
Act is yet to be amended, to enable the NASS revisit it towards making a change
where necessary. It’s needless to reiterate that the work was haphazardly
carried out by the 109 respected officers, probably owing to their inability to
comprehend that the contemporary Nigerian society comprises intelligentsia that
can sense a foul play without much ado. Hence, the said public servants need to
take a closer study of the real content or constituents of the society in
question.
It’s either they review the
controversial provisions or consider forfeiting their integrity, because well
informed citizens are already boiling in respect of the amendment. Of course,
they can’t fold their hands and watch inferno engulf their mansion. The development
is arguably not unlike a situation where a dog ends up devouring the bone that
was hung on its neck. Think about it!
FDN Nwaozor
Follow: @mediambassador
No comments:
Post a Comment