Lawyers clash over SERAP’s call for probe into ‘Cash-for-Bills’ allegations in NASS

A compelling debate has emerged within Nigeria’s legal community as prominent lawyers weigh in on two critical national issues: the continued withholding of local government statutory allocations and the explosive allegations that members of the National Assembly pay up to N3 million to present bills.

Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Chief Mike Ahamba, and human rights lawyer, Mr Ige Asemudara, offered contrasting viewpoints on a call by the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) for the Senate President, Goodwill Akpabio, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abbas, to refer the ‘cash-for-bills’ allegations to anti-corruption agencies.

While Ahamba questioned the approach, Asemudara hailed SERAP’s call as ‘patriotic’ and ‘legitimate,’ asserting that it is a serious embarrassment that demands immediate investigation and prosecution.

ALSO READ: Ekiti Assembly rejects rubber-stamp tag

Addressing the issue of local government funds, particularly in Osun State, Chief Mike Ahamba stated that the situation represents a clear breakdown of the relationship between the federal and state governments and a disregard for judicial pronouncements.

“These things are matters within the competence of the lawyers in the matter. They know exactly what orders are made, and they know how to enforce orders.

“As far as I’m concerned, I believe that things have gone wrong in respect to the relationship between the federal government and the local governments,” Ahamba said.

He stressed that the Nigerian Constitution, under Section 7, provides for a democratically elected local government system, not one run by appointed officials.

“If a state government has conducted a valid election, those democratically elected officials should be the ones receiving and dispersing the funds.

“The federal government has no power to withhold money. It should be sent to the state government, as provided under the Constitution, to distribute through the local government,” he asserted.

Ahamba highlighted a pervasive breach of protocol, noting the common practice of the state government acting as a clearinghouse for local government funds, a role that should be handled by the local government’s financial officers.

“The accounting officer is the man who is in charge of finance, the finance officer in the local government. He’s an experimental officer. And they use him for the local government.

*Whichever government is democratically elected should sit down and disperse it. That’s what it should be,” he explained.

On his part, Mr Ige Asemudara took a more expansive view, arguing that the issue is not limited to a single state but is a national problem of judicial disobedience.

“If the Supreme Court or any court, for that matter, has given a judgment, every person must respect it,” Asemudara insisted.

He advised the beneficiaries of such judgments to take legal action against the state’s Chief Law Officer, the Attorney General, by filing contempt applications.

“If there’s any affront on any subsisting judgment of the Supreme Court in respect of allocation in a state or in any state, it must be enforced.

“The agency should be the chief lobbyist. He should be brought down on it. I will not be looking at anybody as a sacred cow. No, this is a law. It must be enforced,” he said.

He later added that the Attorney General of the Federation, whom he sees as a “stumbling block,” should also be proceeded against, as he does not enjoy immunity.

When confronted with SERAP’s demand for a probe into the ‘cash-for-bills’ allegations, both legal experts offered starkly different interpretations of the appropriate course of action.

Chief Ahamba questioned the premise of SERAP’s call, suggesting that if the EFCC law is to be considered, paying a personal sum to present a bill does not necessarily constitute a crime.

“If somebody decides to pay money, his personal money to present a bill, when he has a right to present a bill, what is my business about that?”

“And what is your business? By extension, what is SERAP’s business about that?” he asked.

Ahamba argued that SERAP’s approach was misguided.

“If SERAP has information that public funds have been misappropriated, then they should report straight to EFCC.

“Don’t wait for the president of the Senate and the speaker of the House of Representatives to report themselves if they are actually committing an offence,” Ahamba maintained.

He emphasised that the direct and proper channel for such a report is to the anti-corruption agencies themselves, bypassing the accused individuals.

Mr Asemudara, however, provided a resounding endorsement of SERAP’s position, calling it “patriotic, it is legitimate, it is not irrational.”

He contended that such a ‘grievous allegation’ made against the National Assembly leadership is a “very serious issue that must be taken seriously by the leadership of the National Assembly, by the leadership of the executive, by the law enforcement agencies.”

Asemudara called for a full investigation and prosecution of all officers who have been “named, who have been fingered in such allegations.”

He described the situation as a “serious embarrassment to the nation” that must not be taken lightly.

“That call by SERAP is legitimate,” Asemudara affirmed, noting that his organisation, the Mission Against Injustice in Nigeria, is also making the same call.

“Every person who had been named, fingered, or in any way implicated in such allegations should be investigated and prosecuted,” Asemudara added.

He concluded that this alleged practice is a significant “clog in the wheel of delivering good governance to the people of Nigeria,” reinforcing the urgency of a transparent and thorough investigation.