Talking about suspension of elected senators

The National Assembly has over the years played politics to the extreme by repeatedly, egotistically misappropriating its gavel in contradiction of democratic system and severally axed opposing colleagues that were elected by the people in their respective senatorial districts and constituencies for their counterparts at the House of Representatives.

The same blunder also plays out recurrently in various Houses of Assembly across the states. By democratic norms, the electorate freely and wittingly bid their mandate to some persons to exercise the sovereignty on their behalf as their representatives and therefore can only be recalled or removed from the workplace by the people.

In other words, the action of the Senate recently by suspending a duly elected legislator, Senator Ovie Omo-Agege representing Delta central senatorial district is clearly a display of disdain, naivety and above all, constitutes a robbery against the entire people of the district.

By the grotesque intrigues, the entire population of the senatorial district being represented has been unconsciously, forcefully kicked out from the Federal Government by the act of arbitrarily shutting out its representative from participating in legislative businesses by elected colleagues.

Frankly speaking, the action fell below the bar of decorum. This aberration gravely portends danger as any acts of the parliament or resolutions passed during the period of such unlawful suspension cannot legally be sustained without carrying along the district or constituency as a valid stakeholder in the national project.

Succinctly put, all resolutions by the legislative body during the period such a representative is placed on illegitimate moratorium should logically be null and void as it is the legitimate right of all senatorial districts and constituencies to be part of deliberations that affect the nation or states. The risk in sustaining the noxious, malevolent and mischievous scheme is that it could someday extensively be used as a tool of oppression against a district, constituency or geographical zone that genuinely clamors for welfare of its population such that its representative may also be kicked out during the plenary.

• Of varsities without electricity

Election and recall, apart from orders of the court afford the electorate exclusive rights to ‘hire and fire’ those they endorsed for public offices.

It therefore becomes grossly erroneous to conceive that legislators, duly elected with certificate-of-return issued by the electoral umpire and consequently sworn-in to represent the people canonly exercise the mandate by the discretion of other elected colleagues. The mandate to represent the people in the senate, House of Representatives or House of Assembly is not in any way shared responsibility or conditional, but sacrosanct; exclusively determined by the people and not members of a legislative body.

And even if a colleague is found guilty of commissions or omissions including in-house rules, the appropriate people that can call the shorts or cut short his duties are the electorate. At most, the legislative chamber can withdraw privileged benefits it freely allotted by partisan considerations where contravention of rules is substantiated against the colleague.  That’s the extent in-house rules can go. Thus, in-house powers of legislative bodies begins and ends with partisan benefits to members by whatever criteria it adopts but not to shut out a bona-fide legislator elected to represent a legitimate group of people from participating in legislative businesses in the society.

Unfortunately, it largely remains a myth in the contemporary society instead selfishly amassing monetary benefits at the detriment of the people.

Carl Umegboro,

Abuja.