the strange reluctance with which members of the executive arm now respond to house invitations, the latest being that of
aviation minister, Dr. Kema Chikwe, who had to be subpoenaed last Thursday.
The latest handbook of the Centre for Democracy and Governance (CDG) on fighting corruption noted that oversight of the
legislature "provides a powerful check on the executive authority, enhancing accountability where a dominant executive branch might otherwise operate with
impunity."
It stated further that programmes to modernise legislatures and workshops to help members of Parliament understand their role
in governance aim to strengthen their oversight capacity.
In the same breath, requiring that anti-corruption agencies report to Parliament rather than the executive is gradually gaining
acceptance. The CDG cited in this regard recent amendments to legislations in Zambia and Uganda directing their Anti-Corruption Commission and the
Inspector-General, respectively, to report to Parliament rather than the Head of State.
On the www -Democracy at the Internet, we learn that since the late 1970s restoration or establishment of democracy has
produced stronger legislative bodies in many countries.
Most notably in Latin America, where newly restored legislatures have taken a leading role in combating executive branch
corruption. An example of this was the Congressional impeachment of Brazilian President Fernando Collor de Mello, initiated by the Parliamentary Commission of
Inquiry.
More recently, the Brazilian Senate formed a Special Committee to investigate allegations that government officials had been
involved in fraudulent sale of government bonds.
The Kuwaiti Parliament has become quite assertive since its re-instatement following the Gulf war. Recently, it divulged the
royal family's practice of demanding kickbacks for favours and exposed corrupt procurement procedures in the ministry of defence.
The Taiwan Headlines had cause to state in November last year that "the idea that matters directly on peoples
rights and obligations should require the consent of those people's directly elected representatives..." In that country, this is almost a hymn now recited
and relied upon by the lawmakers to assert themselves.
It should be noted that while the primary objective of legislature oversight is to detect problems and deficiencies in the
delivery of government services, PEER -an acronym for Joint Legislative Committee On Performance Evaluation and Expenditure Review (in the US) - reviews assume
a variety of forms spelling out its three major types of oversight review to include financial audits, economy and deficiency reviews and programme evaluations.
And so in its over 20 years of operation, PEER has become in the US, a significant resource for the legislature, providing
in-depth evaluations of government operations as well as short-term information assistance.
Since its inception, the PEER committee has now published over 370 reports and completed over 2,000 legislature and special
requests including fiscal notes, budget and other limited scope analyses, special investigations, evaluations and feasibility studies.
Back home, it was one of the federal ministers, Kanu Agabi (formerly in charge of justice now in solid minerals) who stirred
the hornets nest a while ago, postulating during his lecture at the Nigerian Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS), Kuru near Jos that indeed the
oversight function of the National Assembly doesn't actually exist.
Since then, it would seem, all has not been the same again. Explanations had to be sought painstakingly, on action/spending
held to be extra-budgetary by the legislature. For instance, when Jubril Martins Kuye (minister of state for finance) had to appear before a legislative panel
to defend the ministerial residence largesse.
Presently, there is a lot of hot air in the House of Representatives over what has been referred as "tampering with"
the inputs of legislators on the provision of water projects throughout the country as contained in the 2001 Appropriation Act (actually carried over from 2000
budgetary provision).
The House is presently investigating the issue even though a member, Mr. Alexander Nwofe (Abakaliki/Izzi, Ebonyi) is calling
for caution, given that contracts for the projects were only awarded last November and mobilisation fees only recently paid.
But he added that "we are alarmed, we want to know why inputs we made into the water projects budgets were removed and new
ones added. We want to know who did what because what you now have on paper is not what was approved by the House and yet we are the representatives of the
people."
But by far more puzzling is the initial refusal of the minister of aviation, Mrs. Kema Chikwe, to honour three invitations by
the House committee on aviation; mandated by Resolution 14 of February 3, 2001 to conduct a public hearing on the circumstances surrounding the alleged
inflation of a radar contract by the erstwhile chairman of the Nigerian Airspace Management Agency (NAMA), Chief Rochas Okorocha.
The minister had to be threatened by an order of arrest before she bulged last Thursday for the proceedings which eventually
turned out to be a melodrama.
Observers are wondering whether it was necessary for the committee chairman, Mr. Awwal Tukur, to reel out in his summons the
sections of the constitution which empowers the House to subpoena and conduct public/open hearing on any matter? Could they, (Sections 88 (1) (a) and (b) 89 (1)
(a), (b), (c), (d) and (2) of 1999 Constitution and 6 (1), (2), (3) of the House powers and privileges Act 1953, not be said to be elaborate enough?
Yet apart from reacting to incidents as they come, the legislative arm is still to make a formal declaration of this apparent
attempt to erode it of its constitutional provision.
What appears to be an earlier concern raised was the letter written in November last year by the Speaker of the House of
Representatives, Ghali Umar Na'Abba, to former Vice President, Dr. Alex Ekwueme, in his capacity as Chairman of the panel on the relationship between the
executive and legislature.
In the epistle circulated to the press then, Na'Abba observed that the principle of oversight (checks and balances) cannot find
convenience in the system "only when it suits our personal ends. This separation should be properly respected so that no single branch can gather
sufficient power of itself that will allow it to exercise despotic control over the whole nation".
He added: "Bicameralism reduces legislative dominance, while the presidential veto gives to the president a means of
defending himself and of preventing (legislative) overreaching.
"The Senate's role in appointments and treaties checks the president. The courts are assured independence through good
behaviour and tenure and security of compensation and the judges through judicial review will check the other two branches. The impeachment power gives the
(legislature) the authority to root out corruption and the abuse of power in the two branches. And so on".
A legal draughtsman, Emeka Asuzu, noted that "legislative oversight is an imperative of modern democracy the world
over".
Discountenancing the reported comments of Ekwueme, Professor Ben Nwabueze and Kanu Agabi, that the powers of oversight is not
as wide-ranging as is being claimed, Asuzu submitted that "if Muslim countries and monarchical nations like Thailand and Kuwait can say they are giving
powers to their Parliaments to investigate their kings, then what are we talking about? Oversight by the legislature has become an established norm, it is not
supposed to be controversial."