In this interview with ALEXANDER OKERE, the Edo State House of Assembly Committee Chairman on Youths, Sports and Information, Adjoto Kabiru, speaks on why his faction suspended the deputy Speaker and his loyalists
What is the bone of contention in the crisis rocking the Edo State House of Assembly?
It is not because four honourable members defected to the Peoples Democratic Party from the All Progressives Congress that they were suspended. The reason for their suspension was their conduct which, to us, leaves very much to be desired. Those four honourable members turned themselves into what I described in an earlier press briefing as bank marketers with targets.
They defected from the APC to the PDP, which is not our business. They said their seats should not be declared vacant. The matter is in court and we do not want to comment on it. After defecting, they tried to woo other members with money. We said, “No.” They told us to use this opportunity to harvest. But we told them that even goats knew it was not every leaf that was edible. Goats, sometimes when they eat, avoid certain leaves because they are poisonous. We told them that the mandate of the people was not something that they could trade with. We are not prepared to go to Abuja or anywhere in the country. They met virtually every APC member; that was why I called them marketers.
We had to refer their matter to the committee on privilege because they refused to stop the rather ugly movement within the House, trying to approach other members to sell their mandate and go to the PDP. That committee recommended that they should be suspended and investigated. When you are being investigated, normally, you do not stay in office. You will be asked to step down and that is our rule. It is there in the Edo State House of Assembly Rule 38 up to Sub 7, that once a member is suspended, he is expected to leave the precinct of the parliament while he is being investigated. At the end of the investigation, if not found guilty, he resumes his duty as a legislator.
The genesis of the problem was that they were suspended but they refused to go. They forced themselves into the precinct of the parliament, which is not parliamentary.
But the spokesperson for the group and deputy Speaker alleged they were not given a fair hearing on allegations that were levelled against them. Is that not supposed to be part of the procedure?
They had that opportunity and as I speak with you, they still have that opportunity. They have the opportunity to ventilate their anger the way the rules of the House spell it out. If they are not guilty, simply appear before the committee on ethics and privileges and say your own side of the story. As lawmakers, we believe in fair hearing.
They approached us and we have records of that. They approached the Majority Leader and he went on TV to mention the amount that a particular member promised to give to him if he defected to the PDP. If you have been suspended on allegations levelled against you, you subject yourself to the rule and the chairman of the committee will hear from you. But they did not. Instead, they took the law into their hands. The Deputy Speaker ‘Nichodemously’ came to the House of Assembly at 6 a.m. when our sitting time is 10am, and said he had turned himself into a Speaker. He sat as a Speaker and placed a suspension on the Speaker of the Edo State House of Assembly. His failure to follow the procedure amounts to a misconduct, which the committee will investigate.
But the other faction alleged that the House held unlawful session against it and allowed miscreants into the Assembly, which was why it decided to place a counter suspension on the leadership of the House. What’s your take on that?
I protest vehemently that the House did not lead miscreants into the parliament. What happened was an eyesore. The press saw what happened. Who led miscreants? Who broke into the chambers? Who destroyed the doors to the chambers? Who sat illegally without the mace?
From the unfolding events, you can see those who are fomenting trouble. After sitting and declaring himself speaker, he came the following day. Who is trying to foment trouble? Instead of subjecting himself to the rule of the House, he, with the aid of the Nigeria Police and thugs forced himself into the chambers, sat and placed a suspension order on the Speaker of the House. The next day, he came again with the intention of sitting. It was after we resisted that he acknowledged Mr. Speaker but refused to go out.
They were the ones that led miscreants into the hallowed chambers; we could not have done that. We were elected. We are not under suspension or any threat. We could not have brought in thugs. We are 15 and they are just 9. By that number, who will bring in thugs? What for?
Are there two Speakers now in Edo State House of Assembly?
No. Before one can say he is a Speaker, there are processes. We are 24 members. Two-third, at least, will sign an impeachment notice. The symbol of authority, the mace, must be there. The two-third voting will be by raising of the hand and it will be counted to make sure that it is a two-third majority before you can remove a sitting Speaker. Once a sitting Speaker is removed, another one is elected and sworn in by the Clerk of the House. The current Speaker, Uyi Igbe, was sworn in. Whoever is claiming to be Speaker has not passed through the processes I have outlined.
You alleged that they connived with the police to break into the Assembly. But it is known that lawmakers have policemen attached to them. Could the suspended members and five other PDP lawmakers not have come in with the policemen legitimately attached to them?
That is not true because of the manner they came in. The time was ungodly. They came in at 6 a.m. in a convoy and one of the buses they came with was filled up with mobile policemen, who were not attached to them. The policemen attached to the Edo State House of Assembly are not mobile policemen.
Is it true that the Deputy Speaker has not been allowed to preside over the House in the absence of the Speaker?
I have been a member of this House since 2009, a second timer a ranking member. I am aware that Festus Ebea has presided over the affairs when the Speaker travelled two times and the records are there for you to verify at the clerk’s office. It is not true.
Did each of the APC lawmakers get N30m from the governor as claimed by the suspended members?
Why did they not say it? Why did they have to wait until we accused them? The onus is on them to prove the allegation. It was after our shout to Nigerians for help that some members want to sell their mandate that they said that we too collected money.
What was the outcome of the peace meeting the House had on Wednesday?
We appealed to the four suspended members to follow the House rule if they wanted the suspension to be lifted. But the appeal fell on deaf ears. They begged us to talk but we insisted on following the House rule.
Are you open to a political option to resolve the crisis in the House?
Like I said earlier, the matter is already in court. We cannot comment on that. As far as the issue of suspension is concerned, the court will decide. We are no longer considering any option other than the option provided by the court. There is already an order and it remains, except vacated.
The other group said it had also gone to court to get a counter injunction. Are you aware of that?
We are not aware of it. Once a court issues an order, it is only a superior court that can vacate that order. Although, I am not a lawyer, but from my experience, a superior court vacates an order or the same court when approached, based on certain reasons that were not available to the court as of the time the order was granted. They cannot say that there is another order. Where is the order coming from, when you have not served anybody?
They have been served with a court order through a substituted means. It has been published. They have seen it. One would expect them as lawmakers and not law breakers to ventilate their anger through constitutional means.
The court hearing has already been fixed for June 23. Let them talk to their lawyers to speak on their behalf. Some of them have described the court order as a “black market” court order. I see that as an affront on the judiciary because no court order can be obtained through the black market. It is their responsibility to prove otherwise.
Please do share this with your friends on facebook, google+ and twitter, using the share and like buttons below.
campusflava
No comments:
Post a Comment