AGF and Kogi conundrum By Idowu Akinlotan

On the surface, the National Assembly does not appear to have any hidden interest in the Kogi House of Assembly stalemate, nor in Kogi as a state, irrespective of the turmoil in that burdened and distressed state. But after waiting for some weeks for Kogi lawmakers to resolve the impasse they created in February when five members led by Hon. Umar Imam purportedly impeached the Speaker of the House of Assembly, Hon. Momohjimoh Lawal, both chambers of the National Assembly, one after the other, resolved to take over the state’s legislative functions. The state legislature had been divided into two factions, one labelled as G-15, and the other, G-5. There are no clear indications the G-15 has been depleted in rank; but last week when the G-5 sat to suspend 10 of their colleagues using a crazy political calculus, their rank had swollen to about nine. The House of Assembly is made up of 25 members: 13 Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), 10 All Progressives Congress (APC), and two inconclusive state constituencies elections.


But shortly after the Senate concurred with the House of Representatives to take over the state’s legislative responsibilities, the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, wrote the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Solomon Arase, who had presumably asked for advice on the Kogi conundrum, to disregard the National Assembly’s order to seal the House of Assembly premises. Incensed federal lawmakers have asked both the AGF and IGP to appear before them to explain their actions. This will be the second time the AGF will be offering legal advice on the conundrums in Kogi. In last year’s governorship election, the AGF waded in after the APC candidate in the election, Abubakar Audu, died after the election, advising the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to allow for the substitution of candidates in the APC regardless of the completion of the poll. The electoral umpire, anchoring its decision on the incompletion of the announcement of election results, promptly declared the election inconclusive, and Yahaya Bello, without a running mate, was drafted in to ‘complete’ the poll.
The AGF’s intervention in Kogi raises eyebrows in many quarters. Five lawmakers backed by state executive and coercive machineries have overwhelmed their colleagues and are pretending to make laws for the state. The coercive minority has colonised the Assembly complex. It apparently suits the governor well that the Group of Five is in charge of the lawmaking affairs of the state. When the National Assembly took over the legislative function of the state, the budget had not been passed, and no case was filed in court. It was shortly after the federal lawmakers had waded into the fray that the AGF rose up to interpret the intendment of the constitution, suggesting that in any case, the stalemate in the Assembly could still be resolved administratively or legally. It was not immediately clear which scenario ought to have worried the AGF more: the arithmetic madness in the Assembly, or the federal lawmakers’ adherence to the letter (not the spirit) of the constitution.
There is no doubt that the intervention of the AGF is superfluous. By suggesting that the status quo be maintained in the Assembly and recourse be made to legal or administrative instruments to resolve the stalemate, the AGF was in no way attenuating the conflict in the legislature. He should be worried that his advice seemed to have indirectly legitimised the actions of a virulent minority, a scenario the constitution never envisaged, whether in letter or in spirit. Aggrieved members have now gone to court, a depressing and irritating admission of the impotence and weakness of the majority. The minority is sitting pretty in the House, and has even gone further, with the help of four defectors, to pass the budget. Had the National Assembly taken over effectively, the usurping minority would have been uprooted, court processes would not be barred in any form, and the disgraceful arithmetic farce reigning in the state would have been avoided.
There is no creative way to argue that the AGF’s interventions in Kogi have advanced the cause of democracy and good governance. In last year’s election, INEC had a legal department that ought to have managed any misgiving or legal conundrum the electoral umpire had. Any dispute would have been resolved in court, as in fact is being done at a cost to the image of the Justice ministry and INEC’s putative independence. In the present case, had the National Assembly taken over Kogi Assembly, it would have served notice that no ambitious group of minority lawmakers or meddling governor would be allowed to plan a coup against the state legislature. It does not appear that the AGF advised himself about the chequered history of democracy in Nigeria, particularly how in many instances the executive arm manipulated the legislature at federal and state levels to undermine democracy, federalism and the rule of law.
Had the AGF done his homework well, he would have recalled how both the Olusegun Obasanjo presidency and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), citing the war against corruption, foolishly meddled in the affairs of Plateau State and engineered the removal of ex-governor Joshua Dariye using five lawmakers in 2006. Every time such meddling took place, the powerful national government always cited a cause that resonated with the undiscriminating public. The AGF will also recall that before then, in 2005, that great exemplar of strong-arm tactics, Chief Obasanjo, engineered the removal of ex-governor Diepreye Alamieyeseigha of Bayelsa State purportedly for corruption, when in fact the reason was not unconnected with the former president’s political struggle with ex-vice president Abubakar Atiku.
Surely, the AGF could not also have forgotten the crazy impeachment of ex-governor Rashidi Ladoja of Oyo State in 2006, nor even that of Ayo Fayose in the same 2006. The gale of executive lawlessness orchestrated by the Obasanjo presidency did not promote transparency or democracy, nor conduce to good government. Instead, that culture of insidious executive interference in state affairs has continued in one form or the other to the chagrin of federalists and democrats. It is that shameless anti-democratic culture that is now playing out, under a clever pretext, in Kogi State in the current stalemate. Had the right culture been promoted when the Fourth Republic was founded, it would be unthinkable for five lawmakers to muscle out 15 of their colleagues as Ogun State lawmakers also did in 2009 under the governorship of Gbenga Daniel; nor would a dithering governor have clothed that lawlessness with executive imprimatur; nor would an attorney general have attempted to offer creative explanation to defend the indefensible.
Something is still fundamentally wrong with Nigerian democracy. When they can get away with it, the executive arm and its colluding agencies remorselessly pursue anti-democratic objectives, cloaking them in varying and mesmerising guises. The problem, it seems, is that most Nigerian politicians and leaders saddled with the responsibility of governing Nigeria at different levels are in fact not convinced democrats. They are democrats as an afterthought. They have no deep conviction about democracy, a concept that appears alien to them; and no regard for federalism, which is often to them an inconvenience. Thus, for eight  years, Chief Obasanjo exhibited contempt for a concept (democracy) that required discipline and self-sacrifice, two attributes he neither had in abundance nor was he even willing to give the little he had. His successors, particularly Goodluck Jonathan, struggled and wrestled with the twin principles, and only managed in over five years of his presidency to sustain a semblance of the two, admittedly a little better than Chief Obasanjo did.
Whether in Kogi or elsewhere, there are no indications President Buhari’s government has got off to a good start on democracy. He has squirmed and voiced his pains in his many and frequent encounters with democratic principles. And whether directly, such as his tiff with the judiciary, or indirectly through the actions and utterances of the AGF, President Buhari must innovate and work assiduously to leave a lasting democratic legacy. To this end, he must have a full understanding of the concept of democracy and be absolutely persuaded of its value in sustaining peace, justice and stability. His predecessors laid a wobbly foundation for the Fourth Republic. President Buhari needs a new, solid and enduring foundation upon which future leaders can build. The AGF’s Kogi excursions do not give confidence that President Buhari has taken charge of all the deep issues pertaining to democracy and good governance. He desperately needs to go beyond fighting corruption and reining in insurgency to tackling the bigger and more ramifying issues of justice, democracy and federalism.