The Senate on Wednesday rejected a bill by President Goodluck Jonathan for fresh amendments to the 2010 Electoral Act.

Two key provisions in the bill are those seeking to empower the Independent National Electoral Commission to fix the sequence of elections, and for political parties to have a free hand to include presidential and governors’ aides as delegates at their conventions or primaries.

The bill had earlier sailed through its first reading in the Senate but when its second reading and debate kicked off at the Senate’s plenary on Wednesday, members, in a near combative mood, shot it down.

The leadership of the Senate had pleaded that “the baby should not be thrown away with the bathwater,” but the Senators insisted that the bill sent to them by President Goodluck Jonathan would not be passed because it was ladden with “toxic provisions.”

Reacting to the development, the Jonathan/ Sambo Campaign Organisation, said, “We will continue to engage the Senate in this matter as we believe our proposals will lead to a smoother electoral process.”

The Leader of the Senate, Mr. Teslim Folarin, who the lead debate, had earlier called the attention of his colleagues to the relevant provisions of the bill.

He said the proposed amendment to Section 25 (1) of the 2010 Act would give INEC the power to determine the dates and sequence of elections at both the federal and state levels.

Folarin added that Section 87( of the Act was to be adjusted to grant leave to political appointees to vote at party primaries or conventions.

Section 87( of the Act states that, “No political appointee at any level shall be a voting delegate at the convention or congress of any political party for the purpose of nomination of candidates for any election.”

According to Folarin, Section 134 of the Act is to be deleted because it is already taken care of in Section 29 of the 1999 Constitution (First Alteration) 2010.

Section 29 of the constitution deals with issues of the establishment of election tribunals and timelines for the filing of election petitions as well as delivering of judgments.

The Senate leader had barely ended his arguement when shouts of “No, No, No, No” started echoing from his colleagues.

Senators Kabiru Gaya, was the first to fire a shot at the bill when he faulted the proposal that political appointees be made delegates to party primaries or conventions.

Referring to the President of the Senate, Mr. David Mark, he said, “Mr. President , this bill is entirely killing all the work we have done for years. The problem in the past years is that we did not have internal democracies in the parties and that is why we had to go through all these.

“The late President set up an electoral reform committee headed by Justice Muhammadu Uwais and they came up with a recommendation. Now for us to consider this bill is entirely bringing the whole process backwards. I suggest that we should not waste time on this bill. We should just throw this bill out and ensure that it is dead before arrival.”

He received the support of the Chief Whip of the Senate, Alhaji Kanti Bello, and Senator Ahmed Lawan, who also argued that the bill, if passed would make nonsense of the previous amendments to the 2010 electoral Act. They added that its passage would amount to an assault on the desire for internal democracy in political parties.

Arguing that the National Assembly was empowered by Section 4 of the constitution to make laws, Bello pointed out that some sections of the bill negated that power.

He said, “We are to pass a bill based on public hearings, discussions, meetings day and night so that there will be internal democracy in our parties and some of the provisions in the bill as pointed out are already contained in the amendment bill of the constitution.

“So I feel this should not be accepted and I appeal to my colleague to just throw away this bill. There is a virus. With due respect to my Leader, I am sorry you are bringing something that is dead on arrival.”

In his contribution, Lawan, who appeared impatient with the debate, urged Mark to call for a voice vote on the bill. This was even as his colleagues made efforts to be called also to contribute to the debate.
Efforts by Mark, the Deputy President of the Senate, Chief Ike Ekweremadu, Folarin and the Deputy Senate Majority Leader, Mr. Victor Ndoma-Egba (SAN) to have the bill passed were rejected by a majority of the senators who called loudly that the question on whether it be read the second time be put to voice voting.

Ndoma-Egba (SAN) had admitted that the bill contained provisions that were totally different from what the Senate Committee on Constitution Review was working on.

He said, “I am sure for those of us who are members of the Constitutional Amendment Committee, are surprised at some of these proposals. Because what we are doing in the committee appears to be different from what is being proposed.”

The Senior Advocate , however, advised that the bill be referred to the committee so that it could be merged with a similar bill currently before the Senate.

Ekweremadu, in his contribution, warned that throwing out the bill would imply that preparations for the 2011 elections would suffer hitches.

He clarified that the bill was an executive bill and not a proposal from the committee as being insinuated by members.

“My plea to my distinguished colleagues is that the bill be returned to the committee and the committee will now do the necessary work by rejecting all that needs to be rejected and bring new provisions that will help us. If we reject this bill, in two weeks time, we will have no Electoral Act.”

Before asking the lawmakers to vote on the bill , Mark, tried again to persuade them to consider the provisions of the bill with a view to removing the so-called offensive aspects.

He said, “ We have got a couple of alternatives. One way is for us to completely forget this bill which is before us and then go ahead, but we are still going to amend the constitution in the areas that this bill has suggested.

“So don’t forget that timelines is one of them. One of the areas being suggested here is the timeline. So it is not the whole bill as it is that will be thrown away. We have to be careful so that we don’t throw away the baby and the bathtub.

“So I can allow more debate, but let us be a little careful. Let us not see the bill holistically as it is now and say that it is just a matter of changing day and dates or time and procedure of the order and precedence of the elections.

“I think the bill contains much more than that, but from the noise that it has generated it already shows clearly that there is a lot of attention being paid to this bill.”

Mark’s comments further attracted a babble of voices calling for the question to be put.

The spokesman of the Senate, Senator Ayogu, in an interview with journalists, said Nigerians should not worry about about the rejection of the bill. He said that the amendments to the 1999 Constitution would take care of the preparations for the 2011 elections.

He said, “I just want to speak on the executive bill in the Senate today to say that Nigerians should not be very anxious of whether we will meet the time frame to make up the necessary amendment; within the Constitution and the Electoral Act, we have enough time.

“I want to assure Nigerians that it will be delivered timely and you know that any law that is not consistent with the constitution to the extent of that inconsistency shall have no biding effect.

“So what is important is to keep our eyes on the ball and, moreover, even inside the committee we have already been working ahead on the electoral Act to make sure that we purify the electoral Act to conform with the changes that are being made in the constitution.”

Eze said some of the provisions of the rejected bill would make “the parties more dictatorial, impede the development of democracy and run counterproductive against the interest of Nigerians.

“You know that once a bill is dead in one chamber, it is technically dead in the other chamber. But I think that we are all going to work together; and we implore Nigerians not to lose sleep over this. Because what is important is that we get it right,” he said.

However, the Senate may accept the proposal that 150 days and 30 days be lower and upper limits for the conduct of elections.
“That is really the crucial thing that INEC needs; a breadth of time. It will give them the scope they need,” Eze said.

The proposal earlier submitted for consideration by the President was 90 days and 30 days limits. This meant that elections would be conducted not earlier than 90 days and not later than 30 days to the May 29 hand over date. Do you want to change your financial status then click on http://no1success..com/