Why Jonathan didn’t announce fuel subsidy withdrawal


•House may overrule Presidency on subsidy

Security reports forced President Goodluck Jonathan from announcing the withdrawal of the fuel subsidy during his budget presentation on Tuesday.
A top government official, who confided in our correspondent, said there were plans by 69 members of the National Assembly to humiliate the President at the session.

The source said: “Based on security reports, the President decided to shelve a formal announcement of the withdrawal of fuel subsidy.
“It was not a question of ambush but the presidency chose to avoid the issue during the presentation to avoid generating heated argument at the session.
“We have reports that some members were mobilized to start shouting down the President once he announces the withdarawal of fuel subsidy. So, we designed a way out.

“About 69 of some of these bad elements were mobilized to embarrass the President. And if that happened, the image of the nation will be rubbished before the international community. The boos and jeers will also overshadow the budget presentation.
“To beat them to their game, the President was silent on it. It was a case of being proactive.

“Do not forget that some members of the National Assembly had attempted to humiliate the President.”

There were feelers that the House of Representatives may overrule the presidency on the withdrawal of fuel subsidy.
The House is poised to restore fuel subsidy in the interest of the masses.

But fresh facts emerged that security reports allegedly forced the President from announcing the withdrawal of the fuel subsidy during the presentation of the budget on Tuesday.

Investigation by our correspondent however revealed that most members of the House were caught unawares by the ambush tactics adopted by the President.
It was also learnt that many of the Representatives are angry that the President opted for Executive Fiat contrary to the advice given him by the National Assembly.

Some caucuses in the House met on Tuesday night and early Wednesday on how to reverse the Executive Fiat during the consideration of the budget.
A principal officer of the House, who spoke in confidence, said: “We have not heard the last word on this matter. We are poised to resist the Executive Fiat.
“We will include the fuel subsidy in the 2012 Appropriation Bill in line with the desire of the majority of Nigerians.
“We have taken a position to reject the removal of subsidy and we will not go back on that. It is going to be an interesting battle between the Executive and the Legislature.

“Since the President has used Executive Fiat, we will also invoke our powers as enshrined in Sections 80, 81, 82, 83 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution as amended. Do not forget that we are empowered to exercise control over public funds.

Section 80(3 and 4) says: “No moneys shall be withdrawn from any public fund of the Federation, other than the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Federation, unless the issue of those moneys has been authorized by an Act of the National Assembly .
“No moneys shall be withdrawn from the Consolidated Revenue Fund or any other public fund of the Federation, except in the manner prescribed by the National Assembly.”
“Section 83(1) says: “The National Assembly may by law make provisions for the establishment of a Contingencies Fund for the Federation and for authorizing the President, if satisfied that there has arisen and unforeseen need for expenditure for which no other provision exists, to make advances from the Fund to meet the need.”
Another top leader in the House said: “We can also jack up the budget benchmark to accommodate subsidy. The benchmark is based on $70 per barrel whereas the international price is $100 per barrel.
“Just wait and see how we will handle the Executive. We are eager to start the debate before we go for recess on December 23.

“We will certainly overrule the President on the withdrawal of subsidy.”

A source in the presidency however said the President was well-guided by the law in withdrawing the subsidy.

The source said: “The President weighed all options based on the law and the provisions of the 1999 Constitution. He relied on sections 16(1) and (2) of the constitution.
“Before withdrawing the fuel subsidy, he also obtained legal advice. The option left for any aggrieved group or individual is to go to court.
“The President took this decision in the interest of the nation.
Section 16 (1) (b)(c) reads in part: “The state shall, within the context of the ideals and objectives for which provisions are made in this Constitution –control the national economy in such manner as to secure the maximum welfare, freedom and happiness of every citizen on the basis of social justice and equal of status and opportunity;
“The state shall direct its policy towards ensuring that the economic system is not operated in such a manner as to permit the concentration of wealth or the means of production and exchange in the hands of few individuals or of a group.”
“That the economic system is not operated in such a manner as to permit the concentration of wealth or the means of production and exchange in the hands of few individuals or of a group.”

Source: http://www.thenationonlineng.net/2011/index.php/news/29852-why-jonathan-didn%E2%80%99t-announce-fuel-subsidy-withdrawal.html