chidexy:

While technically, the House can summon anyone, but they cannot extend such powers to the President since they do not have the legal authority to enforce his being summoned - it's a simple as that.

Say, under what legal authority are they summoning the President and Commander in-Chief?

Kobojunkie:

Um.. . . again, the House CAN SUMMON ANYONE(ANYONE INCLUDES ANYONE EVEN THE PRESIDENT), so says the Constitution. . . . and as long as NO ONE is EXEMPT FROM THAT RULE(THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS APPLIED FOR ANYONE), that mean that the house can summon the president. It is the same even here in the UNITED states.

Please Educate yourself especially since I see you have followers to seem to cling to your words there. IF THE CONSTITUTIONS MAKES NO EXCEPTION, the the rule applies to ALL and SUNDRY.

Beaf:

[size=14pt]When has congress ever summoned the US President, liar?
Thats the question, liar.[/size]

maclatunji: Hahahahaha- Power resides with the people and the National Assembly is the constitutional representative of the people. They can summon anybody in Nigeria. See how people just post without any valid points raised. Farouk Lawan's case is separate from GEJ and in any case is being handled by the House through its institutional mechanisms. Already, the man has been suspended, which official in the Executive has GEJ suspended or sacked in view of very detailed allegations and evidence of corruption? If you cannot find any, let me point one out for you, the extra-budgetary spending on oil subsidy. Where did the money come from and how did this government spend it without appropriation by the National Assembly? GEJ has a lot of questions to answer and this is not the Presidential campaign debate that he manipulated to serve his purposes.

He has to answer questions because Nigerians are tired of stories and excuses!

chidexy:

While technically, the House can summon anyone, but they cannot extend such powers to the President since they do not have the legal authority to enforce his being summoned - it's a simple as that.

Say, under what legal authority are they summoning the President and Commander in-Chief?

maclatunji: Don't worry, did Bill Clinton not face questioning by the US Congress? GEJ's time is coming.

O.D.B.:

that was an impeachment

O.D.B.:
yes there are crystal clear conditions for an impeachment. The process must be endorsed by at least a 2/3 majority of bout houses and the impeachment process will be a joint hearing by both houses. Clinton was impeached that's why he gave a video conferencing.

An impeachment process is also an impeachment weather you survive it or not.

O.D.B.:
Because the National Assembly cannot extend an invitation to the President or any citizen with full immunity that's why.

And in case you forgot the ultimate ruling house is not the Legislative but the Supreme court which has the power to interpret any piece of legislation or law and decree it either constitutional or unconstitutional. So if the supreme court can't subpoena the President what makes you think the House can?

Kobojunkie: Instead, Tell us where these crystal clear conditions on IMPEACHMENT-ONLY SUMMONING can be found in the Constitution . . . Please SHOW US, don't tell us!!

O.D.B.:
Whenever the President is addressing the house, it is never an interrogative affair rather a declaration. Do not confuse budgetary proposals and war declarations as a summons since the President is not expected to be interrupted or questioned.

Kobojunkie: Instead, Tell us where these crystal clear conditions on IMPEACHMENT-ONLY SUMMONING can be found in the Constitution . . . Please SHOW US, don't tell us!!

Kobojunkie:

Stop making things up! What are you rambling about now?

The constitution does not need to be interpreted by the courts before NASS can take advantage of the powers bestowed on it. Many of the rules are in plain English and if needs to be changed, NASS does that, not the courts. The courts have no powers over the House. Please read your own constitution before you yap on.

Again

O.D.B.:


the supreme court can rule any piece of legislation that is deemed unconstitutional. For example the criminalization of Gays can be argued as an infringement of civil liberties and personal rights and dignities. The house passed that bill but it can be overturned by the Supreme court if argued.

There have been many bills passed by state Assemblies in the U.S. that have been overturned by the Supreme court. FACT.

Secondly, to demonstrate the enormous power the President wields, He/She can actually suspend the constitution through introduction of Marshal Law and thus make the House go on a long recess.

Kobojunkie: Instead, Tell us where these crystal clear conditions on IMPEACHMENT-ONLY SUMMONING can be found in the Constitution . . . Please SHOW US, don't tell us!!

O.D.B.:
The Judiciary if you must know is a 3rd arm of Government which wields a lot of power as well.

Kobojunkie: Instead, Tell us where these crystal clear conditions on IMPEACHMENT-ONLY SUMMONING can be found in the Constitution . . . Please SHOW US, don't tell us!!

O.D.B.:
If you so much want the house to summon the President why not lobby your representative to start an impeachment process, that's their only chance but the impeachment must be supported by a clear breach of conduct over a specific crime or crimes committed while in Office.

O.D.B.:
If you so much want the house to summon the President why not lobby your representative to start an impeachment process, that's their only chance but the impeachment must be supported by a clear breach of conduct over a specific crime or crimes committed while in Office.

Kobojunkie: Instead, Tell us where these crystal clear conditions on IMPEACHMENT-ONLY SUMMONING can be found in the Constitution . . . Please SHOW US, don't tell us!!

chidexy:

While technically, the House can summon anyone, but they cannot extend such powers to the President since they do not have the legal authority to enforce his being summoned - it's a simple as that.

Say, under what legal authority are they summoning the President and Commander in-Chief?

O.D.B.:

that was an impeachment

Kobojunkie:

Please learn about your Government and the various powers it really has. NASS does not have power to solve Security issues. That power belongs to the Executive, which is your President and all those under him.

This house has been there about a year, and it is just as good a time as any to start asking what the F**k is going on, since we doled out almost a Trillion naira to solve security so far.

porka:

Hello Madam, I can see that you are trying very hard to justify this nonsense summons.

http://www.nigeria-law.org/ConstitutionOfTheFederalRepublicOfNigeria.htm

89. (1) For the purposes of any investigation under section 88 of this Constitutional and subject to the provisions thereof, the Senate or the House of Representatives or a committee appointed in accordance with section 62 of this Constitution shall have power to -

(a) procure all such evidence, written or oral, direct or circumstantial, as it may think necessary or desirable, and examine all persons as witnesses whose evidence may be material or relevant to the subject matter;

(b) require such evidence to be given on oath;

(c) [size=13pt]summon any person in Nigeria to give evidence at any place or produce any document or other thing in his possession or under his control, and examine him as a witness and require him to produce any document or other thing in his possession or under his control, subject to all just exceptions; [/size]and

(d) issue a warrant to compel the attendance of any person who, after having been summoned to attend, fails, refuses or neglects to do so and does not excuse such failure, refusal or neglect to the satisfaction of the House or the committee in question, and order him to pay all costs which may have been occasioned in compelling his attendance or by reason of his failure, refusal or neglect to obey the summons, and also to impose such fine as may be prescribed for any such failure, refused or neglect; and any fine so imposed shall be recoverable in the same manner as a fine imposed by a court of law.

(2) A summons or warrant issued under this section may be served or executed by any member of the Nigeria Police Force or by any person authorised in that behalf by the President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives, as the case may require.

porka:
While the constitution gives the power of summons to the NASS, it also gives the president immunity against arrest (prosecution) which is the only recourse the NASS has in case the person summon refused the summons. So if you cannot effect the arrest of the president when he refuses (he will not go because no president has thus been summon and Jonathan will not lay a precedence), why issue the summons.

http://www.nigeria-law.org/ConstitutionOfTheFederalRepublicOfNigeria.htm

308. (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Constitution, but subject to subsection (2) of this section -

(a) no civil or criminal proceedings shall be instituted or continued against a person to whom this section applies during his period of office;

(b) a person to whom this section applies shall not be arrested or imprisoned during that period either in pursuance of the process of any court or otherwise; and

(c) no process of any court requiring or compelling the appearance of a person to whom this section applies, shall be applied for or issued:

Provided that in ascertaining whether any period of limitation has expired for the purposes of any proceedings against a person to whom this section applies, no account shall be taken of his period of office.

(2) The provisions of subsection (1) of this section shall not apply to civil proceedings against a person to whom this section applies in his official capacity or to civil or criminal proceedings in which such a person is only a nominal party.

(3) This section applies to a person holding the office of President or Vice-President, Governor or Deputy Governor; and the reference in this section to "period of office" is a reference to the period during which the person holding such office is required to perform the functions of the office.

porka:
What exactly will they do if he refused to appear before them? Call for impeachment? Then they are going to cause one of the gravest security challenges this country has ever faced, i.e. the resurgence of ND militancy. And then the security challenge will just escalate. Now tell me, how has that solve their problems?