Kobojunkie:

Since it seems a lot of you are simply here to argue blindly. Let me help you




While the above response from the Constitution already address the compelling of the person to appear, I should ask that you learn to DISCONNECT issues appropriately.

A Summons by NASS has NOTHING to do with immunity, or arrest but usually a call to testify or answer questions. When you want to discuss Immunity then you talk of the courts being involved and NASS is not the Nigerian Court.





Please go study your constitution, and learn the meaning and application of these words, so you do not come back asking me of things that are clearly explained in that document.

Again, a Summons is NOT an accusation or suggestion of guilt. It is simply a summon. The constitution explains why it can happen, when, and what happens if turned down. If the President turns it down without consequence, then anyone else can, and should EQUALLY be able to turn it down without consequence.

porka:

What's your point exactly?

Kobojunkie:

[size=14pt]Learn Your Constitution!!![/size] cause that is the only way you learn your right as a citizens and an individual in this union.

porka:

Ok. I am ready to learn from you.

Shall we go now?

If the constitution says anyone can be summoned by the NASS for any reason, what happens if s/he refuses? Say me or you for instance.

Kobojunkie:

Did you even bother reading the response I posted which includes all that? See what I mean? Many of you are just here to post responses, and UNSUBSTANTIATED claims, without necessarily taking time to read the contents presented you.

porka:

Why not answer a simple question?

Kobojunkie:

I already did. You should learn to read. Go to the last post of mine in the previous page and re-read the included excerpts from the constitution which details exactly what should happen.

porka:

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;

[b][size=13pt](c) 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; 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.
[/size][/b]
If this is your answer, then we'll proceed to the next question;

How do you compel a person, since you are trying to separate that from arrest?

How will Speaker Tambuwal compel President Jonathan to obey his summons?

Kobojunkie:

Again, a summons is NOT an arrest. But simply a summons. It is like saying calling you for Jury Duty is an arrest.

You only get a warrant out IF YOU fail to give a valid reason for not showing up. When you deliberately ignore the Law, there are consequences to follow . . in some cases, an arrest, in others possibly impeachment.

Now note how the latter is NOT DIRECTLY connected to the FIRST? YOU, by BREAKING THE LAW, Create the Opportunity for the second. No one is above the law . . . that is how it ought to be, even in Nigeria.

porka:

Please refer to my 1st question.

I'd ask what happens if one refuses to honor the summons, I didn't ask if a summons is same as arrest.

And your answer was an excerpt from the constitution which clearly says the person shall be compelled to attend the summons.

Now, who compels the President of Nigeria to attend the NASS summons is the question.

Kobojunkie:

If all you are interested in is the extreme cases of when a President subverts the law, then you are probably on the wrong thread since this is not the thread for it. No well-meaning President should subvert the laws of the land, not even in Nigeria, especially since he swore an oath to uphold the laws within(he was sworn in under that constitution).

In the meantime, I suggest you study up your constitution.

porka:

I agree with you, we all need to study that document.

I can see you are trying to be clever.

If the framers of the constitution (or any laws for that matter) are so simple minded, then there won't be need for punishments.

In other words, they have in mind those extreme cases before they inserted the punishments.

If no punishments are inserted in laws, even the simple stuffs would be ignored by human beings, the president of Nigeria or any nation being human.

So who compels the attendance of Nigeria's president in NASS summons according to the constitution you have studied so much? As it appears that President Jonathan might not obey the summons.

Kobojunkie:

You are not smart at all. The consequences of the breaking the law is NOT HIDDEN from anyone. If you need to know what the consequence of subverting the constitution is, you need to read the document. It is clear what the consequences are should a president do such. GO READ THE DOCUMENT ALREADY TO LEARN LESSONS THAT COULD POTENTIALLY SAVE YOUR LIFE!!

Like I said, this thread is not about that so I will rather go ahead with the issue at hand.

porka:

No, I am not claiming to be smart.

I am only learning from you and you are proving to be a difficult teacher.

There would not have been any need for all this if you ponder with me that the consequence of issuing the summons is graver than what it intended to address.

1) Jonathan will not obey the summons. He won't because no president has been issued such summons. He won't because obeying will put future presidents at jeopardy, setting a precedence for any useless summons. He won't because his attendance will jeopardize security and intelligence efforts, even when they say it's a close-door session, anything he says there will find it way to the social media and the MSM the next minute.

2) Tambuwal's house might try to compel him through impeachment threats, since a Nigerian president cannot be arrested.

3) Impeachment threats will aggravate the security challenges that Tambuwal is "trying" to address, because Niger Delta militants will read ulterior motives into it.

4) If he refuses and there was no consequence(s), Tambuwal's House of Representatives would simply look funny in the eye of the public.

Those were my points ab initio but it seems you wanted us to go round and round.

porka:

No, I am not claiming to be smart.

I am only learning from you and you are proving to be a difficult teacher.

There would not have been any need for all this if you ponder with me that the consequence of issuing the summons is graver than what it intended to address.

1) Jonathan will not obey the summons. He won't because no president has been issued such summons. He won't because obeying will put future presidents at jeopardy, setting a precedence for any useless summons. He won't because his attendance will jeopardize security and intelligence efforts, even when they say it's a close-door session, anything he says there will find it way to the social media and the MSM the next minute.

2) Tambuwal's house might try to compel him through impeachment threats, since a Nigerian president cannot be arrested.

3) Impeachment threats will aggravate the security challenges that Tambuwal is "trying" to address, because Niger Delta militants will read ulterior motives into it.

4) If he refuses and there was no consequence(s), Tambuwal's House of Representatives would simply look funny in the eye of the public.

Those were my points ab initio but it seems you wanted us to go round and round.

Kobojunkie:

Points? All you have up there are your suppositions/your made-up theory of what could or might HAPPEN . . . Nothing factual in any wise, and nothing that changes the laws in any shape or form.

Again, learn to separate REALITY from the commotion in your head. I hate trying to dig into the minds of people when the issue does not call for it at all. Why in the world would I want to spend my day digging through that swamp when nothing has happened? What for? What the heck for?

So far all that has happened is that NASS has summoned the President, simple as that. For all you and I know, the president may supply NASS with a good enough reason for why he cannot attend. But so far it seems the President has yet to respond or ignore. He has not even suggested he will not go, and there is no FIRE on that mountain yet.

porka:

May be you should take a look at this...

http://www.punchng.com/news/northern-crisis-jonathan-to-ignore-reps-summons/

I like clever people like you madam.

Btw, have you ever heard or seen any summons without a date?

porka:

May be you should take a look at this...

http://www.punchng.com/news/northern-crisis-jonathan-to-ignore-reps-summons/

I like clever people like you madam.

Btw, have you ever heard or seen any summons without a date?

Kobojunkie:
That link with the UNNAMED official is NOT an official rejection from the president. Be careful to wait to hear for one.

If anything, you, as a Citizen of this country, should be in support of Your president respecting the laws of the land. Not coming here to suggest that it is OK for the president to undermine the law because that part of the law has never been used before.

Do you need to hear of a summons first before you demand that THE LAW BE OBEYED since Yes, it is the LAW? What the heck kind of question/brain-fart is that?

ndu_chucks:

Nigeria is currently at war and these times call for unusual actions. The President should not fight the summons because fighting it does not help the security situation on ground. The President must be brave and comply.

Out of respect and cordiality, the summon had an open date to enable the President to honour it at a convenient time.

ndu_chucks: You and the commander-in-chief who seems AWOL at the moment can trivialize the current situation all you want. To the rest of us and others who have been personally affected by the bombings and indiscriminate killings by JTF, we are at war. shi kena

Let us pray that bombs will not explode in your neck of the woods.

Beaf:

No mofo can summon the President. Period.

ndu_chucks:

This is not an adversarial act, anyway he has already been summoned.

[size=14pt]Northern crisis: Jonathan to ignore Reps’ summons[/size]
June 22, 2012 by Olalekan Adetayo

President Goodluck Jonathan will not honour the House of Representatives’ summons over the spate of violence in the northern part of the country, a top official in the presidency said on Thursday.

The official, who pleaded not to be mentioned, said the summons was not based on any point of law.

But the House said on Thursday that it had the power under Section 89 (1-a) of the 1999 Constitution, to summon “any person” over whom it had the power of appropriation, including the President.

Spokesman for the House, Zakari Mohammed, said this even as he explained that the summons to Jonathan was not intended for a confrontation with the President.

The Reps had on Tuesday passed a resolution asking the President to appear before them to explain what he was doing to tackle the insecurity in the country.

The resolution was sequel to a motion moved by a lawmaker, Yakubu Barde, a Peoples Democratic Party member, representing Kaduna on the bombing of three churches in Kaduna State on Sunday and the reprisals that followed.

Leading the debate, Barde said that poverty and crime would prevail in the country if the current insecurity situation was allowed to continue.

He urged the President to step-up the fight against insecurity in the country.

The motion was unanimously adopted by the House but no date was fixed for the President to show up before the lawmakers.

The lawmakers’ summons came a day after Jonathan travelled out to Rio De Janeiro, Brazil, for a United Nations Earth Summit, leaving behind a burning country.

But the presidency official said the lawmakers did not have any right under the nation’s constitution to summon the President under such a condition since the country was not practising a parliamentary system of government.

He said under the presidential system of government which Nigeria practises, the President has an exclusive power that places him above such summons by the House of Representatives.

He said, “Nigeria is not practising a parliamentary system of government like it is obtainable in Britain where the Prime Minister is a member of the Parliament; and he is just the first among equals.

“We practise a presidential system of government which gives an executive power to the President. He cannot be summoned in such manner by the House.

“Again, a resolution of the National Assembly is an opinion that is not binding on the executive arm of government.

“It will interest you to know that the National Assembly under former President Olusegun Obasanjo passed similar resolutions summoning him like about four times.

It is on record that he did not honour any of the invitations and nothing happened. Their resolutions are mere opinion or advisory.”

As at press time, the Special Adviser to the President on Media and Publicity, Dr. Reuben Abati, could not be reached for his comments on whether his boss would honour the invitation or not.

Zakari said the intention of the House was to “interface” with the President on the security problems, including the escalating bomb attacks, kidnappings and armed robberies.

He said the House was concerned that Jonathan might be facing some challenges which the intervention of the legislature could help to resolve.

He said, “The best way to address this crisis is to interface with Mr. President. That is why we said he should come along with his service chiefs.

“Are the security funds not enough? What is it that he knows, which we do not know?

“If there are frustrations, what are these frustrations? We want to know.

“The invitation is not to bring the House in conflict with Mr. President.”

“We went to the Villa and had a luncheon with Mr. President; nobody complained then.

“This invitation is a continuation of the interface; now we are asking him to come and brief us on the security situation in our land,” he added.

On the grounds of the legality of the invitation, the House spokesman argued that under Section 89 (1-a) of the 1999 Constitution, the National Assembly could summon “any person” over whom it had the power of appropriation, including the President.

He said in the 2012 budget, the legislature appropriated about N1tn for security and had the powers to summon anyone to explain how the money was utilised.

However, he clarified that the matter at hand was not about power but rather on how to find urgent solutions to the security situation.

ndu_chucks: You and the commander-in-chief who seems AWOL at the moment can trivialize the current situation all you want. To the rest of us and others who have been personally affected by the bombings and indiscriminate killings by JTF, we are at war. shi kena

Let us pray that bombs will not explode in your neck of the woods.

porka:

No, I am not claiming to be smart.

I am only learning from you and you are proving to be a difficult teacher.

There would not have been any need for all this if you ponder with me that the consequence of issuing the summons is graver than what it intended to address.

1) Jonathan will not obey the summons. He won't because no president has been issued such summons. He won't because obeying will put future presidents at jeopardy, setting a precedence for any useless summons. He won't because his attendance will jeopardize security and intelligence efforts, even when they say it's a close-door session, anything he says there will find it way to the social media and the MSM the next minute.

2) Tambuwal's house might try to compel him through impeachment threats, since a Nigerian president cannot be arrested.

3) Impeachment threats will aggravate the security challenges that Tambuwal is "trying" to address, because Niger Delta militants will read ulterior motives into it.

4) If he refuses and there was no consequence(s), Tambuwal's House of Representatives would simply look funny in the eye of the public.

Those were my points ab initio but it seems you wanted us to go round and round.

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?

haka_nai: Well,i don't see anything wrong with the invitation/visit after all he attends some personal visit less significant to this one.What is the purpose of the meeting?If it has anything to do with the nation what is wrong if he goes there for them to rub minds.Not all of them are bad and some actually represent there people and deserve to know what the C-in C is doing with regards to the nation.He could also strengthen his position in case of security votes or support/rating over the issue.
Just go abeg visit them GEJ.nothing do you except if you are ashamed of your records.

edicolove: Tambuwal is such an id1ot! He will end up like Salisu buhari. You cannot take on a sitting president. Check your history. Except in cases where the president's party is not the dominant party. The people trying to use him will dump him when the fire gets really hot. And he doesn't have the support of the people. So he is heading for the gallows. The guys a f00l. He will be impeached soon. He forgot, he only emerged as speaker because of the anger of the southeast that the speaker was not zoned to them. The same intrigue that brought him in, will kick him out very soon.

Edistupid has spoken his usual thrash. Oga, tambuwal and his cohorts are basically doing the job they were voted for. they are empowered as stated in the constitution.Its just an invitation. If the retardeen is wise, he should utilise it in showcasing his acheivements security wise to the whole world