₦airaland Forum

chukwudi44:
Lolz!! The same people pushing for Saraki's iresignation gave a gubernatorial ticket to Sylva and Audu who are both more grievious corruption charges!! Even certified looters like Fashola and Amaechi have had their names forwarded to the senate to be made ministers!! On what basis then is anyone asking Saraki to resign

I tire o! There's so much dishonesty and selective justice in the land. Hypocrites everywhere. Different rules for different folks.

chukwudi44:
The bill to confer immunity on the leadership of the NASS and the CJN is not an amendment as there currently exists no such immunity to be amended!! A fresh bill will be introduced to confer immunity on the leadership of the other two arms of government that is currently been enjoyed by the executive arms alone!!

It is either the immunity law is scrapped altogether or it is made to go round the other arms of government as well!! We cannot allow the legislature to become a rubber stamp of the executive through mindless harrassments and intimdation!!An independent legislature is the bedrock of any functional democracy!!! A rubber stamp legislature breeds dictatorship and messes up the whole democratic process of checks and balances.

Oya introduce the bill na.

destinysaid:
wizard of d first order hw did u know? already on FP at evening time

If have been on NL long enough you would know what would get to FP or not.

There are some good post that never got anywhere, it's all about the OP - MOD relationship.

All is jst 2cover up mess. First tym to comment....

agabusta:
The constitution is superior to any other law. In as much as the constitution did not confer such immunity on the Senate President and Speaker, any attempt to get same through the back door is null and void.

They think they are smart. They know it will be difficult to get the constitution amended to include the obnoxious immunity. They now want to go through the back door and send it in as a bill, which can then be passed as Act. They re quite funny, they know that if the president witholds his assent to a bill passed, 2/3rds majority of NASS can overule the president after a while, and the bill will become a law.

But what u senile old man and them did not realise is that the law will be contradicting the provisions of the constitution.

The constitution did not provide that the senate president and speaker have immunity, as such, an Act of the National Assembly that seeks to make it so will be null and void.

The constitution is supreme!

When the bill is passed into law go and commit suicide

TonyeBarcanista:
Often times I wonder the kind of people that dominates our political space. I read in amazement the proposed move by members of the National Assembly to amend the 1999 Constitution(as amended) so as to grant immunity powers to the President of the Senate and the Deputy, the Speaker of the House of Representative and the Deputy, and also the Chief Justice of the Federation. Their argument was simply because the Head and Deputy Head of the Executive arm of government at both the Federal and State levels enjoys such privilege. Let's look at the constitutional provision

The Constitutional Provision:
For any amendment of the Constitution to be valid, Section 9 must be fulfilled upon which the president shall grant his ascent(or veto). According to sections 9(1) and (2) of the Constitution...

9(1) The National Assembly may, subject to the provision of this section, alter any of the provisions of this Constitution.

9(2) An Act of the National Assembly for the altertion of this Constitution, not being an Act to which section 8 of this Constitution applies, shall not be passed in either House of the National Assembly unless the proposal is supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds majority of all the members of that House and approved by resolution of the Houses of Assembly of not less than two-thirds of all the States.

Going by the emboldened, we can SAFELY say that irrespective of the overwhelming support the proposal may have in the NASS, it is still subject to the approval of two-thirds of all 36 States Houses of Assembly. Will the States support the amendment? How long will that take (considering that each States Houses of Assembly may conduct public hearing and seek the views of stakeholders/constituents before arriving at a decision)?

Is The Proposed Immunity Pro-Nigeria or Pro-Corruption?
It is very unfortunate that our federal legislators in their bid to protect some of their own from facing corruption and criminal offences seek to tow this inglorious path. This is even coming at a time when the call for the removal of immunity clause from Vice President, Governors and Deputy Governors is very high. What kind of immunity does the leaders of the parliament need when parliamentarians already enjoy legislative immunity(that is they won't be arrested/prosecuted for whatever they do on the floor of the parliament)? This move is at best anti-Nigeria and pro-corruption. Beside, it is alien to any democracy that parliamentary leaders enjoy immunity from arrest and prosecution. It is unheard of even in the USA that our democracy is modelled from.

It is unfortunate that our parliamentarians have taken such futile exercise as matter of importance instead of legislating on issues that affects the common man. Finally, I wish to assure members of the NASS that their proposed effort to grant their leaders such privilege is futile, unpatriotic and shall be resisted. We are waiting...


May God Bless Us All

Absolutely correct. Spot on.

TonyeBarcanista:
Often timed...


May God Bless Us All

i believe you bro... Well lets see what the government decides

Pdp be careful u, ve started again supporting corrupt politicians what u ve enjoyed doing for 16gud years.it CHANGE in all ratification.

agabusta:
The constitution is superior to any other law. In as much as the constitution did not confer such immunity on the Senate President and Speaker, any attempt to get same through the back door is null and void.

They think they are smart. They know it will be difficult to get the constitution amended to include the obnoxious immunity. They now want to go through the back door and send it in as a bill, which can then be passed as Act. They re quite funny, they know that if the president witholds his assent to a bill passed, 2/3rds majority of NASS can overule the president after a while, and the bill will become a law.

But what u senile old man and them did not realise is that the law will be contradicting the provisions of the constitution.

The constitution did not provide that the senate president and speaker have immunity, as such, an Act of the National Assembly that seeks to make it so will be null and void.

The constitution is supreme!

When the bill is passed into law and part of the constitution !! Try and get yourself some education

TonyeBarcanista:
Unfortunately, governors, their duputies, the president and his deputy enjoy such immunity.

its on note that this legislooter are hell bent on something, why why why. This move is a signal and sign of looting to high heaven. Owo to ba se loba ma n ge. Their guilty conscience is troubling them,

any senatorm rep members that support this is a ROGUE and should face the wrath of the law to the fullest

naija sha

TonyeBarcanista:
Often times I wonder the kind of people that dominates our political space. I read in amazement the proposed move by members of the National Assembly to amend the 1999 Constitution(as amended) so as to grant immunity powers to the President of the Senate and the Deputy, the Speaker of the House of Representative and the Deputy, and also the Chief Justice of the Federation. Their argument was simply because the Head and Deputy Head of the Executive arm of government at both the Federal and State levels enjoys such privilege. Let's look at the constitutional provision

The Constitutional Provision:
For any amendment of the Constitution to be valid, Section 9 must be fulfilled upon which the president shall grant his ascent(or veto). According to sections 9(1) and (2) of the Constitution...

9(1) The National Assembly may, subject to the provision of this section, alter any of the provisions of this Constitution.

9(2) An Act of the National Assembly for the altertion of this Constitution, not being an Act to which section 8 of this Constitution applies, shall not be passed in either House of the National Assembly unless the proposal is supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds majority of all the members of that House and approved by resolution of the Houses of Assembly of not less than two-thirds of all the States.

Going by the emboldened, we can SAFELY say that irrespective of the overwhelming support the proposal may have in the NASS, it is still subject to the approval of two-thirds of all 36 States Houses of Assembly. Will the States support the amendment? How long will that take (considering that each States Houses of Assembly may conduct public hearing and seek the views of stakeholders/constituents before arriving at a decision)?

Is The Proposed Immunity Pro-Nigeria or Pro-Corruption?
It is very unfortunate that our federal legislators in their bid to protect some of their own from facing corruption and criminal offences seek to tow this inglorious path. This is even coming at a time when the call for the removal of immunity clause from Vice President, Governors and Deputy Governors is very high. What kind of immunity does the leaders of the parliament need when parliamentarians already enjoy legislative immunity(that is they won't be arrested/prosecuted for whatever they do on the floor of the parliament)? This move is at best anti-Nigeria and pro-corruption. Beside, it is alien to any democracy that parliamentary leaders enjoy immunity from arrest and prosecution. It is unheard of even in the USA that our democracy is modelled from.

It is unfortunate that our parliamentarians have taken such futile exercise as matter of importance instead of legislating on issues that affects the common man. Finally, I wish to assure members of the NASS that their proposed effort to grant their leaders such privilege is futile, unpatriotic and shall be resisted. We are waiting...


May God Bless Us All

The legislative arm of Govt. must not make mistake instead they should work towards removing immunity of Governors so that this regime achieve total change

TonyeBarcanista:
Often times I wonder the kind of people that dominates our political space. I read in amazement the proposed move by members of the National Assembly to amend the 1999 Constitution(as amended) so as to grant immunity powers to the President of the Senate and the Deputy, the Speaker of the House of Representative and the Deputy, and also the Chief Justice of the Federation. Their argument was simply because the Head and Deputy Head of the Executive arm of government at both the Federal and State levels enjoys such privilege. Let's look at the constitutional provision

The Constitutional Provision:
For any amendment of the Constitution to be valid, Section 9 must be fulfilled upon which the president shall grant his ascent(or veto). According to sections 9(1) and (2) of the Constitution...

9(1) The National Assembly may, subject to the provision of this section, alter any of the provisions of this Constitution.

9(2) An Act of the National Assembly for the altertion of this Constitution, not being an Act to which section 8 of this Constitution applies, shall not be passed in either House of the National Assembly unless the proposal is supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds majority of all the members of that House and approved by resolution of the Houses of Assembly of not less than two-thirds of all the States.

Going by the emboldened, we can SAFELY say that irrespective of the overwhelming support the proposal may have in the NASS, it is still subject to the approval of two-thirds of all 36 States Houses of Assembly. Will the States support the amendment? How long will that take (considering that each States Houses of Assembly may conduct public hearing and seek the views of stakeholders/constituents before arriving at a decision)?

Is The Proposed Immunity Pro-Nigeria or Pro-Corruption?
It is very unfortunate that our federal legislators in their bid to protect some of their own from facing corruption and criminal offences seek to tow this inglorious path. This is even coming at a time when the call for the removal of immunity clause from Vice President, Governors and Deputy Governors is very high. What kind of immunity does the leaders of the parliament need when parliamentarians already enjoy legislative immunity(that is they won't be arrested/prosecuted for whatever they do on the floor of the parliament)? This move is at best anti-Nigeria and pro-corruption. Beside, it is alien to any democracy that parliamentary leaders enjoy immunity from arrest and prosecution. It is unheard of even in the USA that our democracy is modelled from.

It is unfortunate that our parliamentarians have taken such futile exercise as matter of importance instead of legislating on issues that affects the common man. Finally, I wish to assure members of the NASS that their proposed effort to grant their leaders such privilege is futile, unpatriotic and shall be resisted. We are waiting...

May God Bless Us All

Immuniry does"nt prevent a public office be it a president or wahtsoever drom beign investigated is just that they will nt be convicted for the time beign
For once who are unbiased in your analysis keep it up critisize when necessary and keeo a mum on peer parlour analysis

Don't mind the rogues

engineerboat:
its on note that this legislooter are hell bent on something, why why why. This move is a signal and sign of looting to high heaven. Owo to ba se loba ma n ge. Their guilty conscience is troubling them,

any senatorm rep members that support this is a ROGUE and should face the wrath of the law to the fullest

papadenzel:
God bless u too...ce n"est pas possible...rumor mongers on d proll again...

jamais

Are we going to watch these Leaders cage us forever

Are we going to watch these Leaders cage us forever [color=#000099][/color]

Dead on arrival immunity clause for thieves in the senate
It cannot work
Nigerians are anxiously waiting for the motion in the senate and stones and sachet water will be used to pelt the proposers
Rubbish looking for a way to shield saraki from prosecution when he is already a thief facing CCT

mygee2:
Immuniry does"nt prevent a public office be it a president or wahtsoever drom beign investigated is just that they will nt be convicted for the time beign
For once who are unbiased in your analysis keep it up critisize when necessary and keeo a mum on peer parlour analysis

Abeg no contract ya selff, immunity serve its purpose when in power, that is the whole essence of it. The cry is that let immunity (olenity, theirfinity, lootynity, anynity) be remove, let the full weight of the law takes its,
this will be a caution to tjeir reckless and i dont care life style

TonyeBarcanista, well said.
Continue with non partisan posts like this and your coast ll be enlarged than what you imagine.
Last Bullet:

TonyeBarcanista:
The Constitution has given legislators legislative immunity and judiciary judicial immunity. Nobody can arrest or prosecute them for whatever they do in line of their parliamentary or legislative duties (as the case may be). So what else do they want? This is the accepted norm all over the world!

I don't knw the immunity u are talking about because recently saraki the Senate president is currently standing trials.....if he had immunity he will not be charged.

Bulk of the blame should go to the citizens who elect men and women of questionable character to leadership positions

Barcanista! C'est Merveilleux!!!!

Tonye this your right up shows there is still hope for you, your case is a conundrum sometimes your brain works sometimes it is on extended leave, anyway I agree with your sentiments, some of these senators are just extremely stupid to think that nigerians r fools and will fall for their foolish antics in which case these senators should just be lined up in front of a firing squad and shot

chukwudi44:
When the bill is passed into law go and commit suicide

Ha haha u sound very pained after I busted ur silly thought patterns.

You must think that we are silly. The supreme court will take a stand against such nonsensical bill.

You think conferring immunity also on the CJN will make them support such shenanigans?? You are in for a shocker.

TonyeBarcanista:
Often times I wonder the kind of people that dominates our political space. I read in amazement the proposed move by members of the National Assembly to amend the 1999 Constitution(as amended) so as to grant immunity powers to the President of the Senate and the Deputy, the Speaker of the House of Representative and the Deputy, and also the Chief Justice of the Federation. Their argument was simply because the Head and Deputy Head of the Executive arm of government at both the Federal and State levels enjoys such privilege. Let's look at the constitutional provision

The Constitutional Provision:
For any amendment of the Constitution to be valid, Section 9 must be fulfilled upon which the president shall grant his ascent(or veto). According to sections 9(1) and (2) of the Constitution...

9(1) The National Assembly may, subject to the provision of this section, alter any of the provisions of this Constitution.

9(2) An Act of the National Assembly for the altertion of this Constitution, not being an Act to which section 8 of this Constitution applies, shall not be passed in either House of the National Assembly unless the proposal is supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds majority of all the members of that House and approved by resolution of the Houses of Assembly of not less than two-thirds of all the States.

Going by the emboldened, we can SAFELY say that irrespective of the overwhelming support the proposal may have in the NASS, it is still subject to the approval of two-thirds of all 36 States Houses of Assembly. Will the States support the amendment? How long will that take (considering that each States Houses of Assembly may conduct public hearing and seek the views of stakeholders/constituents before arriving at a decision)?

Is The Proposed Immunity Pro-Nigeria or Pro-Corruption?
It is very unfortunate that our federal legislators in their bid to protect some of their own from facing corruption and criminal offences seek to tow this inglorious path. This is even coming at a time when the call for the removal of immunity clause from Vice President, Governors and Deputy Governors is very high. What kind of immunity does the leaders of the parliament need when parliamentarians already enjoy legislative immunity(that is they won't be arrested/prosecuted for whatever they do on the floor of the parliament)? This move is at best anti-Nigeria and pro-corruption. Beside, it is alien to any democracy that parliamentary leaders enjoy immunity from arrest and prosecution. It is unheard of even in the USA that our democracy is modelled from.

It is unfortunate that our parliamentarians have taken such futile exercise as matter of importance instead of legislating on issues that affects the common man. Finally, I wish to assure members of the NASS that their proposed effort to grant their leaders such privilege is futile, unpatriotic and shall be resisted. We are waiting...


May God Bless Us All

Bacanista my Man though we hv different view in Political arena but I must say we are on the same side regarding the aforementioned issue

For the first time, I read something sensible frm this guy. Weldone

dialfa:
We are not a banana republic

Do you know the meaning of banana republic? you have been living in banana republic since you were born.

chukwudi44:
The bill to confer immunity on the leadership of the NASS and the CJN is not an amendment as there currently exists no such immunity to be amended!! A fresh bill will be introduced to confer immunity on the leadership of the other two arms of government that is currently been enjoyed by the executive arms alone!!

It is either the immunity law is scrapped altogether or it is made to go round the other arms of government as well!! We cannot allow the legislature to become a rubber stamp of the executive through mindless harrassments and intimdation!!An independent legislature is the bedrock of any functional democracy!!! A rubber stamp legislature breeds dictatorship and messes up the whole democratic process of checks and balances.

I never thought about it from that angle, but I that could be a step in the right direction. If the proposal sails thru, the NASS principal officers will have a greater incentive to assert their independence.
In addition, a special security force should be created solely for the purpose of protecting the NASS and her principal officers. That way, no future president would be able to unilateral withdraw police orderlies from a Speaker or SP he/she is feuding with.

Kennywills7:
Supported@Barcanista
Anyone encouraging immunity for the leadership of Nass is as well encouraging corruption
I think immunity gives them the privilege to do as they wish and they eventually get away with it when they leaves office as long as they are friends to those at the top or in power

you people have shalow mind. it is unfair that executive arm of govt should have immunity while legislature and judiciary should not have and thus leave the two arns to whims and caprice of executive.
the more independence of each arm of govt the more corrupt free free we become.

the issue of saraki is eye opener and their step to put immunity clause to avoid such case is in right direction. if the sanate president is corrupt the sanate will first impeach him and then he will be tried. not by rubishing the sanctity of sanate or any other arms of govt.

this is exact reason the drafter of our national constitution forsaw in putting immunity for much revered executive arm

TonyeBarcanista:
Often times I wonder the kind of people that dominates our political space. I read in amazement the proposed move by members of the National Assembly to amend the 1999 Constitution(as amended) so as to grant immunity powers to the President of the Senate and the Deputy, the Speaker of the House of Representative and the Deputy, and also the Chief Justice of the Federation. Their argument was simply because the Head and Deputy Head of the Executive arm of government at both the Federal and State levels enjoys such privilege. Let's look at the constitutional provision

The Constitutional Provision:
For any amendment of the Constitution to be valid, Section 9 must be fulfilled upon which the president shall grant his ascent(or veto). According to sections 9(1) and (2) of the Constitution...

9(1) The National Assembly may, subject to the provision of this section, alter any of the provisions of this Constitution.

9(2) An Act of the National Assembly for the altertion of this Constitution, not being an Act to which section 8 of this Constitution applies, shall not be passed in either House of the National Assembly unless the proposal is supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds majority of all the members of that House and approved by resolution of the Houses of Assembly of not less than two-thirds of all the States.

Going by the emboldened, we can SAFELY say that irrespective of the overwhelming support the proposal may have in the NASS, it is still subject to the approval of two-thirds of all 36 States Houses of Assembly. Will the States support the amendment? How long will that take (considering that each States Houses of Assembly may conduct public hearing and seek the views of stakeholders/constituents before arriving at a decision)?

Is The Proposed Immunity Pro-Nigeria or Pro-Corruption?
It is very unfortunate that our federal legislators in their bid to protect some of their own from facing corruption and criminal offences seek to tow this inglorious path. This is even coming at a time when the call for the removal of immunity clause from Vice President, Governors and Deputy Governors is very high. What kind of immunity does the leaders of the parliament need when parliamentarians already enjoy legislative immunity(that is they won't be arrested/prosecuted for whatever they do on the floor of the parliament)? This move is at best anti-Nigeria and pro-corruption. Beside, it is alien to any democracy that parliamentary leaders enjoy immunity from arrest and prosecution. It is unheard of even in the USA that our democracy is modelled from.

It is unfortunate that our parliamentarians have taken such futile exercise as matter of importance instead of legislating on issues that affects the common man. Finally, I wish to assure members of the NASS that their proposed effort to grant their leaders such privilege is futile, unpatriotic and shall be resisted. We are waiting...


May God Bless Us All

Well said bro

Actually one of the characteristics of a deepening democracy is that it's actors (in the case members of the national assembly) will try all tricks in the book to legally twist , bend, shake the law to their selfish advantage

We the people of Nigeria will not allow it and will voice out. In writing. On the streets. Through our legislative representatives. Media etc

We will not allow it

Let them try

But they shall not succeed

galantjoe:
you people have shalow mind. it is unfair that executive arm of govt should have immunity while legislature and judiciary should not have and thus leave the two arns to whims and caprice of executive.
the more independence of each arm of govt the more corrupt free free we become.

the issue of saraki is eye opener and their step to put immunity clause to avoid such case is in right direction. if the sanate president is corrupt the sanate will first impeach him and then he will be tried. not by rubishing the sanctity of sanate or any other arms of govt.

this is exact reason the drafter of our national constitution forsaw in putting immunity for much revered executive arm

U could have made ur point without throwing insults at people while i agree wit ur point, am just against immunity for our Nigerian politicians, they don't deserve it dat even include the executive, the interference by d executive is bad for democracy, after carefully drawing d lines i hv come to d conclusion dat they too nees immunity if not d immunity enjoy by d executive should b remove too
Once again u don't have to insult others to make ur point
Thank u