In Nigeria, party supremacy is constantly at variance with parliamentary autonomy, with lawmakers resisting any ploy to trample on the independence of the legislature. JONATHAN NDA-ISAIAH writes on the controversies generated from the debate.
Party supremacy is not an academic concept. The term which entails that party members must abide by the decisions or instructions made by the leadership of a political party is also alien to the constitution. This explains why party supremacy is not absolute. Because of its limited power, the party cannot instruct elected members on how to govern and who they must appoint. Party supremacy is also restricted where obeying party instructions will breach the constitution, an act or a law.
In Nigeria, the party system is generally regarded as weak. Most politicians campaign on the platform of a party and depend heavily on its manifesto but as soon as they get into power, they dump the party manifesto like a pack of cards and start acting as if they are independent candidates. Political analysts posit that there is a thin line between party supremacy and parliamentary autonomy.
Most of them have blamed former President Olusegun Obasanjo for deliberately weakening political parties in Nigeria, going by the way he handled the then ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) during his eight-year reign. The thinking is that in the first and second Republic, party chairmen were revered and seen as demigods. The governors and even the president report to the party chairman who is the number one leader of the party. The party chairman whips erring members into line and makes sure the executive and legislature execute party manifestos to the letter.
But like the biblical analogy which states that ‘a thief cometh not but to steal and to destroy’, Obasanjo came into the country’s political space in the guise of an ex-military ruler transformed into a democrat. When it was least expected, he destroyed party structures by introducing a term ‘party leader’ into the country’s political lexicon which gives the president absolute control over the party and relegated the party chairman to the background. In achieving this, he was always changing his party chairmen at will. This, political pundits believe, laid the foundation for the destruction of party supremacy in Nigeria.
In 2015, the successive ruling party, All Progressives Congress (APC), stormed the political arena with its campaign theatrics summarily called the change agenda. The great mass of Nigerians keyed into the much touted campaign slogan, with the hope that the change agenda will also restore party supremacy in the country’s political system. Disappointingly, it did not turn out to be what they thought it could. The APC failed its litmus test, which was the election of principal officers in the National Assembly.
As a party, the APC wanted Senator Ahmed Lawan to be the Senate President, with Senator George Akume as his deputy. It was the same story in the House of Representatives where the party wanted Hon Femi Gbajamilia to emerge the Speaker. In a twist of fate, the political equation of some power brokers in the legislature threw Senator Bukola Saraki up as the Senate President against the wish of their party. It was the same ballgame in the House where Yakubu Dogara emerged as the speaker.
Saraki went a notch higher to disregard the party’s directives on positions of other principal officers. This singular move put him on a collision course with his party and the executive. Saraki’s argument and that of other party members was that the lawmakers had the backing of the constitution to elect their principal officers.
It has been a back and forth argument since then as the acrimonious relationship between the National Assembly leadership and the party is said to have affected governance.
Determined to settle his debate, the National Institute of Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS) in Abuja organised a national conference on political party supremacy and the dynamics of parliamentary autonomy. Speaking at the event, Vice President Yemi Osinbajo did not spare his party either in addressing the issue. He declared that there are no strong parties in Nigeria. He said, while the opposition PDP is on death row, the governing APC is gasping for breath.
Osinbajo, who was represented by the special adviser political to the president, Babafemi Ojudu, said concerns should be directed at strengthening the political parties because as things stand today, political parties in the country are very weak.
He pointed out that parties fashion philosophies and ideologies for which they mobilise around, recruit members and draw up manifestos. With this, he said they sponsor candidates for elective offices, both in the executive and the legislature.
“When you see the tension we have now, it is because we have not paid adequate attention to building a strong party. Where the party is strong and it understands its mission, it will promote its ideology and make its elected officials to subscribe to its ideology and manifesto.”
He further stated that where disagreement arises, the executive will come together and bring members of the caucuses of the National Assembly or the state assembly together to argue and debate. He said the youths will be invited, everybody will be there and decide on what position should be, noting that you never get to hear about disagreement on the pages of newspapers or on the floors of parliament.
He called on all political actors in Nigeria to build very strong parties, stressing specifically that it is unacceptable for a lawmaker elected by a party that produced the leader of the executive to get up in the parliament and drag down such an official as if he is doing the bidding of the opposition.
In a veiled reference to APC lawmakers in the National Assembly he said, “You cannot disparage your own party; you cannot disparage an official elected by your own party. What will be the cause of that? Both the people in the legislature and the executive must have gotten there based on issues and ideals they don’t subscribe to. If that is the case, should there be any disagreement at all, there should be an avenue for resolving that disagreement.”
He contended that it was not acceptable for any lawmaker to build road blocks on the part of programmes for which his party was elected to power. According to him, if a party has an acceptable manifesto and based on this manifesto the people voted for that party and its candidate too into the parliament, how then will such a person build a road block and ensure that the programmes for which people voted for him and his party are not allowed to proceed to the benefit of the people.
Osinbajo said, “My party was elected on the basis of the promises we made to the people that we are going to provide security across the country, fight corruption and diversify the economy and provide for the poor people of this country. When you subscribe to these and you now get to the parliament and make it your duty to dismantle this, then there is a problem.”
“Every one of us present in this hall must have heard one thing or the other about parties that operated in the first and second republic. These parties were very strong and the members were committed to the ideals, whether they agree with those ideals is a different matter.”
“The NPN subscribed to a particular set of ideals, same thing for the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN), GNPP, and everybody abided. Even when you disagree, you cannot come out to say you are wrong, there are avenues and vehicles laid down within those parties where you can make your disagreement known.”
“It does appear that we just look for a party or a medium convenient for us for winning elections and realise our ambition. The moment we do that, we begin to plot some other things, looking forward to another election and looking forward to another medium that will enable us win the next election. By doing this, we are not building any party”.
Also speaking at the occasion, Senate President, Bukola Saraki said political party supremacy places the overall interest of a political party over that of the individuals that make up the party.
Represented by chairman, Senate Committee on Defence, Abubakar Kyari, Saraki said the objectives of the political party before elections are documented in a manifesto. He declared his support for the development of enforceable codes of conducts for political parties and politicians in the country.
Saraki said, “Parliamentary autonomy is a true functional democratic government. In line with the French philosopher, Montesquieu’s principle of separation of powers which is one of the major tenets of democratic practice in a presidential system, the framers of the 1999 constitution (as amended) recognise the independence of the National Assembly in choosing its leaders and carrying out its legislative roles.”
“The National Assembly differs a lot from the state Houses of Assembly because of its multi -ethnic, multi – religious and multi- lingual composition. These differences explain why it is difficult for the executive arm of government to coax and silence the legislature like it has done most times at the state level.”
“A harmonious relationship is built between the executive arm and the Legislature when the provision of the constitution is respected. It is important in order to entrench peace and reduce the tension that sometimes takes place between both arms of government.”
On his part, the chairman of electoral reforms committee, Ken Nnamani, said independence of the legislature does not mean the recklessness or irresponsibility of the legislature.
Nnamani, who is a former Senate President, quoted Justice Stephen Breyer of the United States Supreme Court in arguing that separation of powers does not mean that branches of government need to be antagonistic to each other. According to him, working together is what the interdependence seeks to achieve as they are independent but depend on one another for effectiveness.
Nnamani said, “This is the reason the constitution has designed our democracy with checks and balances. The independence of the legislature does not mean the recklessness or irresponsibility of the legislature. It means that the legislature regulates itself in working together with other branches for the promotion of good governance.”
“It is good to have independent and effective legislature as it is the hallmark of a strong and durable democracy. In several instances, our legislature has intervened as a watchdog. Recall the instance of the historic 2006 constitutional amendments (otherwise called third term).”
He further lamented that the party system in Nigeria has not developed as it ought to as many legislators don’t understand how to be good party members and remain effective legislators.
Nnamani averred that supremacy of the party does not mean that the party bureaucrats should dictate to the legislature how it should do its work, noting that this will undermine an important pillar of constitutional democracy – the independence of the legislature.
He further explained that it does not mean that the leadership of the legislative house should be annexed to the headquarters of the political party such that the members of the party’s national executive committee should determine proceedings in the legislature.
“In making up his mind on issues for decision in the chambers, the legislator may consult the leadership of the party for direction and insights. That is why there are party caucuses in the legislative house. It is from the leadership of the caucus that the party radiates influence into the legislative chamber. Mark the word radiates. The choice of word is to convey the subtlety of reason and persuasion. It is not a matter of issuing diktats and reading riots acts.”
“Party leaders should be persons who command respect from the party members such that the legislators from the party will naturally look up to them for guidance. Also, the role of the whips in the legislature is to ensure coordination and directions of members toward the legislative agenda of the ruling party and the opposition party”.
On his part, former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Dimeji Bankole, disagreed with the former Senate President, saying party supremacy and party discipline is an assumption that they need to negotiate to work towards so that Nigerians can get the dividend of democracy.
According to him, you cannot reform or innovate without negotiating, as negotiation is an act, not a wish and not an assumption. He said if those in government refuse to negotiate to move things forward for the young people that are coming up, in 30 years from now, Nigerians will not be able to live in our country anymore.
He said, “If we do want economic development, if we do want our foster policies to be done and to have the results that we are looking at, we need to negotiate those positions.”
“Over 43 percent of Nigeria’s budget will be spent at the states and local governments. We know that the governors in Nigeria are the leaders of political parties in the states and local government levels, which means what you call party supremacy is the governors’ supremacy, and therefore there is no problem as far as there is full control of the party at the state level.”
“If we agree that we have a party supremacy, discipline at the state level, how come we are not solving primary health, primary education and all those basic things that affect local government? So, party supremacy does not mean you will have anything good, especially when the states’ assembly have no autonomy. No state assembly in Nigeria today can talk anyhow to a governor.
“The position I think we should be pushing is the act of negotiation. Not just between National Assembly executive but the judiciary as well, because some of us have experienced how the judiciary works and when you disagree, they tend to charge you to court. Then, you will understand how the judiciary works.”
“We know what the issues are. If, as leaders, we lack the character to negotiate, it means that we are personalising issues of importance. The demographic situation in Nigeria is changing. 30 years from now, you are going to have a bigger number of pensioners than we have today. What that means is that we have a lot more to spend on taking care of our elderly people. We cannot even pay salary and pension today, let alone think of what is going to happen in 20 or 30 years’ time.”