By Omolara Akindeko

THE beauty of democracy is the liberty to choose freely. Its attractive ingredi­ents include seeming representation of diverse views, opinions and tendencies. But, perhaps, the principle of separation of powers with inbuilt checks and balanc­es among the legislature, the executive and the judiciary is the most cherished aspect of constitutional rule.

The Nigerian political structure is largely borrowed from the American Presidential system, where each arm of government takes pride in asserting its roles within the confines of the Consti­tution. In the United States, Congress’ oversight authority derives from its “im­plied” powers in the Constitution, public laws, and House and Senate rules. It is an integral part of the American system of checks and balances.

Congressional oversight “is oversight by the United States Congress over the executive branch, including the numer­ous U.S. federal agencies. Congressional oversight includes the review, monitor­ing, and supervision of federal agencies, programmes, activities, and policy imple­mentation. Congress exercises this pow­er largely through its committee system, covering authorisation, appropriations, investigative and legislative hearings by standing committees; specialised inves­tigations by select committees; and re­views and studies by congressional sup­port agencies and staff.”

Oversight is an implied rather than an enumerated power under the U.S. Con­stitution. The Congress does not have the authority to conduct inquiries or investi­gations of the Executive, to have access to records or materials held by the Execu­tive, or to issue subpoenas for documents or testimony from the Executive.

Oversight also derives from the varied powers of the Congress in the Constitu­tion. It is implied in the legislature’s au­thority, among other powers and duties, to appropriate funds, enact laws, raise and support armies, declare war, impeach and remove from office the president, vice president, and other civil officers.

The Watergate Scandal, which dis­graced President Richard Nixon out of office and the Monika Lewinsky affair, which rattled former President Bill Clin­ton are remarkable examples of the use of oversight powers by the American Con­gress.

The Nigerian National Assembly is be­coming very infamous for trivialising its powers to oversight the executive arm of government. Rather than spend time on building solid frameworks for good gov­ernance, Nigerian lawmakers have be­come quite notorious in harassing Cabi­net Ministers and heads of government agencies.

A damning profile of the Nigerian Leg­islature was painted by Eugene Enahoro, a columnist in the Daily Trust recently. His verdict: “Our virtually unproductive and yet expensively maintained NASS, has acquired a reputation for nefarious activities, such as using constituency funds for personal benefits; demanding kickbacks from Ministries, Departments and Agencies before discharging their constitutional functions; and collecting outrageous unearned allowances, while at the same time consistently failing to meet stipulated number of sittings.

“Time and again, the NASS has failed to resolve issues of mis-governance and corruption, while using their oversight power to collect gratification to facilitate cover-ups, and dampen the political will to bring perpetrators of dishonorable acts to justice. In recent memory, there was the Maina Pension Scam in which the Chairman of the Pension Reform Task Team could not account for N195 billion. Although the NASS set up an in­vestigative committee, the report wasn’t implemented. There was the failure to investigate the $15 million private jet arms scandal in which cash was sent to South Africa for a purported arms deal. There was the kerosene subsidy scam in which several billions of naira was stolen and they neither issued an indictment nor took concrete steps to resolve the is­sue. The NASS also failed to investigate senators, who were accused of benefiting from the N32.8 billion Police Pension Funds loot.”

If the foregoing assessment is debat­able, what about the performance re­cord of the NASS? In its first legislative year ended June 9, 2016, the Senate received 271 bills, four of them from the Executive. In twelve months, only seven bills were passed, giving the Senate a 4.1 percentage score. In the lower chamber, 685 bills were presented, but only 85 were passed while 130 were referred to committees. In concrete terms, the House of Representatives scored 12.4 per cent.

With such dismal performance, Nige­rian lawmakers are reputedly the high­est paid in the world, going by a report published by The Economist Magazine. A Nigerian Senator earns N353, 750,988 yearly in consolidated emolument. This amount is 52 per cent higher than what lawmakers in Kenya are paid, be­ing the second highest in Africa. Mean­while, minimum wage remains N18,000 monthly or N216,000 a year for most hapless Nigerians.

To whom much is given, a lot is expect­ed. The performance, pronouncements and posture of these over pampered lawmakers must be worrisome to many Nigerians. Hiding under the guise of car­rying out oversight functions, they have become a pain in the neck, dabbling into issues that are best resolved at the Execu­tive level.

The latest of such infraction is the MTN saga. The Nigerian Communications Commission, in exercise of its regulatory role, had in October, last year, imposed a N1.04 trillion fine on MTN for failing to disconnect unregistered SIM lines. After several representations and negotiations, including a visit to Nigeria by South Afri­can President, Jacob Zuma, the fine was reduced to N330 billion. These negotia­tions, with a court case instituted by the telecoms company, happened over a pe­riod of eight months, inflicting a lot of pressure on its business.

Related News

Meanwhile, the Senate and the House Committees on Communications had called several meetings with MTN and NCC, seeking information, more appro­priately seeking relevance in a matter that is purely within the purview of the regulatory agency. Many analysts have expressed reservations on the overbear­ing posture of these committees, which duplicate efforts, asking ministers to come and explain the workings of their office at the National Assembly.

At the last count, the House of Rep­resentatives committee had called five meetings, seeking to teach NCC how to discharge its functions by interpreting its enabling law. In the wisdom of the House Committee Chairman, Hon. Saheed Fi­jabi, the fine on MTN “should have been doubled to about N3 trillion and not even the N1.04 trillion they were asked to pay.”

If the committees were diligent enough, they would have found that Section 73 of the NCC Act says: The Commission shall have powers to resolve disputes between persons, who are subject to this Act (the parties) regarding any matter under this Act or its subsidiary legislations.”

The import of the above proviso is that dispute resolution with respect to op­erations of the NCC is an exclusive Ex­ecutive function under Section 73 of the NCC Act. There is no room for interven­tion by the legislature!

These two committees must be oblivi­ous of the issues, governing the telecom­munications industry. Unlike other sec­tors that require massive funding from government, the ICT industry is an en­abler of economic activities. With right policies and operating environment, it acts as a catalyst for job and wealth cre­ation.

The National Bureau of Statistics, re­porting the performance of the sector recently said: “In real terms, the tele­communications sector contributed N1,411.74 billion to GDP in the first quar­ter of 2016, or 8.83%, an increase of 0.5% points relative to the same quarter of the previous year.

“In contrast with the economy as a whole, which recorded a real growth rate of -0.36% in the first quarter, growth in the telecommunications sector increased to 5.00% in the first quarter, from 3.49% in the final quarter of 2015. The share of telecommunications in total real GDP had declined throughout 2010 to 2014; but for the last five quarters, growth in telecommunications has been higher, meaning the trend has reversed.”

The suggestion of the committees for a strict enforcement of the fines on MTN flies in the face of logic. The inten­tion of the penalty is not to raise funds for government, rather it is a regulatory function designed like other regulations, to ensure quality service, protection of consumers’ rights and national interest. Besides, the NCC cannot maintain a rigid position in protecting an industry that is yet to realise its full potentials.

The Executive Vice Chairman of NCC, Prof. Umar Danbatta, while signing the settlement agreement with MTN, said the decision to vary the penalty “was taken based on professional and global best practices, in line with the NCC core value ‘to be fair, firm and forthright.’”

For emphasis, he added “the Com­mission has always carried industry and stakeholders along in taking transparent regulatory actions”, and emphasised that at no point will the regulator do anything to jeopardise the business health of the entire sector.

“We were careful not to take decisions that are likely to cripple the business in­terest of the operators we regulate. Be­sides, the downturn of the global econo­my is biting hard on everybody and every sector, so we must therefore be sensitive and flexible in our decisions”, the NCC boss said.

  • Akindeko is Executive Director, The Leaders International Institute, Abuja.

abuja