By Taiye Odewale
Abuja
Confusion seems to have enveloped the Senate over the recent requests by the Presidency for the confirmation of board members of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the Resident Electoral Commissioners (RECs).
The development followed the interpretation of section 171 of the Constitution by Vice President Yemi Osinbajo on such appointments.
Lawmakers, who offered insights into the dilemma of the Senate, yesterday, told Blueprint under anonymity, that the Senate had taken comments from the Presidency about its interpretation of Section 171 of the 1999 Constitution, very seriously.
Recent media reports have quoted the Presidency, particularly the Vice President, a professor of law, as having agreed with the submission of some lawyers that Section 171 empowers the President to name Heads of extra-Ministerial bodies without recourse to the Senate.
The Presidency and the lawyers have used that position to justify the likely appointment of the Acting Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Ibrahim Magu without screening in the Senate.
But, sources in the Senate said the position of the lawyers and the Presidency, has thrown up a constitutional crisis which further suggests that previous governments, including that of President Olusegun Obasanjo, the late Umaru Yar’Adua, the government of Dr. Goodluck Jonathan as well as the incumbent, President Muhammadu Buhari, might have acted against the law if the position of the Presidency is right.
“The Senate may have no other option than to hold back on the planned screening and confirmation of the Board members of the CBN, the Resident Electoral Commissioners (RECs) and other nominees sent to it for confirmation,” a senator said under anonymity.
The lawmaker said the Senate had also taken adequate notice of the motion by the House of Representatives, which advised the Presidency to head to the Supreme Court if it was not clear on the matter.
“As things are, a good number of Senators are pushing that the Senate takes the media reports of the Presidency’s position on Section 171 as government’s position since the reports have not been refuted,” explained the source.
