THIS ADVERT SPACE IS AVAILABLE. CONTACT +2348036986103 NOW (CALL, SMS OR WHATSAPP) or Email: theforefrontng@gmail.com (MORE DETAILS HERE)

Monday, 17 July 2017

More trouble as Presidency drags Senate to Supreme Court over appointments

Image result for osinbajo and saraki



Nigeria - Report indicates that the presidency has dragged the Nigerian Senate to the Supreme Court of Nigeria. 

According to Daily Trust, the presidency seeks to determine its earlier stance that certain federal appointments should not require the Senate's confirmation. 

The presidency was said to have insisted that the refusal by the Senate to confirm the appointment of the EFCC boss, Ibrahim Magu, had more to do with politics than with the law. 



A legal advisory has since been prepared by judicial and legal experts as a working document in the presidency on the differences in the constitutional interpretations on matters of certain federal appointments.

The Senate had on July 4 passed a resolution suspending all issues relating to the confirmation of nominees and urged Acting President Yemi Osinbajo to respect the constitution and laws as they relate to nominees' confirmation. But the presidency's legal advisory has concluded that a judicial pronouncement preferably by the Supreme Court is what is needed at the moment. 

A government source quoted in the report said though it was the view of the presidency that certain federal appointments should not require the confirmation of the Senate based on Section 171 of the Constitution, the present administration had continued to send such appointments to the Senate pending the ultimate judicial interpretation of the matter. 

The source said: “The advisory which affirms the powers of the president to appoint in acting capacity into positions such as the EFCC chairmanship, also notes that in the recent past, the ministerial nomination of Late Babalola Borishade (Ekiti state) by President Olusegun Obasanjo was rejected repeatedly by the Senate.

 “In fact, it would be recalled that this particular nomination was presented four times in 18 months before it was eventually confirmed by the Senate.” The source further said the advisory unearthed a ruling of the Supreme Court on the matter where the current Chief Justice of the Federation, before his elevation as CJN had ruled in line with the view of the presidency on the matter. He said it was inaccurate to say the federal government or the presidency had started to act unilaterally on its own interpretation of Section 171. 

He continued: “This is because, even after the acting president, (who spoke when he was vice president in support of the view of some leading lawyers) the presidency has continued to send nominations to the Senate both while the president himself was around and while away by the acting president. 

“Since the time the acting president spoke and when Senate recently expressed its disagreement we have been sending nominations severally including into the INEC and other boards and commissions. So we are clearly not acting unilaterally based on our own interpretation of the law, even though we believe firmly we are right. 

“Here is the point, the presidency believes that Section 171 is clear that certain appointments do not require Senate consent, but the presidency is not already behaving as if it's interpretation of the law has become a policy. 

“The presidency is persuaded that its interpretation is the correct one, but we are conscious and aware of the fact that only a proper judicial ruling on the matter would make it a settled policy that sits right with the rule of law. 

That is why we have not stopped sending all manners of nominations to the Senate, most of which the Senate has actually confirmed, even well after the acting president spoke. “In fact the conclusion of the legal advisory on the matter is very clear that a judicial pronouncement preferably by the Supreme Court is what will settle the matter. 

According to that legal advisory the divergent positions being held by the executive and the legislature on the subject of confirmation is one that requires timely and ultimate resolution. Such resolution could only be reached through judicial process. 

Such interpretation would lay to rest the lingering crises between the two arms.” 

WHEN ON WEB VIEW SEE OUR TOP LEFT AND RIGHT SIDE BAR FOR LIVE STREAM NEWS CHANNELS (GLOBAL AND NIGERIAN )

LIKE US ON FACEBOOK  

FOLLOW US ON:
>BBM Channel: C002CB006 {WELCOME TO THE FOREFRONT
>{Instagram: the_forefront_nigeria }

Connect with Joshua Osagie (Blog owner)
 > facebook  (fan page) 
 > twitter
 > Instagram: osagiejoshua

Share this post with others on social media with options below.

JOIN OUR FACEBOOK PAGE FEED DOWN THE SITE (SWITCH TO WEB VIEW FOR PAGE UPDATES)

No comments:

Post a Comment

Disclaimer!!! Opinions expressed in comments do not represent THE FOREFRONT'S or Joshua Osagie's views. All participants are entitled to their opinions. Thank you!!!

YOUR COMMENT IS IMPORTANT. REWARDS STARTING FROM OCTOBER. DROP YOURS.

Advertise on the Forefront: For advert placement in the blog or advert posts like news updates, reach +2348036986103 [by call or WhatsApp].


TO GET ACCESS TO THE FOLLOWING WHEN YOU ARE ON MOBILE PHONE VIEW, SWITCH TO WEB VIEW DOWN THE BLOG:

1) SEE OUR TOP LEFT AND RIGHT SIDE BAR FOR LIVE STREAM NEWS CHANNELS (GLOBAL AND NIGERIAN )
2) VIA SHARES, COMMENTS AND LIKES, JOIN OUR FACEBOOK PAGE FEED DOWN THE SITE FOR PAGE UPDATES.
3) WHEN WE ARE STREAMING LIVE FOOTBALL MATCHES OR GENERAL SPORTS FOR BETTER SCREEN RESOLUTION.
SWITCH TO WEB VERSION NOW!