A major constitutional crisis appears in the offing in Ekiti State, as indications emerged yesterday that Senate might reject President Olusegun Obasanjo�s proclamation of a state of emergency in the state.
The Senate, which along with the House of Representatives, reconvenes tomorrow, is required by section 305(6)(b) of the 1999 Constitution to approve the presidential proclamation otherwise it will lapse.
But many senators, according to THISDAY information, have started to mobilise their colleagues to oppose confirmation of the proclamation on the ground that the conditions, which the constitution specified must be present before emergency rule could be declared in any part of the federation were not present in Ekiti before the President decided to suspend the democratic order in the state.
The information adds that the opposing senators are also arguing that if an emergency situation existed at all, the Federal Government, which shirked its responsibility of providing security and protection for the constitutional government in the state created it.
Consequently, they argue that the proper thing for the Senate to do in the circumstance is to refuse approval and ask the Federal Gover-nment to restore democratic and constitutional order in the state in order �not to lay a bad precedent in which all it takes to overthrow a state governor is for the central government to sponsor dissidents to cause crisis so as to create an emergency situation that will lead to the proclamation of a state of emergency.�
THISDAY information from the Presidency yesterday confirmed the growing ranks of senators expressing objection to the proclamation but stated that the matter was being �handled appropriately.�
The President had last week proclaimed emergency rule in Ekiti following the political crisis that arose from the failed attempt to impeach Governor Ayo Fayose and his deputy, Chief Biodun Olujimi.
The President had cited the emergence of three claimants to the governorship of the state, Fayose, Olujimi and Speaker of the House of Assembly, Chief Friday Aderemi, as creating a situation that could lead to the breakdown public order and public safety.
He subsequently suspended the governor, his deputy and the House and appointed a former military governor of Oyo and Ogun States, Brig-Gen. Adetunji Olurin, as the sole administrator of the state.
In a nationwide broadcast the President said he took the action in order to save the state from anarchy, explaining that he had published the proclamation in a gazette that had been forwarded to the National Assembly for confirmation as provided in section 305 of the constitution.
Although there were mixed reactions to the proclamation with more people approving of it in the belief that it would avert anarchy in the state, the balance appears to be tilting against it in the Senate as more senators begin to contemplate the wider political implications of the suspension of democratic rule in Ekiti.
Senators who spoke anonymously to THISDAY said many of their colleagues were expressing fears that Ekiti might be an experiment for the implementation of larger agenda aimed at reversing the losses inflicted on the Presidency by the defeat, in April, of the President�s attempt to extend his tenure.
�The growing fear is that following the facts of the case in Ekiti, it might a way of testing the waters. Some of our colleagues think that the crisis in the state was sponsored to create an emergency situation so that the government could be sacked,� a senator said, adding: �If it works in that state, it can work elsewhere, and indeed in the whole of the country.�
The senator cited the problems in Anambra and Plateau States, saying they were similar to the Ekiti crisis. �The main problem was the failure of the actors to follow the due process laid down in our constitution,� he said, explaining that once the proper procedures were bye passed, there was bound to be a crisis.
He pointed to the �absurdity of six out of 24 members of the House in Plateau, claiming to have begun an impeachment proceeding against the governor, when they fall far short of the figure required by the constitution to kick-start the process not to talk of consummating it.�
The senator said many of his colleagues were alarmed that �that was going on under the supervision of a Federal Government agency (the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC,) in a volatile state like Plateau.�
According to him, �Every discerning Nigerian can see that the Federal Government has embarked on a mission to provoke crisis in that state. And when that happens, no one can imagine the violence that it will precipitate. What will the people want us to do? Accept to approve an avoidable emergency rule?�
Another senator told THISDAY that there was a growing feeling that emergency rule was avoidable in Ekiti and that it was precipitated by the Federal Government, adding that the emerging consensus was that if it was preventable then the Senate should right the wrong that had been done.
He said: �The point is that the Senate must not be seen to be legalising avoidable truncation of democratic order. If the Federal Government fails to act in its area of responsibility and allows the situation to degenerate, it must not be allowed to hold another party responsible for its act of omission.�
The senator said from the facts of the Ekiti case, �it is obvious that the Federal Government did not only precipitate the crisis, using the EFCC, it also deliberately refused to arrest the drift towards the undermining of the constitution.�
He said many of his colleagues are wondering why the Federal Government refused to call the acting chief judge, Justice Kayode Aladejana, who was appointed by the House, to order even after the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Alfa Belgore, had informed him that his (Aladejana) appointment was improper.
He stated: �You will recall that the view of the chief justice on the unconstitutionality of that appointment was corroborated by the Attorney General of the Federation, Chief Bayo Ojo. Why then did the police oblige the speaker of the House who claimed to be acting governor on the basis of what the chief law officer of the federation had said was unconstitutional?�
According to him, several of his colleagues are without doubt that the Ekiti crisis is a script with wider dimensions that must be terminated at this stage, and the best way to do that is to withhold legislative approval for the proclamation.
Asked if this would not lead to anarchy in the state as Governor Fayose appeared to be unpopular with the people, he said: �The issue is that we have a constitution, which specifies ways of doing things. We have to elect to obey our constitution because the alternative to that is anarchy. So, the people must understand this. Two, the growing view among senators is that it was the Federal Government that exacerbated the situation by failing to provide adequate security for the protection of the constitutional government of the state.�
He said many of his colleagues believed that what was right must be done, and that included restoring the constitutional government of the state with the Federal Government discharging its responsibility of providing security.
�Once the Federal Government instructs the police to do its job, normalcy will be restored,� he argued.
Expectedly, nocturnal meeting took over Abuja yesterday as pro and anti proclamation senators met to strategise on how to deal with the presidential request for approval.
By section 305(6)(b), the support of two-thirds majority of all the members of each chamber of the National Assembly is required for approval.
Oct252006