Why Reps threw out FOI Bill - Deputy Speaker

Usman NafadaThe cold attitude of members of the House of Representatives to the Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill has been causing ripples in some quarters in Nigeria. Deputy Speaker of the House, Honourable Usman Nafada, who presided over proceedings on the day the bill was rejected, in this interview with Ag. Group Politics Editor, Idowu Samuel, explains the problems with the Bill.

The Freedom of Information Bill has been on the table since the advent of democracy, but the House of Representatives refrained from passing it last week. What is the reason for that?
Who told you that?

But the House did not pass the bill...
I believe that the sponsors of the bill need to educate other members of the House on what the bill is all about. To some members, this bill is saying that all information about any authority or individual must be revealed at any time a request is made for such information. It may be so, but you have to tell them the limitations of the bill and I believe some of our members do not know that. So, the sponsors of the bill must do extra work towards educating every member on how it would not infringe on their individual or collective interests. We have not thrown away the bill, we are taking it again soon.

You have gone through it and you are familiar with it; what is your own attitude to the bill?
Yes, I have gone through the bill, but it is not my responsibility to tell members whether to pass it or throw it away. My own is to preside and when I do that, I consider the interest of the majority. You were there on the day the bill was presented, the majority had the day and I ruled in their favour.

We learnt that an alteration had been made to the bill such that it should read “Right to Information” and not “Freedom of Information”. It was said that the former president made allusion to that. What would the House do on that?
Yes, the former president pointed the attention of the National Assembly to that before he left. But the problem now is that most members don’t seem to be aware of that. If we all agree on that, the only thing we could do is to add the observation by the former president by way of amendment and then put the whole bill the way we want it to be. But we are yet to arrive at that level now.

Another attempt is now being made by the National Assembly to amend the 1999 Constitution. What are the areas that you as a leader would want the amendment to cover?
Well, we have not formed our committee yet. It is after doing that that we could draw the guidelines. We are not the ones amending the constitution, but members of the public. We have to call for a public hearing and then allow Nigerians to speak on the areas they prefer to be amended in the constitution. We are in a democracy where everybody must have a say and that precludes the National Assembly from dictating the areas that should be amended. We should learn to listen and then do what the people say. That is the function of the National Assembly as far as lawmaking business is concerned.

Some members are in suspense on the issue of reorganisation of the House standing committees. What is the stage of reconstitution now?
The fact of the matter is that we have not dissolved any committee. The issue is that some members are in as many as eight committees, while some do not enjoy membership of more than two. What we are doing now is trying to moderate the distribution of committees so that one member would not be having more committee membership than his colleagues. It would not be good if one member is on five committees, while some are on only two. Again, there are some committees that have no chairmen and we will try and find chairmen for them. We are talking about committees on the Police, land transport and African integration. These are available chairmanship slots which we are considering filling.

The House has been embarking on probe of different sectors from the start to the end of the tenure of the past civilian administration. The general impression is that the probe is targeted at some individuals. Is it?
No, we are not targeting anybody and that is the reason we said the probe of the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), for instance, should start from 1999 to 2008. We did not say the probe should stop at 2007, we included the current year and we extended it to those currently serving in NNPC. It includes the current president and members of the National Assembly.

Why do you think the Presidency was not keen about initiating probe into the activities of the past administration? Why is it the National Assembly that has taken the gauntlet?
I don’t know where you got the idea that the executive arm should initiate probes. The constitution has empowered the National Assembly to investigate; there is no other place to look for that power of investigation. If the executive also has that power in the constitution, it does not matter who starts the investigation at any point in time.

As a principal officer in the House, how would you rate the performance of this set of legislators?
I am only six months in office and I need time to assess the standard and make comments.

But you have been around all along observing and that should give you the ability to assess. Shouldn’t it?
We have a peculiar problem at the moment and that may not be too worrisome; more than 80 per cent of our members are new. Some had had the experience about legislative assignments from the state Houses of Assembly where they came from. All the same, there are many who came in and started learning the process. I think we need some sort of retreat to put them on track by making them learn the rudiments of legislative practices. We would ensure that every member of the parliament would be in attendance. If we are able to do that, I believe things would be alright. But so far, I think we are not faring badly.

When are you going to organise that retreat?
It may come this year, perhaps at the beginning of the second quarter.

Some political analysts have been advocating the independence of the National Assembly. Now that you are in charge, how would you guarantee such kind of independence if only to settle the case once and for all?
When you are talking about independence, that could only come with financial autonomy. In a situation where you are cap-in-hand begging for money, t you don’t have any independence. Consider the case of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC); it is not independent because it is an appendage of the Federal Government which votes money for it. It is only when you have the financial independence that you could call yourself independent.

People who watch you preside tend to conclude that you have a militant approach to leadership. They say often that you are always in a hurry to bang the gavel. Could that be true?
When you are president, you are there neither to represent the leadership nor yourself. I have never been there as Usman Bayero Nafada, I have always been there as the deputy speaker. We have a brief that was given to us by the clerk and you are expected to follow the brief. When you get to the House, you are given the brief and you try to follow the brief prepared for you accordingly. So, I try at all times to follow the brief. It is out of order to do anything out of the brief prepared for you. We have been watching other parliaments and you must have noticed that once the lawmakers are in the chambers, they get serious.