Home FEATURES Yes, Buhari Committed Offence But You Can’t Summon Him, Nwabueze Tells NASS

Yes, Buhari Committed Offence But You Can’t Summon Him, Nwabueze Tells NASS

Legal luminary and elder statesman, Professor Ben Nwabueze (SAN) has made it clear to the leadership of the National Assembly that the legislature does not have the power to summon President Muhammadu Buhari for violating the Constitution when he paid $496,000,000 to the U.S. government for the purchase of military aircraft, without the authorization of the National Assembly.

In a letter he wrote to the NASS leadership, dated April 27, Nwabueze, however, acknowledged that Buhari’s action was unpardonable for not getting the approval of the lawmakers before paying for the Tucano aircraft, but that he was not one of those that could be summoned by the National Assembly as provided in Section 89(1)(c) of the Constitution.

In the letter, Professor Nwabueze, an expert in constitutional law, said: “I commend you for the courage of the role you play in checkmating the incipient dictatorship of President Buhari.

“It is, to me, simply unpardonable that he should pay out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Federation the sum of U.S. four hundred and ninety six million dollars ($496,000,000) for the purchase of military aircraft without the authorization of the National Assembly as specifically required by Section 80 of the Constitution ‘in the expectation’, as he puts it in his letter, ‘that the National Assembly would have no objection’.”

He said said that ‎summoning Buhari to appear before the National Assembly to address it on the state of the nation and to answer questions in explanation of his action had raised questions as to whether the National Assembly has the power to so summon him, and whether it was proper for it to do so.

According to him, the word “summon” is defined in the dictionary as a “command or order by authority to appear”.

‎While admitting the Section 89(1)(c) of the Constitution empowers the Senate or the House of Representatives to “summon any person in Nigeria” he added that the president was not covered within the meaning of the term “any person” under the section because he is also the “Head of State” so proclaimed by Section 130(2) of the Constitution.

See also:  Kogi Gov, Ododo, Seeks FG Partnership To Accelerate Oil Exploration

He said: “The term ‘any person’ must therefore be viewed within the context of the concept of the state and the concept of Head of State.”

He explained that the concept of a head of state as a moderating agency was perhaps best effectuated by the provision in the Constitution of the French Fifth Republic (1958) and the Constitution of Romania (1991) under which the President of the Republic, as Head of State, is invested with power to “secure respect for the Constitution”, to “secure, by his arbitration, the regular functioning of the governing authorities as well as the continuity of the state”, and to serve as “guarantor of national independence and territorial integrity”.

Professor Nwabueze argued that the head of state is expected to take all such actions as may be required for dealing with a grave and immediate danger threatening the integrity of the state or its institutions and authority.

“Besides, Section 89 of the Constitution specifically provides that the power of the National Assembly to ‘summon any person in Nigeria’ is ‘subject to all just exceptions’. The exemption of the Head of State from the power is surely one of the ‘just exceptions’.

“Whilst President Buhari by his actions and utterances, may have brought humiliation and degradation to himself as president, he remains our Head of State, and should be treated as such, and accorded all the pomp and dignity appertaining to the office.

“He is entitled to appear before the National Assembly whenever he chooses to do so in order to deliver a state of the nation address, but whenever he goes to the National Assembly for this purpose he does so in state.”

Source: THISDAY. [myad]