Parliamentary System: To Be Or Not To Be

Nigeria gained independence from Britain in 1960, after several years of colonial rule. Expectedly, Nigeria adopted the parliamentary system of government, which is the one prevailing in Britain and many other Commonwealth countries. The parliamentary system of government is one in which the party or a coalition of parties with the greatest representation in the parliament forms the government, with its leader becoming the Prime Minister. In this regime, executive powers are exercised by members of parliament appointed by the prime minister to the cabinet. The party or parties in the minority serve in opposition to the majority and have the duty to challenge the programmes and policies of the government regularly. This system of government is mostly regulated by conventions rather than statutes. The prime minister may be removed from power whenever he loses the confidence of a majority of the ruling party or of the parliament. One of the major features of the parliamentary system is individual and collective responsibility, which ensures the accountability of the government to the legislature and, thus, the populace.

The collective responsibility of ministers to the parliament takes different forms. First and foremost, it signifies that the government remains in office only so long as it retains the confidence of the parliament and that all ministers stand or fall together with that government. Ministers must support government policies, but they must also resign or seek the dissolution of the government if defeated in parliament on a matter of confidence (for instance, a vote on the budget). Collective responsibility implies that ministers are bound by the decisions of the cabinet, even when they had no part in their discussion or decision. Second, all members of the government speak in concert in parliament, unless the prime minister relieves them of that duty. This can happen when the government has no stated policy on an issue and allows a free vote to take place in parliament or when the prime minister allows a member of his or her government to differ publicly from a policy. The principle of ministerial responsibility ensures that the government acts as one entity and that this entity is answerable and accountable to the parliament. This was well captured in Section 83 of the 1960 Constitution, which states that “the cabinet shall be collectively responsible for any advice given to the Governor-General by or under the general authority of any minister of the government of the Federation in the execution of his office.”

During the first republic, a parliamentary system of government was in operation under the 1960 and 1963 Constitutions. This lasted until January 1966, following the military intervention in the government of Nigeria. A constituent assembly was put together towards the end of military rule in 1978, leading to the draft 1979 Constitution, which established the presidential system of government for the second republic. It was the first time Nigeria was experimenting with the presidential system of government, comprising the executive and the legislature as separate and autonomous bodies. Although the president wields the same powers as the prime minister in the parliamentary system, he has no control over them and is not part of parliament. In the presidential system, the country was divided into constituencies and senatorial districts, which produced the parliamentarians, while the president was elected by the people through direct ballot. And this has been one of the major reasons against the presidential system, as it is said to be overbloated and too expensive to sustain.

Presently, and even with the separation from the executive, parliamentarians in Nigeria have no mind of their own other than to do the bidding of the executive. Requests from the executive to the parliament are not properly scrutinized before blanket approval is granted; candidates nominated for confirmation of the parliament scale through parliamentary screening as a matter of course; and the legislature is more of an extension of the executive. What would then happen were the prime minister to be a member of parliament in Nigeria together with his cabinet members? It will only be a matter of garbage in, garbage out, and the people will be the worst for it. In the other jurisdictions where parliamentary democracy is practiced, the prime minister labours to convince parliamentarians on certain policy issues, and it does not take time for a vote of no confidence to be passed in deserving cases. That can never happen in Nigeria, where the parliament is busy padding the budget to take care of the pecuniary interests of its members. In fact, the parliament would most likely not sit on most occasions, preferring rather to announce wild approvals for executive policies without debate.

Ideally, the parliament should be a check on the executive, performing oversight functions over government ministries, departments, and agencies. The parliament should ensure the implementation of the appropriation law to ensure compliance and avoid corruption and waste. Where the parliament is up and doing in the discharge of its constitutional duties, the executive is tamed and assisted to perform maximally, under the doctrine of checks and balances. In the case where the parliament is truly independent and autonomous, dictatorial policies and actions are curtailed, corruption is easily exposed and tackled, and the people will feel the positive impact of the government. I honestly do not think that Nigeria has advanced to a state where the leader of the ruling party (prime minister) is made to sit together in the same chamber with parliamentarians and his ministers. The influence will be overbearing and overwhelming, to the great disadvantage of the people. If part of the agitation for a return to the parliamentary system of government is to save costs, we then need to choose between money and progress. We have had enough of the presidential system to gather the experience needed to stabilize that option, whereas we have only had one parliamentary experience. We can build on these experiences to define our own brand of democracy rather than go back to the parliamentary system. In any case, we will still have the same Independent National Electoral Commission, the same election tribunals, and indeed, the same Nigeria Police Force. The challenge to me is to build on our institutions to insulate them from political interference and to have them manned by people who are strong enough to stave off such unwarranted incursions. The other point is that the parliamentary system of government is more like a unitary affair, which cannot suit the case of Nigeria with all its multi-ethnic and multi-religious entities. Let us retain the presidency and improve on it.

I met this young man through his father, Pastor Shyngle Wigwe, at the headquarters of the Redeemed Christian Church of God in Ebute-Metta, Lagos. He was very committed in his devotion and stood out amongst the rest, given his imposing stature. Later on, when I had the occasion to sit with him and his wife as a panelist during a couples’ seminar, I got to know him as the father of Herbert. Many years later, I got a phone call from one of my mentors in the legal profession to quickly join him in Ikoyi. I raced down there. It turned out to be a legal assignment involving Herbert. When I eventually met him, he was very cool, calm, and relaxed. It turned out that he was then the one preaching to me about the need for patience and cooperation with the system. While waiting for the interview, I had cause to engage him on many issues, from politics to the economy to his faith in God and even legal matters. Herbert was very knowledgeable, courageous, and daring indeed. But he was also very gentle, firm, and humble.

After explaining the legal issues involved in the matter at hand to him, he then dropped a bombshell when he stated emphatically that he was going to enroll to study law. I asked him how. With all his crowded schedules and the busy routine of steering the ship of the big Access Bank,. He would read every letter sent to him and respond when necessary. Always ready to assist, Herbert would link you up with anyone, so long as it would add value to you. When I got to know that he had actually enrolled in the law course, I sent him a message asking why he would not seek permission from senior lawyers before crossing from banking to law. Later on, it was time for us to travel together. Herbert greeted the pilot familiarly and warmly, joking with the hostesses as we climbed the plane to take our seats. He was very disciplined with his diet, taking tiny little bits of a specially prepared nutritious diet but skillfully passing the mendemendes (we call them junks) to me. What is mine? I guzzled everything and washed it down.

After our engagement, he then took me to his house, asking me to sit in the inner chamber. I just stood on my feet, wondering how he expected me to sit in his private chamber as a first-time visitor to his house. When he got back from where he had gone to instruct his aides to prepare food for me and noticed that I was still standing up, he queried me thusly: Are you not my lawyer, who is supposed to know all my secrets? He just left me there, dazed, and went about his meetings. I then looked at myself, this village boy, in this mansion with one of the biggest bankers in town! I collapsed my little frame on the sofa and began to devour the rich diet placed before me. I even slept off when the air conditioner had done its work on me. Back in Lagos, he took me straight to his office and asked me to sit down and feel at home. How? In this big palace? Herbert was very jovial, down to earth, and unassuming. He touched everyone that crossed his path. No doubt Nigeria has lost a gem, but I still believe that the owners of the Chopper can be brought to book. Rest in power, man of God, and man of the people.

This article was written by: Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN

Source: TheNigeriaLawyer