[ad_1]
As a new administration takes charge in May this year, the issue of ministerial appointments becomes germane. Ministerial appointments are seen as a “special meal ticket”, where whosoever gets the plum appointment, as some people will say, has arrived.
This is so because appointive or elective positions in Nigeria confer on a person special status, connection and juicy contracts where money begins to flow. Though not a recent phenomenon, the embarrassing manner in which appointments are made nowadays is highly absurd and shameful. It became worse from the 1999 democratic dispensations where many interest based ministries were created. We have ministries like Inter-Governmental Affairs,
Police Affairs and Special Duties etc. that do not add any value to governance. These ministerial appointments were based mainly on being loyal party members, nominated by party stalwarts and to balance federal character among other primordial considerations. Many people are clamouring for portfolios to be attached because a non-attached ministerial portfolio before confirmation gives the Executive the leeway to have many ministerial positions created with many substantive ministers and ministers of states to serve various interests. Section 142 (2) gives the President the power to nominate persons for the post of minister who in turn has to be confirmed by the Senate. Section 147 (1) says: “There shall be such offices as Ministers of the Government of the Federation as may be established by the President.” This means the President has the discretion to handle ministerial matters, with its numbers and portfolio as he deems fit without any time frame to appoint them. But, as Nigerians at least, we expect him to be guided by competence, ability to deliver and not primordial considerations. Portfolio-attached ministerial nominee is for good governance.
A constitution amendment or resolution to this effect has been futile as the 9th Assembly jettisoned it a few weeks before the ministerial list was submitted. They saw the resolution passed by the 8th Senate mandating the President to attach portfolios as unnecessary. (The Guardian of July 24, 2019). One is of the opinion that there is no need for the Senate to confirm any nominee if, what the Senate does is to tell the candidate to take a “bow” because he or she is a former legislator. In the past, candidate to be confirmed had to tell a tale of how he was once a scavenger or motor park tout, and before you knew what was happening the person succeeds in dazzling the Senate to confirm his/ her appointment (case in point was former Minister of Foreign Affairs, late Olugbenga Ashiru).
Although the constitution did not specify the manner the Senate should confirm a min- isterial nominee, a semblance of decorum, seriousness and sense of duty is expected to be displayed by the Senate when carrying out this important national assignment. Section 147 (6) gives the Senate 21 days to complete the screening which means they should at least demonstrate some levels of thoroughness in this regard. Amendment to this section is seriously being clamoured for. What we find in Nigeria is laughable.
The nominee to be confirmed is made to face a whole plenary of the Senate answering general questions. Imagine a female Minister during the Obasanjo administration was being asked why she was not married during her question and answer session. One wonders whether this is what a serious Senate does for a serious task of confirmation. In the US and similar climes, confirmation of ministerial nominees is not done by the whole Senate or Parliament asking general questions that have nothing to do with the portfolio the nominee is going to be appointed eventually.
This is ridiculous. In all of these, the first thing the country can do is to make our constitution people oriented. The National Assembly should put the nation first and not their interests. We should allow ministers to come from the six geo-political zones instead from the 36 states of the federation including the FCT – for quality and not quantity. The argument to attach portfolios to ministerial appointments is in order to put round pegs in round holes. Section 142 (2) should be amended to add a time frame for the President to submit his ministerial list. Catchment areas and Federal Character have affected our socio-economic and political psyche. Meritocracy and not mediocrity should be considered when handling national assignments. The Federal Character section should be amended while ministerial appointments should not be seen as compensation for party stalwarts and loyalists but a call to service.
Above all, the annual budget defence and other confirmation of government nominees should face special committees with Senate and House committees in charge of those areas of competence handling the nominees instead of a whole plenary sitting for hours to do this. As the country enters a new democratic dispensation from May, 2023; and going for- ward, portfolio-attached ministerial appointments is a desideratum for transparency, accountability and good governance. The Executive and Senate should save itself from time wasting and embarrassing ventures of portfolio-less ministerial nominations and confirmation jamborees forthwith – this must stop.
[ad_2]
Source link
