Still on the recall of Senator Dino: The Senate protecting its own against the wishes of the people

One man’s meat is another man’s poison; so they say, and so we say when the people of Kogi West complain about their Senator. They got what they asked for. Citing low performance, distant representation, lack of constituency office and zero town hall meetings as the reason for an attempt to recall Senator Dino Melaye, one could almost pity the constituents of Kogi West for the choice of representation they are stuck with. Dino is peculiar because he has brought unnecessary attention to his people and reduced the hitherto distinguished position to an undistinguished level. He entertains at the slightest opportunity instead of making meaningful contributions. 

The people however still have a Constitutional right to determine what they want. We say we get the leader we deserve, but the people of Kogi West are now been represented by a leader they don't want and have a right to remove and replace him - by law.

With a court order, upon Dino's application to the court asking that 'status quo' be maintained, it has become imperative that the INEC does forthwith suspend the recall process as the court has ordered. The wishes of the electorate as well as the functions of INEC will simmer down while Senator Dino can now sleep with his eyes closed. There are claims that Senates attempt to investigate the INEC chairman on his role at TETFUND made him abandon this process, but this may not be true and INEC has claimed it is not true.

There were rife and well placed insinuations that the Governor of Kogi State was instrumental to the setting in motion of the recall process. While this may be seen in some quarters as inconsequential, it goes a long way to show how power relationship is the driving force in our polity today. Dino versus Bello is the cause of the brouhaha in Kogi West and not probably the wishes of the people.

I have always advocated the use of the weapon of recall as a shield for voters and I still believe in its efficacy. In 'Our weapon of recall'  https://mylegalviews.wordpress.com/2012/11/15/our-weapon-of-recall/, I advocated that sections 69 and 100 of the constitution can be achieved if need be. It should however come from the people and not orchestrated as in the instant case, though that in itself can not invalidate the process so long as the constitutional requirements are satisfied.

The purpose of this analysis is to correct the assertion of Deputy Senate President on the issue of recall. While agreeing that the use of an advertorial by the Attorney-General of Kogi State to drive home the point of recalling Dino is immoral and financial recklessness, the claim that the Senate must sanction the recall process is a misplaced argument from the Senator.

The Deputy Senate President berated the Kogi State Attorney-General for his position in the advertorial and described him as a professional liability to the State. Perhaps because of lack of knowledge or for the self-serving purpose of the Senate, he interpreted section 68 of the Constitution as a sanction of the propriety of a recall process. How a lawmaker of his status and years of representation turns a law on its head still baffles me.

Section 68 (1) (h) provides that ‘A member shall vacate his seat if the President of the Senate receives a certificate under the hand of the Chairman of INEC stating that the provisions of this Constitution have been complied with in respect of the recall process’ and 68 (2) provides that the Senate President shall give effect to the above so however that he shall first present evidence satisfactory to the Senate that the recall provision is applicable to the member affected. In this case, while INEC would have done the legal process required of it through its Chairman, the administrative duty and execution of the process remains in the Senate.

Ekweremadu and the Senate in extension misconstrued this for sanction of the process whereas it is only an administrative act on the part of the senate leadership. This misconception will remain until a Senator is actually recalled and the provisions of the law tested.

Whether it is Dino or another Senator, since a whole lot of them are undistinguished, let the recall process be tested and let us make the Senate a more serious organ. It is our claim that the wishes of the electorate that voted in a Senator can not be subjected to the whims and caprices of the Senate whether to give effect to or not.