In my recollection, the best contribution Chief Akinjide ever made in the democratic process was the speech he delivered at the Constituent Assembly on November 16, 1977… The only point of disagreement I had with him was the issue of the presidential system of government, which he endorsed but which I disagreed with… To me that speech still stands as his legacy in the defence of the presidential system of government.
To me that speech still stands as his legacy in the defence of the presidential system of government. For the benefit of readers, I hereby present the speech. Looking at the Draft, power is vested in four clear institutions and this was deliberate, having regard to our experience of the last 17 to 20 years. The first institution is the People of this country. The second is the President. The third is the Legislature, and fourth is the judiciary. You will and that all are evenly balanced and that one serves as a check on the other.
I will now move to the next subject which is the Presidency. There has been a lot of debate and a lot of contribution on this point . So, I do not think I can really improve seriously on the argument advanced. However, Mr Chairman, I am a convinced believer in the Presidential system. There are definite reasons for this and I will try to give some of them.
This is third reason. We did approve that the Senate should have the power to review Ministerial materials assembled by the President. If it is not in the Draft, then it must be an omission, the printer’s error. I am sure, at the appropriate time, at the Committee Stage, it will be restored. In the case of the Prime Minister, there is no power of review but in the case of the President you have power to review.
Mr Chairman, I will touch briefly the Sharia. I was involved at the Sub-Committee level which worked on this particular subject, and also involved at the CDC level on this subject, and at the drafting stage. I asked myself: What was the cause of the controversy? I think the causes are two. One, a lot of big names got unnecessarily involved in the controversy, so people thought there must be something in it. The second reason, to my mind, is a misunderstanding.
Since the creation of the States, we have already got the Federal Intermediate Appeal Court which is between the High Court and the Supreme Court, so that the State Sharia Court of Appeal, you cannot straight to the Supreme Court because you cannot jump that gap. Something just has to be done. No matter on what line of argument you are, there has to be an appeal somewhere between the Supreme Court and State Sharia Court of Appeal.
Nigeria Latest News, Nigeria Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: PremiumTimesng - 🏆 3. / 78 Read more »
Source: PremiumTimesng - 🏆 3. / 78 Read more »
Source: PremiumTimesng - 🏆 3. / 78 Read more »
Source: PremiumTimesng - 🏆 3. / 78 Read more »
Source: PremiumTimesng - 🏆 3. / 78 Read more »
Source: PremiumTimesng - 🏆 3. / 78 Read more »