4 hours ago
22
Professor Anthony Agbazuere is a Human Rights and Constitutional Lawyer. In this interview he talks about the six months suspension slammed on Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan for disobeying the Senate rule, says the Constitution empowers the Senate to make its rules, among others. JOY ANIGBOGU brings the excerpts:
The suspension of Senator Akpoti, is it lawful, is it just, is it fair? What do you think?
In the first place, I think it’s important that Nigerians at this stage, having talked about this issue for a reasonable time, should allow the Senate to do their job. I want to say that the Nigerian Constitution empowers the Senate, in fact just like very many other associations, empowers the Senate to make their rules. And now, I think there is also a confusion amongst some people. The issue of misconduct and sexual harassment are separate. So, what I think happened on Wednesday was the issue of misconduct, and by the provisions of that rule book of the Senate, there are certain things you are not expected to do on the floor of the Senate. That level of misconduct, that quantum of misbehavior, are things that nobody would tolerate. The Senate refused to tolerate it. And you will agree that in that Senate, there are very distinguished people that if they felt that the woman did the right thing, they would not have allowed this issue of suspension. And I think it is also good that there is a window that if she apologizes for the misconduct, not sexual harassment, that she could be forgiven. And that is an issue. And everybody that saw what happened that day, when it was played on Arise Television and all of that, will discover that it was wrong. In their rule book, it is stated that before you speak, you must speak from your seat, the seat allocated to you. She needed to have complied with that and then gone for that order 10, raised it from that particular seat. The last time she spoke Wednesday, it was from that seat where she had rejected. And from that seat, the camera was also able to capture her. So that is the issue. So as far as I’m concerned, the issue of misconduct is what the Senate has treated. And it is also shocking to me that the Senator did not take out time to read the contents of that rule book. You can see again that she submitted a petition and she didn’t know that she wasn’t supposed to sign. So that also begins to question the caliber of people that we elect into our National Assembly and stuff like that. So as far as I’m concerned, I believe it’s a family affair. If they put their house in order, they could still move ahead and forgive her. I think that it’s also not good for Nigeria that the Senate, the upper chamber of our legislative arm of government, should be allowed to be wasting time on trivialities like this. So my position is that the misconduct exists as a window. If the woman apologises, it’s fine. The issue of sexual harassment is also separate. She has submitted her petition with the fault that she hasn’t submitted to their committee, the ethics committee. Of course I know that by the rules, by the time it gets to hearing that matter, the Senate president will allow the deputy president to sit. I don’t know why he’s being over-dramatized like this.
I beg to differ on whether or not, with regards to the sexual harassment case, it’s actually linked to what occurred and has led to her suspension. Because she said that she raised Order 10 on the day and mentioned during the interview that she had with Arise News and possibly now stated in her petition that the reason why she felt marginalized and maligned by the Senate president was as a result of her refusal to certain favours he had asked for. So it’s quite linked. And that’s why a number of people have said that perhaps an investigation into the matter ought to have been done and given fair hearing by the committee before a decision was made. Especially because people also question the integrity of this process and the fairness of the hearing. What do you have to say about that?
They are distinct. For example, if you contested an election and you feel you were rigged, there is time given by law when you can file your election petition. 21 days. Then you bring it after 30 days or after two months. And you say somebody is not treating you fairly. You must keep to the rules in anything you do. So what she should have done that day should have been to go to that new seat. She would have fired her missile. It would have made sense. You cannot place something on nothing and expect it to stand. She caused her own problem. For her to have signed that petition by herself with the rules that don’t allow, showed that she wasn’t reading the rules. That is the point. So they are distinct. If you talk about unjust treatment, you see that issue of sexual harassment is a thing that is according to her because I watched her on Arise. She said it happened on the 8th of December 2023 and that she even lied to her husband. Why did you lie to your husband when your husband asked you? Apart from that, after that time too, I also discerned in the course of my inquiries that she is a member of the International Parliamentary Union and the only female nominated in that Senate. And because of that, she’s been travelling, even after that December 2023, even with the Senate President, they went to several places, Switzerland, Zanzibar, and so on. Again, that some of our bills, the gold bill, is already gone through the second reading. And again, the diaspora banking has already gone past the first reading. So these things are not good. Maybe if you think you don’t have a good case, you now raise another issue as if it’s blackmail. So that is my worry. So my take is that even when you think you have a good case, handle it well so that you don’t also create a wrong for yourself when trying to achieve your right.
Prof, in all of what you have said, I’d like to debunk some quick holes there. Let’s be objective, because a woman travels with the Senate President doesn’t mean she doesn’t have a right to say if there was any case of sexual harassment. She just needs to prove that in court. Prof, you also supported the Senate here and you didn’t see anything wrong as a professor of law with the court order that she shouldn’t sit on that committee, which the Senate Committee on Ethics violated. You’ve not said anything about that. You didn’t see anything wrong. You also didn’t see anything wrong with the fact that a woman’s fate was determined without the woman even saying anything on that panel. You never saw anything wrong with that. Also, you never saw anything wrong with the fact that the altercation, as it were, was a shouting match between the Senate President and Senator Natasha Akpoti. The Senate President, too, said so many things during that altercation. I would suspend her. I would do this and all of that. It wasn’t that he was just keeping quiet while she was insisting on her right…
You never also talked anything about the order 10 that she said she was insisting on, which has to do with privileges of a senator. So there are many parts you left out…
I’m not delivering a lecture. You’re asking the questions that I’m answering. So it’s what you raised that I replied to. Number one. Number two, as far as I’m concerned, I know that the Supreme Court has variously stated that you don’t stop the National Assembly from doing their job and so on. But I know that if there is a court order pursuant to Section 287 of the Nigerian Constitution, everybody, every authority is bound to respect it. Yes. You didn’t ask me that, so I would have told you. And that’s one thing that is very clear. I don’t know if they were actually served.
They were served…
It’s not for me and you to begin to argue that. I’m saying if they were served, that they were supposed to have respected it. Since the matter is still in court, the court knows what to do. The Senate is supposed to be spending their time on more quality things after touching the matter the way they have done. Again, you talked about giving her a fair hearing. The committee invited her. She didn’t go. That was wrong, maybe because of the court order. Again, what they’re doing, like I said earlier, has to do with the misconduct. I know too well that even there, where you work, you have rules. You cannot, in the course of trying to fight for your own rights, also make some mistakes. You made some mistakes. And you can see, now she has represented her petition because she got it wrong. And they now reminded her that she was wrong. So the point to take home is that misconduct and the issue of sexual harassment are different, and that they should be so treated distinctly and that what was treated Wednesday was misconduct. And, as far as I’m concerned, honestly, she has a right to protest, assuming she’s been sexually harassed. But the point remains that she kept quiet for too long, and having kept quiet for too long, going close to that same person without complaining until she committed this misconduct. It could still be seen as blackmail. So these are the issues. But whether it is that or not, it is for the court now to decide. Don’t forget again that the wife of the Senate President also went to court. So the matter is also in court. And I also learnt she also filed a 100 million suit. Whether she has withdrawn it now or not, I don’t know. But out of the 250 billion suit filed by the wife of the Senate President, it’s also there. So it’s now for the court to decide. At the end of the misconduct, I thank God that there’s a window. If she now accepts to maybe say, look, for misconduct and not sexual harassment, I apologise.
English (US) ·