By Willy Eya, Taiwo Amodu and Chinelo Obogo
Nigerians reviewed Senate’s rejection of President Muhammad Buhari’s request for $29.96 billion loan and declared it was in order.
The consensus of opinion was that the presidentshould have consulted with and carried along the National Assembly leadership and intimated them of plans to borrow such huge funds for infrastructural development, among others, before sending a formal request to the lawmakers for consideration.
But, some said the president got what he deserved as he was allegedly aloof and did not do his homework well before sending in the foreign loan request.
Yesterday, at plenary, Senators threw out the president’s request to borrow almost $30 billion because no breakdown of how the money would be utilised was attached to the request.
In the correspondence to the Senate, the president only enumerated how a part of the loan was needed to arrest polio resurgence in the country but lawmakers were not impressed.
They threw out the request without a debate.
Former lawmaker and commissioner, Tanko Yakassai said Senate only acted within its mandate in rejecting Buhari’s request.
He also explained how such weighty request was done in time past. “It is within the power of the Senate either to approve or reject a request; the only thing we need to know is their reason for rejecting.
“As a former commissioner for Finance, and a former officer in the National Assembly, my opinion is that if government wants to borrow money, the usual thing is to invite the leaders of both chambers, the leaders of the party in power, and also, the opposition and brief them in detail what government will do with the money. They would also be given an idea how government intends to repay the money because there is no use borrowing money to invest in something that would not generate revenue, while you would leave the burden for the future generation. These are important pieces of information that you are required to give to the legislators.
“Unfortunately, sentiments have played a role in the relationship between the executive and the legislature. At the beginning, when there were issues as to who should be presiding officers of the Senate, I think some people in the executive and even the ruling party, did not behave with the future on their minds. They did not foresee the necessity of a cordial relationship between the executive and the legislature because none can succeed without the other.”
Yakassai also explained how the president could turn the situation around.
“It is not too late and he still has the right to make the request again. What the president needs to do is to invite principal officers of the National Assembly or direct Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and appropriate ministers, including Ministers for Finance and that of Budget and National Planning, to have a session with the Senate. It is through that that the legislators would be informed of government intentions…”
But Dr. Junaid Muhammed differed.
He said the president “must come down from his high horse” if he wants a favourable result from the National Assembly.
He said the decision of the Red Chamber must have been informed by the failure of the executive arm of government to convince the legislature on the essence of the loan just as he declared that foreign loan was not the solution to the present economic challenge facing the country. “I don’t know the reasons they gave but a loan of that magnitude is like a Treaty and the president on his own cannot pass a Treaty; the National Assembly must be carried along.
“What is happening now is like Deja vu— something happening again. I remember in 1982, President Shehu Shagari wanted a loan and a joint session of the National Assembly then insisted it must be tied to specific projects.
“The solution to the recession isn’t borrowing. President Buhari must tell us what he wants to use the loan for and the National Assembly must be adequately informed. He must be able to convince them.
“The issue here isn’t politics since the All Progressives Congress is in the majority in the Senate. Of course, if he cannot tell them, they have the right to reject his loan proposal.
“No head of government has the right to borrow money and expect them to rubberstamp it. It is not done! This isn’t a military government and I won’t support a president that behaves as if this is a military government.’’
In his own reaction, former chairman of the Senate Committee on Privatisation Ayo Arise, expressed concern over the stance of the lawmakers.
He, however, submitted that the position taken by the Senate must have been informed by failure of the Presidency to convince them, sufficiently, on the imperative of the loan.
“I was a little bit taken aback. I do not know their reasons, but, I think the Federal Government hasn’t convinced them sufficiently.
“If government says they want to use it to build roads and infrastructure, there wouldn’t have been basis for non-approval.
“Today, there is no electricity, federal roads are in bad shape and everybody is suffering. So, I don’t see any reason why they should not approve, but, they reserve the right to take that decision. Maybe government didn’t enumerate the projects they want to use the projects for. If they have done that, I don’t think the lawmakers would be standing on any high moral ground to reject it.’’
Former governor of Anambra State, Chukwuemeka Ezeife applauded Senate’s decision to reject the loan request.
“Buhari swore to a Constitution with provisions for federal character. What it means is that things, including funds, infrastructure etc, should be shared fairly and equitably among the geopolitical zones.
“There is no worse corruption than the president sharing things with nepotism and ethnic sentiments. So, for the first time, we should clap for the Senate. People in Nigeria should begin to wake up.”
Regardless, to Rights Activist and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Femi Falana, the Federal Government should take the rejection in good faith and focus more on recovery of looted funds.
He also pleaded with government not to plunge Nigeria into toxic debt with the fresh foreign loan.
“The federal government should take the rejection as a challenge to review recovery of looted wealth of the nation and the criminal diversion of billions of dollars from the Federation Account. A few months ago, I urged the Finance Minister, Kemi Adeosun, to embark on an aggressive recovery policy. Apart from acknowledging the letter and assuring me that the letter was receiving attention no measure has been put in place to recover the looted wealth of the nation. In frustration, I was compelled to submit a petition to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission to recover the fund and prosecute indicted individuals and corporate organisations.
“Following the submission of the petition, a former governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria demanded apology from me for saying that he gave out a loan of $7 billion to 14 banks, sometime in 2006. Since he admitted that the money was a “deposit” and not a loan, I rejected his demand for apology. Moreso that the $7 billion and the bailout of $4 billion given to the same banks in 2008 have not been refunded. Curiously, the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria has not demanded repayment of the said sum of $11 billion from the banks.
“I have also just confirmed that one of telecommunication companies operating in the country recently engaged in money laundering and successfully but illegally transferred over $25 billion out of Nigeria. Since the Money Laundering Act of 2011, as amended, requires that the entire proceed of the crime be forfeited to the federal government, it is hoped that the highly-placed public individuals involved in the criminal enterprise will not compromise the interests of the nation this time around!
“If official efforts are intensified to recover the billions of dollars which have been looted or diverted from the Federation Account by economic saboteurs, the federal government does not need to plunge the nation into another toxic debt.”
Source: The Sun
