Connect with us

Headline

Comparatives of Western Legislative Experience in Electing Parliamentary Leaders

Published

on

The imbroglio in the Nigeria upper legislative assembly, the Senate, resulting from the defection of the Senate President, Dr. Bukola Saraki, from the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) to the main opposition, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), has reached fever pitch as calls for his resignation or impeachment from a section of the APC rings the air.

Championing the calls are the national chairman of the party, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole, and Senate majority leader, Ahmed Lawan, who have threatened fire and brimstone should he fail to resign his position as the president.

On the other hand, Saraki has turned down the call to resign citing constitutional provisions and precedence obtainable world over, which permits the minority group to produce parliamentary leaders through elections.

According to Andrew Kennon, a former Clerk of Committees in the British House of Commons “The House’s freedom to make its own choice among an array of volunteers probably means that any sense of it being the ‘turn’ of a particular party is out of date.

Kennon’s over 40 years in the British House of Commons made him an authority capable of speaking authoritatively on areas of legislative elections.

Below are samples of parliamentary procedures requisite for elections in developed democracies and the precedence set for others to follow:

UNITED KINGDOM

MPs elect the Speaker from amongst their own ranks. The House must elect a Speaker at the beginning of each new parliamentary term after a general election, or after the death or resignation of the incumbent. Once elected, a Speaker continues in office until the dissolution of Parliament, unless he or she resigns prior to this. Customarily, the House re-elects Speakers who desire to continue in office for more than one term. Theoretically, the House could vote against re-electing a Speaker, but such an event is extremely unlikely. Until 2001, the election of a Speaker was conducted as a routine matter of House of Commons business, as it used motions and amendments to elect. There was, however, a considerable amount of behind-the-scenes lobbying before suitable candidates were agreed upon, and so it was very rare for a new Speaker to be opposed. However, this system broke down in 2000 when 12 rival candidates declared for the job and the debate occupied an entire Parliamentary day.  Under the new system, candidates must be nominated by at least twelve members, of whom at least three must be of a different party from the candidate. The House votes by secret ballot; as in Nigeria, an absolute majority is required for victory.

In recent times, from the 19th century onwards, the Speaker has even been a member of the Opposition and not all Speakers have been the candidates proposed by the ruling Party even if they are from that Party. For example, in 1895, the Conservatives and Liberal Unionists put forward Sir Matthew White Ridley, a well-respected MP who had many years of experience, and hoped for a unanimous election as the previous Speaker had been a Liberal. However, the Liberals decided to oppose him and eventually nominated William Court Gully who had been an MP for only nine years and had been a relatively quiet presence. Gully won on a party-line vote. In 1951 there was a great demand from the Labour Party for Major James Milner to become the first Labour Speaker after he had served as Deputy Speaker for eight years. However, the Conservatives (who had just regained power) nominated William Shepherd Morrison, Conservative MP, against him. This was at the time an unusual step. The vote again went down party lines, and Morrison was elected. In 1992, Betty Boothroyd, a Labour MP who had been Deputy Speaker, contested against the Conservative former Cabinet member Peter Brooke. About 70 Conservative MPs supported Boothroyd ensuring her election. She was the only Speaker elected in the 20th century not to be a member of the governing party at the time of her first election. In 2000, most Labour MPs supported Michael Martin. However, most Conservatives felt that a Conservative Speaker should be chosen. They supported two prominent Conservatives, Sir George Young and Deputy Speaker Sir Alan Haselhurst. After a lengthy sitting of the House, Michael Martin was elected Speaker. Following the debacle of this election the rules were changed as stated above. In 2009, John Bercow, a Conservative MP was elected Speaker following an election by secret ballot in which the frontline Labour MP, Margaret Beckett, and another Labour MP, Parmjit Dhanda, participated.  Labour was in Government at this time. Bercow thus became the first Speaker to be elected in the 21st century not to be a member of the governing party at the time of his first election.

IRELAND

The Ceann Comhairle (“head of the council”) is the chairperson (or speaker) of Dáil Éireann, the lower house of the Oireachtas (parliament) of Ireland. The person who holds the position is elected by members of the Dáil from among their number in the first session after each general election. Despite this, a government usually tries to select a member of its own political party for the position, if it has enough deputies to allow that choice. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle holds office as the Deputy Chairman of Dáil Éireann under Article 15.9.1 of the Constitution. In the absence of the Ceann Comhairle, the Leas-Cheann Comhairle deputises and performs the duties and exercises the authority of the Ceann Comhairle in Dáil proceedings. By tradition, the position is reserved for the Opposition, but the appointment is made by the Taoiseach (Prime Minister) of the day.

AUSTRALIA

The President of the Senate is elected by the Senate in a secret ballot. The Clerk conducts the election. The Presidency has always been a partisan office and the nominee of the government party has nearly always been elected, although this cannot be guaranteed since the government of the day does not necessarily have a majority in the Senate. The President is assisted by an elected Deputy President.

The traditional practice has been that the government nominates a Senator to be elected as President, and the Opposition nominates a Senator to be Deputy President. If there are no other nominations, no election is required, however the Australian Greens in 2005 and again in 2007 put forward Senator Kerry Nettle as a rival candidate when the position of President was vacant. Neither Government nor Opposition Senators supported that candidacy. After the 1996 election, the Labor Party refused to nominate Colston to become Deputy President of the Senate. In a bid to win him over, the Howard Coalition government offered to support him. Colston resigned from the Labor Party by fax message at 11:30 a.m. on 20 August, and he took his seat as an independent that afternoon. In the evening, he was elected Deputy President, on the nomination of the Coalition.

UNITED STATES

The Constitution designates the Vice President of the United States as President of the Senate. The Constitution also calls for a President pro tempore to serve as the leader of the body when the President of the Senate (the Vice President) is absent. In practice, neither the Vice President nor the President pro tempore customarily the most senior (longest-serving) Senator in the majority party actually presides over the Senate on a daily basis; that task is given to junior Senators of the majority party.

The Senate Majority and Minority Leaders are two United States Senators who are elected by the party caucuses that hold the majority and the minority respectively. These leaders serve as the chief Senate spokesperson for their parties and manage and schedule the legislative and executive business of the Senate.

Party leaders and whips of the United States House of Representatives are elected by their respective parties in a closed-door caucus by secret ballot and are also known as floor leaders. The U.S. House of Representatives does not officially use the term “Minority Leader” although the media frequently does. The House instead uses the terms “Republican Leader” or “Democratic Leader” depending on which party holds a minority of seats.

In common U.S. Congressional Republican caucus legislative usage, the caucus chair is styled conference chairman and is outranked by the Speaker or Senate President pro-tempore, and the leader or whip of his or her party.

 

CANADA

In Canada, the elected members of each party in Parliament, including senators, or a provincial legislature, elect among themselves a caucus chair who presides over their meetings. The exception to this norm is the Conservative Party of Canada, whose caucus chair is appointed by the party leader. This person is an important figure when the party is in opposition and an important link between cabinet and the backbench when the party is in government.

 

FRANCE

The Senate is the upper house of the Parliament of France, presided over by a president. The senators elect a President from among their members. The current incumbent is Gérard Larcher. The President of the Senate is, under the constitution of the Fifth Republic, first in the line of succession in case of death, resignation or removal from office (only for health reasons) to the Presidency of the Republic, becoming Acting President of the Republic until a new election can be held.

Elected by secret ballot at the beginning of the legislative session by members, the President of the National Assembly represents the Assembly and directs discussion and debates.

The President normally comes from the largest party represented, assisted by Vice Presidents from across the represented political spectrum.

The above is a testimony that the President of the Senate has not fallen short of any constitutional provision, and should not be in any form of pressure to relinquish his position, or be threatened with impeachment before his party might be in the minority.

The case of John Pam West of the Senate and Edwin Ume-Ezeoke of the Nigerian Second Republic are clear evidences of the what must be.

 

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Headline

FBN vs GHL: Supreme Court Voids Appeal Court Judgment, Orders Immediate Handover of FPSO Tamara Tokoni Crude Oil to General Hydrocarbons

Published

on

By

The long drawn legal tussle between FirstBank of Nigeria Limited and General Hydrocarbons Limited over the ownership of the crude oil aboard the FPSO Tamara Tokoni, may have come to a conclusive end as the Supreme Court of Nigeria delivered its judgment.

The Apex Court, on Friday, ordered the Chief Registrar of the Court of Appeal and the Admiralty Marshal to immediately hand over the crude oil aboard the FPSO Tamara Tokoni to General Hydrocarbons Limited (GHL), bringing to an end a legal dispute over the asset.

In a unanimous judgment delivered by a five-member panel of justices, the apex court held that the suit instituted by First Bank of Nigeria (FBN) was contractual in nature and not an admiralty matter.

The court consequently ruled that both the Federal High Court and the Court of Appeal lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the case.

The Supreme Court accordingly allowed the appeal filed by General Hydrocarbons Limited and set aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal, describing it as perverse.

Justice Abiru, who read the lead judgment, announced the unanimous decision of the panel comprising Justices Uwani Aba-Aji, Salawa, Agim, Uwa and Abiru.

Continue Reading

Headline

GbajaGate: I’ve Done No Wrong, Govt Playing to Shut Me Up – Adeyemi Matthew Speaks from Hiding

Published

on

By

Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew, the man alleged to have forged government appointment letters and falsely paraded himself as the Director-General of the alleged Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) and Presidential Economic Advisory Council, has denied the allegations against him, claiming the Presidency is attempting to silence him.

Speaking with PREMIUM TIMES from an undisclosed location on Thursday, Adeyemi insisted he had done nothing wrong and described the government’s actions as a “defence mechanism.”

“You know the government we have. They are just playing a defence mechanism to shut me up. My organisation was set up in 2024,” he said.

Adeyemi declined to disclose his whereabouts, saying he had gone into hiding because his life was under threat.

“They are now after my life. I have gone into hiding. I’m underground,” he said.

When asked whether he had fled the country, he declined to respond directly.

“I will not be able to disclose any information now. I don’t consider myself safe,” he added.

The embattled suspect also declined to provide his alleged appointment letter or any document to support his claim that he was legitimately appointed, saying his lawyers had advised him not to discuss the matter publicly.

“I just decided to speak to you out of respect. My lawyers are working on something. Whatever they say, I will let you know,” he said.

The Presidency has accused Adeyemi of forging appointment letters and other official documents while falsely presenting himself as Director-General of the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council and the Presidential Economic Advisory Council, agencies it insists do not exist.

Presidential spokesman, Bayo Onanuga, said Adeyemi and two others have been charged before the Federal High Court on an eight-count charge bordering on forgery, impersonation and related offences.

According to the Presidency, concerns first emerged after the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission reported that another body appeared to be performing functions similar to its statutory responsibilities.

The Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, subsequently petitioned the Department of State Services and the Nigeria Police Force, alleging that forged appointment letters bearing fake signatures, official seals and reference numbers had been used to create the impression that the suspects were presidential appointees.

The Presidency said investigations revealed that Adeyemi and his associates allegedly operated from an office within the Federal Secretariat Complex in Abuja, held meetings with Nigerian and foreign officials and sought diplomatic support from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for visa applications.

According to the Presidency, police arrested Adeyemi on October 27, 2025, after which searches conducted at his office and residence allegedly yielded forged government documents.

Investigators also alleged that financial intelligence uncovered 34 bank accounts linked to Adeyemi, including accounts allegedly opened in the names of purported government agencies.

The Presidency further claimed that Adeyemi used forged documents to open an account with the Central Bank of Nigeria in the name of the alleged agency, although investigators found that no public funds were paid into the account.

The case is scheduled to come up before the Federal High Court on July 27.

Continue Reading

Headline

Court Dismisses Abejide’s Suit, Upholds Mark-led Leadership of ADC

Published

on

By

The Federal High Court in Abuja on Thursday affirmed Sen. David Mark’s leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

Justice Musa Liman, in a judgment, also dismissed the suit filed by Rep Leke Abejide challenging Mark and Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola as national chairman and national secretary of the party for lacking merit.

Justice Liman upheld the preliminary objections filed by ADC, Chief Ralph Nwosu, Mark and Aregbesola which challenged Abejide’s suit.

The judge held that the court lacked the jurisdiction to dabble in the internal affairs of ADC, as the suit was non-justiciable.

He also held that Abejide lacked the legal right to have instituted the suit, having failed to show to the court that his rights had been violated in any way as a result of the emergence of Mark-led leadership.

He equally held that Abejide, who is a member of the House of Representatives, failed to explore the party’s internal mechanism for dispute resolution.

Justice Liman also resolved the three issues in the substantive suit in favour of the defendants.

On whether Mark, the former Senate president and Aregbesola, who was the former Governor of Osun, emerged as leaders of the party in compliance with the enabling laws, the judge resolved this against Abejide, the plaintiff in the suit.

He held that the handing over of the leadership of the party by Nwosu to Mark did not violate the provisions of the party’s constitution.

The judge agreed that the disputed July 2, 2025, meeting of the party was a stakeholder meeting which preceded the party’s National Executive Council (NEC) meeting held on July 29, 2025, which produced Mark and Aregbesola as the party’s leaders and was monitored by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

Justice Liman, therefore, declared that the emergence of Mark and Aregbesola as leaders of ADC was valid and in accordance with the constitution, the Electoral Act, 2026 and the party’s law.

The judge consequently awarded a fine of N2 million each in favour of all the defendants which shall be paid by Abejide.

He also awarded a N10 million fine against Abejide’s lawyer in compliance with the Electoral Act, 2026.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Abejide had instituted the suit to stop the Mark-led leadership of ADC.

In the originating summons, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1637/2025, filed on Feb. 15 by Idris, the lawmaker sued ADC, Ralph Nwosu, Mark, Aregbesola and INEC as 1st to 5th defendants respectively.

NAN reports that Nwosu was the former national chairman of ADC who stepped down for Mark, the ex-Senate president.

Abejide, among the eight reliefs, sought an order nullifying Nwosu’s handover or transfer of ADC’s leadership to Mark and Aregbesola as interim national chairman and interim national secretary respectively on July 2, 2025, at Shehu Musa Yar’adua Centre, Abuja, for being illegal, unlawful, null and void.

He sought an order of perpetual injunction restraining Mark and Aregbesola from parading themselves as leaders of the party “as their purported appointment, selection or election was unlawful, illegal, null and void.”

He also sought perpetual injunction restraining INEC from recognising Mark and Aregbesola as ADC’s interim national chairman and interim national secretary.

He alleged that their appointment, selection or election did not meet the requirements of Section 82 of the Electoral Act, 2022, among other prayers.

NAN

Continue Reading

Trending