Standing Strong on Due Process
Text of speech by Senator Ken Nnamani on the Public Presentation of the Book: ‘Standing Strong’ on October 21, 2021 at the International Conference Centre, Abuja.
Today is about truth and a book borne from it. I present to Nigeria and leaders
of the African continent the simple truth that for democracy, political stability,
and economic development to flourish in Africa, we must strive to maintain due
process.
Due process is the heart of the rule of law and democracy. In 2007,
this principle prevented a possible truncation of democracy. Because we stood
strong on due process, the bid to extend Obasanjo’s presidency beyond the
constitutional limit failed.
It has been said that every generation must discover its mission – either fulfill
or betray it. Let me suggest to us that at this point in our history, our mission in
Nigeria is to strengthen the institutions of democracy and ensure that the
democratic gains aren’t lost in an ugly power struggle.
Eternal vigilance is the price of democracy and liberty. Our vigilance for
democracy requires that we learn from our history, a history of success and
failure. This is why I wrote this book: to remind us of the dangerous path we
could have taken but for the vigilance and courage of some legislators and to
challenge us to never abandon the responsibility of protecting due process for
our democracy to survive
Our democracy was tested in 2006, it passed. It was tested again in 2015 and
passed. This has culminated in the Buhari presidency. The crucial 2015 test
would not have been if we failed the 2006 test. The 2006 test was a test of
whether leaders will rise above fear and the politics of the strongman to
strengthen democracy by upholding due process. It was a test of solidity of our
legislature. The 2015 test was a test of whether a ruling political party and an
incumbent president will have the grace and patriotism to accept political defeat
and allow the opposition to form a new government. This was not a simple test.
Many African countries failed this test. The result of such failure is the collapse
of national consensus and retreat into authoritarian politics with its attendant
political instability and economic stagnation.
We owe it to the integrity, courage and steely determination of President
Mohammadu Buhari and the humility and graciousness of President Jonathan
that Nigeria reached the important milestone of countries that have consolidated
democracy by peacefully transferring power to the opposition. We have to
acknowledge the persistence of President Buhari to continue to peacefully
contest for the presidency in different electoral cycles. He was not deterred by
previous disappointments, including manipulation of the electoral process. He
placed his trust and confidence in the sanctity of the ballot box and believed
that deliberation, persuasive, and rule-based conducts are the recipes for
democratic governance.
2
Let us also commend President Jonathan for overcoming the ever-present
temptation amongst African leaders who refuse to leave power and find a way
to scramble the electoral results even when they have lost clean and square.
Such dare-devilry has thrown their countries into utter instability and chaos. We
should be grateful that these two leaders helped us overcome the storms in
2015. Their exemplary leadership has made Nigeria a shining light in
consolidating democracy. But we have to remember that the challenges of
democracy never end and the work of consolidating democracy is ever
recurrent. As we move forward as a nation, we will confront challenges that call
for wisdom, courage and collaboration.
The story of what happened with the Third Term saga has been told by many
people. What I aim to offer in my book is the reflection of someone who was at
the driver’s seat during the journey. As expected, there have been some serious
omissions and plenty whitewashes about the role of some individuals in the
saga. My focus is to narrate the facts in a manner that will help my compatriots
appreciate the role that individuals who face a crisis and remain committed to
core values can play in taking society to a higher level.
There is a raging debate on whether institutions or leadership matters most in
entrenching democratic ideals. On one hand, many institutionalists have argued
in support of building institutions. The argument is that irrespective of the
character and competence of individual leaders, once institutions are strong it
does not matter the pedigree of individuals who occupy political offices. The
opposing argument is that we should instead focus on recruiting the most
competent and ethical leaders and even if our institutions are weak, we will be
ok. I think these two extremes are wrong. We need strong institutions as well
as credible and competent leadership to ensure sustainable development.
Leaders matters. Institutions matter. Good leaders create and sustain good
institutions.
Institutions and leaders played a key role in successful economic and social
development in the past three decades. East Asia has exhibited this, with
various factors contributing to its economic miracle. Others see it as an
indication of the region’s openness to global trade. These interpretations are
underpinned by the role of leaders who were purposeful and value-driven in
moving these countries into the First World. General Park reshaped South
Korea from the 1960s onwards. Lee Kuan Yew and his transformative
leadership replicated the same feat in Singapore. What emerges from East Asia
is that leaders that matter are those that redefine their society, build quality
institutions and work hard to preserve their integrity
Our future depends on how we build great institutions and match them with
great leadership. The experience of the Third Term saga illustrates how a
combination of good institutions and good leadership can save a people during 3
political turbulence. It is often said that the heart of constitutional democracy is
representation. Where the legislature is strong and truly representative, the
people are protected against authoritarian impulses that often characterize
public leadership. Where the legislature is weak and captured by special
interests, the bulwark against autocracy is easily dismantled.
Nigeria’s constitution positions the National Assembly as a pillar of democracy.
In the constitution, the legislature is protected from executive override and
committed to supporting the executive in managing the national economy. In a
constitutional democracy, the checks and balances system guarantees freedom
and liberty.
While in office as Senate President, I gave serious thought to this structure of
constitutional governance. I considered that the constitution intended
cooperation not competition between the two political branches. In seeking for
a conceptual framework to manage the intricate relationship between the
executive and legislative branches, I conceived the idea of the ‘Third Way’. The
‘Third Way’ as a model of legislative leadership meant that the basis of
relationship between the executive and legislative is ‘interdependence’. In
Nigeria’s legislative history since 1999, we have seen two dominant modes of
executive-legislative relationship. The first is the way of antagonism between
the legislature and the executive. The second is the way of subservience of the
legislature to the executive. The first leads to unnecessary turf battles between
the legislature and the executive. The second requires that the legislature
abandons its constitutional responsibilities and become a rubber stamp to the
executive. None of these models lead to sustaining an effective and stable
government. None of them can provide effective legislative framework for
inclusive economic growth.
As Senate President, I abandoned these disruptive models. I developed the
Third Way which I called the Theory of Interdependence. In this theory, the
legislature must protect its independence while providing legislative support to
grow the economy and manage the polity. Interdependence recognizes the
overriding responsibility of the President to manage the national economy in a
manner that is complemented by the power of the legislature to oversee the
exercise of presidential power. Interdependence requires a new orientation that
weans legislators away from undue antagonism and competition with the
executive on the paraphernalia of power, but rather focus on providing a strong
legislative framework for socioeconomic development.
To resolve Africa’s underdevelopment and political instability crises, we need
legislatures who have embraced a cooperative culture and transcended their
delight of competitive politics.
In the 5th National Assembly, we attempted to follow the path of
interdependence and co-management and it yielded the fruits of sustained 4
economic growth. We didn’t need to agree with everything the executive did or
said. We didn’t need to accept all the provisions in their bills. But we offered
them utmost respect and responsibility and aided the effectiveness of executive
programs through legislations, appropriations, and oversights. We recognized
that the unity and development of the country trumped any lust for power or
passion to spite and abuse. I believe that the present National Assembly is on
that path and, in spite of the negative impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, we
will see a resurgence of sustained economic growth during the administration.
In my earlier book, The Third Way, I presented the ideas and principles that
informed my leadership of the National Assembly between 2005 and 2007. In
this book, I present the drama and the upheavals that threatened to derail
constitutional democracy in Nigeria. I detail some of the important conversations
that strengthened our resolve to uphold due process and guide our country
away from the cliff-hanger. My intention is not to sensationalize; rather to
present a factual account of that defining moment without malice to anyone. I
recognize that actions of political actors are often guided by many strategic
considerations. So, I feel sympathy for those who failed the test of leadership
and I am full of praise for those who kept faith with constitutional responsibilities.
But, it is important to point out the failures and highlight the successes so that
we provide future generation of legislators a model of an effective legislature.
My model of legislating is shaped by the debate about whether the legislator is
an agent or a trustee. This debate is an enduring one. The concept of an agent
means that the legislator goes to the assembly to vote according to what his
constituents want. As a trustee, the legislator is elected to employ his best
reasons to represent his constituents. He does not always say what they want
him to say. He says what he thinks is the right thing for his constituents. So,
based on the concept of trusteeship, a legislator is permitted to vote his own
perceptions and belief.
During the debate on the Third Term Bid of President Obasanjo, I weighed
these two competing concepts of the role of a legislator. I decided to marry the
two concepts. I wanted Senators to vote their mind on the question whether to
amend the constitution to allow President Obasanjo a Third Term. I also wanted
them to effectively represent the views of their constituents. To be an informed
trustee, the Senators needed to understand the views of their constituents
before casting their votes.
On this basis, the Senate adjourned to allow Senators to consult with their
constituents about the constitutional amendment. With this intervention, some
Senators returned to the plenary with enlightened views. Many who were
previously overwhelmed with exigencies of politics returned with stories of the
vehemence of their constituents. This ‘Damascus experience’ changed the
game on the Third Term vote. It was obvious that majority of Nigerians wanted
the National Assembly to keep faith with the constitutional limitation on tenure.
5
To ensure that Nigerians saw how their representatives were responding to the
most important question of democracy, the Senate decided to televise its
proceedings. Publicizing the proceedings was faulted by those who wanted to
smuggle into the constitution the extension of tenure through undefined and
darkly proceedings. They knew that if we isolate Nigerians from the proceedings
and therefore reduce public pressure on the legislators it could be possible to
ram through with their agenda. But I stood strong. The principal officers of the
National Assembly stood strong. We overcame this intense pressure even from
the highest level of government. We continued to broadcast the proceedings.
The result of the publicity and openness was that we ultimately secured our
democracy.
The degree of public interest the debate generated owed largely to the decision
to televise our deliberations. This was about the origin of the now
institutionalized use of television to publicize the proceedings of the National
Assembly. The publicity of the proceedings made legislators to sit up and take
seriously the art of law-making. No one wanted to be caught on camera either
sleeping or making disjointed statements. No one wanted to be seen by
members of his community taking a disgraceful position on such important
issue. Publicly televised proceedings became a new incentive structure to
improve the quality of proceedings in the Senate. Suddenly, we gained a new
insight into the legislative craft, we were then ready to subject our decisions to
public scrutiny.
As a graduate student in the US, I followed some of the most contentious
debates in the US Congress. When I became a Senator I wrote a book, My
Mission as a Senator, where I articulated my legislative priorities and the
legislative framework to grow the economy. In furtherance of the vision, as
Senate President, I restricted myself from the procurement process in the
National Assembly so that I can maintain a high level of credibility and
engagement with legislative business in order to transform the institution of
legislature. I recruited the best and the brightest I could find across the country
as economic, legal and political advisers. I created a policy research group that
included industry stakeholders and experts to improve the rigor of law-making.
These innovations paid up huge social capital for the National Assembly.
Suddenly, the National Assembly became the most credible public institution in
Nigeria. The National Assembly became effective, credible, and efficient.
Nigerians now came to regard the National Assembly as a collection of patriots
devoted to generating laws and legislative framework for economic growth and
social inclusion.
From my stewardship at the National Assembly, I learned the importance of
integrated leadership. As their own choice, I had great relationships with my
fellow senators. I remain eternally grateful to my colleagues for finding in me6
the competence and integrity to lead at that difficult time in the life of the Senate.
Every success we achieved was because of that unity of purpose and
determination to frustrate the devices of the enemies of legislative
independence.
In the green Chamber, we found a great friend in Rt. Hon Masari and his
principal officers. We formed a bond of trust based on mutual respect for
parliamentary privileges. Without the leadership of the House of
Representatives, we could not have carried out the people’s business and foiled
the orchestration to undermine Nigeria’s constitutional democracy
My overriding message today is that institution matters. But leadership matters
most. We need to focus on building the strongest and most resilient institutions
of democracy and development. We need to have the best-in-class institutions
since economic and social development turns mostly on the quality of
institutions. However, recent political experience teaches us that crafty
autocrats can rob these institutions of meaning and use them against
democracy and development. The Third Term Bid was almost a disaster, but
for the vigilance and courage of the National Assembly leaders who supported
the due process and opposed an invasion of self-serving politicians.
My book chronicles my monologues and dialogues when I was seeking the
strength to serve my country. I found great support in the late maverick US
Senator, John McCain. McCain said that courage is not the absence of fear but
the determination to do what needs to be done in spite of the fear. My mind
echoed incessantly with his words as I pondered the possibility of a military
overthrow of Nigeria’s democratic government
With my colleagues on my side, I decided to ride the storm. I struck upon a
concept that defined what I did in the storm of political firework in the Senate. I conceived myself in the role of a judge holding the fair balance between
contending parties to a dispute. I decided that my responsibility was to uphold
our rules of procedure and the overriding requirement of the constitution. I made
sure that no one forced a decision on the Senate. I insisted that Senators have
the freedom and presence of mind to make the best decision. I knew that if
given the freedom and the information they needed, they would make that
decision to reject the agenda.
The morning of May 16, 2006 was very tense that I could even hear my
heartbeat as a thick silence descended on the Senate floor. Many prominent
politicians were on hand to observe proceedings. It is important to note that
while the Senate was on recess, I decided to write a speech that will emphasize
to my colleagues the historic moment that they will usher in through their votes.
I revised the speech several times but hid it from any Senator. That speech will
be my last act of statesmanship to urge my colleagues to walk on the path of 7
constitutional democracy and not allow political expedience to overwhelm their
sense of patriotism.
The speech worked magic. After I delivered it and called for votes to determine
whether the bill should be read a second time, there was total silence. To take
it beyond doubt, I called for votes a second time. There was no vote for the bill
to go on to the third reading. I struck the gavel. Third Term was dead—hurray!
Jubilation filled the hall. Senators pumped hands and embraced one another.
Everyone heaved a sigh of relief. Both those who supported and those who
opposed the Third Term bid now agreed that it deserved to die. One of my fears
was that the outcome of the debate could damage the solidarity and support we
had in the Senate but I was proven wrong. The death of the Third Term, in fact,
generated more solidarity and cooperation in the Senate. We became a closer
family. We saved the nation. In doing so, we saved the National Assembly from
ridicule.
Dear Compatriots, I have taken us through this narrative to restate the simple
truth that the salvation of democracy anywhere depends on protection of due
process. We have imperfect institutions. But as long as we are willing to uphold
the basic tenets of democracy which primarily requires that the citizens choose
their leaders and leaders while in power should not extend their mandate, we
can cure these imperfections. The work of building a prosperous and stable
society will task national and local leaders. It is work that requires us to mobilise all human and natural resources. It is work that cannot thrive in societies riven
by conflicts and violent disagreements. In 2007, we came close to becoming
such a society. But we survived because the leadership of the National
Assembly realised the imperative of upholding legislative due process. We won
because we respected due process.
The question remains: should we build institutions or recruit competent and
ethical leaders? I say, let us do both. Let us build strong and resilient institutions.
Let us also look for men and woman who have the intelligence, the courage,
and the honesty to defend those institutions from cynics and autocrats who may creep in the cloak of democrats. Always, we should stand strong on due
process.
May God bless Nigeria
May God bless all of us
Thank you,
Senator Ken Nnamani, GCON.
