…as Nigerians allege ulterior motives
…more of shakedown than problem-solving
The Nigerian National Assembly has gained a reputation for conducting high-profile hearings on urgent matters of national interest.
These hearings, often conducted by ad-hoc committees, are meant to address pressing issues affecting the nation.
The Nigerian Constitution empowers the National Assembly to oversee government activities, a responsibility detailed in Sections 88 and 89. To fulfill this crucial role, standing and ad-hoc committees are established.
A committee has the power to arrange hearings, obtain records, and call witnesses to testify on key topics, including national security and public expenditure.
However, many Nigerians are increasingly questioning the true purpose of these committees: Are they genuinely aimed at solving national problems, or are they just a well-orchestrated shakedown?
Critics argue that the Assembly is more interested in exerting influence and securing financial gains than serving the national interest. Chidi Omeje, a public affairs analyst described the incessant investigative hearings as “mere theatrics and gimmicks”. “It have never yielded any result, it’s just like a grandstanding to let people know that they are working. It’s just a business transaction for them”, he said.
Findings by BusinessDay reveal that resolutions from most investigative hearings and interactive sessions remain unimplemented, with reports gathering dust on shelves. The National Assembly appears to exert more energy in summoning public officials—perhaps as a show of relevance to the public—than in pursuing the recommendations that would provide solutions to the problems these hearings are meant to address.
For instance, the Senate has yet to adopt the report from its investigative hearing on the power sector, which was held in April. This hearing followed a significant increase in electricity tariffs by the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC), which saw prices jump from N66 to N225 per kilowatt-hour for customers enjoying at least 20 hours of power supply daily.
Despite the urgency of the situation, months have passed without the report being presented or adopted by the upper chamber. According to Eyinnaya Abaribe, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Power, the report includes far-reaching recommendations to address the issues plaguing the sector, yet these remain in limbo.
Another notable hearing was on the mining sector, where the Senate Committee on Solid Minerals held a three-day session to scrutinize the input and output values of Nigeria’s mining industry, given its critical role in economic diversification, foreign exchange earnings, and social inclusion.
The hearing was sequel to the growing activities of illegal miners and the dwindling revenue derivable from solid minerals development in the country. The red camber grilled top stakeholders including Dele Alake, minister of solid minerals development, heads of Agencies and stakeholders in the mining sector.
When BusinessDay inquired of the report and implementation progress, one of the media aide to the Sampson Ekong, chairman of the Committee said the report is yet adopted by the senate.
“The report is ready but has not been presented at the Senate plenary yet, until after its presentation”, he said.
Similarly, the petroleum sector has seen a series of investigative hearings with little to show for it. Heads of ministries, agencies, and other stakeholders in the oil and gas sector have repeatedly been summoned by the Senate, but no concrete resolutions have emerged.
The most recent session, focused on alleged economic sabotage in Nigeria’s petroleum industry.
Sometimes these hearings end in closed door sessions and the details are kept from the public.
This lack of transparency and tangible outcomes continues to fuel public sentiment that these hearings are more about financial gain and political maneuvering than actual governance.
A telling example of this perception is the case of Farouk Lawan, a former federal lawmaker sentenced to seven years in prison in May for accepting bribes while serving as the chairman of the defunct House of Representatives ad-hoc committee investigating fraud in the fuel subsidy regime in 2012.
The former lawmaker was prosecuted on charges of or receiving a bribe of $500,000 from Femi Otedola, a billionaire oil magnate. The money was part of the $3milllion Lawan requested to have the businessman’s firms removed from the list of companies indicted for fuel subsidy fraud.
Lawan’s case highlights the potential for corruption within the Assembly, further undermining public trust.
More recently, Richard Teng, CEO of Binance, alleged that members of the House Committee on Financial Crimes demanded money from Binance representatives during a meeting at the National Assembly Complex.
Such allegations contribute to the growing narrative that the Assembly’s investigative efforts are more about personal enrichment than national accountability.
In the security sector, the 10th National Assembly has repeatedly summoned service chiefs and heads of security agencies. However, Senate President Godswill Akpabio admitted during a plenary session in March that the Senate has deliberated on numerous motions on insecurity with resolutions that have not been effectively followed up.
The late Chief of Army Staff, Lt. Gen. Ibrahim Attahiru, had also expressed frustration with the incessant summons, noting that they were disruptive and distracting from his duties in the field.
Read also: Can 10th National Assembly meet Nigerians’ expectations?
Attahiru noted the summons are disruptive and distraction as he is always on the field dealing with security threats, but lawmakers insisted that summons must be obeyed at all times by public officers no matter any circumstance.
Despite President Bola Tinubu’s March appeal for restraint in summoning heads of ministries, departments, and agencies (MDAs) before parliamentary committees, the practice has continued unabated.
Only recently, the Senate criticized the management of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPCL), the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), the Nigeria Police Force, and 12 other agencies for their persistent refusal to honor summons and respond to queries raised against them in the 2019 audit report.
Ahmed Wadada, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Public Accounts, expressed frustration over the affected public agencies’ persistent refusal to respond to queries in audit reports, calling it detrimental to the aspirations of President Tinubu’s administration.
He said apart from NNPCL, FIRS and the Police , other heads of agencies involved in the habit of not honouring committee’s invitations to respond to queries against them are the Office of the Accountant General of the Federation, Nigeria Mining Cadastre Office, Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (former DPR) and Federal Ministry of Industry, Trade & Investment.
Others are FCT Internal Revenue Service, Nigeria Immigration Service, Federal Ministry of Women Affairs, Ministry of Defence, Nigeria Communications Satellite Limited, etc.
The growing public disappointment with the Legislature is further fueled by the tussle for ‘juicy’ committees among lawmakers. The current National Assembly has 224 standing committees, with the 10th House of Representatives alone having 141 committees for its 360 members. These so-called juicy committees, often chaired by a select few individuals who wield considerable power, are seen as lucrative positions that further enrich those in charge rather than serving the public good.
In July, Senate President Godswill Akpabio reshuffled the standing committees, including the removal of Ali Ndume as Senate Chief Whip and Vice Chairman of the Appropriation Committee. Ndume, who was believed to be targeted due to his critical comments about Tinubu, was reassigned as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Tourism—a less “juicy” position in Nigerian political lexicon.
Proliferation of committees
A cursory glance at the 10th National Assembly’s activities reveals a frequent use of hearings to summon heads of Ministries, Departments, and Agencies (MDAs), as well as top business executives.
The current National Assembly has 224 standing committees. The 10th House of Representatives, with a total of 360 members, has 141 standing committees that run its oversight functions of monitoring the affairs of various MDAs. While the Senate with 109 members has 83 standing committees.
Despite having the highest number of standing committees in history of Nigeria’s legislative arm, the 10th National Assembly has also set up several ad-hoc committees since inception in June 2023.
These committees ostensibly seek to investigate issues ranging from economic crises, sabotage and security concerns to public health and education. However, the effectiveness of these committees in producing actionable solutions is debatable.
The legislative arm has set up ad-hoc committees on several issues such as fuel subsidy removal, oil theft, electricity tariff hike, job racketeering, education, rift between Dangote Refinery and NNPC, among others despite having standing committees dealing with these issues.
This has led to widespread skepticism about whether the proliferation of these ad-hoc committees is truly aimed at national interest or serves other, less noble purposes.
Read also: With 10th National Assembly election over, Nigerians task new leaders on quality legislation
A shakedown circus?
Critics argue that the committee system has become a tool for legislators to extract personal benefits rather than a platform for genuine problem-solving.
The frequent summons of MDA heads and business executives often lead to what insiders describe as a “shakedown” – a process where those summoned are pressured into financial settlements or concessions to avoid negative publicity or more severe consequences.
This is further exacerbated by the fact that many MDAs are said to have “off-the-books” budgets specifically allocated for dealing with these hearings.
Such budgets are not officially recorded but are reportedly used to grease the wheels of the legislative process, ensuring that officials can navigate the often perilous terrain of National Assembly scrutiny.
For instance, an ad-hoc committee set up by the House of Representatives to investigate the alleged job racketeering and recruitment misconducts in several federal agencies in 2023 was later accused of extortion of heads of agencies and vice chancellors of federal institutions.
“While a few agencies with uncompromising leadership were being scapegoated and harassed during the daily hearing as TV cameras rolled, some committee members were detailed to, behind closed doors, negotiate illicit payments by heads of institutions considered culpable of recruitment irregularities,” an investigative report published by Premium Times in August 2023 said.
“During the negotiation with the leadership of the Committee of Vice Chancellors, representatives of the committee demanded three million naira from each institution. The professors protested, saying their institutions were poorly funded and that it would be difficult to raise the bribe money,” it added.
In 2012, the House committee chaired by Herman Hembe faced serious accusations from the then-CEO of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Arunma Oteh, of demanding substantial bribes during an investigation. Oteh publicly questioned Hembe’s integrity to continue the probe, alleging financial impropriety.
Similarly, in the 9th Assembly, the House committee investigating the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) was engulfed in controversy.
The committee’s chairman, Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo (now minister of Interior), recused himself following allegations of benefiting from contracts under scrutiny.
The NDDC management’s subsequent walkout and counter-accusations, including claims against other lawmakers, led to a public spectacle that derailed the investigation. The exchange led to the infamous “off your mic” moment in the committee.
The politics of committee memberships
These committees are often chaired by a select few individuals who wield considerable power within the Assembly.
In many cases, one legislator chairs multiple committees while also serving as a member of several others. This concentration of power is not coincidental but is instead a strategic move designed to maximise the allowances that come with committee memberships. The result is a system where the focus shifts from genuine legislative oversight to personal enrichment.
Business executives, particularly those heading major corporations, often find themselves exhausted by the constant summons to these hearings. Some CEOs have reported receiving multiple summonses each year, each one requiring extensive preparation, legal consultations, and, often, a financial outlay to navigate the process smoothly.
The appointment of committee chairs is another aspect where the real power dynamics of the National Assembly are on display.
The Presiding Officers of both chambers – the Senate President and the Speaker of the House of Representatives – wield considerable influence through their ability to appoint and remove committee chairs. These appointments are often used as tools for political maneuvering, with loyalists rewarded with powerful positions and rivals sidelined or placated with less influential roles.
Committee chairs, once appointed, have significant autonomy and can use their positions to build influence, both within the Assembly and with external stakeholders.
For instance, Senate President Goodswill Akpabio has reshuffled the red chamber’s standing committees several times in a bid to reward loyalists and downgrade opponents in the assembly.
In July, the senate president reshuffled the standing committees following the removal of Ali Ndume as the Senate chief whip and vice chairman of the Appropriation Committee.
Ndume, who was believed to be targeted due to his anti-Tinubu’s comments, was named as new chairman of the Senate Committee on Tourism, a less “juicy position” as it often said in the Nigerian political lexicon.
