Worrisome oversight functions: ALTON drags NASS to court

ITREALMS:

The Association of Licensed Telecom Operators of Nigeria (ALTON) has explained why they recently dragged the National Assembly (NASS) to a Federal High Court in Abuja, seeking interpretation over the alleged worrisome oversight functions on telecommunications companies by various NASS committees, reports ITRealms.

Confirming this to ITRealms, ALTON chairman, Engr. Gbenga Adebayo, said the resolution to seek this interpretation was taken at the organisation’s General Meeting held on Friday, 20th October, 2017, including an order restraining NASS from serving any further summons on telecommunication companies pending the determination of the case, which industry observers described as largely “embarrassing harassment.”

ITRealms also gathered that the resolution include that a firm of solicitors with good track record in handling high-profile constitutional law cases be instructed to institute an action in court seeking the court’s interpretation of the provisions of the constitution on the extent of the National Assembly (NASS)’s oversight functions on telecommunications companies.

ALTON chairman expressed dismay that its members have been inundated with incessant summons from different committees of the NASS served on their Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) to appear before several National Assembly (NASS) Committees.

This, he said, have negatively impacted on the ability to focus on business operations.

“The NASS’ insistence on attendance of CEOs at such session is without consideration of these CEOs reasonable schedule conflict or the fact that other senior management staff may be better versed and suited due to the nature of their job roles vis-a-vis the subject matter of investigation,” he lamented.

ALTON also cited an instance, saying that the Ad-Hoc Committee set up by the House of Representatives to investigate the Health Implications of Telecommunications Towers in residential buildings, called for public hearings on Monday 10th and Tuesday 11th April, 2017, at which the industry was supposed to be represented by ALTON, but the Committee, insisted that each operator make its own presentation.

“There were further hearings on Tuesday, 25th April and 8th and 23rd May 2017. However, at those Hearings the Committee insisted that it would only grant audience to the CEOs of the Companies and no other representative, in spite of technical knowledge and seniority of such representatives,” he decried.

In addition, ITRealms reports that ALTON observed that some of the investigative duties of the different committees overlap and require similar information from the attendees.

“For instance, members are summoned by both the standing Committee on Telecoms and its Ad-hoc Committee on Operational activities of Telecoms Equipment and Service Providers both investigating loss of revenue to the Federal Government. The Committee on Telecoms is also investigating loss of jobs which the Committee on Labour also summons members in respect of. The Committee on Telecoms also served summons for investigation by its Adhoc Committee for Value Added Services and Committee investigating locally manufactured skills,” he said.

ALTON further pointed out that apart from the duplication of effort by the Committees, the manner of invitation borders on harassment of our members as the invitations are sometimes scheduled on the same day leading to conflict or scheduled back to back for 3 to 4 days, which will necessitate member CEOs being away from their businesses for such long periods.

ITRealms further gathered that some of the requested information border on information within the purview of specific government agencies, such as the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) and Ministry of Communications, which NASS could easily request the agencies to provide, such information as evidence of Tax remittances to government since inception of members operations, which could date as far back as sixteen (16) years; or confidential information which members should not be obliged to provide e.g. list of all employees and current remuneration package of these employees.

Equally, ITRealms gathered that ALTON plea before the Federal High Court include determination of  (a) Extent of the NASS’ oversight functions as it relates to private companies and particularly, Telecommunications Companies being private companies;  (b) Extent of the NASS’ oversight functions with respect to private companies and particularly, Telecommunications companies which are already subject to regulatory oversight by regulators; (c) Specific nature of information which the NASS can lawfully request from private companies including Telecommunications Companies, and whether it includes companies’ confidential information and information within the purview of government agencies.

Others are: (d) “Specific nature of directives that can be made by NASS pursuant to the outcome of their investigative activities;  (e) Declaration on the proprietary of the NASS to issue these summons and insist that our members are represented by their CEOs and not senior management representatives whose job function deal with the subject matter of investigation; and (f) An order restraining the NASS from serving any further summons on Telecommunication Companies pending the determination of the action.”

Chuks Egbune/GEE 

ITREALMS ... everything news digitally!

Emerging issues in oversight functions of MDAs

Commentary@ITREALMS: 

Background

The legislature is an institution which represents the common and collective interests of the citizens through the enactment of laws and the exercise of oversight functions on the activities of the executive arm of government.

Therefore, the major interest of a legislator is representation and presentation of the common interest of its citizens. These interests are domiciled in the various executive functions in the MDA’s. it will then be wise to say that; economic activities and growth of the nation are dependent on the relationship between the appropriation and implementation through oversight activities.

The power of oversight is conferred on the Nigerian legislature by the Constitution to enable the National Assembly to expose corruption, inefficiency, or waste in the execution or administration of laws within its legislative competence and in the disbursement and administration of funds appropriated by the Acts

Therefore, Legislative Oversight, one of the cornerstones of democracy, refers to the legislature’s review and evaluation of the selected activities of the executive arm of government. It is a means for holding the executive accountable for its actions and for ensuring that policies are implemented in an effective manner.

All these powers to legislate is vested in the National Assembly through the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria

“4(1) The Legislative powers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria shall be vested in a National Assembly for the Federation which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives.”

The constitution further vested the power to control public funds to the Legislatures as contained in the Section 80 (3)

“No money shall be withdrawn from any public fund of the Federation, other than the Consolidated of the Federation unless the issue of that money has been authorized by an Act of the National Assembly”

Oversight functions serve a variety of purposes:

·         It creates investors’ confidence and attracts more private sector participation.

·         to keep the executive establishment responsible and accountable,

·         to promote rationality and efficiency in the formulation and administration of public policy,

·         to reap party advantage and to advance the causes of individual legislators’ interest groups and other stakeholders in the polity.

·         It involves the responsibility of legislative committees to review, study and evaluate on a continual basis

Through an effective exercise of oversight functions, the legislature can exercise adequate checks and balances, transparency and political legitimacy and better enforce financial regulations and policies and ensure wide participation, ownership and sustainable democracy. The legislature can create a responsible and accountable environment that facilitates the achievement of development goals

Power to Conduct Investigations

Section 88 of the constitution vests the National Assembly with the power to conduct investigations into any matter or thing with respect to which it has powers to make laws. It also has the power to conduct investigations into the conduct or affairs of any person, authority, ministry, or government department charged, or intended to be charged with the duty or responsibility of executing or administering laws enacted by it and the disbursement or administration of funds appropriated or to be appropriated by the legislature.

These powers are meant to expose corruption, inefficiency or waste in the execution or administration of laws within its legislative competence and in the disbursement or administration of funds appropriated by the legislature.

Emerging issues and Barriers to Oversight Functions

 Inspite of the important role that oversight functions play in nation building, there are various factors that contribute to diminish the legislature’s capacity to engage in steady and resourceful oversight of the executive. They include;

i.              Conflict of Interest (COI)-this is a serious issue that pose a barrier to a legislative functions and oversights leading to corrupt decision making by members due to vested interest.

ii.            Lack of Democratic Culture The presence of amateur legislators in great number and the shortage of staff aides due to the lack of continuity in legislative membership accounts for the lapses of the legislature in the discharge of its functions. The vast majority of new democracies lack a democratic culture, dialogue, tolerance and respect for each other’s opinion. These are relatively new concepts. This constitutes a serious handicap for the development of parliamentary democracy which is founded on the virtues of robust debate and compromise on major issues of national interest.

iii.           Personal Ambition, Interest, and Agenda of Legislators. The leadership of the National Assembly or State Houses of Assembly often demonstrate propensity for confrontation with the executive without reflecting on the negative impact on the national or public interest.

iv.           Adverse Legislative Environment The large number of legislators tend to induce the members into compromising stands in order to be noticed or to get the projects for their constituency noticed by the executives.

v.            vi. Undermining Legislative Oversight Functions by the Executive.

vi.            Other barriers to effective exercise of oversight functions especially in Nigeria can be summarized as follows; the politically charged environment of conflicting interests, antagonism between the majority and opposition parties often resulting in a stalemate; antagonism between the legislature and the government with the latter often reluctant.

*Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, @Interactive session organised by the Senate Committee on Communication in Lagos.

ITREALMS ... everything news digitally!