Court never said you had power to increase budget, Falana tells lawmakers
Femi Falana, human rights lawyer, says a federal high court never ruled that the national assembly had power to increase estimates of the appropriation act.
He was reacting to a claim by the house of representatives that “the federal high court has ruled that the national assembly has the power to increase or review upward the budget estimates laid before it by the executive”.
Last week, the senate and the house issued statements flaying Babatunde Fashola, minister of works, power and housing, for saying that the national assembly introduced new projects into the 2017 budget.
The minister was also reported to have said that the legislature indiscriminately reduced the budgetary allocations of some projects, and that a judicial remedy might be sought to determine if the national assembly had the power to increase budget estimates.
In response, the national assembly explained it reduced the budgetary allocations of some projects for the sake of prudence.
In a statement issued on Tuesday, Falana said a court never ruled that the legislature could upwardly review the budget.
“Sometime in 2014, I had cause to challenge the extent of the oversight powers of the national assembly to rewrite the appropriation bill or increase the budget estimates presented to it by the president. (See Suit No FHC/ABJ/CS/295/2014: Femi Falana v the president and three Ors),” he said.
“In dismissing the case the respected learned trial judge, the Honourable Justice G O Kolawole questioned my locus standi to institute the action after he had described me as ‘a renowned human rights crusader’ and acknowledged my humble contributions to ‘the development of human rights jurisprudence in Nigeria’. In justifying the dismissal of the suit his lordship said that the reliefs sought in the case qualified me to be described as a ‘meddlesome interloper’.
“No doubt, the learned trial judge said that the national assembly is not a rubber stamp parliament. The incontestable statement has since been twisted to give the very erroneous impression that the power of the national assembly to increase the budget has been judicially recognised. With respect, the summary of the decision of the court by the national assembly is grossly misleading.
“In the entire 22-page judgment the learned trial judge never said that the national assembly has the power to increase any budget proposal submitted to it by the president. On the contrary, the federal high court made it categorically clear that the national assembly lacks the legislative powers to prepare ‘budget estimates’ for the president or ‘disregard the budget proposals laid before it and substitute it with its own estimates’.
“Even though I have taken the legal battle over the dismissal of the case to the court of appeal, I wish to state, without any fear of contradiction, that the learned trial judge concurred with my submission that the constitution has not vested the national assembly with powers to increase the budget.”
days gud to hear
Your comment..The likes of Femi Falana and Sagy constitute some of the problems this country is passing through today. They speak from both sides of their mouths. By now we expects Femi Falana to approach the court about the sudden disappearance of the President Nigerians voted but come to television with trivial issues. If the National Assembly has no power to alter any part of the budget then no need for the executive to present before it for consideration. Let Femi tell Nigerians the simple meanings of consideration and approval. Considering in this context implies correction inputs. Right in front of his nose in Lagos, a governor spent eight years in office, the only thank you from such a man to Lagosians is to make his wife a senator till date; yet the likes of Femi claim to be human rights lawyers and accord such a man national leader. Thank God your likes are fast expiring. If nobody can stop you and your likes definitely natural efforts will stop you.
You are taking it too personal.make your contribution without utterances.
IF YOU HAVE PERSONAL ISSUES WITH THE TINUBU, CHOOSE ANOTHER MEDIUM TO EXPRESS IT. THE CASE OF BUDGETING IS NOT AN AVENUE FOR YOU TO CONDEMN MAN WHO HAS NO INPUT ABOUT THE BUDGET
Falana has stated his own position and even went to court in furtherance of it. Let us know your position. If I campaigned to reduce the nations debt burden and I get the peoples vote, I am supposed to tailor my budget to achieve that purpose. By the NASS argument if I send a budget of 5 trillion, they can make it 6, 7 or 8, ridiculous. You can liaise with the executive but you cannot distort the overall priority of the executive. In this particular case the overall is for improved capital spending to build internal capacity for growth but NASS is distorting that. There are three of such borehole in my town, one by DIFRI and two by legislators, no drop of water. Another federal health centre in the LG area is now overgrown by weeds. Better to give states grants and collaborate for projects than for a federal legislator or agency to dabble into state projects without any structure for maintenance. It is better to cancel a budget head than to reduce it in such a way that it will suffer abandonment.
So this is my issue with a lot of Nigerians. Has Falana raised a valid point here? yes he has. Do you have grievances over the handling of Lagos state during Tinubu’s adminstration. it appears you do. Does that take away from the validity of Falana’s deductions or render them null and void?No it does not. Let us encourage the people that speak up against the wrongs going on around us (whether or not they pander to our own personal interests or opinions) The idea of the three governments and separation of power is so that no one single entity could come into power and ignore the liberties of the people. Separation of power also provides check and balances where the branches of government may check one another’s powers and equilibrium with their own. It does not however mean that you have multiple branches carrying out the same function. I personally feel it would have been more appropriate for the house to invite the Ministers to justify their entries (when clarification was needed)and then recommend the insertion of additional entries under relevant ministries if they felt those entries would better portray the with the Federal Character of the country as they claim. Separation of power should not imply duplication of duties.