Members of the House of Representatives recently had a rowdy plenary as they disagreed on which committee to conduct investigations into alleged illegal allocation of government land at the Trade Fair Complex in Lagos, PHILIP NYAM reports
Disagreements and even fights are common features of parliaments across the globe. But when lawmakers disagree over a matter that does not call for controversy, the public becomes uncomfortable and suspicious.
It is against this backdrop that the House of Representatives has received a lot of bashing from constituents, political analysts and social commentators over the rowdiness that characterized its plenary session penultimate Tuesday. It was an issue of jurisdiction.
The legislators had engaged in a heated debate over which committee should be saddled with the responsibility to investigate alleged irregularities surrounding the allocation and management of the Lagos International Trade Fair Complex. However, the public found this development surprising because each of the standing committees of the House has its jurisdiction clearly spelt out in the Rules and Standing Orders of the chamber.
Even ad hoc committees have their terms of reference explicitly enumerated, leading members of the public to question the reasons behind the interest shown by lawmakers regarding which committee to conduct the investigation of alleged illegal and criminal allocation of federal government land at the Lagos Trade Fair Complex. Analysts are also divided as to whether the dispute was caused out of national, personal or pecuniary interest.
The motion
The dispute arose following the motion of urgent public importance sponsored by Hon. Ademorin Kuye (APC, Lagos). Kuye had in the motion sought an inquiry into reports of unauthorised sales and mismanagement of government assets at the complex, suggesting that the Committee on Public Assets should spearhead the investigation.
Presenting the motion at the plenary presided over by Deputy Speaker, Benjamin Kalu, Kuye submitted that the 350 hectares Lagos International Trade Fair complex facility along LagosBadagry Expressway was constructed and opened in 1977 to coincide with the first Lagos international fair.
According to him, the complex, uniquely designed with exposition halls, demonstration halls for the federal government, state governments, international corporations, as well as recreation parks, artificial lake, chalets, press centres, shopping stalls and a festival square.
He informed that in 1994, the Federal Government leased some spaces at the Lagos International Trade Fair Complex to businesses from the Balogun Market to enable them move and decongest Lagos Island. According to him, following this, in September 2002, the Balogun Business Association and its over 53,000 members, the Auto Spare Parts and Machineries Dealers Association (ASPAMDA), Cosmetic & Jewellers under the Banners of Association of Progressive Traders as well as professionals and corporate bodies operating under the name International Centre for Commerce, moved to the Lagos International Trade Fair Complex.
The Lagos lawmaker noted that there have been allegations of gross abuse of power, underhand tactics and misappropriation of funds and dues over the years by the Board of Trustees and Management of the Lagos International Trade Fair Complex Ltd. “Concerned that the master plan for the development of the Lagos International Trade Fair Complex have been significantly altered and land belonging to the Federal Government is being balkanized by the current Management of the Lagos International Trade Fair Complex.
“More concerned that the Lagos International Trade Fair Complex is a conflagration of ethnic fire waiting to happen as honest businesses are losing money and being ruined by unilaterally allocating approving and monitoring of the construction without recourse to statutorily mandated agencies at the state and federal level,” he submitted.
Kuye argued that he is most worried as hundreds of billions of revenue that should be generated from the complex is going to pockets through this misappropriation of land at the complex Consequently, he prayed the chambers to mandate the House Committee on Public Assets to investigate the illegal and criminal allocation of Federal Government land at the Lagos International Trade Fair Complex by the management in order to avert impending riots and implosion.
The disagreement
Kuye’s proposal was however challenged by the chairman of the Committee on Rules and Business, Francis Waive (APC, Delta), who argued that the matter fell under the jurisdiction of the Committee on Commerce. His objection triggered a series of exchanges among lawmakers, each side defending the oversight powers of their respective committees.
Ordinarily, Waive, being in charge of Rules and Business Committee, is supposed to be the custodians of the House Rules and his position on issues would be taken as sacrosanct. But Waive’s intervention was quickly countered by the chairman of the House Committee on Navy, Hon. Yusuf Adamu Gagdi (APC, Plateau).
Citing the House Standing Orders, specifically Order 109, Rules 1 and 2, Gagdi argued that all Federal Government properties, including the Lagos Trade Fair Complex, fall within the purview of the Committee on Public Assets. According to Gagdi, the complex remains a federal property, and oversight responsibility should therefore rest with the Public Assets Committee rather than Commerce.
“If you check Order 109, it clearly states that the Committee on Public Assets oversees ministries and agencies charged with the management and disposal of public assets.
The Lagos Trade Fair is one of such public assets,” Gagdi stated. However, Hon. Mark Essiet (APC, Akwa Ibom) backed Waive’s position disagreeing with Kuye and Gagdi, insisting that the Trade Fair Complex falls under the purview of the Committee on Commerce. “Trade fair is not a public asset being sold.
It is a commercial entity, and the House Rules on page 153 clearly list it under the functions of the Committee on Commerce. If the House has made a mistake by its earlier decision, we have the powers to reverse it,” Essiet stated. These arguments led to a tensed atmosphere in the chambers, necessitating the Deputy Minority Leader, Ali Isa (PDP, Gombe) urged his colleagues to exercise restraint and adhere to procedure.
He instead, proposed the creation of a joint committee. He also suggested that the Committee on Commerce take the lead, with the Committee on Public Assets and other relevant committees participating. His motion was however not supported by any of his colleagues. Following Ali’s failed bid to calm the lawmakers, chairman of the Committee on Solid Minerals, Jonathan Gbefwi (SDP, Nasarawa) proposed a different approach, supporting a joint committee but insisting that the Committee on Public Assets should lead the inquiry since the issue centred on the ownership and potential sale of a property belonging to the Federal Government.
He argued that while activities at the complex relate to commerce, the underlying matter involves public assets belonging to the Federal Government.
But as the tension raged, a new twist to the argument was introduced by the Deputy Chairman of the Committee on Commerce, James Wubarka (PDP, Adamawa), who informed the chamber that his committee had already begun oversight work on the complex, including two visits. He cautioned that reassigning the investigation will undermine his committee’s ongoing efforts and encroach on its jurisdiction.
Speaker’s intervention
As tension continued unabated, Deputy Speaker, Kalu, intervened to restore order, clarifying that the motion before the House concerned the allocation of the premises used for trade fairs rather than the commercial operations.
To end the deadlock, the deputy speaker ruled that an ad hoc committee made up of members from both the Public Assets and Commerce Committees would be set up to conduct a joint investigation.
Rejection
Despite the ruling by the deputy speaker, the lawmakers remained indignant as the disagreements persisted. As a result, when the main motion was eventually put to a voice vote, it was rejected by a majority. The development led to a noisy and tense session, forcing Kalu to call for calm. He therefore called for a closed-door meeting to address the dispute.
