Connect with us

News

Senate re-amends electoral bill to define mode of primaries 

Published

on

Senate Chamber
Senate in Session
Share

*Political parties must follow the law or miss out in elections – Lawan
 
The Senate on Tuesday re-amended for a second time, the Electoral Act Amendment Bill, 2022, to include provisions which clearly define the mode of primaries for political parties.

The re-amendment was sequel to a motion on “rescission on clause 84 of the Electoral Act No. 26 2010 (Amendment) Bill, 2022 and Committal to the Committee of the Whole.”

The motion was sponsored by the Senate Leader, Yahaya Abdullahi (Kebbi North).

The Senate President, Ahmad Lawan, after the amendment to the electoral bill by the Committee of the Whole, said the re-amendment was done to harmonize its position with that of the House of Representatives.

He added that amendment accommodate clearly define provisions for the mode of primaries.

Lawan expressed optimism that the bill would be signed into law when transmitted by the National Assembly to the President for his assent.

He warned that political parties that fail or refuse to abide with the provisions on the mode of primaries, would miss out on the opportunity to participate during elections.

He said, “On the mode of conducting primaries by parties to produce candidates, we have concluded our task on the amendment to the Electoral Act No. 6 2010 Bill.

“You would recalled that the Senate and the House passed the Electoral Act amendment Bill with slight difference.

“While the House passed the mode of primaries to be direct and indirect only, the Senate passed the mode of primaries to be direct, indirect and consensus.

“What we have done is to give very clear and sufficient definition to each mode of primaries.

“The direct primaries is well define on how it will be conducted; ditto the Indirect primaries. And for the consensus, the two chambers have produced in this Bill, very clear definition of how a consensus candidate would emerge.

“Therefore, we are very glad that we have been able to achieve this consensus between the two chambers to arrive at this harmonized version, and we are also very optimistic that Mr. President will sign the bill.

“Our desire is to ensure that we reform the electoral processes in Nigeria for better transparency, accountability and Integrity to the satisfaction of Nigerians and the international community.

“Political parties, when this is signed into law, will have the responsibility of ensuring that they follow the law, otherwise they will end up missing the opportunity to participate in elections.”

The amended bill provides in clause 84 (2) that, “The procedure for the nomination of candidates by political parties for the various elective positions shall be by direct, indirect primaries or Consensus.”

It added in 84(3) that “a political party shall not impose nomination qualification or disqualification criteria, measures, or conditions on any aspirant or candidate for any election in its constitution, guidelines, or rules for nomination of candidates for elections, except as prescribed under sections 65, 66, 106, 107, 131, 137, 177 and 187 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).”

On Direct Primaries in 84 (4), the amended version provides that, “A political party that adopts the direct primaries procedure shall ensure that all aspirants are given equal opportunity of being voted for by members of the party and shall adopt the procedure outlined below:

“(a) In the case of Presidential Primaries, all registered members of the party shall vote for aspirants of their choice at a designated centre at each ward of the Federation.

“(b) The procedure in paragraph (a) above of this subsection shall be adopted for direct primaries in respect of Gubernatorial, Senatorial, Federal and State Constituencies.

“(c) Special Conventions or Congresses shall be held to ratify the candidate with the highest number of votes at designated centres at the National, State, Senatorial, Federal and State Constituencies, as the case may be.”

On Indirect Primaries, the bill provides under 84(5) that, “A political party that adopts the system of indirect primaries for the choice of its candidate shall adopt the procedure outlined below:

“(a) In the case of nominations to the position of Presidential candidate, the political party shall – (i) hold a Special Presidential Convention at a designated centre in the Federal Capital Territory or any other place within the Federation that is agreed to by the National Executive Committee of the party where delegates shall vote for aspirants of their choice.

“(ii) the aspirant with the highest number of votes cast at the end of voting shall be declared the winner of the Presidential primaries of the political party and that aspirant’s name shall be forwarded to the Commission as the candidate of the party.”

It further provides under 84(7) that, “Where there is only one aspirant or a consensus candidate in a political party for any of the elective positions mentioned in subsection (5)(a), (b), (c) and (d), the party shall convene a special convention or congress at a designated Centre on a specified date for the confirmation of such aspirant and the name of the aspirant shall be forwarded to the Independent National Electoral Commission as the candidate of the party.”

The Electoral Bill provides in 84(8) that, “A political party that adopts the system of indirect primaries for the choice of its candidate shall clearly outline in its constitution and rule the procedure for the democratic election of delegates to vote at the convention, congress meeting.”

On Consensus Candidate the bill in 84(9)(a) provides, “A political party that adopts a consensus candidate shall secure the written consent of all cleared aspirants for the position, indicating their voluntary withdrawal from the race and their endorsement of the consensus candidate.”

It goes further in paragraph (b) that, “Where a political party is unable to secure the written consent of all cleared aspirants for the purpose of a consensus candidate, it shall revert to the choice of direct or indirect primaries for the nomination of candidates for the aforesaid elective positions.”

The bill states in paragraph (c) that, “A Special Convention or nomination Congress shall be held to ratify the choice of consensus candidates at designated centres at the National, State, Senatorial, Federal and State Constituencies, as the case may be.”
 

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Senate Moves to Reshape Legal Profession, Proposes Two-Year Mandatory Pupillage for New Lawyers

Published

on

Senate Logo
Share

The Nigerian Senate on Wednesday considered sweeping reforms to the legal profession, passing into second reading a bill seeking to amend the Legal Practitioners Act 2004. Central to the proposal is a mandatory two-year pupillage programme for newly called lawyers, designed to align training and regulation with global best practices.

Debating the bill at plenary, lawmakers agreed that the legal system must evolve in response to technological advancement, complex commercial transactions, and growing demands for professional accountability. The bill was sponsored and led by the Leader of the Senate, Senator Opeyemi Bamidele.

According to Bamidele, the current law — nearly six decades old in design — no longer reflects contemporary realities of legal practice. He explained that the reform seeks to modernise oversight structures, strengthen discipline mechanisms, and enhance the quality of service within the profession.

A major highlight of the bill is the restructuring of the Body of Benchers, which, for the first time, will be established as a corporate legal entity with financial autonomy, strengthened secretariat, and defined rule-making authority. The reforms also introduce a clearer institutional framework for committees, oversight, and policy enforcement.

The Senate Leader stressed that the initiative would deliver “a coordinated and well-modernised regulatory framework that addresses admission to the bar, discipline, and professional standards.”

The bill also seeks to fast-track disciplinary processes by reorganising the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC). Under the proposed structure, multiple panels would sit across the country while wielding broader sanctioning powers, including suspension, disbarment, restitution, compensation, cost awards, and formal apologies. For transparency, disciplinary outcomes will be published, while affected practitioners will retain the right of appeal to the Supreme Court.

Additionally, the proposal creates a new Ethics, Adherence and Enforcement Committee empowered to inspect law offices, demand records, investigate public complaints, and prosecute cases before the LPDC.

To further boost competence, two years of compulsory pupillage and ongoing professional development will now be requirements for lawyers before full practice certification and licence renewal.

The bill also criminalises unauthorised legal practice, clearly defining the practice of law to protect the public from impersonators and unqualified service providers. Other provisions address the regulation of foreign lawyers, reform of the Senior Advocate of Nigeria rank, and improved safeguards for clients and public trust.

Speaking in support, Chief Whip of the Senate, Senator Tahir Monguno, recalled his experience entering practice over 35 years ago, noting that the realities of the digital age justify reform.

“This bill is very apt and germane,” Monguno said. “We are in the digital age, and our legal profession must reflect these realities.”

The Senate subsequently referred the bill to its Committee on Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Matters for public hearing and a report within two weeks.

 

Continue Reading

News

Tinubu Approves Nigerian Team for US–Nigeria Joint Security Working Group

Published

on

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu
Share

President Bola Tinubu has approved the Nigerian contingent of the US–Nigeria Joint Working Group, a new collaborative platform aimed at strengthening security cooperation between both countries.

The decision follows agreements reached during a recent high-level visit to Washington, D.C., led by the National Security Adviser (NSA), Nuhu Ribadu. Ribadu will head the Nigerian side of the Working Group, supported by senior officials drawn from key security and government institutions.

The Nigerian members include Minister of Foreign Affairs, Amb. Yusuf Maitama Tuggar; Minister of Defence, Mohammed Badaru Abubakar; Minister of Interior, Hon. Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo; and the Minister of Humanitarian Affairs, Dr. Bernard M. Doro.

Also on the team are the Chief of Defence Staff, Gen. Olufemi Oluyede; Director-General of the National Intelligence Agency, Amb. Mohammed Mohammed; and the Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun.

Ms. Idayat Hassan of the Office of the National Security Adviser and Mr. Paul Alabi of the Nigerian Embassy in the United States will serve as the secretariat.

President Tinubu urged the members to work closely with their US counterparts to ensure the effective implementation of all agreements reached across various sectors.

The announcement was made on Wednesday in a statement by Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy.

Continue Reading

News

Obasanjo Returns $20,000 Allegedly Given for Fayose’s Birthday Logistics

Published

on

EX President Olusegun Obasanjo and Former Ekiti State, Ayo Fayose
Share

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo has returned the $20,000 allegedly provided to him by former Ekiti State Governor, Ayo Fayose, ahead of Fayose’s 65th birthday celebration, following a fresh disagreement between the two political figures.

Fayose confirmed the development during an interview with AF24 News, where he narrated the sequence of events surrounding the controversy. According to him, preparations for his birthday prompted him to reach out to individuals he had previously fallen out with politically. He noted that this move was aimed at “mending fences,” but stressed that his call to Obasanjo should not be misconstrued as an apology.

The former governor recounted that Obasanjo visited his Lagos residence days before the celebration and expressed willingness to attend the event, despite having a conflicting engagement in Rwanda. Fayose said that during the visit, Obasanjo requested financial support for his travel logistics, prompting him to provide $20,000.

“I changed $20,000 and gave it to him. How can you accept somebody’s money and come and be spiting that person?” Fayose said, expressing disappointment over Obasanjo’s subsequent public remarks.

The matter escalated after Obasanjo stated that he had not opened the money and would return it, comments that Fayose considered disrespectful. In response, Fayose said he sent the former president a strongly worded text message demanding clarity and expressing his displeasure.

Following the exchange, Obasanjo reportedly returned the money.

“I have written to him, and he has returned my $20,000,” Fayose confirmed during the interview. When asked how he felt about the return of the funds, he replied: “I am very happy. I will not allow such a man to carry my money away.”

The clash adds another layer to the long-standing political tension between both men, who have had a history of public disagreements spanning several years.

Continue Reading