The situation in Ekiti betrays the expectations of good leadership and dividend of democracy for which the people gave their popular votes on June 21, 2014
The current reports coming from Ekiti State involving the Governor of the State, Ayo Fayose and the House of Assembly leave much to be desired. Reports have it that seven members of the 26-member assembly reconvened plenary – when the House was supposed to be on recess – sat on a Monday (a legislative work-free day) and approved the governor’s commissioner nominees. All of these under the watchful eyes of about 300 policemen deployed to give them cover. And the following day, the governor sealed-off the office of the Speaker and sacked his aides vide letters from the Secretary to the State Government (SSG). Obviously, it is too early in the day for Fayose and all the actors in Ekiti to drag the state into crisis. Therefore, all stakeholders need to act within the ambits of the law and interest of the people.
This Newspaper finds these crises within a month of Fayose’s tenure in office as setting a dangerous situation in Ekiti State, which is in all ramifications detrimental to the development of our democracy. It is obvious that for good governance to thrive in a democracy, the legislature must be seen as being truly independent. As such, those who swore to uphold the tenet and letters of the Nigerian Constitution in principle must live up to that dictate. That members of the Ekiti State House of Assembly and the Speaker are of the opposition party do not in anyway undermine the mandate that Fayose holds as governor. He ought therefore not to be cowed into desperation and to do things that are inimical to the people of the state and the constitution.
We are also mindful of the fact that for the Speaker to have given the House recess, a day after Fayose was sworn-in speaks ‘volume.’ But Fayose and members of the House could work in harmony since they are supposedly in offices for the common good of the Ekiti people. In the true sense of it, democracy ought to thrive better with the opposition in control of the legislature. That helps to check the excesses of the executive – as the case is often with the American mid-term election for legislature.
It is however sad that the governor, while fielding reporters’ questions, compared what is happening in Ekiti to have precedents in Edo and Rivers States. While there is no basis for comparing the current situation in Ekiti with what obtained in Edo and Rivers where the governors have controlling majority in the Houses of Assembly, this nevertheless brings into focus the need to actually ensure the separation of powers between the executive and the legislative arms of government.
Indeed, the development in this “Land of Honour”, once more, raises the issue of who defends the constitution in matters like this? For instance, can the action of the seven legislators stand as legal and binding on the state? Or must someone with a locus standi approach the courts for interpretation of such breach of the constitution?
The situation in Ekiti smacks of illegality and impunity which betrays the expectations of good leadership and dividend of democracy for which the people gave their popular votes on June 21, 2014.
