Lawmakers want court to legalise ‘budget padding
A group of serving and former members of the House of
Representatives have concluded plans to approach the courts for the
interpretation of Section 80 (4) of the 1999 Constitution as amended.
This
they say, is in efforts at correcting the impression that Nigerian
lawmakers criminally inflate budget proposals submitted by the executive
arm of government.
The
lawmakers said their intent is to ask the courts to give an
interpretation on the ownership of budget between the executive and the
legislature.
The section of the
constitution the lawmakers are seeking interpretation for confers
absolute power on the legislature over public funds.
Section
80 (4) “No money shall be withdrawn from the Consolidated Revenue Fund
or any other public fund of the Federation, except in the manner
prescribed by the National Assembly”.
The
lawmakers, under the aegis of Faculty Board of Initiatives, FBI, said
the controversy generated by the budget padding issue has made it
expedient to approach the court for proper interpretation of the law.
According to Eseme Oyibo, the spokesman of FBI, said at a press briefing on Thursday
that the group believed that ‘padding’ was a misapplication of word
because, as lawmakers, the constitution allowed budget proposals to be
adjusted which was why it was presented as a bill by the President.
Eyibo,
a former spokesman of the House of Representatives, said the annual
Appropriation bill flows from the Executive to the Legislature and goes
back to the Executive after its passage before assent and
implementation.
According to
him, pre-budget meeting between both arms of government that allows the
executive to take into account the input of the legislature would have
been of no basis, if it was not provided for by the constitution.
He
however admitted that an abuse of the process was possible, while also
urging Nigerians to protect the legislature in order to ensure checks
and balances, as well as separation of power in government.
“The
Appropriation act is a law which flows from budgetary estimate from
executive to the legislature and back to the presidency as prescribed by
section 80 sub section 4 of the constitution.
“The
question is could the framers of the constitution could have envisaged
that no money from the consolidation fund be spent without the
prescription of the legislature?
“It
goes to mean that budget was not meant to be rubber stamped by the
legislature. Budgetary proposal was intended to come through the
legislature so that the principles of balance and separation of power
could be strengthened.
“Adjustments made in the budget is what we believe that the budget must have been padded. The term is wrongly applied here”.
“Constituency
and zonal interventions projects is in tandem with democratic tenets,
Nigerians must protect the sanctity of the legislature because it
remains an integral part of democracy and rule of law in the polity.
“It
is important to preserve the institution. Let us not behave like a
society acting drama in the theatre of the absurd. I am pleading with
Nigerians that please the word padding is a misapplication in the
circumstances of the budget.
“Constituency
projects and zonal interventions projects are intended to serve the
people. We are here to call for the preservation of the institution and
express support for the president.”
Comments
Post a Comment