Fireworks Over Elumelu’s Call for Pantami’s Resignation

Udora Orizu writes that members of the House of Representatives recently argued over Minority Leader, Hon. Ndudi Elumelu’s motion calling for resignation of the Minister of Communications and Digital Economy, Isa Pantami for his past comments backing activities of terror groups

It was a dramatic week at the House of Representatives, as the Majority and Minority caucuses of the lower chamber clashed, over the procedure taken by the Minority Leader, Hon. Ndudi Elumelu, to call for resignation or sack of the Minister of Communications and Digital Economy, Isa Pantami for his past comments backing activities of terrorists.

The Pantami Controversy

The Minister of Communications and Digital Economy, Isa Pantami is currently facing serious backlash as the views he held in the past about terrorism came to light.

Over one decade ago, Pantami vocally promoted the vicious Jihadist narrative of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. He took extreme positions in support of the ruthless exploits of Taliban elements and Al Qaeda. The Minister, in some of his videos on YouTube, spoke glowingly of Abu Quatada, al Falasimi and other Al-Qaeda leaders he admired. In one of the videos, while responding to a question about Osama Bin Laden’s killing of innocent “unbelievers,” Pantami said although he conceded that Laden was liable to err because he was human: “I still consider him as a better Muslim than myself. We are all happy whenever unbelievers are being killed, but the Sharia does not allow us to kill them without a reason. This jihad is an obligation for every single believer, especially in Nigeria,” he said.

In another audiotape, Pantami was engaged in a tearful defense of murderous Boko Haram against alleged extra-judicial killings by the Nigerian military and asked for an amnesty for them just like Niger Delta militants: “See what our fellow Muslim brothers’ blood has turned to? Even pig blood has more value than that of a fellow Muslim brother.”

These recordings of him expressing these views began circulating on social media last week, leading to calls from millions of Nigerians for his resignation or sack by President Muhammadu Buhari.

The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in a statement said the minister doesn’t belong to the Federal Executive Council, calling on President Muhammadu Buhari to fire him.

But, the Presidency on the evening of April 22nd rose in stout defence of the embattled Minister, saying he had since apologised for his alleged past association with Al-Qaeda and Taliban.

The Presidency also said the ‘cancel’ campaign against the Minister was aimed at smearing his image despite the good work he was doing to improve the lives of everyday Nigerian in the last two years.

After the Presidency expressed it’s support for the minister, many Nigerians expressed displeasure with the Presidency. Some of them took to the social media to denounce the federal government for backing Pantami. Many wondered why government left former Finance Minister Kemi Adeosun to her fate following a report that she forged her National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) discharge certificate. Others also cited government’s clamp down on end SARS protesters.

Meanwhile at the House of Representatives, it was bandy of words among the lawmakers on the issue at hand.

Elumelu’s Motion

At the plenary on April 21, the Minority Leader of the House of Representatives, Hon. Ndudi Elumelu moved for the immediate resignation or sack of the Minister.

Under Matters of Privilege, Elumelu asked the House to cause a debate on the issue, stressing that Pantami’s apology does not hold water and he should be sacked.

Elumelu said: “Mr Speaker, my privilege borders on one of the serving ministers called Sheikh Ali Isa Ibrahim Pantami. He is the Minister for Communication and Digital Economy of the federal republic. And the portfolio that he currently occupies gives him the free latitude to administer, coordinate and manage the flow of sensitive information within and outside the shores of Nigeria.

“And Mr. Speaker, there have been insinuations that he has direct links and personally subscribes to the extreme Islamic believe of Al-Queda, Taliban and Boko Haram sects. Evidence available on the cyberspace lays strong credence to a relationship and existing mutual collaboration between him and the deceased Yemen terrorist. Recently, Mr Speaker, while the minister was answering questions during his daily Ramadan lecture, a few days back, he owned up that he took extreme positions in support of the brutal exploits of Al-Queda and the Taliban out of ignorance, claiming that he was young when he did that, but now he is matured.

“Mr Speaker, my worry is that I am a serving member of this chamber and in the last few days, I have been inundated with calls from my constituents claiming that if it is right, that this House they have always seen talk about insecurity can sit down on this floor and tolerate the fact that a serving minister where there are allegations of him being a member of Al-Queda and Boko Haram, owned up and said that he did whatever he did at that time because at that time he was a youth and he is still serving in this administration. Mr Speaker, I feel it will be out of place for me to sit here and not to speak about it and totally call for his resignation or suspension.”

Ruling on the matter, the Speaker Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila faulted Elumelu for raising a point of privilege without showing how his privileges were breached.

”I think you came under the wrong order. But your point of order is well noted. As you know, under privilege we don’t debate such issues,” Gbajabiamila said.

The Clarification

Following the Speaker’s ruling, some media outfits misreported that Gbajabiamila had blocked Elumelu’s motion preventing him from calling for Pantami’s resignation. This led to a statement of clarification, by Spokesman of the House, Hon. Benjamin Kalu.

Kalu in the statement said Elumelu’s motion was not a shutdown of Elumelu’s views, rather it was to point out its wrong presentation, adding that the House of Representatives will hear the call by Elumelu for the resignation of the Minister when it is properly presented before it.

The statement read thus, “The House is aware of several publications on online and in traditional media claiming that the Speaker of the House, Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila blocked a motion by the Minority Leader of the House, Hon. Ndudi Elumelu purportedly demanding the resignation of the Minister of Communications and Digital Economy, Isa Pantami.

“This misrepresentation of facts for the sake of sensationalism has necessitated this statement of clarification. For the avoidance of doubt, the House is guided by the Standing Orders of the House of Representatives (House Rules) in its operations and administration. In this case, the Minority Leader should have known better than to present such an issue for debate via Order 6 of the House Rules which only applies to Legislative Privileges.

“He ought to have come under Order 8 Rule 4, as a matter of Urgent National Importance, or via a Motion on Notice to enable other members to second the motion and make their contributions through debate in a truly democratic fashion, after which the House would be able to take a position on the issue. It is, therefore, pertinent to inform Nigerians that the House has not acted in error, but in line with the provisions of its rules. All insinuations that the House did not allow democratic debate to take place on the important issue of Pantami’s resignation are simply untrue.

”The House acknowledges the severity of the issue and its nature as a matter of public concern. As always, the House stands ready to give audience to Hon. Elumelu or any other member of the House on this issue, provided that such audience is sought through the proper channels and brought under the relevant rules of the House.”

The Minority Caucus Fired Back

Reacting to Kalu’s statement, the Minority Caucus of the House of Representatives fired back at the Spokesman, insisting that Elumelu’s motion was properly presented at the floor of the House.

The caucus said the order was properly cited by Elumelu, stressing that the matter was also debatable.

In a statement on April 23rd signed by the spokesman of the Minority caucus, Hon. Francis Ottah Agbo, the caucus rejected the position of the House Spokesman, demanding for an apology from Kalu.

The lawmakers while reiterating its call for the resignation of the Communication Minister, said the statement also points to a deliberate scheme to jeopardize the nation’s fight against terrorism.

The statement read in part, ”The attention of the Minority Caucus in the House of Representatives has been drawn to a statement by the Chairman of House Committee on Media and Public Affairs/ Spokesman of the House, Hon. Benjamin Kalu, which clearly exposed a sinister intention to misrepresent the rules of the House, mislead the undiscerning public and frustrate genuine effort in the fight against terrorism in our country.

”We find it shocking that instead of standing with Nigerians at this critical moment, Hon. Kalu chose to engage in a personal attack on the Minority Leader, Hon Ndudi Elumelu, for pointing to the dangers of retaining in office, the Minister of Communications and Digital Economy, Isa Pantami, after reports of the minister’s support for terrorists came to the fore. This is especially after the minister himself admitted to the facts of his sympathy for violent, extremist and terrorist groups, including, the al-Qaida and Taliban.

“Indeed, Hon. Kalu’s claim that our Minority Leader did not properly present his motion, under an appropriate rule is completely dumb, frivolous and exposes his poor knowledge of the legislative procedures. It also points to a deliberate scheme to jeopardize our nation’s fight against terrorism. Furthermore, we take a strong exception to Hon. Kalu’s vain posturing of trying to tutor the Minority Leader, a well respected seasoned legislator, on the House Standing Rules and parliamentary convention!

“It is instructive to state that the motion by the Minority Leader calling for the resignation or sack of the Minister by President Muhammadu Buhari was properly presented under the House rules as provided in Order 6: 1,2&3 (Privileges), contrary to claims by Hon. Kalu. Order 6:1,2,3 clearly and generously provide for a full debate on the issue brought pursuant to it.

“For the avoidance of doubt, while sub-section 2 of the Order 6 provides that “whenever a matter of privilege arises, it shall be taken into consideration immediately”, subsection 3 is clear in providing that whenever a matter of privilege arises, it shall be disposed of and no other issue shall be considered until “the debate on a motion thereon” is adjourned”

“Moreover, it is clear that the Speaker, Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila, conceded to the appropriateness of the Order, under which the Minority Leader presented his motion, and for that, did not rule him out of order, regarding the presentation of the motion and its consequential prayers. Furthermore, the Hon. Speaker, in accepting the motion, announced that the issues raised have been noted.

“It is therefore completely irresponsible for anybody, let alone the spokesperson of the House, who should be abreast of the Rules, to state that the Minority Leader ought to have known better than coming under Order 6. His statement is therefore in bad faith and should be disregarded and withdrawn by him immediately.

“Our Caucus will not condone any unwarranted attack on any of our colleagues, let alone the Minority Leader, who is doing very well by speaking the mind of the silent majority of Nigerians, who have no platforms to speak out. In any case, we are aware that Hon. Kalu was not in Plenary when the motion was moved. We expected him to have consulted the Rule book before attacking the Minority Leader. For we believe if he had done that, he would have saved the 9th House of Representatives the embarrassment his statement has caused!

”Our caucus, standing with millions of Nigerians, also demands that the Speaker should immediately act on the prayers of the motion, by conveying same as the position of the House to Mr President, having accepted the appropriateness of the procedure and taken legislative note of the prayers therein.

“As a caucus, we stand behind the Minority Leader in insisting that the Minister of Communications and Digital Economy, Isa Pantami, should resign or be removed by President Muhammadu Buhari, as his continued stay in office poses a great threat to our national security. Insecurity is blind to creed and party colourations and this underscores why the Caucus will resist any attempt by anyone to politicize a clear existential threat to our motherland!”

Kalu Kicks Back

In his reaction, Spokesman of the House, Hon. Benjamin Kalu said the 9th House under the leadership of Speaker Femi Gbajabiamila will never support terrorism or its supporters.

Kalu insisted that Elumelu failed to properly present his motion in a debatable way, ruling out any apology.

The House spokesman, also said Hon. Agbo will be invited to the Ethics and Privileges Committee of the House should he (Agbo) continue to misinform the public.

The statement titled “Isa Pantami: Elumelu’s Improper Presentation”, read in part, “Our attention has been drawn to the press release by one Hon Francis Agbo, who claimed to be the spokesman of the minority caucus, alleging that the speaker was wrong in not allowing the debate on the issue raised by the minority leader. My office will not join personal issues with him or go to the content of the yet to be presented lead debate but will not fail to insist, as follows;

“That the press release in reference, was not directed at the minority leader or to disparage his person in any form, truth be said, raising such issues on behalf of Nigerians defines the value of our representation and we commend him. However, there are rules for such a presentation that must be followed in line with parliamentary practice.

“The House acknowledges the severity of the issue and its nature as a matter of public concern. As always, the House stands ready to give audience to Rep. Ndudi Elumelu or any other member of the House on this issue, provided that such audience is sought through the proper channels and brought under the relevant rules of the House.

“The House rules allow for Motions on Notice, Motions without Notice, and Motions on Matters of Urgent Public Importance. The minority leader could have come under any of these but he erroneously chose to come by way of privileges. That Order 6 (1) reads; Privileges are the rights enjoyed by the House collectively and by the members of the House individually, conferred by the legislative Houses( Powers and Privileges )Act, 2017 and other statutes, Practices, Precedents, Usages, and customs. Purposively speaking, privileges are House-specific either individually or collectively. Therefore, issues that come under privileges must have this all-important element and must not be general in nature.

“That Order 6(3) reads; A member raising a matter of privilege shall draw the attention of the House to the provision(s) of the Legislative Houses ( Powers and Privileges) Act, 2017 or the standing orders of the House and other statutes breached in relation to him or the House. At no point did the minority leader, Hon Ndudi Elumelu comply with these provisions of the house rules, simply because there was no nexus between the issue and the provisions of this Powers and Privileges Act, 2017. The matter did not and will never qualify to be brought to the house under Order 6. (Privileges)

“That the relevant issue raised by Hon Elumelu which is of national importance is inadmissible under privileges for what it seeks to address, since matters under privilege, once breached, must be personal and internal to the House. This is why all matters of privilege are sent to the House committee on ethics and privileges, not to the President directly as the house resolution as alleged by the yet to be tutored “spokesman” of the minority caucus. One wonders what the house committee on ethics and privilege will be doing with the sack of Pantami.

“That there is no debate on privileges unless a motion has arisen from it, in which case, it must be seconded before debated in line with the house rules and procedure to a motion. That Hon Ndudi Elumelu, though seasoned, experienced, and celebrated legislator unlike his spokesman Hon Francis Agbo, came under the wrong order on this issue and the presiding officer, the Rt. Hon. Speaker Femi Gbajabiamila brought it to his notice openly on the floor of the house and in front of the camera watched and heard all over the world.

“That the right parliamentary corridor to pass important issues like this, which had a national out-look, not specific on a particular member of the House to the exclusion of all others and urgent, should have been either through a Motion on Matter of Public Importance or a Motion on Notice, since it concerns the entire nation. That bringing it up under any of the two motions, will give the debate a democratic spread among members from different constituencies to be well heard.

“That at no point did the presiding officer, Rt. Hon Femi Gbajabiamila, acknowledge that Hon Ndudi Elumelu came through the correct Point of Order, rather, he told him the opposite, and Hon Francis Agbo should be honourable enough, not horrible in deceiving Nigerians with his skill in the misrepresentation of facts. I refer Nigerians to the video coverage of the plenary of the said date.

“That it appears the Minority Caucus spokesman is just waking up, because one wonders where he was when Hon Jaha Babao brought a proper Matter under Privileges the following day on the same issue in the presence of the minority leader, to correct all the misrepresentations and unanimously adopted by the House. This resolution of the house is in line with my formal Press Release since it was not contested by any segment of the house including the Minority leader or the Caucus members. It was a very ranking member of the caucus Hon Nkem Abonta, who openly agreed with Hon Jaha Babao and pleaded that the right thing should be done and proper motion tabled by the Minority leader Hon Ndudi Elumelu on this issue before the house. It appears the caucus is divided on this; the knowledgeable against the learners.

“That the minority leader has allowed Hon Francis Agbo to defeat the integrity of the content of his call, by opting to play politics on such a serious matter with his sentimental appeal to the public rather than do the right thing by representing the matter to the house as being guided. After all, the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker at one time or the other were guided and they retraced their procedural steps on important issues ( Eg. Disease control bill and the Diaspora Petition) The minority leader and his mouthpiece are advised to show humility in leadership and service to Nigerians on this issue like the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker have shown severally.

“It is, therefore, pertinent to inform Nigerians that the House has not acted in error, but in line with the provisions of its rules. All insinuations that the House did not allow democratic debate to take place on the important issue of Pantami’s resignation are simply untrue. As always, the House stands ready to give an audience to Rep. Elumelu or any other member of the House on this issue, provided that such audience is sought through the proper channels and brought under the relevant rules of the House.

“That the House stands by these positions as they are in line with the House rules we made to guide us and should not be seen breaching it as every good law applies to both principal officers and first-time members in the spirit of equality before the law. How can we breach the laws we made for ourselves and expect Nigerians to obey the ones we make on their behalf.

“That the house will not be apologizing for properly guiding a derailing senior member of the house, hoping that the minority caucus should scout for a knowledgeable spokesman, not just a prose writer. The job of a good spokesman goes beyond literature.”

What Next?

As the legislators resume legislative activities for the week, the Minority Caucus might present the motion again. The question remains, will the APC lawmakers support it? Even if they do will the Presidency heed to the prayers of the parliament, given that it has expressed its support for Pantami?

QUOTE

That it appears the Minority Caucus spokesman is just waking up, because one wonders where he was when Hon Jaha Babao brought a proper Matter under Privileges the following day on the same issue in the presence of the minority leader, to correct all the misrepresentations and unanimously adopted by the House. This resolution of the house is in line with my formal Press Release since it was not contested by any segment of the house including the Minority leader or the Caucus members. It was a very ranking member of the caucus Hon Nkem Abonta, who openly agreed with Hon Jaha Babao and pleaded that the right thing should be done and proper motion tabled by the Minority leader Hon Ndudi Elumelu on this issue before the house. It appears the caucus is divided on this; the knowledgeable against the learners