The Senate Wednesday rejected a motion to immortalize the late Professor Humphrey Nwosu, former chairman of the National Electoral Commission (NEC) now Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) .
The motion, sponsored by Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe (APGA Abia South) and backed by 15 other senators, sought to recognise Nwosu for his role in conducting the June 12, 1993, presidential election—widely regarded as the freest and fairest election in Nigeria.
Abaribe who rose through orders 41 and 51 of the Senate ‘s standing rules to move the motion, highlighted Nwosu’s contributions by noting that his leadership in the electoral process led to the declaration of the late Chief MKO Abiola as the presumed winner and the eventual recognition of June 12 as Democracy Day.
According to him, the late Prof. Humphrey Nwosu served as NEC chairman from 1989 to 1993 and courageously defended the electoral process during the 1993 presidential election.
However, the Senate Leader, Senator Opeyemi Bamidele (APC Ekiti Central), objected to the motion, pointing out that copies had not been distributed to lawmakers as required by Senate rules.
Deputy Senate President Jibrin Barau, who presided over the plenary, put the motion to a voice vote, and the majority of senators rejected it.
Also, an attempt made by Abaribe to push for consideration of the motion through order 42 under “personal explanation,” was rejected by the Deputy Senate President.
Irked by the development, Abaribe argued that “Even if the Senate leader says it doesn’t follow, a senator must be given the chance to make a personal explanation. We are not under a dictatorship”.
But the Senate leader in a quick response, maintained that Senate procedures must be followed unless an exception was agreed upon.
He reminded the chamber that legislative business had moved on, making further debate on the matter untimely.
Reacting, former Senate Leader, Senator Yahaya Abdullahi (PDP, Kebbi North), cautioned that the Senate was drifting toward dictatorship by preventing senators from expressing their views due to conflicts in Senate rules.
He insisted that Abaribe be allowed to present his motion, saying, “We have been managing this Senate for a long time.”
Abaribe on the strength of Senator Yahaya Abdullahi’s submission , quickly rose to kick against rejection of his motion by saying that “We are not under a dictatorship,” and insisted that his point of order be heard.
Citing Order 1(b), he argued that in cases not specifically provided for in the standing orders, the Senate has the discretion to regulate its procedure.
“Even if the Senate Leader says it doesn’t follow, the fact remains that when a senator seeks to make a personal explanation, that senator must be given the chance,” Abaribe maintained.
In response, Barau upheld the Senate Leader’s stance, rejecting Abaribe’s motion.
He referred to Order 42, which states that a senator may make a personal explanation “by the indulgence of the Senate and with the leave of the President of the Senate,” but “no controversial matter may be brought forward.”
Barau revealed that Abaribe had initially sought approval to bring the motion under Orders 41 and 51, which was denied.
He argued that Abaribe’s switch to Order 42 was improper and had not been previously discussed with Senate leadership.
Senator Bamidele then suggested that Abaribe bring the motion on a different legislative day, stating that “Order 1(b) cannot override the clear provisions of the standing orders.”
Jibrin upheld Bamidele’s position and ruled that the Senate should proceed with its agenda, advising Abaribe to reintroduce the motion at a future legislative day.