Presidential candidate of the Labour Party (LP) in the 2023 election, Peter Obi, has condemned the National Assembly for approving President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s request to validate emergency rule in Rivers State through a voice vote.
In a series of posts on his X handle on Thursday, Obi argued that such an approach to a crucial national matter was a violation of constitutional provisions.
He had earlier urged members of the National Assembly not to support the removal of Governor Siminalayi Fubara.
“While still agonizing over the ongoing deterioration of democracy in our nation, especially with the situation in Rivers State, and trying to reach out to our National Assembly members not to support and sustain the unconstitutionality and arbitrariness, I just heard that they have added salt to injury by using a voice vote.
“The Constitution is clear that this cannot be done through a voice vote but by calling individuals to answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’. You cannot determine a two-thirds majority by a voice vote.”
Obi emphasized that while achieving a two-thirds majority was necessary, it must be done through a transparent process that upholds constitutional principles.
“While a two-thirds majority is crucial, it does not justify bypassing proper procedures and undermining the principles of transparency and accountability. The use of a voice vote in such a significant decision not only disregards constitutional requirements but also erodes public trust in the democratic process. Decisions of such magnitude must be made with integrity, following the letter and spirit of the law.
“It’s disheartening that a decision as crucial as approving an emergency proclamation — one that could alter the course of the nation — was handled with such casual disregard for constitutional standards. The 1999 Constitution of Nigeria (as amended) clearly requires that such a proclamation must be approved by at least two-thirds of all members of each House — the Senate and the House of Representatives. A simple call of ‘Aye’ or ‘Nay’ cannot accurately measure this crucial threshold.”
He argued that when a supermajority is required, proper voting methods such as division, roll call, or electronic voting must be used.
He further stressed that this was not merely a procedural issue but a fundamental question of legality and legitimacy.
“This is not just a technicality; it is a matter of law and legitimacy, as the Senate Standing Orders and House Rules were established to ensure that decisions of this magnitude are made transparently, with accountability.”
Obi described the National Assembly’s actions as a betrayal of democratic principles.
“Ignoring these procedures is not just an oversight, but a betrayal of the democratic process.
“A voice vote for such a critical matter is not just insufficient; it’s a dangerous precedent. If we can bend the rules so easily, what stops us from undermining other pillars of democracy? Today, it’s a voice vote on a state of emergency—tomorrow, it could be a voice vote on citizens’ fundamental rights.
“It is painful to think that members of the National Assembly, who swore to uphold the Constitution, could participate in a process that sidesteps the very essence of due process. We must ask ourselves: If the law no longer anchors our decisions, then what does?”
