Furniture allowance controversy still haunts Senate, says Ndoma-Egba
Senator Victor Ndoma-Egba who was once described as a "baby lawyer" by a colleague in the National Assembly, was named Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), becoming the first serving senator in the country to become a member of the Inner Bar. The man, who wanted to be a priest, then a medical doctor, but ended as a politician, spoke to ALIFA DANIEL in Abuja on a wide range of issues. Excerpts:
HOW will your elevation as Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) affect you in the Senate
Well it certainly comes with a lot of responsibilities and expectations...
How would you for example deal with the issue of the Legislature wanting to draw federal funds the first line just as much as the Judiciary
The matter ought to have been referred to the Committee on Judiciary. The Constitution does not mention the legislature and it must be an oversight, because the Legislature is the only institution that makes the difference between democracy and military rule. Any kind of government can do without a legislature but not a democratic setting. It is democratic because of the presence of the legislature. For the Legislature to be omitted, in the provisions of Section 80 to 84 and then sections 162 to 164 must have been inadvertent. The Judiciary is clearly provided for. The Executive is the arm that operates the budget so it is presumed that the Executive is provided for. It is the National Assembly that is omitted. The Constitution does not exclude the National Assembly from the first line provision. It is not excluded. A void exists that could be filled by legislation. The legislation that Senator Agboti brought had the purpose or intention of filling that void in the Constitution. I do not think that the non-mention of the legislature by the relevant provisions of the Constitution meant that the legislature is excluded. It was an omission.
As the only SAN in the National Assembly, people would expect you to be a kind of synergy between the judiciary as and legislature. Do you envisage that role
I had said that this has nothing to do with being a Senior Advocate. The legal profession is my constituency; the Judiciary is my primary constituency. With my experience, it is only natural that I see myself as their voice. I relate very well with judges of virtually from all the jurisdictions, and I have a first hand knowledge of their problems and limitations. I am in the best position to speak for them. Being a Senior Advocate has merely added weight to my voice.
What would you be telling your colleagues on how things can be improved in the judiciary
We have ethics that must be followed. Two, there must be integrity in all our dealings. We should be unquestionable. You must work hard, have integrity and must abide by the profession of ethics.
Senators have problems pushing for their welfare because of the way Nigerians see them, do you think the Senate is being blackmailed into silence by some interests
Yes, they have become shy talking about their welfare. It has to do with events before now. In 1999, there was the issue of furniture allowance. However, the perception the public has is totally inconsistent with the facts of the matter. The Senate appears to be unable to wean itself from that impression the public has because of that furniture allowance saga. Then every move in the Senate is linked to "Ghana Must GO" bag and that Senators are self-serving. This Senate was determined early to create a new image and so it plays shy of any matter that has to do with welfare.
How would you score the Senate, which has been accused of being a sell out to the Executive, and is seen as a parastatal of the Executive arm of government
In fact a friend told me that we are a department of the Presidency. The nature of the Senate is such that it should always act as a stabilising institution. In the U.S., the Senate, is not an activist. I do not know whether the public expects the Senate to engage in combat for the sake of it. We have a Constitutional duty to perform. We are not dramatists that are playing to the gallery. We have a constitutional duty and as far as those constitutional duties are concerned, the Senate has played its role creditably. Take the 2004 budget for instance. All the innovations in the budget today were at the instance of the Senate. We met half way with the Executive that is what politics is all about, compromises here and there. Take the issue of the screening of ambassadorial nominees. We turned down the President's nominees until we got all the information we required. The impression that it is a department or parastatal of the Presidency is unfounded and not supported by the records.
How would you score the Judiciary in the last five years
Under the circumstances, the Judiciary has done well. Judges are like gold fish; they cannot hide. A judge carries his office with him.
Whether he is in church, at a social function, in his court, in his bedroom, he carries his office. The fact that the judiciary has evolved a self-cleansing mechanism, where errant judges are dealt with by the judiciary is good. Virtually in every human institution, there must be bad eggs, but that they have put in place a mechanism to address the few bad eggs means they are worried about their place in the constitution. The judiciary has done well in handling constitutional issues in the last five years. For example, there are the issues of resource control and tenure of local councils. The institution has as far as its constitutional duties are concerned, lived up to expectations. However, there have been constraints. Many courtrooms do not qualify to serve as such. In most courts, ordinary typewriters are still in vogue, and the impression is that the age of technology is passing the judiciary by. We are still using the manual typewriter with carbon paper and manual eraser not electric or electronic typewriter or the computer. High Court judges are still taking notes in long hand. You see a 60-year-old judge listening to maybe 15 lengthy submissions. The facilities in the courts are inadequate and obsolete. Then our laws of procedure leave room for manipulation.
Do you have any political plans beyond the Senate in 2007 How true are the speculations that you want to be governor
As for 2007 and beyond, only God knows. I have never said that I want to be governor. I have a mandate that is in its early stages and the decision as to who becomes the governor in Cross River is not that of an individual.
Are there experiences that prepared you for your present position as a senator and lawyer
There are advantages having a judge as a father and a teacher and mother who became a politician. They focused me quite early. As a child, I thought of being a Catholic priest and when I entered Mary Knoll College Ogoja, but things happened that changed all that. The civil war for instance with its attendant dislocation and deprivations. The anxiety of travelling through a war zone to go to school, killed the ambitions of priesthood. Then came the consideration of reading medicine. At the end of the war, my father started picking the pieces of his practice. I offered to be sleeping in his chambers as some form of security. The office was about four kilometres from the house. The moment you entered there to sleep, you will just read books until the next morning. Once I started reading law books I started nursing the plan to study law. I had hoped to obtain a PhD and teach law in the university. Circumstances intervened again. I ended up with Kanu Agabi (SAN) for nine years. Soon after that, he left to become a commissioner and I was left to take responsibility of the chambers. When he came back the issue of postgraduate studies was no more there.
I was appointed commissioner at 27. And I began to see sense outside the context of legal profession. I developed a different definition of service more or less and then the issue of my ambition of going to the bench again gave way.
