SOYINKA URGES STATE ASSEMBLIES TO REVERSE DECISION
By Fola James
President Muhammadu Buhari has gone ahead to sign the Executive Order declaring curfew in Lagos, Ogun and FCT despite controversy that greeted the action.
Nobel Laureate, Professor Wole Soyinka and Ebun Adegboruwa, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, SAN have expressed their reservation over the manner the president declared a curfew in the two states.
The Pan-Yoruba political group, Afenifere has also slammed the president, insisting that the decision was hasty as it did not give enough room for the people of the state to prepare.
Yinka Odumakin, the spokesman of the group said the curfew will impose more hardship on the people.
On Sunday, the president in a nationwide broadcast ordered a total shut down in the two states and FCT, as part of the federal government’s effort to stop the spread of the corona virus.
The novel disease has already killed two Nigerians while over 120 have tested positive to the global pandemic, according to the National Centre for Disease Control, NCDC.
“Based on the advice of the Federal Ministry of Health and the NCDC, I am directing the cessation of all movements in Lagos and the FCT for an initial period of 14 days with effect from 11pm on Monday, 30th March 2020.
This restriction will also apply to Ogun State due to its close proximity to Lagos and the high traffic between the two States,” Buhari said in the broadcast.
But few hours before the curfew took off, the governor of Ogun state, Dapo Abiodun said the stay-at-home order will no longer commence until Friday this week.
Abiodun said this was necessary to enable his people prepare for the emergency.
He said the president has already approved of the reversal.
But Soyinka, in his reaction to the issue said President Buhari has usurped the powers of the states’ assembly to decide on whether to impose curfew.
“Constitutional lawyers and elected representatives should kindly step into this and educate us, mere lay minds.
The worst development I can conceive is to have a situation where rational measures for the containment of the coronavirus pandemic are rejected on account of their questionable genesis.”
Does the president has the power to impose curfew, Soyinka asked?“So, before this becomes a habit, a question: does President Buhari have the powers to close down state borders? We want clear answers.
We are not in a war emergency.
Appropriately focused on measures for the saving lives, and committed to making sacrifices for the preservation of our communities, we should nonetheless remain alert to any encroachment on constitutionally demarcated powers.
We need to exercise collective vigilance, and not compromise the future by submitting to interventions that are not backed by law and constitution.”
He said the president did not act on time “A President who has been conspicuously AWOL is now alleged to have woken up after a prolonged siesta, and begun to issue orders.
Who actually instigates these orders anyway? From where do they really emerge? What happens when the orders conflict with state measures, the product of a systematic containment strategy – `including even trial-and-error and hiccups – undertaken without let or leave of the centre.
So far, the anti-COVID19 measures have proceeded along the rails of decentralised thinking, multilateral collaboration and technical exchanges between states.
I urge governors and legislators to be especially watchful. No epidemic is ever cured with constitutional piracy. It only lays down new political viruses for the future,” he said.
Adegboruwa , a human rights activist, had slammed Buhari for imposing curfew in the two states, describing it as illegal.
“Though I commend the federal and State governments for their proactive measures to combat the COVID 19 menace, this cannot be the basis for the restriction of movements or imposing total lockdown by executive proclamations,” the SAN said.
Meanwhile, the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, said the president took the decision for the collective interest of Nigerians, as it was the right thing to do at the moment.
Malami said the President has not committed any illegality.
According to him, “It is important to inform the discerning members of the public that the President did not make a declaration of a state of emergency under Section 305(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) which would have required the concurrence of both House of the National Assembly.”
He cited constitutional provision to support the act “Even at that Section 305(6)(b) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) permits a proclamation of a State of Emergency to run for a period of 10 days without the approval of the National Assembly when the parliament is not in session as in the present situation wherein the National Assembly has shut down.
Adegboruwa’s is wrong, he said. “The learned silk also goofed when he questioned the President’s powers to restrict movement and claiming that such powers can only be exercised by the state governors and the respective state assemblies.
It is clear from the President’s broadcast that what His Excellency sought to address is a public emergency occasioned by a dangerous and infectious coronavirus disease.
The restriction of movement came on the heels of advice received by the President from the Federal Ministry of Health and the NCDC, the two focal agencies in the fight against COVID-19,” the AGF said.
