By ADETUTU FOLASADE-KOYI
On November 20, police threw a security cordon around the National Assembly (NASS) and in the process prevented some lawmakers from accessing their offices. Incensed lawmakers thereafter demanded a thorough investigation of the unfortunate incident because one, it had never happened in the history of the Fourth Republic that security men would blatantly take over the premises of the National Assembly and secondly, bar legislators from gaining entry into the complex. Thirdly, presiding officers and their colleagues were even tear-gassed in the process.
Six days after that invasion, Senate commenced a formal probe but rather than mandate its standing committee on Police Affairs, the chamber, under the guidance of Senate President David Mark, set up a seven-man Ad-Hoc Committee with Senator Ahmed Makarfi, as chairman.
Other members of the committee are Senators Atiku Bagudu; Victor Lar, Gbenga Kaka, Paulinus Nwagu, Jubrilla Bindowo and Ehigie Uzamere.
Although Mark did not specify a time limit to the investigation, earlier, Senate Leader, Victor Ndoma-Egba (SAN), in the motion, which kick-started the probe had requested that “the ad-hoc committee investigates the unfortunate incident and report back in seven days.”
Ndoma-Egba had also prayed in his motion that the chamber condemned the police invasion and tear-gassing of lawmakers and others.
That was the scenario until December 15 when the Makarfi committee commenced the investigation with an invitation to the National Assembly Divisional Police Officer (DPO), James Idachaba to give his testimony on the unfortunate incident.
On the first day of appearing before the Senators, Idachaba told the committee that the instruction to close the gates that day was based on a directive received from the Federal Capital Territory Command.
In fact, that testimony almost went unheard because Makarfi initially refused to allow newsmen into the venue but was prevailed upon by the members who argued that such weighty matter should not be conducted behind closed doors.
The committee subsequently invited the FCT Police Commissioner, Wilson Inalegwu, to appear before the committee and also, explain whether he gave the directive or not.
Not done yet, Idachaba’s new testimony the following day threw everybody off balance. Nothing prepared even the committee members for what the NASS DPO told them about the dramatis personae in the tear-gassing episode.
He absolved officers from the FCT command as the culprits and pointed in the direction of security details attached to the Senate President.
Idachaba based his submission on a video recording of the incident where he identified policemen attached to the office of the Senate President as those who committed the act.
Curiously, heads of other security, paramilitary agencies attached to the National Assembly and even Makarfi sharply disagreed with Idachaba’s submissions before the committee.
The security agencies were emphatic that they were not aware of any of Mark’s security detail, throwing teargas at Tambuwal.
But Idachaba stood his ground, arguing that he actually saw Mark’s security detail, whose name he did not mention, through that video, perpetrate the act.
During the incident, Tambuwal and some federal lawmakers were locked out of the complex on that day after a futile attempt to stop the Speaker, by firing tear gas canisters at him and his colleagues.
Then police said it acted on security reports that the National Assembly would be invaded by thugs on the day when lawmakers were set to either ratify or reject President Goodluck Jonathan’s extension of emergency rule in the North east states of Adamawa, Borno and Yobe states.
Expectedly, Mark’s Media Adviser, Kola Ologbondiyan, distanced his boss from the incident. In a statement by him, the Senate President was emphatic that security details attached to his office could not have done what was ascribed to them.
“We wish to state without equivocation that the security details attached to the Senate President did not and could not have attacked the person of Speaker Tambuwal with teargas.
“We find the reports credited to Idachaba that security details of Senator Mark attacked Speaker Tambuwal with teargas as absolute falsehood, dubious, vexatious, horrible and embarrassing.
“It is also imperative to state that any attempt to create a needless feud between the two chambers of the National Assembly is mischievous and wicked
“For the avoidance of doubts, we declare that the security aides of the President of the Senate did not attack Speaker Tambuwal with teargas.”
Perhaps, the solution to Idachaba’s testimony is simple: The Makarfi committee should ask to view the same video Idachaba claimed he saw the security details, throwing tear-gas at Tambuwal for themselves. Thereafter, the committee can, then, make up its mind on whether the cop’s testimony is credible or not.
Curiously, Senator Mark was also tear-gassed at the NASS lobby on his way to the House of Representatives’ chamber when he heard about the treatment meted to Tambuwal
Is Idachaba also saying that Mark’s security details couldn’t recognise their boss and also tear-gassed him too?
Follow us on Twitter: @NewsFetchers
Like our Facebook page: NewsFetchers
No comments
Post a Comment