MINISTERIAL SCREENING: A “TAKE A BOW AND LEAVE” EXERCISE

Drama, according to Aristotle, is a mimetic or representational art that mirrors human experiences. However, most at times, some people, especially non-theatre goers often assume that the act of dramatisaion is exclusively for those involved in Theatre Arts: Well, this is true for professionals or the academics. On a personal note, I beg to stretch the conceptualisation of drama beyond that. For life itself is drama. It is on this premise that William Shakespeare in one of his plays, As You Like It, says, “All the world’s a stage,/ And all the men and women are merely players”, re-enacting different scripts.

One field of human endeavour that is dramatic is politics. Nigeria for example, is a good theatrical stage whereupon; different types of drama such as tragedy, tragi-comedy, comedy, melodrama and farce are staged. It is a stage full of different political actors who dramatise both scripted and impromptu dramatic pieces. Our National Assembly, the House of Representative and the senate, are commonplace political theatres. It is also common to watch our lawmakers turn the hallowed chambers into a boxing arena as they punch one another like Anthony Joshua and Mike Tyson. From sworn foes, they can suddenly turn friends whenever the occasions arise. This is mostly done in matters of money or an issue whereby their gains stand tall like Mount Everest at the expense of the masses.

The recent ministerial screening that was conducted by the Senate foregrounds one of such dramatic farce. It is no longer news that the said screenings was nothing but a dramatic display, as ministerial nominees; particularly ex-senators and members of the House of Representative were unanimously asked by their incumbent to only “Take a bow and leave hallowed chambers”.

Of the 14 ministerial nominees screened by the hallowed chambers, only four were grilled by the lawmakers, ten were given the privilege of “taking a bow and leave”. Although some sane law makers grudged over the controversial policy, Senate President Lawan, waved the pleas by some senators to quiz the nominees on the ground that the senate was only obeying a standing tradition that predates them. The question is that does the tradition overrides the constitutional provision that empowers them to question people who are nominated to serve approximately 180 million Nigerians?

Another question that begs for answers is that how sure are these honourable lawmakers credibility of these “anointed ministerial nominees”? Yes, they might argue the fact that having served as senators or house of reps members, they are well experienced enough to man the designated ministries. But on the other hand we cannot deny the fact that being a senator or house of rep member does not make one qualified for a ministerial position. Besides, legislative business is parallel to administrative function.

Some of these anointed nominees, although having served as lawmakers and governors in their respective state, might lack the technical know-how to administer their new portfolios. A man or woman who failed to execute a project for his constituent after three tenures in the legislative house cannot do miracle when he enters a cabinet office.

Further, since most of these “take-a-bow and-leave” beneficiaries were not given the opportunity to defend their credentials before the senate, no one can ascertain their capability before they would be cleared to serve. Merely asking them to take a bow and leave the hallowed chambers, was in a way sending a negative signal to the populace that leadership position in Nigeria is now too cheap. All one needs to do is to serve in the senate or house of representative to get qualified.

Screening is meant to scrutinise intending nominee to know their capabilities and integrity. Some of these nominees might have committed one fraud or the other while serving as legislators, yet they take a bow and live policy swept off the possibility of finding out their past records. It would have been good if these anointed nominees were subjected to serious grilling to enable them account for their past stewardship.

Conversely, screening a handful of the nominees and leaving others was tantamount to favouritism—this was too obvious in the drama that unfolded in the hallow chamber wherein Sen. President Lawan played a major role. During his inauguration as the newly elected Senate President, Lawan told Nigerians that the 9th assembly would not be a “rubber-stamped senate” yet the just concluded “take-a-bow-and-leave” screening clearly contradicts his promise. Lawan and his colleagues must not take the trust given to them by Nigerians as senators for granted, except they are tired of the legislative process.

One cannot leave out the logic to opine that the honourable lawmakers were simply tired of their job; hence they adopted an easier way of getting their job done. On the other way round, it could be that perhaps the beneficiaries of the “take-a-bow-and-leave” policy greased the dry palms of their ex-colleague to make them have an easy ride during the screening.

In order to convince Nigerians that these nominees are capable of doing their job, President Mohammadu Buhari should do a personal scrutiny on these anointed nominees. Before taking their oat of offices, they should be made to undergo a mini-screening process either by the bureau of public administration or the financial monitoring bodies like the EFCC or ICPC, to ascertain their integrity, having served in various capacities.

And if anyone is found wanting of any offence, s/he should not be allowed to beat the rap as such persons should be dropped from taking up ministerial position. Again, the senators should give equal screening opportunity to anyone nominated to take up a position during subsequent screening. This is to avoid doubt and favouritism that greeted the last ministerial screening so as to come out with people whose records and integrity are clearer before Nigerians and the world in general.