Why House Ratified Tinubu’s State Of Emergency In Rivers – Rep Benedict

The member representing Okpe/Sapele/Uvwie constituency, Etanabene Benedict, has said most social commentators criticizing the actions of the National Assembly did not have access to information regarding some issues.

Naija News reported that the House of Representatives and the Senate, on Thursday, using voice votes, ratified President Bola Tinubu’s state of emergency proclamation in Rivers State.

The federal legislative arm also upheld the suspension of Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy and members of the House of Assembly.

In an interview with News Central, on Thursday, the Delta State lawmaker said he and many other opposition lawmakers opposed the President’s declaration, but when they understood the reason behind the President’s action they had to support it.

“Things that happen outside plenary are different what you see in plenary. When everybody comes to plenary and you say those who want to say aye and those who want to say nay, that is not the issue. What happens before, if reported, perhaps some of all these statements people will not be making them at all,” he said.

The Labour Party lawmaker dismissed that the National Assembly was intimidated or induced into ratifying the President’s proclamation. He said many changes were made to the President’s declaration.

Benedict added that the House approved the suspension and declaration for peace to reign, and then the Governor could return to his seat.

He continued, “It is very clear that the proclamation made by Mr President two days ago, communicated to the National Assembly didn’t return to him the way he did it. That tells you that there were a lot of issues that members of the National Assembly had to contend with, fight with; and as opposition members or as the case may be, collectively change some of the things as designed by Mr President.

“So it was not like what people say that if Mr. President brings something it goes back exactly as it is. Take a look at the statements he made, you would have seen that there were a lot of objections, there were a lot of rejections, there were a lot of modifications, there were a lot of things done. I personally moved the motion on the floor insisting that the conduct or the oversight of the sole administrator is not provided as Mr. President made it in his broadcast; that it is the National Assembly in line with section 11, sub-section 4. So we did things to change.

“See the ultimate goal is that when you are in government, when you are managing a situation, it is different from people who are making social comments outside. If for whatever, let us assume that Mr. President did not even make the proclamation, this problem of impeachment has gone on and for whatever reason they say the Governor has been impeached and the Governor said no you cannot impeach me; under this circumstance violence will come, loss of life will come.

“At what stage are we going to be saying, no, we don’t need to shed blood? So many of us disagreed with the proclamation at the initial stage but when we sought clarification and understanding on some workings; the ultimate goal of achieving peace we started not looking at… It is to restore peace for a continuation of office of the governor.”