A last-ditch effort of the House of Representatives to concur with the Senate on an amendment to the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC) Act, 2000 failed to pass. The bill had come before the House of Representatives\u00a0 but was stood down by the Speaker on the ground that further clarification was needed on the contents of the bill. The bill which had earlier been passed by the Senate was without public hearing or stakeholders\u2019 input. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
One of the amendments, which is the substitution of the word \u2018Member\u2019 with \u2018Commissioner\u2019 with reference to members of the board of the ICPC is ambiguous. It is unclear if the Commissioners who have specialised portfolios by virtue of the amendment are intended to replace the members of the ICPC\u2019s board or if these are entirely new positions created for the Commission. Section 3 of the ICPC Act provides for the representation and participation of special interests such as women, youth, legal practitioner in the membership of the Commission’s board. The bill appears to attempt to cloak the persons who represent these interests and other members of the board with an elevated Commissioner status that is at odds with the purpose of a law enforcement agency like the ICPC. \u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Also,\nthe proposal in the bill for operational staff who are referred to as\nCommissioners, Deputy Commissioners, Assistant Commissioners in section 4(7) of\nthe principal Act,<\/strong> to be substituted with the titles Directors, Deputy\nDirectors and Assistant Directors, respectively is vague. It is not clear if\nthe bill intends to merely create a new cadre of bureaucratic staff or replace\nlaw enforcement officers in the Commission.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The amendment takes\nthe power to make Standing Orders away from the Chairman and places this power\non the Commission. It also removes the Chairman\u2019s powers to make rules to give\neffect to the ICPC Act. Placing the power to make Standing Orders on the\nCommission is ambiguous, as there is no clear authority responsible for this\naction. Also, the deletion of the option allowing the Chairman and superior officers\nof the Commission to make oral directives and the introduction of mandatory use\nof written directives, appears to be aimed at further reducing the power of the\nChairman. The practice in establishment laws is that the\nauthority for making Standing Orders is vested in a person such as the head of\nthe agency. <\/p>\n\n\n\n On\nthe amendment with regard to the quorum of the Commission, five members out of\na total of thirteen members (comprising the Chairman and twelve members), is\ninadequate. The amendment which allows any five of the members to meet and form\na quorum means that they can take far reaching decisions for the Commission, including\nmaking a decision on whether an investigation or operation should commence,\ncontinue or be terminated with or without the Chairman\u2019s input.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The proposed increase\nin fines and penalties for offences under the Act should\nnot be arbitrarily stipulated but based on sound reasoning. Also, the provision\nof a two-year imprisonment term without an option of fine for anyone whose\npetitions to the Commission are found to be false or intended to mislead, may\nbe used arbitrarily against perceived opponents of public officials. This may\nalso result in concealment of genuine claims by individuals. <\/p>\n\n\n\n These portions of the\namendment distort the leadership structure of the ICPC, whittle down the powers\nof the Chairman, reduce the effectiveness of the Commission, and are generally inimical\nto the fight against corruption. <\/p>\n\n\n\n While some aspects of\nthe amendment appear problematic, the proposal to expand the jurisdiction for\ncases brought under the ICPC Act, to the Federal High Court, in addition to\nState High Courts and High Courts of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) is\ncommendable. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The\namendment of the ICPC Act was done without proper consultation of stakeholders,\ncivil society and the public. There was no public hearing on this bill, which\ngoes against best practice on lawmaking and public participation. This law is\none that will have extensive ramifications on citizens. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The amendment to the\nICPC Act failed to pass in the 9th<\/sup> National Assembly. However, the\nnewly inaugurated 10th<\/sup> National Assembly should revisit the bill,\nreview it critically and invite public input before further legislative action\non it. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" A last-ditch effort of the House of Representatives to concur with the Senate on an amendment to the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC) Act, 2000 failed to pass. The bill had come before the House of Representatives\u00a0 but was stood down by the Speaker on the ground that further clarification was needed on the contents […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":3274,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[11],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3269","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3269","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3269"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3269\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3279,"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3269\/revisions\/3279"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3274"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3269"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3269"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3269"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}