Reports that top officials of the executive arm of government shunned an investigative hearing by the House of Representatives on the volume of fuel consumed daily in Nigeria are worrisome. The officials who reportedly shunned the hearing include Minister of State, Petroleum Resources, Timipre Sylva; Minister of Finance, Budget and National Planning, Zainab Ahmed; Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Godwin Emefiele; Chief Executive Officer of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited, Mele Kyari; and Managing Director of the Petroleum Pipeline Marketing Company, Isiyaku Abdullahi.

We wonder what gave those who failed to heed parliamentary summon the impetus to do so, considering the provisions of Nigeria’s constitution, on such invitation. Section 88 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) empowers the National Assembly to conduct investigation, and it can summon public officials in the course of that investigation. We hope the named officials were duly invited to appear before the legislative committee; and if they were, then Nigerians deserve to know why they shunned the invitation. Considering humongous resources involved in the subsidy regime, Nigerians deserve public accountability.

If the House of Representatives decide to investigate claims that trillions of naira is being spent to subsidise fuel, Nigerians support that. Under past administrations, notably that of former President Goodluck Jonathan, petroleum subsidy was turned into a cesspool of graft; and President Muhammadu Buhari, while campaigning for election promised to sanitise the sector, which he viewed as sleazy. Nigerians are appalled that despite granting only NNPC Limited license to import fuel, the allegation of corruption lingers.

So, the National Assembly has every reason to investigate the allegations surrounding the subsidy regime. Specifically, Section 88(1)(b) of the supreme law of this land provides: “Subject to the provisions of this constitution, each House of the National Assembly shall have power by resolution published in its journal or in the Official Gazette of the Federation to direct or cause to be directed investigation into the conduct of affairs of any person, authority, ministry or government department charged, or intended to be charged with the duty of or responsibility …” to perform a named function.

In Section 88(2)(b), one of the named function is to “expose corruption, inefficiency or waste in the execution or administration of laws within its legislative competence and in the disbursement or administrations of funds appropriated by it.” Under Section 89(d), the House of Representatives is empowered “to issue a warrant to compel the attendance of any person who, after having been summoned to attend, fails, refuses or neglects to do so and does not excuse such failure, refusal or neglect to the satisfaction of the House or committee in question …”

The leadership of the National Assembly must realise that Nigerians are not satisfied with their performance of constitutional responsibilities imposed by sections 88 and 89 of the constitution. Nigerians believe if they are living up to their responsibilities, the executive branch would have been more efficient. Many Nigerians see them as rubber stamp legislators, and that accounts for the inefficiency and waste in government. Indeed, both the House of Representatives and the Senate have initiated several probes, with huge public funds expended on them; yet inefficiency in glaring in several sectors.

The present allegation in the public arena that the subsidy regime is bedevilled by corrupt practices deserves thorough investigation. The claim that the federation account does not receive monthly returns from the petroleum sector, since nearly all earnings from the crude oil export is used to pay subsidy, should alarm all stakeholders. We urge the House to exercise its powers firmly, so that the allegations of corruption surrounding the subsidy regime are unraveled. (Anadolu Agency)