What began as a routine legislative exercise has spiralled into a bruising institutional dispute.
It has pitted political caucuses against parliamentary procedure, with troubling questions raised about the integrity of the law-making process.
At the centre of the storm are four newly enacted tax reform laws that were passed by the National Assembly, signed by the President, gazetted, and certified, yet are now mired in allegations of post-passage alterations.
Yesterday, the House of Representatives moved decisively to contain the growing controversy, formally disowning an interim report produced by an ad-hoc committee constituted by the House Minority Caucus to probe the alleged alterations.
The committee is headed by a member representing Ogbaru Constituency, Anambra State, Victor Afam Ogene.
Ogene, a journalist, made available the interim report by the minority caucus committee on Friday.
The report claims that there were alterations in the gazette, contrary to what the House passed.
The House declared that the committee was procedurally invalid and lacked the authority to conduct investigations or submit reports for legislative consideration.
The House rejected outright the findings of the minority caucus.
According to the House, only the plenary or the Speaker has the constitutional and procedural authority to constitute standing or ad-hoc committees to conduct investigations on behalf of the legislature.
Political caucuses, whether majority or minority, do not possess such powers, and any committee set up by them lacks institutional recognition, the House insisted.
It made this known through a statement by spokesman, Akintunde Rotimi, which said: “The setting up of such a committee is not recognised under the Standing Orders of the House.
Neither the Majority nor Minority Caucus, nor any political caucus, has the authority to constitute investigative committees whose reports can be tabled before the House for legislative action.”
The House warned that reports emanating from such informal bodies had the potential to mislead the public and create unnecessary confusion, especially in a matter as sensitive as alleged alterations to laws already enacted and signed by the President.
The statement noted that the House had already established a properly constituted, bipartisan ad-hoc committee to investigate the allegations, rendering any parallel caucus-led inquiry unnecessary and improper.
