By Tochukwu Madu Esq M.P.P
INTRODUCTION
Public hearing is a vital mechanism for strengthening the legislative process and, particularly, an important tool in legislative committee work. One of the major functions of the Legislature in modern democracy is to facilitate and increase its engagement with the public. Whether they be to determine the need, benefits and consequences of proposed legislation; or to monitor, scrutinize and investigate the implementation of legislation and exercise of Executive powers, they are pivotal for ensuring transparency, democratic participation and credibility in the legislative process (The Nigerian House of Representatives, 2017). In Nigeria, the National Assembly – comprising of the upper and lower chambers – have committees which consider proposed laws or issues of public interest. These Committees often travel around the country to hold public hearings and they encounter certain challenges during this process. These challenges include but are not limited to: lack of political will to follow the investigation to a logical conclusion; lack of requisite skills by the Committee members, etc, Hence, this piece provides an overview of public hearing in Nigeria, and attempts to identify the challenges of public hearing associated with and to proffer solutions/recommendations to ease the situation.
Research methodology: Qualitative study – descriptive analysis
Referencing style; Harvard
Data used: Primary and secondary
PUBLIC HEARING: TERM, PURPOSE, OBJECTIVES AND TYPES
According to The Nigerian House of Representatives (2017), Public hearing refers to a special meeting organized by house committees to obtain and analyse relevant information, expert and other public advice on proposed legislation, regulations or policy issues concerned with governance. Public Hearings are also important means by which the Parliament scrutinizes and investigates the exercise of Executive powers, including the functions of government Ministries, Departments and Agencies (The Nigerian House of Representatives, 2017). Therefore, public hearings are of legislative or oversight nature. In practice, they are meetings organized by the competent committee, attended by the stakeholder members of Parliament, as well as representatives of the Executive branch, independent state bodies, civil society organizations, professional associations or citizens’ associations, provided to exchange opinions, positions and information on a given issue within the scope of the committee. Public Hearings can be held at Parliament House and also at other locations within the country, determined by the committee as suitable for purpose.
Brief History and Overview of Best Practices
The process of public hearings represents an important instrument in the work of parliaments, arising in practice in Anglo- Saxon parliaments such as the British Parliament and the US Congress, with subsequent examples in a number of parliaments in Scandinavian countries. According to a publication by Westminster Foundation for Democracy (2020), the genesis of these processes is found as early as the 17th century, as the result of the need to achieve oversight by the English Parliament over the work of the executive branch, i.e., the government and each Minister in particular. The process of public hearings is implemented by parliamentary committees, and it represents a significant improvement in the oversight over the work of Ministers and other public officials, as opposed to the traditional form of oversight implemented mostly through Parliamentary questions (Westminster Foundation for Democracy, 2020)
Public hearings are detailed, long-lasting and persistent questionings, primarily of public officials, regarding their work. In practice and through the implementation of public hearings, Parliamentary committees are able to respond to issues of greater public significance and thus enable the parliament to successfully achieve its competencies, with the core axis thereof being the rule of law and the system of division of power.
Public Hearing in Nigeria; Imo state
Public hearings were introduced to the National Assembly, as one of the processes used by committees to implement their scope, through the Law on the National Assembly, and procedurally regulated in detail by the Rules of Procedure of the National Assembly (Westminster Foundation for Democracy, 2020). In the Nigerian legislative process, public hearings are not governed by a specific law but are provided for in the Standing Orders of the Senate, the House of Representative and the State Houses of Assembly. The Authority which the Nigerian parliament relies upon to prescribe their standing orders is section 60 of the 1999 constitution. The section provides that;
“Subject to the provisions of this constitution the Senate or the House of Representatives shall have power to regulate its own procedure including the procedure for summoning and recess of the House” (CFRN,1999)
Worthy of note is the fact that the National Assembly, by virtue of section 4 of the Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (CFRN,1999), have the requisite powers to make laws for the State. In the process of law making; a bill for a law presented before the house would pass the 1st reading, second reading and third reading as is provided under section 58, 59 and 60 (CFRN,1999). It is during the second reading, after members of the house might have argued for or against a bill that presiding officer of the House may send the bill to special committee or committee of the whole House to conduct further reviews of the bill. Other sections of the constitution authorizing or requiring the use of public hearings include section 62 which mandates the Assembly to constitute Committees and sections 88 and 89 which confer quasi-judicial investigative powers to the parliament, including the power to summon persons to give evidence as well as to compel attendance by any invited persons who fail or neglect to answer summons.
Public hearings are very important in determining the public acceptability of a law or a legislative action. In the Senate Standing Orders particularly order 102. -(2E) II, it is stated that:
“Each hearing conducted by a committee or subcommittee shall be open to the public, except if the committee or subcommittee, in open session and with a majority present determined by roll call, shall vote that all or part of the remainder of that hearing on that day shall be closed to the public because disclosure of testimony, evidence or other matters to be considered would endanger national security or would violate any law or rule of the
Senate”
Difference between a public and a private (in camera) hearing?
Committee hearings are usually held in public, with members of the general public and media free to attend. Public hearings at Parliament House are usually webcast and viewed on the Parliament’s website.
You can ask, before or during the hearing, to give your evidence privately if the information you intend to provide is confidential. If the committee approves your request, the public and media will be excluded, the webcast switched off, and the hearing will proceed in private. Private hearings are known as in camera hearings (Parliament of NSW, 2019)
In camera evidence is treated as confidential. However, depending on the nature of the evidence, the committee may refer to it in its report. If it intends to use in camera evidence, the committee will first consult with the witness. Although unlikely, in extraordinary circumstances the committee or the House can order access to or publication of in camera evidence without consulting the witness (Parliament of NSW, 2019).
Who can attend a hearing?
Members of the general public are free to attend public hearings. However, only people who have been called to attend as a witness may speak to the committee.
The media can attend to report and record public hearings. Filming is only permitted with the committee’s approval, and the use of cameras restricted to accredited media (Parliament of NSW, 2019).
Purpose and objectives of public hearing
- To create a means by which the Parliament can inform or educate the general public of their law-making decisions, and also other aspects of legislative functions
- Promoting citizens participation in deliberations and legislative business in the Parliament.
- To improve transparency and credibility and public trust in the legislative process
- To strengthen democratic expertise in evidence-based decision-making and in so doing, improve the quality and effectiveness of the legislative process (The Nigerian House of Representatives, 2017)
Types of Hearing
- Legislative Hearing: Legislative hearing is conducted by legislative Committees, typically for consideration of bills that are due to become law. The opportunity for the hearing usually occurs during the second reading of a Bill on issues that relates to laws and budget. (Zwingina, 2012; The Nigerian House of Representatives, 2017)
- Investigative Hearing: This type of hearing is conducted to solve issues or unravel certain facts (The Nigerian House of Representatives, 2017). The Parliament usually orders an investigative hearing when there is suspicion of wrong doing on the part of public officials or even on the part of its own members, which is against public interest. Investigative hearings in the Nigerian Legislative practice are guided by sections 88 and 89 (CFRN,1999). The past investigation into the Faruk Lawan and Femi Otedola allegations and counter allegations before the Nigerian House of Representatives committee on Ethics and Privileges is a good example of an investigative hearing.
- Oversight Hearing: This type of hearing is arraigned towards the activities of government and usually occur when a committee of the Parliament obtains the mandate of that parliament to conduct hearings of a specific nature on the executive branch or department over which that committee has oversight. A practical example of this was when the Nigerian Senate committee on Pension Administration conducted oversight hearings that exposed weaknesses in the old Pension scheme. In the Nigerian House of Representative, the Fuel Subsidy Committee formally headed by Hon. Faruk Lawan conducted impressive oversight hearings into the fuel subsidy regime of the Government. The same House had also conducted oversight hearings into the Electricity Power sector projects using the Power committee led by Hon. Olumelu (Zwingina, 2012)
- Quasi-Judicial Hearing: This type of hearing is more formal than a legislative hearing, in the sense that the responsible Parliamentary Committee must hold evidentiary hearing, and make decision based on written and oral evidence given. A Quasi-judicial decision cannot be based on the opinions of Committee members (Public hearing manual, 2017). An Impeachment proceeding of the Nigerian President, Vice President, Governor, or Deputy Governor, by the National Assembly, or Imo
State house of Assembly respectively is a classic example of a Quasi-Judicial hearing (S. 143 and 188, CFRN,199)
- Confirmation hearing: In the Nigerian legislative practice, this type of hearing is undertaken by the Senate or the State House of Assembly which usually mandates a committee to conduct public hearings on nominees of the President or the State Governor. The Senate also periodically sits as a committee to conduct a hearing on some nominees. This was done during the Ministerial screening exercise as well as the screening of the Chief Justice of Nigeria nominee that was conducted within 2023 (S. 231(1), 271(1), CFRN, 1999)
- Field Hearing: Field hearings are public hearings that are conducted outside the premises of the National Assembly. The most common field hearings we have had in Nigeria, according to Zwingina, (2012) are the public hearings conducted during the review of the 1999 constitution. Various subcommittees of the National Assembly conducted public hearings in the six geopolitical zones of the country and the States. Such field hearings provided opportunities for more inputs from citizens who may not otherwise have the opportunity to travel to Abuja for that purpose.
CHALLENGES OF PUBLIC AND INVESTIGATIVE HEARING IN NIGERIA
In spite of the essence of public hearings in our Legislative system there have been some challenges in the process and the outcomes:
1. ORGANIZATION COST
One of the major challenges of public participation in public hearing is inadequate financial resources to conduct a public hearing. The process from start to finish requires funds and time to set up a conducive environment that can effectively engage people and their thoughts. In addition, the arrangement of forums, workshops or public meetings requires not just funds, but long preparation time, and competent legislative staff. Human and capital resources are required to engage the media, refresh the participants, decorate the venue with essentials, etc., Hence, inadequate funding, as is always the case, have posed a serious challenge to public hearing.
2. LACK OF PUBLIC AWARENESS
Members of the public are generally uninformed of upcoming public hearings or may not understand how to participate effectively. Information about public hearings is not properly disseminated to citizens, which greatly affected the turn out in hearings, and consequently, the quality of laws passed or decisions reached. The medium of publicity adopted while sending invites for public hearing should be vast and efficient.
3. TIME CONSTRAINTS
Legislators often have strict time frame for the consideration and passage of bills, leaving little or no time for public input and review. The Public on the other hand, may have several needs of their time which takes priority over attending a public hearing at the time.
4. THE ABSENCE OF TECHNICAL COMPETENCE
The National Assembly does not have an independent Budget office and is therefore totally dependent on the data provided by the Executive for Budget preparation. The technical staff available to the National Assembly committees do not have the capacity, or the access, to Executive departments in order to ascertain detailed information as well as obtain accurate and correct expenditure profiles. The Committees simply make do with materials provided by the Executive departments.
5. NON-ATTENDANCE OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS
A problem that occurs periodically is nonattendance of Legislative committee hearings. While many individuals and even officials of Government respond favourably to invitations during public hearings, there are a few high-profile officials who have tried to undermine the process. There are also cases when officials deliberately travel or absent themselves during committee hearings. We also have cases of improper or incomplete documentation presented to the National Assembly Committees in order to mislead them or to cover up Executive inadequacies.
6. LACK OF POLITICAL WILL
The 1999 constitution has empowered the LEGISLATURE to conduct investigations to check corruption, inefficiency, or waste in the government of the state. It is assumed, by the framers of the constitution, that the Executive branch of the state would fulfil this responsibility by prosecuting and seeking judicial punishment for those exposed. However, it is very sad to note that despite many exposures by the National Assembly, the Executive has been unwilling or unable to prosecute those exposed or enforce prescribed punishments. This serves as a major challenge to public hearings.
7. INFLUENCE OF VARIOUS INTEREST, PRESSURE GROUPS AND
LOBBYISTS:
Lobbyists and interest groups may have different interest on a given subject of discourse, which more often than not, are not in line with overall public interest. Due to the internal connections of these lobbyists, their interests are propagated beyond that of the ordinary citizen without such connections. Such attitude will definitely discourage the ordinary citizen from attending or submitting memoranda in a public hearing, because of the possibility of being ignored.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Public hearings are an important mechanism for strengthening the democratic and legislative process. Citizen participation in the lawmaking process is a basic component of citizenship, which can be facilitated through public hearings. This piece has provided an overview of public hearings and identified the various types – Legislative, Field, Oversight , QuasiJudicial, etc. It has also revealed that public hearings are not without challenges, including but not limited to: organizational costs, lack of political will, inadequate funding, and the influence of lobbyists. In view of the above, the following recommendations are advanced:
- Legislative committees should use various means to provide and promote civic education and enlightenment, which can be achieved through public enlightenment programs, thereby increasing citizen awareness and participation in governmental activities.
- Regular public hearings should be conducted to give citizens the opportunity to make inputs on matters of national interest.
- Legislators should ensure that the conduct of oversight functions, which aim to check the excesses of the Executive, is not jeopardized or unduly interfered with by corrupt politicians.
- It may be necessary to amend the constitution to allow the Attorney General of the Federation and states to accept matters referred by the National Assembly or state Houses of Assembly for prosecution, or to permit independent prosecutors to be hired by these bodies to prosecute offenders without undue interference from the Executive and corrupt politicians.
- Technical assistance can be targeted to key legislatures and staff of House of Assembly to broaden their knowledge and improve efficiency.
REFERENCES
Parliament of NSW (2019) ‘Giving evidence at Parliamentary Committee hearing LAC18/319.05 Version 1’retrieved: www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/commiittees (accessed: 19th March, 2024)
Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, (2007) ‘Senate standing orders 2007 as amended’ Abuja: National Assembly Press, p. 129.
The constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (Amended, 2023)
The Nigerian house of representatives, (2017) ‘Public hearing manual’ Abuja: National Assembly Press
Westminster Foundation for Democracy (2020) ‘Public hearing at the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia’ retrieved:
http://www.parlament.gov.rs/upload/documents/brochures/Javna%20slusanja%20ENG%20za %20Web.pdf (accessed: 17th March, 2024)
Zwingina, J.S (2012) ‘the role of public hearing in the law-making process – being a paper presented at the international conference on law reform and the law making process’ retrieved: https://ir.nilds.gov.ng (accessed: 17th March,2024).
