Oblang:



The senate can only refuse to confirm but cannot sack someone appointed in acting capacity...

Kathmandu:
Let's use one nominee the Senate rejected and can you tell us the selfish reason he was disqualified

wristbangle:


Kathmndu, I hope u are seeing this. This explains what am about to say.

greatiyk4u:
Magu

Kathmandu:
When the Senate refuses to to confirm then invariably the person has been rejected and the executive should look for a replacement.


There are principles of Seperation of powers in our constitution which must be adhered to. That principle helps to check dictatorship



The reason why governors are rascals today is because the legislature there are now their mobile phone that they can dial anyhow they want.


I hope you can see the hell congress is giving Trump for every nominee or policy forwarded to them

Kathmandu:
Magu wasn't disqualified for selfish reasons rather we saw a DSS report of corruption against Magu which he couldn't defend. Magu was tainted based on that report and it doesn't augur well to head a sensitive agency with corruption hanging like a sword of Damocles over you.


Remember this maxim that "He who comes to equity must come with clean hands"

wristbangle:


You have a point but this works well in a sane environment but not in Nigeria where all sort of rubbish is condone.

The question is why would they reject the appointee from the executive arm if they (senate) don't have an ulterior move to present their candidate hence not revealing their mess.

This current senate (8th) are crooks and useless because the appointee does not belong to their caucus and may reveal their hidden evil secrets.

All the same, like you said there should thorough communication between the senate and presidency on whom to appoint.

greatiyk4u:

which he couldn't defend"


I give up on you when I saw this from you

helpee:
It is sagay himself that is confused. The Senate can't decide for executive who to nominate for a position but the executive too can't decide for the Senate who to confirm and as long as you are not confirmed as an EFCC chair, you can't hold on to the office illegally. The law envisaged a situation whereby the president may eventually nominate his wife as EFCC chair for vendetta and personal reasons so it created a check and balance via confirmation with the Senate which are representatives of the people. Once the Senate says no, it means no. If you are not happy with your senator decision you can recall him but whatever he does in his capacity today as your senator is legal and must be respected. So it is partisan sagay that is a comedian

ynaijaNews:


Chairman of the Presidential Advisory Committee against Corruption (PACAC), Prof. Itse Sagay has described the Senate as a ‘confused’ assembly.

Sagay said this while reacting to the suspension of confirmation of appointees over a statement made by Acting President Yemi Osinbajo.

Osinbajo had reportedly said the President was empowered to make some appointments without seeking legislative approval as provided in Section 171 of the Constitution.

He was reportedly speaking about the refusal of the Senate to confirm Ibrahim Magu as chairman of the EFCC.

Sagay however said the senators wee afraid because their hands were not clean.

He said Magu was an executive appointee who could not be sacked by legislative pronouncement.

He said, “Those who have profited from the corruption that has ravaged this country for years are the ones the Senate is trying to please. Magu is an executive official appointed by the executive arm and he has powers under the EFCC Act, and clearly, the constitution gives the President the power to appoint him.

“The Senate cannot be both legislature and executive. They cannot determine who should be sacked or not. They can do that for their legislative aides but not for members of agencies under the executive branch.

“This is a confused Senate which does not know whether it is a legislative body or an executive body. It wants to be co-executive with the Presidency which is not possible.”

YNAIJA

Oblang:



The senate can only refuse to confirm but cannot sack someone appointed in acting capacity...

profhezekiah:
The senate has become gathering of comedians

helpee:
It is sagay himself that is confused. The Senate can't decide for executive who to nominate for a position but the executive too can't decide for the Senate who to confirm and as long as you are not confirmed as an EFCC chair, you can't hold on to the office illegally. The law envisaged a situation whereby the president may eventually nominate his wife as EFCC chair for vendetta and personal reasons so it created a check and balance via confirmation with the Senate which are representatives of the people. Once the Senate says no, it means no. If you are not happy with your senator decision you can recall him but whatever he does in his capacity today as your senator is legal and must be respected. So it is partisan sagay that is a comedian

helpee:
The law envisaged a situation whereby the president may eventually nominate his wife as EFCC chair for vendetta and personal reasons

helpee:
It is sagay himself that is confused. The Senate can't decide for executive who to nominate for a position but the executive too can't decide for the Senate who to confirm and as long as you are not confirmed as an EFCC chair, you can't hold on to the office illegally. The law envisaged a situation whereby the president may eventually nominate his wife as EFCC chair for vendetta and personal reasons so it created a check and balance via confirmation with the Senate which are representatives of the people. Once the Senate says no, it means no. If you are not happy with your senator decision you can recall him but whatever he does in his capacity today as your senator is legal and must be respected. So it is partisan sagay that is a comedian

HAH:


The senate have given a valid reason for the rejection but all the prof did was weep sentiments. The senate said there is separation of power and the laws says certain appointees by the president must be confirmed by the senate, the senate rejected a nominee based on a report from another arm of the executive twice, instead of bringing valid laws that says they don't have such powers to reject he is saying they are corrupt

helpee:
It is sagay himself that is confused. The Senate can't decide for executive who to nominate for a position but the executive too can't decide for the Senate who to confirm and as long as you are not confirmed as an EFCC chair, you can't hold on to the office illegally. The law envisaged a situation whereby the president may eventually nominate his wife as EFCC chair for vendetta and personal reasons so it created a check and balance via confirmation with the Senate which are representatives of the people. Once the Senate says no, it means no. If you are not happy with your senator decision you can recall him but whatever he does in his capacity today as your senator is legal and must be respected. So it is partisan sagay that is a comedian