brownlord:
Robot!

read and comprehend now

nortcentrallord:
Go back and read the post again.

Go back and complete reading it.

Now take sometime to digest it.

Oya, comment now. FP is not by force .

Grow up and stop exhibiting impetuous attitude.

PrettyClare7:
lawmakers trying to circumvent the law only God knows what is in dat amended law that they dont want the state house of assembly to see. They were hoping GEJ would be clueless as to what is law.

nduchucks:
Nonsense!!

Only the National Assembly may alter any of the provisions of the Constitution after which the amendmends must be approved by resolution of the Houses of Assembly of not less than two-thirds of all the States.

The President has no authority to reject any doggone Amendment approved by NASS.

The four-fifth rule applies to State creation and Chapter 4 (Fundamental Rights). All other amendments to any provision only needs the said two-thirds majority approval.

san316:
He's now working in line with GMB. He knows that gmb wants a lean government and separating the office is not in line with that.

eagleeyez:



Am sorry but I don't understand u. President has veto .....please explain, as am confused

nduchucks:


Please read my other posts on this thread. The President can veto Bills but not Amendments to the constitution.

CFCfan:

I was wondering too. There is no need to separate the offices of the Attorney-general and minister of justice. Just like it's done in the US, the title "minister of justice" could be dropped.

Caseless:
I can't wait for may 29th to get this clueless man off my head.

Caseless:
I can't wait for may 29th to get this clueless man off my head.

annylove:
For a whole human being to be on ur head how do u sleep at nite.

ebosed:


I concur but they should make it impossible for the president to unilatarally sack the A G. Just like the INEC chairman to protect and guaranty his objectivity.

Caseless:
I just sleep on ur chest.

eagleeyez:


I don't need to read your other posts. Can a law be ammended with out the presifent of a countrying signing off? Are u saying legislative arm of govt are to an extent a power on their own

Please I don't need your response.

annylove:
Bravo good for u then.

Caseless:
good for you, too.

nduchucks:
Nonsense!!

Only the National Assembly may alter any of the provisions of the Constitution after which the amendmends must be approved by resolution of the Houses of Assembly of not less than two-thirds of all the States.

The President has no authority to reject any doggone Amendment approved by NASS.

The four-fifth rule applies to State creation and Chapter 4 (Fundamental Rights). All other amendments to any provision only needs the said two-thirds majority approval.

Badgers14:



The president has constitutional power to veto any bill passed by the house/senate. And likewise the house/senate has the power to override his veto. Usually politicians don't go the later route even though it is constitutional. Be mindful though that the override must pass both chambers and sometimes the ruling party might have the vote for the override on one chamber and not the other, henceforth the override can't stand.

"Omololu Ogunmade's report here that the President had signed but later withdrew his assent because of advisers who pretended to be working for the President's interest is one of the most thoughtless reports I have seen in recent time. It cannot be differentiated from one of those "highly informed" opinions usually expressed in most liquor parlours in Nigeria.

This is even more the time to commend Jonathan for acting most statesmanly - removing personal interest, vindictiveness and "let them be caught in their own trap" mentality - in his most crucial final national assignment in office. Let me explain: One of the most ridiculous amendment proposed by the National Assembly was the one that says, once the assemblies agree on amendment of any section of the Constitution, the presidential assent shall stand discarded. The primary target in that proposition was Jonathan himself. They thought that Jonathan was going to manipulate his way back to office and therefore sought to create certain legal structures and lay landmines that will severely whittle his presidential powers and effectiveness. The lawmakers deceived themselves that they were copying America but without first asking themselves whether ours is exactly America's history. That's a facade, their main and only reason was to hamstring Jonathan. If Jonathan is not a statesman to the core, or were he made in the mold of his opponents, he would have rushed to sign an amendment that will tie Buhari's hand or make his office almost meaningless when he assumes it, knowing he (Buhari) belongs to the same party as most of the legislators, and because Jonathan has NOTHING PERSONAL to loose or gain if he signs it. But that's not Jonathan.

I think rather than walking on that notorious path of "advisers that misled Jonathan," serious journalists should look at the bigger picture which is Nigeria, a picture that Jonathan has considered over and above his personal interest. A serious journalist should begin to write on why "patriotic" legislators refused to guarantee local government autonomy which Nigerians trooped out to the Senate/House public hearings to demand but rushed to propose amendment which rubbishes the seal of the number one office in this country. Were Jonathan to be vindictive and not a statesman, he would have sigend the bill. The legislators left existential issues that place challenges on our corportae existence but embarked on issues of supremacy of power between the Executive and the Legislature. Jonathan did the right thing by rejecting to leave a booby trap for the incoming President. He should be commended, not redicled with beer parlour narratives."

jpphilips:


Do you understand what a "veto" means and why it is called a presidential privilege?

jpphilips:



Veto is a presidential privilege as such cannot be overridden by any arm of Government, it does not apply to only Nigeria alone, Just recently, Obama used his veto to remove some sanctions from president Rouhani of Iran, even the congress inviting Netanyahu to address the house did not upturn that veto.

Badgers14:
.

Sir, I believe you could use some help here. First congress inviting Netanyahu was just a way for him to improve his public statues in Israel ( his elections were around the corner at the time and he faced strong opposition, his ratings went down during that time). His visits has nothing to do with Vetoes, votes on vetoes are strictly for elected members of congress. Also don't forget that the president recently issued the said executive orders after the deal with Iran was successful ( maybe that was part of the deal?).
Also, do you know why the Republicans went to court to block Obama's executive actions on immigration? because they do not have the votes in both chambers to Override his Veto. ( and Obama knows that because he is a Harvard Trained lawyer and a former Professor of "Constitutional law" in university of Chicago- Chicago IL.

nduchucks:


Under our constitution, the President is not authorized to veto constitutional amendments. He has the constitutional authority to veto bills.