Nigeria's Senate has moved to distance itself from one of its own committees, following the controversy generated by an attempt to order the arrest of a former top oil official. The upper chamber sought to make clear that the decision did not reflect its official position, in an episode that exposed friction over how far a committee can go in its dealings with those it summons.
At the centre of the row is Mele Kyari, the former Group Managing Director of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation. The Senate Committee on Public Accounts had recently considered and purportedly resolved to issue, or recommend the issuance of, an arrest warrant against him, following allegations that he had failed to honour invitations extended by the committee.
The handling of the matter quickly ran into a procedural objection. It was noted that the issuing of such warrants should be the responsibility of the Senate President or the Speaker, or their deputies in their absence, as clearly stated in the relevant rules and laws. From this standpoint, the committee was seen to have overstepped the bounds of its authority in moving to order an arrest.
The dispute was further inflamed by remarks attributed to Senator Adams Oshiomhole during the deliberations, in which he was said to have described the NNPC as a bunch of criminals and thieves. A fellow senator called on him to withdraw that statement, arguing that such language should not be allowed to convey the impression of a Senate that is out to witch-hunt public officers or individuals.
Given the opportunity to respond, Oshiomhole stood his ground. He argued that he would not apologise for reacting when fellow senators are abused, and invoked the rule of law as the principle that keeps people like him protected. His defence underscored the divisions within the chamber over both the tone of the proceedings and the conduct of the committee.
On the substance of the arrest warrant issued against Kyari, the Senate President announced that he would hold a meeting with members of the Public Accounts Committee to address the matter. The move signalled an attempt to rein in the controversy internally and to clarify the proper channels through which the Senate exercises its oversight powers.