Per Kerr Fatou’s reporting, President Barrow set up yet another commission to look into LG activities within three months, making the reports almost available before the pending LG election. One would wonder if the president is weaponizing the constitution to defeat his opponents at the poll.
Yes, the president has the power to set such a commission, but the question is should the mayors & the affected parties challenge his decision for failure “to faithfully execute the laws” and acting with a “corrupt intent” in constituting the commission? If he acted in good faith, then his action should muster the constitutional test. If not, should the commission continue or would he have found himself violating obstruction statutes warranting an NA impeachment inquiry?
Late Justice Scalia’s partial dissent in U.S. v. Aguilar, stated that the term “denotes ‘[a]n act done with an intent to give some advantage inconsistent with official duty and the rights of others….” In other words, the court must find that there’s “a concrete showing that [he] acted with an intent to obtain an improper advantage for himself or someone else [his candidates] inconsistent with official duty and the rights of others.
Personally, I think the affected parties should challenge this decision at the Supreme Court instead of duking it out at the commission—that could be done later. It would enrich Jollof’s jurisprudence to see how the apex court reconciles the take care provision of the Constitution with the president’s act of setting this instant Commission.
N/B: Do not confuse fighting corruption with this act as the political will is/was not/will not be an agenda of this gov’t.
Article by: kerrfatou.com
February 15, 2023 - BY Admin