Oshiomhole warns Akpabio that rushing bills and withholding copies from senators is dangerous.

• Emphasises that each word and clause must be examined in detail

• Warns that the process could slide toward authoritarian rule

The senator for Edo North, Adams Oshiomhole, warned yesterday that the way recent amendments to the Senate Standing Rules were handled could erode constitutional safeguards and open the legislative process to authoritarian tendencies.

In an interview with Arise News, Oshiomhole criticised what he called a hurried approach to law‑making in the Senate, saying legislators were not given sufficient time or access to properly examine proposed changes before they were adopted.

He had previously accused the Senate leadership of speeding up procedures, noting that senators did not receive advance copies of the amendments nor enough time to scrutinise them. He argued that this practice undermines proper legislative procedure and risks producing rules that conflict with the Constitution.

Tensions rose on the Senate floor when Oshiomhole tried to raise a point of order during the debate but was reportedly not recognised by the presiding officer. He also objected to provisions he believed could affect eligibility for key leadership positions, including the Senate presidency.

During the interview, he said the rushed consideration of the amendments had already produced avoidable mistakes, citing provisions later found to be inconsistent with the Nigerian Constitution and subsequently reversed.

Oshiomhole stressed that senators should receive advance copies of proposed amendments to allow for detailed study before deliberation on the floor, warning that failure to do so undermines legislative responsibility.

According to him, the way the amendments were processed also deprived some lawmakers of the opportunity to raise procedural objections during plenary. He cited the instance where he attempted to raise a point of order but was not granted recognition.

He further argued that the later reversal of parts of the amended rules highlighted the dangers of hasty legislative decisions. He described such reversals as an institutional embarrassment that could have been avoided with more rigorous scrutiny.

“My view is that we must not rush in making laws. Every clause, every word deserves scrutiny. So rushing…At the end of the day, we have made a couple of mistakes a couple of times.”

“Making laws that are in conflict with existing laws that the National Assembly has made or even more seriously, making laws that are in conflict with the Nigeria constitution. And the only way to avoid those avoidable errors is to have a proper debate.”

“Anything you want to do, whether it is rule‑changing or law‑making, it is important that senators have the benefit of advanced copies. Read it, study it, that is what we are supposed to have.”

“As you can see, there is no better evidence of the danger of rushing than having to revise rules that conflict with the Nigerian Constitution,” he argued on Arise Television.

He cautioned against using internal rules to shape political outcomes or target individuals, warning that such practices could distort democratic governance and encourage authoritarian rule‑making within institutions.

“You don’t make laws either for yourself or against specific individuals that you fear will come. That is the beginning of the road to life presidency and dictatorship,” he warned.

Oshiomhole insisted that Senate leadership should emerge from collective confidence among lawmakers rather than from restrictive procedural or eligibility interpretations.

He maintained that what matters is the support of colleagues, not rules designed to exclude or entrench particular interests.

Oshiomhole also referred to provisions in the Senate Standing Orders that, in his view, raise questions about the eligibility of Senate leadership under current interpretations. He clarified that he never directly asked Akpabio to resign.

He noted that Akpabio, who previously served in the chamber, had not met an eight‑year threshold when his past and current tenures are combined. According to Oshiomhole, if such a benchmark is applied, it could raise concerns about eligibility to preside over the Senate.

The former labour leader argued that ambiguous or inconsistent interpretations of standing rules could fuel institutional tension and weaken democratic norms, adding that such issues should be resolved through clear, transparent and constitutionally grounded processes.

Oshiomhole maintained that his intervention was driven by principle rather than political interest, insisting that his concern was to preserve due process and safeguard legislative integrity within the National Assembly.

“The current Senate President served a four‑year term, lost his reelection bid, served as a minister, and returned this term to become Senate President again. If you add his first term to his current term, he still has not served eight years. If eight years is the minimum requirement, Senator Akpabio does not qualify to preside because he has not met it.”

“If he assumed the role in error, that error must be corrected. Also, the word ‘consecutively’ effectively reduces the senate president’s term to three years for ranking purposes. These kinds of laws are what breed dictatorship in Africa,” Oshiomhole emphasized.