If you’ve been following Edo State politics lately, you might feel a sense of déjà vu. Another administration, another high-profile project, and another wave of investigations and public skepticism.
From the Museum of West African Art (MOWAA) to new flyovers and multi-million dollar MOUs, a consistent question emerges: who is truly authorizing these legacy-defining commitments?
In light of the ongoing scrutiny of projects across Obaseki’s government, it’s time for the Edo State House of Assembly to consider a radical but necessary solution: legislation that acts as a “War Powers Resolution” for our state’s treasury and future.
A Cycle of Scrutiny: From Obaseki to Okpebholo
The need for stronger checks and balances isn’t theoretical; it’s playing out in real-time.
· The MOWAA Investigation: The current House of Representatives is probing the MOWAA project, voicing concerns that its structure could cede “excessive influence” to private interests. This was swiftly followed by Governor Monday Okpebholo’s revocation of the project’s land title, citing concerns from the Benin Royal Palace. The project, intended as a cultural landmark, is now mired in legal and political uncertainty.
There is a need to answer the $250 Million “MOU” Question: The current administration itself faced immediate scrutiny over an alleged $250 million investment deal. Critics called it a “fraud,” while officials clarified it was merely a non-binding MoU to “formalise investors’ interest.” The confusion highlights a critical gap: how should such major, state-altering proposals be communicated and approved?
Infrastructure Across Administrations:
This isn’t a new problem. The Adams Oshiomhole administration was known for major projects like the Benin drainage system. Now, Governor Okpebholo is pushing forward with new flyovers. While infrastructure is vital, the public debate often centers on priority and process, with citizens left asking, “Who decided this, and based on what full picture?”
These cycles of announcements, controversies, and investigations erodes public trust and creates policy instability. We need a system that builds confidence from the start.
The U.S. Model: How a “War Powers Act” Works
So, what does a 1973 American law about sending troops into conflict have to do with building flyovers or museums in Edo State? The principle, not the subject matter.
The U.S. War Powers Resolution was created to check the President’s power to unilaterally commit the nation to war. Its core mechanics are a masterclass in checks and balances:
1. Mandatory Notification: The President must inform Congress within 48 hours of committing forces.
2. Strict Time Limit: Forces cannot remain in hostilities for more than 60 days without Congressional authorization.
3. Power of the Purse: It reasserts Congress’s constitutional power to declare war and fund military action.
In essence, it forces collaboration. It prevents one branch of government from making a monumental, long-term decision without the approval of the people’s direct representatives.
A Proposed “Edo State Project Powers Act”
Imagine adapting this powerful framework for our state. The Edo State House of Assembly could enact a law that mandates legislative oversight for all major executive projects.
Here’s how it could work:
Principle from U.S. War Powers Resolution Adaptation for Edo State Project Oversight
Presidential Reporting to Congress Mandatory Executive Reporting: The Governor must formally and publicly inform the Assembly of any proposed MoU, contract, or project exceeding a set financial threshold (e.g., ₦5 Billion) within 7 days of its proposal.
60-Day Engagement Limit Provisional Approval & Sunset Clause: The Assembly can grant provisional approval for feasibility studies and initial planning. However, full implementation and the release of major funds would be prohibited without a final, comprehensive review and authorization by the Assembly within a set period (e.g., 90 days).
Checks and Balances Legislative-Executive Collaboration: The law would cement the Assembly’s role as a co-equal branch of government on big-ticket items, ensuring that long-term commitments reflect the “collective judgment” of both the Executive and Legislature.
Conclusion: Securing Our Collective Future
A legislative framework like this would not be about stifling development or tying the hands of the executive. It is about securing it. It would transform the House of Assembly from a body that often reacts to scandals into one that proactively safeguards public interest.
By institutionalising transparency and mandatory approval, we can break the cycle of controversy. Whether it’s a museum, a drainage system, or a multi-million dollar investment, the people of Edo State deserve to know that their future is being decided through a robust, democratic process, not in closed-door meetings.
The precedent exists. The need is clear. The question is, does our House of Assembly have the will to act?
What do you think? Should the Edo State House of Assembly pursue such a law? What other projects would have benefited from this kind of oversight? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
Centre for Nigeria Progress 