CRITIQUING THE DEMOCRATIC IDEALS OF STANDING ORDERS OF LEGISLATIVE HOUSE THROUGH THE PRISM OF THE RULES OF THE DELTA STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY: LESSONS FROM A CROSS-COUNTRY SURVEY

Abstract

An important aspect of Parliamentary privilege is that each House has the privilege of controlling its own procedures. The Parliament draws up the rules in its own right because it has the power to introduce whatever regulations it deems appropriate. The permanent written rules under which the House regulates its proceedings are known as the Standing Orders, and these rules governing legislative processes have implication on the authenticity, the reach and quality of representation. Despite the paramount need for the sanctity of these rules, there has been a misuse of its provisions in certain quarters. Impelled therefore by the incessant suspension of lawmakers in Nigeria by Legislative Houses citing breach of Standing Orders/Rules, this article critically examines the extent and application of relevant areas of Standing Orders of the Delta State House of Assembly by interrogating the general level of internal democracy entrenched in it and juxtaposing it with corresponding Standing Orders of the parliaments of two different jurisdictions of New South Wales and Kenya. The paper finds that Standing Orders however well thought out are inherently laden with provisions that infringe upon the principles of democracy and democratic ideals generally and accordingly recommends that Standing Orders must not be in breach of democratic ideals.