Minority Caucus Accuses Reps’ Spokesperson of Misrepresenting House in Executive Defence

The caucus, at a press conference on Wednesday, had asked President Bola Tinubu to suspend all his 2027 political activities, declare a six-month National Security and Economic Recovery Plan and lead the country or resign.

The Minority Caucus in the House of Representatives has accused the Chairman of the House Committee on Media and Public Affairs, Akin Rotimi, of improperly claiming to speak for the entire House while defending the Executive branch.

In a statement issued on Saturday by its spokesperson, Afam Ogene, the caucus insisted that the legislature must maintain its independence and not function as a “lapdog” to the presidency.

The Conflict

The tensions stem from a Wednesday press conference in which the Minority Caucus called on President Bola Tinubu to suspend all 2027 political activities and to declare a six-month National Security and Economic Recovery Plan.

The caucus argued that Rotimi’s subsequent response, which challenged these concerns, inaccurately portrayed the House’s views as aligned with his own.

The lawmakers emphasised that no resolution or decision of the House authorised such a position.

Procedural Concerns and Constitutional Duty

The caucus criticised the use of the phrase “House Notes” in the spokesperson’s statement, describing it as procedurally misleading. They noted that the House had not convened since June 15, leaving no opportunity for a collective mandate on the matter.

Citing Sections 14(2)(b) and 88 of the Constitution, the lawmakers maintained that their primary responsibility is to hold the Executive accountable, not to offer unsolicited defences of its actions.

Ultimatum and Policy Grievances

Following an emergency virtual meeting on June 19, the caucus demanded a public apology from Mr Rotimi within 72 hours, warning that it would petition the House Committee on Ethics and Privileges should he fail to comply.

Beyond procedural disagreements, the caucus expressed alarm at the failure to implement budgets since 2024. They claimed that funding for key defence and security agencies remains below 30 per cent, which they argued had significantly hampered the operational capacity of security forces to address national threats.