Protocol and Etiquette in International Relations: NASS Versus the CJN in the Order of Precedence in Nigeria
Bola A. Akinterinwa
P
rotocol and etiquette is at the epicentre of diplomacy in theory and praxis for reasons that are not far-fetched: they deal with rules and regulations of behaviour. Diplomacy, either as an art or science, is generally rule-based even if it is, more often than not, breached. Protocol Officers have their functions regulated. In any given official event, protocol officers must follow the relevant order of precedence at the event. Consequently, masters of ceremonies must be conversant with the courtesy titles and relevant patterns of address.
In the same vein, foreign guests can be visiting a country, in which case the visit may be private, official, or officious in character. It might also be a working or state visit. The different categories of visit have their protocolar rules of reception that must be appropriately adhered to. More interestingly, there are not only an order for convoys on state occasions and flag etiquette, but also order of national honours and hierarchy of appointments and functionality. In other words, the business of diplomacy is increasingly being professionalised and thus requiring all those people seeking jobs with international organisations to be well trained in it.
In the strong belief that Nigeria’s royal fathers have a lot to do in the quest to maintain peace and security in their communities, the Achievers University in Owo has introduced Traditional African Protocol in the curricula of its Diploma and Post-Graduate Diploma in Diplomatic Studies and Practice scheduled to begin in the 2024-2025 session. Traditional protocol and etiquette is more inspiring and ought to constitute the other sides of the international protocol and etiquette coin in the maintenance of international peace and security. In this regard, which protocol is more appropriate or take precedence during public ceremonies: traditional or international practice? Should a Local Government Chairman be superior to a traditional ruler in his domain? The order of precedence needs re-articulation in Nigeria.
Order of Precedence in Nigeria
Order of precedence is an important element of diplomatic protocol and etiquette which deal with rules and customs governing official and officious interactions between and among nation states through their diplomatic agents with the ultimate objective of promoting mutual recognition and respect, peaceful coexistence, and cooperation. Order of precedence essentially deals with hierarchy or ranking of individuals, groups and organisations. They are generally provided for in agreements, especially in the event of disputes. For example, an agreement can stipulate that a dispute shall be referred to a Court of Arbitration in a particular country, meaning that, that court takes precedence over other courts in the signatory States.
At the level of nation-states, every state has its own order of precedence. Consequently, a given individual may have a ranking that is higher or lower in comparison to what obtains in other countries. Again, difference in ranking may be due to name designations. In Nigeria, there are Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of State for Foreign Affairs. While a Minister of Foreign Affairs has responsibility to oversee a country’s foreign affairs in its entirety, a Minister of State has responsibility for specific foreign policy areas. Even though the ‘Ministers of State for’ claim equality with the ‘Ministers of,’ and have successfully struggled to be allowed to participate in Cabinet meetings, only the Minister of Foreign Affairs is internationally recognised to represent and act on behalf of Nigeria, unless the Minister of State is specifically assigned to so act.
Grosso modo, the order of precedence is nothing more than a list of official functionaries, dignitaries and officials publicly recognised during ceremonies. The order does not have any legal binding but can be seriously infuriating and damage official ties when someone is not duly recognised as it should be or when one is wrongly presented to the audience. In fact, several diplomatic rows have been generated in international relations as a result of not following the right order of precedence. It is against this background that the recognition of Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Kudirat Kekere-Ekun as Grand Commander of the Order of Niger (GCON) and recognition of the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Honourable Tajudeen Abbas as Commander of the Federal Republic generated controversy in the National Assembly (NASS).
One problematic that arises at the level of the controversy is the non-distinction between ‘Order as an honour’ and ‘Order as ranking or hierarchy.’ Order as an honour in Nigeria may imply the seniority of the House Speaker, meaning that the Speaker cannot but take precedence over the CJN. Put differently, the highest level of national honours in Nigeria is the GCFR (Grand Commander in the Order of the Federal Republic). This is followed by the GCON (Grand Commander in the Order of the Niger). GCFR and GCON are normally reserved for the President and Vice-President of Nigeria.
To a great extent, being president and vice-president, and in that capacity as Grand Commander, can rightly justify the reservation of the GCFR and GCON for them. The early recipients of the GCFR included Queen Elisabeth, Dr, Nnamdi Azikiwe, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, the Nigerian president we never had, and General Yakubu Gowon. While the automatic conferment of the honour of GCFR and GCON to the first two citizens of the country may not be subject to query, especially because of its colonial origin, the mania of conferment of the GCON to other Nigerians, at times of nobility, is embarrassing. Some recipients duly merit the honour. Some recipients do not merit the award. Honouring corrupt people taints the National Honour and necessarily creates a new class of honour: Grand Commander in the Order of Corruption (GCOC). This should not be so. National Honour must be earned and not simply by election into public office.
The Commander of the Federal Republic (CFR) is the third highest level of national honour, and therefore the third in line of succession to the Nigerian presidency. In terms of presidential succession, the definienda is institutional or constitutional ranking. By further implication in the order of precedence, the House Speaker cannot but take precedence over the CJN. If we admit here that the House Speaker is senior in ranking to the CJN, can it be rightly argued that the House Speaker is the equal of the Senate President? Is it because the honour of GCON is conferred on the Senate President that it must also be conferred on the House Speaker? Why must a political appointee be honoured be mere fact of occupation of an office? Why is national honour conferred at the time of commencement of duty and not towards or after tenure in office when performance would have been well known? Can it be rightly argued that, because Honourable Members of the House of Representatives and Distinguished Senators are elected directly and indirectly that they are all equal in status? These questions are necessary because of the mania of the controversy.
On Tuesday, October 1, 2024, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu (PBAT) announced the award of the second highest national honour, GCON, to the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, and the third highest national honour not only to the deputy Senate President, Barau Jibrin, but also to the CJN, Kudirat Kekere-Ekun during his 64th Independence Anniversary Speech to the nation. The following day, Wednesday, October 2, Honourable Phillip Agbese of the All Progressives Congress (APC, Benue), moved a motion of urgent importance on the need to elevate the national honour of CFR given to the House Speaker to GCON. The House of Representatives passed the motion on equality with the Senate. The motion was a complaint against PBAT for awarding the CJN, Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, a higher national honour, GCON, but gave the CFR, the third highest national honour to the House Speaker, Tajudeen Abbas.
Deductively observed, three reasons might have informed the motion and its quick passage by the House of Representatives. First, the Speaker is higher in constitutional ranking than the CJN in State Protocol. Secondly, during the Ninth Assembly, attempt was made to award the honour of CFR to the then 14th House Speaker, Olufemi Hakeem Gbajabiamila (2019-2023). It was first resisted but was later addressed diplomatically but not permanently. It was only acquiesced to. Thirdly, it was considered that, if the Senate President could be given GCON, why should the Speaker of the House of Representatives not be given the same since they are at par? But are they really at par? As reportedly put by the House of Representatives, the honourable members ‘are not subservient to any arm of government. We are not in competition with anybody, but we want to be given our right place.’ In this regard, what really is the right place for the House Speaker?
From the constitutional point of view, what qualifies the President of Nigeria or the Vice-President of Nigeria to be awarded GCFR or GCON if it is not by the ordinary factor of their election into the Office of the President and Office of the Vice-President? To what extent should the occupation of an office be more important than the experiential contributions to nation-building in the determination of ranking of public officers? Additionally, why should an elected person into a public office, for three or four years, be superior to public officers with greater knowledge and experience acquired over decades of contributions to national development?
Precedence in Diplomatic Practice
The current order of precedence in England and Wales can be categorised into three main parts: sovereign, religious, and political. In these cases, separate orders exist for men and women. In the peerage system (body of peers or titled nobility in the United Kingdom), a Peer can have many titles of nobility, as well as belong to different ranks and peerages. However, a Peer derives his precedence from his highest-ranking title. In the same vein, peeresses have their precedence the same way and hold their highest-ranking title in their own right or by marriage. Britain has five ranks of nobility, which in ranking order, are as follows: duke, marquess, earl, viscount, and baron. As noted in http://www.britannica.com>topic ‘until 1999, peers were entitled to sit in the House of Lords and exempted from jury duty. Titles may be hereditary or granted for life.’
And true enough, at the crescendo of the order of precedence in the sovereign category, is the Sovereign, regardless of gender and members of his or her family. After the Sovereign, come the sons, the grandsons, the brothers, the uncles, the nephews, the grandsons of former sovereigns who are dukes and grandsons of former sovereign who are not dukes, in that descending order of importance.
The next level of order is that of the archbishops, high officers of state and others. The most senior is the Archbishop of Canterbury followed, in order of declining seniority, by the Lord High Steward who is appointed during ceremonial coronation), the Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, the Archbishop of York, the Prime Minister, The Lord High Treasurer, The Lord President of the Council, the Speaker of the House of Commons, The Lord Speaker of the House of Lords, the President of the Supreme Court, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, and the Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal.
It is after this category that the Ambassadors and High Commissioners to the United Kingdom come in. The category of nobility, bishops; Marquesses and others; Earls et al; Viscounts and others; Bishops; Barons/Lords of Parliament; as well as the Gentry and others; Master of the Rolls and Supreme Court Justices; and Royal Household officials, follow in that order. Two points are noteworthy in the UK order of precedence.
First is the observation that every given stratum of society has its order of precedence. The order of precedence of the Sovereign and his family and extended relations is noteworthy. So is that of the Archbishops and public officials. In this regard, sovereignty and religion take precedence over appointed or elected political public officials. For instance, the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Archbishop of York take precedence before the Prime Minister. This means religious status takes priority before the political status. Additionally and more relevantly to the Nigerian case, the Speaker of the House of Commons and the Lord Speaker of House of Lords take precedence before the President of the Supreme Court and the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales. This means that a House Speaker generally takes precedence before a Chief Justice.
In the United States, the order of precedence is not different from what obtains in the United Kingdom, but varies according to professions and society. There are the US Army order of precedence, USMC ribbon order of precedence, US flag order of precedence, US Air Force ribbons order of precedence. At the level of US government order of precedence, the line of succession of cabinet officers is defined by the order of creation of the departments and agencies.
After the president come the Vice-president, Speaker of the House, President Pro Tempore of the Senate, Secretary of State, Secretary of Defence, Attorney-General, Secretary of the Interior, Secretary of Agriculture, Secretary of Commerce, Secretary of Labor, Secretary of Health and Human Service, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Secretary of Transportation, Secretary of Energy, Secretary of Education, Secretary of Veterans Affairs and Secretary of Homeland Security. This is the order as updated on September 20, 2024. This line of succession, in the event the President dies, resigns, becomes incapacitated, is removed from office or is unable to hold office, is based on the US Constitution and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947. The importance of various departments and their Secretaries is determined by the time of establishment and ranking, and therefore, of age.
In Britain order of precedence is largely influenced by the monarchical parliamentary system, while it is largely influenced by the presidential system in the United States. France operates a semi-presidential system and its order of precedence is also a reflection of it. Order of precedence, referred to as ‘ordre de préséance, for public ceremonies in France is established by Décret no. 89-655 du 13 septembre 1989 relatif aux cérémonies publiques, préséance , honneurs civils et militaires, that is, Decree no. 89-655 of 13 September 1989 relating to Public Ceremonies, Precedence, and Civil and Military honours.
As established since 9 January 2024, the French order is as follows: President of the Republic; Prime Minister; President of the Senate; President of the National Assembly; former Presidents of the Republic (Nicolas Sarkozy and François Hollande in order of term); the Government in the order decided by the President of the Republic; former Prime Ministers in order of term (15 of them); President of the Constitutional Council; Vice-President of the Conseil d’État (Council of State); President of the Economic, Social and Environmental Council, the Defender of Rights; Members of the National Assembly, Senators, European Parliament members; the judicial authority represented by the first president of the Court of Cassation and the public prosecutor of that court; the first President of the Revenue Court (Cour des Comptes) and the Public Prosecutor of that court; the Great Chancellor of the Légion d’honneur; the Chancellor of the National Order of Merit; the Chancellor of the Order of the Liberation, and the Chief of Defence Staff.
From a comparative perspective, the Vice-President in the US and Nigerian presidential systems is the second ranking public official in the order of precedence while it is the Prime Minister in France. France clearly distinguishes between the Senate President and President of the National Assembly. The Senate, often referred to as the Upper Chamber, and the House of Representatives, also referred to as Lower Chamber, constitute the National Assembly in various countries and in Nigeria. The same is true of France. However, the notion of National Assembly (Assemblée Nationale) in France, which is the lower house of the bicameral French Parliament under the Fifth Republic established in 1958, means House of Representatives in Nigeria. Generally, the Speaker takes precedence before the judicial officers in all cases. Regardless of whatever definienda that might have been considered in establishing any order of precedence, there is the need to always place emphasis on the integrity of the recipient with particular emphasis on his or her contributions to societal development rather than on political whims and caprices.
Unlike professional and academic honours that are grosso modo awarded on strict merit, national honours have been much politically bastardised that few people have respect for it now. In fact, recall the case of a Local Government chairman, who reportedly did not pass the West African School Certificate Examination, but was elected and still had the effrontery to tell academic professors to seek election if they want to be earning about N120,000 being paid to the Local Chairman by then, as opposed to the N80,000 being paid to professors. In other words, by election, a School Certificate holder is superior to an academic professor. The other problems to address include whether protocolar ranking should or should not be done on the basis of professional feats. The award of GCON to the CJN is not stricto sensu because of the occupation of the Office of the CJN but particularly in acknowledgment of the cumulative years of her judicial services to the nation. A Senate President or House Speaker is constitutionally given the honour by mere occupation of the offices and not necessarily because of their years of service in that capacity. The honourable and distinguished members of the NASS in Nigeria appear to be operating like a monarchy within a presidential democracy. This should not be so. GCON can be given to the House
Speaker as a constitutional right but not because the same was given to the CJN who by dint of national contributions merit the honour.
