 Well, we would be looking at whether or not it should be compulsory for a presidential debate or governorship among others and will be joined by legal practitioners of Festus Ocuche. Before then, on the heels of the controversy surrounding the ongoing presidential debate, ahead of the 2023 general elections, the Conference of Nigerian Political Parties, that's a CNPP, has called on the National Assembly to take steps to enact laws to make participation in presidential governorship, debates around day three and part of Nigerian electoral process. The wealthy and or the CNPP believes in legalizing the presidential and governorship debate according to them, it will go a long way in helping the electorate make informed decision on the choices of the Chief Executive of the State or the Federal Republic of Nigeria or even the choice of a lawmaker to represent his or her constituency. The CPN has therefore called on the National Assembly to immediately set up modalities for making it customary for the candidates who engage in debate as part of Nigeria's electioneering process, especially at the presidential or governorship levels in the first stands. According to them, they also say that emphasis is that this debate will help the people enlighten them and also create an avenue for engagement of candidates and giving the electorate the opportunity to interface with the leaders for proper assessment to determine the level of preparedness for leadership, commitment and governance. The list is almost on and the conversation cannot stop but this morning, like I mentioned earlier on, a legal practitioner Festus Oguche joins the conversation. Festus, it's good to have you join us. Thank you very much for inviting me. So my question to you is, do you think that it should be compulsory, debate should be mandatory and compulsory in Niger? Yes, it should be mandatory, it should be compulsory, whichever way you want it. Because it's very important that you have to tell the people what you're going to deliver, your objectives, your mandates and such other things that will convince them to vote you into office and where you begin to shy away from attending such debates and conferences to talk to the people then apparently you don't have an agenda. But it's not something that should be legalized so to speak because I know that in the United States which a system we follow very religiously, it's a matter of tradition, traditional in the sense that the presidential candidate or the governorship candidate has to go and meet the people, that's where the idea of how town hall meetings emerged and emanated and I think it's a thing of joy for anybody who is a candidate for any of these elective, executive elective positions to meet to the people and could talk to them about their manifesto, about their agenda, about what they want to do, convince them. As a matter of fact, a very sophisticated democracy is that candidates go from door to door. That's what happens chiefly in the United Kingdom and parts of Europe, even in Germany. And they go from door to door trying to convince people that this is what is obtainable, this is how I want to do this, what I'm going to do and they commit them to their promises to the words they say. And sometimes in some jurisdictions I think they are looking at and that is one of the things that were issues that were raised the other day at the prestigious law faculty of the reverse state university here or whether a candidate can make a promise and not fulfill it and cannot be charged to court for obtaining my false pretence. And I think it is obtainable that way because if you get to report you and talk to the people and look vote for me because I'm going to make that one matter equal to 50 combo. I'm going to develop the economy, I'm going to bring all that infrastructure and the idea that if they get to the police office, I'm going to do a different thing all together. I think you should be criminally liable. And I think that's the extent to which these issues is going to extend in such manner that politicians should not just go on the platform and begin to relapse series of promises and all that and not meet the obligations in the citizenry. All right so but quickly let's also make reference you know to the United States shortly after the series of John Kennedy and Richard Nixon's series of debate presidential debate. It became a thing of public concern because the public began to make, they started making a demand, they started an expectation, the public started expecting this debate. So it's whatever it is that we have because we're following is as a result of you know the demand of the public. Of course now presidential debate has become the American's institution and that's because the people demanded it. So have we gotten to that point where you know we can rightly say that we're not forcing this because we also have stances where some presidential candidate and what have you declined to become part of the process. But it's become an institution of the United States because of the people and the demand that they have placed on it. So with this do you still think that it should be compulsory? Hello are you with me? Yes please. Yes I would say that yes we have gotten to that stage like I said earlier where these debates are mostly compulsory and persons must be invited and when they are invited they must attempt such debates as to prove their competence and prove their capacity to deliver in the course of the electoral process. These are very very important but then if it gets to a situation where a presidential candidate begins now to shy away from such debates then it becomes a different kind of official together. It's not that you can find him liable. It's not written in any law that maybe a candidate must if he doesn't call his liable in any way but just being a tradition. Then if he absents himself from that kind of opportunity to speak to the people to address them on these vital issues of governance that is craving their support and craving their votes of course it gives a very good signal that that's a very bad candidate. So for the United States it's a tradition to give the example of those debates between Nixon and this other candidate and how it went through but then on such platform that is where apart from delivering or telling the people your agenda the whole lot of things should come to play because I find the people the opportunity to assess your not just your competence alone not just your capacity but also your level of decency your level of civility your maturity everything will come to bear and that's why it's all very very very important even if it's not there in any of the written books either in the electoral act or in the constitution it's very very straightforward that it is very vital and imperative. I hope I've answered your question I hope I answered your question because I was getting distracted. Well Dr. Festus Mr. Festus or Sir Festus however we have to go now and I was hoping that we had enough time but unfortunately that's not you know our question but however we hope that we get to that point where whether or not it should become mandatory it's important that it's you know it should be considered it should be very critical but if we look at who we are copying and who were where this actually originated from we found that it burned out from the people the people began to be entrusted and they placed the demand on all of that well that's it this morning thank you so much Festus Oguche for being part of the show well he Dr. Festus I don't know why I'm calling him doctor but that's fine he's a legal practitioner he joins us this morning from River State Port Harcourt and that's it if you missed out on any part of the conversation it'll be great to follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram and you can also subscribe to our YouTube channel at Plus TV Africa and Plus TV Africa Lifestyle I am Messia Bofo and thanks for staying with us we'll definitely return tomorrow with the breakfast