According to this Paper’s checks, the two-term house member’s reaction was because her colleague raised a cardinal and fundamental point of order to suit the Standing Order of the House, just as he stated vividly that it was against the Order of the House for the items in a Bill to run at variance with the title of the Bill, and cited Sections 4.3 and 4.4 of the Bill which derailed from the focus of the Bill to address devolution of properties to female children. Etienam had said that such clause should be presented in a separate Bill.
Barr. Etienam, representing Orue-offong Oruko State Constituency had said in the floor of the house while considering the bill at the committee of the Whole House that either the short-title be amended to accommodate that particular subject matter or the subject matter expunged from the bill.
The Speaker who reasoned with the fundamental point raised by Barr. Etienam had ordered that the bill be stood down to enable individual members and the Committee cite relevant laws involved for proper guidance, comparison and possible amendments. During the third reading, Hon. Alice Ekpenyong moved a motion for the faulted section of the bill to be expunged and that was done last Week Thursday .
Hon. Alice, believed to have been in such moods when under any little pressure, had unleashed her perceived anger on her colleague who she thought perhaps did not protect her interest in the matter.
