Tag:

National Assembly

Tinubu arrives National Assembly, delivers brief speech

by Folarin Kehinde May 29, 2024

written by Folarin Kehinde

President Bola Tinubu has arrived at the National Assembly Complex as part of his itinerary to commemorate the 25 years of unbroken democracy in Nigeria.

Tinubu’s motorcade arrived at the National Assembly at about 11:57am and he’s yet to enter the chamber.

Shortly after the president’s arrival, the Speaker of the House, Abbas Tajudeen, alongside the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, entered the chamber.

Mr Akpabio announced that the President would not address the chamber but only listen to the Old National Anthem.

He urged the lawmakers to download the new anthem.

However, the President, thereafter, made a brief speech to the lawmakers.

This is coming amid confusion from the Presidency over conflicting statements of Tinubu addressing a joint session of the National Assembly.

On Monday, the National Assembly had announced that it would hold a special joint session on Wednesday to mark the 25th anniversary of democracy in Nigeria.

May 29, 2024 0 comments

Leading Reporters INEC lied, documents show APC candidate on CAC filing of firm awarded contract to print sensitive election materials Image

Headlines

INEC lied, documents show APC candidate awarded contract

by Leading Reporters March 17, 2023

written by Leading Reporters

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) lied in its claim that APC governorship candidate Aishatu Dahiru was not listed as a director in Binani Printing Press, a company awarded the contract of printing sensitive election materials, Leading Reporters can confirm.

According to documents seen by Leading Reporters, Ms Dahiru alias Binani, who is running for governor in Adamawa on the platform of the All Progressives Congress (APC), is named as a director of Binani Printing Press with RC-816807,No 17 Atiku Abubakar Road Jimeta, Adamawa Yola and established on May 11 2009.

On Thursday, INEC defended the deal with Binani Press, insisting the commission was certain the printing press could deliver following an inspection of the company’s facility and the completion of additional due diligence by the Corporate Affairs Commission.

“After inspecting the company’s facility and carrying out due diligence at the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), the Commission was satisfied that they are qualified printers with the requisite technical capacity, security consciousness and expertise in printing security documents,” INEC had claimed in a statement on Thursday.

It then issued a verdict, declaring, “Aishatu Dahiru Ahmed was not listed as one of the Directors of Binani Printing Press Limited.”

INEC lied, documents show APC candidate on CAC filing of firm awarded contract to print sensitive election materials

INEC issued the statement after a Sahara Reporters’ story that uncovered how Nigeria’s electoral body awarded a N434 million election materials printing contract to a company owned by Ms Dahiru, incumbent senator of Adamawa Central.

The documents revealing the company’s records and expressly naming Ms Dahiru as a director have cast aspersions on INEC’s statement and further tainted the commission’s credibility to conduct free and fair elections in Nigeria, particularly under the leadership of its current chair, Mahmood Yakubu.

The electoral commission’s spokesman Festus Okoye did not immediately respond to telephone calls to seek comments on the CAC findings.

March 17, 2023 0 comments

Leading Reporters Six States Ask Supreme Court To Cancel Presidential Election Image

Headlines

Supreme Court to abrogate presidential election

by Leading Reporters March 3, 2023

written by Leading Reporters

Adamawa, Akwa-Ibom, Bayelsa, Delta, Edo and Sokoto states have dragged the Federal Government before the Supreme Court over the conduct of the February 25, 2023 presidential and National Assembly elections.

The suit filed by the Attorneys General of the six states has the Attorney General of the Federation as sole respondent.

The plaintiffs on February 28 predicated their case on the grounds that, “The collation of the national election results from the 36 states of the Federation, and that of the Federal Capital Territory, for the said 2023 presidential and National Assembly elections have not been carried out in compliance with the mandatory provisions of relevant sections of the Electoral Act, 2022; the INEC Regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct of Elections, 2022, made pursuant to the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022; and the INEC Manual for Election Officials, 2023.”

In the suit filed by their lawyer, Mike Ozekhome, SAN, the states said the agents and officials of the Federal Government and INEC failed to transmit the collated result as prescribed by the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022; the INEC Regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct of Elections 2022; and the INEC Manual for Election Officials requiring transmission of the results by the use of Bimodal Voter Accreditation System in flagrant breach of the relevant provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022; the INEC Regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct of Elections, 2022; and the INEC Manual for Election Officials, 2023.

They stated that, “non-compliance with the due process of law has led to a widespread agitation, violent protests, displeasure, and disapproval from a wide spectrum of the Nigerian populace, including international observers, political parties, well-meaning Nigerians and former Head of States of the Federal Republic of Nigeria”.

The plaintiffs argued that the federal government through INEC, “is empowered by law to correct the elections due to technical glitches and errors arising from the conduct of the elections with substantial effect on the electoral process in line with the provisions of Section 47 (3) of the Electoral Act, 2022; and other relevant sections thereof.

“Whilst queries were being raised as to the failure or deliberate refusal of INEC to transmit the results electronically, INEC suddenly pulled down its portal harbouring the Regulations and Guidelines, thus leaving the plaintiffs in the dark

“Most Nigerians, including the governments and peoples of Adamawa State, Akwa Ibom State, Bayelsa State, Delta State, Edo State, and Sokoto State, are entitled to a proper and electoral lawful process and procedure that guarantees a free, fair, transparent and credible election”.

Amongst the issues raised for determination by the apex court were: Whether having regard to the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022, governing the 2023 nationwide general elections, particularly paragraphs 38 of the INEC Regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct of Elections, 2022; and paragraphs 2.8.4; 2.9.0; and 2.9.1 of the INEC Manual for Election Officials, 2023 thereof, the electronic transmission of votes collated at polling units and the use of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) in the transmission of collated result is made mandatory.

“Whether the Federal Government of Nigeria through presiding officers of its executive body, Independent National Electoral Commission was bound to electronically transmit or transfer Polling Unit Results in Form EC8A using BVAS by uploading Scanned Copy of the said Unit Results to the Independent National Electoral Commission Result Viewing Portal (IReV) in the course of the General Elections held on the 25th of February, 2023 throughout the Federation.

“Whether the Federal Government of Nigeria in the recently held Presidential and National Assembly elections conducted nationwide on 25th February, 2023 through INEC, complied with the mandatory provisions of extant laws, INEC Regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct of Presidential Elections, 2022″.

“Whether the failure of the Federal Government of Nigeria through the Defendant and INEC to electronically transmit or transfer Polling Unit Results in Form EC8A using BVAS by uploading Scanned Copy of the said Unit Result to the Independent National Electoral Commission Result Viewing Portal (IReV) after the counting and announcement of the Polling Units results on 25th of February, 2023, violates the provisions of Sections 25; 47(2); 60 (1), (2), (4) & (5); 62; 64(4)(a) & (b); 70; and 148 of the Electoral Act, 2022, governing the 2023 nationwide general elections, particularly paragraphs 38 of the INEC Regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct of Elections, 2022; and paragraphs 2.8.4; 2.9.0; and 2.9.1 of the INEC Manual for Election Officials, 2023, for the conduct of the presidential election.

“Whether the failure of the Federal Republic of Nigeria through INEC to comply with the provisions of Section 60 of the Electoral Act, 2022 and the Regulations and Guidelines for Conduct of Elections, 2022 made pursuant to the Electoral Act and the Constitution of the FRN, 1999, as amended, in collating and announcing the results of the Presidential and National Assembly Elections render the already announced results and the elections conducted as a whole a nullity”.

“Whether the entire results of the presidential election conducted on the 25th of February, 2023, as announced by the Chairman of INEC at the National Collation Centre, Abuja in flagrant provision of Sections 25; 47(2); 60 (1), (2), (4) & (5); 62; 64(4)(a) & (b); 70; and 148 of the Electoral Act, 2022, governing the 2023 nationwide general elections, particularly paragraphs 38 of the INEC Regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct of Elections, 2022; and paragraphs 2.8.4; 2.9.0; and 2.9.1 of the INEC Manual for Election Officials, 2023, for the conduct of the Presidential Election, were valid.”

The plaintiffs urged the apex court to declare, “that the Federal Government of Nigeria, through INEC was bound to electronically transmit or transfer Polling Unit Results in Form EC8A using BVAS by uploading Scanned Copy of the said Unit Result to the Independent National Electoral Commission Result Viewing Portal (IReV) in the course of the General Elections held on the 25th of February, 2023 throughout the Federation in compliance with the provision of Sections 25; 47(2); 60 (1), (2), (4) & (5); 62; 64(4)(a) & (b); 70; and 148 of the Electoral Act, 2022, governing the 2023 nationwide general elections, particularly paragraphs 38 of the INEC Regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct of Elections, 2022; and paragraphs 2.8.4; 2.9.0; and 2.9.1 of the INEC Manual for Election Officials, 2023, for the conduct of the presidential election.”

They are seeking “A declaration that the entire results of the Presidential Election conducted on the 25th of February, 2023 announced by the Chairman of INEC at the National Collation Centre, Abuja, in flagrant violation of the provisions of Sections 25 of the Electoral Act, 2022, governing the 2023 nationwide general elections, particularly paragraphs 38 of the INEC Regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct of Elections, 2022; and paragraphs 2.8.4; 2.9.0; and 2.9.1 of the INEC Manual for Election Officials, 2023, for the conduct of the Presidential Election, were invalid, null and void, and of no effect whatsoever.

“A declaration that the fundamentally flawed electoral process through the non-uploading of the results of each of the 176,974 Polling Units nationwide, in respect of the presidential election and National Assembly Elections held on Saturday, 25th February 2023 were not in accordance with the provisions of Sections 25; 47(2); 60 (1), (2), (4) & (5); 62; 64(4)(a) & (b); 70; and 148 of the Electoral Act, 2022, governing the 2023 nationwide general elections, particularly paragraphs 38 of the INEC Regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct of Elections, 2022; and paragraphs 2.8.4; 2.9.0; and 2.9.1 of the INEC Manual for Election Officials, 2023, for the conduct of the presidential election.

“The plaintiffs also brought an application praying the apex court for an order directing a departure from the rules of the apex court in the interest of justice by directing for accelerated hearing of the substantive suit. Besides, plaintiffs also filed another application seeking for an order for abridging time for parties to file and serve responses for and against the suit. No date has been fixed for hearing.

March 3, 2023 0 comments

Leading Reporters Tinubu gives N25m “victory expenses’’ to all candidates contesting under APC

Headlines

Breaking: Tinubu gives N25m “victory expenses’’ to all candidates contesting under APC

by Leading Reporters February 19, 2023

written by Leading Reporters

Senator Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the presidential candidate of All Progressives Congress APC, in what seems like a last-minute desperate move to get the support of his party men across the board is currently transferring the sum of N25million each to party members seeking elective positions under APC.

The first phase of the financial largesse was transferred to those contesting for the Senate and the Federal House of Assembly. Also, those contesting for the state houses of assembly were not left out, according to a discreet source who would not want his name in print.

The largesse, according to the source was also extended to serving senators and members of the Federal House of Assembly who are not returning to the National Assembly.

While N25million was transferred to candidates contesting for the Senate and the Federal House of Assembly, contestants for state houses of assembly were gifted N20 million in what is called “Party Victory Support Fund”.

The fund transfer which commenced on Friday, the 17^th of February was said to have followed an earlier request for account numbers of all APC contestants. The Money-For-Support fund is being coordinated by Tinubu close associates, including Hon. James Abiodun Faleke.

The source who claimed to have received his share of the fund revealed that Tinubu is using his associates’ accounts to make the transfers to avoid traces. He said that the earlier plan was to give them cash, but the current stand of the Federal Government on Naira redesign frustrated the plan, hence the transfers to the beneficiary accounts.

When asked if he would vote and mobilize votes for Ahmed Bola Tinubu as a way of returning the favour given him by Tinubu, our source said that Tinubu made him an irresistible offer and there is nothing binding them that it must translate to voting for him or mobilizing for vote for him.

“He is just being generous. We were told it was to support and cushion the cash-scarcity effect. I am not bound by anything to vote for him”. The source said.

February 19, 2023 0 comments

Headlines

Despite “Nigeria’s Failed Economy,” 27 Ex-Governors Still Jostle to Remain in Empty System as Senators

by Leading Reporters September 4, 2022

written by Leading Reporters

The idea of a lifetime of near unbelievable salaries, allowances and privileges are clearly appealing to state governors whose terms are limited to a “mere” 8 years and even that is subject to winning their re-election bid which is not guaranteed as the current governor of Osun State can attest to. Out of the 109 available seats in the upper chamber (Senate) of the National Assembly, 27 seats may be occupied by former and outgoing governors come June 2023.

If these 27 ex-governors or soon-to-be former governors win their respective senatorial seats in the upcoming election, it will mark a 42% increase from the number of ex-governors, 19 of them in the current senate, making the upper chamber an abode of former “Excellencies.”

Nigeria operates a bicameral legislature — the upper and lower chamber. The upper chamber is referred to as the Senate, while the lower chamber is the House of Representatives. The Senate has 109 members, and the House of Representatives has 360 members.

Unlike the elected executive positions (President and Governor) with a maximum of 2-term constitutional limit, the members of the National Assembly have no term limit. This means that as long as you play your politics well, you can always return to the chamber every four years as a “Distinguished Senator” or an “Honourable Member”.

To date, the exact amount these 469 lawmakers earn is unknown to Nigerians; however, in 2018, Senator Shehu Sani, who represented Kaduna Central Senatorial District in the 8th National Assembly, said that a senator earns N13.5 million monthly as a running cost and an additional N750,000 as consolidated salary and allowances. On the other hand, a house of representatives member is reported to pocket N9.3 million monthly.

This, alongside the allure of staying within the loop of power, might account for the number of former “Excellencies” turning to “Distinguished Senators” on the rise with each election cycle since 2007.

In the 6th Assembly (2007-2011), 8 former governors made the Senate their home.

Name	State	Served as Governor
Kabiru Gaya	Kano	1992-1993
Adamu Aliero	Kebbi	1999-2007
Ahmed Makarfi	Kaduna	1999-2007
Bukar Ibrahim	Yobe	1999-2007
Chimaroke Nnamani	Enugu	1999-2007
George Akume	Benue	1999-2007
Sani Yarima	Zamfara	1999-2007
Saminu Turaki	Jigawa	1999-2007

These 8 individuals joined the Senate immediately after they completed their 2-term constitutional limit as governors, except for Kabiru Gaya who served as a governor of Kano state from 1992-1993, about 1 year.

The next Assembly (2011-2015) saw an increase in the number of those who have served as governors going to the Senate. This time, the number increased to 9. Ahmed Aliero and 4 others who served in the 6th Assembly retained their seats, while Abdullahi Adamu, Bukola Saraki, and 2 others joined them as first-time Senators.

Name	State	Served as Governor	Number of times in the Senate
Adamu Aliero	Kebbi	1999-2007	Second time
Ahmed Makarfi	Kaduna	1999-2007	Second time
Bukar Ibrahim	Yobe	1999-2007	Second time
George Akume	Benue	1999-2007	Second time
Kabiru Gaya	Kano	1992-1993	Second time
Abdullahi Adamu	Nasarawa	1999-2007	First time
Bukola Saraki	Kwara	2003-2011	First time
Danjuma Goje	Gombe	2003-2011	First time
Joshua Dariye	Plateau	1999-2007	First time

In the 8th National Assembly, the number increased to 13, a 44% increase from the figure recorded in the 7th Assembly, possibly signalling increasing interest in the Senate.

George Akume, who went to the Senate House immediately after he completed his 8 years as Governor of Benue state (1999-2007), retained his seat as a third-term Senator. Same as Kabiru Gaya of Kano state.

Adamu, Saraki, Goje, Dariye, and Yarima, who all served their 2-terms as governors of their respective states, returned to the Senate for their second term. Others on the list were first-time Senators.

Name	State	Served as Governor	Number of times in the Senate
George Akume	Benue	1999-2007	Third time
Kabiru Gaya	Kano	1992-1993	Third time
Abdullahi Adamu	Nasarawa	1999-2007	Second time
Bukola Saraki	Kwara	2003-2011	Second time
Danjuma Goje	Gombe	2003-2011	Second time
Joshua Dariye	Plateau	1999-2007	Second time
Sani Yarima	Sokoto	1999-2007	Second time
Aliyu Wamakko	Sokoto	2007-2015	First time
Godswill Akpabio	Akwa-Ibom	2007-2015	First time
Jonah Jang	Plateau	2007-2015	First time
Rabiu Kwankwaso	Kano	1999-2003; 2011-2015	First time
Sam Egwu	Ebonyi	1999-2007	First time
Theodore Orji	Abia	2007-2015	First time

Two former governors of Plateau and Sokoto states were in the 8th National Assembly. Joshua Dariye, the governor of Plateau state from 1999-2007, was in the 8th Assembly as a second-term Senator, while Jonah Jang, who had completed his 2 terms as governor, joined as a first-timer.

Aliyu Wamakko joined his predecessor Sani Yarima in the senate; they both had served as governors of Sokoto state. Rabiu Kwankwasnso also joined Kabiru Gaya, both having served as governors of Kano state. This means that out of the 3 senatorial seats available to these states, 2 were occupied by former governors of the states (Plateau, Sokoto, and Kano).

In 2019 when the 9th Assembly members assumed office, the number of former state governors rose to 19. An increase from the 13 recorded in the 8th Assembly.

Kabiru Gaya is in the Senate for his fourth term. Two other former governors in the current 9th Assembly are there for their third term as Senators, while 5 are serving their second term in the Senate. The others are first-time Senators.

Abdul’aziz Abubakar Yari, the former Governor of Zamfara is not in the current Assembly, but only because his Senatorial election was nullified on May 24, 2019, by the Supreme court.

Name	State	Served as Governor	Number of times in the Senate
Kabiru Gaya	Kano	1992-1993	Fourth time
Adamu Aliero	Kebbi	1999-2007	Third time
Danjuma Goje	Gombe	2003-2011	Third time
Abdullahi Adamu	Nasarawa	1999-2007	Second time
Aliyu Wamakko	Sokoto	2007-2015	Second time
Chimaroke Nnamani	Enugu	1999-2007	Second time
Sam Egwu	Enugu	2007-2015	Second time
Theodore Orji	Abia	2007-2015	Second time
Abdul’aziz Abubakar Yari	Zamfara	2011-2019	First time (Election nullified)
Gabriel Suswam	Benue	2007-2015	First time
Ibikunle Amosun	Ogun	2011-2019	First time
Ibrahim Geidam	Yobe	2009-2019	First time
Ibrahim Shekarau	Kano	2003-2011	First time
Kashim Shettima	Borno	2011-2019	First time
Orji Kalu	Abia	1999-2007	First time
Rochas Okorocha	Imo	2011-2019	First time

Chimaroke Nnamani, who served as Enugu state Governor from 1999-2007, and his successor, Theodore Orji are both in the Senate as second-time Senators. The two former Governors of Nasarawa state are also in the Senate. Abdullahi Adamu is a second-time Senator, while Tanko Al-Makura is a first-timer. This implies that 2 out of the 3 seats available to each of the states (Enugu and Nasarawa) are occupied by those who have served as governors for two terms.

The 10th Senate, which will commence in June 2023, is likely to see an increase in the number of former governors and soon-to-be- ex-governors who will be referred to as Distinguished Senators.

Thus far, in the lead-up to the 2023 general elections, 27 former governors and soon-to-be ex-governors are senatorial candidates in their respective states for the 2023 general election.

Out of the 27 candidates, Kabiru Gaya, testing the hypothesis of the senate being an unofficial “lifetime” employment, is returning for a fifth term, while two others are going for their fourth term in the Senate.

Aliyu Wammako, Chimaroke Nnamani, and Sam Egwu are all going for a third term in the Senate.

Name	State	Served as Governor	Number of times in the Senate
Kabiru Gaya	Kano	1992-1993	Returning for a 5th term
Adamu Aliero	Kebbi	1999-2007	Returning for a 4th term
Danjuma Goje	Gombe	2003-2011	Returning for a 4th term
Aliyu Wammako	Sokoto	2007-2015	Returning for a 3rd term
Chimaroke Nnamani	Enugu	1999-2007	Returning for a 3rd term
Sam Egwu	Ebonyi	1999-2007	Returning for a 3rd term
Abdul’aziz Abubakar Yari	Zamfara	2011-2019	Returning for a 2nd term
Gabriel Suswam	Benue	2007-2015	Returning for a 2nd term
Godswill Akpabio	Akwa Ibom	2007-2015	Returning for a 2nd term
Ibrahim Gaidam	Yobe	2009-2019	Returning for a 2nd term
Ibrahim Shekarau	Kano	2003-2011	Returning for a 2nd term
Orji Kalu	Abia	1999-2007	Returning for a 2nd term
Saminu Turaki	Jigawa	1999-2007	Returning for a 2nd term
Seriake Dickson	Bayelsa	2012-2020	Returning for a 2nd term
Tanko Al-Makura	Nasarawa	2011-2019	Returning for a 2nd term
Abubakar Sani Bello	Niger	2015-2023	Contestesting for the 1st time
Adams Oshiomhole	Edo	2008-2016	Contestesting for the 1st time
Aminu Tambuwal	Sokoto	2015-2023	Contestesting for the 1st time
Atiku Bagudu	Kebbi	2015-2023	Contestesting for the 1st time
Darius Ishaku	Taraba	2015-2023	Contestesting for the 1st time
Dave Umahi	Ebonyi	2015-2023	Contestesting for the 1st time
Gbenga Daniel	Ogun	2003-2011	Contestesting for the 1st time
Ibrahim Dankwambo	Gombe	2011-2019	Contestesting for the 1st time
Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi	Enugu	2015-2023	Contestesting for the 1st time
Okezie Ikpeazu	Abia	2015-2023	Contestesting for the 1st time
Samuel Ortom	Benue	2015-2023	Contestesting for the 1st time
Simon Lalong	Plateau	2015-2023	Contestesting for the 1st time

Nine former governors are contesting for their second term as Senators. The other 12, if successful at the polls, will be serving their first term as Senators, having served two terms as governors of their respective states.

Apart from the increase in the number of former governors who may become Senators, there will also be an increase in the number of states whose former governors will occupy 2 out of their 3 senatorial seats.

For instance, Abia state has 3 seats in the Senate, the same as every other state in the country. Of these 3 seats, 2 will be occupied by those who have served as governors if they win in the upcoming elections.

It will be the same story for Benue, Ebonyi, Kano, and 4 other states as 2 of their former governors are contesting for 2 of the available 3 senatorial seats.

Name	State	Served as Governor	Number of times in the Senate
Kabiru Gaya	Kano	1992-1993	Fourth time
Adamu Aliero	Kebbi	1999-2007	Third time
Danjuma Goje	Gombe	2003-2011	Third time
Abdullahi Adamu	Nasarawa	1999-2007	Second time
Aliyu Wamakko	Sokoto	2007-2015	Second time
Chimaroke Nnamani	Enugu	1999-2007	Second time
Sam Egwu	Enugu	2007-2015	Second time
Theodore Orji	Abia	2007-2015	Second time
Abdul’aziz Abubakar Yari	Zamfara	2011-2019	First time (Election nullified)
Gabriel Suswam	Benue	2007-2015	First time
Ibikunle Amosun	Ogun	2011-2019	First time
Ibrahim Geidam	Yobe	2009-2019	First time
Ibrahim Shekarau	Kano	2003-2011	First time
Kashim Shettima	Borno	2011-2019	First time
Orji Kalu	Abia	1999-2007	First time
Rochas Okorocha	Imo	2011-2019	First time

With every election cycle, the possibility of a young politician who desires to represent his/her people someday at the Senate appears slimmer as the hallowed chamber is becoming increasingly filled with individuals who have once served as state governors.

If the trend continues, it’s only a matter of time before a majority of the legislature’s upper chamber seats become filled with former state governors.

If you’re wondering when the sorosoke generation might be able to take a stab at governance, it is anybody’s guess. News Source dataphyte.com

September 4, 2022 0 comments

Headlines Opinion

Nigeria’s insecurity: One impeachment not enough

by Leading Reporters July 31, 2022

written by Leading Reporters

By Tonnie Iredia

Over 80 senators across political parties and a majority of House of Representatives members, have reportedly agreed to begin impeachment proceedings against President Muhammadu Buhari, if the growing insecurity across the nation persisted beyond the next six weeks. It was a rather stern ultimatum given by the federal legislators on the eve of their departure to a 2-month vacation. Anyone who thinks the legislators are ready for a hard time with the executive needs to take a second look at their subsisting posture which portrays them as members of a rubber stamp legislature.

They actually showed the turf they are made up of when in line with their feeble outlook, they allowed as long as six weeks for the presidency to make amends not withstanding that they had had cause more than once to show ample frustration over the prosecution of the fight against insurgency and every form of insecurity in the land.

Senator Call To Impeach President Buhari

No empirical reason was given for how the ultimatum of six weeks was arrived at; making it appear that it was influenced by their desire to avoid a disruption to their vacation. With the rash of attacks which led to several killings in the last few weeks, one would have expected the representatives of the people to put off their vacation for now so as to squarely face the severe issue of widespread fear and anxiety in the nation. It was an error of judgment that the legislators kept to their schedule of incessant vacations at this crucial point.

Time there was when Nigerian legislators cut short their vacation to deal with what they often called “urgent matters of national importance” even though such matters were essentially always about their welfare. So, not many people are able to comprehend why our legislators faithfully go on vacation as if it is one of their critical functions. Besides, the same legislators do not only enjoy every public holiday, they usually go away for weeks before and after every holiday for which other public officers enjoy no more than the two days officially declared for it

The National Assembly has a constitutional right to follow the impeachment process it is threatening to invoke and we are not anxious to dispute their power but if the recent tough talks end up only as half-hearted sermons, the legislature would merely place the nation in jeopardy. To start with, it is difficult to understand why the minority leader of the House of Representatives, Ndudi Elumelu was begging his colleagues to take advantage of their long holiday to stay away from what has become the highly unsafe Abuja. The plea no doubt unveils many posers.

First, was Elumelu encouraging legislators to abandon Nigerians who have no option but to stay in the location? Second, bearing in mind that there is hardly any safe place today, where precisely would legislators who buy the plea head to? On at least two occasions, in the last couple of weeks, the city of Owo in Ondo state has been attacked twice. In Niger state, the media reported no fewer than 12 villagers abducted last Tuesday by suspected gunmen in Shaddadi village in the Mariga Local Government Area of the state. Would legislators leave Abuja for any of these volatile areas or would those of them from Enugu state prefer to go home to nearby Ozalla town where the Actors Guild of Nigeria raised alarm the other day of the alleged kidnap of two veteran film stars who had gone missing after they left a movie location in the state?

If Elumelu’s plea to legislators is taken as a joke, from a leader not generally given to frivolity, many analysts would be on the same page with Idris Wase, Deputy Speaker who accused the minority leader of playing politics with the lives of citizens. However, Wase’s sharp reaction is a sign that at the appropriate time, disagreements may as usual displace the seeming consensus of legislators on the nation’s grave insecurity.

Indeed, many of them would stay away from voting as they did during the crucial issue of the bill on electronic transmission of election results. Some other lawmakers might choose to pay lip service to the so called impeachment proceedings by supporting it during debates and rejecting it during voting as they did while considering the numerous pro-women bills. Already, in spite of the claim by Senator Smart Adeyemi that the impeachment threat was bipartisan, at least one member of the House of Representatives from Imo state, Chike Okafor has vowed that lawmakers of the ruling All Progressive Congress APC will resist any attempt to impeach the president by those he described to be grandstanding just to be noticed by their constituents

This unpredictable disposition of some legislators to the subject was already visible within the National Assembly on the day of the threat. Senate President Ahmad Lawan, was not comfortable with the subject and objected to its discussion on the floor of the senate. About seven other senators, that reportedly included Opeyemi Bamidele and Gabriel Suswam were also said to have shared Lawan’s sentiment. It was perhaps the unpredictable environment created by their ambivalence that influenced the reaction of the presidency to the impeachment that those behind the threat were merely “performative, babyish and playing to the gallery.” The reaction can hardly be dismissed as every wrong the legislators wish to blame Buhari for, exposes their own unquantifiable contributory negligence. A National Assembly whose leadership stated unequivocally from the beginning that they would approve whatever the president presented to them cannot be seen at this point to be isolating the same president. If impeachment is an option, it cannot affect only one side.

There is much for which the nation can justifiably blame the legislature concerning the worsening insecurity in our clime. More often than not, this column has had to berate our legislature for the simple reason that its power to check the executive is hardly done with the interest of the nation in mind. Huge sums of monies were appropriated for the military to combat insecurity with no evidence that the funds were used for the purposes for which they were approved. How come the relevant committees of the National Assembly were never able to use oversight to identify lapses in military spending? The former service chiefs under the leadership of General Gabriel Olonisakin were accused by many of misappropriation of funds, yet it was only after the team left office that legislators started summoning their successors to appear to brief them on the state of affairs. Even the opportunity our lawmakers had to interrogate the team during their screening for their new appointments as ambassadors was frittered away in pursuit of shadows.

The legislature also distracted the president many times especially in its passage of convoluted budgets. It became so much that at the signing of this year’s budget,, Buhari was constrained to openly condemn what he described as “worrisome changes” to the budget by the National Assembly. The changes amounted to N378.9 billion covering 460 duplicated items inserted in the budget – a figure that has 144 items more than the 316 items inserted in last year’s budget. To make matters worse, many of the projects were surreptitiously placed under MDAs that have no bearing with them. For example, the sum of N67.8 million for the construction of “Gun Armouries” was found in the budget of the Ministry of Environment which is not a security organization. Interestingly, the blame game is never extended to the unwholesome initiatives of those that have a final say in the preparation of the budget

It is true that Nigerians have endured enormous pains in the last few years. It is also true that as the overall boss of the nation, the president ought to take much of the blame on the basis of vicarious liability. But considering that much of what has gone wrong in Nigeria is criminal, no one can be held to account for the crime committed by others. This is why the current threat of impeachment of the president is too narrow. Nigerians should clamour for the removal of all conniving public office holders.

July 31, 2022

July 31, 2022 0 comments

Headlines Opinion

The beauty of Nigeria’s recent delegate elections

by Leading Reporters June 19, 2022

written by Leading Reporters

Tonnie Iredia

The pain of Femi Gbajabiamila, Speaker of the House of Representatives that many of his colleagues would be unable to return to the National Assembly is with due respect misplaced. While Femi as an individual is free to miss some of his close friends who could not secure their party tickets to run in next year’s general election, their loss was not against the run of play.

Indeed, failure of many lawmakers to return to the legislature has been the trend since 1999 when democracy was restored in Nigeria. At each election season, the competition to get into office grows more intense progressively. To start with, Nigerians who thought politics was a dirty game have since changed their minds by discarding the fear of political violence because of the transparent evidence that nothing in the country is as lucrative as politics. Thus, with increased interest in politics, electioneering has assumed a fiercer dimension capable of unseating several incumbents.

The Speaker’s conclusion that loopholes in the delegate system caused the loss of his colleagues at the party primaries is also not entirely accurate. The system may have played a role; but if the truth must be told, many legislators are undeserving of reelection. They really have no business in the legislature because they are only there to pick-up ‘basic’ salaries and humongous allowances.

Their incapacity is aggravated by their omission to appoint competent legislative aides to assist them perform their duties satisfactorily. For inexplicable reasons, they also have no viable constituency offices as demanded by law which would have positioned them to get acquainted with the real preferences of the people they represent. Many are in fact unknown to their constituents. The contributory negligence of passing a poorly worded Electoral Act 2022 was essentially the last self-inflicted injury. Just before that, there were bills with unpardonable typographical errors and sheer contradictions of the provisions in different sections that no one detected.

In fairness, national legislators are by far better than their colleagues in the Houses of Assembly in the states – a good example being the 24-member Kwara state legislature in which virtually every bill passed since 2019 was sponsored by the state governor. Accordingly, Nigerians should not bemoan the inability of certain legislators to return to base in 2023. The argument about continuity is essentially feeble. What should bother us now, is how to raise the level of political awareness among our people to vote for persons of substance that are passionate about making laws for good governance of society. Of course, some legislators have endeavoured to acquit themselves creditably. Gbajabiamila is in fairness one of such dutiful lawmakers, hence he got back his party ticket unopposed to contest the seat of his Surulere, Lagos constituency notwithstanding the contentious electoral bill which targeted members of the executive branch of government.

From the events of the last few months, the new electoral law has inadvertently helped to get many incumbents out of the legislature. In a country like Nigeria with stunted growth, it is unfair for certain persons to be in power for too long to the detriment of other citizens. It was therefore almost like a divine intervention that made the lawmakers by their own volition to pass a bill to their own disadvantage, just as it blinded them from some rather unintended errors until it was too late to act. The ‘wisdom-after-event’ thought of overriding the president was probably for self-consolation as the present legislature had no capacity during its potent days to contemplate such no-go area, let alone now that many members are nursing heart-broken injuries while vibrancy has been adjourned till after the 2023 election.

One of the gains of the new Electoral Act is that it has emboldened hitherto timid people to rise up to challenge the self-made emperors in our democracy. It was quite interesting to learn that our senate president among a few others who lost out in the recent political intrigues had attempted but failed to coerce winners to step down for them. That was obviously a tall order within the context of the new circumlocutory electoral law. According to media reports, Bashir Sheriff Machina, the winner of the All Progressives Congress APC Yobe North Senatorial District primaries has said that rather than step down for Ahmed Lawan, he himself intends to become the senate president having served as a law maker earlier in 1990. Machina confirmed that it was because he never intended to step down for anyone that he declined to complete the withdrawal form attached by the party to the nomination package. Now, with the new Electoral Act, the Machinas of this world appear invigorated.

As proof of the growing awareness of the muscle of the new law, aggrieved supporters of certain flagbearers in Kogi state who were being cajoled to step down stormed the APC national secretariat last Thursday, to protest attempts to substitute winners with favoured aspirants. Protesters from Abia and Ondo states had earlier demonstrated against same allegations. In the case of Enugu state, some aspirants claimed the party denied them the necessary forms to fill for the submission of candidates. They also alleged that the party instead offered them ‘withdrawal concession forms’ which they reportedly rejected. In the past, party executives implemented such anti-democratic behaviour with ease. There is doubt now if the party would not end up losing as the oppressed have provisions of the new electoral law to proceed with.

The situation in Akwa Ibom North-west Senatorial District does not appear different from that of Yobe state where a retired Deputy Inspector-General of Police, Udom Ekpoudom who won the party primaries has rejected pleas for him to step down for Senator Godswill Akpabio. There are few high points in the Akwa Ibom situation. First, the party having failed to get the cooperation of Udom claimed to have organized fresh primaries which Akpabio allegedly won. Second INEC monitored the first and not the second primaries. Third, the Akwa Ibom office of INEC disowned the second primaries thereby strengthening the resolve of the former police boss to hold-on to the ticket. The old attitude of putting blames on electoral officials didn’t succeed because INEC headquarters aptly discountenanced attempts to blackmail its Resident Electoral Commissioner in Uyo who testified that the only primaries monitored by his office was the one which produced the former police boss.

However, the development was not restricted to the ruling party. The main opposition Peoples Democratic Party PDP has had its share of the trend. Last week, the party’s candidate for the Kebbi Central Senatorial District, Haruna Dandio Saidu denied stepping down for the former Kebbi governor, Adamu Aliero who recently defected from the APC to the PDP. In a petition to INEC, Haruna warned that he was prepared to institute legal proceedings against any person who forges any document which purports that he accepted to withdraw his candidature. But for the new law, the underdogs in the two political parties would probably have been sacrificed to suit the wishes of party caucuses. This development therefore underscores the beauty of the recently conducted party primaries across the country.

Nigerians can now hope that elections in the country would depart, even if slightly, from the old order where we hosted failed elections. For example, the opportunity for the voices of the underprivileged people to be heard will at least stop the fake landslide victories of ruling parties whose members value party interests more than the wishes of those they are supposed to represent. In addition, our youths are now persuaded to pick up their permanent voters’ cards and vote out non-performing office holders. With this development, many contending national issues will be appropriately determined. One such issue is whether the nation is comfortable with a Northern candidate taking over from the outgoing President from the same region. This burning issue in addition to another one concerning whether a Muslim-Muslim ticket does not matter will all be determined not by political gladiators who are currently debating the issues but by eligible voters.

June 19, 2022 0 comments

Headlines

Does anyone deserve immunity in Nigeria?

by Leading Reporters April 10, 2022

written by Leading Reporters

By Tonnie Iredia

In 2007, the Nigerian Judiciary turned down a request by the Federal Government to declare the office of Vice President Atiku Abubakar vacant on account of his defection from the then ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) to the Action Congress (AC).

The decision was premised on Section 308 of the Nigerian Constitution which protects a sitting President and his Vice as well as State Governors and their deputies from being prosecuted in court while in office. Atiku’s case therefore helped to underscore the inviolability of the immunity clause.

However, conscious of some likely negative effects, such as abuses by political office-holders, Umaru Yar’adua who became President a few months later, sought to expunge it from the Constitution. Yar’adua pointedly argued during the launch of his anti-corruption campaign that nobody in Nigeria deserved “the right to be protected by law when looting public funds.”

The suggestion was well received in many quarters, especially by those who wondered which party manifesto a Defector-Vice President would execute while in a ‘limbo-office.’ Interestingly, the Action Congress reputed to consist of progressives opposed the proposal on political grounds thereby making it more difficult for possible negative fall-outs from Section 308 to be resolved.

According to the then Publicity Secretary of the party, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, it was not the immunity clause that was protecting looters but the lack of political will by government to tackle corruption. The immunity clause survived, not because many were persuaded by the reasoning in Atiku’s case, but more because the attempt to sack Atiku was seen as political and not on account of corruption. In addition, Nigerians had assumed that any ill-gotten wealth garnered by corrupt leaders would be legally retrieved later while those found guilty of corrupt practices would be severely penalized.

This assumption has since been disproved especially after a former party chieftain declared that those who defect to the ruling party would have their sins forgiven. Perhaps, no one imagined that the immunity clause which was genuinely inserted in the Constitution to dissuade anyone from distracting the executive arm would be exploited by the same beneficiaries to commit mischief.

The logical reasoning was that as a developing society challenged by infrastructural deficiencies, leaders in the executive arm would have so much to do about development to have spare time to be engrossed in politics. In truth however, many Nigerian politicians are prepared to hide under constitutional protection and technicalities to engage in unwholesome political and electoral mal-practices. It is now obvious in retrospect that office holders who enjoy immunity are able to use the privilege negatively for personal gains which was not the purpose of the provision.

This over-pampering of executives who are not required to reciprocate the goodwill accorded them ought to be reviewed. For example, whereas the constitution stops anyone from instituting legal cases against leaders in the executive arm, the same constitution failed to also bar such leaders, while in office, from initiating same against members of the public. So, they can sue but cannot be sued! They are also free to engage in political immorality which they quickly defend using the instrumentality of the immunity clause.

Even the legal injunction that executives should not be engaged in other assignments except governance has not materialized. The first problem came from a new arrangement in which candidates elected at elections suddenly became designated by their parties as national leaders in the case of President or state leader in the case of governors. The main result of this designation and consequent preoccupation with party matters is that the executives have been diverted from spending ample time on governance issues as if they were elected by the entire electorate to run one political party or the other.

President Muhammadu Buhari as the national leader of the ruling APC has had to take charge of the party at different times. At a point he, had to arrange for a caretaker management when the party’s chairman was removed while he stepped in again recently to stop the party’s national convention from derailing. Governors Mai Mala Buni of Yobe, Abubakar Bello of Niger and Gboyega Oyetola of Osun had to virtually run the national working committee of their party for almost two years thereby relegating the tedious but substantive task of state executives.

While many state governors are now more seen in Abuja than their state capitals dealing with one party issue or another, many have in the last one year traversed the length and breadth of the country on party assignments well ahead of the official time for electioneering. As a result, the original time for governance has been heavily appropriated while expanding the time for electioneering. Yet, the constitution, in anticipation of the numerous projects of development that have to be executed for the benefit of the masses barred everyone from distracting executives.

In the midst of these self/party imposed distractions, some governors are counselled that to be reelected or elevated to higher positions, they have to defect to another party. They hurriedly implement such arrangements ignoring the fact that their current positions were attained through the sponsorship of another political party. If legally challenged, they are able to plead Section 308 of the Constitution. What bothers many about this trend is that it is only the arguments of senior lawyers copiously quoting the Supreme Court that the people hear.

No one considers that some die-hard actors would soon design extra-judicial arrangements to protect their votes from being transferred to another party. In other words, the injustice of defection which converts winners to losers by transferring the votes obtained at elections may soon generate political violence leading to another inexplicable insecurity. To confirm that there is no remorse about the approach, even legislators that the Constitution says should lose their seats upon defection are left untouched. What then is the purpose of voting, if the wishes of the people can be recklessly reversed?

The expectation that somewhere along the line, judicial activism would decisively put a halt to the vicious attack on the spirit of the Constitution is daily fading. At the same time, the justification for defection is becoming more bizarre by the day. The other day, one governor who was defending his defection from one party to another said on national television that he moved to avoid a fellow governor whom he described as a bully. He neither explained the venue of the alleged bullying nor how a governor in another state can stop him from working in his own state.

What he inadvertently confirmed was that he loathes how the so-called unnamed bully operates during party meetings. But why should a governor, an otherwise statesman, be occupied with party matters? When the court declined to remove him from office, he publicly celebrated “victory” whereas what happened was that the court couldn’t find an approved punishment for his unwholesome conduct.

Except the country finds a way of reversing the trend, defectors would increase shortly thereby retarding national growth and development. So far, the way the cases in court challenging the politicization of governance are being handled suggests that the reprehensible conduct will not be addressed soon as all eyes are turned towards only the letters of the law. With the fast approaching primary election for which everyone is already in the mood for campaigns not much can be done in the area of pushing for an amendment to Section 308 of the Constitution.

The direction to look towards in the circumstance is for our Supreme Court to help shape our public policy by using its powers of interpretation to positively expand the provisions of the section in such a way that the genuine intention of the drafters of our Constitution is attained. For example, considering that the judiciary has said that votes scored at an election belong to political parties, the executives wishing to defect should be allowed to do so but without taking away votes which still belong to their erstwhile parties.
April 10, 2022

April 10, 2022 0 comments

Headlines Investigation

Meet The “Bullionaire” Senator Patrick Ayo Akinyerule who own Eighteen Bureau De Change, Other Companies with which he cuts deals

by Leading Reporters April 4, 2022

written by Leading Reporters

The Senate Committee Chairman on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions, Senator Patrick Ayo Akinyerule and his family members own and sit in the board of at least eighteen companies as a serving Senator, including bureau de change, oil companies, construction companies, insurance and banking related companies, among other general services companies.

Investigations carried out by LeadingReporters into the financial activities of the company revealed what highly suggests that the Senator lacks the virtue of morality in leadership.

The Senator who represents Ondo Central is a fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria. By virtue of his profession, the moral dimension of leadership should not be strange to him. But that seems far from what obtains. Instead, it has become a situation where public petitions are converted to cash and business opportunities.

LeadingReporters investigation followed series of petitions received by this online news platform that Senator Akinyelure uses his position for self-aggrandizement and deal-cutting.

Among companies with which the Senator allegedly uses to cut ‘deals’ include:

Allover Bureau De Change Ltd, KKT Bureau De Change Ltd, Folly-Tizzy Bureau De Change Ltd, APL Bureau De Change Ltd, TopKem Bureau Dey Change Ltd

Other companies linked to the Senate Committee Chairman on Ethics include, but not limited to: KKT Oil Services Ltd, Allover Engineering Services Ltd, Senpat Engineering Ltd, PAL Construction Ltd, Folly Tizzy Services Ltd, Alphamate Commodities Co. Ltd, APL Insurance Brokers Ltd, Kunly and Associates Ltd

Further investigation revealed that Senator Ayo uses other companies where he fronts his wife and other relatives to perpetrate his alleged corruption. These companies are used as recipients of slush funds from those who have been petitioned and are willing to pay their way out of any indictment. They include:

Folly-Tizzy Bureau De Change Ltd and Bestomi Bureau De Change Ltd

Other allegation, as contained in the petition sent to this platform for publication against Senator Akinyelure is that 85% of petitions to his office become a leverage to negotiate mouthwatering deals with companies, government agencies and individuals. Oil companies are majorly his targets, according to a source that spoke to LeadingReporters on condition of anonymity. Others include government MDAs.

These monies are received in dollars via his Bureau De Change companies or that of his associates which would be revealed in our next publication. Besides, construction companies and oil companies linked to him receive patronage from defaulting companies and agencies that desire their names to be cleaned from every corruption allegations.

A petitioner who does not want his name mentioned shared his experience how Senator Akinyerule leveraged his petition to negotiate mouth-watering deal with a multinational company that shortchanged Nigeria Government of billions of Naira. He said that his presence in the office of the Senate Committee Chairman on Ethics and Privileges became a sore sight that he was literally told not to show up again.

He said it was much later that he received a call from someone who claim to be speaking from the office of the Senator directing him to go soft on the issue as that may become a risky adventure for him. The petitioner said that the caller literally told him that the company in question has link in virtually every government ministry and agency and there was little or nothing anyone could do about his petition because of the company’s strong links.

The office of the Senate Committee Chairman on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions is an office where morality should hold sway. But what obtains there is a far cry from what is expected from an office that should be a hub of morality, empathy and patriotism for Nigeria Government and Nigerians.

All efforts to get Senator Patrick Ayo Akinyelure to address the allegations against him as texts and calls text to his known lines were not responded to as at the time of filing this report.

April 4, 2022 0 comments

Headlines

Why Section 84(12) of Electoral Act 2022 scares Nigeria politicians

by Leading Reporters April 1, 2022

written by Leading Reporters

On March 18, 2022, a Federal High Court sitting in Umuahia Abia State, declared Section 84(12) of the newly amended Electoral Act, 2022 as illegal and a violation of the provisions of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).

The judge, Justice Evelyn Anyadike in her ruling, held that Sections 66(1)(f); 107(1)(f); 137(1)(g); and 182(1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution already stated that appointees of government seeking to contest elections were only to resign at least 30 days to the date of the election and that any other law that mandated such appointees to resign or leave office at any time before that, was unconstitutional, invalid, illegal, null and void to the extent of its inconsistency to the clear provisions of the Constitution.

In view of this, she directed that Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act, 2022 be struck down as it cannot stand when it is in violation of the clear provisions of the Constitution.

Recall that President Muhammadu Buhari signed into law the Electoral Act on February 25, 2022. But on March 1, Mr. Buhari wrote a letter to both chambers of the National Assembly requesting them to delete Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act.

Prior to his letter to the National Assembly, Mr Buhari had expressed his dissatisfaction with that particular section of the Electoral Act. He stated this emphatically on the day he signed the Bill into law, noting that the Section constitutes a fundamental defect, as it is in conflict with extant constitutional provisions.

What Exactly is in Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act?

This particular Section of the Electoral Act states that “No political appointees at any level shall be a voting delegate or be voted for at the Convention or Congress of any political party for the purpose of the nomination of candidates for any election”.

What this means in simple terms is that a political appointee (like ministers, commissioners, special advisers, personal assistants, etc), be it at the federal or state level is not allowed to be a voting delegate or be voted for in a political party primary. And since such an individual was not allowed by the provision of Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act to be a delegate or be voted for in the political party’s primaries, thus, he/she cannot be a candidate for an election.

The only way such an individual would be a candidate is if he/she resigns before the party’s primaries, and political parties are mandated by Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act to conduct their primaries and submit the list of candidates at least 180 days (i.e 6 months) before the date appointed for a general election.

In a situation where a political party fails to comply with Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act, subsection 13 of the same Section states that the political party’s candidate shall not be included in the election for the particular position the candidate has filled in for.

Perhaps because there are reports of some political appointees in this current administration intending to vie for some political positions in the upcoming general elections, or that political appointees have historically contested elections while holding their positions or intend to continue to do so, there have been several debates or push for Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act to be deleted, relying on the provisions of the 1999 Constitution which Justice Anyadike, the Judge of the Federal High Court in Umuahia, Abia State also relied upon in her ruling.

What the Provisions of the Constitution say About Appointees of Government Seeking to Contest Elections

While delivering her judgment, Justice Anyadike cited 4 Sections in the 1999 Constitution. Here’s what each Section says.

According to Section 66(1)f of the Constitution, (1) no person shall be qualified for election to the Senate or the House of Representatives (f) if he is a person employed in the public service of the Federation or of any State and has not resigned, withdrawn or retired from such employment 30 days before the date of the election.

Section 107(1)f states that (1) “No person shall be qualified for election to a House of Assembly (f) if he is a person employed in the public service of the Federation or of any State and he has not resigned, withdrawn or retired from such employment thirty days before the date of election”.

Sections 137(1)g and Section 182(1)g make reference to individuals who want to contest for election to the office of President and Governor, respectively.

Section 137(1)g says that such a person (i.e the individual contesting for the office of the President) is not qualified if he/she is a person employed in the civil or public service of the Federation or of any State, and he/she has not resigned, withdrawn or retired from the employment at least thirty days before the date of the election.

Section 182(1)g is for individuals who want to run for the office of the Governor of any state. It states that “No person shall be qualified for election to the office of Governor of a State if – being a person employed in the public service of the Federation or of any State, he has not resigned, withdrawn or retired from the employment at least thirty days to the date of the election”.

It was based on these provisions of the 1999 Constitution that the Judge of the Federal High Court sitting in Umuahia directed that Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act, 2022 be struck down. The judgment has however been met with mixed reactions and has generated debates among legal practitioners.

On the Umuahia High Court Judgment

Ariyo-Dare Atoye, the Executive Director of Adopt a Goal Initiative (AGI) and one of the frontliners in the push for the Electoral Act to be signed into law told us that the National Assembly acted rightly on Section 84(12). “Political appointees give the Executive arm an undue advantage during party conventions and congresses for elective office. Political appointees seeking elective office deny other aspirants a level playing field if they remain in the office during the primaries”, he said.

According to Atayo, Sections 66(1)f; 107(1)f; 137(1)g; and 182(1)g of the 1999 Constitution which the judge cited in her judgment did not cover political appointees because they are not public servants.

Mr Atoye explained that “there are a plethora of cases in which the status of a public servant has been defined. One of the cases is that of ADAMU V. TAKORI (2010) ALL FWLR (P. 540) 1387 C.A”. The Court of Appeal held that a political appointee like the Attorney-General is not a public servant employed in the service of the federation or of a state and is therefore not covered by Section 318(1) of the Constitution”.

He reiterated that political appointees are not public servants that they exist at the pleasure of the appointors who can hire and fire without recourse to the public service rule which is not the case for a public servant, as the Executive cannot fire a public servant without going through the laid down procedure in the Public Service Book.

Mr Atoye further explained that by global convention, once political appointees are interested in public office, they resign immediately before the party’s timetable is out.

He stated that the matter the judgment on Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act will not stop at the outcome of the “forum shopping” in Abia State, and therefore advised that all political appointees who are seeking to contest their party primaries should not ignore the provisions of Section 84(12) until the Supreme Court has settled the matter.

Meanwhile, yesterday, the House of Representatives and Senate stated that they will appeal the judgment of the Federal High Court, Umuahia asking the Attorney-General to delete Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act, 2022.

April 1, 2022 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts