Updates:
Court Stops House From Changing Leadership As Defecting Lawmakers Lose Round One
The hope of the House of Representatives lawmakers who defected from the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress to retain their seats now looks dim as a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on Monday declared that they have no business remaining in the House since they left the party that brought them in.
The court held that the most honorable thing the lawmakers should have done is to resign their membership from the House and leave.
The court presided over by Justice Adeniyi Ademola also ruled that the 12th to 53rd defendants (the defecting lawmakers) could not vote to remove the leadership of the House as they had threatened and could not also sponsor a motion to that effect.
But the lawmakers are not giving in easily as they have vowed to appeal the ruling of the High Court.
The ruling was sequel to the suit instituted by the PDP against the House of Representatives, and listed as 2nd to 10th defendants all the principal officers of the House, comprising the Speaker,Aminu Tambuwal, Deputy Speaker (Emeka Ihedioha), Mulikat Akande-Adeola (The Majority Leader), Leo Ogor (Deputy Majority Leader), Isiaka Bawa (Chief Whip), Ahmed Mutkar (Deputy Chief Whip), Gbajabiamila (Minority Leader), Samson Osagie (Minority Whip) and Sumaila Kawu (Deputy Minority Leader).
The lawmakers who defected from the PDP to the APC were also cited in the matter as the 12th to 53rd defendants.
Curiously, the Speaker of the House, Tambuwal, had aligned with the APC lawmakers in asking that the suit be dismissed for want of merit.
But ruling on the case on Monday,Justice Ademola held that the Originating Summons was justiceable and hence, the court had jurisdiction to hear the case.
The presiding judge argued that where the fundamental rights of any person was likely to be breached, the court had the power to intervene.
The court also dismissed the issue of abuse of court processes which the defendants had raised as it held that the plaintiff in the instant case was a defendant in other cases and hence the issue of abuse of court process did not arise.
Justice Ademola, while also ruling on locus standi, held that the plaintiff had the locus to institute the suit.
Citing the provision of Section 68(1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution,Justice Ademola held that the 12th to 53rd defendants could not effect changes in the leadership of the House.
He also held that the 12th to 53rd defendants could not vote to remove the leadership of the House and also could not sponsor a motion to that effect.
The court therefore granted an order of perpetual injunction restraining the 12th to 53rd defendants from effecting change in the leadership of the house.
Justice Ademola also granted an order restraining the defendants from altering, tampering or moving towards effecting change in the leadership of the House.
It will be recalled that the PDP had asked the court to among others, restrain Tambuwal, other principal officers of the House and its defecting members in the House from taking any step “to alter or change the House leadership.
Hon. Nanchang Ndam, a PDP officer, had stated in a supporting affidavit that while the defection of some of the defendants was still a subject of litigation before Justice Mohammed, the defendants, particularly the Minority Leader, Femi Gbajabiamila, had issued threats to change the leadership of the House.
The plaintiff in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2/2014 raised two questions for the court’s determination and sought four reliefs.
The PDP had asked the court to determine whether, in view of the mandatory provision of Section 68(1)(g) of the Constitution, and in view of the pendency of an earlier suit by the defecting lawmakers, they (the defecting legislators) could participate in any proceedings to remove the House’s principal officers.
The PDP also asked the court to determine whether, in view of the provision of Section 68(1)(g) of the Constitution and the pending suit by the defecting legislators, they (the defecting lawmakers) could lawfully alter the composition or constitution of the House leadership.
In their counter-affidavit deposed to by one Mr. Mike Msenge, the defendants told the court that from prolonged practice of the House of Representatives (1st defendant), the political party with majority of members in the House formed its core leadership.They argued that PDP was not a human being but one of the registered political parties in Nigeria and that the leadership seats in question were being occupied by the 2nd —8th defendants, who were human beings.
They also contended that prior to the defection of the lawmakers to APC, the plaintiff, PDP, hitherto had majority membership in the House, hence the 2nd-8th defendants, being members of the plaintiff, were elected into those leadership positions they currently occupied in the House.
They added that with the defection of the 12th—53rd defendants from the plaintiff to the APC on December 18, 2013, the plaintiff had lost its majority status, which had switched to the APC.
Represented at the court by a team of counsel led by Mr Sebastian Hon, SAN, and Magaji Mahmud, SAN, the defecting lawmakers, maintained that PDP lacked the locus-standi to query administrative issues within the House, adding that the plaintiff by its action had shown that it was nothing but a busybody and meddlesome interloper.
They therefore asked the court to discountenance PDP’s argument that the Speaker and other principal officers of the House were merely holding a mandate that was entrusted upon them by the party. They also urged the court to differentiate the case of Rivers State governor, Chibuike Amaechi, from that of the leaders of the House.
Our previous Report:
BEVERLY HILLS, CA, March 31, (THEWILL) – A Federal High Court in Abuja Monday declared that the 37 members of the House of Representatives elected on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) who defected to the All Progressive Congress (APC) must give up their seats as they are “not competent to vote or contribute to any proceedings in the House of Representatives.”
According to the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN), Presiding judge in the suit, Justice Adeniyi Ademola declared as follows: “Having perused the arguments of counsel and the constitutional provisions, it is clear and unambiguous that the defendants were sponsored by the PDP and won the election on its platform.
“It is also the court’s opinion that their tenure has not expired and there is no division in the PDP.
“The defendants are, therefore, not competent to vote or contribute to any proceedings in the House of Representatives.
“An order of perpetual injunction is, hereby, ordered, restraining them from altering or attempting to change the leadership of the House of Reps.
The suit was instituted on January 07, 2014, by the National Headquarters of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to stop the House from effecting a change in its leadership.
It sued the House of Representatives, and listed as 2nd to 10th defendants all the principal officers of the House comprising the Speaker, Deputy Speaker (Emeka Ihedioha), Mulikat Akande-Adeola (The Majority Leader), Leo Ogor (Deputy Majority Leader), Isiaka Bawa (Chief Whip), Ahmed Mutkar (Deputy Chief Whip), Gbajabiamila (Minority Leader), Samson Osagie (Minority Whip) and Sumaila Kawu (Deputy Minority Leader).
