The Abuja
Division of the Federal High Court, yesterday, declined to halt moves by the
Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, to declare the seats of all the fifty-one
lawmakers that defected to the All Progressives Congress, APC, vacant.
However,
before striking out the suit that was filed before it by the lawmakers,
Justice Ahmed Mohammed, stressed that in line with section 68(1) (g) of the 1999
Constitution, as amended, only the Senate President and Speaker of the House of
Representatives, have the statutory powers to sack the plaintiffs from office.
Justice Mohammed
delivered the judgment after he dismissed a fresh motion by the APC lawmakers,
asking the high court to suspend its verdict sine-die (indefinitely), and await
the outcome of a referral application they filed before the Appeal Court in
Abuja.
The lawmakers
had insisted that in view of section 295(2) of the constitution, the high court
ought to allow the appellate court to give a clearer interpretation of section
68 (1) (g) of the constitution which bothers on the issue of defection.
Dismissing their
application as unmeritorious, Justice Mohammed, accused the lawmakers of
deliberately attempting to ‘arrest’ his judgment six months after hearing was
concluded on the matter.
“Hearing has
been concluded and the matter fixed for judgment. I do not know the
procedure for an application to adjourn a ready judgment. In the final
analysis, I find no merit in the application. The application is completely
alien in the administration of Justice in Nigeria and it is accordingly
dismissed”, the Judge held.
On the
substantive matter, the high court, said it was convinced that the crux of the
plaintiffs suit, bothered on alleged threat by the erstwhile PDP Chairman,
Alhaji Bamanga Tukur, to declare their seats vacant following their defection
to the APC.
The court held
that the fact that PDP does not have the powers to execute such threat reduced
the suit by the lawmakers to a mere academic exercise.
Consequently,
the court said there was no live issue for it to determine since PDP had filed
two separate suits with a view to compel both the Senate President and the
Speaker to declare the plaintiffs’ seats vacant, as well as, to compel the
Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, to conduct fresh elections in
their various constituencies.
Therefore,
Justice Mohammed, yesterday, asked the APC lawmakers to await the outcome of
the two pending suits, saying “It is the law and practice in civilised
societies that parties who have submitted their dispute before a competent
court, must allow the court to decide on it.
It will be
recalled that the lawmakers had asked the court to determine whether
considering the circumstances in the national and various state chapters
of the PDP, there actually existed a faction or division within the
party.
“Whether any of
the Plaintiffs or other members of the PDP holding elective seats who desires
to become a member of another faction of the party or any other political party
is not saved by the proviso to section 68 (1) (g) of the Constitution of the
Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended. As well as, “whether in view of
the proviso to section 68 (1) (g) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic
of Nigeria, 1999 as amended, the 1st Defendant, or any other officer of the 4th
Defendant or authority howsoever described, can declare the seats of any of the
Plaintiffs or other members of the 4th Defendant that opted to join another
political party vacant in the present peculiar and precarious circumstance of
the 4th Defendant”.
Nevertheless,
PDP, which yesterday hailed the judgment as “a victory for the nation and for
our polity”, in a preliminary objection it filed against the suit, insisted
that there was never a crisis in any of its chapters, saying there was only a
minor disagreement among some of its members.
Relying on a
previous court judgment that stopped the Alhaji Abubakar Kawu Baraje led nPDP
from operating in Nigeria, the party, further challenged the jurisdiction of
the court to meddle into intraparty affairs, saying, “It is normal to have
disagreements within a political party and that does not qualify as crisis”.
Besides, PDP
told the court that the plaintiffs not only failed to disclose any reasonable
cause of action, but also failed to utilize the internal dispute resolution
mechanisms within the party before rushing to court.
More so, the APC
lawmakers, had in their suit, also prayed the court for , “A declaration that
the circumstances prevailing in the various state chapters of the party which
led to factions/divisions as witnessed at the Special National Convention of
the 4th Defendant held on 31st August 2013 and holding of a parallel convention
simultaneously at another venue, followed up with the opening of a parallel
National Head Office and release of the names of new parallel National Officers
constitute and qualify as crisis and divisions anticipated under section 68 of
the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended.
APC is a failure , they will always fail
ReplyDelete