An Abuja Division of the Federal High Court on Tuesday did not
lift its order barring the National Assembly from overriding
President Muhammadu Buhari’s veto of the electoral amendment
bill.
The court presided by Ahmed Mohammed had in its previous sitting
stopped the National Assembly from proceeding with implementation
of Section 58 of the Constitution which allows lawmakers to
override the president in the process of signing a bill into
law.
The National Assembly Conference Committee on Electoral Act
(amendment) Bill had recently adopted a reordered sequence of the
2019 general elections, putting the presidential election last.
This has initiated a series of controversies in the polity with
some senators of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) saying
it was targeted at Mr. Buhari, to prevent his re-election.
Both chambers of the National Assembly, though dominated by the
APC, amended the order of the election. The proposed sequence of
elections would make the National Assembly election come first in
2019, followed by governorship and state Houses of Assembly, and
presidential as last.
This is against the sequence rolled out by Independent National
Electoral Commission (INEC) late 2017, which put presidential and
National Assembly elections first and governorship and state
assembly to follow.
President Muhammadu Buhari had on March 13 refused assent to the
bill, after it was forwarded to his office. He had said the
amendments if allowed to pass violate parts of the
constitution.
Shortly after the bill was refused by the president, the Federal
High Court restrained the Senate from proceeding with further
actions on the matter.
The restraining order followed an application by counsel to the
Accord Party, Wole Olanipekun, who is asking the court to stop the
lawmakers from tampering with the electoral act.
After issuing the restraining order, the court decided to
proceed with the substantive application on Tuesday.
At the resumed hearing, however, an Abuja based lawyer, Okere
Kingdom, informed the court of his decision to join in the
matter.
In an attempt to persuade the court to entertain his appeal, Mr.
Kingdom said he was filing the motion on behalf of ‘a political
party’ and thus reserves a right to be heard, since the decision of
the court would adversely affect his party’s position in the
forthcoming 2019 general elections.
Mr. Kingdom said the rules of the court allowed him to be
joined, if he wished to do so.
He, therefore, asked the court to allow his application. The
applicant also threatened to file a separate application, at the
same court, should his request be refused.
The other parties to the matter, however, opposed the
application in its entirety.
Mr. Olanipekun said the applicant has not undertaken to comply
with the speed with which the parties plan to proceed with the
case. He urged the court to refuse the application to ensure an
accelerated hearing of the substantive suit.
Also present at the hearing was the Attorney-General and
Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, who urged the court to refuse
the application for lacking in merit. Mr. Malami said the argument
brought forth by the applicant that he is representing a political
party is not sufficient to allow him partake in the trial.
Speaking on behalf of INEC, its counsel, Femi Falana, urged the
court to refuse the application on the grounds that the motion is
”materially defective”.
After standing down the matter for about an hour, Justice
Mohammed refused the application by Mr. Kingdom.
The court then adjourned the matter till March 26, without
proceeding with hearing into the substantive matter.
With Tuesday’s court case, the injunction against the lawmakers
still stands.
TheNigerialawyer reported how the Senate resolved to write the
Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) on the matter, saying it was a case
of an arm of government (Judiciary) preventing another arm
(Legislature) from performing its duties.
An Abuja Division of the Federal High Court on Tuesday did not
lift its order barring the National Assembly from overriding
President Muhammadu Buhari’s veto of the electoral amendment
bill.
The court presided by Ahmed Mohammed had in its previous sitting
stopped the National Assembly from proceeding with implementation
of Section 58 of the Constitution which allows lawmakers to
override the president in the process of signing a bill into
law.
The National Assembly Conference Committee on Electoral Act
(amendment) Bill had recently adopted a reordered sequence of the
2019 general elections, putting the presidential election last.
This has initiated a series of controversies in the polity with
some senators of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) saying
it was targeted at Mr. Buhari, to prevent his re-election.
Both chambers of the National Assembly, though dominated by the
APC, amended the order of the election. The proposed sequence of
elections would make the National Assembly election come first in
2019, followed by governorship and state Houses of Assembly, and
presidential as last.
This is against the sequence rolled out by Independent National
Electoral Commission (INEC) late 2017, which put presidential and
National Assembly elections first and governorship and state
assembly to follow.
President Muhammadu Buhari had on March 13 refused assent to the
bill, after it was forwarded to his office. He had said the
amendments if allowed to pass violate parts of the
constitution.
Shortly after the bill was refused by the president, the Federal
High Court restrained the Senate from proceeding with further
actions on the matter.
The restraining order followed an application by counsel to the
Accord Party, Wole Olanipekun, who is asking the court to stop the
lawmakers from tampering with the electoral act.
After issuing the restraining order, the court decided to
proceed with the substantive application on Tuesday.
At the resumed hearing, however, an Abuja based lawyer, Okere
Kingdom, informed the court of his decision to join in the
matter.
In an attempt to persuade the court to entertain his appeal, Mr.
Kingdom said he was filing the motion on behalf of ‘a political
party’ and thus reserves a right to be heard, since the decision of
the court would adversely affect his party’s position in the
forthcoming 2019 general elections.
Mr. Kingdom said the rules of the court allowed him to be
joined, if he wished to do so.
He, therefore, asked the court to allow his application. The
applicant also threatened to file a separate application, at the
same court, should his request be refused.
The other parties to the matter, however, opposed the
application in its entirety.
Mr. Olanipekun said the applicant has not undertaken to comply
with the speed with which the parties plan to proceed with the
case. He urged the court to refuse the application to ensure an
accelerated hearing of the substantive suit.
Also present at the hearing was the Attorney-General and
Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, who urged the court to refuse
the application for lacking in merit. Mr. Malami said the argument
brought forth by the applicant that he is representing a political
party is not sufficient to allow him partake in the trial.
Speaking on behalf of INEC, its counsel, Femi Falana, urged the
court to refuse the application on the grounds that the motion is
”materially defective”.
After standing down the matter for about an hour, Justice
Mohammed refused the application by Mr. Kingdom.
The court then adjourned the matter till March 26, without
proceeding with hearing into the substantive matter.
With Tuesday’s court case, the injunction against the lawmakers
still stands.
TheNigerialawyer reported how the Senate resolved to write the
Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) on the matter, saying it was a case
of an arm of government (Judiciary) preventing another arm
(Legislature) from performing its duties.