Defection: Rumblings in House over verdict

Defection: Rumblings in House over verdict

Posted by Sylvester on Sunday, April 6, 2014 0

Sponsored Advertisement?

JOHN AMEH reports that these are certainly no sweet times for the 37 members of the House of Representatives caught in the web of Monday’s judgment by an Abuja Federal High Court. A moody atmosphere enveloped them for the rest of week that started in an unsavoury note caused by the judgment .

Flash back to December 19, 2013. On that day, it was with glee and excitement on their faces that 37 members of the House of Representatives announced their defection from the ruling Peoples Democratic Party to the mega party and bride of the time, the All Progressives Congress.

The jubilant lawmakers cited ‘divisions’ in the PDP as the reason for their action, shoring up the numerical strength of the APC in the process. From 135 members, the party climbed to an unexpected slim majority lead in the House.

A fidgety PDP rushed to the court, fearing the APC was about to change the leadership of the House. Such an action would have cost the PDP at least four principal positions.

Positions such as Majority Leader, Chief Whip, Deputy Majority Leader and Deputy Whip would have been given up by the PDP.

The seat of deputy speaker was also not safe, given the threat of the APC to impeach the occupant, Mr. Emeka Ihedioha. The seat of the speaker was the only one seemingly guaranteed then, owing to the claim by the two camps that they would retain the occupant, Mr. Aminu Tambuwal, whichever way the pendulum swung.

In the originating suit, the key relief sought by the PDP was that the court should restrain the House from effecting a change of its leadership.

The PDP sought to maintain the status quo in the leadership structure on the grounds that the 37 lawmakers filed a separate case on their defection yet to be decided by the judiciary.

Delivering judgment on the matter, Justice Adeniyi Ademola, did not only declare the defection of the lawmakers illegal, he also granted other reliefs.

The court barred the lawmakers from effecting a change in the leadership of the House, the main prayer of the PDP.

Among others, the court ruled that the 37 lawmakers should no longer participate in activities of the House, including contributing to motions on the floor.

Ademola, therefore, advised the affected lawmakers to resign honourably from the House.

Part of the judgment reads, “From the facts admitted by the parties, the 12th to 53rd defendants (defected lawmakers) were sponsored by the PDP in the 2011 elections and their terms are yet to expire.

“It is the court’s opinion from the evidence before it that there is no division in the PDP.”

Ademola added, “The plaintiff (PDP) has discharged the onus of proof and the defendants have failed to do so.

“There is no division in the PDP, yet they (lawmakers) defected to another political party, the APC; they should either resign their seats or relinquish their seats honourably; they have no business in the House of Representatives a day longer,” he added.

The judgment left bile in the mouths of the defected lawmakers as was evident in their display of anger immediately Ademola wrapped up his beat of the case.

The excitement that greeted their defection on December 19 had been replaced by anger, frustration and a political fate hanging in the balance.

Expectedly, the APC caucus at the House tagged the judgment “controversial”, “strange” and “intended to serve the interest of the PDP-led Federal Government.”

The caucus accused the judge of over-stepping his bounds by “injecting opinions” not sought in the originating suit in his judgment.

The Minority Whip of the House, Mr. Sampson Osagie, responded on behalf of the caucus.

Osagie stated that the PDP only sought to restrain the 37 lawmakers from effecting a change in the leadership of the House.

He argued, “The only import of of the judgment is that the 37 members cannot participate in the removal of the leadership of the House.

“There is nothing more to it; the judge was not called to offer any other personal opinion.

“Our colleagues have appealed the judgment, a copy of which has been served on the House.”

The caucus criticised the Federal Government and the judge for allegedly “turning law on its head” in the desperation of the former to cling to power.

It said, “We want to assure members of the public that there is no court judgment before the House, directing any member of the APC to vacate his or her seat.

“In any event, section 68 (2) of the 1999 Constitution makes it clear that satisfactory evidence must be presented to the House before any of the provision of S.68 (1) can become applicable.

“At the moment the APC in the House remains strong and focused on the need to provide necessary checks and balances to the rudderlessness of the ship of State as being piloted by the ruling party in this country today.


“At a time when this government is unable to explain to Nigerians the whereabouts of huge missing funds; at a time, when profligacy among ministers of this government has reached its crescendo; at a time when scores and thousands have been sent to their untimely death under a scheme purported to be a recruitment sham; at a time when government assets in the power sector have been sold out with Nigerians experiencing more darkness than light; at a time when insecurity and insurgency has almost defied government emergency rule and at a time when mis-governance has taken centre stage while Nigerians has continued to wallow in abject penury, the PDP government has continued to run the country like the private fiefdom of those holding the reins of power.

“Nigerians, we know we cannot succumb to the shenanigans of the ruling party that has plundered this nation for 15 years.

“The House of Representatives remains the bastion of hope of the traumatised and pauperised Nigerians and we shall not give in to the attempt of some of our PDP colleagues in collusion with a certain judge to turn facts and law on its head to achieve some sinister ends.”

One of the 37 lawmakers, Mr. Ahmad Ali, is the chairman, House Committee on Justice.

Ali, a lawyer, said much had been established by the lawmakers to show that the judgment was unfair to the 37.

According to him, in the eye of the law, the only available legal option was to appeal the judgment, a step already taken by the lawmakers.

Ali said the members were ready to pursue the matter to the Supreme Court.

“We are already on appeal; that is the sensible thing to do in a situation like this. By appealing, we have made our position clear enough.

“So, we wait for the outcome of the appeal”, he added.

In the appeal, the lawmakers opposed the judgment on six grounds.

On ground 3(c-e) for instance, the appellants noted, “The judgment of the trial judge is perverse. The judgment of the court is not supported by the relief sought by the plaintiffs.

“The trial judge erred in law when he granted reliefs not sought by the plaintiffs.”

They also argued that Justice Ademola lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the suit in the first place.

In the camp of the PDP caucus, it is jubilation galore, though momentarily, in view of the pending appeal. From the anxiety of last December, the PDP has regained its confidence.

Deputy House Majority Leader, Mr. Leo Ogor, said the judgment vindicated his party’s decision to approach the court.

The PDP has been vindicated because we believe in the rule of law.

“The judiciary, as the arm of government vested with the powers to interpret our laws, has clearly spoken what is the correct position.

“We went to court because the defection had no basis in law and we thank the court for interpreting the law correctly,” he added. For now, the fate of the 37 lawmakers hangs in the balance, as the nation looks forward to the outcome of the appeal and perhaps, a further recoursing to the Supreme Court.