The National Assembly’s two chambers have decided to appeal a Federal High Court judgment issued last Friday in Umuahia, Abia State, nullifying Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act 2022.
Political appointees with political ambitions must resign their positions before running in primary elections under this provision.
The Senate first reached the resolution during plenary yesterday, after debating a motion titled “Urgent need to appeal the judgment of the Federal High Court Umuahia on Suit No.: FHC/UM/CS/26/2022 on Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act 2022 on Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act 2022.”
The House of Representatives also decided to appeal the same ruling, which ordered Abubakar Malami, the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, to remove section 84(12) from the new electoral act.
Senator George Thompson Sekibo (Rivers East) sponsored the motion in the Senate, which was co-sponsored by 79 other senators.
In his presentation, Sekibo pointed out that Section 4(1)(2) and (3) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, gave the National Assembly the power to make laws for the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
“There is a difference between the civil service or public service and political appointment,” he says, referring to the interpretation of the words “civil service” and “public service” in Section 318.
He urged the Senate to express concern about the judgment, particularly because it was denied the opportunity to represent itself in a matter arising from its legitimate functions, warning that “allowing the judgment to stand without concern will set a precedent on which anyone can go to court and obtain judgment to ridicule the good intentions of the National Assembly as an institution.”
As a result, the Senate decided to appeal the decision.
During the Green Chamber proceedings, the House decided to refer the trial judge, Justice Evelyn Anyadike, to the National Judicial Council (NJC) for investigation.
The lawmakers expressed disappointment and dissatisfaction with the decision, which they claimed was aimed at usurping the legislative powers granted to them by the 1999 Constitution, as amended.
The lawmakers chastised the judiciary and the executive for usurping the legislature’s powers, claiming that only the legislature, not a presidential appointee, has the power to amend the law.
Femi Gbajabiamila, the Speaker of the House, said he learned about the case from the media and promised that he would not sit by and watch the parliament be mocked while he was in office.
Gbajabiamila said it was strange that the National Assembly was named as a defendant in the suit and that the judgment was obtained from a court in Umuahia, adding that parliament must appeal the decision and ensure that it is overturned.
Section 84 (12) Work in Progress – Malami is being deleted.
The federal government has stated that it is still working on repealing section 84 (12) of the Electoral Act of 2022.
Abubakar Malami, the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, told State House correspondents about it after President Muhammadu Buhari presided over a federal executive council meeting at the Presidential Villa.
When asked for an update on the implementation of a federal high court ruling in Umuahia, Abia State, ordering him to delete section 84 (12) of the amended electoral act, he said the relevant agencies were working on it.
“The true position of it, in that respect, is that government printers, and indeed the Law Reform Commission, among others, who are responsible for the codification and gazetting of our laws, are naturally working hand in hand with the Office of the Attorney General to ensure that what goes into our laws is indeed in line with the provision of the law,” he said.
“And, as you correctly stated, there is also the possibility of an appeal.” So, in effect, I’m saying that the deletion of Section 84 Subsection 12 is a work in progress that is currently being considered.”
Lawyers applaud the NASS’s planned appeal.
Meanwhile, some lawyers in the country yesterday praised the National Assembly’s decision to appeal the judgment, claiming that it would improve the country’s jurisprudence.
They claim that the judge went beyond the scope of his authority in such matters.
They urged the National Assembly to appeal the ruling as soon as possible, predicting that the case would eventually reach the Supreme Court, where it would be decided one way or the other.
Mr Abdul Balogun, a senior advocate, predicted that the decision would be overturned on appeal.
According to him, a court should not have such powers or render such a decision.
Another lawyer, Sylvanus Akpotia, said the ruling could throw the country’s electoral process into chaos. It remains the position of the law, according to him, until the judgment is challenged in the Court of Appeal.
“I applaud the Senate and House of Representatives for passing the resolution,” he said. The move will strengthen our country’s democracy and legal system.”
“A judgment must be obeyed until it is overturned by a higher court, even if it is given by a drunken hooligan.” However, I anticipate an appeal in the coming days.”
The court’s decision, according to Barrister Ismail Amedu, sets a dangerous precedent in the country’s jurisprudence.
