More troubles await the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Aminu Tambuwal, over his recent defection to the All Progressives Congress, investigation has revealed.
The PUNCH learnt on Thursday that apart from his security details that were withdrawn by the Nigeria Police Force on Thursday, Tambuwal might be barred from entering either his office or the National Assembly when the House resumes on December 3.
This was one of the decisions reached during a meeting held by top officials of the Peoples Democratic Party which had in attendance President Goodluck Jonathan.
Tambuwal had on Tuesday adjourned the House till December 3 after he stunned his colleagues by announcing his defection from the PDP to the opposition All Peoples Congress.But on Thursday, the Police authorities withdrew his security aides, citing section Section 68 (1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution as amended as reason.
The section reads, “A member of the Senate or of the House of Representatives shall vacate his seat in the House of which he is a member if -
(g) being a person whose election to the House was sponsored by a political party, he becomes a member of another political party before the expiration of the period for which that House was elected.”
A top Presidency source told one of our correspondents on the condition of anonymity that the legal advice before the Federal Government and the leadership of the PDP was that Tambuwal was no longer the speaker of the House in the eye of the law.
He noted that the speaker contravened section (68)(1)(g) by defecting when there is a subsisting court injunction to the effect that there is no division in the PDP.
According to him, the decision to strip Tambuwal of all the rights and privileges of the speaker was taken based on that legal submission.
The source added that the government and the PDP leadership resolved that instead of taking Tambuwal to court for defecting without vacating his seat, he would be the one to go to court when his rights are withdrawn.
He said, “The withdrawal of Tambuwal’s security details is in order. Section 68 (1)(g) made it clear that a lawmaker who defects when there is no division in his party shall vacate his seat.
“The legal advice is that the operational word there is ‘shall.’ That section of the constitution is self-
“There is a subsisting court injunction that there is no division in the PDP and that there is no merger.
“It therefore means that based on that constitutional provision, Tambuwal is no longer a member of the House. Since he is no longer a member, then he cannot be the speaker.
“The withdrawal of his security details is in order. He will even be stopped from entering his office. He is no longer a member of the House.
“Instead of us taking him to court, he will be the one to go to court.”
President Goodluck Jonathan had on Wednesday engaged some leaders of the PDP in a meeting aimed at taking a common position on the matter.
Those who attended the meeting included the National Chairman of the PDP, Adamu Mu’azu; the Deputy Leader of the House, Leo Ogor; as well as governors Gabriel Suswam (Benue); Godswill Akpabio (Akwa Ibom); Seriake Dickson (Bayelsa); Ibrahim Dankwabo (Gombe); and Sullivan Chime (Enugu).
Top governmental officials who also attended the parley were the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Anyim Pius Anyim; the National Security Adviser, Sambo Dasuki; and the Attorney-General of the Federation, Muhammed Adoke (SAN).
Reps may defy Tambuwal
There were also indications that the House might reconvene within the next one week to take further actions over Tambuwal’s defection.
The PUNCH learnt that the decision to reconvene the House was also one of the outcomes of the meeting between Jonathan and some principal officers of the House and PDP leaders.
The principal officers were the Deputy Speaker, Mr. Emeka Ihedioha; the Majority Leader, Mulikat Akande-Adeola; and the Deputy Majority Leader, Mr. Leo Ogor.
By enabling provisions, the House requires the approval of one-third of the total number of 360 members to reconvene the House.
A reliable source in the House, who confided in The PUNCH on Thursday, said, “What will happen is that about 120 members will sign and pass over to the speaker, asking that the House should be reconvened. That is what is going to happen in the next one week.”
Police action, ploy to bring harm to me –Tambuwal
While justifying the withdrawal of Tambulwal’s security aides, the Force Public Relations Officer, Emmanuel Ojukwu, had in a terse statement in Abuja, hinged the Police action on Section 68(1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution as amended.
The statement read, “In view of the recent defection by the Right Hon. Aminu Waziri Tanbuwal, CFR, the speaker of the House of Representatives, from the PDP to the APC and having regard to the clear provision of section 68(1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution as amended, the Nigeria Police Force, has redeployed its personnel attached to his office.”
Tambuwal however accused the Acting Inspector-General of Police, Suleiman Abba, of breaching the constitution by withdrawing his security aides.
He noted that by using Section 68(1)(g) as the basis for his action, the IG had assumed the powers of the Judiciary, the only arm of government empowered to interpret the constitution.
His comment was contained in a statement by his Special Adviser on Media, Mr. Imam Imam.
The statement reads, “We are on authority that nothing in the 1999 Constitution nor the Police Act confers on the police force adjudicatory powers including the interpretation of the constitution.
“In any case even Section 215 of the 1999 Constitution does not contemplate the issuing of or compliance with unlawful orders by the President and or the Inspector General of Police respectively.
“What the IG has done therefore has no basis in law including the 1999 Constitution which he has cited. It is a brazen act of crass impunity, gross constitutional breach and contempt of court. The IG should desist from assuming or usurping the constitutional functions of the Judiciary.”
The statement added that the judiciary had long interpreted the section the IG quoted and concluded through two court cases that there were indeed divisions and factions in the PDP.
It said, “For the avoidance of doubt, the question of whether or not there is a division or faction in the PDP has been resolved by Lord Justice Faji of the Ilorin Division of Federal High Court in suit FHC/ABJ/CS/605/2013, in which the court held that indeed there were factions in the PDP.
“Again, in suit no FHC/ABJ/CS/ 605/2013, the Sokoto Division of the Federal High Court per Justice Aikawa, the judgment of the court was that there was not only division but faction in the PDP, which later merged with the APC.”
Tambuwal further said the IG’s action was not only contemptuous of the courts, but also “a ploy to bring harm” to his person .
Source: Punch
The PUNCH learnt on Thursday that apart from his security details that were withdrawn by the Nigeria Police Force on Thursday, Tambuwal might be barred from entering either his office or the National Assembly when the House resumes on December 3.
This was one of the decisions reached during a meeting held by top officials of the Peoples Democratic Party which had in attendance President Goodluck Jonathan.
Tambuwal had on Tuesday adjourned the House till December 3 after he stunned his colleagues by announcing his defection from the PDP to the opposition All Peoples Congress.But on Thursday, the Police authorities withdrew his security aides, citing section Section 68 (1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution as amended as reason.
The section reads, “A member of the Senate or of the House of Representatives shall vacate his seat in the House of which he is a member if -
(g) being a person whose election to the House was sponsored by a political party, he becomes a member of another political party before the expiration of the period for which that House was elected.”
A top Presidency source told one of our correspondents on the condition of anonymity that the legal advice before the Federal Government and the leadership of the PDP was that Tambuwal was no longer the speaker of the House in the eye of the law.
He noted that the speaker contravened section (68)(1)(g) by defecting when there is a subsisting court injunction to the effect that there is no division in the PDP.
According to him, the decision to strip Tambuwal of all the rights and privileges of the speaker was taken based on that legal submission.
The source added that the government and the PDP leadership resolved that instead of taking Tambuwal to court for defecting without vacating his seat, he would be the one to go to court when his rights are withdrawn.
He said, “The withdrawal of Tambuwal’s security details is in order. Section 68 (1)(g) made it clear that a lawmaker who defects when there is no division in his party shall vacate his seat.
“The legal advice is that the operational word there is ‘shall.’ That section of the constitution is self-
“There is a subsisting court injunction that there is no division in the PDP and that there is no merger.
“It therefore means that based on that constitutional provision, Tambuwal is no longer a member of the House. Since he is no longer a member, then he cannot be the speaker.
“The withdrawal of his security details is in order. He will even be stopped from entering his office. He is no longer a member of the House.
“Instead of us taking him to court, he will be the one to go to court.”
President Goodluck Jonathan had on Wednesday engaged some leaders of the PDP in a meeting aimed at taking a common position on the matter.
Those who attended the meeting included the National Chairman of the PDP, Adamu Mu’azu; the Deputy Leader of the House, Leo Ogor; as well as governors Gabriel Suswam (Benue); Godswill Akpabio (Akwa Ibom); Seriake Dickson (Bayelsa); Ibrahim Dankwabo (Gombe); and Sullivan Chime (Enugu).
Top governmental officials who also attended the parley were the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Anyim Pius Anyim; the National Security Adviser, Sambo Dasuki; and the Attorney-General of the Federation, Muhammed Adoke (SAN).
Reps may defy Tambuwal
There were also indications that the House might reconvene within the next one week to take further actions over Tambuwal’s defection.
The PUNCH learnt that the decision to reconvene the House was also one of the outcomes of the meeting between Jonathan and some principal officers of the House and PDP leaders.
The principal officers were the Deputy Speaker, Mr. Emeka Ihedioha; the Majority Leader, Mulikat Akande-Adeola; and the Deputy Majority Leader, Mr. Leo Ogor.
By enabling provisions, the House requires the approval of one-third of the total number of 360 members to reconvene the House.
A reliable source in the House, who confided in The PUNCH on Thursday, said, “What will happen is that about 120 members will sign and pass over to the speaker, asking that the House should be reconvened. That is what is going to happen in the next one week.”
Police action, ploy to bring harm to me –Tambuwal
While justifying the withdrawal of Tambulwal’s security aides, the Force Public Relations Officer, Emmanuel Ojukwu, had in a terse statement in Abuja, hinged the Police action on Section 68(1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution as amended.
The statement read, “In view of the recent defection by the Right Hon. Aminu Waziri Tanbuwal, CFR, the speaker of the House of Representatives, from the PDP to the APC and having regard to the clear provision of section 68(1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution as amended, the Nigeria Police Force, has redeployed its personnel attached to his office.”
Tambuwal however accused the Acting Inspector-General of Police, Suleiman Abba, of breaching the constitution by withdrawing his security aides.
He noted that by using Section 68(1)(g) as the basis for his action, the IG had assumed the powers of the Judiciary, the only arm of government empowered to interpret the constitution.
His comment was contained in a statement by his Special Adviser on Media, Mr. Imam Imam.
The statement reads, “We are on authority that nothing in the 1999 Constitution nor the Police Act confers on the police force adjudicatory powers including the interpretation of the constitution.
“In any case even Section 215 of the 1999 Constitution does not contemplate the issuing of or compliance with unlawful orders by the President and or the Inspector General of Police respectively.
“What the IG has done therefore has no basis in law including the 1999 Constitution which he has cited. It is a brazen act of crass impunity, gross constitutional breach and contempt of court. The IG should desist from assuming or usurping the constitutional functions of the Judiciary.”
The statement added that the judiciary had long interpreted the section the IG quoted and concluded through two court cases that there were indeed divisions and factions in the PDP.
It said, “For the avoidance of doubt, the question of whether or not there is a division or faction in the PDP has been resolved by Lord Justice Faji of the Ilorin Division of Federal High Court in suit FHC/ABJ/CS/605/2013, in which the court held that indeed there were factions in the PDP.
“Again, in suit no FHC/ABJ/CS/ 605/2013, the Sokoto Division of the Federal High Court per Justice Aikawa, the judgment of the court was that there was not only division but faction in the PDP, which later merged with the APC.”
Tambuwal further said the IG’s action was not only contemptuous of the courts, but also “a ploy to bring harm” to his person .
Source: Punch
No comments:
Post a Comment