Defection-and-Loss-of-Office:-Supreme-Court-Precedent-Gogo

Defection and Loss of Office: Supreme Court Precedent -Gogo

By  Tide 
October 18, 2024

Tamunosisi Gogo Jaja, a former member of the Rivers State House of Assembly, has raised serious concerns over the actions of 27 lawmakers who defected from their political party to the All Progressives Congress (APC). According to Jaja, these legislators secured a court injunction from a Federal High Court, preventing the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from taking actions such as revoking their certificates of return or removing them from office after their defection.

Jaja asserts that this legal maneuver contradicts established legal precedents set by the Supreme Court, which has clearly ruled that any lawmaker who defects from the party under which they were elected automatically forfeits their seat.

Supreme Court Ruling on Defections

Jaja emphasized that the Supreme Court has ruled on the issue of defections, stating that legislators who leave the political party under which they were elected lose their seats. In Abe v. Lawal (2014), the Supreme Court affirmed that members of a legislative house who defect from their political party without justifiable reasons should vacate their seats, as mandated by Section 68(1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria.

This section of the Constitution provides that “a member of the Senate or House of Representatives shall vacate his seat in the House if he becomes a member of another political party before the expiration of the period for which he was elected.” This legal provision seeks to uphold the integrity of the political system by discouraging opportunistic defections that destabilize governance.

Legal Maneuvering to Retain Office

Despite this constitutional mandate, Jaja argued that the 27 lawmakers have avoided the consequences of their defection by obtaining a court injunction that shields them from being removed from office. He criticized the legislators for failing to disclose this legal maneuver to the public, thereby undermining transparency and accountability in the political process. According to Jaja, the court's order has allowed the lawmakers to retain their positions, contradicting the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling on defections.

The Case of Martins Amaewhule

Jaja also raised concerns regarding Martins Amaewhule, the speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly. He pointed out that Amaewhule’s case was filed before his defection to the APC, and any ruling recognizing him as the legitimate speaker was based on circumstances that existed prior to his political switch. Jaja contended that after his defection, Amaewhule, like the other lawmakers, should have forfeited his position in accordance with the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Defections Undermine Political Integrity

In an interview with Channels TV, Jaja reiterated his position that the actions of the defected lawmakers, including securing court orders to remain in office, are both legally and morally questionable. He stated, “The Supreme Court had earlier said that as soon as you defect, you automatically lose your office.” Jaja criticized the legislators for attempting to hold onto their positions on a shaky legal foundation, which he argued erodes public trust and weakens the political process.

By defying the clear legal precedent set by the Supreme Court, Jaja warned that the actions of the 27 lawmakers threaten the integrity of the Nigerian political system, highlighting the need for accountability and adherence to constitutional principles in governance

Post a Comment

0 Comments