APC: Judge Did Not Order 37 Lawmakers To Vacate Seats

APC: Judge Did Not Order 37 Lawmakers To Vacate Seats

Tuesday, April 1, 2014 4:53 pm

The All Progressives Congress, APC, has said Justice Adeniyi Ademola did not order the 37 members of the House of Representatives who defected to the APC to vacate their seats because he is not competent to issue such a ruling, as the issue of whether or not they can defect was not before him.

In a statement issued in Lagos on Tuesday by its Interim National Publicity Secretary, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, the party however said it will appeal the ruling because Justice Ademola’s perpetual injunction restraining the concerned lawmakers from participating in motions and debates in the House is unconstitutional and defeats the very purpose for which the members were elected into the House.

It said Justice Ademola’s unsolicited comments were clearly gregarious, unnecessary, superfluous and has no foundation in law or fact, hence should be ignored.

APC asked the Chief Justice of Nigeria to act urgently to sanction Justice Ademola for engaging in mischief that could bring the bench into disrepute.

”If this case had been issued a day later than Monday, we would have said the Judge was caught in the web of April Fool! Alas, he indeed made the ruling on Monday, hence the need for us to take it very seriously for several reasons.

”Firstly, the question whether the House of Representatives members should vacate their seats was not a question before Justice Ademola for determination. The only question for him to determine was whether the APC members, with their numerical strength at that time, had the right to change the House leadership such as the Majority Leader, Chief Whip and their deputies. So Justice Ademola had no business commenting on seats being vacated.

”Secondly, it is highly unprofessional and unethical for one judge to delve into a matter that is sub judice in another court. A judge should not make comments on matters being litigated in another court. The question of seats being vacated or otherwise is being heard by Justice Ahmed Mohammed in the Federal High Court in Abuja who, on 29 March, 2014, said the issue was still live before him and is not ripe for judgment,” the party said.

APC recalled the alarm it raised in a statement on 14 December, 2013, that the PDP is shopping for a pliant judge who will be heavily induced to do its bidding in the case over the defections from the ruling party to the APC.

In that statement, the main opposition party warned against any attempt by the PDP and the Presidency to turn back the hands of the clock as far as the cleaning up of the judiciary is concerned, by inducing a servile and disreputable judge to do the duo’s bidding.

Quoting from that statement, APC said: ”We recognize the efforts of the present CJN to sanitise the judiciary since she assumed the mantle of leadership but she should not allow any black leg to reverse the gains that have been recorded on the altar of unmitigated avarice. This is because if that happens, Nigerians will hold the judiciary vicariously liable for the catastrophic consequences that may follow.”

Noting that its alarm has now proven to be prescient, the party wondered whether there was any link between what is clearly an exercise in judicial rascality and President Goodluck Jonathan’s recent boast in Kwara that the PDP would soon retrieve its ‘stolen’ mandate from those who defected from the PDP to the APC.

”That presidential boast raises the following questions: What did the President know and when did he know it? Was this judgement procured by the PDP for a price, in which case the President’s statement amounted to a Freudian Slip? Are we to expect more of this?

”It is necessary to unravel this so the PDP and the Presidency, in their desperation, will not paint the judiciary with their brush of failure and crash our democracy,” it said.

The party urged its supporters not to panic as the judgement was clearly intended to cause mischief, adding however that the plan by the PDP and the Presidency has fallen like a pack of cards!

Join The Conversation

One Comment

  • double O Me says:

    Sample Comment:

    I am worried that when a judgement favours APC they hail the judge but when it is against them, they make disparaging statements about the judge. In any suit, one party will win while the other will loose. If you have any issue against any ruling, go upstair (appeal the judgement) but not to be making unwarranted statements and allegation against the judge. By my understanding of the judgement, what the judge meant was that ordinarily the law makers should have vacated their seats and by so doing, they can not be part of any decisions or voting in the House since the day of their defection except they are re-elected. Hence, the law is no longer recognizing you as a member of the House, thus you can no longer be part of any proceedings of the House. So, the judge in my opinion was only giving preamble to his judgement and for all (including the doubting Thomas like Lai Mohammed) to know the basis of the judgement.

  • What do you think?

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.