Judiciary
By Anthony Isibor.
MIKE Ozekhome, SAN and a constitutional lawyer, has described the Court of Appeal’s decision to declare as null and void, the provisions of the Electoral Act section 84, sub section 12 as a welcome development.
The Appeal Court had earlier on declared as null and void the provisions of section 84[12] as unconstitutional because it was in conflict with some sections of the Nigerian Constitution.
The Senior Advocate, who has always condemned that section of the Constitution to be unconstitutional, expressed satisfaction that his little contribution to the polity was being appreciated by Nigerians and by the court of law.
Section 84 [12] has been a subject of intense litigation and political debate in Nigeria since it was signed into law in February this year through the amended Electoral Act 2022 by President Muhammadu Buhari. And even though President Buhari had on several occasions urged the National Assembly to remove the controversial clause in the Electoral Act, it has consistently declined the president’s request.
According to the provision of the Section under question, “No political appointee at any level shall be a voting delegate or be voted for at the convention or congress of any political party for the purpose of the nomination of candidates for any election.”
Speaking on the voidance of the section 84[12] on the Morning Show on Arise TV recently, the constitutional lawyer added that the law should not be interpreted with emotions, sentiments or on the basis of morality.
According to him, section 84[12] was null and void because it was inconsistent with various sections of the Constitution.
“The Constitution has already made provision for those who can vote and who can be voted for,” he said.
He said that in law, you cannot add or subtract from constitutional wordings as doing so will render such a law that confronts the Constitution frontally will be rendered null and void, and will be struck down by the court because section 1 sub section 1 of the Constitution said that this Constitution shall be supreme, and then section 1, subsection 3 says; any other law which is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution shall, to the extent of the inconsistency be null and void. That is why in many occasions, I have referred to the Constitution.
“To break it down to local parlance that the ordinary man can understand, what is the Constitution?
“We call it the grand norm, the highest law of the land. In the local parlance, the constitution is the Kabiesi, Oba, Eze, Emir of the land. The other ones are like district heads like Baale; other laws like the National Assembly Acts.
“So, I say section 84 [12] was null and void because it was discriminatory against Nigerians. That is what the Court of Appeal judge decided days ago, that that section 84[12] which was struck down by Justice Evelyn Anyadike of the federal high court Umuahia judicial division, that it breaches section 42, subsection 1a of the Constitution in that it is discriminatory against a certain set of Nigerians.
“We call such a law that is targeted at particular class or person, ‘A law Ad Hobinea’.
“Although the Court of Appeal did not say so, let me also say that ‘It breaches Nigerians’ rights to freedom association and assembly under section 40 of the Constitution, so I am helping to add that one.
It is discriminatory when you say a certain class of people because you call them political appointees, ministers, special advisers, personal aids, they cannot vote and be voted for at congresses and conventions of political parties where they are to serve as delegates and vote and be voted for as Nigerians . You are punishing them for serving Nigeria. And you call them political appointees, and because of that you have to now punish them.
How is that fair, meanwhile, only on Tuesday, the same National Assembly itself did the greatest Hussain Bolt and John Benson 100 metres sprint by passing a law, first reading, second reading, third reading, all in one day. They have never done that to accommodate laws that will remove the suffering of Nigerians or remove insecurity or remove corruption. But they were able to do first, second, and third reading all in one day. What were they doing, they were accommodating elected members of Parliament, elected representatives at the National Assembly, the behemoth 109 senators, the 360 members of the house of representatives, and the various house of assembly members. They accommodated them, that they can vote and be voted for at this same conventions. So what is good for the goose is not good for the gander after all.
So you want to sit down as a Senator and go and contest, House of Reps, you sit down there and go and contest, House of Assembly, you sit down there and go and contest but you say a minister cannot also go and contest.
Laws must be made to apply to all persons and class evenly on a level playing ground. Once the law is discriminatory, then such a law is bad, bad, and bad.
That is what the Court of Appeal did, and that is why I am happy that I have once again been vindicated on my analysis because I don’t mix my analysis of law with emotions.
He also reiterated that the defection of a governor is not unconstitutional.
Ozekhome also urged the National Assembly to amend and give more clarity to the provisions of the Constitution that are unacceptable, ambiguous and against the will of the people so as to avoid misinterpretation by the judiciary.
2022-05-16 @ 17:27
Tags: Mike Ozekhome President Muhammadu Buhari
