Falana, Tinubu, Clark
By Victory Oghene
Human Rights lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana SAN and elderstatesman, Chief Edwin Clark have carpeted President Bola Tinubu over attrmpt to reinstate 27 Pro Wike lawmakers who defected to the All Progressives Congress (APC).
Falana described President Bola Tinubu’s intervention in the political crisis in Rivers State as only advisory.
In a statement on Tuesday, Falana said he agreed with former Lagos Governor, Tunde Fashola (SAN), who said that President Tinubu has no constitutional role to resolve the political crisis in Ondo and Rivers states.
NATIONAL WAVES had reported that both Rivers State Governor, Siminalayi Fubara and Federal Capital Territory Minister, Nyesom Wike signed a eight-point resolution from the closed-door meeting with President Tinubu at the Presidential Villa.
Recall that Wike, has been at loggerheads with Fubara, his godson over alleged disloyalty.
Part of the resolution reads: “All matters in court to be withdrawn immediately. Also, all impeachment proceedings initiated against the governor by the state House of Assembly should be dropped immediately.”
The resolution was signed by Fubara, Wike; National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu; Speaker, Rivers State Assembly, Martin Amaewhule; PDP Chairman, Rivers State, Aaron Chukwuemeka and APC Chairman, Rivers State, Tony Okocha.
The resolution added, “The leadership of the Rivers State House of Assembly as led by the Rt. Hon. Martin Amaewhule shall be recognised alongside the 27 members who resigned from the PDP.
“The remunerations and benefits of all members of the Rivers State House of Assembly and their staff must be reinstated immediately and the Governor of Rivers State shall henceforth not interfere with the full funding of the Rivers State House of Assembly.”
While reacting to Tinubu’s intervention, Falana said, “Whilst the President of the Republic may intervene in the crises rocking the states, his intervention must always be grounded in the provisions of the Constitution.
“I agree with former Governor Tunde Fashola SAN, who has said that President Tinubu has no constitutional role to resolve the political crisis in Ondo and Rivers States. Therefore, the intervention of the President in both cases is purely advisory.
“With respect, the presidential reinstatement of the 27 cross-carpeting members of the Rivers State House of Assembly by the Presidency is alien to the Constitution in every material particular. The seats of the cross-carpeting members have been declared vacant by the Speaker known to law.
“To that extent, the Independent National Electoral Commission is mandatorily required to conduct the by-election once the ex parte order issued by the Federal High Court last Friday is quashed.
“In the case of Abegunde v Labour Party (2015) LPELR 24588 (SC) the Supreme held that a legislator who abandoned the political party that sponsored him and decamped to another political party has automatically lost seat in the Parliament.
“However, the cross carpeting legislator can only retain his seat if he can prove that the political party that sponsored him is divided into two or more factions. The 27 members of the Rivers State House of Assembly who decamped from the PDP to APC have lost their seats because the PDP that sponsored them is not factionalised or divided as stipulated by the Constitution.”
Falana further said the actions taken by the state House of Assembly led by the Speaker recognized by law was valid and would remain so.
He said, “Even if all the cases in the Rivers State High Court and the Federal High Court are withdrawn in line with the advice of the President, it is submitted that all actions taken by the Speaker recognised by the Rivers State High Court, remain valid, including his pronouncement on the vacant seats of the 27 cross-carpeting members of the House.
“In other words, only a court of law is constitutionally competent to set aside the pronouncement of the Speaker which is anchored on section 109 of the Constitution. Furthermore, as the Speaker has not been removed by the required number of legislators, a presidential directive cannot remove him.
“It is also necessary to point out that until a by-election is conducted by the Independent National Electoral Commission to fill the 27 vacant seats, the remaining members of the House are competent to conduct legislative business except the impeachment of the Governor which can only be carried out by the two thirds of the entire members of the House of Assembly.
‘In Diapolong v Joshua Dariye (2007) 27 WRN 1, (the Supreme Court per Tobi JSC) held: ‘It is my view that until the vacancies created by the carpet crossing members are filled by the process of by-election, the Plateau State House of Assembly can only transact such legislative duties that require the participation of less than 2/3 majority of ALL the members of that House, which duties definitely excludes impeachment proceedings.’
“In view of the foregoing, the President and all the parties involved in finding political solutions to the crisis in Rivers State are advised to turn to the Constitution for guidance without any further delay.”
In a related development, Clark condemned the agreement to reinstate the 27 lawmakers who defected to the APC.
At a press briefing in Abuja on Tuesday, Clark condemned the agreement, describing it as appalling and unacceptable to the people.
The elder statesman also alleged that Fubara had been “ambushed and intimidated” into signing the agreement, adding that Tinubu’s intervention was a desecration of the constitution.
“It is obvious that Governor Siminialayi Fubara was ambushed and intimidated into submission. President Tinubu should know that with all the powers he possesses, he cannot override the Constitution.
“From all that transpired at the meeting, the laws of the land have not been obeyed. President Tinubu simply sat over a meeting where the constitution, which is the fulcrum of his office as President and which he swore to uphold and abide by, was truncated and desecrated.
“The eight resolutions reached, are the most unconstitutional, absurd, and obnoxious resolutions at settling feuding parties that I have ever witnessed in my life. As a matter of fact, some media captured it very well when they described it as directives,” he said.
Clark also alleged that the resolutions showed that Tinubu was trying to compensate Wike for winning the presidential election in Rivers for the APC, adding that people “will resist such draconian, arbitrary and unconstitutional action by Mr President and his customer, Nyesom Wike”.
“We will go to court to challenge this so-called one-sided and oppressive action of Mr. President”, he added.
