IG IS RIGHT ON TAMBUWAL! I was happy with the outcome of the invitation of the House of Representatives to the speaker, Hon Aminu Tambuwal to the Inspector General of Police, Suleiman Abba who reportedly refused to recognise Tambuwal as Speaker. The tragic-comedy that took place at the National Assembly last week when the Police attempted to stop some lawmakers from entering the National Assembly. I was there at the Force Headquarters where Governor Rotimi Amaechi was threatening that his party would take law into its hands should PDP rig the next year election. They abused and poured invectives on the police leadership during the APC protest in Abuja last week. Not only that, the party had issued statements where the Police IG was condemned in strong terms for withdrawing the security details of the speaker without allowing the court to decide that. Now, with all these as backgrounds, the House constituted a kangarooic panel to investigate the jumping-of-the-fence-if-the-gate-is-closed drama. Ordinarily, the lawmakers ought to have known that they cannot be the prosecutor, the judge and the victim in their own case But that is where people are sincere in their responsibilities to the society. The IGP refuses to recognise Tambuwal as the speaker and the lawmakers walked out on him. The IG had earlier asked one of his officers to stand in for him, the panel said no, he must come and he went and they walked out on him. I support the position of the IG, in the eye of the law, Tambuwal has not only ceased being a speaker but he is no longer a member of the House! Read Section 68 (1) of the 1999 constitution: 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... The only proviso is given could not be used by Tambuwal because he should have defected when the former PDP were defecting. Please read the proviso that could have make him retain his membership: ...Provided that his membership of the latter political party is not as a result of a division in the political party of which he was previously a member or of a merger of two or more political parties or factions by one of which he was previously sponsored. The APC argues that it is only the court that could determine the speakership of Tambuwal and that the constitution is silence over which party produces the speaker but the constitution speaks loud and clear how a member could forfeit his seat. If the IG Police stands on what the Constitution says, the onus lies with him to challenge the police action in the court. But whenever you hear the beer parlour analysts talking you wonder if you are addressing the same issue. They said the constitution is silence on which party produces the speaker but where the constitution speaks on how to lose the membership of the House, they ignore it. But the jaundiced analysts would say since the governor of Ondo state, Segun Mimiko did not resign from office when he defected Tambuwal stays, is that what the constitution says? Yet they claimed they are different, is there any difference here?
Posted on: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 13:37:55 +0000