(OPINION) Sit-tight defecting lawmakers By Ochereome Nnanna OUR democracy is being threatened by blatant refusal of the 37 defecting members of the House of Representatives to obey the rulings of a court of competent jurisdiction. On Monday, March 31, 2014, an Abuja High Court presided over by Justice Adeniyi Ademola, ruled that the members of the House of Representatives elected on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, who announced their defection to the opposition All Progressives Congress, APC, should resign and stop participating in the business of the House. Justice Ademola hinged his decision on Section 68-1(g) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, which states as follows: “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:…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; provided that his membership of the latter political party is not as a result of division in the political party of which he was previously a member…”. Justice Adeniyi, in his judgement, merely repeated an earlier verdict of another Abuja High Court Judge, Elvis Chukwu on October 18, 2013, declaring that, as there was no division in the PDP, the intending defectors must be ready to vacate their seats, as doing so is mandatory under the Constitution. But the defecting Reps had tried to evade the consequences of their free choice by going to court to obtain injunctions to prevent the declaration of their seats vacant until this substantive case has been disposed of. Following the verdict of Justice Ademola, the APC caucus in the House of Reps came out of a crisis meeting and made the shocking declaration that they would not obey the court’s decision. They were swiftly backed by the National Secretariat of the APC, with the Interim National Publicity Secretary of the Party, Lai Mohammed, asking the Chief Justice of Nigeria to sanction Justice Ademola for “bringing the Bench into disrepute”. The defection of the 37 former PDP House members to the APC was not the first time it would be happening under this renascent democracy. In fact, there are also cases of members of the APC crossing over to the PDP without giving up their seats as the constitution demands. Many commentators supporting the actions of the defectors from all sides are quick to point out that the PDP has been a beneficiary of many defections from the opposition parties since 1999, wondering why they are now crying wolf and seeking a constitutional pound of flesh because they are now at the receiving end of the stick. That is neither here nor there. The question before us is this: What should a member of the Senate or House of Representatives elected on a party platform do if he decides to cross over to another party when his tenure has not ended and there is no division in the party on which he was elected? What is the position of the law that guides the practice of our democracy? The only realm of our Republic’s estate (Judiciary) that is empowered to provide answers to these questions has spoken. Both Justices Chukwu and Ademola have affirmed, in separate judgements, that there is no division in the PDP. People say it is obvious there is a division in the ruling party. What is obvious to the naked eye has been proved otherwise in the eyes of the law. Till date, the declared position of the law is that there is no division in the PDP, and therefore any defection based on a purported division in the party is an adventure in which the legislators involved risk losing their seats in accordance with Section 68 1(g) of the Constitution. We must begin to understand the constitutional system we are operating. It is a system that gives a commanding role to the political parties. Even though the political parties have not been able to stamp their authorities on members, especially those elected on their platforms, the truth is that no president, governor or legislator can become one unless a political party gives him the ticket to vie. The importance of the political parties in the political fortunes of its elected members were not known until the shocking Supreme Court verdict in 2007, which declared that the electorate vote for political parties, not individual candidates. It was that logic that necessitated the transfer of the mandate the people gave to Sir Celestine Omehia to Chibuike Amaechi to become the Governor of Rivers State. The argument was that since it was Amaechi that won the governorship primaries or obtained the ticket of the PDP, Omehia who never contested in the primaries was not the candidate for the PDP. It is the logo of the party that we see when we go to vote for candidates, and since we cannot contest elections without being sponsored by political parties, it is illogical, nonsensical and fraudulent for a person who got elected to any office to abandon the political party that sponsored him and move over to another party and yet keep his seat. That is not the constitutional injunction. Section 68-1(g) is crystal clear and unambiguous. It is an act of gross political betrayal and prostitution for people to cross carpet and keep their seats under this constitution, and such transgressors must be punished by their seats being taken away from them if they fail to resign honourably. If we continue to allow this it will fuel political instability and encourage politicians to obtain their mandates from their people through false pretences, an electoral deceit. Anyone who truly desires to move to another political platform is free to do so. But he must resign and obey the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Those who refuse to obey the law should be left in the hands of law enforcement agencies to do their jobs and protect the sanctity of the law and courts of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Posted on: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 06:23:44 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015