Court orders National Assembly to begin impeachment of Buhari

A Federal High Court sitting in Osogbo, Osun State, yesterday ordered the National Assembly to immediately commence the impeachment of President Muhammadu Buhari.

Justice Maurine Adaobi Onyetenu gave the order following a suit filed by two Nigerians, Kanmi Ajibola, a lawyer, and a human rights activist, Sulaiman Adeniyi, urging the court to compel the National Assembly to impeach Buhari.

The applicants had three months ago written to both the Senate and the House of Representatives on the need to impeach Buhari, citing alleged constitutional breaches by the president, and threatened to approach the court if they failed to act accordingly.

But when the lawmakers refused to yield to the request, Ajibola and Adeniyi filed a suit at the Federal High Court, Osogbo seeking an order of mandamus to compel both the Senate and the House of Representatives against President Buhari.

In the suit filed on Tuesday, June 19, 2018, they hinged their arguments on four grounds.

In the motion ex-parte, the duo claimed that in flagrant violation of the 1999 Constitution, Buhari contested election, won and was sworn in as the president on the 29th day of May 2015 without possessing the basic constitutional requirement, which would have made him qualified for the election.

They further alleged that the 4th respondent, who is President Buhari, in flagrant violation of section 137 (1) (j) of the 1999 Constitution, presented a forged certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) for the purpose of the 2015 presidential election that brought him to the office of the president.

“In the light of the 4th respondent’s placement to continue in the office as the president, he has no certificate and basic requirement upon which this placement to continue in the office can be placed.”

Besides, they accused the president of treating the orders of the court with disdain and abusing the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria at will, particularly from the angle of the observance of the federal character as contained in section 14 of the constitution.

“The 4th respondent on the 29th day of May 2015, took an oath of office, among others, to the effect that, he would rule in accordance to and protect the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, particularly section 14 (2) (b) which stipulates that the security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government.

“In the contrary, the 4th respondent has proved to be unable to guarantee the security of lives and property of the citizens of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in fulfillment of his oath of office. The herdsmen killings of the innocent citizens under the 4th respondent have been uncountable, unbearable and unprecedented overheating figures in the globe.

“The 4th respondent in contravention of the due process and sections 80 and 81 of the 1999 Constitution spent about $496 million on the purchase of Tucano Jets without the approval of the National Assembly of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as required by the law.

“The 4th Respondent ordered to be withdrawn, money from the public fund of the Federation without the approval of the National Assembly or the authorisation of its act and same used for the purchase of Tucano Jets.

“The 4th respondent has committed several impeachable offences, that is, gross misconduct.

“By the provision of section 143 of the 1999 Constitution, the 1st to 3rd respondents (Senate President, Speaker of the House of Representatives and the National Assembly) have the statutory duty to impeach the 4th respondent as the president and Commander in-Chief of Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on gross misconduct.

“The 1st to 3rd respondents have closed their eyes to the gross misconduct of the 4th respondent.”

The applicants told the court that they had the right and duty to compel the first and third respondents to perform their statutory duty of impeachment against the fourth respondent having breached the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Citing several constitutional authorities in the written address in support of the motion ex-parte and with 44-paragraph affidavits, Ajibola and Adeniyi raised some posers by putting Nigeria side by side with some developed nations.

“Can the conduct of the 4th respondent, particularly on the presentation of a forged certificate, be condoned in America or great Britain unchecked?

“Can the 4th respondent continue to benefits from his act of forgery and infraction of constitution?

“Definitely, an American president cannot be genuinely accused of presentation of a forged certificate and still be allowed to continue as the president, likewise the prime minister of the Great Britain,” they noted.

After moving the application, Ajibola prayed the court that with the available documents before it, the judge should order the National Assembly to perform its constitutional duties without fear or favour.

Delivering her ruling, Justice Onyetenu granted the application and ordered “that the National Assembly being the 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents commence the impeachment of Muhammadu Buhari.”

The court adjourned further hearing of the matter to October 30.