The Guardian
Email YouTube Facebook Instagram Twitter WhatsApp

Supreme Court stops N’ Assembly over constitution’s amendments


nigerian constitutionTHE Supreme Court yesterday barred the National Assembly from taking any step to pass into law the Fourth Alteration Act which seeks to further amend the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended.

When the suit filed by the Federal Government seeking to stop the lawmakers from overriding President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan’s veto came up, the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Mahmud Mohammed who presided, warned ‎all the parties against taking any action that will affect the subject matter of the suit.

Consequently, the apex court adjourned hearing in the suit to June 18, 2015 when a new government would have been enthroned and the present life of the legislative house would have expired.

By the order, the whole amendment exercise, which has cost so much in terms of financial and human resources, has been consigned to the legislature’s waste bin. Worried that the National Assembly may proceed with passage of their amendments, the Attorney General of the Federation applied for an order of interlocutory injunction restraining the lawmakers from taking any further step towards passing the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (Fourth Alteration) Act, 2015 into law pending the final determination of the suit earlier filed before the court.

In an application filed by counsel to the AGF, Chief Bayo Ojo (SAN) under Order 3 Rule 14 of the Supreme Court Rules as amended, the AGF predicated the application on several grounds, including that the National Assembly was determined to proceed with passing the constitution amendment by overriding the veto of same despite the fundamental nature of the issues raised against it.

When the case came up before the court, the CJN sought clarification on whether the suit was properly instituted, saying that the President should have filed the suit by himself and not through the AGF. According to him, since the dispute is not between the Federal Government and the federating units, the proper person to file the suit should be the President.

But Ojo insisted that the suit was properly instituted. The justices of the court also sought to know whether it was right not to make State Houses of Assembly parties since they participated in the process that resulted in the amendments.

The court therefore adjourned the suit to June 18 for Ojo to address the court on whether the case was properly constituted. Prior to the adjournment, however, the CJN said: “Parties should not do anything that will affect the subject matter of the suit.”

In the application for injunction,‎ the AGF said it was more in the interest of the Nigerian polity that the issues in the substantive suit be resolved one way or the other before the National Assembly can proceed further on the proposed alterations to the constitution.

The AGF said: ‎”Hon. Samson Osagie, Minority Whip of the House of Representatives said to the whole world at a press conference purposely called on the issue of this suit , that despite any case filed against the said Act (which actually is a Bill), the National Assembly would go ahead to pass it into law.”

The AGF said the balance of convenience tilts in favour of resolution of the suit before any further step could be taken on the Bill. A lawyer in the chambers of Chief Bayo Ojo, Theophilus Okwute, in an affidavit attached to the application said he was aware of a press conference held by the defendant and said: ‎”That I listened to Hon. Samson Osagie, the Minority Whip of the House of Representatives on the NTA 9 O’clock News on 24/04/2015 when he said that the National Assembly would go ahead to pass the (Fourth Alteration) Act (Bill) 2015 into law despite any Court action because no order had been made against the National Assembly to restrain it from doing so.

“That by that very disposition of the said Hon. Samson Osagie who spoke to the press as a principal officer of the defendant/respondent, it is clear that the defendant/respondent is determined to proceed to pass the Fourth Alteration Act (sic) into Law despite the pendency of the substantive suit herein.

“That fundamental questions were raised by the plaintiff/applicant on the proposed alterations to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria through the Fourth Alteration Act, 2015 which is in issue in this suit.

“That it will be in the larger interest of Nigeria that those issues be resolved before the defendant/respondent takes any further step in giving effect to the proposed alterations to the Constitution.

“That with the utterances of Hon. Samson Osagie at the press conference earlier alluded to in this affidavit, it is clear that the defendant is determined to ignore the proceeding before this honourable court on the proposed alteration and proceed to give effect to the alterations to the Constitution.”

‘‘That the defendant/respondent will not lose anything or suffer any prejudice if this application is granted. ‘‘That the balance of convenience tilts in favour of granting this application.

‘‘That the whole Nigerian legal system shall be put into confusion if the defendant/respondent proceeds to give effect to the Fourth Alteration Act (Bill) 2015 and this suit succeeds such that the Constitution remain unaltered, meaning that the Act is void and of no effect.

‘‘That the Constitution is the basic law of Nigeria and should only be amended following due process. ‘‘That it will be in the interest of justice to grant this application.”

The Federal Government had taken the National Assembly to the Supreme Court asking the court to declare the amendments to the constitution proposed by the lawmakers as unconstitutional.

Receive News Alerts on Whatsapp: +2348136370421

1 Comment
  • “argumentum ad consequentiam” and the Supreme Court has actually stood up its’ ‘argument from adverse consequences’ correctly considering the whole Nigeria citizens.