Ajulo, Aborisade back executive order 10, urge sanctions for violators

Constitutional lawyer, Dr. Kayode Ajulo, has commended President Muhammadu Buhari for signing Executive Order 10, which grants financial autonomy to states legislature and judiciary.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Ajulo made the call in Abuja yesterday, insisting that the President’s decision to sign the order was “a step in the right direction.”

President Buhari had signed the executive order granting financial autonomy to states legislature and judiciary on Friday, May 22, 2020.

The Executive Order No. 10 of 2020 made it mandatory for states of the federation to grant financial autonomy to the Legislature and the judiciary in their appropriation laws.

The order has generated mixed reactions across the country with some groups commending the President for bringing the intention of the drafters of the constitution to bear, while others have opposed it.

But Ajulo argued that section 5 (1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) had confirmed that the executive powers of the President shall extend to execution and maintenance of its provisions.

Meanwhile, Human rights lawyer, Femi Aborisade, has said violation of section 315(2) of the constitution, which necessitated the President’s signing of the Executive Order to enhance section 121(3), should attract impeachment of the President and governors.

Aborisade told The Guardian in Ibadan that punishing them with impeachment would discourage willful violation of the constitution.

His words: “By virtue of section 315(2) of the 199 Constitution (as amended) by the 4th Alteration Act granting financial autonomy to state legislature, the Executive Order will further enhance observation of section 121(3) of the constitution to the effect that allocations to state legislature are paid directly to the heads of that arm of government.”

“I, however, think non-observance of the provisions of the constitution by the governors or the President should be punished by impeaching them, apart from criminalising violations of the provisions to discourage habitual violation of such provisions by the executive arm of government.