Thursday, 28th March 2024
To guardian.ng
Search
News  

Assembly, group disagree over petition against Aregbesola

By Tunji Omofoye, Osogbo
20 August 2015   |   2:16 am
The Osun House of Assembly has said that it was untrue that it received any petition prior to the one sent by a serving judge in the state, Justice Folahanmi Oloyede against Governor Rauf Aregbesola for alleged financial mismanagement.
Aregbesola1

Aregbesola

The Osun House of Assembly has said that it was untrue that it received any petition prior to the one sent by a serving judge in the state, Justice Folahanmi Oloyede against Governor Rauf Aregbesola for alleged financial mismanagement.

Speaker of the Assembly, Honourable Najeem Salaam made the statement at the plenary yesterday in response to the claim made recently by the Publicity Director of the Civil Coalition for Emancipation of Osun State (CSCEO), Mr Seun Adeoye on Channels Television’s Sunrise Daily that its group had sent a petition to the House earlier and was not treated.

The CSCEO has however accused the state assemblymen of being economical with the truth over their denial that no petition against the state governor, Mr. Rauf Aregbesola apart from the one sent by Justice Folaranmi Oloyede was before them.
The group claimed that another petition jointly presented by three different organisations and calling for the impeachment of Aregbesola and his deputy, Mrs Grace Titilayo Laoye-Tomori was received by the State House of Assembly on June 25, 2015.

It would be recalled that Justice Oloyede sent a petition to the Assembly calling for the impeachment of the governor and his deputy, Mrs Titilayo Laoye-Tomori.

Salaam said, there was no record showing that any petition was sent before Oloyede’s own, saying, some other petitions came in form of letters only after the one sent by the judge.

He said: “It is unfortunate that some people are fond of name calling, as they claimed that some other petitions have been sent to the House before the one sent by Justice Oloyede.

“It is a blatant lie that any petition had been sent earlier. We have the record of what we are doing in the house. The first petition we received on this issue was the one sent by the judge

“Though, all others have been following, but their prayers are almost the same, must we continue to treat petitions alone when we have several other things to do, especially when the contents of those petitions are the same?

“For that reason I want to implore the people to be careful and say things the way they are, rather than scoring cheap political points”.

According to him, the petition has been treated with fairness, in line with the mandate given to the state legislature.

0 Comments