Sola
A human rights group, the Civil Rights Realisation and Advancement Network (CRRAN), has criticised the deployment of troops in Kano State by the National Security Adviser (NSA) following the Emirship tussle, calling it unconstitutional.
The group stated that the deployment of troops in any operation, even by the president, is subject to the provisions of section 217 of the Nigerian Constitution, adding that the court had affirmed this several times.
Military troops on Saturday took over strategic locations in Kano following the reinstatement of Sanusi Lamido as Emir and the deposition of Aminu Bayero by the state government.
The troops were reportedly enforcing a court order restraining Sanusi’s reinstatement.
Reacting to the development, CRRAN, in a statement by its President, Olu Omotayo, described the situation in the state as “unfortunate.”
However, the group stressed that the deployment further demonstrates the rising misuse of troops by the federal government to achieve unconstitutional means.
CRRAN said: ” The Federalism we operate in this country had its roots in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999(as amended). A careful look at the Constitution will show that there is nowhere in the Constitution where chieftaincy matters are placed on either the exclusive or concurrent legislative powers of the federal government.
“It should be noted that the office of National Security Adviser (NSA) is not a creation of law but a political office of an aide to the president. So the deployment of troops by the NSA at the instigation of the Chairman of the ruling party APC Alhaji Ganduje, is an assault on the Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria.
“The Courts in several decisions have stated clearly the procedure for deployment of troops by the President who has the sole authority to deploy troops in accordance to the provisions of the constitution.
“The deployment of the military in any operation, even by the President, is subject to the provisions of Section 217, of the Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria, and the Court has affirmed this position of the law.”Omotayo cited the case of the Minister of Defence vs. Ochikiri & Ors 2020 to support his position, stressing that the court was clear on when and how troops could be deployed in a civil matter.
“The issue in Kano is neither an emergency nor insurrection to warrant the deployment of the military through the President and the National Assembly.
For whatever reason or motive the invasion of Kano State over chieftaincy matters under the authorisation of the President will be unconstitutional, assault on the Rule of Law and the people of Kano State.
“It would be recalled that when President Tinubu was governor of Lagos and challenged the Federal government at the Supreme Court, in the case: ATT GEN OF LAGOS STATE V. ATT GEN OF FEDERATION (2004) LPELR-10(SC) (Pp. 44-46 paras. D), the Supreme Court while admonishing President Obasanjo, stated thus: “It has been argued that the President by virtue of the “Oath of Office,” which he took in assumption of office, is bound “to protect and defend the Constitution”.
” In addition, the “executive powers of the Federation”, is vested in the President by Section 5 Subsection (1) (a) of the Constitution and such powers extend to the execution and maintenance of the Constitution. This is certainly so, but the question is does such power extend to the President committing an illegality? Per UWAIS , C.J.N. So we commit this judgement of the Supreme Court to the president and urge him not to pursue the route of illegality”, it said
CRRAN added: ” Furthermore there is procedure laid down by the law to enforce disobedience to court order. There is a return date on the court order, so the procedure is to report the issue of disobedience back to the court which issued the order.
“The order given by Justice Liman shows how the judiciary in the country has allowed itself to be ridiculed by politicians.
“We submit without equivocation that the Federal High Court lacks both party jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction to entertain issue of chieftaincy matter under the Kano state Emirate Council Law. More disturbing is the fact that the said restraining order granted by the Federal High Court was grated vide the Exparte”.
