LEADING lawyer, Mr Femi Falana, on Thursday, doubled down on his claim that former president, Dr Goodluck Jonathan, is constitutionally-barred from running for the office again.
This time, he went both jurisprudential and constitutional to prove his point. As vice president, Jonathan succeeded his late boss, President Umaru Yar’Adua, in 2010 and won the 2011 presidential election to extend his stay in office to five years.
He lost in his bid to further extend his presidential stay in 2015 to incumbent President Muhammadu Buhari.
Being widely thought to be interested in staging a comeback, another term of four years will take his tally to nine.
Falana, in his conviction rooted in jurisprudence and the constitution, said the former president cannot seek office again.
In an op-ed he mailed to Nigerian Tribune, Falana argued that the Supreme Court had ruled that the amendment barring a situation like that of Jonathan can apply in retrospective.
He alluded to the apex court’s pronouncement on similar amendment to draw his conclusion. It stands that the particular provision, Section 137(3) is yet to be directly tested in court.
The provision reads, “A person who was sworn in to complete the term for which another person was elected as president shall not be elected to such office for more than a single term.”
The amendment, among others, was signed into law by President Buhari. Jonathan, being the only living ex-president to have enjoyed the succession-by-default arrangement, is widely perceived as the target of the amendment, carried out by the governing All Progressives Congress (APC) dominant majority in the parliament.
ALSO READ FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE
Curiously, Jonathan is now being worked into the 2023 equation on the platform of the governing party which sacked him and his party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), from office.
In the op-ed, titled, ‘Why President Jonathan cannot run’, Falana said, “It has been confirmed that former President Goodluck Jonathan has decided to join the All Progressives Congress for the purpose of contesting the 2023 presidential election.
“However, the former president is disqualified from contesting the election by virtue of Section 137(3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended, which provides as follows: ‘A person who was sworn in to complete the term for which another person was elected as president shall not be elected to such office for more than a single term.’
“Some people have said that the amendment is not retrospective and therefore cannot apply to Dr Jonathan.
With respect, it is a misleading interpretation of the amendment in question. Toyin v. Musa (2019) 9 NWLR (Pt.1676) 22 at 43 – 44 and Toyin v. PDP (2019) 9 NWLR (pt.1676) 50 at 64 – 65, the Supreme Court held that the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (Fourth Alteration, No. 21) Act, 2017 which amended section 285 on pre-election matters was retrospective and not prospective.
“Consequently, the apex court dismissed the appeals, even though the pre-election case was filed in 2015 while the amendment took effect in March 2017.”
The rights lawyer also sought another angle to the debate, to completely close the case against the former president. Beyond the amendment, he pointed at the settled issue of tenure of office, going back again to the apex court as his supporting authority.
Alluding to the famous case of former Oyo State governor, Rashidi Ladoja, Falana explained, “Even if the amendment is said not to be retrospective, it is submitted that under the current constitution, a president or governor cannot spend more that two terms of eight years.
“In other words, the constitution will not allow anyone to be in office for more than a cumulative period of eight years. In Marwa v. Nyako (2012) 6 NWLR (Pt.1296) 199 at 387, the Supreme Court stated that Section 180(1) and (2)(a) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria has prescribed a single term of four years and if a second term, another period of four years and not a day longer.
“In the case of Gov. Ladoja v INEC (2008)40 WRN 1 the Supreme Court rejected the prayer of Governor Ladoja for 11 months’ extension to cover the period he was kept out of office through illegal impeachment.
“The Supreme Court rejected the prayer on the ground that a governor is entitled to spend a maximum period of eight years or less and not more than eight years. “It is not in dispute that Dr Jonathan became the president of Nigeria in 2010, following the sudden death of President Umaru Yar’Adua.
He later contested and won the 2011 presidential election. “Having spent five years in office as president, Dr Jonathan is disqualified from contesting the 2023 presidential election.
“The reason is that if he wins the election, he will spend an additional term of four years. It means that he would spend a cumulative period of nine years as president of Nigeria, in utter breach of Section 137 of the Constitution which provides for a maximum two terms of eight years
and then