There are strong indications that the House of Representatives may seek judicial interpretation of the ruling delivered by the Federal High Court on the deletion of the controversial Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act signed into law by President Muhammadu Buhari.
Chairman, House Committee on Media and Public Affairs, Hon Benjamin Kalu, who conveyed the House position on the ruling denied knowledge of the National Assembly being a party in the suit.
While giving insight to the rationale behind the introduction of the new provision, he argued that the provisions of the 1999 Consideration (as amended) was misconstrued as it clearly stipulates who is public servants, not political appointees.
Hon Kalu said: “The judgement of the Federal High Court has raised a couple of issues. Let me say that the House of Representatives is not aware of this legal matter and is still not aware whether we were necessary party to this matter or not.
“It is important to note that it is out of place to comment on a judgement we are yet to see the certified true copy. So, we will make comment on this judgement once we receive the certified true copy of the judgement to know the length and breadth of the judgement.
“We have read from the media that the judgement bothers on Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act amendment bill which Mr President signed into law recently and for which Mr President has communicated the National Assembly, i.e the Senate and the House of Representatives.
“As you are aware, the Senate has treated the (President’s) letter by voting on a motion moved on it while the House of Representatives is still waiting for legal opinion from the legal department that is currently looking at the issues raised by Mr President in that letter before debating it. That was before we heard of this letter.
“When we get the CTC, we will like to know who represented us, who served us and all those technicalities.
“It is important to let Nigerians know the mindset of the Legislature, the intention of the Legislature while drafting section 84(12) bothers on our intention to have an excellent Electoral reform.
ALSO READ FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE
- After 36 Years On The Queue, 79-Yr-Old Balogun Becomes 42nd Olubadan
- ASUU Strike May End This Week —FG
“As you know, for Electoral reform to be effective, it has to be transparent, it has to be accountable, it has to be inclusive as possible, it has to be competitive as possible and it has to be fair for it to be credible.
“If any of these elements is missing at any point, it include pre-election processes, election processes and post-election processes. If any of these ingredients is missing at any point towards achieving a credible election, it will affect the whole picture.
“That’s why we wanted to address the conduct of appointed officers who are appointees of political office holders, who are used as tools during Conventions and Congresses and being part of the body that determines who becomes a Candidate in the general election or who will not be a candidate on the general election.
“It is important that how that process is conducted is considered to enable us to have a credible process that will be above board.
“We wanted to give a level playing ground for those who have been in government and are not supposed to use the undue advantage of being in government while running for office, especially in political party administration; so that they will be at par with those who are not occupying any office so that they will be at par to run for office.
“It has nothing to do with public servants. I say this because I heard that many have argued that it offends the provisions of the Constitution with regards to Section 66, and a couple of other provisions that bother on how to be qualified or to be disqualified for an election especially the Section that talk about 30 days withdrawal before the election. That is for public servants.
“We are talking about political appointees. Section 318 define who a Public Servant is and that does not include political appointees.
“The ability to distinguish between these two will help us understand what the Electoral Act is trying to do as against what is being roped in as trying to do at the moment and that it is offensive to the Constitution.
“When we get that judgement, we will know whether that differentiation was clear or was not clear. Who is the public servant that is referred to in the various provisions that were relied on in taking this decision. Who are the political appointees that are referred to?
“The Electoral Act addressed Political Appointees, while the Constitution addresses public servants.
“We have to get the judgement to know if this was clearly demarcated or not. That will help us understand the position from where the judgement was given and the next step to take,” the House Spokesman stressed.
How Workplace Sexual Harassment Forces Many Out Of Their Dream Jobs
Why Reps may seek judicial interpretation of Umuahia judgement ― Kalu
Marburg Virus: What You Need To Know About Disease Recently Detected In West Africa
Why Reps may seek judicial interpretation of Umuahia judgement ― Kalu
Why Reps may seek judicial interpretation of Umuahia judgement ― Kalu
and then