More than four months after it reared its head, there is no end in sight to the crisis rocking the Kogi State House of Assembly. Moves by stakeholders and the National Assembly to resolve the impasse have proved abortive. JAMES AZANIA revisits the protracted crisis and its implications for the state.

THE unfolding development in the Kogi State House of Assembly is becoming intriguing by the day. Five out of the 20 members of the House had purportedly impeached the Speaker, Momohjimoh Lawal, and installed Imam Umar in his place. Thus, the G-5, as the group is called, may have ambushed the task of lawmaking in the Confluence State; the Umar-led faction has purportedly passed the 2016 Appropriation Bill. Ordinarily, the Kogi State House of Assembly has 25 members, but as at the time Lawal was purportedly impeached, it had 20 members, owing to the sacking of five lawmakers by the court.

While the G-5 faction has continued to manouvre its way, by convening sittings in defiance of the order by the National Assembly for the sealing of the House of Assembly complex, no one is in doubt that things have gone awry with the legislative arm. This is in spite of the fact that the G-15 faction, led by the embattled Speaker Lawal, appears to have evaporated from the scene.

The House of Representatives, after it sent a 10-man investigative panel chaired by the Deputy Whip, Hon. Pally Iriase, to the state, pronounced the action of the G-5 illegal and resolved to take over legislative functions in line with the law. Against this background, it asked the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Solomon Arase, to seal the complex. The Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, had also voiced his opinion on the matter, by questioning the propriety of the NASS order.

Malami’s intervention opened another vista in the imbroglio. The Attorney-General called on the IGP to unseal the House of Assembly complex, following the initial, albeit belated shutting of the complex on the directive of the NASS.

Malami, in a legal opinion addressed to Arase, said mere legislative misunderstanding between the legislators is not the major crisis envisaged by the constitution to justify the action taken by the National Assembly. He said all legal avenues must be exhausted in an issue involving impeachment, adding that the National Assembly is to act in advisory capacity in the matter since the issue does not directly affect the security of the state and does not amount to a state of emergency.

The Attorney General in a response, following a request for legal advice by the IGP in a letter: No 3383/IGP.SEC/ABJ/VOL.40/779, dated March 18, 2016 averred that the situation in the state did not warrant the order for the sealing of the assembly complex.He stated that after careful reading of the situation envisaged under Section 11(4), which can give rise to a “take-over”, the decision by the National Assembly reveals that it must be by “reason of the situation prevailing in the state”.

Section 11(4) invoked by the House of Reps, states inter alia: “At any time when any House of Assembly of a state is unable to perform its functions by reason of the situation prevailing in the state, the National Assembly may make such laws for the peace, order and good government of that state with respect to matters on which a House of Assembly may make laws as may appear to the National Assembly to be necessary or expedient until such time as the House of Assembly is able to resume its functions; and any such laws enacted by the National Assembly pursuant to this section shall have effect as if they were laws enacted by the House of Assembly of the state.”

The federal lawmakers had explained while giving the order for the sealing of the complex: “In view of the fact that the Constitution clearly required National Assembly to do the taking over, this resolution of the House was not respected by the factions, which still sat, especially the G-5, which claimed it is in court.”

But, the Attorney-General differed, arguing: “The conditions must go beyond the situation prevailing within the House of Assembly itself. The Constitution, in my opinion, presumes that the general security situation in the state should have deteriorated to the extent that the House of Assembly finds it difficult or impossible to operate or exercise its normal legislative activities. Section 11(4) is therefore, not meant to address mere issues of disagreement between legislators within the State House of Assembly, since it is recognised that such disagreements or disputes are normal incidences within the democratic governance space. The 1999 Constitution therefore never presumed that every disagreement within a state legislature would be visited with the sanction of National Assembly legislative oversight.

“It is instructive to note that section 11(4) is part of the General Section 11 of the Constitution which is titled, ‘Public Order and Public Security’. It must therefore be read within such a context and not merely in relation to the situation within the House of Assembly.”

Malami: “In view of the foregoing, the next question would be: Was there a security situation in Kogi State at the time in question which made it impossible for the State House of Assembly to exercise its legislative functions? From information available to me, it would appear that the answer to the question is no, as there was no such alarm raised by the relevant security agencies or by the Federal Government itself?

‘’Without prejudice to the above issues, it is further necessary to interrogate the legal status of a resolution of a house of the National Assembly. It is a notorious fact that parliamentary resolutions are merely persuasive and not binding in law… it lacks legal efficacy and cannot become the basis to compel executive action such as the present directive to the Nigeria Police Force to seal off the (Kogi) House of Assembly.

“A close reading of Section 11(4) further suggests that if the National Assembly is expected to ‘make laws’ for the peace, order and good government of a state in crisis, it cannot make such laws on the basis of a resolution”.

He said the view of the National Assembly that the alleged impeachment of the Speaker of the House of Assembly by ‘five members of the house’ was ‘null and void’ was like usurping the function of the judiciary.

He said: “In view of the foregoing, I am of the considered opinion that sufficient legal basis has not been established for the consequent directive to the Inspector-General of Police by the House of Representatives to “seal the Kogi State House of Assembly complex until the matter is resolved.”

While the Attorney General’s submission will either anger or elate the Kogi assembly members, depending on what side of the divide they belong, the twists have continued to elicit response from observers and residents of the state.

The House of Representatives had, on February 23, passed a resolution describing the action of the five legislators of the state assembly as “unconstitutional, null and void”.

The Inspector General of Police appeared not in a hurry to obey the directive of the House of Representatives, but the Senate added its voice, the police complied and sealed the Kogi assembly complex on March 30. It was subsequently reopened, on the strength of Malami’s legal opinion.

Speaking when he appeared before the lawmakers, Arase appeared tempered in his role of approbating and reprobating on the Kogi assembly matter. Residents of the state who are directly affected by the assembly impasse have been quite unequivocal on the issue and have continued to make their position known.

For instance, Idris Miliki Abdul, the Executive Director, Centre for Human Rights and Conflict Resolution (CHRCR), Lokoja, is in support of the National Assembly’s directive for the sealing of the assembly. He said: “I support 100 per cent the taking over of the Kogi State House of Assembly. Reason is the fact that what took place on the February 16 where five members broke into the assembly, deprived the media who are the mirror of the society from observing the proceedings and procedure and came out to proclaim that Speaker Lawal had been impeached and that they have now elected Hon. Umar Imam as the new speaker. As at that time we had 20 members; and for you to be able to form a quorum to either impeach or elect principal officers you need two-third of the entire members of the assembly.

“So, the fact that five persons do not amount to two-thirds makes the exercise null and void and therefore has no legal effect. The state assembly is a creation of the law and is expected to make laws for the citizens of the state and therefore cannot be seen to be violating the provisions of the Constitution and the laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

“On the legal opinion sought for by the Inspector General of Police, it was not even necessary in the first instance, as the National Assembly is a creation of the law and has followed all the due process to come up with the position. Remember the same National Assembly (House of Representatives) relied on the petition by the G-15 in the Kogi State House of Assembly. There was a petition and the petition was discussed at the House of Representatives and a committee was set up to visit the state for fact finding. Unfortunately, the same group of five under the leadership of illegal speaker refused to meet or appear before the fact finding committee of the House of Representatives under the guise that they were before the court of law. Apart from the fact there is no court of law that can stop the National Assembly or the House of Assembly from performing its statutory function in respect to a petition or complain by Nigerians, therefore the non appearance of members of the G-5, to state their own side of the story made them liable to disobedience of constituted authority, in this case, the National Assembly.

“Furthermore, on March 17, the Senate considered the resolution of the House of Representatives and concurred, which was well publicised and communicated to the Inspector General of Police, so on what basis does he need legal opinion of the AG from carrying out the instruction, directive of the National Assembly? I’m the Attorney General/Minister of Justice, on what basis in the point of law will he tell us that the action taken by the House of five members on February 16, purportedly to have impeached the speaker. We therefore ask, is the advice of the Minister of Justice political or legal? The Attorney General/Minister of Justice cannot be seen to perpetrating illegality.

“And, what is the definition of crisis? When we have five against 15, with the protection of the Kogi State executive arm, playing the role of a shadow party in the conflict the Kogi assembly in collaboration with the Nigeria Police, by giving protection to members in their illegal activities? We therefore submit or conclude that all the activities taken absolutely by the five members since February 16 till date is null and void and cannot stand and therefore call on the relevant stakeholders to see to the amicable resolution of the crisis in the Kogi State House of Assembly as soon as possible”.

A social commentator and an APC member from Yagba West, Mr. Dele Babalola, states that shutting the Kogi State House of Assembly complex will not do the state any good. His words: “The way I see it, shutting the House Assembly will be antithetical to this and not augur well for the development of the state.

“The situation here does not call for the shutting of the House of Assembly, because there is no crisis in Kogi State. The Assembly is in session and this has further been reiterated by the intervention of the Attorney General and Minister for Justice, who rightly advised that the order be vacated. What we are witnessing here is the result of undue interference by outside forces in the smooth running of the legislative arm in Kogi State.”

Source: Nation.

"Exciting news! TheNigeriaLawyer is now on WhatsApp Channels 🚀 Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest legal insights!" Click here! ....................................................................................................................... Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material and other digital content on this website, in whole or in part, without express and written permission from TheNigeriaLawyer, is strictly prohibited _________________________________________________________________ [Register Now] ILA Nigeria Branch Marks 10 Years With Infrastructure Financing As Theme For 7th Annual Conference The International Law Association - Nigeria Branch 7th annual conference on public-private partnerships for sustainable infrastructure financing, April 4-5 in Abuja. Details: https://ilanigeria.org.ng/conference _________________________________________________________________

NIALS' Compendia Series: Your One-Stop Solution For Navigating Nigerian Laws (2004-2023)

Email: info@nials.edu.ng, tugomak@yahoo.co.uk, Contact: For Inquiry and information, kindly contact, NIALS Director of Marketing: +2348074128732, +2348100363602.