Monday, July 31, was a very interesting day to many political observers and generality of Nigerians. It came with rare political activities that amazed almost everyone. Three major events of the same colouration happened and it kept almost every tongue wagging. Impeachment processes came, so to speak, in “torrent” as though it was fast going out of fashion.
The first to come was from Kano where the Speaker of the State House of Assembly, Abdullahi Ata, was removed from office. And what was his offence? He refused to carry other members along in running the affairs of the legislative house.
His removal was not sudden. The issue had remained pending for about two months. The idea was broached at the initial stage, but following the intervention, according to information, by the governor of the state, Abdullahi Umar Ganduje, it was halted.
For whatever reason, the legislators got spurred again and without much ado, yanked him off the seat and installed Al Hassan Rurum as the new Speaker. The removal came on a day the legislators resumed from a two months recess.
A similar move was reported from the North Central part of the country. In Benue State, specifically, eight of the 30 legislators in the state converged and issued an impeachment notice to Governor Samuel Ortom.
The move, however, backfired as the 22 other legislators eventually suspended the “rebels” clothed in the garbs of legislators.
Lest the northern politicians in the northern part of the country think they had the monopoly of the political shenanigan disguised as impeachment process, those in Imo State House of Assembly, swung into action. 19 of the 37 members of the Imo State House of Assembly fired the state’s Deputy Governor, Eze Madumere. He was said to have been guilty of gross misconduct, but those who know better said it was not unconnected with the deputy governor’s opposition to the plan by Governor Rochas Okorocha to “impose” his son in law as the next governor of the state.
Except, perhaps, the impeachment of Ata in Kano State, the other two exercises have been arguably considered to be aberrations, especially in view of the fact that they allegedly contradicted the Constitution of the country.
Reason, therefore, that the sacking of Ortom by eight out of 30 legislators would not hold. Reason too that a High Court in Owerri, Imo State, stopped the swearing in of Callistus Ekenze, whom Okorocha chose to replace Madumere, and approved by the House of Assembly.
The condemnation that followed the impeachment exercises spoke volumes about their inappropriateness. More than anything, they showed that they were more of political abracadabra than any other thing. Politically discerning individuals saw through their actions and blamed government and powerful forces for the developments.
For instance, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, stressed that the plot to impeach Ortom with the assistance of the police was a recipe for anarchy.
Obviously enraged by the development, he said any attempt to disregard the rule of law and the Constitution in the impeachment of a governor amounted to officially sanctioned lawlessness.
An experienced lawmaker and former Senate President, Senator David Mark, speaking in the same vein declared that the plot by just eight out of 30 legislators to impeach Ortom “was at best an exercise in futility.”
“I will advice members of the Benue State House of Assembly to be guided by the Constitution and legislative rules and procedures. They should not engage in any act that could undermine the established tenet of democracy.
“The action of some members of Benue State House of Assembly violates section 188 (2) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) which requires that a Notice of Impeachment has to be supported by at least one third of the members of the House to be valid. This is obviously not the case here.
“What is expected of the lawmakers is a collaborative effort with executive arm of state government to provide the needed dividend of democracy to the people of Benue.”
In a joint statement on the same issue by Senate President, Bukola Saraki, and Speaker, House of Representatives, Yakubu Dogara, the impeachment process in the Benue State House of Assembly was also described as an illegality.
“We believe this unlawful and unconstitutional move to impeach Governor Samuel Ortom by a minority should be condemned by all lovers of democracy, at home and abroad. We call on President Muhammadu Buhari to call the police to order and prevent a break-down of law and order,” the federal legislators said.
From all indications, almost everyone is picking holes in the actions of the Benue eight legislators on the ground of its illegality. But what does the constitution say on the removal of a governor or his deputy? Section 188 (2) of the 1999 Constitution states the steps to take, and a violation of the steps renders the action a nullity.
The section reads: Removal of Governor or Deputy Governor from office
(1) The Governor or Deputy Governor of a state may be removed from office in accordance with the provisions of this section.
(2) Whenever a notice of any allegation in writing signed by not less than one-third of the members of the House of Assembly.
(b) stating that the holder of such office is guilty of gross misconduct in the performance of the functions of his office, detailed particulars of which shall be specified. The speaker of the House of Assembly shall, within seven days of the receipt of the notice, cause a copy of the notice to be served on the holder of the office and on each member of the House of Assembly, and shall also cause any statement made in reply to the allegation by the holder of the office, to be served on each member of the House of Assembly.
(3) Within fourteen days of the presentation of the notice to the speaker of the House of Assembly (whether or not any statement was made by the holder of the office in reply to the allegation contained in the notice-, the House of Assembly shall resolve by motion, without any debate whether or not the allegation shall be investigated.
(4) A motion of the House of Assembly that the allegation be investigated shall not be declared as having been passed unless it is supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds majority of all the members of the House of Assembly.
(5) Within seven days of the passing of a motion under the foregoing provisions of this section, the Chief judge of the State shall at the request of the Speaker of the House of Assembly, appoint a Panel of seven persons who in his opinion are of unquestionable integrity, not being members of any public service, legislative house or political party, to investigate the allegation as provided in this section.
(6) The holder of an office whose conduct is being investigated under this section shall have the right to defend himself in person or be represented before the panel by a legal practitioner of his own choice.
(7) A Panel appointed under this section shall
(a) have such powers and exercise its functions in accordance with such procedure as may be prescribed by the House of Assembly; and
(b) within three months of its appointment, report its findings to the House of Assembly.
(8) Where the Panel reports to the House of Assembly that the allegation has not been proved, no further proceedings shall be taken in respect of the matter.
(9) Where the report of the Panel is that the allegation against the holder of the office has been proved, then within fourteen days of the receipt of the report, the house of Assembly shall consider the report, and if by a resolution of the House of Assembly supported by not less than two-thirds majority of all its members, the report of the Panel is adopted, then the holder of the office shall stand removed from office as from the date of the adoption of the report.
(10) No proceedings or determination of the Panel or of the House of Assembly or any matter relating to such proceedings or determination shall be entertained or questioned in any court.
(11) In this section – “gross misconduct” means a grave violation or breach of the provisions of this Constitution or a misconduct of such nature as amounts in the opinion in the House of Assembly to gross misconduct.
However, strange as the action of the legislators may be, particularly in the Benue case, there are cases in the past where the Constitution was violated with impunity. One major case is the one that saw former Governor Joshua Dariye sacked from office in 2006 over alleged financial scam. Shielded by security agents provided by the Federal Government, a five-man House of Assembly body received the report against Dariye and executed the impeachment.
Ayodele Fayose of Ekiti State and his Deputy, Mrs. Biodun Olujimi, were also sacked in 2006 by members of the State House of Assembly. Led by the Speaker, Mr. Friday Aderemi, the legislators left Ado Ekiti to a neighbouring town and under the protection of security agents provided by the Federal Government, carried out the impeachment of the state governor.
The snag they had against Fayose at the time was that he helped himself illegally with money belonging to the state, especially with regards to the Ekiti State Poultry Project handled by his childhood friend and contractor, Gbenga James.
James became a witness against Fayose in the probe.
Having learnt some lessons from the past cases obviously, Ortom proved smarter as the move against him was upturned.
He also went the whole hug and secured an order of a court to restrain the lawmakers from removing him from office.
According to Justice Theresa Igoche of the Makurdi High Court on Wednesday the legislators could not impeach Ortom based on the resolution of the sitting of the legislators on Monday whereby an impeachment notice was issued to the governor.
READ ALSO: Impeachment plot against Ortom, a nullity – Senator Mark
Although Nigerians may be shocked by the impeachment galore on Monday, political pundits know that such moves are not uncommon at this time of the year when elections are just a few months to come.
With the calculations and realignment of forces ahead of the 2019 election, there is no distance the typical politician will not go to ensure that they retain power and even spread their tentacles further.
In fact, no one should be shocked if anytime from now, some legislators at the National Assembly serve President Muhammadu Buhari an impeachment notice. It will also be in line with activities to expect at a time like this when the general election is just some months away.