An advocacy group under the aegis of Kingdom Human Rights Foundation International, on Thursday, went before the Federal High Court in Abuja to challenge decision of the All Progressives Congress, APC, to zone the leadership of the National Assembly in a manner that would exclude the South East region of the country.
In an originating summons marked as FHC/ABJ/CS/477/2019, the group, alongside a member of the APC, Hon. Kenneth Uzochukwu who was cited as the 2nd Plaintiff, posed three legal questions for the determination of the court, even as they equally sought for six declarations.
Cited as Defendants in the matter were the APC, the National Assembly and the Federal Character Commission.
Specifically, the Plaintiffs, through their lawyer, Mr. Okere Nnamdi, are praying the court to determine; “Whether the 1st Defendant (APC), can ignore the express provisions of Section 224 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in zoning/determining which of the six geo-political zones in Nigeria (recognized in the Federal Character Establishment Act) produces the presiding and principal officers of the 9th National Assembly comprising of the House of Representatives and the Senate.
“Whether the decision of the 1st defendant to zone/cede the office of the Senate President to the North East, Deputy Senate President to South-South; and Speaker of the House of Representatives to the South west and Deputy Speaker to North Central and thereby totally excluding/obliterating/annihilating the South east geo-political zone in the political arithmetic of Nigeria, particularly in the 9th National Assembly breaches the express provisions, spirit and tenor of sections 14 (3) and (4) and 244 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended); AND complies with the Federal Character principle of Nigeria”.
” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />
As well as, “Whether in view of the combined reading of Section 1 (3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and Article 2 of the Constitution of the All Progressives Congress 2014 (as amended), the National Executive Committee or the National Working Committee of the 1st Defendant can take any decision to zone principal and presiding officers of the National Assembly of Nigeria in a manner that offends the express provisions, sprit and tenor of sections 14 (3) and (4) and 224 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended); by subjecting the Igbos of South-east Nigeria to discrimination, marginalization, humiliation, domination, suppression, hatred and inequality in Nigeria”.
Upon determination of the questions, the Plaintiffs, prayed the court to declare that, “The 1st Defendant cannot for any reason whatsoever ignore the express provisions of Section 224 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in zoning/determining which of the six geo-political zones in Nigeria (recognized in the Federal Character Establishment Act) produces the Presiding and Principal Officers of the 9th National Assembly comprising of the House of Representatives and the Senate.
“A declaration of the honourable court that the decision of the 1st defendant to zone/cede the office of the Senate President to the North East, Deputy Senate President to South-South; and Speaker of the House of Representatives to the South west and Deputy Speaker to North Central and thereby totally excluding/obliterating/annihilating the South east geo-political zone in the political arithmetic of Nigeria breaches the express provisions, spirit and tenor of sections 14 (3) and (4) and 244 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended); AND offends the Federal Character Principle of Nigeria.
“A declaration of the honourable court that the National Executive Committee or the National Working Committee of the 1st Defendant cannot take any decision to zone or cede principal and presiding officers of the National Assembly of Nigeria in a manner that offends the express provisions, sprit and tenor of sections 14 (3) and (4) and 224 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended); in view of the combined reading of section 1 (3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and Article 2 of the Constitution of the All Progressives Congress 2014 (as amended).
“An order of the Court directing/compelling the 1st Defendant to review/reverse its unconstitutional, unjust, discriminatory and clannish decision to zone/cede the presiding/principal officers of the National Assembly in a manner that offends the Federal Character of Nigeria, provided for in section 14 (3) and (4) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
“An order directing and compelling the 1st Defendant to observe the Federal Character Principle of Nigeria in every of its decision(s) and program(s) in line with the express/mandatory provisions of section 224 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Likewise, “An Order of court compelling/mandating the Federal Character Commission of Nigeria to carry out its constitutional/statutory responsibility of working out equitable formula for the distribution of all cadres of posts in Public Service of the Federation, particularly the present composition of the government of the Federation; to wit: (a) President Muhammadu Buhari (President) North. (b) Prof. Yemi Oshibanjo (Vice President) South-west (c) Justice Tanko Muhammed (Chief Justice of Nigeria) North; in such a way that the Heads/Presiding Officers of the National Assembly must balance the equation among the six geo-political zones recognized by Law”.
Vanguard
Comments are closed.