Federal high court sitting in Umuahia the Abia State capital has declared section 84 (12) of the amended Electoral Act 2022 a nullity, directs Attorney general of the Federation to delete the section.

The Federal High Court sitting in Umuahia, Abia State has ordered the Attorney General of the Federation to immediately delete Section 84 (12) of the Amended New Electoral Act.

While signing the Electoral Bill into law last month, President Buhari had asked the National Assembly to delete section 84 (12), which restricts sitting cabinet members from contesting for elective offices without resigning.

The section says: “No political appointee at any level shall be voting delegate or be voted for at the Convention or Congress of any political party for the purpose of the nomination of candidates for any election”.

President Buhari argued that “Section 84 (12) constitutes a disenfranchisement of serving political office holders from voting or being voted for at conventions or congresses of any political party, for the purpose of the nomination of candidates for any election in cases where it holds earlier than 30 days to the national election”.

However, the Senate refused to consider the president’s request and threw out the bill seeking the amendment of the section, with lawmakers stressing that an amendment of Section 84 (12) would be going against the civil service norms and would be injurious to the well-being of the society.

On Wednesday, the AGF said following the Senate’s refusal, the Federal Government will consider all options available to it before a position will be taken.

Malami further explained that even though it is the responsibility of the lawmakers to legislate, if it becomes necessary, the government will exploit other options which will include either putting forward another request to the parliament for reconsideration, approaching the court, or accepting the law just as it is.

The Federal High Court sitting in Umuahia has today struck down Section 84(12) of the newly amended Electoral Act which President Muhammadu Buhari had written to the National Assembly to delete.

The court in a judgment delivered by Justice Evelyn Anyadike held that the section was unconstitutional, invalid, illegal, null, void and of no effect whatsoever and ought to be struck down as it cannot stand when it is in violation of the clear provisions of the Constitution.

It would be recalled that President Muhammadu Buhari had while signing the amended Electoral Act urged the National Assembly to delete the provision as it violated Constitution and breached the rights of government appointees. The President further wrote a letter to both Chambers of the National Assembly seeking amendment by way of deleting the provision an amendment the Senate rejected in plenary.

Justice Anyadike in the Suit marked FHC/UM/CS/26/2022 held that Sections 66(1)(f), 107(1)(f), 137(1)(f) and 182(1)(f) of the 1999 Constitution already stipulated that appointees of government seeking to contest elections were only to resign at least 30 days to the date of the election and that any other law that mandated such appointees to resign or leave office at any time before that was unconstitutional, invalid, illegal null and void to the extent of its inconsistency to the clear provisions of the Constitution.

Counsel to the Plaintiff Emeka Ozoani, SAN while addressing newsmen stated that by this judgment, the National Assembly is not required to further make any amendments to the section as the import of this judgment is that Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act is no longer in existence or part of the Electoral Act. The Judge thereafter ordered the Attorney General of the Federation to forthwith delete the said Subsection 12 of Section 84 from the body of the Electoral Act, 2022

vicdom:
CC: Ferg.ie001

vicdom:
CC: Fergie001
I was arguing with some neophytes earlier that the section 84 (12) of the new electoral act violated our constitution, positing that any court can easily throw it out.

fergie001:

You remember I said it....The judgement is in order.

famology:



What happened to the other restraining order from the fhc Abuja?

famology:


What now happens to the order of the fhc Abuja?

vicdom:

Already vacated... The convention would go on as planned.

fergie001:

That order is between the National Assembly and the Presidency.

The FHC Abuja only said the President is not compelled to mandate them to delete that Section, however, the National Assembly went ahead with it.

The cases are different.....

vicdom:

Already vacated... The convention would go on as planned.

fergie001:

That order is between the National Assembly and the Presidency.

The FHC Abuja only said the President is not compelled to mandate them to delete that Section, however, the National Assembly went ahead with it.

The cases are different.....

Parachoko:
But, the law was so clear, if you want to contest, resign.

slimghost:
Invalid. The court can’t direct the National Assembly on how to legislate as long as the constitution is not breeched.

The judiciary is a huge problem in Nigeria.

Maxymilliano:
The section can only be removed by an act of parliamentary amendments and not by judicial pronouncement

vicdom:
CC: Fergie001
I was arguing with some neophytes earlier that the section 84 (12) of the new electoral act violated our constitution, positing that any court can easily throw it out.

Racoon:
Hope the AGF is not up to something fishy again?

Nigerialabalaba:

hahaha....what another federal high court will uphold wen anoda person approaches another fhc . u no sabi dis tins abeg.

LasgidyPort:


A judicial pronouncement can render a law null and void.

History is replete with such.