₦airaland Forum

Cantonese:
OP, as it stands, it is a constitutional matter. The issue is in court, with PDP insisting that the 27 seats have become vacant by reason of the decamping. Once again, note that the agreement was not in anyway binding on any of the parties.

By the constitution, it remains incontrovertible that the 27 resigned. Ehie acting in his then position as the speaker recognized by a court order. All actions taken by Ehie in his then capacity as the speaker, therefore, are termed legal.

Petacephas:
You sef, try to learn naa, in the event of a crisis like this in any state house of assembly, it is the house of representatives that takes over the affair as in the constitution not senate

Cantonese:
Certainly 4 is not greater than 27. But you must now ask where the 27 stand. Are they now recognised by the constitution as lawmakers? They know the law. Lawmakers make laws and they should abide by the same laws. Decamping instantly removes them from the house, except in the grounds of division in their party. Is there any division in PDP Rivers State? No is the answer. There is also no division at the national level.

Rivers State faces s constitutional problem. What's on ground is greater than Tinubu's advice. The 27 have not reverted to PDP and now PDP is in court trying to ensure that they never return.

Certainly the 27 have their right to justice where possible. However the law is the law. They are gone. In this case, who is greater. The existing 4 or the none existing 27?

Jackiedemie:
The office of the National secretary of the pdp is in court and they deflected members cited that. You telling me there is no division in the party is like you're being economical with the fact cos all the correspondences are been handled by the party secretary. Legally, the division in the office of the National secretary is a good excuse for them to decamp.

MrProlific95:
Fubara will be disgraced.

Politicians are just greedy hypocrites.

When you make a deal with the devil you must honor it else, be ready for the consequences.

As at when the going was sweet between SIM and Wike, When he was being used to loot Rivers so much so that EFCC desperately wanted to arrest him where was this his Holiness that he has suddenly discovered that he is now shouting I will work for Rivers people which we all know is a facade.

If the allegations are true that Wike rigged Rivers election then who did he use?

Or you think while Wike was rigging for Tinubu SIM was not working for the same purpose.


All politicians (Tinubu, Wike & Fubara, Abaribe etc name them) are all selfish people

Nigeria has some of the most heartless politicians on the Earth

Pierohandsome:
you don't have sense. You think Wike has the support of all federal government architecture? So you don't know that Akpabio, Amaechi , Fayemi etc have already strategized in caging Wike's influence in APC? So if you are Akpabio, you will allow Wike to grow influence in Apc so he can come hijack the leadership of APC in South South which Akpabio is the current leader of South South APC.

Politics is not for kids like you. You don't have Sense, pack well

Cantonese:
Nooo bros, it is not.

Background:

It is important to stress how the Constitution views candidates nominated on a political platform and those elected to office. The power to sponsor candidates in an election is the sole preserve of a political party and the power cannot be challenged by the Independent National Electoral Commission. However, this power must be exercised under laid down rules and regulations considering the amendment to the Electoral Act and recent judicial decisions. Therefore, the votes gotten by any candidate in an election are those of the sponsor, which is the political party.

The Implication

The Nigerian constitution is clear on what to follow when members of the State House of Assembly defect to another political party. The Constitution in section 68(1) states that “a member of the Senate or the House of Representatives shall vacate his seat in the House of which he is a member if – (g) Being a person whose election to the House was sponsored by a political party, he becomes a member of another political party before the expiration of the period for which that House was elected; Provided that his membership of the latter political party is not as a result of a division in the political party of which he was previously a member or of a merger of two or more political parties or factions by one of which he was previously sponsored.”

The question to ask then is whether the PDP in Rivers state or at the National Level has been factionalized or what indeed constitutes a division in a political party. Worth mentioning, however, is that the PDP in a statement signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Hon Debo Ologunagba, demanded that “the Speaker of the Rivers State House Assembly immediately comply with the provision of the Constitution by declaring the seats of the 27 former lawmakers vacant.”

What constitutes division in a political party?

In the case of Sunday Ifedayo Abegunde v Ondo State House of Assembly & Ors, the Court of Appeal in its ruling stated that “the person defecting to another party must prove that the party he is leaving has been divided into two or more. That is to say, the party must be so polarized as to have two chairmen, two or three different Boards of Trustees each claiming to be the authentic one and each still bearing the same party name. That is the type of extreme division envisaged by the Constitution. The defector would also be covered by the proviso where the party has split into two whereby one of the factions is bearing another name and he chose to join the faction of the party with the new name.”

To avoid any ambiguity, the Appeal Court also held that “A community reading of sections 221, 222, 229 of the Constitution as well as section 80 of the Electoral Act, clearly shows that the division envisaged by section 68(1)(g) of the Constitution refers to division in the party at the top or centre not division at the State or Local Government level. Since a political party is recognized as one corporate entity, the division must affect the entire structure of the political party at the centre, i.e., the national leadership of the party. A political party has to be looked at as a whole and not piecemeal.”

Considering the tendencies, and even excesses of Nigeria politicians, where members seeking to defect from a party could themselves instigate a division, the Supreme Court held in FEDECO v Goni that the act leading to the defection must not have been caused by the defecting legislator.

Way forward

The 27 lawmakers in Rivers State cannot benefit from an act of illegality. Being lawmakers themselves, they must hold themselves to a higher standard and tow the path of honour: to vacate office and seek re-election.

Indispensable85:
Must you display your ignorance? It's honourable to keep quiet in matters you have no knowledge of.

MrProlific95:
Fubara will be disgraced.

Politicians are just greedy hypocrites.

When you make a deal with the devil you must honor it else, be ready for the consequences.

As at when the going was sweet between SIM and Wike, When he was being used to loot Rivers so much so that EFCC desperately wanted to arrest him where was this his Holiness that he has suddenly discovered that he is now shouting I will work for Rivers people which we all know is a facade.

If the allegations are true that Wike rigged Rivers election then who did he use?

Or you think while Wike was rigging for Tinubu SIM was not working for the same purpose.


All politicians (Tinubu, Wike & Fubara, Abaribe etc name them) are all selfish people

Nigeria has some of the most heartless politicians on the Earth

Okoroawusa:
This write up didn't really explain anything. I thought it will be either a revelation of an information the writer discovered or an indepth analysis of the current situation.

Tranquill:
But you should know that Ehie already started parading himself and acting as the speaker even before the 27 members decamped to APC. The question is, on what legal grounds? is 4 greater than 27?

Also, the 27 members cited the crisis in the PDP surrounding the position of the party’s national secretary as their reason for dumping the party, and this is a valid reason in the eyes of the law that would not attract any penalty like vacating one’s seat.

They only need to prove that there was unresolved problem in the PDP before they decided to decamp to the APC.

It’s a straightforward case.

Pierohandsome:
You know nothing. Akpabio has been penciled as the next Senate president even before the election. Rest. Wike has no input.

Even if he does, he will now allow Wike to grow influence to overthrow him. You need sense

IfnobeGod20:
You people will just make uncoordinated reference. I expected you to have quoted that section of the law that they leverage on to have made them defected.
My brother, for a defection to be legal or sustained, there must be division in the party to the extend that such division must have paralysed the activities of the party but an absence of the post of secretary doesn't render the party activities paralysed. Till date the party is still functioning and sponsoring members for elections at different levels.
A division must have caused splitting of the party into different units and rendered them inactive to do what they are created to do but nothing like that in the party.

Read below the decision of the supreme court and stop confusing yourself and the public:

"The full bench[3] of the Supreme Court after a careful consideration of Section 68(1)(g) and Chaper VI, Part III(D)[4] of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), Section 80 of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) whose lead opinion was read by M D Muhammad JSC held that the division in a branch of a political party cannot justify a member of that branch who is a member of the House of Representative to keep occupying his seat if he defects to another political party. In the words[5] of M D Muhammad JSC after a review of the previous decisions of the Court on the same point[6], “The principles enunciated by this Court in the two cases, FEDECO v. Goni (supra) and AG Federation v. Abubakar (supra), is to the effect that only such factionalisation, fragmentation, splintering or ‘division’ that makes it impossible or impracticable for a political party to function as such will, by virtue of the proviso to Section 68(1)(g), justify a person’s defection to another party and the retention of his seat for the unexpired term in the house inspite of his defection. Otherwise, as rightly held by the courts below, the defector automatically loses his seat. In the instant case, the two courts are right that the Labour Party that has continued to function as a political party by meeting the conditions of associations by virtue of Sections 221 and 222 of the Constitution must necessarily meet, cannot be said to have been so factionalised, fragmented, split or divided to justify the defection of the appellant to another party and retention of his seat inspite of the defection. This remains the position of this Court on the issue.” The concurring opinion of Galadima JSC is quite poignant. The Law Lord observed that[7]: “Quite rightly, Section 222(a), (f) and (e) of the 1999 Constitution made no reference to the ‘ward’, ‘local government’, or ’state structure’. However, a calm reading of Section 68(1)(g) of the Constitution will show that no reference is made by the framers of the Constitution to ‘a state branch’, ward level or ‘unit level’ of a Political Party, when the framers of the Constitution repeatedly referred to ‘Political Party’ in that Section. If the framers of the Constitution had really intended that a ‘division’ within a ‘State branch’, ‘ward level’, ‘unit level’ of a Political Party, as suggested by the learned silk, (they) would have so expressly stated. Therefore contrary to the argument of the appellant at paragraph 29 of his brief, Section 222 (a), (e) and (f) which referred respectively to ‘National Officers’, ‘geographical area’ and ‘headquarters in the Federal Capital Territory’, is to support the argument that a national outlook of a Political Party is intended by the framers of the 1999 Constitution in construing Section 68(1)(g)…. “(1) Firstly, can a disagreement in a branch of a company be classified as a division in that company when the board of directors of the Company is still intact? (2) Secondly, can the local branch of a Company be wound up or merged with another Company?” He rightly answers the two questions in the negative. This analogical deduction settles the contest between the parties, effulgently and effectually too; for the nature of the division envisaged in the Section 68(1)(g) must be one that affects the total structure of a Political Party.”

The link follows:

https://aolulaw17.medium.com/a-review-of-abegunde-v-4d442d1bef1a

Indispensable85:
Where all these dunce from dey come out sef? Lol 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 mugus too many here aswear 🤣🤣🤣🤣

If you're not truly brain dead, you would've known that Amaechi has no recognition or relevance in this government. Fayemi is of no relevance in this government too. He couldn't even influence ministerial nominee from his Ekiti State neither was he picked eventhough he wanted to be in the cabinet.

Akpabio is wike's right hand man. Somebody that helped Wike to amend the NDDC act in 24hrs to allow Boma, wike's man from Rivers State to be appointed as director of finance in NDDC. U be big MUGU!

If you look at the resolution by the president, you'll know that the presidency is fully behind Wike and the APC lawmakers in Rivers State.


Infact for mentioning Amaechi in this conversation at all, you're a big mu....mu. Lol 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Jackiedemie:
I think it left for the court to decide whether the division in office of the national secretary can be term to be the division in the party or not.

Cantonese:
Ohhhh. Which kind boy you be o. Are you from Panya?

The disagreement between the parties regarding the office of the national secretary is not a division in the party oo. By the way, is there any division in the state? Oya answer that small quechion.

Cantonese:
Ohhhh. Which kind boy you be o. Are you from Panya?

The disagreement between the parties regarding the office of the national secretary is not a division in the party oo. By the way, is there any division in the state? Oya answer that small quechion.

MrProlific95:
Fubara will be disgraced.

Politicians are just greedy hypocrites.

When you make a deal with the devil you must honor it else, be ready for the consequences.

As at when the going was sweet between SIM and Wike, When he was being used to loot Rivers so much so that EFCC desperately wanted to arrest him where was this his Holiness that he has suddenly discovered that he is now shouting I will work for Rivers people which we all know is a facade.

If the allegations are true that Wike rigged Rivers election then who did he use?

Or you think while Wike was rigging for Tinubu SIM was not working for the same purpose.


All politicians (Tinubu, Wike & Fubara, Abaribe, Obi, Atiku etc name them) are all selfish people

Nigeria has some of the most heartless politicians on the Earth

Cantonese:
OP, as it stands, it is a constitutional matter. The issue is in court, with PDP insisting that the 27 seats have become vacant by reason of the decamping. Once again, note that the agreement was not in anyway binding on any of the parties.

By the constitution, it remains incontrovertible that the 27 resigned. Ehie acting in his then position as the speaker recognized by a court order. All actions taken by Ehie in his then capacity as the speaker, therefore, are termed legal.

BALLOSKI:
Ehie was also suspended by the 25 members before they decamped. So, technically, he couldn't have acted in the capacity he acted.