A press release by a Committee of Benin Elders, published in the Vanguard Newspaper of August 13,2019, page 24 and the legal opinion of Hon. Justice S O Uwaifo, a retired Supreme Court Justice published in the Punch newspaper of August 13,2019,page 34,justifying the controversial inauguration of the 7th Edo State House of Assembly require the interrogation of the fundamental issues raised therein as they affect democracy in Edo State in particular and Nigeria in general.
There is no doubt that the names listed as the authors of the press release in support of the questionable inauguration of Edo State House of Assembly-Chief( Prof) E.U. Emovon, Hon(Justice) S. O. Uwaifo, Princess(Prof) Mrs.A. Emovon,Hon(Justice) I. O.Aluyi, Hon(Justice) J.O.Olubor, Prof.D.E. Agbonlahor, Emeritus Prof.R.O.Elaho, Emeritus Prof.A.A.E.Orhue, Prof.U.Edebiri, Brig-Gen(Dr) D.O.Ikponmwen, Maj-Gen S.E.Asemota and Maj-Gen C.O. Omoregie are eminently qualified Benin Elders.
What is curious however, and the reason for the interrogation of their support for the controversial inauguration of the Edo State House of Assembly is the complete absence of any moral and legal foundation for their arguments and conclusions whatsoever.
In the press release under reference they stated as follows-
(1) The inauguration of Edo State House of Assembly was a Constitutional issue that should not be politicized.
(2)That the Governor of Edo State made a Proclamation by a letter to the Clerk of Edo State House of Assembly on the 17th of “July”(sic),2019, and that was what the Governor was expected to do.
(3)The Clerk of the House who has responsibility to inaugurate the house did so that same day with the members elect present.
(4) From what is known, the State Party Caucus had in mind those to hold certain official positions in order to have a political balancing among the Senatorial Districts in the State.
(5) Those who disagreed with the party’s stand decided to stay away from the inauguration despite the telephone calls by the Clerk of the House to the members-elect.
(6) There is no Constitutional requirement that there should be a full House for inauguration to take effect, what is required is a quorum and in the case of Edo State House of Assembly ,1/3, that is 8 out of 24 was required for inauguration.
(7) That the business of Edo State House had fully commenced in the interest of Edo State.
The claim by the Elders that the inauguration of Edo State House Assembly is a Constitutional issue that should not be politicised is absolutely correct. Sadly, in a desperate search for reasons to support what is wrong , the Elders contradicted themselves by saying that the Party Caucus had in mind those to hold certain official positions in the House, and those who disagreed decided to stay away from the inauguration. The question to ask is – is the inauguration of the House of Assembly a business of the Constitution or an activity of a political party? Are these official positions of the House appointees of the political party or elective offices to be carried out by only the elected members of the House? If they are appointees of the political party, why should members stay away from the inauguration of the House after the appointments have been made by the political party? If the official positions of the House are elective, why should the majority,(15) members-elect stay away from inauguration and allow (9) to elect the presiding Officers of the house? Their reasoning in this regard is ludicrous to say the least. It will be interesting for these Elders to tell Nigerians whether the inauguration of the House of Assembly is only about certain officers of the House or a Constitutional requirement for the enthronement of the Legislative Arm of Government.
It is highly embarrassing for some eminent Benin Elders to be presenting to the public the position of the Political Party Caucus on the inauguration of the House when at the same time they claim not to be members of All Progressives Congress, (APC). Are they the Publicity Committee of the Edo APC set up by Anselm Ojezua?The attempt to defend the position of the Clerk of the House on the invitation of the Members-Elect through telephone calls for inauguration and decision for majority of the members-elect to stay away because of the decision of the party caucus on the official positions of the House is most ridiculous because no rational person in Edo State was aware of the Proclamation of Edo State House of Assembly before the late night inauguration on the 17th of June,2019. Shockingly, these Elders cannot claim not to know that that event was conducted at night. And they cannot swear by whatever deity they believe in. What kind of society are we where elders turns truth on its head?
Surprisingly, there is no space in the press release where the elders mentioned that they ever invited the majority elected members excluded from the inauguration for any interview or discussions. How can a retired Supreme Court Justice and other eminent Jurists among the Committee of Elders condescend so low to rush into a judgement in a conflict involving two parties without hearing from the other side? Where is the place of the doctrine of audi alteram partem( hear the other side) which is a fundamental pillar of justice and the rule of law they dispensed in their years at the bench of superior courts of records in this country?
It is highly doubtful whether these Elders are aware of the date and time of the inauguration of the 7th session of Edo State House of Assembly . Their press release stated that the Governor made a Proclamation letter on the 17th of July,2019 to the Clerk and the inauguration was done that same day by the Clerk of the House. The controversial inauguration of Edo State House of Assembly was held in the late night of 17th June, 2019, and not the 17th July,2019 as claimed in their hurried attempt to defend a patently wrong act. And how can these elders defend the moral and legal propriety of inauguration of the House by the Clerk on the same day the Proclamation was issued by the Governor?Is the element of the Proclamation of a State House of Assembly a secret correspondence between the Governor and the Clerk of the House or a public announcement for the information of the Members-Elect and the general public as defined by Law, Public Policy and pristine parliamentary practice and traditions?
The Elders deliberately closed their eyes to the provisions of Section 91 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) which states that no membership of House of Assembly of any State in Nigeria shall be less than 24 or more than 40 to mislead the public when they claimed that there is no Constitutional requirement for all Members-Elect to be present before inauguration. The existence of the above section queries the integrity and impartiality of the Elders. It is therefore surprising how these Elders came to the conclusion that the inauguration of the House can take place without the invitation or notice to all Members -Elect. Those to be inaugurated are legally title holders that must be compulsorily invited to the inauguration. The issue of quorum can only be relevant if there is evidence of Proclamation and invitation of all Members-Elect for the inauguration. Any Member-Elect can be absent on his personal volition, but not to be criminally schemed out in order for an individual or a group of persons to achieve an unlawful objective. These Elders deliberately stabbed morality without any concern that those excluded from the inauguration are equally Edo sons.
For some strange reasons they have become blinded by some ethnic considerations to take side with a minority of the Edo State House of Assembly against the majority simply because a Governor who dispenses favour and patronage out of our collective patrimony have prodded them to do so. Posterity will judge!
It is totally untrue for the Elders to say that the Business of Edo State House of Assembly had fully commenced and already functioning in the interest of Edo State. In the contemplation section 105(3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) NO House Assembly can be inaugurated without a Proclamation and by practice an invitation must be officially extended to all stakeholders particularly all the members-elect to the inauguration. There are two legal elements of Proclamation of the House. The notice of the Public and the invitation of all Members-Elect to the inauguration. Until the Governor of Edo State uses the machinery of his office to give these two elements to his letter of Proclamation to the Clerk of the House or the Clerk enforcing these two elements on the strength of the letter of Proclamation from the Governor, what you have is a gang of violators of the Constitution and the Laws of Edo State usurping the rights and Sovereignties of the Constituencies and Members-Elect that have been deprive of lawful inauguration. The implication of this is that Edo State House of Assembly is a candidate of section ,11(4) of the Constitution . It cannot legally be called a state Legislature in view of Section 91 of the Constitution of the FRN 1999(as amended). In that circumstance, the National Assembly can intervene until the normalcy, respect for law and constitutionalism are replaced because there is no legal House of Assembly in Edo State and those masquerading or pretending to be officials of the House are impostors that should be dismissed.
The threat of declaring the seats of the Members-Elect that have not been inaugurated vacant because of the Constitutional requirement 180 legislative days is equally laughable. A tenant cannot be default of a rent when the landlord has not given access into the apartment. It is sickening and a corrupt counsel that the Members-Elect that have not be inaugurated should make themselves available to an illegal Speaker for swearing-in. All the Elected Members of the House of Assembly are equal by rights and privileges . The first among equals or the Speaker can only exercise such right by voluntary consent and the election by majority members of the House. The man pretending to be speaker was never elected by majority of the members of Edo State House of Assembly .Can the Benin elders deny this fact? He is presently presiding over 9 members and 14 out of the 24 members of the House are challenging his authority and the illegal inauguration of the House.
Consequently, it suffice to say that the said press release of the Benin Elders is not self serving and but unhelpful to the roles expected of Elders in any decent society. Edo State is supposed to he decent society, and the opinion of these Elders do not reflect the position of all men and women of good will in Edo State. The content of the press release should be ignored and the authors are at best seeking the attention of the Governor for their parochial, narrow and immediate personal interest. Their role is supposed to be conciliatory instead of becoming advocates of immorality and illegality. They are not helpful to the desperate political ambition of the Governor for reasons that the Members-Elect that were excluded from inauguration are members of APC and delegates to the gubernatorial primaries of All Progressives Congress. These Elders are not. What nature of help is the press release by these Elders for APC, Governor Godwin Obaseki and Democracy in Edo State other than to exacerbate the already tended political atmosphere in the State?.
It is most unfortunate that Hon. Justice S.O. Uwaifo, a retired Supreme Court Judge on page 34 of Punch newspaper dated 13 August,2019 will take his views on a matter concerning the inauguration of Edo a State House of Assembly pending in in several courts to the public via a newspaper advertorial. A retired Justice of the Supreme court, how did he pay for it and for what purpose? For a man of his standing , it is legally sacrilegious and repugnant to natural justice, equity and good conscience, offensive, embarrassing and a total disrespect to the ethics of the legal profession to descend into an arena an offer a governor induced legal opinion aimed at intimidating the presiding Judges in the cases to rely on such Pedestrian and watery legal polemics . His legal opinion on the House of Assembly inauguration crisis is NOT a Judgement of a Higher Court or a Ruling of a Higher Court for the implementation of a lower Court. It should therefore be disregarded by the Judicial Officials sitting on Edo State House of Assembly crisis and the Nigeria public should note this novel attempt by retired judicial officers to subvert the course of justice.
We unequivocally commend and encourage the National Assembly and the Judiciary to speedily resolve the crisis of Edo State House of Assembly in line with the Laws and Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Edo people and the general public should ignore the press release of the Elders that lead to no peace, but a justification of repulsive conduct.
Signed by:
Committee of Benin Progressives.