Adopt a Goal Initiative (AGI), a civil society organisation, has accused the the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN) of “forum shopping” over Abia High Court judgment, which ordered the deletion of Section 84(12) from Electoral Act, a section which barred political appointees from contesting election except they resigned their positions.
A Federal High Court sitting in Umuahia the Abia State capital, Friday, declared unconstitutional Section 84(12) of the newly amended Electoral Act.
The court presided over by Justice Evelyn Anyadike while delivering judgement held that the section is in violation of a provision in the 1999 Constitution as amended and should therefore be deleted.
The trial judge held that the Constitution has 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 is unconstitutional, invalid, illegal null and void to the extent of its inconsistency to the clear provisions of the Constitution.
In a quick response, the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation (OAGF) and Minister of Justice late Friday said that it will give effect to the court judgment in line with the dictates of the law and the spirit of the judgment.
The OAGF said judgment of the court will be recognised by the government printers in printing the Electoral Act.
Recalled that President Muhammadu Buhari had while signing the amended Electoral Act also called the attention of the National Assembly to amend the section as it violates the Constitution and breached the rights of political appointees.
Buhari had written a letter to both Chambers of the National Assembly seeking amendment of the section but the Senate rejected the President’s request.
However, in a statement over the weekend by the Ariyo-Dare Atoye, Executive Director of AGI, said the section was in tarden with the reality on ground, adding the high court judgment will be appealed to the upper courts for better interpretation.
The organisation stated: “This matter will not stop at the outcome of the forum shopping In Abia State by AGF Abubakar Malami. It will undoubtedly go upstairs for interpretation.
“We also expect another pending litigation on the subject matter to get to the Supreme Court, or the National Assembly could directly approach the Supreme Court for an immediate interpretation.
“Malami is a long-serving Minister who wants to eat his cake and have it. In a recent statement, we have provided leeway for Malami and others: ‘We urge President Buhari not to represent the amendment to the National Assembly because he has the prerogative to re-appoint any appointee who resigns but fails to win the APC primary.”
Adopt a Goal Initiative noted the National Assembly acted in good faith by refusing the President’s request to further amend the section.
The NGO said: “We are of the view that the National Assembly acted rightly on Section 84(12). Our organisation did push for this provision at the Public Hearing of November 9, 2020.
“Political appointees give the Executive arm an undue advantage during party conventions and congresses for elective office. Political appointees seeking elective office deny other aspirants a level playing field if they remain in the office during the primaries.
“There are a plethora of cases in which the status of a public servant has been defined. The jurisdiction from which we borrowed the Presidential system can also serve a guide. By global convention, once political appointees are interested in public office, they resign immediately before the party’s timetable is out.
“It our my considered opinion that political appointees are not public servants because they are not pensionable. They exist at the pleasure of the appointors who can hire and fire without recourse to the public service rule. The same Executive cannot fire a public servant without going through the laid down procedure in the Public Service Book.
“In addition, it is because political appointees are not public servants that the National Assembly usually spelt out the process of appointment and removal of certain officers like the CBN, EFCC, etc.
“The only reason left for Malami and others to be pursuing this self-centred agenda is because they want to use government resources to Prosecute their campaigns.
“We have resolved as an organisation to resist this attempted personalisation of the law. We shall use every legitimate and democratic means to do so.
“We also have a word of advice for political appointees seeking to contest their party primaries, not to ignore Section 84(12) until the Supreme Court has settled this matter.”
Stay ahead with the latest updates! Join The ConclaveNG on WhatsApp and Telegram for real-time news alerts, breaking stories, and exclusive content delivered straight to your phone. Don’t miss a headline — subscribe now!
