President
Goodluck Jonathan and the National Assembly have finally settled their dispute
over the ongoing constitution
amendment process.
This
followed a directive by a seven-man panel of the Supreme Court led by the Chief
Justice of Nigeria, Justice Mahmud Mohammed, on Monday, asking lawyers to both
parties to broker a settlement talk between their clients.
The
court had then adjourned till Wednesday for report of settlement.
Counsel
for the Attorney-General of the Federation, Chief Bayo Ojo (SAN), who
instituted the suit on behalf of the President, and Chief Adegboyega Awomolo
(SAN), who represented the National Assembly, told the apex court panel that
both parties made concessions before arriving at a settlement.
The
apex court adjourned till 4pm on Wednesday to enable the plaintiff to file
notice of discontinuance of the suit.
Lawyers
to the parties declined to give details of the concessions reached until the
terms of settlement and notice of discontinuance are filed.
President
Jonathan had refused to assent to the 4th Alteration Bill on the grounds of the
alleged failure of the National Assembly to fulfill the mandatory requirement
for the passage of the bill.
The
AGF on behalf of the President had then filed the suit to challenge the
passage of the Bill by the National Assembly following threat by the
legislators to override the President’s assent.
The
plaintiff is opposed to, among other provisions in the proposed amendment
of the constitution which conferred on the National Assembly, the power to pass
an amendment of the constitution without the president’s consent.
The
plaintiff, in his originating summons, wants the court to nullify and set
aside Sections 3, 4, 12, 14, 21, 23, 36, 39, 40, 43 and 44 of the Fourth
Alteration Act, 2015 purportedly passed by the defendant.
The
plaintiff also asked the court to determine two questions, “Whether the
proposed amendment to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999
(hereinafter referred to as the Constitution) by the Defendant through sections
3, 4, 12, 14, 21, 23, 36, 39, 40, 43 and 44 of the Constitution of the
Federal Republic of Nigeria, ((Fourth Alteration) Act 2015 (hereinafter
referred to as The Fourth Alteration Act 2015) which purportedly altered sections
8, 9, 34, 35, 39, 42, 45, 58, 84, 150, 174 and 211 of the Constitution without
compliance with the requirements of section 9(3) of the Constitution is not
unconstitutional, invalid, illegal, null and void?
“Whether
in the absence of compliance by the Defendant with the mandatory requirement of
section 9(3) of the Constitution in the passage of the Fourth Alteration Act,
2015, the Defendant can competently exercise its powers under section 58(5) of
the Constitution to enable the purported Act to become Law?”
The
plaintiff further prayed the court to hold, among others, that the proposed
amendments to the Constitution through sections 3, 4, 12, 14, 21, 23, 36, 39,
40, 43 and 44 of the Fourth Alteration Act, 2015 which purportedly altered
sections 8, 9, 34, 35, 39, 42, 45, 58, 84, 150, 174 and 211 of the
Constitution and passed by the defendant without complying with the mandatory
requirement of section 9(3) and (4) of the said Constitution stipulating
passage by at least four-fifths majority of all members of each House specified
in sections 48 and 49 of the Constitution is unconstitutional, invalid,
illegal, null and void and of no effect whatsoever.”
Source:Punch Newspaper.
No comments:
Post a Comment