Mr. Femi Falana, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, speaks with OLUSOLA FABIYI on the political development in Ekiti State and the expectations of Nigerians from the President-elect, Muhammadu Buhari
Ekiti has been in the news for the past few months. How do you feel with the type of news coming from your state?
I feel embarrassed but I am not surprised. When you interviewed me last year, I confirmed that Mr. Ayo Fayose won the governorship election but I was quick to point out that the Ekiti people were fully back in Egypt. I knew that the Ekiti people would pay dearly for the choice they had made. In particular, I predicted that many people would go on exile. It is common knowledge that 19 elected legislators elected on the platform of the All Progressives Congress had to flee the state last year. Many others have gone on self exile. A diplomat informed me last week that all development agencies had pulled out of the state. People are reluctant to visit the place as all roads leading to the state may be blocked at any time without any notice. The courts have been sealed off since last December on account of a strike by judiciary staff. No investor goes to a state where the rule of law is in abeyance. However, I feel sad and worried when I am reminded that I had analysed the situation correctly. I had thought that I would be proved wrong. With respect to the people, I sincerely believe that they deserve respect for the choice that they have made. That is what liberal democracy is all about.
Fayose received overwhelming support during his election. Why do you think the APC lawmakers are after him? Is it because he’s not in their party?
I cannot hold brief for the APC lawmakers but I do know that peace will continue to elude Ekiti State unless the parties involved in the political crisis are prepared to embrace the rule of law. The House of Assembly of Ekiti State is constituted by 26 members. By virtue of Section 91 of the constitution, the quorum is one third of the entire members. Since you cannot factionalise human beings, not less than eight members shall constitute the quorum. That means that all the proceedings conducted by seven members of the House, including the purported removal of the leadership and the passage of the budget of the state, are illegal, null and void. It should always be realised that such subversion of democracy is not limited to Ekiti State. After all, in the Nigerian Governors Forum, 16 is greater than 19. So, it is not unusual that seven is greater than 19 in Ekiti state. It is part of the official impunity which has characterised the Goodluck Jonathan administration.
Some people claimed that winning the presidency has emboldened the APC’s attempt at removing the governor. Do you share this view?
Yes, I do. I want to believe that the APC members in Ekiti state naively thought that the election of Muhammadu Buhari as President had automatically ended the reign of official impunity. I fully concur with those who said that the result of the presidential election emboldened the APC law makers to embark on the impeachment proceedings. Thinking that the days of state sponsored brigandage were over, the 19 legislators who had gone on exile decided to return home. But they did not reckon with the fact that the police and the army are in an unholy alliance with armed thugs to make it impossible for them to resume legislative duties in the state. Unfortunately, one of the armed goons unleashed on them lost his life.
In the eyes of the law, would you say that the impeachment notice is valid? Some have questioned its validity on the grounds that it was not signed in the House of Assembly complex.
Nigerian legislators should carefully study the judgments and categorical pronouncements of the Supreme Court on the illegal impeachment of Governors Raheed Ladoja and Joshua Dariye. It is very doubtful if the 19 APC lawmakers had taken time to read either of the two judgments. Notwithstanding my reservations, I can say, without any fear of contradiction, that an impeachment notice signed by not less than one third of the members of a House of Assembly is valid under Section 188 of the constitution. It is not the requirement of the law that it is signed in the House of Assembly. But the House has to sit in the chambers to resolve, by not less than two thirds majority, whether to proceed with the impeachment. It is at that stage that the Chief Judge is invited to set up an impeachment panel. In order to frustrate the 19 legislators from passing any resolution in that respect, the Assembly complex in Ekiti has been sealed off by the police and surrounded by armed thugs. In any case, since Governor Fayose has obtained an order of interlocutory injunction halting the planned impeachment, the 19 legislators should respect the rule of law. On his own part, the governor should embrace peace and allow the legislators to resume legislative duties. It is hoped that the ongoing intervention of the elders led by Chief Afe Babalola (SAN) will restore law and order in the state. In the interest of the development of the state, the gladiators should engage in an amicable resolution of the political crisis. Since the disagreements are not ideological, there is no reason why both sides cannot resolve their differences.
They say the governor is not popular, yet he won all the elections in the state. What do you think is responsible for his popularity or do you still believe that he is not popular?
I do not share the view that Governor Fayose is not a popular politician. Unlike other politicians who treat the people with sheer disdain, Fayose identifies with them. But his popularity is based on sentiments and not on any concrete achievements. Instead of addressing the energy crisis, unemployment, insecurity of lives and property etc. The attention of the people has been focused on the impeachment. In an environment where people are poor, the governor promotes stomach infrastructure or what the late chief Lamidi Adedibu tagged “amala politics”. Governor Fayose also takes advantage of the culture of impunity to dominate his environment. That played out during the governorship election when he, in the company of some PDP chieftains, planned with one general to manipulate the electoral process. Characteristically, Fayose admitted that he featured in the audio tape in what has been christened “ekitigate”. As a governor, he has yet to appreciate that he is required by law to rule by law. A governor should not be associated with violent activities. Governor Fayose is a lucky man but he should not take his luck too far.
What is your reaction to the judgment of the Supreme Court which recently set aside the October 2006 impeachment of Governor Fayose?
With respect to their lordships, the judgment of the Supreme Court cannot be justified in law. The apex court held that the issue of Mr. Fayose’s educational suitability to contest the 2014 governorship election could not be raised afresh since it had been determined by the Court of Appeal. But the Supreme Court somersaulted and contradicted itself when it proceeded to reopen the issue of the impeachment of Fayose. It is on record that the suit challenging the impeachment was struck out by the Court of Appeal in a judgment delivered on December 9, 2009. The revered justices of the Supreme Court ought to have rejected the invitation to reopen Fayose’s impeachment since the Court of Appeal had equally determined it. In that case, the law firms of Chief Afe Babalola and Mr. Rotimi Jacobs represented some of the respondents while I defended the Ekiti State House of Assembly.
In Nigeria’s history, Governor Fayose remains the only person who has defeated incumbent governors twice. Don’t you think he has a place in the history of the state and the country?
It is indubitably clear that Governor Fayose is a man of history. Definitely, he has a place in the history of Ekiti state and the country. But he should ensure that he is not on the negative side of history. His first term was marred by politically motivated violence. Since he says he has changed, he should shun violence, settle down and concentrate on governance. The government should attend to the complaints of the judicial workers with a view to reopening the courts. In particular, the government should consider the plight of prison inmates whose cases have been adjourned sine die on account of the workers’ industrial action.
Do you foresee the governor having problems with the Federal Government when Buhari assumes office?
Ceteris paribus, Governor Fayose should not have problems with the Federal Government. Owing to the enormity of the crisis of underdevelopment in the country, Buhari cannot afford to engage in frivolity by taking up those who had wished him dead during the campaign. If he is dissatisfied with any libellous publication or defamatory statement, he should be advised to sue for libel and face the business of governance. Having said the recent barring of AIT was not authorised by him, I have no doubt that the president-elect will not engage in petty squabbles or unnecessary diversions. If Governor Fayose does not continue to promote and instigate violence in Ekiti State, he should have no problem with the Federal Government.
Many people have commended President Jonathan for conceding defeat in the presidential election. Some have advised other African leaders to follow the example of Nigeria. What is your reaction to this development?
Last year, Governor Kayode Fayemi conceded defeat and called Mr. Fayose on phone to congratulate him. But his political party, the APC, later rushed to the election petition tribunal to challenge the result of the election. A few days ago, President Jonathan was quoted as questioning the victory of Buhari at the polls. I hope that the PDP is not heading for the Court of Appeal to challenge the result of the election. But having said that, the President’s concession saved the nation from political crisis and prevented him from allowing himself to be subjected to the Laurent Gbagbo treatment. However, let me point out that the history of Africa does not begin and end with Nigeria. Senegal has had four successful transitions. Benin Republic has had four. Ghana has had three. Nigeria which has just joined the list cannot be teaching other African countries how to ensure political transitions.
Do you think Buhari will meet the expectations of Nigerians who have voted for change?
Understandably, the expectations of the Nigerian people are rather high. During the campaign, Buhari pledged to confront the menace of corruption, infrastructural decay, insecurity of life and property, unemployment and poverty. To seriously address these problems, the government has to challenge the imperialist control of the economy. The government has to learn from China, India and Brazil which have taken hundreds of millions from the cocoon of poverty. They could not have succeeded if they had allowed the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and the World Trade Organisation to mislead them. As far as I am concerned, a lot depends on the commitment of the government to manage the economy in the interest of the people. On corruption, there are adequate laws to deal with the menace. The battle against corruption was completely lost because impunity has been allowed to thrive. With the fall in the prices of crude oil in the international market, the government will be compelled to look for alternative sources of revenue generation to fund the budget. In addressing the challenges ahead, the government has to carry the people along and invest in them by ensuring that the resources of the country are patriotically harnessed and equitably distributed.
No comments:
Post a Comment