The Federal Government has served the Supreme Court’s order on the leadership of the National Assembly to stop the legislature from overriding President Goodluck Jonathan’s veto on amendments to the 1999 Constitution.
The service will halt moves today by the Senate and the House of Representatives to gazette the amendments and pass the alterations into law without presidential assent.
According to sources, the court order, including the ruling of the apex court, was served on the Senate President David Mark and the House Speaker Aminu Tambuwal on Friday.
It was learnt that the ruling was personally signed by the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Mahmud Mohammed.
The order specifically states that all the parties should maintain the status quo.
“This means the National Assembly is expected to stay action on constitution amendments until the determination of the substantive suit. The Senators and House members cannot in any manner gazette or go ahead to override the President’s veto,” a Presidencial source said yesterday.
“We have heard reports of plans by Senators and Representatives to defy the order of the Supreme Court. If they disobey court order, they will be setting a bad precedent. Some of their leaders also risk being jailed if they are contemptuous of the court,” he added, pleading not tobe named because he is not permitted to talk to the media.
Another source said: “Should the National Assembly override the President’s veto, the Federal Government may return to the apex court .
“Once a matter is in court, it is subjudice to act on it. And Order 53 (5) of the Senate Standing Rules states that ‘reference shall not be made to any matter on which a judicial decision is pending in such a way as might in the opinion of the president of the Senate prejudice the interest of parties thereto.”
A Senator said the National Assembly will be guided by national interest and not “judicial ambush”.
The lawmakers, it was learnt, are to meet on options to override the President’s veto “because these amendments are just too fundamental to be halted as a result of judicial process”, he said, adding:
“By Tuesday, we will be able to take a decision. We know the National Assembly leadership will guide us accordingly.”
A principal officer of the Senate, who pleaded not to be named because of what he described as the “sensitivity” of the matter, said: “We learnt the ruling of the Supreme Court has been made available to our leadership.
“Since it is a legal matter, we will seek advice on the next line of action.”
Following disagreement on amendments to the Constitution, the Attorney-General of the Federation applied to the Supreme Court for an order of interlocutory injunction restraining the lawmakers from taking any further step towards passing the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (Fourth Alteration) Act, 2015 into law, pending the final determination of the suit earlier filed before the court.
Jonathan vetoed the amendments to the constitution in a seven page letter to the Senate President and the House Speaker.
The President listed some errors noticeable in the amendments. They are:
• Non-compliance with the threshold specified in Section 9(3) of the 1999 Constitution on amendments;
•alteration to constitution cannot be valid with mere voice votes unless supported by the votes of not less than four-fifths majority all members of National Assembly and two-thirds of all the 36 State Houses of Assembly;
•right to free basic education and primary and maternal care services imposed on private institutions;
•flagrant violation of the doctrine of separation of powers;
•unjustified whittling down of the Executive powers of the Federation vested in the President by virtue of Section 5(1) of the 1999 Constitution;
•30 days allowed for assent of the President; and
•limiting expenditure in default of appropriation from six months to three months.
The others are:
•creation of the Office of Accountant-General of the Federation distinct from the Accountant General of the Federal Government;
•empowering National Economic Council to appoint the Accountant-General of the Federation instead of the President;
•allowing the National Judicial Council (NJC) to appoint the Attorney-General of the Federation rather than the President; and
•unwittingly whittling down the discretionary powers of the Attorney-General of the Federation.
No comments:
Post a Comment