NASS removes controversial clauses in constitution amendment

NASS Removes Fontroversial Clauses In Constitution Amendment

The National Assembly has agreed to remove the
controversial clauses in the amendments to the
Constitution under the Fourth Alteration Act, 2015,
which it passed this year.
It would be recalled that President Goodluck
Jonathan had withheld his assent to the amendments
to the 1999 Constitution and the AGF instituted a
suit against the lawmakers to annul the
amendments.
The lawmakers’ agreed to amend the Act in an out
of court settlement between the representatives of
the executive and legislative arms of government in
Abuja on May 26.
Parties agreed that the views of the president be
considered and effected by deleting some alterations
in the Alteration Act, 2015, for which the president
had withheld his assent.
The six-point of settlement in the suit between the
Attorney-General of the Federation and the National
Assembly, was made public on Wednesday.
According to the terms, NASS agreed to delete
alterations made to Section 8 of the Principal Act on
referendum in respect of state creation.
It also agreed to delete alterations made to Section 9
of the Principal Act dispensing with the assent of
the president in the process of constitution
amendment.
NASS also agreed to delete alterations made in
Sections 45a-45b of the Act relating to Free Basic
Education and Maternal Healthcare Services.
It also deleted alterations made to Sections 150, 174,
195 and 211 of the Principal Act relating to the
separation of the office of the Attorney-General of
the Federation and Minister of Justice.
This also applies to State Attorney-General and
Commissioner For Justice.
Accordingly, the suit of the Attorney-General in Suit
No: SC/214/ 2015 before the Supreme Court was
withdrawn following a motion for discontinuance.
The court accordingly struck out the case.
It was also agreed that President Goodluck Jonathan
shall assent to the Fourth Alteration Act, 2015.
Meanwhile, the Federal Government on Wednesday
said it had arrived at an amicable resolution of the
dispute with the National Assembly (NASS) over the
constitution amendments.
At the resumed hearing of the case, Mr Bayo Ojo
(SAN), counsel to the federal government, informed
the court that parties had met and settled the
matter.
Ojo said that in view of the agreement reached by
the parties, he would like to file a fresh motion for
discontinuance of the suit later in the day.
“The parties met yesterday and both made
concessions and were able to reach agreement on
the terms of settlement.
Mr Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), counsel to the NASS,
corroborated Ojo’s submission, saying that it was
true that the parties had settled.
He urged the court to strike out the suit outright on
account of the parties’ agreement to settle their
differences.
Ojo , however, opposed the oral application,
explaining that he needed to brief President
Jonathan after Wednesday’s Federal Executive
Council meeting on the settlement terms.
He urged the court to grant him an adjournment to
enable him to return to the court to file the notice of
discontinuance.
“Under Order 50 Rule 2 (1), within time, that is 14
days, to file the notice of discontinuance without
necessary seeking leave of the court to do so,’’ Ojo
prayed the court.
The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Mahmud
Mohammed, who presided, however, ruled that the
sitting be stood down till 4 p.m., to enable Ojo brief
Jonathan and return to file the discontinuance
motion.
Ojo had on Monday sought to amend the originating
summons which he filed on behalf of the Attorney-
General of the Federation.
He had sought to substitute the AGF with the
President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as the
plaintiff in the suit.
Awomolo had opposed the application on the ground
that it was “incurably defective.’’
Awomolo argued that the proper party in the suit
was the President of Nigeria, who was not before
the court and, therefore, urged the court to strike
out the suit.
Responding to Awomolo’s submission, Ojo argued
that his application, dated May 20, and brought to
court on Monday was to cure the inherent
defectiveness of his originating summons.
The CJN, however, disagreed with Ojo, saying that
even if the AGF was replaced with the President, the
originating process would still be defective since the
supporting affidavit was not sworn to by the
president.
This prompted the court to direct the parties to go
back and reconcile and report their out-of-court
settlement on Wednesday.
In the originating summons filed on behalf of the
President and Attorney-General of the Federation,
Ojo had argued that the amendment passed by NASS
did not have the mandatory requirement of four-
fifth majority of members.
The government also requested the Supreme Court to
give an order nullifying and setting aside Sections 3,
4, 12, 14, 21, 23, 36, 39, 40, 43 and 44 of the Fourth
Alteration Act, 2015 purportedly passed by the
legislature.
Ojo argued that the defendant was making moves,
with the tacit consent of state legislators, to employ
certain provisions of the Constitution to pass the
purported Fourth Alteration Act, 2015 into Law.
According to the plaintiff’s counsel, the Fourth
Alteration Act 2015 contains many proposed
amendments inconsistent with the spirit of
federalism, separation of powers and checks and
balances.
He argued that it would be in the interest of justice
to grant all prayers sought because most of the
provisions of the purported Fourth Alteration Act
2015 are contrary to public policy and good
governance.
The National Assembly had before the filing of the
suit by the Federal Government and Thursday’s
order for the maintenance of status quo, said after
30 days, it would go ahead to override the
president’s veto.