Removal of the Kogi State Deputy Governor: Ensuing Legal Issues

It is no longer news that Mr. Simon Achuba who happens to be the Deputy Governor of Kogi State was reported to have been impeached by the House of Assembly of Kogi State. However, what amounts to news is the action of the members of the House of Assembly of Kogi State which is qualified to be alien in Nigerian legal parlance.

Before proceeding to comment on the constitutionality or otherwise of the action of the members of the House of Assembly of Kogi State, it would be of good to make a recourse to the use of the word _‘IMPEACHMENT’_ in the laws of our land. Without doubt, the Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended); the grund norm does not make use of the word _“IMPEACHMENT”_ but the word _”REMOVAL”_ is employed by the lawmakers in referring to the circumstance as it appears in this instant case of Mr. Simon Achuba. Also, it is equally a good advice directed to all Nigerians, most especially the learned colleagues and law students, who are passionate in learning the laws of the land to take a cursory notice of this. This writer would be displeased seeing the word _‘IMPEACHMENT’_ in any legal work subsequently. This has to be buried, and the moment is now!

Indisputably, it is trite law which has been settled in the constitutional provisions of Section 6 sub section 6 paragraphs A and B of Nigerian Constitution that courts are empowered to determine the legality or otherwise of the process leading up to the removal of the elected officials. In other words, though the removal of any of these categories of persons (President of Federal Republic of Nigeria, Vice President of Federal Republic of Nigeria, Governor of a state and Deputy Governor of a state as the case may be) could not be challenged in any competent court whatsoever, the process leading up to the removal can be challenged in court.

At this juncture, Mr. Simon Achuba, who as a matter of law is the Deputy Governor of Kogi State but also in fact, he is said to be a former Deputy Governor of Kogi State had been coasted to shores of removal by the members of the House of Assembly of Kogi recently. Hence, what does the laws of the land say with regard to the present issue?

As a student of history, all that happened in the popular locus classicus case of ‘Inakoju v Adeleke’ still lies fresh in my memory and I glean so much in appreciation of the fact of the case. It is the replica of what happened in 12 years ago by the then members of Oyo state House of Assembly during the reign of Rashidi Ladoja, former Governor of Oyo state, who was claimed to have been removed. Interestingly the case later got to the apex court of our land, Supreme Court. While adjudicating on the removal of Rashidi Ladoja, the Supreme Court was quoted to have held thus:

There is certainly a condition that must be strictly complied with before recourse can be made to the ouster clause in the constitution which would constitutionally ousted the jurisdiction of a court of law to entertain or hear the matter. The said condition is that members of House of Assembly claiming to have exercised their right given by the constitution must satisfy before the court that the provisions of section 188 sub 1 to 9 of Nigerian Constitution have been complied with and followed before the act of removing any officer in question would be said to have been constitutionally removed.

In addition, what exactly are the letters used by the lawmakers when a panel of seven persons who had been assigned to thoroughly investigate the allegation levied against the officer in question (Mr. Simon Achuba in this instant case) are meant to give a report as to the guilty of the officer? The need to bring forth the particular section arises, Section 188 sub section 8 of Nigerian Constitution provides:

Where the panel reports to the House of Assembly that the allegation has not been proved, no further proceedings shall be taken in respect of the matter.

And as such, it is explicitly evident at volume three of the Report of the panel, chaired by Mr. John Baiyesha SAN that the recommendation of the panel stated that the allegations brought against Mr. Simon Achuba, Deputy Governor of Kogi State were not proved! Now this connotes that the position of law is very clear that Mr. Simon Achuba remains the Deputy Governor of Kogi state in law.

It is well-settled principle that while interpreting a statute, the interpretative function of the court is to discover the true legislative intent. A statute is best interpreted when we know why it was enacted. It must be read, first as whole, and then section by section, clause by clause, phrase by phrase and word by word and therefore, taking into consideration the contextual connotation and the scheme of the Act, its provisions in their entirety. It is equally be noted that various courts of law had ruled on the principle which is to the effect that; where the words used in a statute are clear, they should be given their ordinary meaning, without any embellishments. TORIOLA V. WILLIAMS (1982) 7 SC Page, MOBIL F.B.I.R (1977) 3 SC Page 53 cases are more apposite.

In conclusion, Nigerian Constitution is unarguably the supreme law in our land. It is indeed the highest law which every other law in Nigeria derives its validity. I humbly recommend to the members of the House of Assembly of Kogi State to read the combined effect of both Section 1 sub section 1 and 3 of Nigerian Constitution – it depicts that whatsoever action taken either by authorities or any person which could not be traced to the laws of our land, such action is alien and would not received the anointing of constitutionality. And such, it would be more apt if the actions of the members of the House of Assembly of Kogi state is likened to be dead on arrival and having constitutionally robed the Constitution of Federal of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).

Mr. Isiaka Azeez Ayinde is a student of laws, community development advocate and a fan of legal advocacy. He writes from the Faculty of Law, University of Ilorin.