As the judgment of an Abuja Federal High Court ordering the Senate to reinstate suspended Sen. Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, continues to generate varied reactions, Mr. Frank Tietie, the Executive Director of Citizens Advocacy for Social and Economic Rights (CASER), has asserted that the court has the power to pass a declarative judgment in the case.
Tietie said the court, pursuant to Section 6 of the Constitution, possesses the authority to issue directives that must be immediately obeyed by all relevant authorities, including the National Assembly.
Responding to the question of whether the judgment constitutes interference in the affairs of the Senate, the Abuja-based lawyer, who spoke on Saturday during his appearance on Arise News, monitored by Persecondnews, said fundamentally, the principle of separation of powers does not strip the courts of authority over the other branches of government – the legislature and the executive.
He said: “The court retains such powers, provided its decisions are made in accordance with the law. The standing rule is that whenever a court in Nigeria, no matter how low or high the court is, makes a pronouncement, it is automatically obeyed.
“However, it appears that this principle is being tested, as we are facing a dysfunctionality that has persisted for so long that it is no wonder we question whether to obey a court order or not.
“When violations occur, individuals who feel affected by the abuse of power can approach the court for redress. The court’s role is to define rights, determine the issues, and provide clear directives. In this case, the court is tasked with determining rights, interests, and principles, and dispensing justice to the person who has approached it.”
On the question of whether the embattled lawmaker can rely on the Friday judgment and attend a sitting, he said, “Sen.Akpoti-Uduaghan cannot rely on the court judgment to resume sitting at the Senate because the judgment is nebulous.
“Furthermore, she has faced significant humiliation, including being fined for contempt charges over an innuendo she made. These issues have overshadowed the real concerns Nigerians are interested in.
“The Nigerian Senate operates by a certain order, and it is expected that they would issue a statement regarding the judgment by now. However, the court’s failure to provide certainty, starting with releasing the judgment itself, makes it impossible for her to return.
“Moreover, the Senate’s statement that reconsidering her case would depend on her apology sets a dangerous precedent, as it subjects democratic norms to personal whims.”
Regarding the differing interpretations of the judgment by the people, he said, “It is unfortunate that people have to engage in interpretation of a judgment. The purpose of the court is to resolve conflicts and clarify doubts when there are ambiguities.
“When individuals approach the court for answers, they should receive clear directions. However, in this case, the judgment seems to have caused more confusion, which is another failure on the part of the court. Nevertheless, we cannot draw conclusions because the judgment has not been published yet.
As we speak, I doubt anyone has a copy of the judgment, which is not ideal. Some courts, like those in the Federal Capital Territory, particularly the High Court, and the National Industrial Court, have a practice of providing judgment copies immediately after they are delivered. The Federal High Court should follow suit and avoid leaving room for uncertainty.
“I spoke to a media icon who referred to the judgment as advisory. However, this is not an international court issuing an advisory judgment to a state. This court is supposed to provide clear directives. Based on media reports, it seems the court disagrees with the length of suspension.
“This is not a new issue, as the core concern is not Sen. Akpoti-Uduaghan herself, but rather the Nigerian Constitution, which guarantees representation rights for certain individuals in the Senate.
“The question is, should the people of Kogi Central be deprived of legitimate representation due to issues surrounding an apology? An apology to whom, exactly? Should the Nigerian state prioritise receiving an apology over the people’s right to representation?”
He also said: “The reporting of this judgment has been overshadowed by the contempt charges against Akpoti-Uduaghan. Contempt is a criminal offense that should be tried separately from the substantive case.
“What we expected was for the originating summons to be dealt with clearly, and the reliefs sought by Akpoti-Uduaghan to be addressed specifically, so that we know what the court has provided for.”
Persecondnews reported that Justice Binta Nyako, in a judgment delivered on Friday, July 5, ordered the Senate to reinstate the Kogi Central senator, deeming her suspension excessive.
The court stressed that the two legislations failed to specify the maximum period that a serving lawmaker could be suspended from office.
Justice Nyako said that while the Senate had the authority to discipline its members, such disciplinary actions must not deprive citizens of representation in the National Assembly.
She noted that since the Senate was constitutionally required to sit for only 181 days in a legislative year, Akpoti-Uduaghan’s 180-day suspension amounted to denying the people of Kogi Central effective participation in national governance.
She said: “The court is not saying that the Senate lacks the power to sanction a member. However, such sanctions must not negate the constitutional right of constituents to be represented in parliament.”
The court, however, found Akpoti-Uduaghan guilty of contempt over a satirical apology she posted on her Facebook page on April 27.
Nyako held that after reviewing the post and the application before her instituted by the third respondent, she was satisfied that it was linked to the suspension matter before the court and therefore found the plaintiff guilty of contempt.
The judge ordered Akpoti-Uduaghan to publish an apology in two national dailies and on her Facebook page within seven days and also imposed a fine of N5m on her.
Leave a comment