Electoral Act: Labour Party Challenges N’Assembly

to Approach Supreme Court for Interpretation

Emameh Gabriel in Abuja

The National Chairman of Labour Party, Julius Abure (Esq) yesterday tasked the National Assembly to approach the Supreme Court for a clear interpretation to lay to rest the controversies on Section 84 (12) of the Electoral Amendment Act, 2022.

This followed a ruling by a Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday, restraining President MuhammaduBuhari and the National Assembly from deleting or taking any further steps regarding Section 84 (12) of the Electoral Act which is currently under contention.

President Buhari had on February 25 after granting assent to the new Electoral Amendedment Act sought an amendment to the bill by requesting the National Assembly to delete Clause 84(12), which he said imposed ‘blanket restrictions’ on political appointees from taking leadership positions in their political parties.

Buhari had argued that the Clause constitutes a disenfranchisement of serving political office holders from voting or being voted for at conventions or congresses of any political party, for the purpose of the nomination of candidates for any election in cases where it holds earlier than 30 days to the national
election.

However, in ex-parte application filed by the opposition People’s Democratic Party(PDP), Justice Inyang Ekwo of an Abuja Federal High Court, ruled that the Electoral Act has become a valid law and cannot be tampered with without following due process of the law.

The judge said he agreed with counsel to the PDP, Chief James Ogwu Onoja (SAN) that, the proper place to challenge the validity of any existing law is court of competent jurisdiction.

In an exclusive interview with THISDAY, the National Chairman of Labour Party, Julius Abure said there was no misgiving in the provisions of the section under contention, noting that it’s not in conflict with Section 40 and Section 42 of the 1999 Constitution as posited by the President.

He argued that the President at the first instance was wrong to have asked the National Assembly to delete the section haven been signed into law, and therefore advised that the proper venue to decide the validity or otherwise of the provision was the apex court. He noted that the said section was intended to cure what he described as “brewing civilian dictatorship” that could “ultimately defeat democratic development in Nigeria.”

He said: “Those provisions are not in conflict with Section 40 and Section 42 of the 1999 Constitution as the President posited.

“Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution is the provision that gaurantees freedom of assembly and association, while Section 42 of the Constitution is a provision that protect the citizens against discrimination.

“If this is juxtaposed with Section 84 (12) of the Electoral Amendedment Act, you will agree with me that they are not in conflict.

“Section 84 (12) of the Electoral Act provides that political appointees who want to contest election or what to perticipate in their party’s primaries must resign few months to the election.

“It’s very clear that the right to assemble is not infringe upon by Section 84 (12). Political appointees are free to be members of their political parties, it is only if the provision was to the effect, preclude appointees from becoming members of a political parties, it’s only then we can be talking about infringement.

Abure argued that there was no conflict, noting that what was important was that the Constitution has anticipated that at times, there might be conflict in terms of the provisions of the Constitution and other laws. And there, it provided that, where there is such conflict or perceived conflict, it’s either for the Executive or the National Assembly to proceed to the Supreme Court for interpretation of those sections.

He said the section would help check the overbearing power of politicians on the people and the electoral process at all levels.

“Political parties’ constitution have it that all political appointees are automatic delegates to congress and primaries. And this appintees are appointed by one person, who can have as much as 20-50 political appointees that are in control of a minimum of one person. We have seen situations where presidents, governors and others have misused that statutory delegates to determine and dictate who becomes candidate of the party, he said.

 On speculations over Labour Party’s planned alliance and negotiations with other political parties ahead of 2023, Abure debunked the rumour, noting that even if that could be hatched later, his party was prepared to contest at all levels in 2023.

He said: “I have not seen any difference between the APC and PDP. And therefore for us, any alliance between these two parties, is off the table. Labour party has the idea and the manifesto to drive the ideas that would move this country. We are determined to contest all elections, including presidential election.

“As we speak, we already have three presidential aspirants who will contest for the office of the president. For us, going into an alliance where Labour Party would be surbordinated, is out of it. But for any political party that wish to forge alliance with Labour Party, we have no objection to it.

“Well the process is dynamic but as events unfold, if there is need to have an alliance, why not? But for now, the NEC and NWC of the party have resolved that we are not going to participate in alliance. Over the years, we have seen in this our democratic dispensation, that alliance have not work.